How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 11)
Discussion
FiF said:
jakesmith said:
Otis Criblecoblis said:
The numbers aren't there, plus rejoining will be on very different terms. The 48% is probably half made up of people who have no real like or love for the EU, but just thought it safer to remain. Getting them to turn out wouldn't happen, especially so on new terms, it's why so many people don't mind abandoning any democratic principles they once had to do anything to remain now.
You could argue the same for leave, maybe loads of them voted for something that is obviously not going to happen. Getting them to come out and vote again? MaybeBut when you have ridiculous children saying they would ignore a democratic result because of democracy then things just cannot and will not be taken seriously. Sorry for the butt hurt.
The small shift currently doesn't bother me so much. It might be that Remain has a lead, but then after 3 years of May making a mess of it and even after not meeting a set in stone deadline to leave, the vote is holding up. I would also expect some movement while in limbo period and with the same daily Remain scares stories.
DeepEnd said:
I guess it is a blame thing.
Brexit Errs mess up Brexit. Blame remainers for messing up brexit.
Brexit Errs lie about Brexit. Accuse remainers for lying about brexit.
Likelihood of Brexit Errs taking responsibility for their vote and admitting it was a stupid idea? No sign yet.
Surely Boris is sending a message by telling pork pies about pork pies? First kippers in the post, then this. It’s clearly a cry for help.
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaignBrexit Errs mess up Brexit. Blame remainers for messing up brexit.
Brexit Errs lie about Brexit. Accuse remainers for lying about brexit.
Likelihood of Brexit Errs taking responsibility for their vote and admitting it was a stupid idea? No sign yet.
Surely Boris is sending a message by telling pork pies about pork pies? First kippers in the post, then this. It’s clearly a cry for help.
ClaphamGT3 said:
DeepEnd said:
I guess it is a blame thing.
Brexit Errs mess up Brexit. Blame remainers for messing up brexit.
Brexit Errs lie about Brexit. Accuse remainers for lying about brexit.
Likelihood of Brexit Errs taking responsibility for their vote and admitting it was a stupid idea? No sign yet.
Surely Boris is sending a message by telling pork pies about pork pies? First kippers in the post, then this. It’s clearly a cry for help.
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaignBrexit Errs mess up Brexit. Blame remainers for messing up brexit.
Brexit Errs lie about Brexit. Accuse remainers for lying about brexit.
Likelihood of Brexit Errs taking responsibility for their vote and admitting it was a stupid idea? No sign yet.
Surely Boris is sending a message by telling pork pies about pork pies? First kippers in the post, then this. It’s clearly a cry for help.
ClaphamGT3 said:
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaign
What does your crystal ball say it means? crankedup said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
crankedup said:
WTO trading for the interim period until the E.U. trade block and U.K. agree otherwise?
The touching faith in the applicability of WTO rules by those who clearly haven't fully grasped how they work would be touching if the situation wasn't so serious.ClaphamGT3 said:
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaign
The other odd thing is that the same group seem to think things like the Yellowhammer base case (likely no deal s
tshow, not even the worst case) are just scare stories that are made up.DeepEnd said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaign
The other odd thing is that the same group seem to think things like the Yellowhammer base case (likely no deal stshow, not even the worst case) are just scare stories that are made up.DeepEnd said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaign
The other odd thing is that the same group seem to think things like the Yellowhammer base case (likely no deal stshow, not even the worst case) are just scare stories that are made up.I've never seen anyone sacked as a result because the plan they handed in addressed what would happen if the building burnt down, a key person fell under a bus or the basement flooded.
The board suddenly say what the f** do you mean our building might burn down. How have you allowed us to get into this situation where our building may burn down.
I think most rational people realise its better to have a plan in place addressing all eventualities.
As for the less rational? Well you can't legislate for that I'm afraid.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I think that's fair.
One of the things that amazed me throughout the campaign was that at no point during all the debates and everything else did anyone appear to call out those advocating leave with a simple "hold on, you're not actually in a position to deliver any of this, are you?".
You might as well have had Farage and Gisela Sturt offering a million quid to anyone who'd vote leave for all the authority they had to do it.
I'm surprised that didn't set off more alarm bells.
You're dangerously close to arguing we shouldn't have had the referendum because one option was not possible.One of the things that amazed me throughout the campaign was that at no point during all the debates and everything else did anyone appear to call out those advocating leave with a simple "hold on, you're not actually in a position to deliver any of this, are you?".
You might as well have had Farage and Gisela Sturt offering a million quid to anyone who'd vote leave for all the authority they had to do it.
I'm surprised that didn't set off more alarm bells.
DeepEnd said:
The other odd thing is that the same group seem to think things like the Yellowhammer base case (likely no deal stshow, not even the worst case) are just scare stories that are made up.
I don't know anyone that has denied every single story, but your posts demonstrate you are the counter to the mythical person you speak of, someone open mouthed to swallow and disseminate anything fed to them. Do you ever stop and think about that ?tshow, not even the worst case) are just scare stories that are made up.sas62 said:
DeepEnd said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaign
The other odd thing is that the same group seem to think things like the Yellowhammer base case (likely no deal stshow, not even the worst case) are just scare stories that are made up.I've never seen anyone sacked as a result because the plan they handed in addressed what would happen if the building burnt down, a key person fell under a bus or the basement flooded.
The board suddenly say what the f** do you mean our building might burn down. How have you allowed us to get into this situation where our building may burn down.
I think most rational people realise its better to have a plan in place addressing all eventualities.
As for the less rational? Well you can't legislate for that I'm afraid.
HSE said:
Your risk assessment should include consideration of what in your business might cause harm and how and, the people who might be affected. It should take into account any controls which are already in place and identify what, if any, further controls are required.
You should be able to show from your assessment that:
a proper check was made
all people who might be affected were considered
all significant risks have been assessed
the precautions are reasonable
the remaining risk is low
You do not need to include insignificant risks. You do not need to include risks from everyday life unless your work activities increase the risk.
Any paperwork that is produced should help with communicating and managing the risks in your business
ClaphamGT3 said:
Here’s an even better idea; focus on the y axis - the one that shows us that +/- 45% of our outbound trade is with the EU. Remember them? The guys we may not have a trade deal with on 31st October?
Then ask yourself how many of the manufacturers contributing to the +/-55% non EU trade are going to continue manufacturing in the UK once those goods don’t have access to the UK market.
Then tell me that you can honestly defend a no deal outcome as being in the national interest.
That only works if (a) you lazily imply that having no deal with the EU will prevent a particularly large amount of trade from happening and (b) rely on the assumption that economic priorities trump all other political choices we make.Then ask yourself how many of the manufacturers contributing to the +/-55% non EU trade are going to continue manufacturing in the UK once those goods don’t have access to the UK market.
Then tell me that you can honestly defend a no deal outcome as being in the national interest.
You know very well that these are not universally accepted assumptions.
I’m very familiar with risk management.
Yellowhammer is not about remote risks, improbable events and black swans. It is about probable consequences of the UK leaving the EU.
Two examples:
- 50%-85% of lorries travelling across the Channel may not be ready for French customs.
- Tariffs make UK petrol exports to the EU uncompetitive. Industry had plans to mitigate the impact on refinery margins and profitability, but UK government policy to set petrol import tariffs at 0% inadvertently undermines these plans. This leads to big financial losses and the closure of two refineries (which are converted to import terminals) with about 2,000 direct job losses.
There will be water though, so that’s OK, with only a low risk of chemical shortages. That I’d agree is like your fire example, not that likely to be an issue and easy to mitigate.
Yellowhammer is not about remote risks, improbable events and black swans. It is about probable consequences of the UK leaving the EU.
Two examples:
- 50%-85% of lorries travelling across the Channel may not be ready for French customs.
- Tariffs make UK petrol exports to the EU uncompetitive. Industry had plans to mitigate the impact on refinery margins and profitability, but UK government policy to set petrol import tariffs at 0% inadvertently undermines these plans. This leads to big financial losses and the closure of two refineries (which are converted to import terminals) with about 2,000 direct job losses.
There will be water though, so that’s OK, with only a low risk of chemical shortages. That I’d agree is like your fire example, not that likely to be an issue and easy to mitigate.
DeepEnd said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
The reality is - as we have seen on these threads over three years now - is that Brexiteers will lie and lie and lie again rather than admit the truth about Brexit and what it means. To acknowledge the truth would be to acknowledge that they were taken for fools by the leave campaign
The other odd thing is that the same group seem to think things like the Yellowhammer base case (likely no deal stshow, not even the worst case) are just scare stories that are made up.But since those we elected to work out the details (based on the manifestos of the two leading parties promising to deliver on the vote) have failed to actually do just that an instead extended and extended the deadline we have ended up with a new person who has prmosed to deliver the result of the vote and that is leave.
He has been truthful so far as to say we are either getting a deal or not but we are leaving at the end of October. That is the truth and had anyone wanted any different at the last election they could have voted liberal a party who pledged to revers the result.
People did not vote Libdem so clearly they were happy to leave. Everything else is just conjecture
Well I think Yellowhammer report is probably based on the best prediction of what no deal might mean and it sounds quite painful for many.
Some of it might be better, some might be worse.
Your reference to the “truth”, do you actually think it’s made up or blown out of proportion?
Or do you just not care if no deal is really bad?
Some of it might be better, some might be worse.
Your reference to the “truth”, do you actually think it’s made up or blown out of proportion?
Or do you just not care if no deal is really bad?
DeepEnd said:
Well I think Yellowhammer report is probably based on the best prediction of what no deal might mean and it sounds quite painful for many.
Some of it might be better, some might be worse.
Your reference to the “truth”, do you actually think it’s made up or blown out of proportion?
Or do you just not care if no deal is really bad?
Yellowhammer is as I understand the estimater of an impact under no deal so is it the truth well its certainly what some who wrote it think could happen so its a truthful statement in that respect.Some of it might be better, some might be worse.
Your reference to the “truth”, do you actually think it’s made up or blown out of proportion?
Or do you just not care if no deal is really bad?
Again really bad is not quantifiable (I might be a EU citizen shorting the pound making a killing is it bad then??) .
Do I personally care if its really bad well yes as I live in the UK etc. But I think Labour under corbyn would be awful but I would also have to accept that if at the next GE people vote him in. I could not just moan an say lets have another
ClaphamGT3 said:
Yellow hammer is not a risk assessment.
This is what is so maddening about these threads - they are full of people who can’t grasp even the basic facts.
No ... it’s a contingency plan This is what is so maddening about these threads - they are full of people who can’t grasp even the basic facts.
I’ve been involved in writing many
Plan and prepare for the worst case scenario and resource accordingly
It doesn’t mean it will happen .. it just means you are aware of the worst case and have planned a response to it
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff