The EU debate - Part III

Is Alastair Campbell writing this **** for her? She's getting into a bad habit of relying on sound bites and statements that don't actually say anything at all.

 

What do you expect her to say?

 

He gave you a clear question to answer. You came back with your usual garbled nonsense.

 

By the way Pete, Custard, and Hull,

When you make a statement that you exaggerated, or didnt mean, or cannot back up.
Its easier to just do what I did and admit as such, rather than tell people that you DID explain it, when you didn't, and stubbornly maintain that they are too stupid to understand your explanation.

FYI, we may avoid arguments in future by doing this.

 

Didn't take long

 

Or just dont say it at all

 

It was a choice of both or neither and you bumbled on with your idealist view that everyone will pander to the mighty UK and we'll come out of 'negotiations' with everything we wanted. You then followed that up with a straight answer not before your usual misplaced condescension.

 

Then what would you post?

 

At some point something of substance. Perhaps there still isn't any substance as the principals are squabbling.

 

Why not just not exaggerate in the first place?

 

And if someone does explain it, and another **** wit can't understand it, the onus is on the **** wit to say which bit they don't understand, otherwise you'd be guessing which answer they're looking for.

FYI we may avoid arguments in the future by doing this.

 

That's true also I will give you that

 

I said: "I'd rather have no freedom of movement and then negotiate on access to single market. If there's no access to the single market and there will be tariff barriers then the government will receive a lot of money in tariffs. What's not to like?"
Isn't that clear that I wanted no freedom of movement and was willing to accept no access to the single market. I am willing to accept you didn't understand that though.

 

Pete, Hull and Kustard lasted a handful of pages

 

What if the person being asked doesn't believe that the choice isn't that black and white? Isn't it better that the answer is more complete?

 

The point is though, are you prepared to pay more money for goods and/or services if it means less immigrants in the UK? Because i am not

 

Was it not obvious that Bodanki was exaggerating to highlight the point. Did anyone genuinely believe he expected 200% tariffs?
Seriously?

 

The only stumbling block being will other counties like Japan want to invest in the UK if we have tariffs with the EU, or just go to an EU country in the first place.

 

It was a choice of two hypothetical scenarios. If I wanted Pete's view of what he wants to happen he's mentioned it 1000 times across three threads.

 

Paying more for goods and services would have the advantage of paying less taxes due to the country receiving tariff fees.
It makes sense for immigrants to have a job offer before they come to the country.