Jump to content

robbin

Member
  • Posts

    960
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by robbin

  1. robbin

    Brexit View

    Nice try, but lame!
  2. robbin

    Brexit View

    Eh, Sephiroth? "...whilst simultaneously repeating every wishful-thinking/half-baked theory from the UKIP/Brexiteer perspective (Turkey joining!..." You sneer, but perhaps you have overlooked (or didn't know) that until the last minute when he saw that the referendum was going to be closer than he thought, the UK's Prime Minister was openly supporting Turkey's application to join the EU. Moreover, there was a time (prior to Erdogan's crackdown) when the EU was doing a deal for visa free travel for Turkish citizens and was desperately trying to be close to Turkey because it wanted Turkey's help with the migrant crisis. That was not a "half-baked" theory from the UKIP/Brexiteer perspective" as you say. "But the UK government's formal position is to support Turkey joining the EU and over the years it has sounded enthusiastic. In July 2010, on a visit to Turkey, David Cameron warned France and Germany not to shut Turkey "out of the club"." is just one BBC news report. There are many such reports over several years. So you can stick to your ignorance of the facts if you wish, but when you are wrong, you should at least be corrected, particularly if you put up a straw man to validate your sneering comments. Last time I looked Cameron was neither UKIP or a Brexiteer.
  3. robbin

    Brexit View

    To put it mildly, Keano! Sephiroth, I'm flattered you took the time to look at some of my older posts, but I think you have just proved my point (again) by your implied suggestion that in fact I didn't vote to remain. Nothing in what you quoted suggests that (if you engaged any sort of objectivity to it) I was pushing for a leave vote. As part of what you quoted makes clear, I thought it unlikely there would be a majority to leave. Just because I was responding to hysterical postings by setting out what I saw as some 'pros' to a Brexit, you rush to interpret that as some confirmation that I was a leave supporter (presumably to try to support your already incorrect assumption that was the case). You couldn't be more wrong and you have just demonstrated my point yet again as well as demonstrating your absence of objectivety or willingness to enter into any sort of intelligent debate. ETA: Not that I am inviting you to do so now - it's clear you are one of those who are not prepared to consider anything other than your entrenched views, so I think I've said all I want to say on the subject, as what we are doing is not debating. I think some sort of a deal must still be likely (but far from certain) so we may never see whether there would have been any significant disruption on borders, but if there is no deal, we can take stock in May and see whether yours was a hysterical position or a correct one.
  4. robbin

    Brexit View

    I agree, Keano. I chuckled when I read that about the EU wanting to protect the peace in Ireland! If that is even slightly true, it will soon become clear because if the EU refuse to do any deal other than the now defunct backstop in the now defunct WA there will be a border of sorts put in place. For the EU to say that there MUST be a WA with a backstop that avoids a hard border, otherwise no deal, when the effect of no deal is to introduce a border belies their position - their true position is to use Ireland as a pawn in negotiations. The EU would 'drop' Ireland the moment it suited them to do so - Ireland are minnows in this (which is why their economy would take a battering far beyond anything we would suffer in the UK in the event of a disorderly no deal scenario). The self-contradictory position of the Irish government suffers from the same basic flaw and now the reality of that has dawned on them.
  5. robbin

    Brexit View

    Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @ robbin > > "Just so I'm clear, what do you mean by "people > like you Robbin"?" > > People like you = are happy to leave, think > everything will be ok or amazing As I have repeatedly said for 2 years now on EDF (twice, I think, in this thread alone), I voted to remain. I am not happy we are leaving - that's why I voted to remain, however I'm also not hysterical about it, nor have I shut my eyes to all the pros and cons or the realities of the situation. There's precious little of any balanced argument on here - I would estimate it's about 95% (which even for the bubble is hardly representative of the referendum voting)hard liners bitching repeatedly about leaving the EU and suggesting people who voted for it are stupid, racist, evil or have been easily conned. It's not really a good reflection on the collective intelligence or maturity in our bubble. Unfortunately there is not really any 'debate' about the issue on here - it's mostly self-serving comments from rabid remainers who would never countenance for one moment that they are not 100% right (they plainly are not) or that anyone who thinks different is not 100% stupid. If, like me you venture to suggest anything that's not entirely anti Brexit, the usual suspect don't seem to have the wit to engage with that without (incorrect) sniping about me being a die hard Leave voter. I keep getting that sort of ill-considered knee-jerk response, even though I repeatedly make clear my position on the referendum.
  6. robbin

    Brexit View

    Tusk, Merkel and others at the EU are clearly feeling the pressure, just like the UK reps.
  7. robbin

    Brexit View

    Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ? > By the way - if everything you have said turns out > to be true by the end of May 2019 I will eat my > words. I won't do it naked, or on television, or > hopping down the South Bank, but I will eat my > words.? > > And remainers (like me) who think the worst will > happen should also be able to eat our words > > But if it is remainers eating their words, then so > what. No one will have been affected or harmed. > Yay! > > But if people like you Robbin are wrong, then I?m > not sure you eating your words will provide > sufficient comfort Just so I'm clear, what do you mean by "people like you Robbin"?
  8. robbin

    Brexit View

    Particularly if they are the only thing left to eat.
  9. robbin

    Brexit View

    By the way - if everything you have said turns out to be true by the end of May 2019 I will eat my words. I won't do it naked, or on television, or hopping down the South Bank, but I will eat my words.
  10. robbin

    Brexit View

    ... taken in to such an extent that even though HMRC have said to avoid there being border delays for imports there will be no checks on most products, you prefer to disregard what HMRC have said will happen (surely they should know what they are going to do in a no-deal Brexit) in favour of peddling the fear of starvation and the need to bulk buy and stock up on food. If you want to be frightened that's fine, but maybe don't try to justify it on false premise?
  11. robbin

    Brexit View

    I am willing to stand corrected, but I don't recall having said that about people on low incomes. If I did, I don't think I was right, because I can't see how 'food shortages' would be worse for products which low income people would buy, rather than those on higher incomes. As for 'collective insecurity' I think you are referring to a sort of hysteria whipped up by those that want to frighten you for their own ends. You should not be taken in by that, is what I am saying. Seemingly, you have been well and truly taken in by it though - everything seems very black and white in your Brexit view.
  12. robbin

    Brexit View

    keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JohnL said > > ?...If perhaps the EU could just organise a > passport for those of us that wanted dual > nationality but had no connections to do so it > would solve things for us.? > > I?m sure if you volunteer for the proposed EU army > they?d give you a right of residency at least. Way too much hardship involved!
  13. robbin

    Brexit View

    Jenny1 Wrote: > > As to stocking up the cupboards, I'm sure you'd > agree we really shouldn't be put in a position > where anyone (with or without medical conditions) > even has to give it a passing thought. I do and we are not. Everything else is down to a tin foil hat mentality. Even if there is some slight risk of limited disruption and shortages, people should not be such snowflakes about it. It's like the antithesis of the blitz mentality. Gawd help us if we ever get into a real dangerous situation again - we would collectively be pathetic pushovers.
  14. robbin

    Brexit View

    Jenny1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Robbin - you've already pointed out that any rise > in food prices (even if fairly small, and > hopefully temporary) will affect those on small > incomes. Therefore it's sensible, if you have cash > available, to stock up on non-perishable items you > use regularly. > > Do also remember that there are people - like > myself - who already have a limited diet for > medical reasons. Some substantial surgery a few > years back means there are a lot of foods I can't > digest. So it's sensible to make sure I have some > supplies of the non-freah foods that I can eat, in > case they're suddenly less available than normal. > Then you obviously would be entitled (if it makes you feel more comfortable) to stock up on a few things - assuming you do it well beforehand, so as not to contribute to anti-social hoarding and self-inflicted shortages. I still don't think you would need to, but if it made you feel better that would be fair enough. People without specific conditions are different.
  15. robbin

    Brexit View

    It's talking about a different scenario where checks are permanently (or semi-permanently) halted. That's not what HMRC said it would do yesterday. Sky News had a lengthy article on it yesterday if you are interested. The starvation comment was not serious! People who think there is a risk of starvation should go and seek professional help (if only to get them fitted for a nice foil hat).
  16. robbin

    Brexit View

    What it would mean is that there is unlikely to be much disruption to any supply chains into the UK. Presumably that will come as a relief to any kanban type manufacturing operations in the UK (e.g. car manufacturers). We might not all starve to death as well, which would be nice (if a little disappointing for some of you on the EDF!).
  17. robbin

    Brexit View

    "I believe Grayling first articulated the 'no checks' plan in March last year.... It's not a good idea. It will make these fantasy 'trade deals' that Brexiters talk about even more unlikely..." Sorry, I don't follow. How does HMRC carrying out no checks for a temporary period of time (or any period) make other trade deals more unlikely? I may be missing something, but I don't at the moment follow your logic - in fact I can't see how the two are related.
  18. robbin

    Brexit View

    JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > diable rouge Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > "Most" EU goods will be waved through dozens of > > British ports to avoid any traffic delays if > > Britain leaves without a deal on 29 March. > > > > This must be that taking back control of our > > borders thingymajig that everyone keeps talking > > about... > > Drug & people smugglers will have noticed I > expect. What? Do you mean as opposed to no checks at all qua member of the customs union? In any event, the last time I looked, HMRC did not have jurisdiction over immigration matters (as opposed to customs checks)!
  19. robbin

    Brexit View

    I know this will come as a disappointment to any of you who were hoping that those of us not killed in the civil unrest bloodbath (in March 2019) would perish from starvation... "Most" EU goods will be waved through dozens of British ports to avoid any traffic delays if Britain leaves without a deal on 29 March. Should Theresa May not secure a formal divorce agreement with the union, British businesses importing from the EU should have all goods subject to rest of the world checks, meaning they would have to give a full declaration and pay duty before they come over the border. But in a bid to avoid huge traffic jams and delays, HMRC has announced transitional plans which will be in place for a year, where EU goods will be waved through as they are now. The simplified procedures will be in place for three to six months before HMRC reviews them. Officials have promised to give a 12-month notice period to businesses for any changes made to the procedures within that time period. No-deal Brexit means Britain will trade with the EU on World Trade Organisation terms (WTO) which regulate global trade, with rules on import taxes and limits on the number of goods supplied to other countries. The plans are in place to avoid congestion, but critics say it means officials won't know what is coming into Britain. There are 21 locations which will allow EU products to come through without additional checks, including Liverpool, Portsmouth, Hull, the Channel Tunnel in Folkestone, Pembury and Tyne. The simplified checks are available to businesses with an EORI number, which businesses were able to register for from December, who are based in the UK, and are importing from the EU into the UK. Businesses importing controlled goods from the EU into the UK will have to complete a "simplified frontier declaration" before importing the goods, make sure they arrive with all supporting documentation and then send another supplementary declaration within a month of getting the goods. Those importing standard goods will have to make a "customs declaration within your commercial records when the goods cross the border". The businesses will then have to make a supplementary declaration about a month after the goods are received.
  20. robbin

    Brexit View

    More nonsense. When you read what is actually being said, it is clear that it amounts to b*gger all. It suits those with an agenda to spout about food shortages and civil unrest ('where's my preferred instant latte mixture in that cool French packaging??') by latching onto some comment from somebody in the context of worst case scenario contingency planning. Do those people really equate a worst case planning scenario (planning for a scenario which might be incredibly unlikely to happen) with what will actually happen? I doubt they generally do (unless they are very weak minded)- it is far more likely they are mischief making, because it suits their arguments/prejudices. Because a ship has lifeboats, that doesn't mean it is likely to sink. They are there as a precaution. Every time you get on a boat, normal people don't publicly stress about it sinking because someone has seen fit to think to fit it out with lifejackets or lifeboats. I continue to detect something akin to glee from some posters on here, when some clown on social media, or on some other internet site, is reported to have 'warned' of some sort of 'catastrophe'. Postings then appear as some sort of gleeful, self-serving 'I told you so' - as if we are being told about something that is about to happen, rather than something which is extremely unlikely to happen. Do those people think we should not carry out any contingency planning?!
  21. robbin

    Brexit View

    Spot-on JoeLeg. There is obviously a likelihood of some short term supply delays for some (but probably not many) food products. I've never suggested otherwise. What I think is ludicrous is for people to say there will be 'food shortages' as if it will be 80s style Moscow supermarket shelves, or people starving for want of food in the shops. I know we live in a privileged bubble and I accept that I'm more comfortably well off than most, but I think it is absurd for anyone to scare-monger (unless they have an agenda of course) along those lines. If a supply chain delay means I cannot have my preferred 75% cacao content Belgian chocolate and instead have to settle for just 60% (the horror!) then I don't think that sort of thing justifies waving my arms in the air and declaring that our civilisation is ending, or declaring a 'food shortage'. If M&S runs low on Spanish tomatoes, or apples, then I suppose I'll have to slum it by buying British, or South African produce, or one of those other sorts of products I understand may just about be able to make it to the shops as they will be unaffected by any temporary delays on an EU border. In extremis, I suppose I could forego tomatoes altogether, for a week or two, and have some cucumber or peppers instead. Hopefully I'll survive such trauma, if it happens. If some food products are low or sold out for a month or two, I suspect my world will not end. Anyone who truly thinks that first world problems like this amount to a 'food shortage' then so be it, but I don't envy their lack of ability to cope with everyday minor inconveniences. The most likely scenario leading to any shortages is that idiots on social media (either that have an axe to grind, or are just plain stupid) or the 24 hour news media itself, talk up the possibility of a 'food shortage' to such an extent that people start stocking up and thereby create a 'shortage' (for others). I'm sure some on here would like that to happen, but most would not. In my view it is sensible to plan for the worst case scenario if you are a government or a business, but equally it is reckless and anti-social to try to whip up hysteria about something that will never happen or which is extremely unlikely to happen.
  22. robbin

    Brexit View

    Common sense, mostly. Have you reached a contrary view? If so, was it based solely on hysteria, or on something else (as well)?
  23. robbin

    Brexit View

    Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You think the possibility of food shortages is a > project of fear and has no basis in the potential > reality of exiting the EU without a deal? Yes. Obviously.
  24. robbin

    Brexit View

    I know some nutters as well - but none that are 'stockpiling'! What on earth are they stocking up on, I wonder!
  25. robbin

    Brexit View

    alex-b wrote: "Since you?re a leave me, why don?t you sketch out a WA and PD that you think would be better and also acceptable to both sides." Yawn. First of all your blinkers have led you to the wrong conclusion. Just because everyone doesn't hold the same extreme views as you, doesn't mean they are a "leave me" [sic]. As I have pointed out a number of times (latterly in my last post before yours) I voted to remain. It's just that my mind is not closed to every other viewpoint and I don't think everything in the debate is black or white (as you seemingly do). In fact, I think overall there is much more grey than black or white combined. Smouldering resentment and anger tends to cause people to see things more in terms of black and white absolutes - something which continues to hinder proper debate to this day on this issue (on both sides). So no, I hope you will forgive me for not responding to the stock invitation one hears from annoyed remainers (to set out my own WA and PD). That said, if push comes to shove I would accept the WA and PD as they are but without any mechanism (i.e. the 'backstop') for keeping the UK tied up forever while simultaneously removing any bargaining power for the UK and removing any motivation for the EU to agree a trade deal. There - having said I wouldn't do it - I have.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...