Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

tracey3596

Theophile wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42767235

Fair enough but is this attempt likely to work, do you think?
I mean, it's only been how long now and still no coalition?
FOUR MONTHS.
And even though the SPD have agreed to talk about forming a coalition it's by no means a certainty.
Mutti ain't safe yet.

If the two sides agree on a deal, the SPD’s 440,000 members would still have to give their approval before a government can be formed.

https://www.politico.eu/article/spd-agrees-to-start-formal-coalition-talks-with-merkel/

*
Yet again (and before certain pro-remain protagonists "leap") do not mistake this as gloating over German indecision.
Merely pointing out a comparison to perceived difficulties with current UK politics.

phillw

fewgroats wrote: »

The EU has done wonders in making sure that most countries in Western Europe have the same levels of safety.

Damn foreigners taking care of our safety.

We're British, we should be able to put children up chimneys and down mines without foreigners telling us it's wrong.

I'm joking obviously.

ukcarper

phillw wrote: »

History makes a mockery of you, maybe you should study it. It didn't happen without the EU, there was no sign it would happen without the EU, the EU had to fight hard for us to clean up our beaches.



The water companies didn't choose to do it, they were forced to do it. Left to their own devices today they would stop spending money on it.

Some businesses in the referendum went on on about cutting EU red tape, this is the kind of thing that they mean. The working time directive was the number one thing brought up on TV, the uk government has been fighting against it & so I would expect it to go when they have nobody else to answer to.

If the EU are such good environmentalists perhaps they should enforce there own rules on the killing of birds in Southern European countries.

System

tracey3596 wrote: »

Ahem.
From your own quote that you link to is this:
Do you see that?
Do you then understand what it says?
It appears not; these RTA's are still under the jurisdiction of the WTO. However many parties having agreed them and where they are agreed does not alter that.
That is why the WTO must be notified.

If you want to define 'under WTO rules' as including the EU single market, NAFTA & ASEAN feel free. I'll file this under 'trying too hard'.

It's too silly to even debate.

tracey3596

ilovehouses wrote: »

If you want to define 'under WTO rules' as including the EU single market, NAFTA & ASEAN feel free. I'll file this under 'trying too hard'.

It's too silly to even debate.

What's silly is the denial you persist with when the WTO report you chose very clearly states that such matters come under their auspices.
As such, Cogito is very clearly correct in stating that 90% of global trade is under WTO terms.
Wriggle all you want but denial is futile.

cogito

phillw wrote: »

History makes a mockery of you, maybe you should study it. It didn't happen without the EU, there was no sign it would happen without the EU, the EU had to fight hard for us to clean up our beaches.

The water companies didn't choose to do it, they were forced to do it. Left to their own devices today they would stop spending money on it.

You make a mockery of yourself when you suggest that someone should study a subject of which you clearly know very little. If you really want to know why water companies have clean up obligations, it's because those local authorities who previously were responsible for water supplies had failed to do so. It was part of the tender process and those businesses seeking to acquire the water services freely engaged in this. It was not imposed upon them subsequently. Try not to let a few facts get in the way of your prejudices.

Herzlos

tracey3596 wrote: »

What's silly is the denial you persist with when the WTO report you chose very clearly states that such matters come under their auspices.
As such, Cogito is very clearly correct in stating that 90% of global trade is under WTO terms.
Wriggle all you want but denial is futile.

WTO terms is not the same as under WTO auspices.

Herzlos

tracey3596 wrote: »

It's verbalised in almost every post.

It really isn't. If you have some sort of inferiority complex you're projecting it's not his fault.

tracey3596

Herzlos wrote: »

WTO terms is not the same as under WTO auspices.

Herzlos wrote: »

It really isn't. If you have some sort of inferiority complex you're projecting it's not his fault.

Very politely I suggest you wind it in a little and try to disagree with someone else.
I'm not biting, much though it looks like you want me to.
As such it looks like you "have some sort of inferiority complex", not me.

Next.

tracey3596

This explains what I said earlier re: a coalition in Germany.

If SPD leaders fail to deliver more, the risk increases that the party’s 443,000 members might reject a final deal when they are asked to vote.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-politics/germanys-spd-wants-merkel-to-sweeten-coalition-deal-idUKKBN1FB0EC?il=0