U.K - News, Updates & Discussions.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes . And just after they turned Rover around they sold it. If that's their track record, you can expect them to do the same with RR. I certainly won't trust BAe with a nation's crown jewels. I
Therefore, for reasons discussed earlier it has to be SAFRAN.
You'd trust the French with the crown jewels instead?

Are you part of the EU? If the EU is desperate to commit suicide, will you? Try to come up with better reasoning than this regressive perverted line of argument , Paddy.
EU cultural diversity initiatives drive it.

So, there's no solution to this vexed problem which in turn means you exit with no deal. Talk about adding to ones own problems. I'm not complaining. In fact I'm loving it.
We want to leave with no deal and leave the EU to figure out how to make its single market integrity work. I hope they waste even more money taking the matter to court to get a decision that we will simply ignore.
 
It's in both ROI's and NI's interest that there's no hard border between the two, hence the need for a customs border between NI and GB instead.
That's just the problem, we don't need that customs border at all, only the EU needs it. Do you understand me yet? We don't care if goods are moving freely between ROI and NI and then the rest of the UK minus customs checks, we'll quite happily accept that since it will only be a small amount anyway. However the EU does mind about the same in the opposite direction, hence they have a problem and we do not. :D

If you push the problem on to the EU, then the EU will solve it by ejecting ROI from the EU.
That's one option, which plays in our favour.

Or the undesired alternative of creating a hard border between the ROI and NI.
ROI will reject that just as surely as Hungary rejects the EU's asylum policies, no ROI government would survive putting a hard border there. What will the EU do then except bleat and moan and create new legislation governing the porosity of toilet paper?
 
That's just the problem, we don't need that customs border at all, only the EU needs it. Do you understand me yet? We don't care if goods are moving freely between ROI and NI and then the rest of the UK minus customs checks, we'll quite happily accept that since it will only be a small amount anyway. However the EU does mind about the same in the opposite direction, hence they have a problem and we do not. :D

More accurately, GB doesn't care. Only NI and ROI care. And you either create the border and keep NI, or NI leaves the UK and joins ROI or simply becomes independent and joins the EU. But NI wants access to both sides equally, hence the prototcol is for NI, not for GB or ROI or the EU.

So when you say "we don't need that customs border at all", it's not about you at all. But without it, you lose the NI. And the NI loses access to GB.

The choices for the NI are:
Lose GB, keep EU.
Lose EU, keep GB.
No changes because of the protocol.

Right now, all parties involved are for the protocol, so that's how it's going to play out.
 
More accurately, GB doesn't care. Only NI and ROI care. And you either create the border and keep NI, or NI leaves the UK and joins ROI or simply becomes independent and joins the EU. But NI wants access to both sides equally, hence the prototcol is for NI, not for GB or ROI or the EU.


So when you say "we don't need that customs border at all", it's not about you at all. But without it, you lose the NI. And the NI loses access to GB.

The choices for the NI are:
Lose GB, keep EU.
Lose EU, keep GB.
No changes because of the protocol.

Right now, all parties involved are for the protocol, so that's how it's going to play out.
No dude, what I'm saying is that the UK is happy to let goods and people move freely over that border in compliance with the GF Agreement, only the EU is bothered about it. We absolutely don't lose NI by putting no customs border there, the only way we partially lose NI is by putting a customs border between NI and the UK, which we aren't doing and this annoys the EU because of their single market but we don't care, that is their problem alone.

Neither NI or the rest of the UK is for the protocol, but both are for the GF Agreement and so is ROI, so that is how it will play out. The EU can either put a customs border between ROI and the rest of the EU, kick ROI out of the EU or simply deal with it.
 
No dude, what I'm saying is that the UK is happy to let goods and people move freely over that border in compliance with the GF Agreement, only the EU is bothered about it. We absolutely don't lose NI by putting no customs border there, the only way we partially lose NI is by putting a customs border between NI and the UK, which we aren't doing and this annoys the EU because of their single market but we don't care, that is their problem alone.

Neither NI or the rest of the UK is for the protocol, but both are for the GF Agreement and so is ROI, so that is how it will play out. The EU can either put a customs border between ROI and the rest of the EU, kick ROI out of the EU or simply deal with it.

I actually see the NI leaving the UK then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustCurious
I actually see the NI leaving the UK then.
Why? With us they can have access to the UK market and the EU market via ROI. Not to mention the fact they have a 20+% budget deficit and frankly the EU market is negligible for them.

1599949806014.png


The EU has absolutely no cards here.
 
Why? With us they can have access to the UK market and the EU market via ROI. Not to mention the fact they have a 20+% budget deficit and frankly the EU market is negligible for them.

View attachment 17721

The EU has absolutely no cards here.

With you, they have access to the EU market, including ROI, only if there's a custom border between GB and NI. Without the custom border, they lose access to ROI mainly, and the EU by extension. So that's £4.6B in total.

But it's not just the money, it's about political stability. The ROI and NI can't afford a hard border between each other due to political reasons. NI is in a hard place both economically and politically. The solution would have been much easier if NI and ROI were just 1 country and part of the UK from the very beginning, but that's not to be. The £1.9B wouldn't have mattered then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustCurious
With you, they have access to the EU market, including ROI, only if there's a custom border between GB and NI. Without the custom border, they lose access to ROI mainly, and the EU by extension. So that's £4.6B in total.

But it's not just the money, it's about political stability. The ROI and NI can't afford a hard border between each other due to political reasons. NI is in a hard place both economically and politically. The solution would have been much easier if NI and ROI were just 1 country and part of the UK from the very beginning, but that's not to be. The £1.9B wouldn't have mattered then.
They don't have proper access to our market if there's a customs border between Britain and NI though, that's why their PM rejected the EU's protocol and has always been against it. Arlene Foster threw a fit when Teresa "the gullible" May signed up to that shit. A theoretical customs border between NI and ROI would impose the same restrictions but it would impact a much smaller percentage of their GDP.

There's not going to be a hard border either way, because neither the UK nor NI will put one there. That's just something the EU will have to deal with. Even the ROI would be less impacted by a border between the EU and two islands because most of their exports go to the UK and US. So the UK leaves and gets a trade deal with the US and ROI is better off not in the EU. Free movement between ROI and the UK has existed long before the EU came to be. The £1.9bn doesn't matter, it's the £10.5bn that matters.
 
If you can't follow the debate and have no valid points, there really is no need to bore us all to death with a 15 minute video.
In the event, there's little you can do to refute it. I've been observing your analysis of political events over the past 4-5 years. Everytime you're gung ho about a certain issue, the outcome is the exact opposite of what you've anticipated. It's that pathetic.
 
In the event, there's little you can do to refute it. I've been observing your analysis of political events over the past 4-5 years. Everytime you're gung ho about a certain issue, the outcome is the exact opposite of what you've anticipated. It's that pathetic.
There's only one thing that matters in politics, it's the economy. Democratically elected governments rise and fall on that alone. There are no valid economic arguments for either Scotland or NI leaving the UK, in fact, it's not even close.

As regards the EU, the fact they're taking the UK to a court with no sanctioning power is a sign of weakness. In international politics that's what you do when you're all out of cards. As I've said before, the EU parliament is a bureaucratic body that will put self-serving interests above the interests of the EU's member states every time, it's one of the many reasons we left. The EU would rather dick the entire western economy than let commonsense prevail.

Complete free trade of goods and services between the UK and the EU without customs borders solves all problems and is the best economic outcome for every member of the EU and the UK. But oh no, the UK can't be allowed to have that without being politically subservient to some OCD-inflicted legislators and some ridiculous free citizenship system designed to create chaos.
 
Last edited:
There's only one thing that matters in politics, it's the economy. Democratically elected governments rise and fall on that alone. There are no valid economic arguments for either Scotland or NI leaving the UK, in fact, it's not even close.

As regards the EU, the fact they're taking the UK to a court with no sanctioning power is a sign of weakness. In international politics that's what you do when you're all out of cards. As I've said before, the EU parliament is a bureaucratic body that will put self-serving interests above the interests of the EU's member states every time, it's one of the many reasons we left. The EU would rather dick the entire western economy than let commonsense prevail.
You think the EU would drag UK to court, get a decision in it's favour only to see the UK trash it by refusing to implement such a decision. I suppose you think the EU lacks any coercive powers.

I'd like to think that Brexit will be the harbinger of doom for the United in UK. All those dormant independence movements would get a fresh lease of life. I really don't see the UK have the financial wherewithal to take on the financial might of the EU. Best of luck with that for that's exactly what this boils down to.
 
They don't have proper access to our market if there's a customs border between Britain and NI though, that's why their PM rejected the EU's protocol and has always been against it. Arlene Foster threw a fit when Teresa "the gullible" May signed up to that shit. A theoretical customs border between NI and ROI would impose the same restrictions but it would impact a much smaller percentage of their GDP.

There's not going to be a hard border either way, because neither the UK nor NI will put one there. That's just something the EU will have to deal with. Even the ROI would be less impacted by a border between the EU and two islands because most of their exports go to the UK and US. So the UK leaves and gets a trade deal with the US and ROI is better off not in the EU. Free movement between ROI and the UK has existed long before the EU came to be. The £1.9bn doesn't matter, it's the £10.5bn that matters.

Actually it's 4.6B. You have to consider the ROI and EU as a combined entity. And even a part of that 10.5B is included in the mix since not all of that 10.5B is going to stay in the NI.

The backstop didn't make sense, so forget about it. But the protocol makes sense. Goods from GB that stay in NI get a tax refund, but the goods that move into the EU remain taxed. It makes sense.

So the customs border is definitely coming up. The only choice is whether the border comes up between GB and NI, which allows GB to have a say in it, or between NI and EU, with GB having little to no say in it.
 
You think the EU would drag UK to court, get a decision in it's favour only to see the UK trash it by refusing to implement such a decision. I suppose you think the EU lacks any coercive powers.

I'd like to think that Brexit will be the harbinger of doom for the United in UK. All those dormant independence movements would get a fresh lease of life. I really don't see the UK have the financial wherewithal to take on the financial might of the EU. Best of luck with that for that's exactly what this boils down to.
If it didn't it wouldn't be going to court. Besides, governments withdraw from treaties and agreements all the time (INF Treaty, ABM Treaty), the only point of integrity is that they do it formally and don't simply discontinue complying covertly. The agreement with the EU wasn't even active yet. So exactly what have we done that's illegal?

I'm sure you would but sadly it won't. Scotland doesn't even have a plausible budget for an independent Scotland and NI is far more dependent on UK trade than EU trade. The EU is walking a tightrope really, any attempt to be too punitive will be viewed dimly by the US and expose the EU for what it really is. Even the current members would not be too pleased to come to the realisation that the EU will try attack them if they dare to leave.
 
Actually it's 4.6B. You have to consider the ROI and EU as a combined entity. And even a part of that 10.5B is included in the mix since not all of that 10.5B is going to stay in the NI.

The backstop didn't make sense, so forget about it. But the protocol makes sense. Goods from GB that stay in NI get a tax refund, but the goods that move into the EU remain taxed. It makes sense.

So the customs border is definitely coming up. The only choice is whether the border comes up between GB and NI, which allows GB to have a say in it, or between NI and EU, with GB having little to no say in it.
Nope, it's £1.9bn because they will not lose the trade with ROI in the event of no deal because the UK will leave the border open and ROI will do the same as they are both in agreement that the Good Friday Agreement should be upheld. The only thing being ditched is the EU's BS protocol that Teresa the dumb agreed too. We said at the time, "nothing is agreed until it's all agreed," and we meant it, not our fault if the EU wasn't listening.

The EU can implement such taxation if it wishes but it will not do so by imposing a customs border within the UK single market. I would propose that goods ROI is sending on to the EU be separated into ROI and UK or ROI+UK(NI) and UK(GB), depending on how they wish to treat NI going forward, they can then tax them accordingly at the point of entry to mainland Europe, or they can tax UK(GB) goods at the point of entry to ROI electronically minus a border.

ROI will not let a hard border be placed between ROI and NI and neither will the UK and the EU has no physical means of putting one there without agreement (you need to understand this before continuing to debate, it's a cast iron fact), all they can do is implement an electronic taxation of UK(GB) goods as they arrive in ROI, or have a customs border on the European mainland, where there already is one anyway.

The only problem here is the EU's insistence that the virginity of the single market be preserved, when you consider the actual numbers, an open border between ROI and NI is inconsequential. They need to grow up.
 
If it didn't it wouldn't be going to court. Besides, governments withdraw from treaties and agreements all the time (INF Treaty, ABM Treaty), the only point of integrity is that they do it formally and don't simply discontinue complying covertly. The agreement with the EU wasn't even active yet. So exactly what have we done that's illegal?

I'm sure you would but sadly it won't. Scotland doesn't even have a plausible budget for an independent Scotland and NI is far more dependent on UK trade than EU trade. The EU is walking a tightrope really, any attempt to be too punitive will be viewed dimly by the US and expose the EU for what it really is. Even the current members would not be too pleased to come to the realisation that the EU will try attack them if they dare to leave.
Let time answer your question. You've beenproven wrong before.
 
Let time answer your question. You've beenproven wrong before.
Look at Hungary, the EU can't even make them do anything, what chance does it have with the UK? Orban had the right idea, tell them to *censored* off and let them stew.
 
Look at Hungary, the EU can't even make them do anything, what chance does it have with the UK? Orban had the right idea, tell them to *censored* off and let them stew.
That has nothing to do with the economy. The only way you can piss off Brussels is if you tinker with their prescriptions on the economy.

If push comes to shove in the case of the RoI / NI / UK scenario with no prospect of an agreement on customs & with all 3 choosing to respect the GF agreements, I'm guessing RoI will be booted out. It's anyone's guess then how will RoI sustain itself. This , in turn, could set the ball rolling for the re unification of NI into RoI only to be readmitted as a full member with due safeguard for the Ulsters. The Scots will be eagerly awaiting the progress on such a development before they make their move & before you realise it Britain is no longer UK, your flags & the hag in Windsor lose their relevance & you're back in late 17th century pre dating the Union of Scotland & England with Ireland. Good times like bad times don't last forever.

This, Paddy, is known since ages in India as the doctrine of unintended consequences. We've practically written a whole epic on it spanning 1 lakh verses - the largest such epic in the history of mankind. It's time for your people to write theirs.

You may want to bookmark this post.
 
Nope, it's £1.9bn because they will not lose the trade with ROI in the event of no deal because the UK will leave the border open and ROI will do the same as they are both in agreement that the Good Friday Agreement should be upheld. The only thing being ditched is the EU's BS protocol that Teresa the dumb agreed too. We said at the time, "nothing is agreed until it's all agreed," and we meant it, not our fault if the EU wasn't listening.

That doesn't make sense. If there's no way to separate the goods meant for NI and ROI, then that basically gives a back channel for the UK and EU to push goods into each other like the UK is part of the EU. Or the EU will have to put up a customs border between ROI and itself, which basically means kicking out ROI.

I would propose that goods ROI is sending on to the EU be separated into ROI and UK or ROI+UK(NI) and UK(GB), depending on how they wish to treat NI going forward, they can then tax them accordingly at the point of entry to mainland Europe, or they can tax UK(GB) goods at the point of entry to ROI electronically minus a border.

ROI will not let a hard border be placed between ROI and NI and neither will the UK and the EU has no physical means of putting one there without agreement (you need to understand this before continuing to debate, it's a cast iron fact), all they can do is implement an electronic taxation of UK(GB) goods as they arrive in ROI, or have a customs border on the European mainland, where there already is one anyway.

Basically, you are reversing the customs border protocol. Instead of putting one between GB and NI, you want one done between the EU and ROI. I don't think that's going to work out in terms of the sheer volumes of bureaucracy involved, especially concerning so many countries. Every single country will have to create and pass laws specifically for ROI.

Rather it's the EU that doesn't care about the dynamics between ROI and NI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.