Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

Herzlos

Moat_Sart wrote: »

I'm guessing that Buckfast would be far more likely here.

Have you tried Buckfast? It's like a heart attack in a bottle. Plenty of craft beers and whiskys up here though that aren't quite so awful.

goral

If UK want access to financial services EU, must give up fishing policy. And allow EU fisherman to UK waters.

"We are taking back control of our waters".

And brexit not yet happen!
What will be more important for UK? "We are taking back control of our waters"? or access to EU financials services?

What next?

Moe_The_Bartender

goral wrote: »

If UK want access to financial services EU, must give up fishing policy. And allow EU fisherman to UK waters.

"We are taking back control of our waters".

And brexit not yet happen!
What will be more important for UK? "We are taking back control of our waters"? or access to EU financials services?

What next?

If the EU want to pillage our waters, presumably it’s OK for me to rock up in Bordeaux and help myself to their grape harvest.

goral

Moe_The_Bartender wrote: »

If the EU want to pillage our waters, presumably it’s OK for me to rock up in Bordeaux and help myself to their grape harvest.

No, fisher policy exchange to financial services.
No grapes or others.
Do you have any financial services across EU?
If Yes - you will be very pleased.
If No - well, you can enjoy by slogan: "Take back control" at local pub.

lvader

Actually the EU can’t afford to lose access to London financial markets, many of which are global in nature. As long as London doesn’t become tied to EU regulations it will do fine.

adindas

It makes me chuckles when I see a few remoaners got scared with possibility of treason charge and death penalty. But hey this is not a troll but a possibility :D:D:D:D:D

One poster here is accusing me that this idea is coming from disagreement.

Keep in mind the idea of treason charge and death penalty is not my original idea but there is a room for this if you see from my previous posts. So this is not a troll but a possibility. Examples, post #7545 & #7558. I also post example links to this. Whether this charge could be brought in to the court, it will depend on the initial public enquiry and then later, the court will make that decision. All of this is constitutional and it is within the legal framework. Whether there is a capital punishment or not, it will depend on the effort to bring back this punishment. In the past, there was evidence that high level of treason was liable for capital punishment.

It is quite similar to when the remoaners are using Brexit scaremonger Armageddon, doomsday of the British economy. However, the difference is that people could witness that majority of people do not get scared (see the result of EU referendum and Tori landslide win in the GE) and this scaremonger has been uncovered to be untrue day by day. In the meanwhile, there has not been any public enquiry with regard to the treason charge. However, the case like this will normally keep growing and take place in the later date.

There is not any specific rule in this forum that prevent people to use term remoaners. Similarly with the term quitters or quittlings, so to me I do not mind the people keep using this term. I do not mind to be called Quitter or quittlings.

Moe_The_Bartender

goral wrote: »

No, fisher policy exchange to financial services.
No grapes or others.
Do you have any financial services across EU?
If Yes - you will be very pleased.
If No - well, you can enjoy by slogan: "Take back control" at local pub.

I don’t mind the EU having access to our fishing waters as long as we take back control by which I mean time limited access, strict quotas and all fish to be landed in the UK for processing. It is utterly bizarre for one country to insist on having access to the natural resources of another. Why should they and why can’t you see that?

goral

Wait, brexit wasn't supposed to restore independence and we are taking back control of our waters?
And now it turns out that for, for example, access to finance, the UK is able to give up independence and access to territorial waters ...
This was the case in the EU! Where something is given in return for something.

What next? Agricultural policy? Free movement?
And of course, everything is just our new policy back control.

Moe_The_Bartender

I know that English is not your first language but what you have written makes no sense at all. Maybe you should reread and edit so we can understand what you are trying to say.

Getting_greyer

Clear to me what Goral is saying. We are leaving CFP for full control over our sovereign waters. We may then negotiate access for EU fishers in return for something. Which is pretty much what we have now.

He then asks what else. I believe this means we are leaving an institution where we have pooled sovereignty and return for benefits. Once we take back control we will likely give it away again in return for benefits. Sovereignty to some degree is lost in any international agreement. So I think I could summarise his argument as him asking what is the point?