BAE - well over 1,000 UK jobs going

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:45 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Find one example of when i've been a **** to someone who simply asked me to explain my point.

You're a prick on a weekly basis, not necessarily when asked to explain your point.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:47 pm

Sidney1st wrote:The discussion was then talking about people being homeless, can't feed the poor etc.

Some people like to live on the street, so there will always be a degree of homelessness.

That's all I was saying, take some time to digest that info.

As for how I treat people, look in the mirror before pointing the finger at anyone else, you're one of the worst on here for attempting to degrade people or figuratively shouting over them to dismiss their opinion.

So it had no point? OK. That's all I wanted to know.

And by "dismiss their opinion" I assume you mean carefully consider it and then explain why it's bullshit using facts and logic? I make no apologies for explaining to people how their opinions suck. But you won't find a single example of me dismissing someone's opinion without giving it due consideration.

gandhisflipflop · Post by **gandhisflipflop** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:53 pm

[quote="Imploding Turtle"][/quote]

Congratulations. You have won the award for the most ironic post of the year.

ClaretDiver · Post by **ClaretDiver** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:59 pm

Christ almighty, is it not possible to have a thread on this board that does not go downhill like Eddie the Eagle???

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:01 pm

Sidney1st wrote:You're a prick on a weekly basis, not necessarily when asked to explain your point.

I think you'll find it's much more frequently than that. But that still doesn't mean i dismiss anyone's opinion without first actually considering it, no matter how much you want to think it does.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:10 pm

ClaretDiver wrote:Christ almighty, is it not possible to have a thread on this board that does not go downhill like Eddie the Eagle???

It's every time Sidney1st gets involved. He can't stop himself from finding something to argue about.

He quite often boasts about arguing with people on his beloved facebook, often over very trivial matters.

He's a troll, and not even a good one.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:14 pm

He's not a troll. He just liked to pretend he was on occassion until he realised his opinion received less consideration when others couldn't be sure he actually held them.

He's alright really, just wrong a lot.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:52 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:It's every time Sidney1st gets involved. He can't stop himself from finding something to argue about.

He quite often boasts about arguing with people on his beloved facebook, often over very trivial matters.

He's a troll, and not even a good one.

I dont always argue, I do actually make valid points which you don't like me doing usually.

Even when I stop some people still call me names, ref the thread the other week where I was called a Nazi.
As for Fb, I chat on there as much as I do on here, just about a wider variety of things because that's the point of social media...

If you'd prefer I could just not talk to you, even when you're massively wrong about something?
I'm happy to do that.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:53 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:He's not a troll. He just liked to pretend he was on occassion until he realised his opinion received less consideration when others couldn't be sure he actually held them.

He's alright really, just wrong a lot.

I suppose I could take lessons in trolling from you?

As for opinions, they're there to be corrected or proven wrong, something that does happen to you on here.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:55 pm

I think your general tone leads to people calling you names. You're a master at talking down to people. People tend not to like that.

Chobulous · Post by **Chobulous** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:57 pm

A lot of pot - kettle - black it seems on here at the moment.

Hapag Lloyd · Post by **Hapag Lloyd** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:10 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:I think your general tone leads to people calling you names. You're a master at talking down to people. People tend not to like that.

I guess you don't do irony.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:21 pm

Sidney1st wrote: If you'd prefer I could just not talk to you, even when you're massively wrong about something?
I'm happy to do that.

You wouldn't be able to help yourself. You're a born arguer.

I'm never wrong, btw.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:38 pm

Another 1,000 jobs lost from the UK https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... relocation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:45 pm

aggi wrote:Another 1,000 jobs lost from the UK https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... relocation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There's no news in the story that EU agencies won't be based in the UK after Brexit.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:05 pm

dsr wrote:There's no news in the story that EU agencies won't be based in the UK after Brexit.

Not sure how it's not news.
It was certainly news for David Davis, as he had claimed that they would remain in the UK.
"The former business secretary and Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable said Davis’s suggestion the UK could keep the agencies showed just how little grasp the government has of the potential consequences of Brexit.”

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:11 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Not sure how it's not news.
It was certainly news for David Davis, as he had claimed that they would remain in the UK.
"The former business secretary and Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable said Davis’s suggestion the UK could keep the agencies showed just how little grasp the government has of the potential consequences of Brexit.”

It may be news that Davis thinks that the EU will show any interest in being co-operative about the UK's exit. But it's not news that the EU agencies are leaving. Did anyone (apart from, apparently, Davis) believe they wouldn't?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:21 pm

Brexit is going to be the new communism.

The perfect plan, only let down by people and government not doing what should be done.

Its great, it means it can never be questioned without someone going "well, it would have worked if it wasn't for X, Y and Z"

The way its going, I can see May standing up and saying "I'd have got away with it too if it wasn't for those pesky kids"

I'm off to bed, as our inability to act like any sort of nation, let alone a world leading one is starting get me down. Hell, we make Zimbabwe look organised.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:23 pm

dsr wrote:It may be news that Davis thinks that the EU will show any interest in being co-operative about the UK's exit. But it's not news that the EU agencies are leaving. Did anyone (apart from, apparently, Davis) believe they wouldn't?

But surely the issue here is that the hapless and incompetent Davis - who is mean't to be our chief negotiator is so deluded. How many other things is he getting wrong? Anyone who thinks this will turn out well if we maintain our current approach to negotiations, under his leadership, is either blindly optimistic or totally out of touch with reality.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:28 pm

The main thing they're getting wrong is making concessions and getting nothing back. I know you reckon any deal is better than a bad deal, but so far all we're doing is paying many billions and getting nothing. That has to be a worse deal than paying nothing and getting nothing. The EU negotiators believe (possibly correctly) that we're desperate to roll over and give the appearance of getting a good deal, even if we don't get a good deal, and also that we won't just walk away and take our chances in the open market. So of course they're going to screw us. It's what they do - they aren't in it for fair play, they're in it for the benefit (albeit immediate short-term benefit of themselves and of the 27 counbtries they represent.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:59 pm

dsr wrote:The main thing they're getting wrong is making concessions and getting nothing back. I know you reckon any deal is better than a bad deal,

You can't know that because it's not true.
My position is that a deal is inevitable, so we've go to get the best deal we can. Walking away with no agreement over our borders and security, and particularly no agreement over the Irish border etc. etc. simply isn't an option. There won't even be any flights without a deal of sorts. The EU have known this since day one, but it only just seems to be occurring to Davis.
A clear negotiating strategy should have been in place BEFORE triggering Article 50, and sending a blunderer like Davis to negotiate on our behalf with no vision or realistic targets compounded the folly.
The EU have been aware of these issues even before we triggered Art. 50, and obviously can't offer us a better deal than we already have, otherwise everyone of the 27 members would be up in arms.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:10 am

Ah this was a good thread, I enjoyed reading some of it again.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:18 am

nil_desperandum wrote:You can't know that because it's not true.
My position is that a deal is inevitable, so we've go to get the best deal we can. Walking away with no agreement over our borders and security, and particularly no agreement over the Irish border etc. etc. simply isn't an option. There won't even be any flights without a deal of sorts. The EU have known this since day one, but it only just seems to be occurring to Davis.
A clear negotiating strategy should have been in place BEFORE triggering Article 50, and sending a blunderer like Davis to negotiate on our behalf with no vision or realistic targets compounded the folly.
The EU have been aware of these issues even before we triggered Art. 50, and obviously can't offer us a better deal than we already have, otherwise everyone of the 27 members would be up in arms.

Sorry, but numerous other people have claimed that any deal is better than no deal, and I thought you were one of them.

You're right, flights stopping overnight isn't an option. There's no way that the EU would shut down all its flights to the UK, any more than the UK would shut down all its flights to the EU. But trying to link that flight arrangement to the pensions of EU workers and the Irish border question is pointless delaying tactics. In the end, they'll have a deal that allows things to go on as they do now.

The Irish border question isn't an issue, or shouldn't be. If the EU would keep its nose out, then the UK and Ireland could sort it easily. They've even got the Norway-Sweden border to use as a template, if history isn't enough. It's not as if trade rules are any issue, because the EU wants the border question settled before trade rules are discussed.

As far as I can see, if the EU offers nothing apart from mutually beneficial agreements, most of which will be of equal benefit to both sides (eg. flights in and out of the UK can continue, or eg. car exports can continue albeit with WTO tariffs), then we'll be better off than we were before. They won't. That ought to be our strong bargaining position - at present we're paying £8bn per year for access to a free market, they're paying nothing for access to our free market; we can stop paying for that, with the downside of equal tariffs on both sides. Their strong position is presumably the attempt to stop the UK dominance in the financial markets, though as the second largest market is Switzerland there's evidence to suggest they won;t be successful. But if they try and screw us down over everything, then we ought to just leave the talks. But I agree, the negotiating team seem to be pretty incompetent and they won't do it.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:02 am

So you don't think we owe anything then?

Everybody knows we do by the way, and that includes people like Gove and Johnson. Why does UKIP think we don't? and why does UKIP think that that is somehow different from say, Venezuela not paying its creditors?

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:30 am

dsr wrote:The main thing they're getting wrong is making concessions and getting nothing back.

I think you're confusing 'fulfilling our commitments' with 'making concessions, dsr.

We've always known that we'll need to settle the bill before any other talks can take place. Settling the 'divorce bill' is simply the price of admission to the next phase. It means we can begin to talk about our future trading relationship. It doesn't guarantee anything more than that.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:35 am

Paying our share of debts, yes. A lot of this will be in guaranteeing the pensions of British EU officials, which I don't think is controversial. And obviously this will be offset by our share of EU assets.

Does the EU even have a national debt in the same way that the UK does?

But I don't agree that just because the budget has already been set for 2020 and 2021, that we should be paying for that. And I don't agree that we should pay anything for continued access to the EU market - unless the EU pays pro rata for access to the UK market.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:37 am

dsr wrote: But I don't agree that just because the budget has already been set for 2020 and 2021, that we should be paying for that. .

We signed up to do just that, so its only fair that we keep our promise.

After all, we're an honest country aren't we, not at all governed by shysters and liars

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:37 am

But we've agreed to that budget dsr, of course we have to pay for it.

Its not like you can't and expect decent treatment on the international stage is it?

Thats why the govt have pretty much agreed to pay it, and then if the talks on trade don't start (well, there is still the impossible to sort out Irish issue but I think we have to face reality there as well) then you might have a point.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:47 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:But we've agreed to that budget dsr, of course we have to pay for it.

It's a budget, not a commitment. Parliament may agree to Hammond's budget tomorrow, but if the government resigns and Labour gets in, they aren't committed to following it. Circumstances change, budgets change with them.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:09 am

dsr wrote:The Irish border question isn't an issue, or shouldn't be. If the EU would keep its nose out, then the UK and Ireland could sort it easily.

I think when there are accusations of arrogance and a lack of realism from the UK it's this kind of thing. The suggestion that the EU should keep its nose out of an important EU border because it's none of their business.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:16 am

I didn't so much say that it's none of their business, just that Ireland would be able to sort it out perfectly well without the other 26 countries insisting that they must be equally involved. If Ireland of course wants to make it a 27-country to one negotiation, that's their business, but I would have thought it would be easier to work it an a one-to-one country basis.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:26 am

dsr wrote:It's a budget, not a commitment. Parliament may agree to Hammond's budget tomorrow, but if the government resigns and Labour gets in, they aren't committed to following it. Circumstances change, budgets change with them.

Ridiculous and completely irrelevant comparison.

You're the most disingenuous poster on here.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:34 am

I didn't so much say that it's none of their business, just that Ireland would be able to sort it out perfectly well without the other 26 countries insisting that they must be equally involved. If Ireland of course wants to make it a 27-country to one negotiation, that's their business, but I would have thought it would be easier to work it an a one-to-one country basis.

The EU is prepared to treat this border as a "special case", so there is inventive on both sides to sort this out. I hate to say it as a UK citizen, but it makes sense to have the border controls at the ports in England and Scotland, but I can see how that isn't going to go down well at all in some quarters.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:03 pm

dsr wrote:I didn't so much say that it's none of their business, just that Ireland would be able to sort it out perfectly well without the other 26 countries insisting that they must be equally involved. If Ireland of course wants to make it a 27-country to one negotiation, that's their business, but I would have thought it would be easier to work it an a one-to-one country basis.

It's not just a UK/Ireland border though, it's a UK/EU border and impacts all of the countries, not just Ireland.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:30 pm

aggi wrote:It's not just a UK/Ireland border though, it's a UK/EU border and impacts all of the countries, not just Ireland.

How does it? apart from re. trade, which isn't up for discussion because they haven't started trade talks yet. It doesn't affect immigration because the UK and Ireland are basically in their own mini-Schengen, just the two countries. What else is the big deal?

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:53 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bene ... -spzs6b662

Go on, Rowls. If the economy is going great guns, and all these awesome new jobs are increasing tax revenue then explain why we can't afford to feed poor people any more.

....and on another thread you said I looked foolish.

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:59 pm

aggi wrote:It's not just a UK/Ireland border though, it's a UK/EU border and impacts all of the countries, not just Ireland.

So are Eire / EU going to do a Trump and build a wall ? This is their problem, not the UK's.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:14 pm

Us British haven't invaded anywhere for a while. Shall we just take Ireland? It will solve it instantly. Instead of oil it will be the Guiness stocks that keep us rich.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:26 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:So you don't think we owe anything then?

Everybody knows we do by the way, and that includes people like Gove and Johnson. Why does UKIP think we don't? and why does UKIP think that that is somehow different from say, Venezuela not paying its creditors?

We shouldn't agree to pay anything until we know what we are getting for it, if its a deal similar to Canada then no thanks, they didn't pay £60bn to trade with a £70bn deficit and nor should we.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:31 pm

claretandy wrote:We shouldn't agree to pay anything until we know what we are getting for it, if its a deal similar to Canada then no thanks, they didn't pay £60bn to trade with a £70bn deficit and nor should we.

Canada didn't have outstanding financial commitments to the EU's budget.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:42 pm

HatfieldClaret wrote:So are Eire / EU going to do a Trump and build a wall ? This is their problem, not the UK's.

No it isn't!

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:44 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:Canada didn't have outstanding financial commitments to the EU's budget.

And if we decide to leave with no deal then legally how much to we owe ? answer nothing, nadda, not a penny.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:44 pm

Blackrod wrote:....and on another thread you said I looked foolish.

I hope that what ever mental injury you have there's a diagnosis and treatment for it.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:46 pm

claretandy wrote:And if we decide to leave with no deal then legally how much to we owe ? answer nothing, nadda, not a penny.

No, we owe what we'd previously committed to pay.

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:51 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:No it isn't!

Why is it our problem ?

ngsobob · Post by **ngsobob** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:52 pm

Do you Leavers walk away from your financial obligations? It's not a 'fee' to get to trade talks, it's settling up our obligations.

Yesterday the EU announced that the European Medicines Agency would be moving from London to Amsterdam and the European Banking Authority to Paris. That's a 1000 jobs and all the associated budget and multiplier effect on their suppliers etc. Every year, less tax and NI. There will be others.

The country is facing catastrophe. Cling to your monthly titbits of good news, Brexiters, it's like a dry morning in a monsoon.

Don't worry, though, we remainers will win the argument as the good ship UK takes on yet more water.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:53 pm

Do some reading on Ireland Hatfied ffs.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:53 pm

claretandy wrote:And if we decide to leave with no deal then legally how much to we owe ? answer nothing, nadda, not a penny.

Try that with your mortgage. Sell your house and then try to strike a deal with the bank to pay off your mortgage cheaper than if you'd just continued to pay it every month. Then if they don't come back with a deal you like just break off negotiations and declare that you owe nothing. Report back on how that works out for you.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:56 pm

ngsobob wrote:Do you Leavers walk away from your financial obligations? It's not a 'fee' to get to trade talks, it's settling up our obligations.

Yesterday the EU announced that the European Medicines Agency would be moving from London to Amsterdam and the European Banking Authority to Paris. That's a 1000 jobs and all the associated budget and multiplier effect on their suppliers etc. Every year, less tax and NI. There will be others.

The country is facing catastrophe. Cling to your monthly titbits of good news, Brexiters, it's like a dry morning in a monsoon.

Don't worry, though, we remainers will win the argument as the good ship UK takes on yet more water.

You make it sound like you would rather win an argument than have a better life?

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:57 pm

Quickenthetempo wrote:You make it sound like you would rather win an argument than have a better life?

No one gets a better life from Brexit