Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

A Trump branded TV channel being by the end of next month? – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    No, both sides compromised, as is normal in negotiations. Quite why the going to seven years from UK's three year and EU's ten year demand is somehow Boris blinking and not the EU is beyond me.
    Entirely sane compromise. Nobody sane would object to that.
    Choreographed mutual blink. Like I keep trying to tell everyone.
    Yeah, this is precisely how negotiations with the EU go when a deadline is involved.
    Yep. No Deal = Eat my shorts.

    Me, I mean.
    I'm curious as to something I think you said yesterday.

    Namely that the UK agreeing to not set corporation tax at zero is BINO.

    If so then that shows the triumph of the ERG in moving the overton window so far in their direction.
    Looking for a specific litmus test on "sovereignty". For example, can we slash business tax and regs. Or will the deal be along the lines of future divergence is possible bla bla but details tba. Many years of "status quo". All bollox in other words. FOM ended and that's mostly it. Brexit = Immigration. Not bollox, come to think of it, since in truth that WAS it.
    Brexit in practice versus Brexit in theory.

    Something French intellectuals and the ERG can debate.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,790
    So tax payers are going to have to stump up money to sectors that will be screwed in a no deal.

    And Eustaces plan to solve the disaster for lamb exporters is allegedly to find new markets. Where exactly ?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    No, both sides compromised, as is normal in negotiations. Quite why the going to seven years from UK's three year and EU's ten year demand is somehow Boris blinking and not the EU is beyond me.
    Entirely sane compromise. Nobody sane would object to that.
    Choreographed mutual blink. Like I keep trying to tell everyone.
    Or in normal people's parlance a compromise, like I keep saying.

    A compromise more on UK terms than the EU's original ones though (keep status quo in perpetuity).
    People won't agree on who has compromised more, it's one of the more pointless diversions out there. Capitulation does happen, but like the boy crying wolf it happens a lot less frequently than the calling of it.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    He's worked tirelessly but fruitlessly - sounds pretty crap Mr Soon to not be President.
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo blinks on fish....

    Amazing...

    On fish, the EU wanted 10, the, the UK 3, "splitting the difference" would get you to 6.5 - so I don't know where you get "7" as a great "blink" from
    The EU wanted infinity originally. Their original demand was for there to be no change in perpetuity.

    Going to 10 was already them blinking. As the old saying goes then, if you're ok with sex for a million but not a fiver then now you're just haggling over price.
    Phullofshit Thompson and the art of straw clutching strikes again: "We'll throw throw EU fishermen out of UK waters" - sometime in the 2020's.

    I've been reading this site for 15 years and I'm astonished you still post here as you have zero credibility - its clearly your innate desire to troll combined with a curious amount of free time that keeps you posting here.

    Do keep going though I'm sure the employment market will keep waiting for you.
    I am astonished you set yourself up as the arbiter of who posts here
    I am astonished you set yourself up as the arbiter of who posts here
    I have no problem with anyone posting on this site - it is not my remit
    Cool, is it ok with you if I post from time to time though?
    As you wish but attacking posters as trolls may be better avoided
    Yes, I'd hate to acquire the opprobrium of the real arbiter.
    You seem familiar. Are you exiled from ConHome?
    Probably the most insulting suggestion ever made about me ever.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    I feel like everyone knew that it was always primarily a bargaining piece, many of us just thought it was not a good thing to bargain or bluff in that way.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    Scott_xP said:
    Well the deal's not done yet. If it is a bargaining piece, when's the best time to bargain it?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    FF43 said:

    Example: I'd be happy to agree not to lower the minimum statutory leave for UK full-time workers from 20 days annual leave. Level playing field base. And no-one here really wants to cut it.

    But, if the EU increased that in future to, say, 30 days minimum I see no reason why we should be obliged to follow or lose trading privileges.

    There will be lots of little things like this.
    As I understand the EU proposal, the EU could move to 30 days holidays and the UK say to 23 days (or any number as long as it doesn't go backwards from the current 20). Neither side is allowed to change from this (30 days EU, 23 days UK) in order to offer competitive advantage to their businesses, and this would be enforced through arbitration.

    I would think it a grey area about what is gaining competitive advantage and what is normal divergence. Having said that, this is absolutely the kind of arbitration that the WTO does. It's not new.
    No that's not the EU proposal, that's what the UK offered a baseline with a backsliding clause with post-action arbitration. The EU proposal is full alignment with the EU in a huge number of areas and "lightning" tariffs if they unilaterally deem the UK has diverged with no arbitration process until after the tariffs are in place.

    Your love of the EU is blinding you to their unreasonable position and why it will inevitably lead to no deal.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    No, both sides compromised, as is normal in negotiations. Quite why the going to seven years from UK's three year and EU's ten year demand is somehow Boris blinking and not the EU is beyond me.
    Entirely sane compromise. Nobody sane would object to that.
    Choreographed mutual blink. Like I keep trying to tell everyone.
    Yeah, this is precisely how negotiations with the EU go when a deadline is involved.
    Yep. No Deal = Eat my shorts.

    Me, I mean.
    I'm curious as to something I think you said yesterday.

    Namely that the UK agreeing to not set corporation tax at zero is BINO.

    If so then that shows the triumph of the ERG in moving the overton window so far in their direction.
    Indeed. You can guarantee like clockwork that many (former Remainers) here will claim that Boris has caved or the deal is BINO no matter what the detail is.

    The same people would have called May's deal a hard Brexit too.

    Making Leavers cry seems to be a bigger objective than actually what the deal may or may not have in it.
    Look to me to rate the deal. An ardent Remainer who was opposed to Ref2 and saw the May deal as SOFT. I'm objective to a fault. Everyone knows that.

    So ok I'll do it. I'll pronounce when we get the details.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Interesting to see the Observer take the position it has on GIDS and the high court ruling.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/06/the-observer-view-on-the-high-courts-ruling-on-puberty-blocking-drugs-for-children

    'Any questioning of the gender-affirming model – and the role that trauma, internalised hostility to same-sex attraction or misleading online material may play in gender dysphoria in teenagers – is dismissed as transphobic. This is a chilling state of affairs that is detrimental to child safety.'

    I'm surprised they would be as bold as that though fair play to them.

    The Guardian has been openly massively transphobic for years and years now. It is not the least bit surprising.
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
  • Options

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Bunging the fishermen a few million in tax rebates for new boats etc would allow them to put their own money where their mouths have been.

    I've always been suspicious that UK fishermen would be happier to flog any extra fishing quotas than use them themselves.
    Flogging the quotas is what happened last time, no? Will HMG need to compensate their Spanish buyers?
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Example: I'd be happy to agree not to lower the minimum statutory leave for UK full-time workers from 20 days annual leave. Level playing field base. And no-one here really wants to cut it.

    But, if the EU increased that in future to, say, 30 days minimum I see no reason why we should be obliged to follow or lose trading privileges.

    There will be lots of little things like this.
    As I understand the EU proposal, the EU could move to 30 days holidays and the UK say to 23 days (or any number as long as it doesn't go backwards from the current 20). Neither side is allowed to change from this (30 days EU, 23 days UK) in order to offer competitive advantage to their businesses, and this would be enforced through arbitration.

    I would think it a grey area about what is gaining competitive advantage and what is normal divergence. Having said that, this is absolutely the kind of arbitration that the WTO does. It's not new.
    No that's not the EU proposal, that's what the UK offered a baseline with a backsliding clause with post-action arbitration. The EU proposal is full alignment with the EU in a huge number of areas and "lightning" tariffs if they unilaterally deem the UK has diverged with no arbitration process until after the tariffs are in place.

    Your love of the EU is blinding you to their unreasonable position and why it will inevitably lead to no deal.
    I'm just taking a screen shot of that for later in 2020.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    You definitely get a sense that the EU is briefing breakthroughs and such to try and pressure the government. Why else brief out the IMB/fish stuff that probably won't happen.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo blinks on fish....

    Amazing...

    On fish, the EU wanted 10, the, the UK 3, "splitting the difference" would get you to 6.5 - so I don't know where you get "7" as a great "blink" from
    Arguing over the length of the status quo period is a good way to distract from the actual contents of the future deal.
    Could Johnson be plotting a Fish election for 2024?
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
    More catch and at the end of transition the UK will control its waters
  • Options

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Bunging the fishermen a few million in tax rebates for new boats etc would allow them to put their own money where their mouths have been.

    I've always been suspicious that UK fishermen would be happier to flog any extra fishing quotas than use them themselves.
    Flogging the quotas is what happened last time, no? Will HMG need to compensate their Spanish buyers?
    I would imagine that foreign holders of UK quotas will continue to own them.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,331

    Example: I'd be happy to agree not to lower the minimum statutory leave for UK full-time workers from 20 days annual leave. Level playing field base. And no-one here really wants to cut it.

    But, if the EU increased that in future to, say, 30 days minimum I see no reason why we should be obliged to follow or lose trading privileges.

    There will be lots of little things like this.
    In general, "progress", defined as raising standards and assisting poorer people, is potentially held back by the prospect of being undercut by other states. Normally, this is avoided by a tariff wall, giving the home market a degree of protection to enable it to manoeuvre as it thinks fit. However, if the deal gave the UK a permanent right to access the EU without tariffs on goods, then our presence would have a permanent chilling effect on them, and their presence would have the same effect on us.

    What would be reasonable would be to ask Britain, with a long period of notice like 2 years, whether we wanted to match the improvement. If we said no, as we'd have a right to, then the EU would have a right to implement proportionate tariff barriers to compenbsate for being otherwise undercut. The same would apply in reverse.
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
    More catch and at the end of transition the UK will control its waters
    Status quo for seven years? Doesn't the transition end this month?
  • Options
    FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    Trump TV. Needs a Mission Statement. How about "Nut job shall speak to Nut job".
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,658
    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo blinks on fish....

    Amazing...

    On fish, the EU wanted 10, the, the UK 3, "splitting the difference" would get you to 6.5 - so I don't know where you get "7" as a great "blink" from
    Arguing over the length of the status quo period is a good way to distract from the actual contents of the future deal.
    Could Johnson be plotting a Fish election for 2024?
    Will that be oven-ready fish?
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
    More catch and at the end of transition the UK will control its waters
    Status quo for seven years? Doesn't the transition end this month?
    You really are being obtuse and the term or details have not been announced
  • Options

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo blinks on fish....

    Amazing...

    On fish, the EU wanted 10, the, the UK 3, "splitting the difference" would get you to 6.5 - so I don't know where you get "7" as a great "blink" from
    Arguing over the length of the status quo period is a good way to distract from the actual contents of the future deal.
    Could Johnson be plotting a Fish election for 2024?
    Will that be oven-ready fish?
    Free herring for all.
  • Options

    Example: I'd be happy to agree not to lower the minimum statutory leave for UK full-time workers from 20 days annual leave. Level playing field base. And no-one here really wants to cut it.

    But, if the EU increased that in future to, say, 30 days minimum I see no reason why we should be obliged to follow or lose trading privileges.

    There will be lots of little things like this.
    In general, "progress", defined as raising standards and assisting poorer people, is potentially held back by the prospect of being undercut by other states. Normally, this is avoided by a tariff wall, giving the home market a degree of protection to enable it to manoeuvre as it thinks fit. However, if the deal gave the UK a permanent right to access the EU without tariffs on goods, then our presence would have a permanent chilling effect on them, and their presence would have the same effect on us.

    What would be reasonable would be to ask Britain, with a long period of notice like 2 years, whether we wanted to match the improvement. If we said no, as we'd have a right to, then the EU would have a right to implement proportionate tariff barriers to compenbsate for being otherwise undercut. The same would apply in reverse.
    That sounds reasonable.

    It would also be reasonable to extend it to other countries which do not have western standards on environmental protection and workers rights.
  • Options
    anotherex_toryanotherex_tory Posts: 234
    edited December 2020

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
    More catch and at the end of transition the UK will control its waters
    Status quo for seven years? Doesn't the transition end this month?
    You really are being obtuse and the term or details have not been announced
    O'arbiter are we not referring to the same document which describes a 5-7 year transition period for fishing. Of course sovereignty is the key and the UK has taken the sovereign decision to maintain the the status quo and kindly paid the EU £39BN for the trouble of negotiating it which everyone predicted would happen on 24 June 2016.

    Take

    Back

    Control
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
    More catch and at the end of transition the UK will control its waters
    Status quo for seven years? Doesn't the transition end this month?
    You really are being obtuse and the term or details have not been announced
    O'arbiter are we not referring to the same document which describes a 5-7 year transition period for fishing. Of course sovereignty is the key and the UK has taken the sovereign decision to maintain the the status quo and kindly paid the EU £39BN for the trouble of negotiating it which everyone predicted would happen on 24 June 2016.

    Take

    Back

    Control
    You really are shameless.
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
    More catch and at the end of transition the UK will control its waters
    Status quo for seven years? Doesn't the transition end this month?
    You really are being obtuse and the term or details have not been announced
    O'arbiter are we not referring to the same document which describes a 5-7 year transition period for fishing. Of course sovereignty is the key and the UK has taken the sovereign decision to maintain the the status quo and kindly paid the EU £39BN for the trouble of negotiating it which everyone predicted would happen on 24 June 2016.

    Take

    Back

    Control
    You obviously cannot come to terms with Brexit but in the event of a deal most of the country will move on
  • Options
    There's nothing worse than a Remoaner!

    They can't move on! :lol:

  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited December 2020
    Guilliani contacting covid is unfortunate but you'd need a heart of stone not to find it funny
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Well the deal's not done yet. If it is a bargaining piece, when's the best time to bargain it?
    11.55pm
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,603
    Look North just featured a woman whose house is in Tier 2 North Yorkshire but the conservatory is in Tier 3 West Yorkshire.
  • Options

    Look North just featured a woman whose house is in Tier 2 North Yorkshire but the conservatory is in Tier 3 West Yorkshire.

    I think that’s called an edge case...
  • Options
    Roger said:

    Guilliani contacting covid is unfortunate but you'd need a heart of stone not to find it funny

    Who knew hair dye running was a covid symptom?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962

    Look North just featured a woman whose house is in Tier 2 North Yorkshire but the conservatory is in Tier 3 West Yorkshire.

    Then she can stay out of the conservatory, easy.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_xP said:
    No, both sides compromised, as is normal in negotiations. Quite why the going to seven years from UK's three year and EU's ten year demand is somehow Boris blinking and not the EU is beyond me.
    Entirely sane compromise. Nobody sane would object to that.
    Choreographed mutual blink. Like I keep trying to tell everyone.
    Yeah, this is precisely how negotiations with the EU go when a deadline is involved.
    Yep. No Deal = Eat my shorts.

    Me, I mean.
    I'm curious as to something I think you said yesterday.

    Namely that the UK agreeing to not set corporation tax at zero is BINO.

    If so then that shows the triumph of the ERG in moving the overton window so far in their direction.
    Looking for a specific litmus test on "sovereignty". For example, can we slash business tax and regs. Or will the deal be along the lines of future divergence is possible bla bla but details tba. Many years of "status quo". All bollox in other words. FOM ended and that's mostly it. Brexit = Immigration. Not bollox, come to think of it, since in truth that WAS it.
    Brexit in practice versus Brexit in theory.

    Something French intellectuals and the ERG can debate.
    That sounds a bit of a mismatch!
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
  • Options

    So the UK leaves fishing rights as they are, gets to re-negotiate trade deals to exactly where they stand now and adds several layers of bureaucracy and cost to trade with UK's the largest single trading partner in perpetuity and all for a mere £39BN?

    Should the be printed on a double-decker or across two busses?
    If what has been said on fishing that is a win for UK fishermen and of course a deal with the EU will move the debate on as the vast majority of the public get on with their lives
    Do explain the win for UK fishermen? Aren't they already deeply unhappy about the customs and sanitary arrangements that will come into place for their trade even with a deal?
    More catch and at the end of transition the UK will control its waters
    Status quo for seven years? Doesn't the transition end this month?
    You really are being obtuse and the term or details have not been announced
    O'arbiter are we not referring to the same document which describes a 5-7 year transition period for fishing. Of course sovereignty is the key and the UK has taken the sovereign decision to maintain the the status quo and kindly paid the EU £39BN for the trouble of negotiating it which everyone predicted would happen on 24 June 2016.

    Take

    Back

    Control
    You really are shameless.
    Which bit have I got wrong?
  • Options
    solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    itw o
    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo blinks on fish....

    Amazing...

    On fish, the EU wanted 10, the, the UK 3, "splitting the difference" would get you to 6.5 - so I don't know where you get "7" as a great "blink" from
    Arguing over the length of the status quo period is a good way to distract from the actual contents of the future deal.
    Could Johnson be plotting a Fish election for 2024?
    Good news for Sturgeon?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986
    Cicero said:

    Oh dear, another evening of Tory drivel here again this evening. Having ripped us out of the EU, they now seem determined to break up the UK. That Russian money was pretty well spent wasn´t it? TBH, you go down that road HYFUD you ¤will¤ break the Kingdom. So, why not go and have a lie down and stop spouting such bollix.

    I lived in Canada for a while and the reason the confederation stays together is because it is based on clear rules, including the charter of rights and freedoms, a fair division of powers and mutual respect. Scots are now simply pig sick of being patronized and mucked about by a bunch of twattish fifth formers.

    You can go down either, Quebec is still in Canada but then Catalonia is also still in Spain
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,986
    Scott_xP said:
    Hopefully near a Deal then if fish is resolved, state aid was never something the Tory Party would die in a ditch over
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    We’ve been married nearly 50 years. Divorce was always going to be hard and painful.

    Soon we will be free to live alone in our new bed sit. We can go to bed when we choose and eat junk all day and wear tight jeans from the 1970s. There will be no one there to tell us what to do.

    Some say it take maturity and character to make a marriage work. Not us! We’re making our own way. Who needs friends, we’re winning at Brexit.

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    I see the panto has stepped up a notch this evening...i am walking away, no your not, yes i am...we couldn't possibly move one of our red lines its agreed by 27 nations, yes you can , no we can't.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited December 2020

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. Now we have no cake and no say.
  • Options

    I see the panto has stepped up a notch this evening...i am walking away, no your not, yes i am...we couldn't possibly move one of our red lines its agreed by 27 nations, yes you can , no we can't.

    Clap your hands children if you believe in Brexit.

    Louder, or it'll die!

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share, but only after a 3 hr meeting to decide this according to a ridiculously complicated formula.

    Then act shocked when say next time we will make our own cake unless there is some reform to this system.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,955

    Look North just featured a woman whose house is in Tier 2 North Yorkshire but the conservatory is in Tier 3 West Yorkshire.

    Isn't she the one who's in Tier 2 so she can meet folk in her garden...Which is in Tier 3!
  • Options
    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:
    To be fair its his best yet! Practice makes perfect and all that.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    Roger said:

    Guilliani contacting covid is unfortunate but you'd need a heart of stone not to find it funny

    Laughing at somebody getting a virus that causes painful death and multiple organ failure at a reasonable level among their demographic, what a charmer you are.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    Why would he want them to move on? He wants them relying on Him to save Brexit.
  • Options

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    We'll only realize how happy we were when we lose all the good bits. Apart from some painfully contrived notions of 'sovereignty' that get spouted, I haven't yet been made aware of a single tangible benefit of Brexit. All the promised benefits made during Boris's campaign have, of course, long since melted away.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Why should anyone move on? Brexiteers didn’t. They chipped away and eventually were rewarded for their persistence. Brexit settles nothing. It’s just the swing of a pendulum. The economic forces that took us into the EU are still there.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    Yep. No deal is not an option. Never has been. Isn't now. The bullshit around it is tedious and I look forward to turning the page. I just hope the jingoism that Brexit has unleashed fades. My fear is that because it wins votes this government will find a way to prolong it - eg by pushing negotiations on serious divergence from the EU to future "phases". Get Brexit done - until it has to be done again. I personally don't think it will work a second time electorally but Johnson & Co might disagree.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
  • Options

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Sure there is no other sensible option but to adjust and move on. All I ask for is those who have been at the centre of the project are held accountable and arent successful in blaming others for the shambles if it turns out as expected.
  • Options
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Why should anyone move on? Brexiteers didn’t. They chipped away and eventually were rewarded for their persistence. Brexit settles nothing. It’s just the swing of a pendulum. The economic forces that took us into the EU are still there.
    All I can say is that re-joining is not going to be on the agenda certainly for the rest of this decade if ever, and the public will move on even if some will be like the Japanese soldier discovered in the jungle years after the war had ended
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    Yep. No deal is not an option. Never has been. Isn't now. The bullshit around it is tedious and I look forward to turning the page. I just hope the jingoism that Brexit has unleashed fades. My fear is that because it wins votes this government will find a way to prolong it - eg by pushing negotiations on serious divergence from the EU to future "phases". Get Brexit done - until it has to be done again. I personally don't think it will work a second time electorally but Johnson & Co might disagree.
    Seems a bonkers idea. It is neither in nor out, result result in negotiations forever.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    Why would he want them to move on? He wants them relying on Him to save Brexit.
    Move on for now, I mean, rather than feel they've been had.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Why should anyone move on? Brexiteers didn’t. They chipped away and eventually were rewarded for their persistence. Brexit settles nothing. It’s just the swing of a pendulum. The economic forces that took us into the EU are still there.
    All I can say is that re-joining is not going to be on the agenda certainly for the rest of this decade if ever, and the public will move on even if some will be like the Japanese soldier discovered in the jungle years after the war had ended
    Times change. Nothing is forever. Not even Brexit.

  • Options

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    Yep. No deal is not an option. Never has been. Isn't now. The bullshit around it is tedious and I look forward to turning the page. I just hope the jingoism that Brexit has unleashed fades. My fear is that because it wins votes this government will find a way to prolong it - eg by pushing negotiations on serious divergence from the EU to future "phases". Get Brexit done - until it has to be done again. I personally don't think it will work a second time electorally but Johnson & Co might disagree.
    Seems a bonkers idea. It is neither in nor out, result result in negotiations forever.
    Who benefits from it? Boris and friends.
    Who makes the decisions? Boris and friends.

    They care about winning elections, not delivering Brexit to a clear end point.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
    We shouldn't be surprised though that somebody says I am not going to make cakes with you anymore after asking nicely to fairer share and told to shut up and do what you are told, there is no negotiation over your share. And each new cake baking get together results in a smaller and smaller share with a larger and larger bill.
  • Options
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
    One of the things you learn when teaching is that any analogy you use to explain something ends up being bent out of shape as people take it further than you intended.
    This is particularly true when the analogy is based on a poorly defined saying like “have your cake and eat it (too)”.
  • Options

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    Yep. No deal is not an option. Never has been. Isn't now. The bullshit around it is tedious and I look forward to turning the page. I just hope the jingoism that Brexit has unleashed fades. My fear is that because it wins votes this government will find a way to prolong it - eg by pushing negotiations on serious divergence from the EU to future "phases". Get Brexit done - until it has to be done again. I personally don't think it will work a second time electorally but Johnson & Co might disagree.
    Seems a bonkers idea. It is neither in nor out, result result in negotiations forever.
    Who benefits from it? Boris and friends.
    Who makes the decisions? Boris and friends.

    They care about winning elections, not delivering Brexit to a clear end point.
    I can't see it benefitting Boris if by 2024 David Frost still is in negotiations with the EU every other week.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,955

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
    One of the things you learn when teaching is that any analogy you use to explain something ends up being bent out of shape as people take it further than you intended.
    This is particularly true when the analogy is based on a poorly defined saying like “have your cake and eat it (too)”.
    I don't even like cake.
  • Options
    Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,060
    edited December 2020
    HYUFD said:
    If I were mean I would respond with

    “The cake is a lie”.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,105
    dixiedean said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    But every recent joint cake making event have resulted in us not getting our fair share and when we have said come on guys fair shake please, told no, be quiet and take the portion you are given and next time you owe us more money for the ingredients.
    Mummy! It’s not faiiirrr.
    One of the things you learn when teaching is that any analogy you use to explain something ends up being bent out of shape as people take it further than you intended.
    This is particularly true when the analogy is based on a poorly defined saying like “have your cake and eat it (too)”.
    I don't even like cake.
    We could never be friends.....
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Sure there is no other sensible option but to adjust and move on. All I ask for is those who have been at the centre of the project are held accountable and arent successful in blaming others for the shambles if it turns out as expected.
    ThIs is what it's all about now. It's not allowed to blame the voters so the Tories MUST take the rap. Not just Johnson, the whole party. No ifs. No buts. It was them wot done it. That's the political reality.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    HYUFD said:
    If I were mean I would respond with

    “The cake is a lie”.
    Hmm is that tweet saying what he thinks it is.....johnson's deal looks very much like we have not only had our cake but have eaten it
  • Options

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Why should anyone move on? Brexiteers didn’t. They chipped away and eventually were rewarded for their persistence. Brexit settles nothing. It’s just the swing of a pendulum. The economic forces that took us into the EU are still there.
    All I can say is that re-joining is not going to be on the agenda certainly for the rest of this decade if ever, and the public will move on even if some will be like the Japanese soldier discovered in the jungle years after the war had ended
    Yes, but Boris and co. will be gone and forgotten in time. Thereafter we can start on the road to building a sensible long-term British foreign policy again. But it'll be a hard journey.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,561

    Roger said:

    Guilliani contacting covid is unfortunate but you'd need a heart of stone not to find it funny

    Laughing at somebody getting a virus that causes painful death and multiple organ failure at a reasonable level among their demographic, what a charmer you are.
    He's better than some. When Boris got it, some idiots hoped that he would die. IIRC there was even someone on here who did.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    edited December 2020

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    Yep. No deal is not an option. Never has been. Isn't now. The bullshit around it is tedious and I look forward to turning the page. I just hope the jingoism that Brexit has unleashed fades. My fear is that because it wins votes this government will find a way to prolong it - eg by pushing negotiations on serious divergence from the EU to future "phases". Get Brexit done - until it has to be done again. I personally don't think it will work a second time electorally but Johnson & Co might disagree.
    Seems a bonkers idea. It is neither in nor out, result result in negotiations forever.
    Well let's see if there's meaningful divergence or whether it's continued status quo with most of that deferred or "optioned".
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    kinabalu said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Sure there is no other sensible option but to adjust and move on. All I ask for is those who have been at the centre of the project are held accountable and arent successful in blaming others for the shambles if it turns out as expected.
    ThIs is what it's all about now. It's not allowed to blame the voters so the Tories MUST take the rap. Not just Johnson, the whole party. No ifs. No buts. It was them wot done it. That's the political reality.
    Too bad the Opposition couldn't win a game of pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey with eyeholes in their blindfold...
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Why should anyone move on? Brexiteers didn’t. They chipped away and eventually were rewarded for their persistence. Brexit settles nothing. It’s just the swing of a pendulum. The economic forces that took us into the EU are still there.
    All I can say is that re-joining is not going to be on the agenda certainly for the rest of this decade if ever, and the public will move on even if some will be like the Japanese soldier discovered in the jungle years after the war had ended
    Times change. Nothing is forever. Not even Brexit.

    That is true - but I believe Big_G is basically correct here. Most people have already moved on. An election held even today would see Brexit far less salient as an issue compared with a year ago. By 2024 it will be pretty much in the background in much the same way that the 2003 Iraq War had become by 2010.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,917

    Roger said:

    Guilliani contacting covid is unfortunate but you'd need a heart of stone not to find it funny

    Laughing at somebody getting a virus that causes painful death and multiple organ failure at a reasonable level among their demographic, what a charmer you are.
    He's tried to turn the USA into a dictatorship. Deserves to suffer.
  • Options

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Why should anyone move on? Brexiteers didn’t. They chipped away and eventually were rewarded for their persistence. Brexit settles nothing. It’s just the swing of a pendulum. The economic forces that took us into the EU are still there.
    All I can say is that re-joining is not going to be on the agenda certainly for the rest of this decade if ever, and the public will move on even if some will be like the Japanese soldier discovered in the jungle years after the war had ended
    Times change. Nothing is forever. Not even Brexit.

    What about the EU? Is that forever?
    The EU looks more permanent than ever to me. I think Trump was a huge jolt - Uncle Sam just can't be relied upon to look after the western world any more. Other entities now need to don the mantle.
  • Options
    Anyone else enjoying the snooker?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,105
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    When did we EVER take more than our fair share?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Why should anyone move on? Brexiteers didn’t. They chipped away and eventually were rewarded for their persistence. Brexit settles nothing. It’s just the swing of a pendulum. The economic forces that took us into the EU are still there.
    All I can say is that re-joining is not going to be on the agenda certainly for the rest of this decade if ever, and the public will move on even if some will be like the Japanese soldier discovered in the jungle years after the war had ended
    Times change. Nothing is forever. Not even Brexit.

    What about the EU? Is that forever?
    The EU looks more permanent than ever to me. I think Trump was a huge jolt - Uncle Sam just can't be relied upon to look after the western world any more. Other entities now need to don the mantle.
    Coming out of COVID we will see lots of nations struggling and as we know after Brexit, the EU big wigs declared the problem with the EU was it wasn't enough of it, and I am sure this will be the solution to this crisis. Ever closer union is on its way.

    Given the way the world is heading with China dominance, it is for many EU nations the safest way forward to have a protectionist block to shield them.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    kinabalu said:

    Jonathan said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    RobD said:

    Compromise would be a better way to describe it. Alternatively, you could say Johnson and the EU simultaneously blinked.

    EU boats get to catch more fish in British waters.

    yeah, some compromise from them...
    No they don't. Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.

    What was the EUs original demand?
    Wasn't the EU's original demand 10 years and the UK's 0?
    No. The EU's original demand was no change. 10 years was their latest proposal and a compromise from them.
    You can’t judge a negotiation solely using the yardstick of the stated opening position. Your way, every tourist who buys a carpet in a Moroccan market is a negotiating genius.
    Of course. Which is why the UK going from three years to 5-7 was always in line with reasonable expectations for how this would end.

    The most important principle, if the reports are true, is that the UK is getting what it asked for while the EU is getting a face saving transition to what we asked for.

    Considering our fishermen will need to invest in new infrastructure it makes perfect sense to allow a transition anyway so they can get prepared.
    Yes. More fish means more boats and bigger better boats than we have now. So is 7 years long enough?
    It is certain sustainable fishing will be an important consideration and of course of vital interest to the fishermen themselves
    I think on the politics Johnson is covered so long as FOM ends and Fish is not a total sellout. These are the totemic Brexit issues. Ticks in those 2 boxes and his Leaver base will nod and move on.
    I would hope everyone with a sound mind would welcome a deal this week
    It is welcome in the way it’s better to have you valuables stolen than your whole house burned down, but tinged with sadness because both were avoidable. Neither is success. Just degrees of failure.

    To those who cherish the EU I can understand the dismay and hurt

    However, we have never really been a happy member and by leaving that issue may have been addressed but only time will tell just how successful or otherwise it will have been

    It is important though that everyone moves on and adjusts and maybe in a few years decide to join the single market and customs union
    Sure there is no other sensible option but to adjust and move on. All I ask for is those who have been at the centre of the project are held accountable and arent successful in blaming others for the shambles if it turns out as expected.
    ThIs is what it's all about now. It's not allowed to blame the voters so the Tories MUST take the rap. Not just Johnson, the whole party. No ifs. No buts. It was them wot done it. That's the political reality.
    Too bad the Opposition couldn't win a game of pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey with eyeholes in their blindfold...
    But you don't go blaming the sucker for being conned. You blame the conman.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,331
    Fenman said:

    Trump TV. Needs a Mission Statement. How about "Nut job shall speak to Nut job".

    I think it makes political sense for Trump, and probably commercial sense for someone - perhaps 40% of the population will be really interested, and lots of adverts to sell.
  • Options

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    When did we EVER take more than our fair share?
    Maggie managed to negotiate a hefty rebate,,,

  • Options
    Crabbie said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    When did we EVER take more than our fair share?
    Maggie managed to negotiate a hefty rebate,,,

    Which still left us paying more than our share.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    Crabbie said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:
    All that is missing from the top picture is the EU telling you exactly how much of that cake you can have and when you can eat it.
    Since we baked the cake together, it was pretty fair to decide how to share it together. No we have no cake and no say.
    No we will have paid for more of the ingredients than basically everybody else involved and then told by 27 other people to take less than our fair share.
    Sometimes we took more, sometimes we took less. But we baked a good cake together and we were all better off.

    Now we’re alone refusing to play, having a little strop about not getting what we want all the time and how everything is just soooo unfair. Everyone looks on in pity and mild befuddlement.
    When did we EVER take more than our fair share?
    Maggie managed to negotiate a hefty rebate,,,

    Which Tony gave a chunk away for something to vaguely to do with farming reform that never happened. Sounds familiar to today.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    edited December 2020
    Pulpstar said:

    Roger said:

    Guilliani contacting covid is unfortunate but you'd need a heart of stone not to find it funny

    Laughing at somebody getting a virus that causes painful death and multiple organ failure at a reasonable level among their demographic, what a charmer you are.
    He's tried to turn the USA into a dictatorship. Deserves to suffer.
    Yes I class him as a true villain not just a politician I disagree with.
This discussion has been closed.