NPR

SaintK wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:13 pm

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:02 pm Manned Mission to Mars will bring the country together? We can't even agree on a new train line to Birmingham.....

Which is probably going to end up costing as much as manned mission to Mars!!!

The manned mission to mars will almost certainly use a slingshot effect, and Brexit has a certain element of hurtling the economic pattern many, many miles off course. Just with Brexit it's not easy to see what the slingshot will be

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 1:29 pm

Random1 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:21 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:19 am

The UK doesn't produce enough electricity to power itself and has to import from France and the Netherlands. If we're not in the energy market, the lights go out.

https://gridwatch.co.uk/demand/percent

Yes, but we’re trying to make strides to become self sufficient or an exporter.

Here’s just one project https://www.constructionenquirer.com/20 ... ar-plants/

But there are more in terms of wind etc.

Point is, we’re not. Right now, leaving the European energy market would turn the lights off. Future plans are irrelevant for what happens, right now.

And, given the renegotiation for both fishing and electricity is in five years, we’re not getting full control of our fishing if we want the lights to stay on.

We might be trying to expand our generation capacity, but we’re also looking to close down old nuclear plants and high carbon facilities.

And if Scotland becomes independent, England’s electricity supply is a bit fûcked.

Actually this was looked at as part of the no deal planning - apparently the process of selling energy would get more complex and possibly costly but was not legally impossible and a lights out scenario was very unlikely. Two new inter-connectors from the continent were build following 2016 with no deal a possibility which also supports this,.

Not sure why you think the owners of Scottish power plants would not want to sell power across the new border through an existing power grid that would be costly and time consuming to dismantle. Fetishising various kinds of blockades of the rest of the Uk is some kind of Scottish nationalist pastime if my Twitter experience is anything to go by.

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:32 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:13 pm

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:02 pm Manned Mission to Mars will bring the country together? We can't even agree on a new train line to Birmingham.....

Which is probably going to end up costing as much as manned mission to Mars!!!

The manned mission to mars will almost certainly use a slingshot effect, and Brexit has a certain element of hurtling the economic pattern many, many miles off course. Just with Brexit it's not easy to see what the slingshot will be

Elon Musk is going to Mars for a fraction of the cost of any government program.

The UK actually has a decent high tech space industry BTW.

Fuck Mars! Let’s build some new schools, prisons and roads instead.

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:03 pm Fuck Mars! Let’s build some new schools, prisons and roads instead.

In Slough ?

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 2:51 pm

Random1 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 2:38 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 2:02 pm Random1, I don't know what country you're living in - or what world, really - but this boundless optimism does not match the facts.

And a man on Mars would be a hideously expensive boondoggle. What a complete waste of everyone's time.

The UK. I live in the midlands, if that helps.

The Mars mission would not be a waste of money. It would (will - as someone will do it) create so much technological advances that we’d be ahead in everything from propulsion through to hydroponics. It is exactly the sort of project that disparate parts of a union need to form a common purpose, create jobs and create pride in ourselves.

Unifying big state projects on science should be encouraged.

Manned missions to Mars are a total waste of everyone's time. There's lots of serious scientists in related fields who will tell you that the expense and danger completely outweigh whatever potential gains there are (don't get them started on the concept of a "Mars base", either).

And I cannot for the life of me see how "announcing a manned mission to Mars" is something that the Remainers could have done or how it's anything to do with the vote. It's all pie-in-the-sky stuff and completely ignores how these things are planned, funded, and announced.

On the wider point of my optimism - philosophically I’m primarily a stoic. I try to control what I can and try to let the uncontrollable look after itself.

We’ve crossed the rubicon on brexit. There is literally no value in talking Britain down, nor in rehashing old arguments for me. I can’t control what has already gone, so I’m focusing on what is likely to make my country and me successful.

I think optimism is generally more productive than pessimism, but I would say that; I’m an optimist by nature!

It's not optimism, it's (as mentioned before) a Melchett-style refusal to look the facts in the face. Why on earth should Remainers look at the heap of shit we've been handed and be yelled at for not being optimistic? The problems don't go away just by ignoring them and pretending everything's going to be fine.

We've taken a country that's had a decade of austerity and ripped it out of Europe, replacing it with something guaranteed to make things worse, all while being governed by a bunch of hapless, hopeless fanatics. You want to talk positives? Find some - not meaningless platitudes about how change is healthy. Real, concrete examples. Please.

Hugo, if you’re reading this thread - this is why I post and read here.

JM - opened this up just before going out with the nippers - I’ve been walking around a park sporadically cackling due to your post - thank you for calling me melchett-like, it’s a put down I’ll remember with fondness for a while!

I don’t have any examples yet. I’ll keep an eye out and will pop them on here when I find them.

tc27 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 5:43 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 1:29 pm

Random1 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:21 am

Yes, but we’re trying to make strides to become self sufficient or an exporter.

Here’s just one project https://www.constructionenquirer.com/20 ... ar-plants/

But there are more in terms of wind etc.

Point is, we’re not. Right now, leaving the European energy market would turn the lights off. Future plans are irrelevant for what happens, right now.

And, given the renegotiation for both fishing and electricity is in five years, we’re not getting full control of our fishing if we want the lights to stay on.

We might be trying to expand our generation capacity, but we’re also looking to close down old nuclear plants and high carbon facilities.

And if Scotland becomes independent, England’s electricity supply is a bit fûcked.

Actually this was looked at as part of the no deal planning - apparently the process of selling energy would get more complex and possibly costly but was not legally impossible and a lights out scenario was very unlikely. Two new inter-connectors from the continent were build following 2016 with no deal a possibility which also supports this,.

Not sure why you think the owners of Scottish power plants would not want to sell power across the new border through an existing power grid that would be costly and time consuming to dismantle. Fetishising various kinds of blockades of the rest of the Uk is some kind of Scottish nationalist pastime if my Twitter experience is anything to go by.

Wasn’t exactly clear there. If Scotland is in the EU (or EEA/EFTA or somehow otherwise in) and RUK isn’t in the common energy market, it will at a minimum, become more expensive, or alternatively it may be more attractive for Scotland to export via the HVDC connection to Ireland or the future one to Norway. Supply may be more prone to impact of market (and other) forces. Or there may be some restrictions if Scotland is in and RUK isn’t.

Same thing applies to gas, although that’s more easily transportable as LPG if the market demands.

I’m not saying walls go up, I’m saying the economic logic changes and the risk profile increases for RUK. Possibly to the point where supply becomes flaky.

If she's rejoicing, leaving aside issues around where does the energy for that come from?, it'll be from hell

Probably best not to look at that with a UV light

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 1:29 pm

Random1 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:21 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:19 am

The UK doesn't produce enough electricity to power itself and has to import from France and the Netherlands. If we're not in the energy market, the lights go out.

https://gridwatch.co.uk/demand/percent

Yes, but we’re trying to make strides to become self sufficient or an exporter.

Here’s just one project https://www.constructionenquirer.com/20 ... ar-plants/

But there are more in terms of wind etc.

Point is, we’re not. Right now, leaving the European energy market would turn the lights off. Future plans are irrelevant for what happens, right now.

And, given the renegotiation for both fishing and electricity is in five years, we’re not getting full control of our fishing if we want the lights to stay on.

We might be trying to expand our generation capacity, but we’re also looking to close down old nuclear plants and high carbon facilities.

And if Scotland becomes independent, England’s electricity supply is a bit fûcked.

The electricity market in Ireland is all-island, and NIE and it's infrastructure is wholly owned by the ESB since 2010. One of the potential fall outs of a crash out Brexit was the lights literally going out in NI.

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:23 pm

tc27 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 5:43 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 1:29 pm

Point is, we’re not. Right now, leaving the European energy market would turn the lights off. Future plans are irrelevant for what happens, right now.

And, given the renegotiation for both fishing and electricity is in five years, we’re not getting full control of our fishing if we want the lights to stay on.

We might be trying to expand our generation capacity, but we’re also looking to close down old nuclear plants and high carbon facilities.

And if Scotland becomes independent, England’s electricity supply is a bit fûcked.

Actually this was looked at as part of the no deal planning - apparently the process of selling energy would get more complex and possibly costly but was not legally impossible and a lights out scenario was very unlikely. Two new inter-connectors from the continent were build following 2016 with no deal a possibility which also supports this,.

Not sure why you think the owners of Scottish power plants would not want to sell power across the new border through an existing power grid that would be costly and time consuming to dismantle. Fetishising various kinds of blockades of the rest of the Uk is some kind of Scottish nationalist pastime if my Twitter experience is anything to go by.

Wasn’t exactly clear there. If Scotland is in the EU (or EEA/EFTA or somehow otherwise in) and RUK isn’t in the common energy market, it will at a minimum, become more expensive, or alternatively it may be more attractive for Scotland to export via the HVDC connection to Ireland or the future one to Norway. Supply may be more prone to impact of market (and other) forces. Or there may be some restrictions if Scotland is in and RUK isn’t.

Same thing applies to gas, although that’s more easily transportable as LPG if the market demands.

I’m not saying walls go up, I’m saying the economic logic changes and the risk profile increases for RUK. Possibly to the point where supply becomes flaky.

The time frame for negotiations for separating from the UK and establishing the necessary conditions to join the EU is at least a decade so its probably not a real problem. Also as far as I am aware no inter connectors run from Scotland to overseas markets so its not as though the power can go anywhere else.

Not sure why Scotland would join a energy market if its only connected customer was outside of it..then again as the EU/EEA market is relatively tiny for Scotland vs the rest of the UK so it makes about as much sense economically as anything else to do with independence.

tc27 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:35 pm ..then again as the EU/EEA market is relatively tiny for Scotland vs the rest of the UK so it makes about as much sense economically as anything else to do with independence.

If it makes no economic sense that it would seem can only help the cause

tc27 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:35 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:23 pm

tc27 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 5:43 pm

Actually this was looked at as part of the no deal planning - apparently the process of selling energy would get more complex and possibly costly but was not legally impossible and a lights out scenario was very unlikely. Two new inter-connectors from the continent were build following 2016 with no deal a possibility which also supports this,.

Not sure why you think the owners of Scottish power plants would not want to sell power across the new border through an existing power grid that would be costly and time consuming to dismantle. Fetishising various kinds of blockades of the rest of the Uk is some kind of Scottish nationalist pastime if my Twitter experience is anything to go by.

Wasn’t exactly clear there. If Scotland is in the EU (or EEA/EFTA or somehow otherwise in) and RUK isn’t in the common energy market, it will at a minimum, become more expensive, or alternatively it may be more attractive for Scotland to export via the HVDC connection to Ireland or the future one to Norway. Supply may be more prone to impact of market (and other) forces. Or there may be some restrictions if Scotland is in and RUK isn’t.

Same thing applies to gas, although that’s more easily transportable as LPG if the market demands.

I’m not saying walls go up, I’m saying the economic logic changes and the risk profile increases for RUK. Possibly to the point where supply becomes flaky.

The time frame for negotiations for separating from the UK and establishing the necessary conditions to join the EU is at least a decade so its probably not a real problem. Also as far as I am aware no inter connectors run from Scotland to overseas markets so its not as though the power can go anywhere else.

Not sure why Scotland would join a energy market if its only connected customer was outside of it..then again as the EU/EEA market is relatively tiny for Scotland vs the rest of the UK so it makes about as much sense economically as anything else to do with independence.

It's not about economics; it's about Sovereignty, innit ?

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:34 pm

It's not about economics; it's about Sovereignty, innit ?

It sort of is and it sort of isn't about Sovereignty (I hate typing that word, tg for spell check)

A few months ago I posted that I'd been reading archived Times articles about states which had achieved independence, all of which had the very same arguments thrown against them - too wee, too poor, too inadequate, yet none have since applied to re-join the Empire.

Scot Indy is going to be the big topic over the coming months with the Holyrood elections coming up in the Spring, with Brexit being a big card for the SNP - they were awarded a free hit today, Sturgeon tore into the Tories, knowing that the bill would pass anyway, and dog help us, the crap deal is waay better than no deal, but the SNP get a win out of this to carry on to the Scottish election.

A lot of the statements on here about what makes economic sense seem to be ignoring the politics of the last four years. Lots of living in the past going on.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:48 pm

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:34 pm

It's not about economics; it's about Sovereignty, innit ?

It sort of is and it sort of isn't about Sovereignty (I hate typing that word, tg for spell check)

A few months ago I posted that I'd been reading archived Times articles about states which had achieved independence, all of which had the very same arguments thrown against them - too wee, too poor, too inadequate, yet none have since applied to re-join the Empire.

Scot Indy is going to be the big topic over the coming months with the Holyrood elections coming up in the Spring, with Brexit being a big card for the SNP - they were awarded a free hit today, Sturgeon tore into the Tories, knowing that the bill would pass anyway, and dog help us, the crap deal is waay better than no deal, but the SNP get a win out of this to carry on to the Scottish election.

To be fair, I'd have no problem with Scotland leaving - they have been terribly serviced by Westminster.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:48 pm

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:34 pm

It's not about economics; it's about Sovereignty, innit ?

It sort of is and it sort of isn't about Sovereignty (I hate typing that word, tg for spell check)

A few months ago I posted that I'd been reading archived Times articles about states which had achieved independence, all of which had the very same arguments thrown against them - too wee, too poor, too inadequate, yet none have since applied to re-join the Empire.

Scot Indy is going to be the big topic over the coming months with the Holyrood elections coming up in the Spring, with Brexit being a big card for the SNP - they were awarded a free hit today, Sturgeon tore into the Tories, knowing that the bill would pass anyway, and dog help us, the crap deal is waay better than no deal, but the SNP get a win out of this to carry on to the Scottish election.

Yep; & of course ironically, the main influencer for Albexit won't be in Scotland, it'll be a blond cunt in SW1.

What the SNP need to do is not repeat the fuckwitted behaviors of previous administrations leaving the; 'Empire', & to start planning for an exit that isn't focused on spite, & denying the links that have existed for centuries; but instead are focused on building an Independent Nation that, maintains the links it has; but secures it's future; as a part of the European Union, that the majority of its citizens voted for.

mat the expat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 12:39 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:48 pm

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:34 pm

It's not about economics; it's about Sovereignty, innit ?

It sort of is and it sort of isn't about Sovereignty (I hate typing that word, tg for spell check)

A few months ago I posted that I'd been reading archived Times articles about states which had achieved independence, all of which had the very same arguments thrown against them - too wee, too poor, too inadequate, yet none have since applied to re-join the Empire.

Scot Indy is going to be the big topic over the coming months with the Holyrood elections coming up in the Spring, with Brexit being a big card for the SNP - they were awarded a free hit today, Sturgeon tore into the Tories, knowing that the bill would pass anyway, and dog help us, the crap deal is waay better than no deal, but the SNP get a win out of this to carry on to the Scottish election.

To be fair, I'd have no problem with Scotland leaving - they have been terribly serviced by Westminster.

England and the English have been terribly serviced by Westminster - you've got real poverty within a stone's throw of the richest square couple of miles in the country if not the world.
Several English areas which voted Leave now realise that their livelihoods depended on EU grants.

What benefit have Scousers, Geordies, Mancs or Brummies etc really had from Westminster?

edit, or indeed Londoners from the "wrong" areas?

Yes, but us Englanders have no excuse or avenue to secede beyond revolution ....

mat the expat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:55 am Yes, but us Englanders have no excuse or avenue to secede beyond revolution ....

I'd argue that there is a chance for change every four or five years, it's not in the destiny of people born in England to be ruled by those from a small clique who attend certain schools and who marry in the "right way".

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:10 am

mat the expat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:55 am Yes, but us Englanders have no excuse or avenue to secede beyond revolution ....

I'd argue that there is a chance for change every four or five years, it's not in the destiny of people born in England to be ruled by those from a small clique who attend certain schools and who marry in the "right way".

You clearly haven't followed Brexit much then....English people have terrible voter turnout.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:10 am

mat the expat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:55 am Yes, but us Englanders have no excuse or avenue to secede beyond revolution ....

I'd argue that there is a chance for change every four or five years, it's not in the destiny of people born in England to be ruled by those from a small clique who attend certain schools and who marry in the "right way".

Surely there's nobody out there arguing that Boris marries in the right way?

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:29 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:10 am

mat the expat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:55 am Yes, but us Englanders have no excuse or avenue to secede beyond revolution ....

I'd argue that there is a chance for change every four or five years, it's not in the destiny of people born in England to be ruled by those from a small clique who attend certain schools and who marry in the "right way".

Surely there's nobody out there arguing that Boris marries in the right way?

It's not about economics; it's about Sovereignty, innit ?

For some voters yes - for a majority I would argue no. Vote Leave had the headline figure of the UKs contribution to the EU to run with with which just about got them over the line. Indy is peaking ahead in the polls because of Brexit and BJ being a useless c*nt. I dont think most people have really appreciated the economic costs yet (and the nats have no real answers on currency or EU membership).

Scotland had significant trade with the Low countries and Scandinavia in the sixteenth century. England wasn’t its biggest trading partner, or even its second biggest.

Pretty much irrelevant to the modern situation and the way trade works now...a ridiculous justification for secession. Scotland with decades of being in the EU and single market exports more to the USA.

To be fair, I'd have no problem with Scotland leaving - they have been terribly serviced by Westminster.

They get a fiscal transfer equivalent to 10% of spending from the rest of the UK and a devolved administration with wide ranging powers over loads of policy areas - its actually a really good deal.

Yep; & of course ironically, the main influencer for Albexit won't be in Scotland, it'll be a blond cunt in SW1.

What the SNP need to do is not repeat the fuckwitted behaviors of previous administrations leaving the; 'Empire', & to start planning for an exit that isn't focused on spite, & denying the links that have existed for centuries; but instead are focused on building an Independent Nation that, maintains the links it has; but secures it's future; as a part of the European Union, that the majority of its citizens voted for.

Seccession because of one leaders unpopularity is nuts.

The second point is naive - the split will become very acrimonious very quickly especially in the UK government plays hardball (and why wouldn't it?)

England and the English have been terribly serviced by Westminster - you've got real poverty within a stone's throw of the richest square couple of miles in the country if not the world.
Several English areas which voted Leave now realise that their livelihoods depended on EU grants.

What benefit have Scousers, Geordies, Mancs or Brummies etc really had from Westminster?

edit, or indeed Londoners from the "wrong" areas?
Top

Tax income from wealthy areas gets redistributed fairly - Londoners in general and 'The City' generate billions in tax that gets spent in other parts of the UK. Not saying this excuses poverty in other parts of the UK but the wealth is being redistributed.

It sort of is and it sort of isn't about Sovereignty (I hate typing that word, tg for spell check)

A few months ago I posted that I'd been reading archived Times articles about states which had achieved independence, all of which had the very same arguments thrown against them - too wee, too poor, too inadequate, yet none have since applied to re-join the Empire.

Scot Indy is going to be the big topic over the coming months with the Holyrood elections coming up in the Spring, with Brexit being a big card for the SNP - they were awarded a free hit today, Sturgeon tore into the Tories, knowing that the bill would pass anyway, and dog help us, the crap deal is waay better than no deal, but the SNP get a win out of this to carry on to the Scottish election.

Of course upon even a little thought it may occur that splitting a modern unitary state like the UK with a welfare system, single market, shared institutions and hundreds of years of economic, social and cultural union is going to be radically difficult from the removal of a relatively tiny colonial administration on somewhere like Malta.

Erasmus provided for about 10,000 students a year, to study at any European University, and claim up to £3500 per year. It cost UK £250 million per year, and we chipped in for 25 years. Turin will provide for 35000 students to apply to study at any University in the world, and claim up to £10,000 per year. Cost to UK, £100million p.a.

westport wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:53 pm Erasmus provided for about 10,000 students a year, to study at any European University, and claim up to £3500 per year. It cost UK £250 million per year, and we chipped in for 25 years. Turin will provide for 35000 students to apply to study at any University in the world, and claim up to £10,000 per year. Cost to UK, £100million p.a.

Where are those figures from? They don't make much sense.

With Erasmus you want to consider how much they brought into UK universities. Both in fees and the far more lucrative accomodation costs.

westport wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:53 pm Erasmus provided for about 10,000 students a year, to study at any European University, and claim up to £3500 per year. It cost UK £250 million per year, and we chipped in for 25 years. Turin will provide for 35000 students to apply to study at any University in the world, and claim up to £10,000 per year. Cost to UK, £100million p.a.

So Westport.
Universities UK International (UUKI), the umbrella group representing higher education providers, said membership of Erasmus gave a bonus to the British economy worth £243m a year, after subtracting membership costs from the £420m generated by EU students visiting the UK under the programme.

How much will the Turing Scheme bring in to the UK financially ?

Aaaaaand we're out.

The Druid wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:02 pm Aaaaaand we're out.

The border wall around Kent has gone up

Well thats that.

My thoughts are with those in a myriad of sectors who will next the next few months grappling with new trade barriers and those working in supply chains.

tc27 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:33 pmWell thats that.

Yep.

I understand that the Swiss decision to not be part of the EU, despite being completely surrounded by it, means they hardly ever have to talk to them, so their negotiators spend most of their time playing solitaire, & waiting for something to happen. The UK can look forward to getting rid of tens of thousands of civil servants, now that the UK finally has Sovereignty.

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:37 pm

tc27 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:33 pmWell thats that.

Yep.

I understand that the Swiss decision to not be part of the EU, despite being completely surrounded by it, means they hardly ever have to talk to them, so their negotiators spend most of their time playing solitaire, & waiting for something to happen. The UK can look forward to getting rid of tens of thousands of civil servants, now that the UK finally has Sovereignty.

Good point.

Looking forward to the in depth discussions about conformity assesments l, MRAs and measures to alleviate PSP checks we will have here.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:56 pm

westport wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:53 pm Erasmus provided for about 10,000 students a year, to study at any European University, and claim up to £3500 per year. It cost UK £250 million per year, and we chipped in for 25 years. Turin will provide for 35000 students to apply to study at any University in the world, and claim up to £10,000 per year. Cost to UK, £100million p.a.

Where are those figures from? They don't make much sense.

With Erasmus you want to consider how much they brought into UK universities. Both in fees and the far more lucrative accomodation costs.

Erasmus students don’t pay any fees.

Have they announced dropping VAT to under 15% yet?

tc27 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:56 pm

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:37 pm

tc27 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:33 pmWell thats that.

Yep.

I understand that the Swiss decision to not be part of the EU, despite being completely surrounded by it, means they hardly ever have to talk to them, so their negotiators spend most of their time playing solitaire, & waiting for something to happen. The UK can look forward to getting rid of tens of thousands of civil servants, now that the UK finally has Sovereignty.

Good point.

Looking forward to the in depth discussions about conformity assesments l, MRAs and measures to alleviate PSP checks we will have here.

What have you two been smoking? There’s going to be an ongoing, permanent assessment and evaluation, much more red tape both internal and external and more to do in the FCO, DIT and Treasury in managing additional external relationships. More civil servants likely, given the UK state has to take on the responsibilities that were previously dealt with by the EU.

Whoosh?

Good luck to the UK.

The final decoupling of the UK and Germany, the 2 European powers, that started 107 years ago when Germany invaded Belgium.

The EU has mechanisms against socialism. Of course the current UK Government will not implement socialism, however now they are free of the EU I hope that one day the UK can turn to true socialism for the working man and woman.

TheNatalShark wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 11:13 amWhoosh?

Indeed !

There is no end to Brexit; the UK will now be under constant surveillance by the EU, & every bill passed will be scrutinized, to see if it complies with the agreements.

I wouldn't be surprised if the EU immediately has a problem with the rumored state aid to Nissan.

Lemoentjie wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 11:27 am Good luck to the UK.

The final decoupling of the UK and Germany, the 2 European powers, that started 107 years ago when Germany invaded Belgium.

The EU has mechanisms against socialism. Of course the current UK Government will not implement socialism, however now they are free of the EU I hope that one day the UK can turn to true socialism for the working man and woman.