GRcade

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:25 pm**

Denster wrote:I also think the EU has a large portion of the responsibility for that.

Nope

UK voted stupidly for a bunch of lies peddled by largely racist demagogues.
UK triggered Article 50 for no reason and with no plan
UK sent David strawberry floating Davis to "negotiate" - with no plans, position papers or desire to work more than 12 hours a weejk
UK keeps demanding moon on a stick and then acting surprised when rebuff
UK keeps floating ideas that have been comprehensively shot down by other parties (Ireland's view on the border?) and then getting haughty when people wont "be creative" with us.

Everything that's happening, and will happen, to the UK the public and the governemnt is entirely self inflected against all advice on how to avoid.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:29 pm**

What always gets glossed over during all of this is how the EU is now going to fund the massive hole in their finances without the UK, Yunker having ruled out other EU countries needing to pay more. Put simply there are only 3 options on the table - either you get the UK to continue paying in, you get other member states to increase their yearly spend (i.e. Germany, France) of you start making cuts. So which is it going to be Yunker!

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:35 pm**

KK wrote:What always gets glossed over during all of this is how the EU is now going to fund the massive hole in their finances without the UK, Yunker having ruled out other EU countries needing to pay more. Put simply there are only 3 options on the table - either you get the UK to continue paying in, you get other member states to increase their yearly spend (i.e. Germany, France) of you start making cuts. So which is it going to be Yunker!

It makes me laugh how Leavers care so much about EU finances post Brexit.

Simply put, it’s not really any of the UKs business how the EU is funded once Britain leaves.

But to answer you, I am not sure it’s the “massive hole” that you think it is. The UK is a net contributor, but we still received a lot of funding back. A quick Google search suggests there’ll be a €20billion gap after Brexit. Over 27 countries that’s not a lot to find.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:37 pm**

Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Hardly. A question on what the naughtiest thing someone had ever done could be considered irrelevant. A question, however framed, on whether the Primeminister believed the actions they were pursuing were in the best interests of the country is highly relevant

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:38 pm**

Moggy wrote:
KK wrote:What always gets glossed over during all of this is how the EU is now going to fund the massive hole in their finances without the UK, Yunker having ruled out other EU countries needing to pay more. Put simply there are only 3 options on the table - either you get the UK to continue paying in, you get other member states to increase their yearly spend (i.e. Germany, France) of you start making cuts. So which is it going to be Yunker!

It makes me laugh how Leavers care so much about EU finances post Brexit.

It gets brought up so much because it feeds in the narrative delusion of "they need us more than we need then".

Of course now that's becoming "We'll the EU screwed us by not agreeing to our completely reasonable demands. But they screwed themselves more!!!! Bloody odd chap Pedro Foreigner"

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:39 pm**

twitter.com/pointlesslettrs/status/918114065075064832

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:43 pm**

Moggy wrote:
KK wrote:What always gets glossed over during all of this is how the EU is now going to fund the massive hole in their finances without the UK, Yunker having ruled out other EU countries needing to pay more. Put simply there are only 3 options on the table - either you get the UK to continue paying in, you get other member states to increase their yearly spend (i.e. Germany, France) of you start making cuts. So which is it going to be Yunker!

It makes me laugh how Leavers care so much about EU finances post Brexit.

Simply put, it’s not really any of the UKs business how the EU is funded once Britain leaves.

But to answer you, I am not sure it’s the “massive hole” that you think it is. The UK is a net contributor, but we still received a lot of funding back. A quick Google search suggests there’ll be a €20billion gap after Brexit. Over 27 countries that’s not a lot to find.

It'll probably be covered by all of the extra business they get from us, like the entire financial sector moving to places like Ireland and Germany :lol:

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:44 pm**

Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Do you honestly believe that Denster? Come on! Shes the leader!

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:45 pm**

DML wrote:
Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Do you honestly believe that Denster? Come on! Shes the leader!

Look. It's completely unreasonable to ask the leader of the country to ask if she believes the country is following the best course of action.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:45 pm**

If whether Farron thought bum sex was a sin was relevant then this is.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:50 pm**

Errkal wrote:If whether Farron thought bum sex was a sin was relevant then this is.

That's the exact wording Newsnight used as well.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:59 pm**

Denster wrote:I think a No deal is now a distinct possibility and I also think the EU has a large portion of the responsibility for that.

I respectfully disagree.

The prospect of No Deal is on the table because some silly bastards seem to think that this is the only opportunity the UK will get to negotiate with the EU for the next thirty bajillion years and are trying to undo fifty years of work in an eighteen month timeframe.

The sensible solution is to try and have a Norwegian style arrangement in place for when the UK is due to leave in 2019 and to then continue negotiations with the EU to achieve all the things the UK wants from Brexit. If that means European courts having jurisdiction in the UK past 2019 and well in to the 2020s then it's a small price worth paying compared to the economic disaster of a No Deal Brexit.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:23 pm**

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:38 pm**

jawafour wrote:
Hexx wrote:...Back benches basically lining up in to shout 'No deal! not cave to scummy foreigners!'

Hexx wrote:...Of course now that's becoming "We'll the EU screwed us by not agreeing to our completely reasonable demands. But they screwed themselves more!!!! Bloody odd chap Pedro Foreigner"
Hexx wrote:...UK voted stupidly for a bunch of lies peddled by largely racist demagogues...

Hexx, I like your enthusiasm and strong opinions but I feel they could be in danger of being tarnished when you use phrases such as those above.

jimbojango wrote:...I’m fairly sure the indicated flu strain from the Southern Hemisphere for this winter, coupled with the NHS staffing / too many old people conundrum is going to remove a big percentage of the leave vote anyway..

I get the tongue-in-cheek side of this, but I am wary of attempting to lay "blame" for the Brexit result on "old" people. Presumably that thinking would work both ways and one could be equally frustrated at how "young" people chose to vote / not vote?

I'm not looking to pick arguments; but a popular question in this thread is why "leavers" won't post here and I suspect that they won't if they feel they will be labelled as racist, stupid and old.

I'm sure there's a leave support who's not racist, stupid and/or old.

But then I also believe in Ghosts. I've never met one of those either.

To answer your points in turn through :

1) That's what the back benches were saying! Sovereignty! Will of the British People! It mustn't be overidden by people in Brussels etc!"
2) See the BBC comments section on any Brexit Article, especially recently.
3) Find the majority of spokespeople for Leave fit that bit perfectly.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:45 pm**

Now I don't do sports...but do you negotiate scoring points?

n an interview with Emma Barnett on Radio 5 Live Nick Clegg, the former Lib Dem leader and former deputy prime minister, said he was surprised by Theresa May’s refusal on LBC last night to answer the question about how she would vote in an EU referendum now. Clegg said:

I was a bit surprised. I thought she was going to say, ‘Yes, I voted remain then, but now I’m wholeheartedly for - ’, so on and so forth … That’s what I would have expected her to do ...

If you’re negotiating with someone, it’s very important that you negotiate with people who you think in their heart of hearts really believe what they’re doing.

It’s not a very good way of negotiating for a team, if the captain of the team doesn’t seem to be particularly persuaded that they want to stick the ball in the other net

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:02 pm**

DML wrote:
Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Do you honestly believe that Denster? Come on! Shes the leader!

Of a country that’s already decided. What does it matter what she’d vote now. It’s a moot point. One designed only to add further injury to her.
If she says yes she’d still remain - she does herself damage if she says leave - the same but from different quarters.
It’s a no win answer unless she refuses the question.

I applaud her for not answering. The fact that so many in here don’t means nothing

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:07 pm**

Denster wrote:
DML wrote:
Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Do you honestly believe that Denster? Come on! Shes the leader!

Of a country that’s already decided. What does it matter what she’d vote now. It’s a moot point. One designed only to add further injury to her.
If she says yes she’d still remain - she dies herself damage if she says leave - the same but from different quarters.
It’s a no win answer unless she refuses the question.

I applaud her for not answering. The fact that so many in here don’t means nothing

You’d applaud her if she literally shat in your mouth.

The question is perfectly fair. She was known as a Remainer. She’s now the Prime Minister in charge of Brexit that says “Brexit means Brexit” and “no deal is better than a bad deal”. She’s seen all of the reports that are not allowed to be shown to the public. It’s perfectly fair to ask what way she’d vote if the referendum was today.

And it’s painfully obvious that she’d still vote remain. Her job is to do the best for the country and yet she’s doing something she knows is going to be harmful.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:26 pm**

Denster wrote:
DML wrote:
Denster wrote:It’s not a question she should or have to answer. It’s irrelevant.

Do you honestly believe that Denster? Come on! Shes the leader!

Of a country that’s already decided. What does it matter what she’d vote now. It’s a moot point. One designed only to add further injury to her.
If she says yes she’d still remain - she does herself damage if she says leave - the same but from different quarters.
It’s a no win answer unless she refuses the question.

I applaud her for not answering. The fact that so many in here don’t means nothing

The easy obvious answer is to back Brexit and say she would vote that way. Why wouldn't she? She's responsible for it!

I have never heard a leader not say they believe in what they are doing. I think it's a huge issue.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:29 pm**

So it’s relevant to ask Corbyn a hypothetical question on firing nukes at North Korea, but unreasonable to ask the Prime Minister in charge of Brexit if she’d vote for Brexit?

Denster wrote:
Hyperion wrote:How the strawberry float in 2017 are we still having questions about firing nuclear weapons

Because N. Korea are busily trying to build one and use it against others. It's still a relevant question.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:34 pm**

Completely different.

GRcade

Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit

Re: Brexit