European Second Referendum

If you have a life outside of BWFC, then this is the place to tell us all about your toilet habits, and those bizarre fetishes.......

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

Post Reply

In or Out

IN (including all the rules and all the costs including increased costs).
7
44%
OUT (including a proper No Deal Brexit with no payment to the EU at all, and no more rule taking).
7
44%
MAY-be: or are you one of her followers?
2
13%
 
Total votes: 16

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25477
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by BWFC_Insane » Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am

Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:26 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
There is a book call "Lost in Math" by Sabine Hossenfelder. She's a theoretical quantum gravity physicist who knows a thing or two about mathematics.
You need to read her last chapter in her book before you start quoting 'economists' in any argument!
Economists are shit mathematicians who know fxck all about anything. The fact only one backs a no deal scenario instantly tells me that no deal is probably the better option.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

Hoboh
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12590
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 8:19 am

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Hoboh » Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:57 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
I was referring to the crashing out conversation, no one actually knows what will happen except if we take one up the rear from the remainiacs.

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25477
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by BWFC_Insane » Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:26 pm

Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:57 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
I was referring to the crashing out conversation, no one actually knows what will happen except if we take one up the rear from the remainiacs.
If we take the line "nobody knows what will happen" - what we have is a lot of information that does point to the economic impact of a no deal Brexit.

Its like someone saying "lets drive our car of a 50ft cliff". And 9 blokes going "don't be crazy you'll die or at least be very badly hurt" and 1 going "well I've seen people survive such a fall though sometimes they don't" - and you saying "well we don't know for sure so lets do it".

You don't make decisions in life based on "well we can't be sure so lets do it". You weigh up the volume, weight and likely accuracy of the available information then make a decision.

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25477
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by BWFC_Insane » Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:29 pm

Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:26 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
There is a book call "Lost in Math" by Sabine Hossenfelder. She's a theoretical quantum gravity physicist who knows a thing or two about mathematics.
You need to read her last chapter in her book before you start quoting 'economists' in any argument!
Economists are shit mathematicians who know fxck all about anything. The fact only one backs a no deal scenario instantly tells me that no deal is probably the better option.
But the ERG don't ignore economists. They find one they like then say "see, see see, Minford says it will be fine" whilst ignoring all the stuff he says won't be fine at all.

The reality is that Minford isn't saying much different to all the others - he's just presenting a political case for why we should just feck off farming, and manufacturing in this country and let those industries rot.

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:31 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:26 pm
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:57 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
I was referring to the crashing out conversation, no one actually knows what will happen except if we take one up the rear from the remainiacs.
If we take the line "nobody knows what will happen" - what we have is a lot of information that does point to the economic impact of a no deal Brexit.

Its like someone saying "lets drive our car of a 50ft cliff". And 9 blokes going "don't be crazy you'll die or at least be very badly hurt" and 1 going "well I've seen people survive such a fall though sometimes they don't" - and you saying "well we don't know for sure so lets do it".

You don't make decisions in life based on "well we can't be sure so lets do it". You weigh up the volume, weight and likely accuracy of the available information then make a decision.
It's not a cliff edge. We have protocols in place. We even have deals in place.
Plus those on the other side see a cliff edge too. We have bridges that can cross both cliff edges. WTO terms are perfectly normal and not a worry.
As I said "Cliff edge" is biased journalism.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:34 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:29 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:26 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
There is a book call "Lost in Math" by Sabine Hossenfelder. She's a theoretical quantum gravity physicist who knows a thing or two about mathematics.
You need to read her last chapter in her book before you start quoting 'economists' in any argument!
Economists are shit mathematicians who know fxck all about anything. The fact only one backs a no deal scenario instantly tells me that no deal is probably the better option.
But the ERG don't ignore economists. They find one they like then say "see, see see, Minford says it will be fine" whilst ignoring all the stuff he says won't be fine at all.

The reality is that Minford isn't saying much different to all the others - he's just presenting a political case for why we should just feck off farming, and manufacturing in this country and let those industries rot.
You seem to confuse me with Jacob Rees-Mogg.
I don't give a fxck what the ERG say or do.
I voted on the principles I believe in. You can quote economists coming out of Jacob Rees-Mogg's arse by the thousand... All Economists Talk Shit.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25477
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by BWFC_Insane » Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:05 pm

Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:31 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:26 pm
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:57 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
I was referring to the crashing out conversation, no one actually knows what will happen except if we take one up the rear from the remainiacs.
If we take the line "nobody knows what will happen" - what we have is a lot of information that does point to the economic impact of a no deal Brexit.

Its like someone saying "lets drive our car of a 50ft cliff". And 9 blokes going "don't be crazy you'll die or at least be very badly hurt" and 1 going "well I've seen people survive such a fall though sometimes they don't" - and you saying "well we don't know for sure so lets do it".

You don't make decisions in life based on "well we can't be sure so lets do it". You weigh up the volume, weight and likely accuracy of the available information then make a decision.
It's not a cliff edge. We have protocols in place. We even have deals in place.
Plus those on the other side see a cliff edge too. We have bridges that can cross both cliff edges. WTO terms are perfectly normal and not a worry.
As I said "Cliff edge" is biased journalism.
What do we have in place? Precisely?

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:44 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:05 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:31 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:26 pm
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:57 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am
Hoboh wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:37 am
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 9:08 am
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:27 pm
Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:20 pm
This use of the phrase "Cliff Edge".
It's biased.
I agree. It's the same with 'crashing out without a deal'.
Yet the main leave campaign went to pains to say pre referendum that voting to leave wouldn't mean "crashing out" that it would mean a carefully negotiated deal - before we even triggered the leaving mechanic.

The reason it is referred to as "crashing out" is because the number of businesses and industries who trade with or through the EU are too large to properly impact assess. So you're basically going to have thousands of unintended consequences of leaving without a deal. And nobody knows what that will mean. Given a no deal has a contingency planning around troops being deployed on the streets - is that something we really want?
Project fear peddling
But we're talking the government's own projections. To keep saying "project fear" smacks of conspiracy theory.

The only economist the ERG lot refer to in support of no deal, Patrick Minford who is practically the only economist who argues in favour of a no deal, also talks about how a no deal will devastate our farming and manufacturing industries - but reckons "that's a good thing".

Now - conveniently they leave out the bit where he mentions major industries being devastated and the fact he thinks that's a good thing. What is interesting is that his argument for leaving and running down our industry and agriculture is one of classical Thatcher neoliberalism. "Lets focus entirely on finance and services sector and anything else that cannot survive its best to kill off quickly".
I was referring to the crashing out conversation, no one actually knows what will happen except if we take one up the rear from the remainiacs.
If we take the line "nobody knows what will happen" - what we have is a lot of information that does point to the economic impact of a no deal Brexit.

Its like someone saying "lets drive our car of a 50ft cliff". And 9 blokes going "don't be crazy you'll die or at least be very badly hurt" and 1 going "well I've seen people survive such a fall though sometimes they don't" - and you saying "well we don't know for sure so lets do it".

You don't make decisions in life based on "well we can't be sure so lets do it". You weigh up the volume, weight and likely accuracy of the available information then make a decision.
It's not a cliff edge. We have protocols in place. We even have deals in place.
Plus those on the other side see a cliff edge too. We have bridges that can cross both cliff edges. WTO terms are perfectly normal and not a worry.
As I said "Cliff edge" is biased journalism.
What do we have in place? Precisely?
Trade deals of 43bn out of the 117bn we currently exercise through the EU.
Strangely enough not a single EU country in the list. But we have signed off rolling trade deals with:
Switzerland
Turkey
South Korea
Norway
South Africa
Mexico
Egypt
Israel
Palestine
FYR of Macedonia
Morocco
Chile
Colombia
Ghana
Ukraine
Iceland
Algeria
Lebanon
Jordan
Peru
Panama
Tunisia
Ivory Coast
Serbia
Ecuador
Georgia
Dominican Republic
Trinidad
Jamaica
Costa Rica
Mauritius
Namibia
Moldova
Botswana
Madagascar
Guatemala
Papua New Guinea
Faeroe Islands
Cameroon
Belize
El Salvador
Guyana
Bahamas
Mozambique
Barbados
Seychelles
Suriname
Montenegro
Andorra
Antigua & Barbuda
Fiji
Albania
Dominica
Syria
St Kitts & Nevis
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Honduras
Nicaragua
Grenada
eSwatani
Kosovo
and... Lesotho....

............
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:01 pm

Oh yeah, and Zimbabwe, Albania, and the Norwegian Antarctic Claimed Territory... :roll: :roll: :roll:
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:02 pm

But Canada is just hours away... :D
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:06 pm

Oh, and I missed off Liechtenstein, and Vatican City. :|
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:08 pm

We haven't got Japan, USA or Russia. But then, neither has the EU!
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:10 pm

...or China.
Strange that.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:12 pm

Everybody seems to be missing Tibet and Armenia and the Isle of Man.

I bet those Manxites have been missing their medicines, eh? I wonder what their take is on WTO tariffs for motorbikes???
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:14 pm

...in other words, stop being a tit!
There is no cliff edge!.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18439
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:25 pm

Oh, and a final thought. Just over two months ago I bought an antique silver charm from Australia. That's when we were still in the fxcking EU. It cost me an arm and a leg not because of the value, but because the EU insisted on taking its VAT cut.
I still bought it. It still arrived. I still treasure it. No cliff edge there then...
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

Enoch
Icon
Icon
Posts: 4006
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:08 pm
Location: The Garden of England.

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Enoch » Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:26 pm

Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:14 pm
...in other words, stop being a tit!
There is no cliff edge!.
What did the romans.......

User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12676
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:38 am

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:29 pm
The reality is that Minford isn't saying much different to all the others - he's just presenting a political case for why we should just feck off farming, and manufacturing in this country and let those industries rot.
Actually this is what we did in Canada nearly 40 years ago. Nafta and other trade deals signaled the death of the clothing (rag trade) and furniture making industries in Quebec. We put our R&D into hi-tech where we could compete. We are a world centre for aeronautical engineering and computer gaming for example, and no one regrets the passing of the rag trade (where Portuguese women immigrants slaved a way for very little). I guess the theory is short-term pain for long-term gain. It worked here but there was unhappiness at first.
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.
:pray:Image

User avatar
Dujon
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3247
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Nr. Sydney (Australia)
Contact:

Re: European Second Referendum

Post by Dujon » Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:48 am

Lost Leopard Spot wrote:
Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:25 pm
Oh, and a final thought. Just over two months ago I bought an antique silver charm from Australia. That's when we were still in the fxcking EU. It cost me an arm and a leg not because of the value, but because the EU insisted on taking its VAT cut.
I still bought it. It still arrived. I still treasure it. No cliff edge there then...

Thanks, Spotty, you have in one fell swoop saved my country of residence from the effects from the disintegration of the EEC and World Trade. :pray:
A charming English expression of Solidarity and Self Interest: I salute you, Sir. :pissed:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest