http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...y-eu-migrants/
So, apparently, despite the British Government showing full willingness to grant resident EU citizens full rights of residency, the EU doesn't believe they can do an early deal - but don't want to be seen as "blocking" such a deal.
In other news, Beskar to select most edible hat.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
I reccomend a nacho sombrero.
This is why ensuring EU residents without guarenteed reciprication would be a massive mistake; You can not give away your only hostage and expect an opponant of this bad character to just do the same through honour.
Last edited by Greyblades; 05-02-2017 at 11:41.
What's the astonishment here? That EU believes a deal can't be struck as early as June? Or because she mentioned twice that she wants it done by June? OMG, Theresa has spoken twice now, everybody drop whatever you're doing and make it so.
It wouldn't work like that if EU was the Catholic flock and Theresa May the Pope.
May's already made the offer of equivalent guarentees of citizenship, she did it months ago. The only thing keeping May from making a deal is the EU not reciprocating, and the article indicates they're refusinv in an attempt to make May look bad.
After watching the ECB turn off an on the liquidity taps to Italy until their gov't collapsed from the economic chaos, reading the ugly and duplicitous way that the Eurogroup Working Group bounced Yanis Varoufakis from pillar to post, and watching Cameron's failed attempt to renegotiate from the stated position of staying in the EU, you better believe I want a 'bloody difficult woman' to lead Britain now.
I want a good deal, something equivalent to the Ukraine DCFTA with less ECB supervision, and there is no reason on god's earth why this should not be achievable. But... I am 110% ready to turn Britain into Singapore-on-steroids (relative to the EU), if that is the most effective economic response to EU intransigence. Britain would become a market economy rather than a social democracy, which is not what the left would want, but i'd be quite comfortable with that. It's not what I'd prefer, but freedom has a price.
Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar
Except of course if you are the one having to work in the sweat shop... And a nice tax-barrier with EU might made you still too competitive for European market, but I am sure Zimbabwe will buy something... And say good-bye to your mobile, tablets, and giant TV screens, but, as say the one who never really suffer of lack of comfort, freedom has a price. Ask Bangladesh...
And by the way, the "bloody difficult woman" changed her mind faster then Billy The Kid draw his gun.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire.
"I've been in few famous last stands, lad, and they're butcher shops. That's what Blouse's leading you into, mark my words. What'll you lot do then? We've had a few scuffles, but that's not war. Think you'll be man enough to stand, when the metal meets the meat?"
"You did, sarge", said Polly." You said you were in few last stands."
"Yeah, lad. But I was holding the metal"
Sergeant Major Jackrum 10th Light Foot Infantery Regiment "Inns-and-Out"
on the contrary, we'd end up growing faster than the continent (again).
it would involve a lot of adam smithian creative destruction, the economy would look different in twenty years time, but we'd remain a rich country.
but remember; this is not my preference, merely a fallback position. if all the points in my previous post that you fail to address come to pass.
Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar
The astonishment is the EU's astonishment at Theresa May's position given it's been her position since at least November.
It makes sense though, if you think about it.
The UK, as a National Government is most concerned about the Rights of its citizens abroad and the Rights of Foreign Nationals working here. The EU, as a Super-National body is most concerned to maintain its budgets in order to meet its liabilities.
So the EU won't discuss resident rights until the "Divorce Bill" is settled whilst the UK won't want to discuss the Bill until it knows the Rights of its citizens are protected.
Basically, you have two different bodies with fundamentally incompatible goals and priorities - which is just another example of why we don't "fit" the EU's version of Europe.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
What?So you vote for more competition and then expect an opponent who does not actually oppose you?
Last edited by Greyblades; 05-02-2017 at 21:27.
Vitiate Man.
History repeats the old conceits
The glib replies, the same defeats
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
But the process of leaving isn't itself continuous with whatever those different priorities may be; it carries its own priorities.
So don't conflate alleged political and economic differences before the decision to leave with how the decision to leave organizes priorities between the parties.
Vitiate Man.
History repeats the old conceits
The glib replies, the same defeats
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
I find quite funny the Tories' media finally discovered than in a divorce/negotiation the other party has as well interests and points to make. As soon May will have made her mind for at least one month, perhaps some real discussions might take place...
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire.
"I've been in few famous last stands, lad, and they're butcher shops. That's what Blouse's leading you into, mark my words. What'll you lot do then? We've had a few scuffles, but that's not war. Think you'll be man enough to stand, when the metal meets the meat?"
"You did, sarge", said Polly." You said you were in few last stands."
"Yeah, lad. But I was holding the metal"
Sergeant Major Jackrum 10th Light Foot Infantery Regiment "Inns-and-Out"
Nope, individual people are not important - only the survival of the EU dream.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Last edited by Fragony; 05-03-2017 at 10:44.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39789903
And the Bill rises to €100Bn
"There are reports in Brussels that the rising figure might include demands from countries like France and Poland for UK contributions to farm subsidies. The EU may also be planning to refuse to allow the UK a share of the EU's assets including buildings and bank deposits."
On the other hand...
"Zsolt Darvas, a senior fellow at the Bruegel think tank, said a range of factors would have to be taken into account - including the UK's rebate on budget payments and its share of EU borrowing - but he believed a credible figure would be somewhere between 25bn and 65bn euros."
I really hope the EU is super-high balling here.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
I get paying for access to the single market, but paying just to leave? Christ they are determined to prove farage's mafia comparison true.
They are not asking us to pay to leave - they are asking for us to pay up money we pledged to pay over X number of years before we decided to leave.
Basically their argument is we promised to pay this money eventually so now we are leaving we should pay it all upfront now.
I suspect what will happen is we will agree to pay but not all at once (ie keeping the current agreements) and probably not the entire amount.
It's almost like other countries expect you to keep your promises and previously thought of you as trustworthy enough that they planned with the money you promised, but are now unsure about whether you won't just stop paying once you're out since you may seem less trustworthy now. Terrible mafia methods, I know.
"Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu
You read the article I linked?
Rumblings of a bill of 100bn, no accounting for the UK's share of the EU's assets given, you know, how much we paid to build a lot of it.
Once all is said and done I imagine that the actual bill we owe, offset against everything the EU will have to "buy" from us when we leave (like our part-ownership of buildings etc.) the bill will be less than 50bn.
If the EU fails to take into account the cost of the UK's past contributions then the bill will be higher, and unfair.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
100 bn is over 9 years of our Eu contributions, 13 if we count what we regain through spending. To continue paying for the two years of article 40's enactment is obvious, even paying a year or two extra to help the Eu adjust is fair enough but to cover the next decade of funding, of which we will see none of the benefits ourselves, before we even start talking about single market access, is absurd.
Bookmarks