Reply to: Conservative ERG offer their Brexit Proposals

[Yorkie62]

You saying that all foreigners should not be allowed into the country under any circumstance?

No I was messing with you to try to get a response[emoji12]

[WTFH]

FTFY

You saying that all foreigners should not be allowed into the country under any circumstance?

[Yorkie62]

What if we were to have free movement, but maybe with caveats on it, such as:

For < 3 months: They would have to spend time in a detention centre to register their presence in the UK
For > 3 months: If they aren't working (because they are in a detention centre, they must be deported back to the country of origin
And at any time they can be shot on grounds of policy, security or health.

Would that be more acceptable to you than the way the UK currently does it?

Discuss

FTFY

[WTFH]

... never in context.

OPM out of context?
Inconceivable!

[NotAllThere]

Anyone who equates the EU (political dissidents killed: 0) with the USSR (political dissidents killed: millions) has a level of congenital idiocy that would have involved termination under the Nazi eugenic laws.

Perhaps he's a member of Goldsmith's LGBTQ+ society, who think gulags were rather pleasant reeducation centres?

You keep using that meme - unfortunately never in context.

[darmstadt]

What if we were to have free movement, but maybe with caveats on it, such as:

For < 3 months: They would have to register their presence in the UK
For > 3 months: If they aren't working, they must have enough funds and private health insurance so that they are not on benefits (as well as registering their presence)
And at any time they can be expelled from the UK on grounds of policy, security or health.

Would that be more acceptable to you than the way the UK currently does it?

Discuss

Now now, stop taking the urine

[original PM]

Who says the other 3 are a burden? I realise you've stated it twice in your post, but you haven't elaborated on why you say they are clearly a burden.

Does your version of "Free trade" include services, or is it only goods?

I am making an assumption it is a burden because Junker says you cannot have free trade without the other three.

So if all 4 were a benefit then he would be happy to give us just one of them.

I mean Junker would have to be a crap negotiator to insist that if we want the benefits of free trade we could only have them if we took the benefits of the other 3 things as well.


Clearly though this is tongue in cheek - we all know the benefit of free trade versus the 'overheads' required to support the free trade.

Which kind of makes the word 'free' in free trade not quite accurate I suppose.

Or rather

Free....

[WTFH]

So we left and we are trying to negotiate and it seems clearly that free trade is a benefit - but those other things are clearly not - they are clearly seen as some sort of burden - otherwise why would Junker insist you cannot have free trade without the other 3?

If all 4 were a benefit to each and every country in the EU and all we wanted was the free trade bit then we would probably get it - because then hey we only a get a quarter of the good bits of a full EU member.

And so if we then take the obvious corollary of this which is that these things ' regulations for services, the European Court of Justice or free movement' must be a bigger burden than benefit then what is the EU doing about them?

Who says the other 3 are a burden? I realise you've stated it twice in your post, but you haven't elaborated on why you say they are clearly a burden.

Does your version of "Free trade" include services, or is it only goods?

[original PM]

What if we were to have free movement, but maybe with caveats on it, such as:

For < 3 months: They would have to register their presence in the UK
For > 3 months: If they aren't working, they must have enough funds and private health insurance so that they are not on benefits (as well as registering their presence)
And at any time they can be expelled from the UK on grounds of policy, security or health.

Would that be more acceptable to you than the way the UK currently does it?

Discuss

Possibly but that was not the point I was trying to make.

Lets assume everything about the EU is great - if that was the case why did the UK vote to leave? So obviously something is wrong in the EU from the point of view of a number of people.

So we left and we are trying to negotiate and it seems clearly that free trade is a benefit - but those other things are clearly not - they are clearly seen as some sort of burden - otherwise why would Junker insist you cannot have free trade without the other 3?

If all 4 were a benefit to each and every country in the EU and all we wanted was the free trade bit then we would probably get it - because then hey we only a get a quarter of the good bits of a full EU member.

And so if we then take the obvious corollary of this which is that these things ' regulations for services, the European Court of Justice or free movement' must be a bigger burden than benefit then what is the EU doing about them?

[WTFH]

Just a quick one - if these things are so great

'but without accepting regulations for services, the European Court of Justice or free movement.'

surely if we do not want them then it is our loss.

So saying that we cannot have free trade if we do not take the other 3 seems that only free trade is a benefit and the rest is just crap we have to put up with for -- reasons as yet to be defined.

Discuss.

What if we were to have free movement, but maybe with caveats on it, such as:

For < 3 months: They would have to register their presence in the UK
For > 3 months: If they aren't working, they must have enough funds and private health insurance so that they are not on benefits (as well as registering their presence)
And at any time they can be expelled from the UK on grounds of policy, security or health.

Would that be more acceptable to you than the way the UK currently does it?

Discuss

[sasguru]

EUSSR

Anyone who equates the EU (political dissidents killed: 0) with the USSR (political dissidents killed: millions) has a level of congenital idiocy that would have involved termination under the Nazi eugenic laws.

[vetran]

Just a quick one - if these things are so great

'but without accepting regulations for services, the European Court of Justice or free movement.'

surely if we do not want them then it is our loss.

So saying that we cannot have free trade if we do not take the other 3 seems that only free trade is a benefit and the rest is just crap we have to put up with for -- reasons as yet to be defined.

Discuss.

ssh stop being an idiot only Mother EUSSR can solve the worlds problems!

You people don't know what a wonderful organisation it is so we never let you have a vote!

[darmstadt]

From today's blinder of an ERG press conference:

Q: Why did May not go for these plans originally?

You will have to ask her, Davis says.

He says around the world the trend is for more streamlined borders.

You can't get more streamlined than that which already exists within the EU, numpties...

[original PM]

Juncker hints at exactly how vassal he expects the UK to become.

Juncker demands the UK become extremely vassal

Chequers is just the beginning, and the toothless Tigers roaring yesterday didn't help their case.

Just a quick one - if these things are so great

'but without accepting regulations for services, the European Court of Justice or free movement.'

surely if we do not want them then it is our loss.

So saying that we cannot have free trade if we do not take the other 3 seems that only free trade is a benefit and the rest is just crap we have to put up with for -- reasons as yet to be defined.

Discuss.

[Whorty]

Not sure how he gets £13billion in one article, but in the next one:
https://www.economistsforfreetrade.c...s-from-brexit/
The poorest families in Britain will be the biggest winners by having £44 a week extra



So, food prices will fall, rent will fall, property prices will fall, but low-paid worker wages will rise.

Is JRM basically saying that Corbyn is going to get in and destroy the economy?
Forcing rent down, causing the housing market to collapse and paying the poorest more are what Labour are normally good at, not the Tory Elite.

But hark, they make up another number. Not £13billion, not £44 per week:

Have they got Dianne Abbot doing their numbers?