Haven’t a clue.claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Would British steel be cheaper than Chinese steel without Brexit ?
Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Anyway, all this is classic deflection tactics to avoid talking about Brexiteers voting for an IRA sympathiser who still thinks the Warrington bomb was justified.
-
- Posts: 10088
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
- Been Liked: 4161 times
- Has Liked: 57 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
martin_p wrote:Haven’t a clue.
Steel orders are booked way in advance aren't they ?
Why did the previous owners sell the company for £1 in 2016 was that Brexit as well ?
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Fair enough. If you agree with them then it doesn't matter. Definitely not a hypocritical stance.summitclaret wrote:You will. Today is very different. We are not voting for individuals today but parties. Robinson us an irrelevance.
-
- Posts: 2207
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
- Been Liked: 1344 times
- Has Liked: 438 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Are you suggesting that voting for another party today means you don't believe in democracy?summitclaret wrote:If you believe in democracy you must vote brexit today.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I'm not sure it's that simple Nildesp.nil_desperandum wrote:I totally agree. So on current polling predictions approx one third of the population will be voting for the Brexit Party.
66% against sends out quite a strong message - don't you think?
As Ringo would say: that's the problem with democracy, sometimes you lose.
(Oh, sorry forgot to leave gaps and use UPPER CASE lettering.)
My perception is that No Deal Brexiteers will mainly vote UKIP or Brexit, and some will vote Conservative and some Labour.
Brexit will also attract voters disgusted by the conduct of the two main parties.
Most Conservative votes will come from TM deal supporters.
Labour votes will come from 'dyed in the wool' Labour supporters, some leave voters, some remain.
The big remainers will vote Green and Libdem with a few for Change UK.
Ireland, Wales and Scotland have their nationalistic considerations to complicate matters further.
So I think the interesting measure will be Brexit/UKIP versus LibDem/Green/Change as the clearest measure of the strength of feeling on either side.
I genuinely don't know who to vote for- for the first time in my life
I have to say I'm more interested in how voting goes in France, Italy and Germany.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Think the issue is its only competitive within a protected tariff environment (and this is where I'm not sure about the timeline so feel free to let me know if I'm wrong) and didn't the UK government veto an attempt to stop the chinese dumping v.cheap steel on Europe? (basically cheaper than it cost to make to destroy the local steel industries)claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Steel orders are booked way in advance aren't they ?
Why did the previous owners sell the company for £1 in 2016 was that Brexit as well ?
Specialist steel we do well (used to be involved in the transport of lots of it to Ireland) but I've no idea what sort of steel is produced at these two plants.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: RingoMcCartney
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Lots of people appear to be saying this is pretty complicated.
One thinks its really simple.
Standard I'm afraid.
One thinks its really simple.
Standard I'm afraid.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Well I imagine you understand the that something that happened before the referendum can’t be impacted by its result, so no it wasn’t. But this time it is a major factor, every commentator has said so.claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Steel orders are booked way in advance aren't they ?
Why did the previous owners sell the company for £1 in 2016 was that Brexit as well ?
Last edited by martin_p on Thu May 23, 2019 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Course, another way of looking at this
Would British steel be able to survive fullstop?
Looks like the answer to that is "no"
Would British steel be able to survive fullstop?
Looks like the answer to that is "no"
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
martin_p wrote:Is it strictly speaking against EU law? Yes probably. Could the U.K. government have saved British Steel this week? Yes it could. It may have been breaking EU law, but as Lancaster pointed out it would have been a long time before it came to the EU court by which time British Steel would have recovered enough to pay the money back or gone bust anyway. It’s what other countries do.
Here’s one for you. Would British Steel have needed baling out if it wasn’t for Brexit?
Is the government unable to give State aid to save British
Steel due to EU law?
Yes
Or
No?
No "probably"
Just a simple
Yes
Or
No?
As for "if it wasnt for brexit ?" I have 2 balls. Neither are crystal. But I'll raise you cheap Chinese steel and EU green carbon levies.
In the meantime. A one word answer.
Is the government unable to give State aid to save British Steel due to EU law?
Yes
Or
No?
-
- Posts: 10088
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
- Been Liked: 4161 times
- Has Liked: 57 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
martin_p wrote:Well I imagine you understand the that something that happened before the referendum can’t be impacted by its result, so no it wasn’t. But this time it is a major factor, every commentator has said so.
So why was the value of the company £1 if Brexit back then had no impact on it ?
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
You can stop your cut and paste nonsense, I’ve answered your question.RingoMcCartney wrote:Is the government unable to give State aid to save British
Steel due to EU law?
Yes
Or
No?
No "probably"
Just a simple
Yes
Or
No?
As for "if it wasnt for brexit ?" I have 2 balls. Neither are crystal. But I'll raise you cheap Chinese steel and EU green carbon levies.
In the meantime. A one word answer.
Is the government unable to give State aid to save British Steel due to EU law?
Yes
Or
No?
Last edited by martin_p on Thu May 23, 2019 11:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
So you can do yes or no answers!!!Lancasterclaret wrote:Course, another way of looking at this
Would British steel be able to survive fullstop?
Looks like the answer to that is "no"
Is the government unable to give State aid to save British Steel due to EU law?
Yes
Or
No?
I feel another, face saving, blocking coming!
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
The government can't give State aid under WTO terms too, which is what we'd be under post Brexit
This user liked this post: Lancasterclaret
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Why would I do that Ringo?
Everybody else is looking at this thread and thinking you can't read or that you need help.
And as I told you at the time, you refused to read my posts where I accepted you were correct and I wasn't.
But you kept posting the same old stuff, which ignored what I'd said.
So I'll keep replying to you with what I've said, and everyone else will keep wondering what is wrong with you.
I'm fine with that (not comfortable with it, because I don't like doing it like this) but its 100% up to you.
Everybody else is looking at this thread and thinking you can't read or that you need help.
And as I told you at the time, you refused to read my posts where I accepted you were correct and I wasn't.
But you kept posting the same old stuff, which ignored what I'd said.
So I'll keep replying to you with what I've said, and everyone else will keep wondering what is wrong with you.
I'm fine with that (not comfortable with it, because I don't like doing it like this) but its 100% up to you.
Last edited by Lancasterclaret on Thu May 23, 2019 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Yeah, did wonder that and was about to google!Chuckypad wrote:The government can't give State aid under WTO terms too, which is what we'd be under post Brexit
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
The point is that you can either vote for what you believe in - Brexit, in my case - or you can vote tactically because you don't think your option would win so you go for a least-worst choice.nil_desperandum wrote:Sorry, I genuinely don't understand that.
It's quite clear who the candidates are for each party, and they're published in the order in which they will be elected. (Therefore we know that our IRA sympathiser will be elected first).
You then look and see who is No. 1 in each of the other lists and you know that if any of them gets above about 10% then they'll be elected, so effectively every vote counts unless you cast it for a candidate or party (like Tommy Robinson) who have no chance of getting 10%.
Then using current polling data for the NW region you can fairly accurately predict who else will be elected, although the figures are so close in the NW that it is quite difficult to be exact.
It looks like UKip will poll about 32% in the NW. This guarantees them 2 seats and almost certainly 3, so their first 3 candidates will go through.
According to the polls Labour would almost certainly get 2, and Liberals 1, but depending on turnout and if there is a slight swing to Libs then Libs could also get 2, or it could even be 2 for them and only 1 for Labour.
With both Tories and Greens currently polling around the 9% mark they will probably both get a seat each, but it wouldn't take too much for one or both to not get a seat at all, which if course would then go to one of the "big 3" depending on percentages.
So whilst it's somewhat complicated, it's also transparent and it means that every single vote counts. A swing of just 1 or 2% today could change a couple of seats.
In this case, there is no point voting tactically to stop Claire Fox winning, because it won't work. It would be like voting tactically for the Conservatives in Burnley - a nonsense.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
"So how come the banks were bailed out?aggi wrote:We don't even have to look at the British steel stuff, you said:
2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.
The EU says , " that's fine."
What actually happened was that the bail out had to be structured in very specific ways to avoid falling afoul of EU rules. It's this that resulted in the split of Lloyds and TSB and RBS having to pay over a load of money to smaller banks to promote competition.
There are limits on state aid, no-one is disputing that. Your suggestion that these weren't applied in 2008 isn't true though.
"There is a fundamental difference between banks and steel. If the UK, or Belgian, or Italian steel industry has to shut down, then other steel companies will pick up their contracts. Such commercial competition is the thrust behind most of the legislation: saving any of the ailing companies would adversely affect the other steel providers, who would not be able to take those contracts. In the case of the banks, their mutual interdependence made that impossible. Because they had all lent to each other, the collapse of any of the banks would have led to the collapse of the whole financial system. So, saving the banks was not anti-competitive, it was in fact supporting the market economy."
So you admit that the banks were bailed out and that given there are limits to state aid. The Government is unable to give State aid to save British Steel.
When said I -
"2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.
The EU says , " that's fine."
2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.
The EU says, "No can do , UK"
Was it a "downright lie" as you claimed?
Yes
Or
No?
Last edited by RingoMcCartney on Thu May 23, 2019 11:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
If that's true, then post-Brexit there would be no steel coming from China and British Steel would do very nicely thank you. Are you sure it's true?Chuckypad wrote:The government can't give State aid under WTO terms too, which is what we'd be under post Brexit
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: Lancasterclaret
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
They've done a little bit of re-nationalising:If it be your will wrote:The FT reported last night that he had a 30m emergency loan ready to go, but it was pulled for two reasons: a belief in free-markets by members of his own party that failing companies should be allowed to fail, and legal advice suggesting it would break state-aid rules. Apparently (state-owned) Network Rail recently placed a 70m order with British Steel to help with its problems, and that might raise questions with the EU as well.
I must say, if we were going to chuck another 30m at British Steel, I'd rather see it nationalised first rather than it go straight into the hands of the owners, but that course of action would seem an unlikely one for a Conservative government to follow.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48288433" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I don't agree with Fox getting in at all, but dsr is 100% spot on with that.dsr wrote:The point is that you can either vote for what you believe in - Brexit, in my case - or you can vote tactically because you don't think your option would win so you go for a least-worst choice.
In this case, there is no point voting tactically to stop Claire Fox winning, because it won't work. It would be like voting tactically for the Conservatives in Burnley - a nonsense.
But so is Martin, as it drops further down the list, the votes become more important, so its still worth voting for someone else and it might make a difference.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
AbsolutelyIf it be your will wrote:All else being equal - no (probably)
I'm really not trying to use this as an argument against the EU. But the only realistic way of maintaining an active domestic steel industry would be protectionism - either import duties or state aid. Currently the EU decide the former, and the latter is forbidden in EU law.
A bigger question is should we be propping up an unprofitable company anyway? Believers in globalised free markets would argue 'absolutely not'. But if we lost all expertise in steel making, and in 20 years we suddenly needed to make our own steel again, we'd be in trouble. But then you could say that about every sector.
But we can't do everything ourselves anymore, but we do need to hold on to what we've got.
But again, is it a specialist steel plant (ie unique for the country) or are there similar ones making a profit in the UK?
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Lancasterclaret wrote:Why would I do that Ringo?
Everybody else is looking at this thread and thinking you can't read or that you need help.
And as I told you at the time, you refused to read my posts where I accepted you were correct and I wasn't.
But you kept posting the same old stuff, which ignored what I'd said.
So I'll keep replying to you with what I've said, and everyone else will keep wondering what is wrong with you.
I'm fine with that (not comfortable with it, because I don't like doing it like this) but its 100% up to you.
Anybody who can be bothered reading this thread will clearly see you have done nothing of the sort in giving me a yes/no answer.
History repeating itself once again!
You simply cannot get down from your high horse and admit you're wrong can you!
Where have you admitted that "Yes" the government is unable to give State aid to save British Due to EU law?
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
This link is useful:dsr wrote:If that's true, then post-Brexit there would be no steel coming from China and British Steel would do very nicely thank you. Are you sure it's true?
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk ... ry/SN06775" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The point I was trying to make (perhaps not very well) was that that state aid/subsidies would still face severe restrictions under WTO terms rendering Ringo's point slightly moot
Edit - Just to add that in answer to Ringo... he's right in that EU law does restrict state aid
Last edited by Chuckypad on Thu May 23, 2019 11:34 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: Chuckypad
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
You have?martin_p wrote:You can stop your cut and paste nonsense, I’ve answered your question.
OK, to clarify. When I said
"2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.
The EU says , " that's fine."
2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.
The EU says, "No can do , UK"
In a nutshell, no caveats, no "probably" as it stands today, right now.
Was it correct.?
Yes Or No?
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Breaking news....
Tory cabinet has withdrawn support for May's latest deal vote. She'll be gone by tomorrow. She is in charge of no one and nothing. Nowhere to go.
Tory cabinet has withdrawn support for May's latest deal vote. She'll be gone by tomorrow. She is in charge of no one and nothing. Nowhere to go.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Fair play to you.Chuckypad wrote:This link is useful:
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk ... ry/SN06775" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The point I was trying to make (perhaps not very well) was that that state aid/subsidies would still face severe restrictions under WTO terms rendering Ringo's point slightly moot
Edit - Just to add that in answer to Ringo... he's right in that EU law does restrict state aid
-
- Posts: 8507
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:22 pm
- Been Liked: 2887 times
- Has Liked: 1760 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
all these arguments one way or the other at least display a degree of understanding of the complexities of this issue, unfortunately the mind numbingly thick British electorate cannot begin to grasp any of it (I count myself in the same category)
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
RingoMcCartney wrote: When said I -
"2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.
The EU says , " that's fine."
2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.
The EU says, "No can do , UK"
Was it a "downright lie" as you claimed?
Yes
Or
No?
YES (I thought I'd add some Ringo formatting to my answer)
(Actually the answer is no, I said "outright lie" but accuracy isn't Ringo's strong point).
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 6571
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
So We work with people who have been involved with Chinese steel.
Number 1 it’s quality is dramatically less.
Many contracts now state it cannot be used .
The Uk in its history has made 1.7 billion tonnes of steel, China has made that in the last two years.
It’s strategy is to remove competition and then force companies to use it as they have no alternative.
And then Increase the price.
British steel needs to be saved to prevent this happening. It’s manufacturing suicide not
to
It’s not about it being competitive, it’s bigger than that.
Number 1 it’s quality is dramatically less.
Many contracts now state it cannot be used .
The Uk in its history has made 1.7 billion tonnes of steel, China has made that in the last two years.
It’s strategy is to remove competition and then force companies to use it as they have no alternative.
And then Increase the price.
British steel needs to be saved to prevent this happening. It’s manufacturing suicide not
to
It’s not about it being competitive, it’s bigger than that.
These 2 users liked this post: Lancasterclaret dsr
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Again, you are reading this thread like you read all of them.RingoMcCartney wrote:Anybody who can be bothered reading this thread will clearly see you have done nothing of the sort in giving me a yes/no answer.
History repeating itself once again!
You simply cannot get down from your high horse and admit you're wrong can you!
Where have you admitted that "Yes" the government is unable to give State aid to save British Due to EU law?
You ignore anything that you don't agree with.
Its beyond well weird what you do, as you proved before you can actually debate properly when you want to.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Or put it another way
I bother to read your ****
I don't think you bother to read my ****!
I bother to read your ****
I don't think you bother to read my ****!
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Course, if we were part of a federal Europe, then we'd have loads to go roundIf it be your will wrote:I'm sort of joking here, but if you want to do this, and want to use the tools necessary to achieve it, you'll be accused of being a hopelessly nostalgic backward-looking, anti-globalist, anti-EU dinosaur out of tune with the modern global economy. (I'm sure you've made similar claims against me in the past!)
(I'm not an expert in UK steel. I really don't know the answer)
(I'm definitely joking here!)
-
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Mon May 20, 2019 2:33 pm
- Been Liked: 19 times
- Has Liked: 6 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Does the EU actually block bailing out British Steel, or is that just what the right-wing is blaming? They've done it before. For decades they blamed the EU for immigration to the UK when they knew full well that the EU didn't stop them from stricter immigration and fools such as yourself gleefully accepted their lies.RingoMcCartney wrote:You have?
OK, to clarify. When I said
"2008 - Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.
The EU says , " that's fine."
2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.
The EU says, "No can do , UK"
In a nutshell, no caveats, no "probably" as it stands today, right now.
Was it correct.?
Yes Or No?
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Mon May 20, 2019 2:33 pm
- Been Liked: 19 times
- Has Liked: 6 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I enjoy the fact that all the euroskeptics who hate the left because they call them "socialists" are now complaining that EU rules won't let them engage in socialism.
This user liked this post: If it be your will
-
- Posts: 6571
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1233 times
- Has Liked: 56 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
State aid is only allowed by the EU in areas that it declares that it is allowed.
It not allowed in the uk , however you can apply to do it.
It why we cannot pay Jag LR to keep jobs here.
The torrid May just be hiding behind the rule , they may not want to save it.
But that will be a bad decision long term
It not allowed in the uk , however you can apply to do it.
It why we cannot pay Jag LR to keep jobs here.
The torrid May just be hiding behind the rule , they may not want to save it.
But that will be a bad decision long term
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Fair play to you aggi. Full credit to you for admitting I was right.aggi wrote:YES (I thought I'd add some Ringo formatting to my answer)
(Actually the answer is no, I said "outright lie" but accuracy isn't Ringo's strong point).
(If only you could have restrained the pedantry reflex!)
Do me a favour though will you? Have a word to the wise with Lancaster Claret. Somebody appears to have put glue in his pockets. He's unable to hold his hand up!
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
You haven’t read the question he answered have you.RingoMcCartney wrote:Fair play to you aggi. Full credit to you for admitting I was right.
(If only you could have restrained the pedantry reflex!)
Do me a favour though will you? Have a word to the wise with Lancaster Claret. Somebody appears to have put glue in his pockets. He's unable to hold his hand up!
This user liked this post: Greenmile
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
1 - were the banks bailed out?Lancasterclaret wrote:Again, you are reading this thread like you read all of them.
You ignore anything that you don't agree with.
Its beyond well weird what you do, as you proved before you can actually debate properly when you want to.
Yes Or No?
2 - Is the government unable to give State aid to save British Steel due to EU law?
Yes Or No?
It's just about not too late to admit I was right, and you were wrong, with a bit of dignity Lancaster Claret.
While others are round you are admitting I was right and have jumped ship. You're in a bunker of denial.
Hang on!!!
You're not Teresa May are you !!!
-
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
- Been Liked: 827 times
- Has Liked: 1307 times
- Location: burnley
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Brexit plus ukip polling around 40%. You are assuming that all tory and labour votes are for remain which won't be correct. I think we can assume based on the polls thatnil_desperandum wrote:I totally agree. So on current polling predictions approx one third of the population will be voting for the Brexit Party.
66% against sends out quite a strong message - don't you think?
As Ringo would say: that's the problem with democracy, sometimes you lose.
(Oh, sorry forgot to leave gaps and use UPPER CASE lettering.)
around 50% are still up for supporting the democracy and that there is no case for another referendum.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Yes your right I hadn't! I thought he'd come to his senses !martin_p wrote:You haven’t read the question he answered have you.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
- Been Liked: 500 times
- Has Liked: 509 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Which of these 2 statements is factually incorrect?aggi wrote:YES (I thought I'd add some Ringo formatting to my answer)
(Actually the answer is no, I said "outright lie" but accuracy isn't Ringo's strong point).
2008 - Labour bailed out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.
The EU did not block it
2019 - The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.
The EU laws block it?
Which one?