Off Topic EU deabte. Which way are you voting ?

The EU can't politically concede any of their fundamentals to the UK post Brexit

If they did a deal with us that didn't have free movement and a relatively low tariff, then it could spark other EU countries to question their own status.

We're the first country (of meaningful size, before someone pipes up with ****ing Greenland) to exit the EU, they'll play hardball with us, they've already said as much. You're dreaming if you think they're just going to roll over.

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...Brexit-Black-Swan-Nassim-Taleb-Brussels-elite

 

"They couldn't find a coconut on coconut island"

 

You really do come across as a bit of a child, Pete. And now you're behaving like a jilted lover because I'm looking for more reasonable, broader insight and/or conversation from other people. Do you mind if I ask others because you seem like somebody who only likes the sound of his own voice? I shall leave it there.

 

When I think of the common market, I think of a free trade area. Of course we want that, but I'll reiterate, not at the expense of free movement of people.

To be realistic, the EU aren't going to agree to that. That doesn't mean we can't trade with the EU, it just means when we do, we will have to pay a tariff on goods we buy. This also means that the EU will have to pay a tariff to us when they buy from us. It works two ways, but for some reason people are talking like it will only affect us, it won't. The EU will be affected by this, as well. It's in their best interests to have a long hard think about it.

 

Those baked bean cans shouldn't have answered back!...!...

 

I've explained that you don't seem to be aware of what the common market means. Obviously I am aware of it because there was such a beast in the past and there are various markets that are described as common but each one has separate characteristics. Are you capable of explaining what you mean when you say "common market" and which one are you referring to?

 

i ****ing hope not!! For the sake of all of us. He's a dangerous egomaniac...

 

Our financial services sector accounts for 30% of the total market within the EU.

We need them more than they need us, it's a straightforward fact mate 44% > 14%

 

Clinton being the alternative shows just how ****ed US politics is ffs.

Trump having his fat finger on the button is a terrifying prospect

 

Yeah, agreed Tobes. I'm no Clinton fan either. I wouldn't trust her to keep her word on anything. But, it has to be anybody but Trump!...

 

The EU sells about £100bn in goods and services to us more than we sell to them. If there are tariffs to be paid we could make a lot of money.
If we do discuss a tariff free deal then I don't see any logic in the EU insisting on free movement because they know it will never happen. Why would they want it as part of any deal with us but not as part of any deal with the USA?

 

Because the US are big enough to be able to call the shots, we're not!...

 

She also voted against the civil rights act.

I don't believe Trump needs any introduction. We all know what that clown is about.

No matter which one wins, the USA is going to have a terrible president. I suppose Hilary is the lesser of the two evils, though.

 

If that is the case it makes you wonder why no deal has been agreed.

 

We must stop agreeing with each other

 

Appreciated

From what Gove and Johnson implied after the referendum it may still be possible to be part of it? In some form, I get the feeling they believe it's still possible, maybe through quotas because the term "controlling immigration" won't necessarily mean "reducing immigration" and whether there's a way around it where we get certain amount of access to it e.g. certain amount without tariffs in exchange for x amount immigration quota etc. Or otherwise will it be separate agreements completely outside of the common market.

 

And that proves what? It's just what any ****ing lawyer does. They're there to 'advocate' their clients version of events, not to judge who's guilty and who's not!

If lawyers only took on people they were sure were innocent, there'd be a lot of guilty people without representation!

 

So what is so terrible about not having freedom of movement? It would appear the the EU can accept no freedom of movement and the UK will insist on no freedom of movement. They will move on to discuss the rest of the deal.