Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

cogito

phillw wrote: »

Denying people from other countries access to the NHS is prejudice.

So you think that health tourism is OK?

cogito

Moby wrote: »

......and this is how our scientists feel about Brexit:-

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/25/uk-scientist-says-britons-in-europe-ignored-by-government-mark-mccaughhrean

Astrophysicist Mark McCaughrean says Britons in Europe have been abandoned by the government and hopes that the Conservatives will concentrate their minds on their fellow countrymen and women before sealing a deal with Brussels.

!!!8220;I deeply object to the way that the million of us here in the EU27 have been utterly ignored by the British government, along with the 3 million EU27 citizens in the UK. I!!!8217;m not even sure we!!!8217;ve been used as bargaining chips: we!!!8217;ve simply been considered expendable on the altar of increasingly unpleasant rightwing rhetoric and authoritarianism,!!!8221; he said.

Our scientists? One scientist spoke for them all?

Theophile

cogito wrote: »

So you think that health tourism is OK?

Health tourism represents around 0.3% of NHS spending.
Listening to you lot, it feels more like 30%. :rotfl:

Theophile

cogito wrote: »

Our scientists? One scientist spoke for them all?

Obviously, the Guardian correspondent couldn't catch up with each and every scientist in the land, so all we can rely upon here is some kind of poll...

Scientists say ‘no’ to UK exit from Europe in Nature poll

And by a large margin.
https://www.nature.com/news/scientists-say-no-to-uk-exit-from-europe-in-nature-poll-1.19636
Anything else, cogito? :rotfl:

Moby

Richard_Overton_2911 wrote: »

Either you chose to ignore what I wrote or you need it explaining to you.. I posted "I'm sure you realise that Germany is in crisis over its lack of a long term military strategy".. Which if you bothered to look into you will find its true. Every country has one by the way.

Since WW2 Germany's military strategy has always been self defence however this will need to change. Nations don't plan their military spending in 5yrs cycles they need a long term strategy and use this to decide which types of technologies they need so for instance its no good having inshore defence ships if you need to go around the world in the future to places such as Syria .

The world is changing fast and Germany in particular has been caught with its pants down with regards to a long term planned military strategy. No good making threats to Putin about Syria unless you're willing to back up the threats and Germany and France aren't (as usual).



Politically you think Germany is as stable now as it was a couple of years ago?.. Surely not...;)

I chose to ignore what you wrote because its not relevant to what I was saying. A crisis in Germany's military strategy is nothing compared to what we are facing as a result of brexit. In any event Germany could update the quality of its military hardware no problem.

Moby

Tromking wrote: »

tracey3596 wrote: »

This is where Labour abandons Grimethorpe in favour of Islington.

Saw that interview myself. You chose Frank Field's world view I chose Stella Creasy. Who best represents the future?

Moby

Theophile wrote: »

Health tourism represents around 0.3% of NHS spending.
Listening to you lot, it feels more like 30%. :rotfl:

Again and again its fear that seems to be the driver. Fear of being taken advantage of, fear of losing out in the battle of resources, fear of the foreigner, fear of different languages, fear of different cultures, fear of having your own culture subsumed by another culture. Hence the infamous UKIP poster of refugees presented as illegal immigrants. Real statistics on these issues have little impact.

gfplux

Thrugelmir wrote: »

As Individual countries can!!!8217;t veto the withdrawal treaty. I assume that you are referring to :-

"3. As from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions, in cases where, under the Treaties, not all the members of the Council
participate in voting, a qualified majority shall be defined as follows:

(a) A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

A blocking minority must include at least the minimum number of Council members representing more than 35 % of the population of the participating Member States, plus one member,
failing which the qualified majority shall be deemed attained;

(b) By way of derogation from point (a), where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security
Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these
States."

Trade agreements are a totally different matter. As most likely will require unanimous vote of ratification by EU member states. The EU doesn't have sufficent powers to implement one unilaterally.

Thanks.
The leaving agreement will be voted on by the parliament.

As you say any trade agreement has to be agreed by all EU27 country!!!8217;s. That will take a lot of doing as that is where individual country!!!8217;s will have the opportunity to protect their own interests. To be frank I don!!!8217;t know wether they can except a trade deal with exceptions or just say yes or no.

Obviously each country will have already lobbied heavily for their own interest, ALL 27 that makes for a long long negotiating period. Perhaps the transition period will be very very very long.

gfplux

mrginge wrote: »

i think we should all thank Ballard and gfplux for pointing out that there isn’t actually much benefit in the UK attempting to pursue a trade deal, since our potential customers now don’t give a toss and are modifying their supply chains so they won’t be buying anything from us in the future anyway.

Perhaps they don’t realise in their haste to big up the EU, they are actually recommending we need to look for other sources of income.

It has been and will continue to be my pleasure to enlighten you.

gfplux

mrginge wrote: »

Oh well have a big lolly and a pat on the head for being so clever.

Now, on the basis of your cleverness and based on gfplux’s assertion that EU companies ( eg German carmakers) are already moving away from uk suppliers -
What is the point of negotiating a trade deal with countries that aren’t going to spend any (or a declining amount of) money with us?


No deflection, just challenging the logic you and others have constructed.



It’s funny when people have a strop about posters attributing certain meaning to their posts and then proceed to do exactly that to others.

I said modify their supply chains. Why would you think that means moving away from UK suppliers.