The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (12 Viewers)

[clint van damme]

It is a deal that is being put forward. A few countries have ratified the deal. The others seem to be in agreement. So the talks are at an advanced stage.

we aren't allowed to negotiate trade deals until we've left the EU.

 

---

[Captain Dart]

we aren't allowed to negotiate trade deals until we've left the EU.

Which is a cruel and vindictive restriction to enforce now we are leaving.
However I would hope things are progressing behind the scenes.

 

[Monners]

Immigration is not the reason for a housing shortage. Planning laws allowing developers to sit on land, almost entire focus on need in the South East, not replacing housing stock after council house sell off, removal of remaining housing stock from local authority control, for example, are way more relevant than immigration.

Same argument re NHS waiting lists - more to do with lack of investment in infrastructure and staff recruitment (including wages). Imagine (or don't) how much worse the NHS would be without immigration.

Neither side at the time of the referendum seemed to want to understand the complexities around this issue.

Oh yeah, I didn't want to enter the discussion (damn!)

 

[clint van damme]

Which is a cruel and vindictive restriction to enforce now we are leaving.
However I would hope things are progressing behind the scenes.

it's an EU rule and was before we voted to leave so it's not vindictive.
It's also not strictly enforceable so hopefully you are correct that things are progressing behind the scenes in terms of negotiation even if deals can't actually be signed currently, however with the hapless and deluded 'Dr' Liam Fox involved who knows.

 

[skybluetony176]

Out of interest Tony, why did you vote UKIP at the time; so by definition a staunch leave supporter?

Astute - you come across as a staunch leave voter with your clear mistrust (to say the least) of anything EU, and yet appear to have voted remain?

I don't want to enter the argument, but why are you both going at it hammer and tongs, when you have both found it within yourselves to change your minds over the last couple of years?

I voted for them once and once only and it was a tactical vote rather than an endorsement of policy.

To give you the short version Cameron won the election on the pledge of a referendum following negotiations with the EU. I knew that those negotiations wouldn’t be plain sailing and Cameron’s strongest negotiation tool was the threat of the U.K. voting leave. On that basis before the negotiations there was a European election so I took the decision to vote UKIP on this one occasion because the way I figured it the more votes they received the more serious the EU would take the prospect of the U.K. voting leave and in turn that would strengthen the U.K’s arm in negotiations. The rest is history.

 

[skybluetony176]

A lame duck that the EU wants trade deals with the countries involved.

I would have said you couldn't make it up. But you have.

That’s right the countries as individual countries in individual bespoke deals not with the block on TPP terms. Your many times repeated inability to understand this very basic difference is flabbergasting.

 

[Captain Dart]

it's an EU rule and was before we voted to leave so it's not vindictive.
It's also not strictly enforceable so hopefully you are correct that things are progressing behind the scenes in terms of negotiation even if deals can't actually be signed currently, however with the hapless and deluded 'Dr' Liam Fox involved who knows.

I think it is vindictive of the EU to hold the UK to it in the 2 year post article 50 period and it is weak of the UK not to take this matter to court and insist it can negotiate with other countries outside the EU whilst getting on with actual talks.

 

[skybluetony176]

It is a deal that is being put forward. A few countries have ratified the deal. The others seem to be in agreement. So the talks are at an advanced stage.

Without the U.K. the U.K. isn’t in advanced talks with them and that’s what you claimed.

 

[Astute]

we aren't allowed to negotiate trade deals until we've left the EU.

We are allowed to negotiate them. But we are not allowed to sign anything until after we have left.

 

[Astute]

Immigration is not the reason for a housing shortage. Planning laws allowing developers to sit on land, almost entire focus on need in the South East, not replacing housing stock after council house sell off, removal of remaining housing stock from local authority control, for example, are way more relevant than immigration.

Same argument re NHS waiting lists - more to do with lack of investment in infrastructure and staff recruitment (including wages). Imagine (or don't) how much worse the NHS would be without immigration.

Neither side at the time of the referendum seemed to want to understand the complexities around this issue.

Oh yeah, I didn't want to enter the discussion (damn!)

Which I have said several times before.

Everyone seems to have their own version. But agree with most of what you say.

But our population has boomed. The houses sold off are still lived in. It is affordable housing that has suffered the most. And it costs the government billions of pounds each year with excessive rents for housing and putting people up in hotels and similar.

This is why I say the Tories and Labour are to blame for a lot of it. Houses were sold and the money spent. But not on new houses. They have spent billions more on rent than it would have cost in the long run to build. And then they would also have received rent.

I remember when I first mentioned it on here. Some tried to say that Labour were not at fault.

My point on open borders is how can it continue when nothing is being done about the situation we are presently in. The situation is getting worse. And it will continue to do so. We are not even keeping up with the birth rate. The whole situation is a joke. And we can't trust any party to change things because they have failed badly for many years.

 

[Astute]

That’s right the countries as individual countries in individual bespoke deals not with the block on TPP terms. Your many times repeated inability to understand this very basic difference is flabbergasting.

Is that right?

So what are the terms of TPP?

If it is a free trade agreement and nothing else what is the problem?

 

[Captain Dart]

Which I have said several times before.

Everyone seems to have their own version. But agree with most of what you say.

But our population has boomed. The houses sold off are still lived in. It is affordable housing that has suffered the most. And it costs the government billions of pounds each year with excessive rents for housing and putting people up in hotels and similar.

This is why I say the Tories and Labour are to blame for a lot of it. Houses were sold and the money spent. But not on new houses. They have spent billions more on rent than it would have cost in the long run to build. And then they would also have received rent.

I remember when I first mentioned it on here. Some tried to say that Labour were not at fault.

My point on open borders is how can it continue when nothing is being done about the situation we are presently in. The situation is getting worse. And it will continue to do so. We are not even keeping up with the birth rate. The whole situation is a joke. And we can't trust any party to change things because they have failed badly for many years.

The Tories don't have a vision the masses can buy into and Labour wants to change everything which we all know is a dangerous course and could throw everything into turmoil.
What is needed is firm action on a few chosen areas that can be tackled in a single parliament, in my view housing should be top priority with the environment another a close second.

 

[Astute]

Without the U.K. the U.K. isn’t in advanced talks with them and that’s what you claimed.

So what do you know?

It might even be that Japan wants us to have a deal with the EU so it has been said in the open.

But you know everything when you know nothing.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

All agreed apparently. Coming to an EU country near you soon. Not us obviously.

But once again...negative slant on EVERYTHING!
Do you not just think it possible that even if if means a 12month minimum wait that we get the best deal for Britain (might easily be a simple replication of the terms the EU have as our business might form a significant part of what Japan wants access to!)
THEN we dictate what we trade rather than the EU dictating it to us!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Astute]

The Tories don't have a vision the masses can buy into and Labour wants to change everything which we all know is a dangerous course and could throw everything into turmoil.
What is needed is firm action on a few chosen areas that can be tackled in a single parliament, in my view housing should be top priority with the environment another a close second.

To me there are three main things as a Tory would say.

Housing, housing and even more housing.

Then you get a standing ovation from the nodding dogs.

 

[skybluetony176]

New Zealand and Australia are quite strict on who they allow to live in their countries. I'm quite surprised if you agree with them.

There concerns with regards the TPP is not who lives there it’s who will all of a sudden be able to buy homes there while not living there. It’s a pretty simple difference. Although I’m not surprised that you’ve failed to understand the difference.

 

[Astute]

But once again...negative slant on EVERYTHING!
Do you not just think it possible that even if if means a 12month minimum wait that we get the best deal for Britain (might easily be a simple replication of the terms the EU have as our business might form a significant part of what Japan wants access to!)
THEN we dictate what we trade rather than the EU dictating it to us!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Get it right. Negative slant on the UK and whatever happens and positive slant on the EU whatever it does.

 

[Astute]

There concerns with regards the TPP is not who lives there it’s who will all of a sudden be able to buy homes there while not leaving there. It’s a pretty simple difference. Although I’m not surprised that you’ve failed to understand the difference.

I understand it all. It isn't me looking at everything negatively on behalf of the UK all the time.

Like I keep saying let's wait for the details before we celebrate or say it is shit.

 

[skybluetony176]

Lame duck?

What are the details then?

They can’t agree the details. That is why it’s a lame duck. All they have is more questions than answers.

 

[skybluetony176]

Is that right?

So what are the terms of TPP?

If it is a free trade agreement and nothing else what is the problem?

Because it’s not a free trade agreement and nothing else. It’s not even a full FTA before you consider the conditions.

 

[Monners]

Which I have said several times before.

Everyone seems to have their own version. But agree with most of what you say.

But our population has boomed. The houses sold off are still lived in. It is affordable housing that has suffered the most. And it costs the government billions of pounds each year with excessive rents for housing and putting people up in hotels and similar.

This is why I say the Tories and Labour are to blame for a lot of it. Houses were sold and the money spent. But not on new houses. They have spent billions more on rent than it would have cost in the long run to build. And then they would also have received rent.

I remember when I first mentioned it on here. Some tried to say that Labour were not at fault.

My point on open borders is how can it continue when nothing is being done about the situation we are presently in. The situation is getting worse. And it will continue to do so. We are not even keeping up with the birth rate. The whole situation is a joke. And we can't trust any party to change things because they have failed badly for many years.

We don't have open borders, just as part of the EU there is a right to work across the EU zone for all citizens of member states. The issue was that a lot of states joined at a similar time, therefore there was more rapid migration (numbers wise), and there was an opportunity to control these numbers.

However, the majority of immigrants to the UK come from outside the EU zone, with many being students,

Immigration plays a very small role in the housing issue - it really does, but I agree that Labour are as much to blame for not replacing the housing stock as the Tories are (it was actually a vote winning policy that Thatcher nicked from Harold Wilson)

Investment in infrastructure would greatly even out the SE bias, and encourage growth in other parts of the UK - maybe the govt should focus more of tax payers money on this than vanity projects such as HS2 and more investment in the NHS to ensure it delivers a robust public service

Unfortunately I spend a lot of time at hospital and GP's - as far as I am aware, all of the doctors, and many of the nursing staff are at least 2nd generation immigrants (as indeed am I). Myself, three siblings and parents (no longer with us) are not responsible for the lack of housing stck - we have all paid our way in life, and by happy coincidence my mother and sister worked i the NHS for many years (Dad was a carpenter).

 

[skybluetony176]

I understand it all. It isn't me looking at everything negatively on behalf of the UK all the time.

Like I keep saying let's wait for the details before we celebrate or say it is shit.

You clearly don’t understand it all because you’ve claimed something completely different to what I pointed out that New Zealand had said. Twisting again.

There’s already enough details to say it’s shit, it’s also not what we need. We need individual and bespoke deals especially with Japan. They don’t want that and have insulted us as a nation with an invite to a trading block instead that can’t even get of the ground, is full of criticism from those already involved, is being set up to favour one member above all and even then the most influential country on it isn’t even a member.

I just hope that our government isn’t too lazy to do the individual bespoke trade deals that’s needed and sign up for an easy life regardless of the costs.

 

[clint van damme]

Is that right?

So what are the terms of TPP?

If it is a free trade agreement and nothing else what is the problem?

these type of agreements allow corporations to sue governments if the governments policies are affecting their trade.
So for example a company want to import some food which contains an additive that is banned, they sue the government and if they win their compensation comes out of the public coffers.

I think we'll end up involved in these sort of agreements whether we're in or out of the EU but I don't understand why anyone would welcome them.

 

[clint van damme]

Which I have said several times before.

Everyone seems to have their own version. But agree with most of what you say.

But our population has boomed. The houses sold off are still lived in. It is affordable housing that has suffered the most. And it costs the government billions of pounds each year with excessive rents for housing and putting people up in hotels and similar.

This is why I say the Tories and Labour are to blame for a lot of it. Houses were sold and the money spent. But not on new houses. They have spent billions more on rent than it would have cost in the long run to build. And then they would also have received rent.

I remember when I first mentioned it on here. Some tried to say that Labour were not at fault.

My point on open borders is how can it continue when nothing is being done about the situation we are presently in. The situation is getting worse. And it will continue to do so. We are not even keeping up with the birth rate. The whole situation is a joke. And we can't trust any party to change things because they have failed badly for many years.

Most developed economies seem to rely on ever expanding populations. I wouldn't disagree that we're getting close to the time where we need to take a look at this model.

I think it will require some big changes, a lot more than just stopping freedom of movement within the EU, and I think a lot of those changes will be hugely unpopular.
I think one of the main things will be dealing with looking after the ever increasing number of old people.

 

[CCFCSteve]

The

Most developed economies seem to rely on ever expanding populations. I wouldn't disagree that we're getting close to the time where we need to take a look at this model.

I think it will require some big changes, a lot more than just stopping freedom of movement within the EU, and I think a lot of those changes will be hugely unpopular.
I think one of the main things will be dealing with looking after the ever increasing number of old people.

The Western world appears to be one big Ponzi scheme at the moment. Keep increasing the working age population in the hope that it covers the cost of the aging populations. Unfortunately that overly burdens the current infrastructure/public services...leading to some of the issues we are facing regarding housing, NHS etc.

The fact is we are all getting older and living longer. There needs to be a cross party agreement on a solution otherwise the main parties will keep politicising it. Whilst Mays pathetic manifesto had a number of issues with it, the attempt to address social care was correct (if poorly thought out). It was soon turned into the "dementia tax" and the rest is history !

 

[Captain Dart]

They can’t agree the details. That is why it’s a lame duck. All they have is more questions than answers.

Don't be so stupid. This isn't an exercise in cooperation.

 

[Astute]

these type of agreements allow corporations to sue governments if the governments policies are affecting their trade.
So for example a company want to import some food which contains an additive that is banned, they sue the government and if they win their compensation comes out of the public coffers.

I think we'll end up involved in these sort of agreements whether we're in or out of the EU but I don't understand why anyone would welcome them.

Which is why I have said several times now that we can't celebrate or call it shit until we know the details. But of course this is getting ignored like a lot of what I say is.

 

[Astute]

You clearly don’t understand it all because you’ve claimed something completely different to what I pointed out that New Zealand had said. Twisting again.

There’s already enough details to say it’s shit, it’s also not what we need. We need individual and bespoke deals especially with Japan. They don’t want that and have insulted us as a nation with an invite to a trading block instead that can’t even get of the ground, is full of criticism from those already involved, is being set up to favour one member above all and even then the most influential country on it isn’t even a member.

I just hope that our government isn’t too lazy to do the individual bespoke trade deals that’s needed and sign up for an easy life regardless of the costs.

I keep asking for the details that you know. You haven't said about any of them other than they are shit.

 

[clint van damme]

Which is why I have said several times now that we can't celebrate or call it shit until we know the details. But of course this is getting ignored like a lot of what I say is.

I've based my doom and gloom on a no deal scenario which can be modelled because we would then have to follow as set of predefined rules. No one has came back with anything to contradict what I've said. If we do get a deal then you're right, without knowing the terms it's difficult to know what will happen.
Unfortunately no deal is looking increasingly likely.

 

[skybluetony176]

I keep asking for the details that you know. You haven't said about any of them other than they are shit.

You mean apart from the numerous links I’ve supplied? Five just today if I’m keeping count correctly and numerous just yesterday.

If you spend five minutes looking it’s actually very easy to find negative pieces on the TPP. Most reference direct TPP proposed policy and many quote politicians from the would be member states and across their political divides there’s a consensus of concerned voices. Especially in Australia and Canada. Go and look for yourself if you don’t believe me. There’s information out there if you can be bothered to look. I’ve only given you snippets and you’ve dismissed it all while presenting some complete misunderstandings from not understanding that the EU is in negotiations with individuals not the TPP to thinking that we’re in advanced negotiations when all we’ve had is an informal invitation in a newspaper interview with one of the would be members PM. You’ve demonstrated how much you are out of your depth on this at every turn.

 

[martcov]

We are allowed to negotiate them. But we are not allowed to sign anything until after we have left.

Tell Captain Dart that please.

 

[Astute]

You mean apart from the numerous links I’ve supplied? Five just today if I’m keeping count correctly and numerous just yesterday.

If you spend five minutes looking it’s actually very easy to find negative pieces on the TPP. Most reference direct TPP proposed policy and many quote politicians from the would be member states and across their political divides there’s a consensus of concerned voices. Especially in Australia and Canada. Go and look for yourself if you don’t believe me. There’s information out there if you can be bothered to look. I’ve only given you snippets and you’ve dismissed it all while presenting some complete misunderstandings from not understanding that the EU is in negotiations with individuals not the TPP to thinking that we’re in advanced negotiations when all we’ve had is an informal invitation in a newspaper interview with one of the would be members PM. You’ve demonstrated how much you are out of your depth on this at every turn.

Links on hearsay yes. Your favourite subject.

 

[Astute]

I've based my doom and gloom on a no deal scenario which can be modelled because we would then have to follow as set of predefined rules. No one has came back with anything to contradict what I've said. If we do get a deal then you're right, without knowing the terms it's difficult to know what will happen.
Unfortunately no deal is looking increasingly likely.

We don't have a clue.

But I am expecting a deal to be struck. It is the terms that we don't have a clue about.

 

[Astute]

Tell Captain Dart that please.

And others. Look back.

 

[skybluetony176]

But once again...negative slant on EVERYTHING!
Do you not just think it possible that even if if means a 12month minimum wait that we get the best deal for Britain (might easily be a simple replication of the terms the EU have as our business might form a significant part of what Japan wants access to!)
THEN we dictate what we trade rather than the EU dictating it to us!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

You seem to have missed it but Japan doesn’t want a bespoke deal with the U.K. they want us to join the ailing TPP. That might not even happen.

We need a bespoke deal with Japan once we leave the EU, on that I think we both agree. Certainly seems to be the gist of what you’re saying. I would say that anything less is an insult to the U.K. and TPP membership is less. If we’re going to leave the EU so we can do something stupid like join the TPP then leave really is a waste of time. If anyone backing leave welcomes the prospect of joining the TPP with open arms then I’d suggest that they’ve lost sight of what leave was supposed to be.