letter from Boris Johnson to Donald Tusk

[Lower]

Lower wants free trade with the EU and no borders

And it is the EUs fault Lower cant have it

Its the EU's fault that they choose not listen and be proactive in working towards a solution that works for both sides.

A good deal has two winners and should not be punitive to either side. At the moment the EU is taking the punitive route.

 

[Notch7]

Has it?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

Well done you have proved something.

Which is irrelevant.

 

[Lower]

That's not answering the question and it's veery nebulous. Short term, medium term - what time length are these?

What are these benefits?

Rees Mogg own memorable quote was upto 50 years. Yet he still couldn't define the benefits only that it would take upto 50 years to realise something we don't know.

Brexiteers seem to long for this breakup of the EU as their final haily mary hope of being proven correct on Brexit. It's crazy.

Did you call me nebulous?!??! Did you?

SirGalahad is actually Jean Claude Juncker. Just to be clear, i am not Theresa May

Short term- up to 2 years
Medium term- 2-10 years
Long term- 10 years plus.

That non-nebulous (specific) enough for you?

 

[fillyboy]

Well done you have proved something.

Which is irrelevant.

It's always irrelevant when you're proved wrong isn't it.

 

[Notch7]

and we will be better off out financially, emotionally and diplomatically

Financially: no

Diplomatically: no

Emotionally: in your mind, perhaps. For others, no.

There are no financial models that indicate a financial upside.

 

[fillyboy]

Emotionally: in your mind, perhaps. For others, no.

Certainly not for you Notchy, you're already an emotional wreck and we haven't even left yet.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Its a bit of a straw man argument. There is a proposed agreement, but parliament will not approve it. Therefore by definition, there is no agreement.

Therefore, leaving under such circumstances would be extremely stupid.

Just to be clear, i don't think for one second that leaving the EU is a painless process. However, someone likened it to a divorce and i think that's a good analogy.

If it is - then getting divorced before settlement is agreed would also be extremely stupid.

 

[Lower]

That's not answering the question and it's veery nebulous. Short term, medium term - what time length are these?

What are these benefits?

Rees Mogg own memorable quote was upto 50 years. Yet he still couldn't define the benefits only that it would take upto 50 years to realise something we don't know.

Brexiteers seem to long for this breakup of the EU as their final haily mary hope of being proven correct on Brexit. It's crazy.

Sorry, missed the question about the benefits. A few examples below:

1. The freedom to manage our own laws without European oversight. If you want specific examples of the negative effect of EU blanket law application i can give them to you.
2. End free movement of people. I want to be able to control who we allow to live and work here, not have our hands tied about skillsets, numbers etc
3. The freedom to create and flex trade agreements and tariffs with the rest of the world on our own terms. The rest of the world is a much bigger market than the EU.
4. End the nett outflow of money to the EU. Reason should be obvious
5. End automatic alignment with EU standards. By automatically aligning with EU standards we limit
etc etc


I don't long for the break up of the EU. I voted remain at the referendum on the basis that if we stayed then, with the assistance of other like minded EU members, we might have been able to change its course. However, i've concluded that that won't happen any time soon and we're better off out in many, many ways.

 

[Lower]

Therefore, leaving under such circumstances would be extremely stupid.


If it is - then getting divorced before settlement is agreed would also be extremely stupid.

I agree. It would be better if we had a deal. However, as with a divorce, if both parties cannot agree a settlement, should they stay married or would it be better for one party to be be prepared to cut their losses and walk away?

PS. i think we will do a deal with the EU in the short term (up to 2 years to be clear). But it may take leaving the EU without a deal for create the desire within the EU to come to an agreement that both sides want.

 

[SirGalahad]

I voted remain at the referendum on the basis that if we stayed then, with the assistance of other like minded EU members, we might have been able to change its course.

This remains the best course of action. There is no impending threat to the EU either external or internal but Brexit was a missed opportunity for us to remain in the EU but force through change. Look at all those right wing parties who won power and said they were consiering leaving the EU have now dialled back their rhetoric - they know it will be economically disasterous and now are working to make changes - we were the volunteers who bear the cost but the benefits will not flow to us.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I agree. It would be better if we had a deal. However, as with a divorce, if both parties cannot agree a settlement, should they stay married or would it be better for one party to be be prepared to cut their losses and walk away?

It obviously depends on the losses - and whether you have already arranged for somewhere else to go.

 

[durhamplumber]

Its more fun triggering RWR lunatics.

I knew that pic would trigger these RWR Brexiteers just like their RWR Republican brethren.

Not triggered me at all you are Mr double standards after all.

 

[SirGalahad]

Sorry, missed the question about the benefits. A few examples below:

1. The freedom to manage our own laws without European oversight. If you want specific examples of the negative effect of EU blanket law application i can give them to you.
2. End free movement of people. I want to be able to control who we allow to live and work here, not have our hands tied about skillsets, numbers etc
3. The freedom to create and flex trade agreements and tariffs with the rest of the world on our own terms. The rest of the world is a much bigger market than the EU.
4. End the nett outflow of money to the EU. Reason should be obvious
5. End automatic alignment with EU standards. By automatically aligning with EU standards we limit
etc etc


I don't long for the break up of the EU. I voted remain at the referendum on the basis that if we stayed then, with the assistance of other like minded EU members, we might have been able to change its course. However, i've concluded that that won't happen any time soon and we're better off out in many, many ways.

1. Please provide me with lawas that you disagree with. As far as I can recall we voted for 95% of the EU legislation, against 2% and abstained 3%.
2. We can control who we allow to remain here, we simply did not enforce the rules because it was cheaper not to do so and the benefits of immigration outweighed the costs.
3. So now you want tariffs and FTA? We have about 759 we are signatory to which we gained because we were part of the world largest trading bloc. Try negotiate when you are smaller.
4. Correct we do pay into the EU and in return we get tariff free access to the EU, there is an allied benefit its not just a deadweight cost.
5. So we limit ourselves by having standards. Lets become a third world country? How is lowering standards ever boosted an economy?

 

[SirGalahad]

Not triggered me at all you are Mr double standards after all.

DP is triggered, I expected a better retort, looks like you are still fuming.

 

[durhamplumber]

DP is triggered, I expected a better retort, looks like you are still fuming.

Lol...in ya dreams sonny jim.