***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 59 *****
==============================================================
Brexit discussions...
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 02:12
|
>>the man in the cafe in Mandamados today was very emphatic that we were right right to leave. He also told me that Churchill was right and that Germany should be bombed ever 50 years. He was also convinced that the Americans were controlling the world climate and referred me to a web site that would prove it
Titter ye not: www.theguardian.com/environment/2001/sep/24/weather.climatechange
I'm aware of howl olde the article is.
|
Dutchie said
"Nice to be back old laptop kaput."
5 months kaput! Goodness me!
|
If you need a new laptop or tablet then get it before March 29th otherwise there will be a delay in it's replacement.
|
>> If you need a new laptop or tablet then get it before March 29th otherwise
>> there will be a delay in it's replacement.
>>
>>
Project fear?
|
|
Yes, that is. And it sucks value from the real concerns.
|
I dropped it a few times Duncan so it is broken.Used the missus laptop to use.I often like to read forums and not make comments for what it is worth.
|
Copy pasted from a Guardian reader's comment - because I liked the sarcasm.
What is govt's Brexit plan?
TM thinks it's Chequers. Her cabinet thinks it's Canada. Her backbenchers think it's Canada+. Her civil servants thought it was Norway but are now beginning to really worry. The rest of the EU know it's WTO or an unlimited transition period. Does that clarify things?
|
>>an unlimited transition period
..known as BEANO
|
The U.K will carry on with or without the E.U .In what form is anybody's guess.
|
Here is a list of EU tariffs on different products under WTO rules.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45112872
Except few food items, it does not look like a high tariff.
Even if UK has to import dairy, sugar etc. price going up is no bad thing as it would make people healthier :-)
Any reason why these numbers were set as they are? Like why it is 35% on dairy but 6% on tea/coffee?
|
Did you really read that report? I mean, *really* read it? And understand it and it's implications? You seem to think it's just a matter of saying "oh we'll do that then". It's not. It's really not.
You need to understand what you are talking and/or thinking about.
Go back, read it all. And think about it. After all, didn't you once say that you were responsible for writing studies about such things? So presumably you can interpret and assimilate such an article?
Perhaps you think it is Project Fear?
So what does Ireland think? You said you struggled with non-English language countries, but maintained that in Countries like Ireland it was easy for you to study the process. So presumably you already have absorbed documents such as these?
www.prepareforbrexit.com/
The following are selective quotes from the BBC article.
"It's important to remember that, under the WTO's "most favoured nation" rules, the UK couldn't lower tariffs for the EU, or any specific country, alone. It would have to treat every other WTO member around the world in the same way"
"These are what are known as "non-tariff barriers" and include things such as product standards and safety regulations. Once the UK is no longer part of the EU, there needs to be a system for mutually recognising each other's standards and regulations"
"The US, for example, has at least 20 agreements with the EU that help regulate specific areas of trade, covering everything from wine and bananas to insurance and energy-efficiency labelling."
" the UK could well have no such deals in place and would be in new territory. "
"It's also worth remembering that 44% of all UK exports in 2017 went to the European Union on free trade terms, as part of the single market."
"The UK would be treated like any other third country [by the EU] - and in the absence of any trade agreement, that means tariffs and border checks. "
"One problem for both the UK and the EU surrounds proposals they have submitted for splitting up their current quotas after Brexit, for the import of sensitive agricultural products such as beef, lamb and sugar from elsewhere in the world. These proposals have already attracted complaints from other countries, including the United States. "
|
>>Like why it is 35% on dairy but 6% on tea/coffee?
To protect €urope's dairy industry.
|
>> To protect €urope's dairy industry.
Is that a bad thing or a good thing?
ISTR that one of the free trade 'rubs' between US and Canada in NAFTA was Canada's determination to protect its dairy farmers from US agribusiness.
And in other news we now have a minister to ensure adequacy of food supply if/when we go over the cliff.
www.theguardian.com/business/2018/sep/26/uk-appoints-food-supplies-minister-amid-fears-of-no-deal-brexit
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 26 Sep 18 at 21:24
|
>> >> To protect €urope's dairy industry.
>>
>> Is that a bad thing or a good thing?
>>
>> Depends on how many cows you own or how much dairy product you consume I guess. Cheese is something Euopeans do quite well. Most North American cheese is pretty horrible so it would be a shame to see small European producers go to the wall and the supermarkets filled with American processed cheese.
|
>>Is that a bad thing or a good thing?
Obviously a good thing, if you're a member of the EU. I have 'a thing' about full fat Greek yoghurt in that I luv the stuff and can eat a whole 1 litre carton in no time at all.
Would go well with Greek honey but I'm on Lithuanian honey at the moment - see, I luv Europe, but loathe the EU.
|
You can call me Kassandra....
"US offers UK inferior open skies deal after Brexit"
www.ft.com/content/9461157c-1f97-11e8-9efc-0cd3483b8b80
|
...but we'll be free to negotiate better trading terms around the world without the shackles of one of the world's biggest trade blocs around us.
At least we can all be poorer together.
|
|
Thanks Sherlock, I forgot. Though the Bloomberg article puts a considerably more optimistic spin on things.
|
Update on my potential purchase of a property on the Costa Blanca
My views on the preferred area haven’t changed, and I can still envisage myself enjoying several months of the year in this particular location, Moraira. This week I have the company of a lovely Persian lady, well traveled and worldly wise. Her income is derived from managing a substantial personal property portfolio and she strongly advises against any purchase in Spain by a non EU resident for at least two years.
So continuing rental it will be then.
The forecast is a full week of sun...temps now dropped to high 70s, the crowds have left and the only downside is not being able to find any establishment that serves a goat curry which she is particularly fond of.
Another First World problem
|
>>This week I have the company of a lovely Persian lady, well traveled and worldly wise
Has she ever 'travelled' to Iran I wonder?
|
>>>advises against any purchase in Spain by a non EU resident for at least two years<<<
Does it make a difference if you made the purchase whilst still an EU resident? or
If you have a dream follow it - you may never get a second chance.
Did she give the reasons, legal or financial? Did it apply to just Spain or the whole EU?
I can imagine the possible local tax implications of renting may become problematic in the short term. Were you going to set up a Spanish holding company?
|
|
She is quite wrong. Precautions are both necessary and possible. On a phone, at a bbq. Will try to write later.
|
|
With uncertainties over Brexit and the threat I read about of a new recession, I would be inclined to hang on to the money pro tem.
|
Villa in Orihuela with electrical hot water and 3 very ILLUMINATED bedrooms @ £105,768
www.rightmove.co.uk/overseas-property/property-67234729.html?currencyCode=GBP
|
Just back from visiting one of my clients who makes expensive small parts for aircraft. They are subcontractors to about 50 mid - tier suppliers to the industry.
Not any longer. Orders have not been renewed because about 75% of their customers believe that they will need to be recertified to make the parts for aircraft that will be used in the EU and that may take too long.
New orders have now gone to competitors in Denmark, Germany, France and Italy and they have been told that most new contracts are more expensive.
The current order book takes the client to the 3rd week of March 19 funnily enough.
Client's MD is too annoyed for words. 35 years building the business up, specialising in high tech high margin products because that's where the UK is best suited to compete.
The company has been looking for alternative work but without much success, mainly because customers expect problems come March and they are just not geared up for cheaper work.
MD and directors expect to enter CVA if there is a hard Brexit. Over 200+ highly skilled engineering jobs will be lost.
Another client just up the road from them specialises in designing things for aircraft. They don't make anything and just do the technical designs, specifications and drawings. Same issues with them but their workers can easily work "from home" under an umbrella company anywhere in the EU to retain their certification, but the owners of the business feels customers will prefer to use suppliers integrated with certified manufactures abroad so isn't hopeful for the future.
|
@zippy
Naah it's all project fear :P
Both companies have a promising future in Unicorn spares.....
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 2 Oct 18 at 18:58
|
:-)
We expect co 1 to fail even if there is a soft Brexit as customers won't switch work back until the new contracts have expired.
Customers are serious enough to have paid European competitors millions in new tooling as well.
Its so short sighted!
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:09
|
Is this not what we voted for though? Short term pain.
It will be okay again in maybe 50 years if we're lucky. We'll have to do something other than engineering or manufacturing though.
Uncertainty was always going to have these impacts. There will be others like this.
Sorry for your customer though. They are doomed, probably.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 2 Oct 18 at 19:48
|
>> @zippy
>>
>> Naah it's all project fear :P
>>
>> Both companies have a promising future in Unicorn spares.....
Its not a problem, project fear. IDS says we only export 8% to the EU, and Boris says we will make everything up under WT rules
|
>> @zippy
>>
>> Naah it's all project fear :P
>>
>> Both companies have a promising future in Unicorn spares.....
Its not a problem, project fear. IDS says we only export 8% to the EU, and Boris says we will make everything up under WT rules
|
|
Well worth saying twice without an encore Zero.
|
There will be some impact on jobs due to Brexit and this is well known.
How many people in UK lost jobs during 2008-9 recession? One report says 1.3 million. Why no one blamed EU for that?
www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/7066404/1.3m-people-have-lost-their-jobs-in-the-recession-finds-report.html
I also lost my job in 2008 recession. The company had around 200 people and due to recession whole business shut down. Losing job is painful but not end of the world.
I don't believe aviation industry as a whole will suffer from Brexit. Here is one such proof.
www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jul/18/why-brexit-is-no-big-deal-for-bae-systems
Airbus makes parts in both France in UK. How they are going to manufactuer planes then? Just because UK left EU does not mean engineering laws cease to exist. If an aircraft is air worthy day before Brexit it will remain air worthy on day after - unless there is an engineering failure. EU just wants to make life difficult for UK and people in UK (mainly remainers) are assuming they are the victim and powerless to tackle EU.
The remainers should ask the question why EU is making a fuss of whole thing. The EU is an undemocratic concept. Why they can't compromise on 4 freedoms? Those are not laws of physics.
Remainers are upset because jobs are being lost. How many people lost their lives in World Wars I & II? I guess it is over millions. If remainers were in charge, I bet they would have surrendered and accepted defeat in hands of Germans.
Also, it is no good blaming Leavers just because they voted to leave EU. If I go to any restaurant, I order what food I want. Then it is the chef's responsibility to cook the food as per my taste. Do you expect the cook to put raw chicken on plate and say "you placed order for chicken tikka masala, Sir - so you need to cook it now". :-)
The politicians are chefs. If they don't know how to cook (!) then it is their problem, not the people who voted to leave EU. Politicans (starting from Cameron) completely failed to understand public sentiment and now running like headless chickens.
If Brexit is stopped what will happen? Do you start declaring 2nd place parties in votes as winner going forward?
All these "Cancel Brexit" is sign of running away from a problem rather than facing it. You only get more of what you resist.
|
>>If I go to any restaurant, I order what food I want. Then it is the chef's responsibility to cook the food as per my taste. Do you expect the cook to put raw chicken on plate and say "you placed order for chicken tikka masala, Sir - so you need to cook it now". :-)<<
What an excellent analogy Movi.
Pat
|
|
Its a really ridiculous analogy.
|
A better analogy would be going into a restaurant, telling the waiter you want a really great meal, and then refusing to describe it further beyond pointing out that you wil not pay for it.
Not talking about the ingredients, not talking about how it is cooked, not what style, just insisting that it must be a great meal and its not your fault if anybody serves you a meal you didn't want.
Everybody in the restaurant will have the same meal as you, but you're not going to tell them what it will be, either.
|
Daft post which doesn't really deserve much of a response but I will anyway.
If you've told your chef how you want your chicken and he brings something different then you have a right to complain.
If you didn't or weren't able to tell him how you wanted it then you get something which he thinks you might have wanted. Which might or might not suit you. But as you weren't able to be specific you really have nothing to complain about (though I'm sure that you would anyway).
|
>> If you've told your chef how you want your chicken and he brings something different then you have a right to complain.
You have to be tactful though, or he might cluck you out of his restaurant ;)
|
And we're still waiting for a list of the tangible benefits of Brexit.
|
Whilst a colourful analogy a little thought reveals the problem. If you order a named dish in a restaurant you do so on the basis that both you and the chef will know what that dish consists of at least within a certain amount of variation.
The electorate have ordered "Brexit" but the problem is no one how to make the dish. We are now in the situation where our politicians are vying with one another to produce what they claim to be the true Brexit and the electorate have no real idea what they ordered.
When "Brexit" is finally put in front of the customer be assured that the majority will say "that's not what we ordered"
|
Few months old but still covers the above:
tinyurl.com/y8cjs5wj
|
>> Airbus makes parts in both France in UK. How they are going to manufactuer planes
>> then? Just because UK left EU does not mean engineering laws cease to exist. If
>> an aircraft is air worthy day before Brexit it will remain air worthy on day
>> after - unless there is an engineering failure. EU just wants to make life difficult
>> for UK and people in UK (mainly remainers) are assuming they are the victim and
>> powerless to tackle EU.
Here you go again with your "Evil EU empire again".
The EU does not want anything from us, we want to leave and we are trying to get the best deal. The EU is not run by an evil dictator, its member countries voted to join, its parliament is made up by elected members. To show you how democratic it is, even Nigel Farage was able to take a seat.
I can tell you that in the event of a no deal Brexit, Airbus Industries will pull out of the UK, and BAE will be bought up by the Americans. Or disappear. If the no deal scenario continues, Nissan and Toyota will move to Europe and Honda will shut down.
|
>> Airbus Industries will pull out of the UK
To where? What is the guarantee that country would not leave EU in few years time? How many times companies would move their factories?
Brexit is a crack which can turn into crevice soon. That's why EU is trying hard to make it as much as difficult possible for UK.
UK is not really 1 of 28. UK's economy is larger than 15 other EU countries combined. UK's leaving is more like 1 of 6 (not 28).
On other news, Unilever's proposed HQ move from London to Rotterdam (nothing to do with Brexit before you jump into) is not going smoothly as some of their biggest shareholders opposed the idea.
Yes, some of you say my ideas are fantasy (which does look like it at the moment - I admit) but aeroplanes were also considered fantasy once in history.
|
>> >> Airbus Industries will pull out of the UK
>>
>> To where? What is the guarantee that country would not leave EU in few years
>> time? How many times companies would move their factories?
France - it is predominantly a French company.
|
>> >> Airbus Industries will pull out of the UK
>>
>> To where? What is the guarantee that country would not leave EU in few years
>> time? How many times companies would move their factories?
Airbus is a trans European consortium. It builds civil aircraft at Toulouse and Finkenwerder (Hamburg) from components supplied on a just in time basis from around Europe. The wings for example are built at it's Broughton plant near Chester and flown to Toulouse or Finkenwerder on the distinctive Beluga aircraft. At the moment there's absolutely zero customs etc involvement. Thjey might as well be going from Broughton to Glasgow.
After we leave they will (on WTO terms) be subject to duties and will no doubt require loads of regulatory paperwork. If CASA in Spain can build the wings instead and everything is still in the EU Customs Area why leave Broughton open when it's just a costs drag?
Same applies to Honda, Toyota and Nissan and to MINI too.
How can you not grasp that?
|
Improved productivity, or more likely reduced wages will keep the UK competetive.
That should keep the leavers happy.
|
Airbus has factories outside EU, namely USA, Canada, China. None of them follow EU 4 freedoms. So, being inside or outside EU should not matter as such. Unless EU wants to make it a case to penalize UK by not allowing UK operations to continue.
If UK lowers corporation tax, then companies might flock to UK from EU.
Although I don't know if UK can do it later why it has not done it so far. Ireland has low tax and it attracted several corporate HQs. Why EU allows one country to undermine other countries' tax rates?
|
|
I think you are confusing Airbus with BAe.
|
List of Airbus plants here.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus
|
>> Airbus has factories outside EU, namely USA, Canada, China. None of them follow EU 4
>> freedoms. So, being inside or outside EU should not matter as such.
They assemble complete aircraft for the local market, A large local market.
>>Unless EU wants
>> to make it a case to penalize UK by not allowing UK operations to continue.
I am convinced you are paranoid about your pantomime villain.
>> If UK lowers corporation tax, then companies might flock to UK from EU.
They wont, because the cost of exporting back to Europe.
>> Although I don't know if UK can do it later why it has not done
>> it so far. Ireland has low tax and it attracted several corporate HQs. Why EU
>> allows one country to undermine other countries' tax rates?
They dont, the EU slapped a huge fine on Apple
You are beginning to show your complete ignorance of the whole thing now.
|
>> They dont, the EU slapped a huge fine on Apple
That fine on Apple due to they effectively paying less than 1% tax. The effective corporate tax rate in Ireland is 12.5% still way lower than other EU countries.
www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/30/apple-pay-back-taxes-eu-ruling-ireland-state-aid
My point is, why EU even allowed Ireland to have such low tax rate.
>> You are beginning to show your complete ignorance of the whole thing now.
It is better to be ignorant and be aware of one's shortcoming rather than being ignorant yet boasting I know it all :-)
|
>> My point is, why EU even allowed Ireland to have such low tax rate.
One one hand you are saying the EU is undemocratic and dictatorial, on the other you are complaining that members are allowed to set their own tax rates.
The reason is that the individual voting members of the undemocratic EU Eurocrats wont allow them to set a EU wide commercial or personal tax rate.
|
>>My point is, why EU even allowed Ireland to have such low tax rate.
Corporate tax rates are the purview of the member states. It is up to Ireland what rate they choose.
I suspect ours will be equivalent or lower after Brexit to attract businesses. Of course the shortfall will need to be made up by workers tax on pay or VAT and duty increases.
Of course if its duty it will be effectively hidden in rising costs of goods.
|
>> Airbus has factories outside EU, namely USA, Canada, China. None of them follow EU 4
>> freedoms. So, being inside or outside EU should not matter as such. Unless EU wants
>> to make it a case to penalize UK by not allowing UK operations to continue.
IT'S NOT UP TO THE EU.
Any decision to close Broughton (or Filton) is a commercial one for Airbus.
US plant builds narrowbodies for the local market.
Canada operation is consequence of recent acquisition of Bombardier's C Series line.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 3 Oct 18 at 12:29
|
This article briefly explains why they could not use UK built wings on EU aircraft (Airbus!) after a no deal BREXIT.
Maybe it will help Movi un-bury his head.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45755047
|
The article says If the UK leaves the EU without reaching a deal, the EU would not recognise certificates, approvals and licences issued by the CAA.
So this is a political unacceptance rather than engineering constraint.
If EU says without accepting four freedoms, your aircraft is not airworthy that is blackmailing and UK should no bow down to that.
In reality, TM probably will but that's a different discussion.
It is no different from terrorists hijacking a plane and demanding ransom unless their cronies are released from jail.
|
...you really are out of your depth, aren't you!
The current arrangements depend on a legal and regulatory framework that is a constituent part of our membership of the EU. Other (third) countries don't get the benefit of those arrangements, and have to negotiate their own, separate agreements.
We have decided we no longer want to be part of the EU, and as part of that decision one of the 'red lines' is that we will no longer accept any of the regulatory or legal oversight from EU institutions, but have ' control' of our own.
Hence the EU will treat us, quite correctly, as a third country, and expect us to negotiate a new regulatory and legal framework (Which we haven't)
Frankly, without that framework in place, the EU finds itself in a dangerous place, since it has no control/insight into anything the UK might do, and no means of pursuing any contravention or issues. It can't simply hand carte blanche to us - the issues need to be tightly controlled by agreement and framework, as they are with any third country.
It is easier for the UK to offer (at least pro tem) to recognise EU practice, since there is a long running set of standards and legal practice that we fully understand (since we are currently subject to them - and frankly, if we are prepared to accept such an arrangement, it is yet another reason for questioning our pursuance of leaving).
The EU, however, since we currently have no working legal/regulatory framework of our own, are being asked to buy a pig in a poke unless (potentially) protracted negotiations take place.
Some people are determined to see 'blackmail' in every response from the EU, others (IMO the more advised) simp!y see things like this as a natural and measured response to the UK's incompetence.
|
>> This article briefly explains why they could not use UK built wings on EU aircraft
>> (Airbus!) after a no deal BREXIT.
>>
>> Maybe it will help Movi un-bury his head.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45755047
>>
This article actually is far from so equivocal.
"This could stop new aviation parts made in the UK - like wings constructed by Airbus - being put on EU planes."
We will see how well Airbus aeroplanes fly without wings. Pragmatism will win I am sure.
|
>> This article actually is far from so equivocal.
>>
>> "This could stop new aviation parts made in the UK - like wings constructed by
>> Airbus - being put on EU planes."
>>
>> We will see how well Airbus aeroplanes fly without wings. Pragmatism will win I am
>> sure.
Wings can be built anywhere, the UK is not the home of wings.
|
from info.caa.co.uk/euexit/
We believe that if the UK Government and CAA’s preferred outcome of ongoing EASA membership proves not possible, then a continuation of mutual recognition, at least for a time-limited period, would strongly be in the interests of consumers and the aviation industry both in the UK and the rest of Europe.
So once EU realizes aircrafts need wings to fly, they will recognize UK licenses/certificates. They might ask another billion as administration charge though :o)
>> Wings can be built anywhere, the UK is not the home of wings.
True, anything can be made anywhere but there is cost and lead time are associated with any factory relocation. It is not as simple as moving parts from one garage to another. Incidentally, Unilever just realized that (and they are not even moving factories).
|
>> True, anything can be made anywhere but there is cost and lead time are associated
>> with any factory relocation. It is not as simple as moving parts from one garage
>> to another. Incidentally, Unilever just realized that (and they are not even moving factories).
What do you think the costs are in flying the things from the UK to France are? Its not going to take much, to swing that argument one way. How much lead time do you think there is in setting up a fabrication facility in an existing aircraft plant? About two months I reckon.
And the Unilever situation is not a good analogy.
|
i don't have experience in setting up aircraft factory. So can't comment on time line. The total end to end time also includes getting a decision of what to be done. Convincing all relevant stakeholders about chosen approach takes a substantial amount of time.
The Unilever analogy is appropriate in that context. There was no physical movement as such but time took to get agreement from everyone concerned. The technical aspect is always easy part, it is the human factor which is more complex.
The whole of Brexit is about the "human element" part.
|
>> The whole of Brexit is about the "human element" part.
And that is the whole problem with all of your musings about Brexit and how you have given "the eu" this evil persona.
The problem is absolutely nothing to do with the "human" part on or at any level. Its all about regulation, process and economics. The tough stuff, the stuff that all those who encouraged Brexit knew about but chose to ignore because it got in the way of the message.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 5 Oct 18 at 12:28
|
>> The EU is not run by an evil dictator, its member countries voted to join,
It's statements like that which turn me into a raving Brexiteer. It is anti-democratic. It is bureaucratic and run for the benefit of the bureaucrats. And you may vote to join, but not to leave.
Any organisation that results in the citizens of one sovereign nation burning images of the leader of another sovereign nation - as the Greeks did to Merkel - has a serious issue with democracy.
If we were not in the EU, a vote to join it would be resoundingly rejected and with good reason. If the only reason to remain within it is that they're going to play difficult when we leave, then it makes remaining very difficult indeed to justify.
|
>> If we were not in the EU, a vote to join it would be resoundingly
>> rejected and with good reason
An interesting point. I don't think it would be rejected, but what was put up for agreement would be very different from what we have. I do agree that if the current"thing" was put up it would be rejected. Certainly I would vote against.
>>If the only reason to remain within it is that they're going to play difficult when we leave, then it makes remaining very difficult indeed
to justify.
I agree with that also. In fact I think the time had passed where remain is a viable option.
But this insistence from some on refusing to discuss or even be realistic is quite ridiculous.
It will not be alright on the night unless people start thinking and talking about the reality.
And the EU is not playing difficult about us leaving, it is negotiating about what happens after we leave.
What else would or should we expect?
|
>>An interesting point. I don't think it would be rejected,
If we didn't manage to vote to stay in, and people like you, me and millions of others would have moved from remain to leave, then I think it would be resoundingly rejected. "Join the EU, it will cost £350m per week which will be sent to pay bureaucrats and subsidise the poor corners of the EU to grow imaginary olive trees."
>>And the EU is not playing difficult about us leaving, it is negotiating about what happens after we leave.
about which it is not negotiating in a friendly fashion. It wants its cake and to eat it - as do we. And it is seemingly prepared to damage its German motor trade (for instance) in order to make sure that no other country would want to leave.
Silly really. The EU in its current form is damaged. It will not survive. The Euro will eventually kill it. Germany now owns most of Greece, and the worm will turn. All we can hope is that when the EU finally disintegrates it does not lead to civil war. Am I being tin-hat-mad? No idea, but I don't consider it to be an impossible scenario.
>>all right on the night
No it won't be whatever happens. I think we will have a year of chaos (though I don't for a moment believe that flights will not take off). But in ten years time we will be delighted not to be a part of it.
|
>> about which it is not negotiating in a friendly fashion. It wants its cake and
>> to eat it - as do we. And it is seemingly prepared to damage its
>> German motor trade (for instance)
If that were the case, Merkel, as the EU paymaster, would be pushing for a soft Brexit, its not the case which is why she isn't.
>> Silly really. The EU in its current form is damaged. It will not survive.
You've been saying that for a fair few years now, at what point in future history does that become untrue??
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 3 Oct 18 at 15:12
|
>
>>
>> it is negotiating about what
>> happens after we leave.
>>
It is now, but I'm not so sure it was previously, not if you accept the definition that "negotiating" means offering concessions not just sticking-points?
|
>> If we were not in the EU, a vote to join it would be resoundingly
>> rejected and with good reason. If the only reason to remain within it is that
>> they're going to play difficult when we leave, then it makes remaining very difficult indeed
>> to justify.
Its a club you can leave, we are. The EU is not making anything difficult, they just want to treat us like any other country outside the EU, but we want to keep the best bits.
Its not the EU thats making this difficult its the UK.
The time has come for a no deal Brexit, nothing less will satisfy the brexiteers,
|
>>Remainers are upset because jobs are being lost. How many people lost their lives in >>World Wars I & II? I guess it is over millions. If remainers were in charge, I bet they ??>>would have surrendered and accepted defeat in hands of Germans.
That's damn offensive.
I know many service personnel that voted remain because they see the value of the EU and original purpose which was to bind economies so closely together that war would be unthinkable.
Even Churchill called for a United States of Europe to be created in 1945.
Given the American's total lack of support in the Suez crisis and their threat to dump the £, whilst the French served along side us, I know who I would prefer as an ally.
|
>>Even Churchill called for a United States of Europe to be created in 1945.
Indeed he did but, he also said "the UK could never be part of such a union: ‘We are with Europe but not of it. We are linked but not comprised.
And he opposed any UK application to join the European Coal and Steel Community, the precursor of the EU.
|
|
He's been dead 53 years. The world has changed beyond even what he could have imagined. Times change.
|
>> He's been dead 53 years. The world has changed beyond even what he could have
>> imagined. Times change.
>>
It's always tempting to make analogies and draw conclusions from what people said and did in the past, and using Churchill, appeasement or that old chestnut, Suez, is especially dubious.
Churchill was a nineteenth-century imperialist who happened, fortunately, to fulfill his self-proclaimed destiny in 1939. It's tempting to draw an analogy between the attitudes of appeasers and remainers, but really the only apparent similarity is the rather sinister collusion in each case of the bureaucratic establishment to thwart the popular will.
Suez was a disaster of muddled thinking, mainly caused by Eden's mistaken analogies between the circumstances of appeasement in 1938 and Egypt and the arab nationalist movement in 1956. Fortunately America dumped us before we had had time to turn disaster into catastrophe.
If one really wanted to draw an analogy from the episode it might be that the French were a duplicitous and unreliable ally, but that too would be a delusionary groping for unreliable support from a past that is dead.
|
Rather he was never invited to join by the members!
Also don't forget Churchill, as part of the European Council, proposed the formation of a European Defence Force (which GB would have been part of) to counter the Soviet forces as Germany split in two
|
>>>>Remainers are upset because jobs are being lost. How many people lost their lives in
>>>>World Wars I & II? I guess it is over millions. If remainers were in charge, I bet they ??
>>>>would have surrendered and accepted defeat in hands of Germans.
>> That's damn offensive.
Back in front of a proper keyboard after a vacation. I agree Movilogo is very offensive. I lost a grandfather to World War II decades before I was even born. How can you compare the battle for survival against the Third Reich and Axis to the EU? The EU is not a hostile enemy or threat.
You should be ashamed. No doubt your Indian ancestors were also killed in the two world wars.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sat 6 Oct 18 at 21:25
|
>> You should be ashamed. No doubt your Indian ancestors were also killed in the two
>> world wars.
Agreed. I too had relatives who fought in both World Wars.
Although the second was arguably a consequence of first you cannot conflate the two just like that. Unfortunately you seem to have swallowed the anti EU narrative that Germany still wants to dominate Europe and that EU is mechanism by which it does so.
Germany, along with France and up to now UK are big players but none could dominate alone.
|
I have a question, the answer of which I genuinely don't know.
We have 2 large parties - Conservative and Labour.
Both have Leave and Remain supporters.
In which order (from largest to smallest) do you think the ranking would be based on number of electorate falls into that bucket?
Conservative Leaver
Conservative Remainer
Labour Leaver
Labour Remainer
In case you wonder why I asked this, I believe this ranking will determine [1] what kind of Brexit we have [2] whether there would be 2nd/3rd/4th referendum [3] whether situation would change if there is any general election soon [5] whether there would be any split of 2 main parties to form Leave and Remain parties.
|
>> Conservative Leaver
>> Conservative Remainer
>> Labour Leaver
>> Labour Remainer
Don't know how it breaks down by constituency, still less to any notional remain/leave vote in a given constituency.
Both parties are probably, at least on the principle, majority remain. The Conservatives have a very large 'leave' contingent, around 80, many of whom will be satisfied with nothing less than the hardest of hard brexits. Relatively few of the remainers, with exception of Ken Clarke (who's retiring at next election), Anna Soubry and Dominic Grieve put their heads above the parapet but are there come a difficult vote.
Labour is pretty solo=idly remain excepting Jezza and a few others.
|
>> Labour is pretty solo=idly remain excepting Jezza and a few others.
That seems a paradox to me. I thought more Labour voters are Leaver than Remainers. This is also claimed in following URLs.
fullfact.org/europe/did-majority-conservative-and-labour-constituencies-vote-leave-eu-referendum/
medium.com/@chrishanretty/most-labour-mps-represent-a-constituency-that-voted-leave-36f13210f5c6
So how come still Labour strategy is Remain? They might attract few Conservative Remainers but likely to lose lot more Leavers in the process.
Last edited by: movilogo on Wed 3 Oct 18 at 13:31
|
>> So how come still Labour strategy is Remain? They might attract few Conservative Remainers but
>> likely to lose lot more Leavers in the process.
Because most of the EU parties are socialist leaning, and they believe in the greater brotherhood, plus they know its economic madness to leave, and their socialist plans are economically crippling enough as it is.
You have to bear in mind, the core voting rump of both parties remains the same, the only thing that changes the government in power is a couple of million (about 5% of the electorate) of floating voters.
They are a hard bunch to pin down, mostly centre ground without any hard views on not much other than the economy.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 3 Oct 18 at 13:33
|
>> So how come still Labour strategy is Remain? They might attract few Conservative Remainers but
>> likely to lose lot more Leavers in the process.
As I said, most Labour MPs are in favour of remain. They're not delegates and are wholly at liberty to push for remain or the lightest of Exits even if that puts their chance of re-election at risk. The party itself - the Members - are mostly young and pro-EU; hence the motion at conference about another referendum.
Labour policy at present is to respect the referendum but that we remain in a (not the) Customs Union and a (not necessarily the) Single Market - BENO.
labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/
|
Based on this diagram, independentbritain.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/the-eu-is-not-the-single-market/
Why UK can't be in Customs Union? As I understand, SM requires accepting 4 freedoms but CU is not. Currently Turkey (discarding small nations like San Marino and Andorra) is only one which is in CU but not in SM. So what prevents UK being in CU?
CU means EU does have bespoke deal for Turkey. So there is nothing stopping EU doing a bespoke deal for UK too.
Effectively, all these confusing and several groupings like EEA, EU, FTA (Canada style), CM, SU etc were created to accommodate one or more countries with bespoke deals. Either FTA or CU is viable option for UK/EU deals. Failing of all it becomes to WTO by default.
|
I was about to say that the author clearly doesn't know what 'careening' means, but apparently in the US it now means 'careering'.
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/careen
Oh well. I wonder what word they now use for beaching a boat on its side to scrape the barnacles off?
Just humour me, I can't help it.
|
There really is no need for this. Are they *trying* to make themselves more unpopular?
www.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/a-greek-tragedy-how-the-eu-is-destroying-a-country/
|
|
My understanding is that the Greeks are extremely robust in their avoidance of paying tax. ????
|
I spent a few weeks in Greece early 2016. We self catered and ate out every night. We didn’t find a single small restaurant that accepted card payments. Cash cash cash. Bet they didn’t declare some of it for tax purposes.
A friend of mine spent 10 days on Rhodes earlier this year. Same scenario.
|
Just received an email from an acquaintance who is touring Greece ATM.
Extract:-
"All the statistics show that Greece is indeed a poor country within Europe and one where the lot of the average person has declined terribly over the last ten years. The GDP has declined about 25% since 2008. With a GDP per person below Hungary and a considerable disparity between rich and poor, many families are in real poverty. Unemployment has ‘improved’ to 21% but youth unemployment is almost double that. The massive debt load - almost double that of the UK – means that the outlook for the young is bleak. Over the last ten years over 5% of the population – mostly young – have emigrated, taking the dynamism from the future economy. Although the island holiday resorts may give an appearance of business as usual, clearly life here is very tough indeed."
|
Few years ago we visited Corfu. Lovely family run hotel. Not many guests at that time.
Spent a lot of time around the pool and had the usual drinks during the day. We ate there on a night and when we came to settle up the days tally a hard backed book emerged, some totting up and 60 Euro. Infact it was 60 Euro every night. We were never asked to hand in our passports or complete registration forms so I was thinking for all intents and purposes we weren't there.
A check on Trip Advisor on return showed that it was nicknamed the '60 Euro Hotel'
|
>> There really is no need for this. Are they *trying* to make themselves more unpopular?
>>
>> www.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/a-greek-tragedy-how-the-eu-is-destroying-a-country/
It's impossible to form an opinion on that without understanding how Greece got into the position of needing a bailout.
|
>> It's impossible to form an opinion on that without understanding how Greece got into the
>> position of needing a bailout.
Absolutely. Who thought it a good idea to invite them to join a currency union when they could only get in by lying...
The Greeks and Germans are culturally mutually unsuited to a currency union. Bemused by each other.
|
>> The Greeks and Germans are culturally mutually unsuited to a currency union. Bemused >>by each other
Much in the same way that North Dakota and California are bemused by each other. Now remind me what currency share?
|
>> >> The Greeks and Germans are culturally mutually unsuited to a currency union. Bemused >>by
>> each other
>>
>> Much in the same way that North Dakota and California are bemused by each other.
>> Now remind me what currency share?
The Dollar. However they don't only share the dollar, they also share a fiscal union.
Like Wales & Scotland; Paris and Provence; Chelsea and Stratford; etc. Currency & fiscal union, now you're talking. That can work.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Fri 5 Oct 18 at 16:31
|
German politicians where never keen allowing Greeks and Italians to join the E.U.
Bemused wasn't the word more like incomprehension.
|
Unilever scraps plan to move HQ from London to Rotterdam
www.theguardian.com/business/2018/oct/05/unilever-scraps-plan-move-london-rotterdam-uk-netherlands
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 5 Oct 18 at 12:49
|
>> Unilever scraps plan to move HQ from London to Rotterdam
>>
>> www.theguardian.com/business/2018/oct/05/unilever-scraps-plan-move-london-rotterdam-uk-netherlands
Because of pressure from UK shareholders. There was a full explanation on BBC R4 today around 08:35 this morning if you want to understand the back ground.
In brief the company is bi-national UK/Dutch. It currently has HQ in both London and Rotterdam. Management wanted to close one as a streamlining move. Their preference was to close London rather than Rotterdam. Anybody who says Brexit wasn't a factor in there has a veerryyy long nose......
Shareholders objected because of effect on Footsie 100 in which many funds are heavily invested.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 5 Oct 18 at 12:49
|
Earlier in this thread Movi you said
" Unilever's proposed HQ move from London to Rotterdam (nothing to do with Brexit before you jump into) is not going smoothly as some of their biggest shareholders opposed the idea."
So, unrelated news...
|
Yes, Unilever's official line has always been not related to Brexit. However, people often try to associate almost anything with Brexit nowadays :-)
I am not claiming it as Brexit victory but highlighting the point that although the board of Unilever proposed the move, majority shareholders have rejected the idea. This is something the board did not foresee!
The Brexit angle is that, we often read company XYZ moving to EU etc. But those are wishes of some of high ranking officials in that company. The actual movement requires approval and convincing lot many other people. So in reality, even though we see 10 such news every week, may be only 2 end up happening in real life.
If UK reduces corporation tax or makes rules favourable for business, then some of them might relocate from EU to UK as well. It works both ways.
|
>> Unilever
I'm sure it'll all come out in the wash.
|
|
Isn't Unilever an Anglo-Dutch company?
|
|
Yes. Lever Bros merged with a Dutch company in the 1920s, they maintained joint HQs for the last 100 years or so. They were closing the London one to have a less complex structure..(so it is said)
|
>> Yes. Lever Bros merged with a Dutch company in the 1920s, they maintained joint HQs
>> for the last 100 years or so. They were closing the London one to have
>> a less complex structure..(so it is said)
William Hesketh Lever was an intersting character:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lever,_1st_Viscount_Leverhulme
Bits of his legacy still dotted around Harris and Lewis.
|
>>They were closing the London one to have a less complex structure.
Actually, kind of.
It is/was all part of a strategy to make hostile bids more problematic for the bidder.
|
>>It is/was all part of a strategy to make hostile bids more problematic for the bidder.
Perhaps. I am not sure that has ever categorically been stated by the Board?
But if so it would therefore reduce potential shareholder benefits and rightly should be resisted. Is a company run for the benefit of the directors or the shareholders?
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Sun 7 Oct 18 at 11:57
|
>> Is a company run for the benefit of the directors or the shareholders?
Sometimes the shareholders dont act in the best interests of the company, its management and workforce or its customers.
|
I was working yesterday and due to the weather being very wet ended up spending a lunch break in a room with 6 other people.
The discussion turned to Brexit.
I found the reactions both concerning and fascinating and not at all what we're led to believe by the media.
This was a random snapshot of opinions and I'm not posting it to be controversial only to show what 'ordinary working class people' are thinking when in a casual situation.
I don't agree with them all but I do feel both shocked and surprised at some of the results.
There were 7 people in the room including myself.
Of the 7 people, 3 of us voted to leave BUT the other 4 didn't even bother to vote.
When pressed as to why, the answer was mainly because 'my vote wouldn't have changed anything'
When pressed as to whether we should have another vote the answer was a resounding 'No'
Of the 4 who didn't bother to vote, one of them was the owner of the business I was training at.
The ones who did bother to vote (including me) were all over 50 years old.
The ones under 50yrs old felt it 'wouldn't affect them'.
When pressed into the question of a second vote and which way they would vote, they all agreed they wouldn't bother anyway'
When asked if they were 'forced' to vote they all said they would vote to leave with no deal and get it sorted 'as soon as possible'.
I was shocked that so many didn't feel they needed to vote, but I was also shocked that this snapshot of random working people feel that this government will look after their best interests without any input from them.
On reflection, I'm alarmed at how different this result is to the predictions on this forum, and also in the media, should we have another vote.
I'm also concerned that these are people I meet on a daily basis and wonder what the forum think about it.
Pat
|
|
Maybe that supports the contention that it shouldn't have been put to the vote in the first place... seems to me that the general public are a fairly unreliable and fickle bunch.
|
I think you're probably right Smokie.
Pat
|
It shouldn't have gone to a referendum, but now that it has, can we please get on?
I am fed up with reading and hearing about Brexit and Trump!
|
>>can we please get on?
I am fed up with reading and hearing about Brexit<<
Maybe a good idea not to read a thread entitled Brexit Discussion then Duncan.
Pat
|
>> I am fed up with reading and hearing about Brexit<<
>>
>> Maybe a good idea not to read a thread entitled Brexit Discussion then Duncan.
I think it might be called irony.
|
>>
>> >> I am fed up with reading and hearing about Brexit<<
>> >>
>> >> Maybe a good idea not to read a thread entitled Brexit Discussion then Duncan.
>>
>> I think it might be called irony.
Why would you title a thread about Brexit "irony"?
|
>> >> I think it might be called irony.
>>
>> Why would you title a thread about Brexit "irony"?
>>
Can't you go for a very long, unsteady walk along the canal towpath?
|
|
Its not very deep, Sorry.
|
> I was shocked that so many didn't feel they needed to vote, but I was
>> also shocked that this snapshot of random working people feel that this government will look
>> after their best interests without any input from them.
>>
>> On reflection, I'm alarmed at how different this result is to the predictions on this
>> forum, and also in the media, should we have another vote.
>>
>> I'm also concerned that these are people I meet on a daily basis and wonder
>> what the forum think about it.
Nothing surprising there at all, as I've said before few people I work with are remotely interested in politics, even assuming that's a little unusual, it's certainly common to find people uninterested.
Perhaps when we are on here reading and adding to very political threads on here, it's easy for some forget it's not really representative on here imo.
|
Brexit: Japan 'would welcome' UK to TPP says Abe
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45780889
Readers' comments on BBC were interesting. It seems only Guardian and Independent readers are still pro-EU all else now anti-EU or going in that direction.
|
>> Brexit: Japan 'would welcome' UK to TPP says Abe
Super, have you seen the price of Japanese clothes, foodstuffs, steel, and all the other stuff they cant sell elsewhere. Why do you think they make cars outside Japan?
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45780889
>>
>> Readers' comments on BBC were interesting. It seems only Guardian and Independent readers are still
>> pro-EU all else now anti-EU or going in that direction.
You have an uncanny ability to reach a conclusion from no facts. In your case both are usually wrong.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 8 Oct 18 at 13:04
|
Right or wrong is often very subjective.
For example, I consider house price falling is good thing, you may consider it as bad thing.
|
|
...you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own 'facts'........
|
Why do people, seemingly usually, though not exclusively, those on the Leave side, keep dragging this argument back to stay or leave? That's passed. It's all about how we leave now.
If all you have to say is "it'll be alright", then go sit quietly in the corner with those who just keep saying "it'll be a disaster". Neither are helpful.
We need to be focussed on what to do about the new world, not pretending about it.
I suspect that because leave/stay and good/bad are easy arguments they are attractive to people and headlines.
But in fact our challenge is "How?".
How will we keep our airplanes flying, our businesses trading, our borders functioning etc. etc. etc. We do not even have the time to discuss whether or not it will be good or bad, we have to focus on getting there and finding out.
The entire population could be desperate to Leave and be entirely supportive of leaving. That will not make it any easier, or lessen the need for solutions. Or vice versa.
"How?" is a sufficiently difficult question that it certainly cannot be resolved with headlines and opinions sections underneath subjective articles.
Equally Pat's point about the antipathy or ignorance of the "common people", whoever they might be. It simply is not important. Of academic interest, perhaps, but of no importance.
We're leaving. We need to simply leave the best way we can and make the best of whatever comes after.
And stop all the p*ssing in the wind.
|
>> Right or wrong is often very subjective.
>>
>> For example, I consider house price falling is good thing, you may consider it as
>> bad thing.
>>
As someone who works in B2B banking (and some of the consequences of my lending has been on the news, including headline stories), I can tell you that falling house prices will be a real problem for the country because well over 90% of loans to small business loans start off with collateral loans against the entrepreneur's home. Falling prices will limit the money available for business start ups and expansion.
In a worst case scenario a falling property price may see a loan being recalled because lending covenants are breached and in my experience this would result in most instances in business failure.
Yes I know it's a house of cards, but that's how it works.
Last edited by: zippy on Mon 8 Oct 18 at 19:51
|
Bank of England warns the EU is NOT ready for a 'disorderly' Brexit outcome as it says UK financial system can withstand the shock
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6255961/Bank-England-warns-EU-NOT-ready-disorderly-Brexit.html
Seems like a volte-face to me!
|
>> Seems like a volte-face to me!
In what way? The Bank was clear from outset about risks and has prepared accordingly. No reversal of direction involved.
|
Previous BoE predictions were mostly about doom & gloom post Brexit. This is first time I read BoE saying UK is prepared but EU isn't.
That's my interpretation. I understand others' views could be different.
|
>> Previous BoE predictions were mostly about doom & gloom post Brexit. This is first time
>> I read BoE saying UK is prepared but EU isn't.
>>
>> That's my interpretation. I understand others' views could be different.
BoE is still doom and gloom but they're prepared for it!!!
|
>>That's my interpretation.
1) The BoE has been very clear from the start about the risks.
2) According to the Daily Mail the BoE is now saying that there are risks.
How do you interpret that to being an about face? That's not interpretation, that's the ridiculous making up of a conclusion unrelated to any facts or reports because it suits you.
And if you read the article is very clearly does NOT say that the UK is prepared. In fact it goes on at some length about how it is not.
It says that the financial system can "withstand" the shock and then goes on explain further. I presume you didn't rad the whole article.
You clearly read a lot on this subject, I fail to see how you cannot not have learned more about it. You need to read everything, not just where the headline appeals to you. And think about what is said, and what is behind what is said.
|
>> Previous BoE predictions were mostly about doom & gloom post Brexit. This is first time
>> I read BoE saying UK is prepared but EU isn't.
>>
>> That's my interpretation. I understand others' views could be different.
You interpret everything into your anti EU stance, you should seek a job on Trumps team.
|
But I thought that leaving the EU was going to be all sunshine and roses? Why do we need to withstand any shock?
How about rather than making yourself feel good with shallow headlines you try to understand what is really going on and start commenting on stuff that needs to be done rather than these endless, silly comments about why it's all going to be fine.
Did you read to the bottom of the article? Or was that just not as much fun as the headline?
'The possible failure of Brexit negotiations poses another risk.'
The organisation added that the ongoing Brexit negotiations had also created 'pervasive uncertainty' about future trade costs.
'An intensification of trade tensions and the associated further rise in policy uncertainty could dent business and financial market sentiment, trigger financial market volatility, and slow investment and trade,' the report said.
'An increase in trade barriers would disrupt global supply chains, which have become an integral part of production processes in the past decades, and slow the spread of new technologies, ultimately lowering global productivity and welfare.
'It would also make tradable consumer goods less affordable, harming low-income households disproportionately.'
Particularly worth repeating this bit, I think...
harming low-income households disproportionately.'
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 9 Oct 18 at 15:34
|
>> Particularly worth repeating this bit, I think...
>>
>> harming low-income households disproportionately.'
Exactly Mark, one of the main reasons I voted to stay in, for most of us here, we will weather any changes, it is, as often happens, the weakest in society who will suffer most.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 10 Oct 18 at 02:01
|
>>It would also make tradable consumer goods less affordable
Ultimately this will be how we save the planet of course...
/crossthread
|
I'll give another analogy (you may not agree with it but here's my view anyway).
The politicans and some so called experts, are like those who were claiming to be pilots and hence people assumed they were able to fly the plane.
But so far all they have done is switching on the auto pilot mode. The passengers, i.e. common public, are thinking they are in safe hands.
But Brexit is where auto-pilot mode no longer working. Hence, the politicans (and experts) are required to actually fly the plane. But they spent so long in auto-pilot mode they don't even remember (or never learnt in first place) how to manually fly a plane.
They are being exposed as not having pilot's license at all. That's why they are all in panic mode and talking rubbish (based on reading manual of Microsoft Flight Simulator).
Crashing the plane is a valid probability. But they can't fix the auto-pilot mode either. A lot of them tried Flight Simulator and so they are fighting among themselves who should be in control of the plane.
Some of them are blaming the passengers for broken auto-pilot.
|
>> I'll give another analogy (you may not agree with it but here's my view anyway).
Your analogies make less sense than your conclusions.
|
>> Your analogies make less sense than your conclusions.
Falls in same way as the restaurant one. The passengers voted for some sort of flight but the destination country and airfield, the airline and aircraft type were not even thought about. So they decided to go for a wholly untested prototype. The designers don't know how many engines never mind what sort and some of them appear to believe it can consume it's own smoke as a form of perpetual motion. The flight deck too is an untested concept....
|
|
When is the film coming out?
|
>>I'll give another analogy (you may not agree with it.....
May not agree with it? I don't even understand it.
You truly are utterly clueless.
|
>> I'll give another analogy (you may not agree with it but here's my view anyway).
What is the point in your analogy? What we have here is a country trying to do what has never been done before, with a Union that has never done it before, for reasons that nobody knows why.
|
>>Some of them are blaming the passengers for broken auto-pilot.
Maybe the passengers need a life jacket/peoples vote, commonly known as another referendum.
8-)
|
Brexit Discussion - Volume 58 - Dog
