Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I know where the border would need to go keano. I?m asking you how you would control a border in a locked down uk? Presumably a uk that wants to control its borders needs a border between uk and Republic of Ireland? So that?s why your talk of it being just an eu imposition is rubbish

Well you?ve obviously made your mind up on this issue.


Just to say that when there was a border it was a border in name only since so much smuggling went on it might as well have not been there.


Red diesel was a popular earner I understand. If a border is reintroduced at the EU?s demand it won?t prevent chlorinated chickens being smuggled into the Republic


😀

Well you?ve obviously made your mind up on this issue


It?s not an opinion - it?s the facts. If you brits want to absolutely control your borders it means you need to erect one. That?s not an opinion. The opinion is about why you feel the need to do that


As for the previous border, many Irish people would object to it being called a border in name only given the problems it caused. But even with the border of your imagination don?t you agree it was more trouble than it was worth? And by working together in eu we have had a better time of it?

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> the EU won?t need to impose a border.


There already is a border, the nature of the border going forward is a subject of negotiation. We went over this before you misrepresented a Reuters article, selectively quoted to pretend that criticism of your point validated it and then got muddled up about the monetary policy, protectionism and the EU budget and started with the ad-hominems.


At least we've moved on from you making up that "EU states have to erect a border against non EU states", but there's no need for the irrelevant insults against our "friends and partners" as Boris Johnson likes to call them, it's pretty transparent trolling.

  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/06/budget-2020-chancellor-plans-to-finally-end-tampon-tax


Finally, as sovereign UK, we can strive for equality of tax policy, and not have to adhere to the bigoted tax directives of the European Union.


I know not EVERY person who voted to remain is a misogynist. But clearly all remainers are happy align themselves with the misogynists. I hope they're happy with tacitly supporting such bigotry.


I expect most remainers didn't know what they voting for, and just swallowed the lies that the EU is a progressive organisation.. Perhaps they need to be better educated and informed about misogyny, and made aware that their actions have given rise to a normalisation of misogynistic attitudes.

Except TheCat, VAT for the most part is something government decides. Most consumer products are subject to it and the ban on zero rate tax on consumer products is something that applies to ALL products, so trying to conflate that with misogyny and the other infantile daggers of your post is disingenuous. I thought we had got past that?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/07/ban-supertrawlers-from-uk-waters-after-brexit-say-green-campaigners


Finally, as sovereign UK, we can strive for sustainability, and not have to adhere to the environmentally irresponsible directives of the European Union.


I know not EVERY person who voted to remain is an environmental vandal, and not all prejudiced again the dolphin population. But clearly all remainers are happy align themselves with the litterbugs and climate change deniers who form a core part of this posse. I hope they're happy with tacitly supporting dolphinicide.


I expect most remainers didn't know what they voting for, and just swallowed the lies that the EU is an environmental friendly organisation. Perhaps they need to be better educated and informed about their un-sustainible views, and made aware that their actions have given rise to a normalisation of planet-destroying attitudes.

And that, wind ?them? up, is the only point of all of this isn?t it


Write the largest cheque you can?t cash, just to wind ?them? up


And some people will indeed clap that


Worse, you will giggle, give yourself a metaphorical clap on the back. Ignorant of all the problems caused

Okay...since any form of levity appears to be lost on this crowd. Let me be more direct....you (and others) have previously claimed on here that there is 'not one' potential benefit of leaving the EU.


My two posts above give you not one...but two potentials benefits. They may not be that important to you versus other things, but they are two potentials benefits nonetheless, and to deflect by again claiming the leavers are 'ignorant of all the problems caused' just exemplifies the myopia which many display on this thread.


Maybe...just maybe...there's more to this than the ridiculous polarizing position that many take on this thread about the entire brexit process and subsequent trade talks.


Sure, I get that on balance you don't like it. But by dogmatically claiming 'not one' benefit is just wilful obsintnece.


I would add to Blah Blah.....I agree that conflating remain voting with misogyny or environmental vandalism is plainly ridiculous (that was sort of the point). It's almost as ridiculous as constantly being told how 'ignorant' leavers when any little factoid comes out which might be negative for the UK's relationship with the EU going forward. It's interesting that I don't see your calling out of the plethora of 'infantile'and 'disingenuous' posts on here when they clearly agree with your pre-exisating position.

Sorry. Are you claiming your posts are light hearted banter. Or they are making serious points


The two points you claim don?t stand up to any scrutiny


Yes. You can ban super trawlers. Of course you can. It?s you?re legal right


But how does that play out in a bigger picture politically. You can?t claim these are simple, no-cost wins

They are light hearted posts which make serious points (I mean FFS...I used the word 'dolphinicide'!!). The two are not mutually exclusive.


So you now seemingly admit that there are some possible 'wins' but now you've qualified it by saying they have to be 'no cost' wins, and it's now not about 'not one' potential benefit, but has morphed to being all about the 'bigger picture'? Just keep changing the goalposts, as long your narrative stays the same huh?


In anycase, I fail to see how these points don't 'stand up to scrutiny', when you haven't even provided any robust 'scrutiny' or in fact any reasonable counter argument on those two specific points.


Who exactly loses out of removing the consumer/discretionay goods VAT rate on sanitary products? The HMRC, sure....but I'm guessing you knew that.


Anyway, as Keano said above...Yawn....

diable rouge Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The First rule of Troll Club:

>

> If an early hours, half-pissed thread falls flat

> on it's arse, troll a Brexit thread...


I think it's pretty clear that you've proved the first rule is clearly finding something totally irrelevant to the discussion to focus on, and pretending like it is relevant....

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Slow hand clap......

>

> It is blatantly obvious that some (if not many)

> leave voters voted for something without having

> any clue of the complexities. That was the whole

> drive of the leave campaign. So please, don't

> insult the intelligence of people here.


Ha, good grief, some of you people are un-believable. Don't insult the intelligence of the good, right-minded, sensible, remain voters on here is what you mean, right? And in the same paragraph (without any indication of irony), you manage to once again insult leave voters by claiming ignorance as the main driver behind the result.


And you have the gall to brand me infantile and a troll. Time for a look in the mirror my friend....

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So you really want to rerun the same arguments

> around ignorance already done to death, really?

>

> Where shall we start? With a big red bus perhaps?

>

> Put down the troll potion ffs.


Sigh. No I don't want a 'return' to these 'arguments'.


Calling more than 50 percent of the voting population stupid is not an 'arguement', its a symptom of all-consuming self-righteousness, and absolute inability to accept that there may be some concessions or a different viewpoint from one's own.


Its telling that almost every time I (or a few others) decide to voice our opinions on here which disagree with what to you consider to be true, you brand them a 'troll'.....

I've expressed it numerous times before on this forums, but in anycase.....


A deal is highly likely to be preferable to no deal given the 'friction'/transition issues of foremost concern in the short term.


(Despite it often alleged that I don't discuss the issues. I have actually laid out my views on a whole range of things multiple times over the past 4 years (go and check my posting history), but these often then get lost in back an forth on other petty issues that are part and parcel of this forum.)

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've expressed it numerous times before on this

> forums, but in anycase.....

>

> A deal is highly likely to be preferable to no

> deal given the 'friction'/transition issues of

> foremost concern in the short term.

>

> (Despite it often alleged that I don't discuss the

> issues. I have actually laid out my views on a

> whole range of things multiple times over the past

> 4 years (go and check my posting history), but

> these often then get lost in back an forth on

> other petty issues that are part and parcel of

> this forum.)


So that?s a ?no?


Do you believe a deal can be done by Boris? deadline that he?s made up for no reason?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Money has to be raised in order to slow the almost terminal decline of public services bought on through years of neglect under the last government. There is no way to raise taxes that does not have some negative impacts / trade offs. But if we want public services and infrastructure that work then raise taxes we must.  Personally I'm glad that she is has gone some way to narrowing the inheritance loop hole which was being used by rich individuals (who are not farmers) to avoid tax. She's slightly rebalanced the burden away from the young, putting it more on wealthier pensioners (who let's face it, have been disproportionately protected for many, many years). And the NICs increase, whilst undoubtedly inflationary, won't be directly passed on (some will, some will likely be absorbed by companies); it's better than raising it on employees, which would have done more to depress growth. Overall, I think she's sailed a prudent course through very choppy waters. The electorate needs to get serious... you can't have European style services and US levels of tax. Borrowing for tax cuts, Truss style, it is is not. Of course the elephant in the room (growing ever larger now Trump is in office and threatening tariffs) is our relationship with the EU. If we want better growth, we need a closer relationship with our nearest and largest trading block. We will at some point have to review tax on transport more radically (as we see greater up take of electric vehicles). The most economically rational system would be one of dynamic road pricing. But politically, very difficult to do
    • Labour was right not to increase fuel duty - it's not just motorists it affects, but goods transport. Fuel goes up, inflation goes up. Inflation will go up now anyway, and growth will stagnate, because businesses will pass the employee NIC hikes onto customers.  I think farms should be exempt from the 20% IHT. I don't know any rich famers, only ones who work their fingers to the bone. But it's in their blood and taking that, often multi-generation, legacy out of the family is heart-breaking. Many work to such low yields, and yet they'll often still bring a lamb to the vet, even if the fees are more than the lamb's life (or death) is worth. Food security should be made a top priority in this country. And, even tho the tax is only for farms over £1m, that's probably not much when you add it all up. I think every incentive should be given to young people who want to take up the mantle. 
    • This link mau already have been posted but if not olease aign & share this petition - https://www.change.org/p/stop-the-closure-of-east-dulwich-post-office
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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