Blocking London for brexit

[carryfast]

Franglais:
So long as foods are clearly labelled I don’t have a massive problem with them. One issue is that GMO foods are widespread in the US already, without labelling.
If post Brexit we allow GMOs into the UK, that are still banned in the EU, for instance, how would put trade with them be affected?
How would a GM allowed Northern Ireland trade with a GM forbidden borderless Eire?
Issue passports to bumble bees?

The reality as usual is the EU pretending to be whiter than white when it’s actually as complicit as all the rest in allowing the stuff.So how does directive 2001/18/EC deal with the bees issue.Oh wait we’ll call that an unintentional release and everything will be fine.

loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/eu.php

So why would Brexit Britain not actually also give us the powers to toughen up our GM policy by not only totally banning the products but also making all UK based GM research and development illegal.Bearing in mind that,unlike the EU government system,Brexit gives us the power to remove MP’s who are supportive of it.No surprise that Remainers would deliberately try to confuse the differences between ‘free trade’ v customers supposedly being deliberately misled regarding the choice of not buying GM v the so called ‘unintentional’ release of modified genetic material.The former issue having nothing whatsoever to do with the latter two in that free trade and Brexit isn’t mutually exclusive with a watertight GM policy.

While the EU obviously isn’t the panacea of GM control.Including obviously already allowing the situation in which neighbouring states can make up their own minds whether they want to cultivate GM crops and with it the obvious cross pollenation issue again got round by the classification of ‘unintentional’ release.Just as the supposed lie of the EU being all for workers’ rights when the facts are that the power of Brit unions has been smashed since 1973 to date while EU expansion has obviously been all about providing employers with the free movement of cheap labour.

[winseer]

Carryfast:

muckles:
As for Truck drivers blockading London, the blokes a [zb]
Firstly, maybe not all truck drivers are Brexit supporters, so why would they take part?
Secondly, after the fuel protests of 2000, the government made sure it put in laws to stop us blockading the country.
Thirdly, an anti-government protest will often end in violence, which means the media will cover the “disgusting violence” from “mindless thugs” instead of the issues protested about. Somebody who believes in conspreciacy theories might even believe that the government places its own agents into the crowd to start the trouble.
I not sure how likely that is, but it’s what I’d do if I was leading the country and there were protests against me.

Picture the scene when the average employed driver tells the guvnor that he’s just ‘borrowing’ the truck to take part in a Brexit protest and the load will just have to wait.But to be fair he’ll do it unpaid although it will obviously count on the tacho.

I can imagine Full Time drivers in heavily unionized yards being “Remain Supporters”…

For all we know, the split among drivers as a whole - is around 52/48 - just like the national poll averaged out…

[carryfast]

Winseer:

Carryfast:
Picture the scene when the average employed driver tells the guvnor that he’s just ‘borrowing’ the truck to take part in a Brexit protest and the load will just have to wait.But to be fair he’ll do it unpaid although it will obviously count on the tacho.

I can imagine Full Time drivers in heavily unionized yards being “Remain Supporters”…

For all we know, the split among drivers as a whole - is around 52/48 - just like the national poll averaged out…

The point was that unless the driver actually owns the vehicle using someone else’s vehicle without their consent,to take part in a ‘blockade’,could at the very least put the driver in the frame for taking/using a vehicle without the owner’s consent ( vehicle theft ) let alone all the other possible issues involved in that.I’d guess that the organiser has been watching too many fictional Convoy like movies.As for Brexit I’ve reached the conclusion if the head of state couldn’t care less abut the ‘state’ being handed over to a foreign power then there’s not much point in the Leave side flogging a dead horse.When at best all we can do is to just keep arguing with the Remainers to show future generations of subjugated Brits that plenty opposed it but were let down by the country’s leadership up to head of state level just as in 1973 when we joined the EU.Make no mistake the plan in this case has always been sabotage and delay and more delay until the ‘government’ runs the process of Leaving the EU into the ground.Bearing in mind that the issues of sovereignty which apply in this case are clearly the remit of the Queen to uphold not that of MP’s to give away.

[the_maoster]

Winseer:
I can imagine Full Time drivers in heavily unionized yards being “Remain Supporters”…

I am the former but certainly not the latter! Brexit for me was never about immigration which tbh I don’t give a rats arse about, any more than I give a rats ■■■ about another persons ■■■■■■■■■ or religious beliefs. No, to me it was and still is about each nations God given right to self determination. A one size fits all policy that stretches across every nation from the Mediterranean to the Arctic circle simply can not work no matter how much the unelected officials try to shoe horn such a policy in.

If we had remained a “common market” where every member state traded freely and unencumbered then I believe that we’d all be happy little islanders to date.

Simplistic? Probably, but why fix something that wasn’t broken, or at least wasn’t broken right up until the empire builders in Brussels stuck their oars in?

[franglais]

Carryfast:

Franglais:
So long as foods are clearly labelled I don’t have a massive problem with them. One issue is that GMO foods are widespread in the US already, without labelling.
If post Brexit we allow GMOs into the UK, that are still banned in the EU, for instance, how would put trade with them be affected?
How would a GM allowed Northern Ireland trade with a GM forbidden borderless Eire?
Issue passports to bumble bees?

The reality as usual is the EU pretending to be whiter than white when it’s actually as complicit as all the rest in allowing the stuff.So how does directive 2001/18/EC deal with the bees issue.Oh wait we’ll call that an unintentional release and everything will be fine.

loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/eu.php

So why would Brexit Britain not actually also give us the powers to toughen up our GM policy by not only totally banning the products but also making all UK based GM research and development illegal.Bearing in mind that,unlike the EU government system,Brexit gives us the power to remove MP’s who are supportive of it.No surprise that Remainers would deliberately try to confuse the differences between ‘free trade’ v customers supposedly being deliberately misled regarding the choice of not buying GM v the so called ‘unintentional’ release of modified genetic material.The former issue having nothing whatsoever to do with the latter two in that free trade and Brexit isn’t mutually exclusive with a watertight GM policy.

While the EU obviously isn’t the panacea of GM control.Including obviously already allowing the situation in which neighbouring states can make up their own minds whether they want to cultivate GM crops and with it the obvious cross pollenation issue again got round by the classification of ‘unintentional’ release.Just as the supposed lie of the EU being all for workers’ rights when the facts are that the power of Brit unions has been smashed since 1973 to date while EU expansion has obviously been all about providing employers with the free movement of cheap labour.

Firstly, personally, I think there is a lot of nonsense spoken of GMOs, and I’m not overly worried about them, but do believe there are real problems with the Global agro-chemical industry. I do recognise that many people are more concerned than me about GMOs. I’ll cheat a bit by lumping GMOs, agro-chems and animal medication all in one basket here.
The truth is that if a post Brexit UK were to try, as you suggest, to make a “watertight GMO ban”, it wouldn’t work. Trade deals involve free movement of goods and services. If we ban, for instance, antibiotic fed US beef we’d find them countering with a ban on some of our goods. Could we ban chlorine washed chicken? Sure, and they’d surely change production to suit. But would those birds not still be fed on GMO maize? We can use health as an excuse to ban foods but rest assured that Trump, and successors, will listen to Mid West farmers and to Monsanto shareholders than our Gov. If we strike a deal with the US we can bet our “watertight” policy of no GMOs will spring a leak.
And look further: if we accept US GMO grain for animal feed will the EU accept our animals or meat? I don’t know, but it’s a potentiality real problem.

On another note you seem worried about use of nonpasturised milk and raw eggs in some EU approved foods? Why? So long as these foods are clearly labelled, I see no problem. Surely you aren’t for extra legislation from the EU banning foods?

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

[carryfast]

Franglais:
Firstly, personally, I think there is a lot of nonsense spoken of GMOs, and I’m not overly worried about them, but do believe there are real problems with the Global agro-chemical industry. I do recognise that many people are more concerned than me about GMOs. I’ll cheat a bit by lumping GMOs, agro-chems and animal medication all in one basket here.
The truth is that if a post Brexit UK were to try, as you suggest, to make a “watertight GMO ban”, it wouldn’t work. Trade deals involve free movement of goods and services. If we ban, for instance, antibiotic fed US beef we’d find them countering with a ban on some of our goods. Could we ban chlorine washed chicken? Sure, and they’d surely change production to suit. But would those birds not still be fed on GMO maize? We can use health as an excuse to ban foods but rest assured that Trump, and successors, will listen to Mid West farmers and to Monsanto shareholders than our Gov. If we strike a deal with the US we can bet our “watertight” policy of no GMOs will spring a leak.
And look further: if we accept US GMO grain for animal feed will the EU accept our animals or meat? I don’t know, but it’s a potentiality real problem.

On another note you seem worried about use of nonpasturised milk and raw eggs in some EU approved foods? Why? So long as these foods are clearly labelled, I see no problem. Surely you aren’t for extra legislation from the EU banning foods?

Why would the EU have any issues with US food imports when even its own rules state that it has no general issues with the import or cultivation of GM foods.While US meat and fruit and manufacturing imports can obviously already meet EU regs anyway which is why I can buy a Ford Mustang from the local Ford dealer and have the choice of buying numerous Australian,NZ,South African or US food products from numerous local supermarkets and shops but all obviously subject to EU tarrif barriers which is obviously more the point.The truth is there is no problem other than the artificial problems imposed by the power crazed EU dictators just as there’s no problem with the movement of goods and people across the Irish border.

While there’s nothing in terms of safety regulations that can’t be better implemented under the nation state system of government.IE the ability to react quickly based on locally democratic wishes.While your argument seems to contradict itself in firstly pretending that the EU is all for food safety but then on the other hand supporting the US big business type free for all which the EU tacitly supports just the same.In which case again my view obviously fits the definition of the right to agree to disagree.

On that note why would/should the manufacturing sector want to retaliate against the very noble aims of cleaning up the food sector.IE the right to buy non EU type approved US manufacturing products not subject to EU imposed tariff/quota barriers for example isn’t mutually exclusive with saying that we also either won’t accept unpasteurised dairy products or chlorine washed chicken or GM food products,or at least if we do accept them then the customer will be made clearly aware of it at the point of sale.Bearing in mind that a ‘free trade agreement’ doesn’t force the customer to actually buy anything from any particular source nor stop us from informing the customer fully regarding the product on sale.

While yes personally I do think that genetic modification is the devils work to the point where I can’t even buy a rose bush from the local garden centre that’s flowers actually produce a proper strong natural rose type smell for just one example.While the dangers of unpasteurised dairy products are well known which is why the pasteurisation process was invented and then rightly accepted as being a major breakthrough in food safety.The conclusion being that we have nothing to learn from,nor need the interference of,the EU in our trade policies.

[winseer]

Carryfast:

Winseer:

Carryfast:
Picture the scene when the average employed driver tells the guvnor that he’s just ‘borrowing’ the truck to take part in a Brexit protest and the load will just have to wait.But to be fair he’ll do it unpaid although it will obviously count on the tacho.

I can imagine Full Time drivers in heavily unionized yards being “Remain Supporters”…

For all we know, the split among drivers as a whole - is around 52/48 - just like the national poll averaged out…

The point was that unless the driver actually owns the vehicle using someone else’s vehicle without their consent,to take part in a ‘blockade’,could at the very least put the driver in the frame for taking/using a vehicle without the owner’s consent ( vehicle theft ) let alone all the other possible issues involved in that.I’d guess that the organiser has been watching too many fictional Convoy like movies.As for Brexit I’ve reached the conclusion if the head of state couldn’t care less abut the ‘state’ being handed over to a foreign power then there’s not much point in the Leave side flogging a dead horse.When at best all we can do is to just keep arguing with the Remainers to show future generations of subjugated Brits that plenty opposed it but were let down by the country’s leadership up to head of state level just as in 1973 when we joined the EU.Make no mistake the plan in this case has always been sabotage and delay and more delay until the ‘government’ runs the process of Leaving the EU into the ground.Bearing in mind that the issues of sovereignty which apply in this case are clearly the remit of the Queen to uphold not that of MP’s to give away.

We’ve already spent over 40 years going “Oh well, never mind” with regards to Britain being railroaded into the EU in the first instance.
We were grateful for the opportunity to vote “out” - and indeed Cameron won his “unexpected” majority in 2015 on the back of purely “offering a referednum” it has to be said.

That doesn’t mean that Brexit need “always be nothing more than an academic exercise in the futility of Democracy and Democratic Voting” - since if we can’t bloody well make Democracy work - then we’re likely to plump for a dictatorship instead!

Hitler only happened - because Germany was on it’s knees, after all.

Where’s Britain going to be in ten years time - if it is then what Greece is now? Because we all went “oh well, never mind” - and our polticians decided to gamble that we wouldn’t vote them all out in disgust - only for them to be proven correct, and our our “Putsch” against Politican Correctness, unfunded Socialism, and “Rewards for Failing” Bureaucract - falling flat…

[winseer]

the maoster:

Winseer:
I can imagine Full Time drivers in heavily unionized yards being “Remain Supporters”…

I am the former but certainly not the latter! Brexit for me was never about immigration which tbh I don’t give a rats arse about, any more than I give a rats ■■■ about another persons ■■■■■■■■■ or religious beliefs. No, to me it was and still is about each nations God given right to self determination. A one size fits all policy that stretches across every nation from the Mediterranean to the Arctic circle simply can not work no matter how much the unelected officials try to shoe horn such a policy in.

Blimus! I could have written that paragraph above, and you’ve even given God a capital ‘G’ to boot! It seems you and I have more in common than we thought… (I was full time when I voted Leave, but in a non-unionized yard, and yes - to me as well, I don’t give a toss about immigration - for me it was all about spending the Brussels contributions on UK infrastructure and other national services, not just the NHS…) There IS such a think as the “Brexit Dividend” - but our Westmonsters have yet to even make a play at getting it - by canceling payments to Brussels - FFS how hard can that be■■?

If we had remained a “common market” where every member state traded freely and unencumbered then I believe that we’d all be happy little islanders to date.

Simplistic? Probably, but why fix something that wasn’t broken, or at least wasn’t broken right up until the empire builders in Brussels stuck their oars in?

[carryfast]

Winseer:

Carryfast:
As for Brexit I’ve reached the conclusion if the head of state couldn’t care less abut the ‘state’ being handed over to a foreign power then there’s not much point in the Leave side flogging a dead horse.When at best all we can do is to just keep arguing with the Remainers to show future generations of subjugated Brits that plenty opposed it but were let down by the country’s leadership up to head of state level just as in 1973 when we joined the EU.Make no mistake the plan in this case has always been sabotage and delay and more delay until the ‘government’ runs the process of Leaving the EU into the ground.Bearing in mind that the issues of sovereignty which apply in this case are clearly the remit of the Queen to uphold not that of MP’s to give away.

We’ve already spent over 40 years going “Oh well, never mind” with regards to Britain being railroaded into the EU in the first instance.
We were grateful for the opportunity to vote “out” - and indeed Cameron won his “unexpected” majority in 2015 on the back of purely “offering a referednum” it has to be said.

That doesn’t mean that Brexit need “always be nothing more than an academic exercise in the futility of Democracy and Democratic Voting” - since if we can’t bloody well make Democracy work - then we’re likely to plump for a dictatorship instead!

Hitler only happened - because Germany was on it’s knees, after all.

Where’s Britain going to be in ten years time - if it is then what Greece is now? Because we all went “oh well, never mind” - and our polticians decided to gamble that we wouldn’t vote them all out in disgust - only for them to be proven correct, and our our “Putsch” against Politican Correctness, unfunded Socialism, and “Rewards for Failing” Bureaucract - falling flat…

Firstly Cameron made sure that his referendum was never going to have any teeth ( at least regarding Brexit ) by drawing it up as a non binding document on the government.Although we can bet that distinction would have been conveniently swept under the carpet if remain had won.In which case it would be reasonable to say that it was just a scam to get naive anti EU voters onside to help his Party’s electoral chances in the knowledge that it was a contract drawn up for remainers by remainers including himself and Osborne.

As for any comparison of Weimar Germany v EU dominated UK it’s obvious that they are two totally different regimes in which there’s no chance of the Brit forces splitting into different factions in a similar way as that which brought Hitler to power and defeated the Weimar regime.IE realistically without at worst an organised Nationalist/Secessionist faction within the forces prepared to take up arms against the EU establishment,let alone at best the Queen ordering the forces to impeach the government,on the grounds of a national emergency of a Parliament having gone rogue in handing over the country to a foreign power,there just ain’t going to be any supposed Putsch and the government knows it.Make no mistake future generations of subjugated Brits will look back on this point in history with total disbelief that their country was effectively given away to a Soviet/Yugoslav type Federal nightmare with the help and complicity of the head of state and its armed forces.Hopefully these discussions will be there on record somewhere in the future to confirm what happened.

[juddian]

Winseer:

Carryfast:

muckles:
As for Truck drivers blockading London, the blokes a [zb]
Firstly, maybe not all truck drivers are Brexit supporters, so why would they take part?
Secondly, after the fuel protests of 2000, the government made sure it put in laws to stop us blockading the country.
Thirdly, an anti-government protest will often end in violence, which means the media will cover the “disgusting violence” from “mindless thugs” instead of the issues protested about. Somebody who believes in conspreciacy theories might even believe that the government places its own agents into the crowd to start the trouble.
I not sure how likely that is, but it’s what I’d do if I was leading the country and there were protests against me.

Picture the scene when the average employed driver tells the guvnor that he’s just ‘borrowing’ the truck to take part in a Brexit protest and the load will just have to wait.But to be fair he’ll do it unpaid although it will obviously count on the tacho.

I can imagine Full Time drivers in heavily unionized yards being “Remain Supporters”…

For all we know, the split among drivers as a whole - is around 52/48 - just like the national poll averaged out…

Nope, full timer here in heavily unionised yard, well apart from the furriners that is who have no trouble trousering the cash but don’t want to do their part , virtually all the union members are leavers, the remainers tend to be non union members like the furriners, trousering the benefits without contributing.
One could wonder if that’s a tendency among remainers

[franglais]

the maoster:

Winseer:
I can imagine Full Time drivers in heavily unionized yards being “Remain Supporters”…

I am the former but certainly not the latter! Brexit for me was never about immigration which tbh I don’t give a rats arse about, any more than I give a rats ■■■ about another persons ■■■■■■■■■ or religious beliefs. No, to me it was and still is about each nations God given right to self determination. A one size fits all policy that stretches across every nation from the Mediterranean to the Arctic circle simply can not work no matter how much the unelected officials try to shoe horn such a policy in.

If we had remained a “common market” where every member state traded freely and unencumbered then I believe that we’d all be happy little islanders to date.

Simplistic? Probably, but why fix something that wasn’t broken, or at least wasn’t broken right up until the empire builders in Brussels stuck their oars in?

Is this the five minute argument? Or the full half hour?
Lets stick to 5mins. After starting any project problems become apparent. Dont matter how good your plans are, things change.
Starting as a simple Common Market, small glitches become problems: If UK farmers have better welfare standards than their neighbours, and they need more land to raise cattle, or bigger cages for hens, are they in a fair market? If we have better air pollution standards are our factories as competitive as dirty foreign ones? Hence we need common standards. To function as a level playing field any free trade zone, or common market must have common standards, surely?

EU Commissioners propose laws. Elected Euro M.P.s vote on whether or not to accept them.
Not a perfect system. But each countrys elected Government proposes their own Commissioner. A bit like a UK Prime Minister appointing her/his cabinet, isnt it?
But in the UK we have Ministers who are similar in many ways to Commissioners: mostly they are elected as M.P.s but thats not always so. We have had Cabinet ministers who were not elected. Do we vote for a Chancellor of the Exchequer, or a Home Secretary? Is our system perfect? And of course in our system we have had political parties change leaders during a term of parliament, so in the past 100yrs half of our Prime Ministers havent been “elected”.

[franglais]

Carryfast:
Why would the EU have any issues with US food imports when even its own rules state that it has no general issues with the import or cultivation of GM foods.While US meat and fruit and manufacturing imports can obviously already meet EU regs anyway which is why I can buy a Ford Mustang from the local Ford dealer and have the choice of buying numerous Australian,NZ,South African or US food products from numerous local supermarkets and shops but all obviously subject to EU tarrif barriers which is obviously more the point.The truth is there is no problem other than the artificial problems imposed by just as there’s no problem with the movement of goods and people across the Irish border. just as there’s no problem with the movement of goods and people across the Irish border.

While there’s nothing in terms of safety regulations that can’t be better implemented under the nation state system of government.IE the ability to react quickly based on locally democratic wishes.While your argument seems to contradict itself in firstly pretending that the EU is all for food safety but then on the other hand supporting the US big business type free for all which the EU tacitly supports just the same.In which case again my view obviously fits the definition of the right to agree to disagree.

On that note why would/should the manufacturing sector want to retaliate against the very noble aims of cleaning up the food sector.IE the right to buy non EU type approved US manufacturing products not subject to EU imposed tariff/quota barriers for example isn’t mutually exclusive with saying that we also either won’t accept unpasteurised dairy products or chlorine washed chicken or GM food products,or at least if we do accept them then the customer will be made clearly aware of it at the point of sale.Bearing in mind that a ‘free trade agreement’ doesn’t force the customer to actually buy anything from any particular source nor stop us from informing the customer fully regarding the product on sale.

While yes personally I do think that genetic modification is the devils work to the point where I can’t even buy a rose bush from the local garden centre that’s flowers actually produce a proper strong natural rose type smell for just one example.While the dangers of unpasteurised dairy products are well known which is why the pasteurisation process was invented and then rightly accepted as being a major breakthrough in food safety.The conclusion being that we have nothing to learn from,nor need the interference of,the EU in our trade policies.

Its not just GMOs, its also other welfare standards and allowed, drugs, medicines, etc.
The EU is not just about safety standards, it`s true. By putting tariffs on imported foods it helps our balance of payments and protects our farmers. We could, post Brexit, import cheaper food, yes. We could therefore put our own, more expensive farmers out of business. We could paradoxically, end up with a worse balance of payments, and a countryside underused. With no way to earn a living from food what will our land-owners do? How will they get a return on their investment? What will happen to our green and pleasant land??

“While there’s nothing in terms of safety regulations that can’t be better implemented under the nation state system of government.IE the ability to react quickly based on locally democratic wishes.”
If a country has different standards than it`s neighbours and trading partners then it is easier to break rules. If there is a common set of rules, then it is clearly more difficult for rule breakers to escape “over the border”.

“just as there’s no problem with the movement of goods and people across the Irish border.”
So long as we all have the same set of rules as Eire, than free movement of goods can continue, obviously. If we have different standards then the border may be necessary.
You don`t want a border? What if we in the UK have higher welfare standards for milk cows? What if we decide in the UK to ban all EU produced milk because they produce it cheaper? Will the EU need the border, or will it be necessary to protect us?

[carryfast]

Franglais:

Carryfast:
Why would the EU have any issues with US food imports when even its own rules state that it has no general issues with the import or cultivation of GM foods.While US meat and fruit and manufacturing imports can obviously already meet EU regs anyway which is why I can buy a Ford Mustang from the local Ford dealer and have the choice of buying numerous Australian,NZ,South African or US food products from numerous local supermarkets and shops but all obviously subject to EU tarrif barriers which is obviously more the point.The truth is there is no problem other than the artificial problems imposed by just as there’s no problem with the movement of goods and people across the Irish border. just as there’s no problem with the movement of goods and people across the Irish border.

While there’s nothing in terms of safety regulations that can’t be better implemented under the nation state system of government.IE the ability to react quickly based on locally democratic wishes.While your argument seems to contradict itself in firstly pretending that the EU is all for food safety but then on the other hand supporting the US big business type free for all which the EU tacitly supports just the same.In which case again my view obviously fits the definition of the right to agree to disagree.

On that note why would/should the manufacturing sector want to retaliate against the very noble aims of cleaning up the food sector.IE the right to buy non EU type approved US manufacturing products not subject to EU imposed tariff/quota barriers for example isn’t mutually exclusive with saying that we also either won’t accept unpasteurised dairy products or chlorine washed chicken or GM food products,or at least if we do accept them then the customer will be made clearly aware of it at the point of sale.Bearing in mind that a ‘free trade agreement’ doesn’t force the customer to actually buy anything from any particular source nor stop us from informing the customer fully regarding the product on sale.

While yes personally I do think that genetic modification is the devils work to the point where I can’t even buy a rose bush from the local garden centre that’s flowers actually produce a proper strong natural rose type smell for just one example.While the dangers of unpasteurised dairy products are well known which is why the pasteurisation process was invented and then rightly accepted as being a major breakthrough in food safety.The conclusion being that we have nothing to learn from,nor need the interference of,the EU in our trade policies.

Its not just GMOs, its also other welfare standards and allowed, drugs, medicines, etc.
The EU is not just about safety standards, it`s true. By putting tariffs on imported foods it helps our balance of payments and protects our farmers. We could, post Brexit, import cheaper food, yes. We could therefore put our own, more expensive farmers out of business.

Maybe it would help if I clarified that my idea of a ‘free trade’ agreement has always contained the built in safeguard of a clause which actually allows protectionist measures to ensure trade balance and which limits under cutting and dumping on all sides.Or for that matter importing cheap African food while Africans starve.

In which case as it stands ironically it’s the US which has the most grounds to issue protectionist measures against the EU not vice versa.While even more ironically we need the same safeguard regarding our trading relationship with the EU let alone China.It seems strange in that case why you seem to think that the EU is justified in imposing tarrifs on US imports in the interests of ‘trade balance figures’ when it’s the US which has a massive trade deficit with the EU.Or for that matter why you seem to be applying double standards both in regard to Chinese imports to the EU.Let alone our laughable trading relationship with Germany while obviously defending the EU’s stupid anti US trade policy on so called ‘balance of payments’ grounds when you know that ‘balance’ is already way in the EU’s favour.

[gasgas]

This ^ is the point, exactly

[winseer]

I guess if I were an alien looking down on Earth from afar, attempting to make some kind of sense of Earth’s political systems of government - I’d probably think that “all things stay the same until they change”.

The more “change” is resisted - the greater the eventual change when it happens.

I’m pretty sure that five years before all the wars of Earth’s history - we had little to no idea we’d be at war five years hence.

There’s all the pretence that “change isn’t really coming, honest” where people of all political persuasions pretend that “things will go on the way they are, forever”.

The trouble with any political system once it is established, or at least thinks it is established - there is no motivation to “do things right” whatsoever.

This is evident at ALL levels of Bureaucracy in particular.

Why should they change? …but the moment voices are raised, electoral results start suggesting that “change or at least reform is desired” - then they just sink back on their feet of clay, resolutely refusing to do anything other than “business as usual”.

War has always been the “continuation of politics by other means”. Civil war has the potential to be a lot worse than World war, because without other nations getting involved as time goes on - A civil war goes on until the country is entirely destroyed, compared to a world war which ends as soon as one side surrenders.

The EU’s unyielding ways - will likely be the death of one major faction in geographic Europe. Our choice as the voting public - is to decide which side we want to be on, AND if that side is actually going to the ultimate “survivors” or not.

Merely telling the public everywhere that “You have to put up with our limp, please-no-one, political waste and drivel - because that is better than going to war ever again” - wears a bit thin in a world where the population growth is now out of control.

If People cannot make more room for themselves - then watch out! - Nature will one day do it for you, if you’re not careful!

Ever wondered why natural disasters happen to occur where they do, and never in other places?

It isn’t all about Geography - put it that way.

It doesn’t matter what nation you are, what you believe, or what you eat. It DOES matter that none of us humans can survive being killed by something we took for granted “cannot happen to US”.

“Death makes good losers of us all”.

America, China, Russia, Brazil, and India - probably have the best potential to survive this century, as it stands.

Look to these nations then, because the divided other nations, including our own - are stuck in political quicksand, and are sinking fast.

Our system doesn’t work. Change IT, or change your allegiance to one of the viable alternatives - or fall victim to the same destructive forces that have already brought down Empires like Egypt, Rome, and Byzantium.

[muckles]

Carryfast:

muckles:

Carryfast:
why would food standards also stop the free trade of US manufacturing products like cars and trucks and their components.

Becuase as I’ve tried to explain to those who post about how “the nasty British government would sell out to the US and the lovely cuderly wuderly EU look after our interests even though they have been negotiating a similar deal”
the US agriculture industry, we’re talking about huge multi nationals here, not a few good ol’ boys on thier John Deeres and the US based global food multi nationals have lobbied hard in the TTIP negotiations and have plenty of US politicians in their pockets, so they won’t accept any deal that doesn’t include agriculture and food.
For the EU and no doubt the UK the pay off for allowing this would have been far easier access for the financial services sector into the US markets and we all know what influence they have over our goverments?

Let’s get this right we unilaterally remove all EU type approval and duty requirements from US manufacturing exports like cars and trucks and components and we’ll also be happy to accept US agricultural exports so long as they comply with UK food standards and they’ll say no thanks.On that note how difficult can it be to say no growth enhancements used in UK market bound beef just like RHD for UK bound cars and trucks.

So we get rid of barriers imposed by the EU on US imports and put up our own non-tariff barriers on their products and you think that the mighty US food and agriculture lobby would accept having to set-up a separate system of checks, with the associated costs just to win exports to the UK and our government would insist on it when for them the prize if far easier access to the US fincial services market for their friends in The City.

[winseer]

Has everyone forgotten the 20th century?

It was this period of time you see, that only came to an end a generation ago… That’s Pre-year 2000, when we got told another batch of bull scare stories regarding the Y2K bug that was going to blow up all our computers, and melt our brains…

In the 20th century, as late as 1997 - we had NO “Good Friday Agreement” - and a much harder N/S Irish border.
We had plenty of freight crossing the channel both ways.
We were trading with the EU, and they with us.
We liked getting our duty frees, and we didn’t want to ditch the pound - so we didn’t, even under Blair’s Labour Government.

The REAL Y2K bug - was the roll-out of the EURO currency!

That- well and truly f---- everything up bigtime!

Instead of asking Britain to “drop Brexit”, it is about time the Leave campaign started pushing people to “ditch the Euro”.
The love of money - is the root of all evil - especially money based on the name of a pagan goddess - “the name of blasphemy”.

The smarter ones among us - can see right through it.

We were doing OK - until the Euro rollout… Just ask Greece, Italy, Spain, Hungary, Switzerland (not even in the EU!) and the rest who’s economies and borders have suffered as a result of the Euro, ECB, and IMF rather than “Brussels” and the Eurocrats.

[franglais]

GasGas:
This ^ is the point, exactly

I think you posted this before the later insertion of CarryFast`s (post-moderation) post?

[franglais]

Carryfast:
Maybe it would help if I clarified that my idea of a ‘free trade’ agreement has always contained the built in safeguard of a clause which actually allows protectionist measures to ensure trade balance and which limits under cutting and dumping on all sides.Or for that matter importing cheap African food while Africans starve.

In which case as it stands ironically it’s the US which has the most grounds to issue protectionist measures against the EU not vice versa.While even more ironically we need the same safeguard regarding our trading relationship with the EU let alone China.It seems strange in that case why you seem to think that the EU is justified in imposing tarrifs on US imports in the interests of ‘trade balance figures’ when it’s the US which has a massive trade deficit with the EU.Or for that matter why you seem to be applying double standards both in regard to Chinese imports to the EU.Let alone our laughable trading relationship with Germany while obviously defending the EU’s stupid anti US trade policy on so called ‘balance of payments’ grounds when you know that ‘balance’ is already way in the EU’s favour.

So you aren`t talking of free trade, but a tailor made, bespoke agreement? After all, no agreement with a simple “safeguard/protectionist clause” would be signed by anyone with sense. Only take a few years for an army of civil servants to hammer out a deal then.

CF: “ironically it’s the US which has the most grounds to issue protectionist measures against the EU not vice versa.”
I strongly disagree. The US allows their farmers to use growth hormones that are banned in the EU. Apart from health issues this cuts the cost of meat production in the US.
The US Gov subsidises it`s farmers with tens of billions of dollars annually. (Given the US rhetoric, THAT is irony!)
Our farming industry does need protection.

CF: “Or for that matter importing cheap African food while Africans starve.”
Agree. A real problem.

Mr ReesMogg, among others, has spoken of the advantages to us of cheaper food imports when we leave the EU. First hearing seems good?
He isnt so vocal on what will happen to our domestic farming businesses when cheaper imports undercut them. He doesnt speak of those jobs, including some transport work, that still remain in agriculture. It isnt rich land owners wholl feel the pinch, is it? Theyll still receive subsidies to "manage the countryside". (A cynic may relate this to land owning Tory voters?). Its those actually doing something sensible with land, such as growing food! who will suffer the most, it seems to me.

[muckles]

Winseer:
Has everyone forgotten the 20th century?

It was this period of time you see, that only came to an end a generation ago… That’s Pre-year 2000, when we got told another batch of bull scare stories regarding the Y2K bug that was going to blow up all our computers, and melt our brains…

Yes there were many scare stories about Y2k from an uninformed media looking for a sensational headline, but there was also a lot of work done by IT departments across the World to avoid the potential consequences of the Y2K issue, (it wasn’t a bug, just a legacy from the early days of programming)