[1eyedjack]

fromageGB, on 2016-July-19, 08:50, said:

I was dreading Boris as PM, and thought maybe minister of transport would be better. He's good on tubes and bikes ! Seriously, he will be very good in this foreign secretary role. As long as he stays away from the negotiations and trade agreements.

And foreigners

[cherdano]

fromageGB, on 2016-July-19, 08:47, said:

Hello my friend
Maybe that's a racist word where you are, but not here.

Wow. You don't get to call me "friend" after you called me "parasite". Just wanted to make that clear.

But you made my day with your other post. I couldn't think of a single person who'd think Boris Johnson would do well as a foreign secretary. But of course the guy who called immigrants "parasites" and generally made the most idiotic posts in the Brexit threads comes to the rescue. How fitting!

[1eyedjack]

fromageGB, on 2016-July-19, 08:50, said:

I was dreading Boris as PM, and thought maybe minister of transport would be better. He's good on tubes and bikes ! Seriously, he will be very good in this foreign secretary role. As long as he stays away from the negotiations and trade agreements.

Perhaps her first choice was Prince Philip, except that he is getting on a bit and would be constitutionally barred

[shyams]

I loved how the American press made a fool of Boris yesterday. John Kerry was actually forced to rescue Boris...

Well done, US Press.

[helene_t]

shyams, on 2016-July-20, 03:45, said:

I loved how the American press made a fool of Boris yesterday. John Kerry was actually forced to rescue Boris...

Well done, US Press.

Amazing that Boris wasn't prepared at all. The questions should have been expected.

The immediate reaction of the two gents was hilarious. Both wanted the other guy to answer the questions first.

[shyams]

I sense that Mrs May just had a first-hand experience of the unimaginable challenges her government faces in trying to retain unrestricted access to EU markets. Despite the official stance that today's meeting with Chancellor Merkel did not include any "negotiations", it seems likely that UK was told in no uncertain terms that access to markets is predicated on access to free movement.

Mrs May is now caught between a rock and a hard place! I see no realistic way for the UK to turn its back on EU trade without seriously damaging the UK economy. At the same time, I see no realistic prospects of a Tory government being re-elected into power if they cannot "keep out the immigrants".

In essence, Mrs May has to choose between: (A) Allow free movement & ensure Tories lose in 2020 vs. (B) Allow the economy to be hurt & hope to stay in power till 2025! Let the fun times roll!

[Cyberyeti]

shyams, on 2016-July-20, 10:52, said:

I sense that Mrs May just had a first-hand experience of the unimaginable challenges her government faces in trying to retain unrestricted access to EU markets. Despite the official stance that today's meeting with Chancellor Merkel did not include any "negotiations", it seems likely that UK was told in no uncertain terms that access to markets is predicated on access to free movement.

Mrs May is now caught between a rock and a hard place! I see no realistic way for the UK to turn its back on EU trade without seriously damaging the UK economy. At the same time, I see no realistic prospects of a Tory government being re-elected into power if they cannot "keep out the immigrants".

In essence, Mrs May has to choose between: (A) Allow free movement & ensure Tories lose in 2020 vs. (B) Allow the economy to be hurt & hope to stay in power till 2025! Let the fun times roll!

No, she can negociate a trade deal that is not 100% free but where the tariffs are minimal. Germany sells enough cars here that they're going to want that to carry on after Brexit. Britain can probably cope with small tariffs as they'll get that back due to the drop in the exchange rate.

[Trinidad]

Doesn't it take 2 parties to negotiate? And you think the side that stands to loose most if no deal is agreed to has the upper hand in a negotiation?

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

Trinidad, on 2016-July-20, 17:14, said:

Doesn't it take 2 parties to negotiate? And you think the side that stands to loose most if no deal is agreed to has the upper hand in a negotiation?

Rik

That's true if one side doesn't stand to lose enough if no deal is signed, but in Europe, Merkel gets what she wants most of the time and losing 20% of German car sales will mean she'll want a deal.

While I don't quote the daily fail very often http://www.dailymail...t-barriers.html

[Trinidad]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-July-20, 17:54, said:

That's true if one side doesn't stand to lose enough if no deal is signed, but in Europe, Merkel gets what she wants most of the time and losing 20% of German car sales will mean she'll want a deal.

Everybody wants a deal. All of the negotiating parties, even May, wanted the UK to stay in the EU. So, the question is not whether there will be a deal. The question is what the terms of it will be. Do you really think that the new deal will be better for the UK than the old deal? I think that the best deal that they would be able to negotiate is to forget about the whole thing and just stay. All other deals will be worse.

Rik

[gordontd]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-July-20, 17:54, said:

While I don't quote the daily fail very often

... At least not word for word

[gordontd]

Deleted

[Cyberyeti]

Trinidad, on 2016-July-21, 02:00, said:

Everybody wants a deal. All of the negotiating parties, even May, wanted the UK to stay in the EU. So, the question is not whether there will be a deal. The question is what the terms of it will be. Do you really think that the new deal will be better for the UK than the old deal? I think that the best deal that they would be able to negotiate is to forget about the whole thing and just stay. All other deals will be worse.

Rik

The deals with the EU will be worse, but it's not clear by how much. Some of the deals with countries outside the EU will be better (or in some cases will exist because the French can't block them to protect their agricultural sector), the reason for this is that those countries may be worried about stuff that is produced in mainland Europe but not here, if we produce something, it's already factored into the deal with the EU.

[Trinidad]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-July-21, 05:34, said:

The deals with the EU will be worse, but it's not clear by how much. Some of the deals with countries outside the EU will be better (or in some cases will exist because the French can't block them to protect their agricultural sector), the reason for this is that those countries may be worried about stuff that is produced in mainland Europe but not here, if we produce something, it's already factored into the deal with the EU.

Of course, the trade agreements within the EU are such a liability to the UK...

Is your point really that the English want to buy Champagne from Napa valley or Parma ham from Mexico and that thys is worth risking the trade with the EU?

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

Trinidad, on 2016-July-21, 08:53, said:

Of course, the trade agreements within the EU are such a liability to the UK...

Is your point really that the English want to buy Champagne from Napa valley or Parma ham from Mexico and that thys is worth risking the trade with the EU?

Rik

We might want to buy beef from South America for example, but can't at the rate we'll be able to after Brexit because the French blocked that deal. We already buy lamb from NZ, that may well be cheaper.

And I don't think ultimately it will risk trade with the EU. It will simply make it a little more expensive, meanwhile we'll be able to export to countries outside the EU at more competitive prices in some cases (where the country concerned is worried about a commodity another EU country produces a lot of, but we produce a small amount of high end stuff, this happens surprisingly often). I really don't think as much will change on the trade front as people are worried about, it will simply take a while to sort out and there will be uncertainty for a few years.

[fromageGB]

Brexit will hurt EU trade more than ours, if significant tariffs are introduced. We trade more with the outside world already, and the size of our EU imports is significantly greater than our exports the other way. Freedom to negotiate independently will give the UK a better deal than it has at the moment.

[fromageGB]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-July-21, 10:14, said:

We might want to buy beef from South America for example, but can't at the rate we'll be able to after Brexit because the French blocked that deal. We already buy lamb from NZ, that may well be cheaper.

How about 12.8% plus €3/kg cheaper, if we get a free trade deal?

[Cyberyeti]

fromageGB, on 2016-July-21, 12:02, said:

How about 12.8% plus €3/kg cheaper, if we get a free trade deal?

Can be in pounds rather than kg if we want too

That's actually one of the seemingly trivial things about the EU that so upset many of the older generation.

[fromageGB]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-July-21, 12:35, said:

Can be in pounds rather than kg if we want too

That's actually one of the seemingly trivial things about the EU that so upset many of the older generation.

Idiot. I was quoting the EU tariff that we suffer at the moment - tax is a better word.

As I am one of the older generation you may be pleased to hear that Kg and litres are thought vastly superior by many of us.
Farage may have liked his pint, but I prefer my 250ml of red. In fact we can no longer revert to gallons because :
(a) petrol pumps couldn't cope, and
(b) our hearts could not withstand the shock of seeing how expensive a gallon of petrol would be.

[Cyberyeti]

fromageGB, on 2016-July-22, 14:18, said:

Idiot. I was quoting the EU tariff that we suffer at the moment - tax is a better word.

As I am one of the older generation you may be pleased to hear that Kg and litres are thought vastly superior by many of us.
Farage may have liked his pint, but I prefer my 250ml of red. In fact we can no longer revert to gallons because :
(a) petrol pumps couldn't cope, and
(b) our hearts could not withstand the shock of seeing how expensive a gallon of petrol would be.

Please read and understand my post before calling me an idiot, I understood yours perfectly and nothing I said indicated I hadn't.

The whole metric martyrs case upset a lot of people much older than me. Being unable to ask for a pound of bananas and have the market trader show the price per pound and weigh that out on a dual calibrated scale even though such things existed put a lot of people off the EU for life, as they felt it was meddling in something for the sake of meddling. They then just saw the EU doing this in many other things.

I was brought up with both systems so am equally happy with either. I think we've had metrication for long enough that the people completely wedded to imperial measures are now few and far between, but the ability to weigh stuff in either set of measures if people want is probably the only old one that would see any use (other than possibly Fahrenheit).