No Brexit Extension

[SydneyRover]

Selby, I’m not even sure why our Brexit means so much to someone in Australia.

Your brexit, exactly hound like your conservative party too I guess

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hound.

For the fourth time, that gov.uk website categorically does NOT say the report was published on 24 Dec.

It was the WEBSITE that was published on 24 Dec. The "Trade and Cooperation Agreement (including Annexes and Protocols)" is the report itself. That was added this morning. It says it. In black and white

 "26 December 2020
Following documents added: Trade and Cooperation Agreement (including Annexes and Protocols)"

"Added" as in "was not there previously"

If you wanted to check you could have looked here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/commission-publishes-full-text-of-uk-eu-brexit-trade-agreement/amp/

Or here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/brexit-eu-and-uk-publish-trade-agreement/a-56062356
Or here
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-brexit-deal-published-full-23222385.amp

Or here
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1376854/brexit-deal-full-text-summary-trade-deal-EU-UK-what-is-in-the-brexit-deal-evg/amp


This is actually quite depressing. You are taking an incorrect position and implacably refusing to budge on it, when the facts are set out on a plate for you. On a matter of pretty much zero importance. You preferred to assume I was wrong for whatever reason.

If you cannot get facts as straightforward and simple as that right, or back down when it is demonstrated that you are wrong, on such a trivial issue, or be bothered to check the accuracy of what you are insisting, then the concept of civilised, fact-based discussion is out the window.

[DonnyOsmond]

  Wilt's, do you think the EU will have the same member countries in 2026?

Albania and North Macedonia could well have joined by then.

[drfchound]

Hound.

For the fourth time, that gov.uk website categorically does NOT say the report was published on 24 Dec.

It was the WEBSITE that was published on 24 Dec. The "Trade and Cooperation Agreement (including Annexes and Protocols)" is the report itself. That was added this morning. It says it. In black and white

 "26 December 2020
Following documents added: Trade and Cooperation Agreement (including Annexes and Protocols)"

"Added" as in "was not there previously"

If you wanted to check you could have looked here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/commission-publishes-full-text-of-uk-eu-brexit-trade-agreement/amp/

Or here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/brexit-eu-and-uk-publish-trade-agreement/a-56062356
Or here
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-brexit-deal-published-full-23222385.amp

Or here
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1376854/brexit-deal-full-text-summary-trade-deal-EU-UK-what-is-in-the-brexit-deal-evg/amp


This is actually quite depressing. You are taking an incorrect position and implacably refusing to budge on it, when the facts are set out on a plate for you. On a matter of pretty much zero importance. You preferred to assume I was wrong for whatever reason.

If you cannot get facts as straightforward and simple as that right, or back down when it is demonstrated that you are wrong, on such a trivial issue, or be bothered to check the accuracy of what you are insisting, then the concept of civilised, fact-based discussion is out the window.

BST.   It might be the fourth time that you have written about this but it is the FIRST TIME that you have said that it is the website that was published in 24th December, not the agreement.
If that is in fact the case then fair enough.

I have to say that there is no way I could have known that and had you explained as much at the beginning then all this bunkum could have been avoided.
You are still saying that I wanted to prove you wrong but that statement in itself is wrong.
All I did was write a comment based on what I saw.
It wasn’t at all clear to me that it didn’t mean that the document was published on 24th December.
Evidently it can’t have been clear to Tyke either as he made the same assumption as myself.
You also say that this was a trivial issue and I agree with that.
As for those other links that you posted I would t have found them because I wouldn’t have been bothered enough to go and look for them as it was such a trivial matter.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hound
I pointed out 10 hours ago the text that said that the documents had been added on 26 Dec.

I thought that was about as bleeding obvious as it got. What you are now saying is that it is my fault that I didn't understand what you didn't understand.

See,when I point stuff out in here in words of one syllable, I'm accused of being condescending. When I don't point things out in words of one syllable and folk don't follow, I'm accused of drawing arguments out or as one poster has convinced himself, laying traps and delighting in humiliating people.

Here's a thought. Maybe I'm being honest but sometimes failing to read people's minds?

[tyke1962]

Attempting to move the debate away from the trivialities over what was published and when it was I'd give the deal a 6 out of 10 personally .

It just about gives what we voted for a tick whilst acknowledging compromise at the same time .

It's thin I'll say that but let's see how it works out .

I'm fairly comfortable in saying that within the next decade this deal won't stand the test of time because the EU will be not be the around in its present form for too much longer.

It will exist but won't be a significant player in the near future .

Every empire implodes from within , history tells us this .

The Labour support whether that be PLP or remainers in the electorate would be well advised to get with the programme and wise the feck up .

The electorate have rejected you , the deal is done , live with it .

[SydneyRover]

A lot of bother for 6/10 Tyke?

[selby]

  What get's me Tyke is that the remainers are complaining about the rules and agreements that keep us more aligned to the EU rules we had to adhere to while members, do they want a hard Brexit? are they Brexiteers and don't realise it?
   For four years they have argued to stay in and accept every rule and law the EU saw fit to pass , now they are saying the agreement contains restrictions imposed on us by the same people that makes the agreement a cop out and would vote against it, and even start a movement to get back in.
   Bloody Brilliant, talk about beating yourselves up.

[SydneyRover]

If it's true you don't drink selby I'd start and then you'd at least have an excuse.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Selby I do agree somewhat with you on that.  We have chosen to align on a lot of areas and I don't think that's a big issue. It's a choice we have made.  We could of course choose to move from that in time as the world changes.  As deals go it doesn't seem terrible or brilliant and that has to be a good thing.  Time will of course tell but it's nothing like the apocalypse many said it would be is it?  A lot of the paperwork will be fairly easy to complete also. In some areas paperwork was still required within the EU so it's not necessarily the end of the world. A lot of businesses will automate it through existing process anyway.  We will all adapt much more easily than some have made out.

[EasyforDennis]

Selby I do agree somewhat with you on that.  We have chosen to align on a lot of areas and I don't think that's a big issue. It's a choice we have made.  We could of course choose to move from that in time as the world changes.  As deals go it doesn't seem terrible or brilliant and that has to be a good thing.  Time will of course tell but it's nothing like the apocalypse many said it would be is it?  A lot of the paperwork will be fairly easy to complete also. In some areas paperwork was still required within the EU so it's not necessarily the end of the world. A lot of businesses will automate it through existing process anyway.  We will all adapt much more easily than some have made out.

Yes we will adapt but I still cannot see what we have gained from Brexit. I can certainly see what we have lost but cannot see the gains.

[selby]

  I thought it might be a bit deep for some of you Syd, Sorry go back to your building blocks you got for Christmas.

[Glyn_Wigley]

  I thought it might be a bit deep for some of you Syd, Sorry go back to your building blocks you got for Christmas.

Are you still maintaining that it's exporters who pay import duties or didn't you get any building blocks for Christmas yourself?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Tyke
1) If the timing doesn't matter to you, you could have kept out if the discussion instead of sticking your boot in with a wrong assertion.

2) You just don't get this "electorate" argument, do you?

A majority of people voted in the last election for parties who were against Brexit.

Labour supporters in poll after poll are 3:1 against Brexit.

In national polls, the number of people who think Brexit was an error has been rising for 2 years. Currently, there are about 10% more people think it was a bad decision than think it was a good one.

You focus on what you believe and know and think it is what everyone on the Left thinks. It isn't. You are a tiny minority.

Brexit is happening and we've got to make the best of the shambles that you have presented us with. But if the Labour party ever thinks of embracing it as a positive, they are finished. Because the people who think like you on the Left are literally dying out. The future for the Left is internationalist, not nationalist.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

  I thought it might be a bit deep for some of you Syd, Sorry go back to your building blocks you got for Christmas.

Are you still maintaining that it's exporters who pay import duties or didn't you get any building blocks for Christmas yourself?

Actually Glyn it is in some cases.  American steel tarrifs one obvious example.

[Glyn_Wigley]

  I thought it might be a bit deep for some of you Syd, Sorry go back to your building blocks you got for Christmas.

Are you still maintaining that it's exporters who pay import duties or didn't you get any building blocks for Christmas yourself?

Actually Glyn it is in some cases.  American steel tarrifs one obvious example.

Do you mean these?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-tariffs-explainer-idUSKCN1SR1UI

https://www.investors.com/news/economy/what-is-a-tariff/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/05/07/trumps-steel-tariffs-cost-us-consumers-every-job-created-experts-say/

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/02/heres-why-us-importers-and-consumers-pay-trumps-tariffs-not-china.html

I'd got you down as someone who wouldn't fall for Trump's bullshit.

[selby]

  Just a hook Glyn, no bait required.

[Glyn_Wigley]

And you bit it. No need to tell everyone you did.

[selby]

      THE GREATEST PONZI SCHEME EVER INVENTED
Source
 The Centre for European politics Brussels
 20 years of Euro winners and losers February 2919
             WINNERS
 Deutschland per person 23,116 euro per person total1,893 billion Euro
 Neiderlands                  21,003                                346   billion euro
 Griechenland                     190                                    2   billion euro

                        Losers

Spanien                           5,031per person  Total loss 224 billion Euros
Belgien                            6,370                                 69 billion Euros
Portugal                         40,604                               424 billion euros
Frankbeich                     55,996                             3,591 billion Euros
Italien                            73,605                             4,325 billion Euros

  Great if you are German or Dutch not so great to be Italian.                           

[BillyStubbsTears]

Someone going to explain to Selby what a Ponzi Scheme is? He seems to be having a bit of difficulty with the concept.

[Glyn_Wigley]

He has difficulty with a great number of concepts. He hears a phrase that he thinks makes him sound like he knows what he's talking about so he keeps using it. But no doubt when you point out what b*llocks he's spouting he'll come out with the tired and unoriginal 'I was only saying it to wind you up' schtick yet again. A fortnight after he's been exposed.

PS Anybody here think that this wasn't selby telling us what he really thinks?

Glynn, tariffs are levied by the country receiving the goods and paid by the exporter, seeing as we import more goods than we export as you constantly point out to anyone who will listen to the EU there is a large difference between what we will have to pay to the EU and what we will receive from them, which is a much larger amount more than equal to all the farm subsidies we receive from the EU according to one report I read.
  Add on the fee they will have to pay for access to fish in our waters.
  I too think there will be an agreement.

[selby]

   I will just leave it to you experts, after all you have proved good losers for so long.

[Glyn_Wigley]

If only we could take you seriously but you've admitted that you talk b*llocks on purpose. As well as unwittingly!

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

  I thought it might be a bit deep for some of you Syd, Sorry go back to your building blocks you got for Christmas.

Are you still maintaining that it's exporters who pay import duties or didn't you get any building blocks for Christmas yourself?

Actually Glyn it is in some cases.  American steel tarrifs one obvious example.

Do you mean these?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-tariffs-explainer-idUSKCN1SR1UI

https://www.investors.com/news/economy/what-is-a-tariff/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/05/07/trumps-steel-tariffs-cost-us-consumers-every-job-created-experts-say/

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/02/heres-why-us-importers-and-consumers-pay-trumps-tariffs-not-china.html

I'd got you down as someone who wouldn't fall for Trump's bullshit.

No Glyn, just someone who previously worked in the steel industry.  Of course your knowledge on the realities of that tarrif outweighs mine.

[Glyn_Wigley]

No, just my knowledge of Customs Law and Declarations. All Import Declarations have to be in the name of the importer, who has to be a valid legal entity in the country of destination. All taxes and duties have to be paid by said importer. Not by anybody outside the Customs territory of destination.

[SydneyRover]

 ''Throughout history Britain’s ruling class has created crisis after crisis – just like now''

“The privately educated Englishman – and Englishwoman, if you will allow me – is the greatest dissembler on Earth,” he says. “Was, is now and ever shall be for as long as our disgraceful school system remains intact. Nobody will charm you so glibly, disguise his feelings from you better, cover his tracks more skilfully or find it harder to confess to you that he’s been a damned fool.”

Le Carre' from 'the secret pilgrim'

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/27/history-britain-ruling-class-created-crisis-boris-johnson-brexit-covid

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

No, just my knowledge of Customs Law and Declarations. All Import Declarations have to be in the name of the importer, who has to be a valid legal entity in the country of destination. All taxes and duties have to be paid by said importer. Not by anybody outside the Customs territory of destination.

Glyn you are getting stuck on technicalities ie who remits a final payment but that doesn't mean they actually pay it. It's like vat the person who paid the vat bill isn't actually the one who pays it in most cases.

When tarrifs came in most companies went "we are not paying that" so it leaves a choice of what to do. 

Of course there are also some arrangements that differ so that the seller does directly pay the bill.  They don't tend to care as long as it's paid.  So it can be mixed dependent on rules and agreements.

[wilts rover]

Isn't it you getting stuck on the technicalities BFYP?

All taxes and duties have to be paid by the importer - is pretty clear. That's WTO rules I believe.

How the importer goes about getting that money back from the exporter - or not - is down to the particular agreement as you have pointed out, but the actual legal obligation seems pretty clear.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Isn't it you getting stuck on the technicalities BFYP?

All taxes and duties have to be paid by the importer - is pretty clear. That's WTO rules I believe.

How the importer goes about getting that money back from the exporter - or not - is down to the particular agreement as you have pointed out, but the actual legal obligation seems pretty clear.

Perhaps so, but isn't the more relevant point actually who is impacted by it?

[Glyn_Wigley]

No, just my knowledge of Customs Law and Declarations. All Import Declarations have to be in the name of the importer, who has to be a valid legal entity in the country of destination. All taxes and duties have to be paid by said importer. Not by anybody outside the Customs territory of destination.

Glyn you are getting stuck on technicalities ie who remits a final payment but that doesn't mean they actually pay it. It's like vat the person who paid the vat bill isn't actually the one who pays it in most cases.

When tarrifs came in most companies went "we are not paying that" so it leaves a choice of what to do. 

Of course there are also some arrangements that differ so that the seller does directly pay the bill.  They don't tend to care as long as it's paid.  So it can be mixed dependent on rules and agreements.

Those are arrangements between companies, nothing to do with the Tariff. If importers/exporters want to negotiate prices between themselves that's up to them - it's why the Tariff was put there in the first place, to try and price the exporter out of the market. But any duty is always levied on the importer, never the exporter.