Thread: Brexit - It's Still On!

Originally Posted by buriramboy

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-48519746

Read that in full my Algerian friend and that's from the Brexit Bashing Corp.

did you? it's an opinion piece

very interesting though, nice find, basically, the Queen will be 'used' in this strategic move but it would be an 'illegal' trick

From the article:

It would be unprecedented in modern times to use this power for political reasons, rather than to end a session in preparation for a new Queen's Speech.

One leadership candidate, Rory Stewart, has said to do so would be "illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic and it wouldn't work".

You seem to have ignored the bit that says no deal is the default position which was the whole point of this exchange with you disputing that.

I will put my money on unlimited extension, with a complete collapse of the 2 party system

the future of UK politics: a pro-Brexit fascist party led by Nigel, and a new REMAIN thing led by former Blair Labour and disappointed conservatives

this is going to be fun

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

nothing to do with English as your first language, as you seem to suffer yourself from reading comprehension and critical thinking skills

it was the default on March 29 but the UK parliament has superceded that law with the a new vote that the UK will not leave without a deal. Are you saying that majority vote was invalid? because it's not, and that last vote supercede whatever was voted before.

I understand you don't understand those complex legal and parliamentary rules, but that's what they are. In your chav world you might think it's not important and you can project whatever fantasy world you might have about your own country, but reality is reality and doesn't care what you and you other Brexit chav friends think

The law is NOW Brexit with a DEAL, not BREXIT without a DEAL

if Brexit with a DEAL is not possible, then it's REVOKE with a parliamentary vote, or unlimited extension until the end of time, which is basically the same as REMAIN

A50 default is to leave with or without a deal by the set date which may be extended. This is part of a contract between and within the EU and every member state. Parliament cannot arbitrarily revise the terms of that contract by simply voting to change it, any more than they could at some later date withdraw from the May/Merkel surrender Treaty.

If what you suggest is right and no deal is no longer the legal A50 default, then the only possible Brexit outcomes are indefinite extensions or total surrender.

But right or wrong here's how I see it. The law can commit the UK to leave with or without a deal, but cannot commit the UK to leave with a deal. Why? A deal can be made only between two or more parties. In the case of Brexit, if the EU refused to make a deal, would that leave the UK in breach of its own law that demands it does have a deal?

Ok, that is not what happened. But let's say, let's just say, the EU takes advantage of UK law requiring a deal, to offer a deal that demands total surrender; are you suggesting the UK is legally obliged to accept? In that case, Parliament broke the law by rejecting the surrender Treaty.

Do you people have laws in Belgium?

Originally Posted by buriramboy

You seem to have ignored the bit that says no deal is the default position which was the whole point of this exchange with you disputing that.

the author THINK it's the default position, but how can it be default, when another binding vote made it clear that any brexit will not happen without a DEAL, hence the need for the Queen trickery. It's a legal dead end, where one rule is superceded by the other or put one rule in a deadlock.

basically, Brexit has been stalled by Maybot parliamentary manipulation to get her deal through

and of course there is the burden of a PM taking the political responsability of making that big mistake

Only BoJo can do it, he might be crazy enough to make you believe he will, but only on the surface

Originally Posted by jabir

If what you suggest is right and no deal is no longer the legal A50 default, then the only possible Brexit outcomes are indefinite extensions or total surrender.

The EU27 will never let the UK leave without a deal, and article 50 is a guideline for things to do. Basically it's all at the discretion of the EU27 as it has already been demonstrated in the last 18months. You are technically still part of the EU, we OWN you.

The EU27 will do everything possible for the UK to accept the current deal even if it means indefinite extension, which is obviously the new default, whether you like or not

basically, what you want on your own doesn't mean shit, and that's why you can't leave the hard way. If you could, you would have done it already. You didn't. It's not going to happen now.

Do you people have laws in Belgium?

you live in a cave, what would you know what a law is

think of Brexit this way,

you are at the golf course, you decided to leave without paying the bills or sign some paperwork to cancel your membership. Fine. The doors are locked until you do. And your car was impounded. What are you going to do? order another drink at the bar and relax until it's night time or pay up and be on your way

we OWN you !!!

for you Brexit loons, you keep forgetting you are not joining the EU and refusing a new deal

the truth is you are stuck in the current EU supranational agreement, and without a deal, you can't leave that agreement without replacing it with a new agreement

basically you simply can't just walk away, that's the dirty secret your devious 2 face leaders didn't tell you

unless you want to become the new NK or Iran, and be cutoff from the world

we really OWN you now, it's hilarious

Brexit - It's Still On!
Planet Dragonfly: 2,112 posts of pap.

^You don't even own your ass ya clown

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

The EU27 will never let the UK leave without a deal, and article 50 is a guideline for things to do. Basically it's all at the discretion of the EU27 as it has already been demonstrated in the last 18months. You are technically still part of the EU, we OWN you.

The EU27 will do everything possible for the UK to accept the current deal even if it means indefinite extension, which is obviously the new default, whether you like or not

basically, what you want on your own doesn't mean shit, and that's why you can't leave the hard way. If you could, you would have done it already. You didn't. It's not going to happen now.

you live in a cave, what would you know what a law is

Whoosh must be your norm. I explained why you are wrong, so off you prance on some tangent about the EU pwning the UK which is debatable and irrelevant in context.

If you represent your people the sooner we break free the better.

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

I think ThaiVisa is perhaps a better fit for you, Hugh. Sorry, but you truly are a fucking bore.

Trouble is SA you think you are some upper class, eloquent ex civil servant, when in fact you are an ex lower end abusive toilet inspector living off the taxpayers you so despise, yet you dont even have the good grace to acknowledge those "lower end chavs" that paid your salary for so many years and whose shoes you are not fit to polish. You show show yourself to be economically illiterate and in your sad self deluded reality, you think you are some literate economic guru. In fact you are just another sad expat living in a third world beach side sh@thole, boasting about fricasse of chicken, as if we who live in a 1st world beach side city, where your monthly pension would not buy the front gate and the hovel you live in wouldn't make a rudimentary deposit, are somehow envious. You really are a sad pathetic fooker who is so self absorbed you haven't even noticed dragonfly's tongue down the back of your pants, but at least it explains why he talks so much sh#t.

[QUOTE=bsnub;3955464]Care to point out what specifically in that post was inaccurate? I thought it was rather concise but specifically it did not mention any economic theory in depth so your comment seems odd at best.

Not that I need to explain myself to you snubs. But firstly It was a comment in general of SA's posts. He uses figures to suit his argument. His figure of 16% unemployment is fairly correct if you include everyone without a job part timers etc. That is fair enough but in that sample there would be a few hundred thousand that are migrants from the EU on that basis. Remove them and the figure would be much lower. These figures are rubbery at best. It is a true though if actual unemployment benefits are looked at EU migrants on benefits in Britain are double that of British migrants in the EU. For example there are about 15,000 polish migrants on benefits in Britain whereas in Poland there are 2 British migrants on benefits in Poland. The disparity costs the British taxpayer, a fact that escapes SA, being an ex public servant who is another burden on the taxpayer with no positive tax contribution, and now on a pension that has to be paid for by others in the private sector.
A bit like a tapeworm that lives on a host, just a different version of a parasite. In other words the only positive contribution he will ever make to the taxpayers he so despises is when he eventually jumps off of a Pattaya condo balcony which is the Pattaya equivalent of a human worming tablet.

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

Trouble is SA you think you are some upper class, eloquent ex civil servant, when in fact you are an ex lower end abusive toilet inspector living off the taxpayers you so despiset.

Are you a home-grown ocker or one of those lower end migrant provincial English oiks that did well in ditch excavation?

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

...A bit like a tapeworm that lives on a host, just a different version of a parasite. In other words the only positive contribution he will ever make to the taxpayers he so despises is when he eventually jumps off of a Pattaya condo balcony which is the Pattaya equivalent of a human worming tablet.

Difference is the tapeworm, like most parasites, is genetically designed with the smarts to keep its host alive. Says much that SA roots for its and his own demise!

That really is bitterly ironic coming from someone who advocates economic suicide for the UK.

Originally Posted by squirrel

That really is bitterly ironic coming from someone who advocates economic suicide for the UK.

Bit of a stretch, even from you, that it's suicide to utterly reject the EUs insistence on unconditional surrender.

[QUOTE=Hugh Cow;3956347]

Originally Posted by bsnub

Care to point out what specifically in that post was inaccurate? I thought it was rather concise but specifically it did not mention any economic theory in depth so your comment seems odd at best.

Not that I need to explain myself to you snubs. But firstly It was a comment in general of SA's posts. He uses figures to suit his argument. His figure of 16% unemployment is fairly correct if you include everyone without a job part timers etc. That is fair enough but in that sample there would be a few hundred thousand that are migrants from the EU on that basis. Remove them and the figure would be much lower. These figures are rubbery at best. It is a true though if actual unemployment benefits are looked at EU migrants on benefits in Britain are double that of British migrants in the EU. For example there are about 15,000 polish migrants on benefits in Britain whereas in Poland there are 2 British migrants on benefits in Poland. The disparity costs the British taxpayer, a fact that escapes SA, being an ex public servant who is another burden on the taxpayer with no positive tax contribution, and now on a pension that has to be paid for by others in the private sector.
A bit like a tapeworm that lives on a host, just a different version of a parasite. In other words the only positive contribution he will ever make to the taxpayers he so despises is when he eventually jumps off of a Pattaya condo balcony which is the Pattaya equivalent of a human worming tablet.

I'm curious now. Is there a breakdown of EU citizens on benefits in the UK and the type of benefit? Is there a similar set of figures for UK citizens in the EU? A link would be most interesting.

I'm pretty sure my wife can only stay in Germany as long as I am in work, but that's due to third national married to EU citizen. EU citizens, as a family, have more rights. What's worse is the wife has even less rights in the UK, should I return.

The Polish problem was all due to the UK and not with the EU. The EU has taken the blame for a mistake made by the UK Government. It's fitting that PM May has fallen at the hands of her own UK Government as well.

Leadsom admitting to have taken drugs as well. Clearly few of them are fit for national service let alone governing the country.

What are you talking about, it Labour under Blair who opened the floodgates when didn't have to, it was a choice. People know where blame lies.

As to your wife, you should have bit the bullet years ago when things were easier and done a few years in Blighty and got her a Brit passport.

Some discussion on the economics of no deal for SMEs and consumers:

Troy, your wife has been resident with you as the spouse of an EU national exercising their rights as a person economically active. She has the right to apply for a residence card acknowledging her presence which after 5 years of such residence qualifies her for the status of permanent resident which cannot be vitiated unless she is absent from the conferring state for more than two years. If you are economically active, or seeking to be, then you are entitled to the full rights of any citizen viz benefits, healthcare etc., and so is your spouse, if you are not and you are of independent means then access to the health care system and other benefits are restricted. You as a Brit working in Krautland, have acquired EU rights that are now exercisable in the UK under the Surinder judgement and your spouse is therefore entitled to accompany you to the UK under the European regulations and not subject to the UK immigration rules, if you wish. This will still apply to you under the transitional arrangements until I think Dec 2020. By obtaining German residence or citizenship she will of course be able to travel/live anywhere in Europe whereas if she went the Brit path then she would only be able to travel to work in Ireland. After the transitional arrangements expire Brits will be subject to a EU visa regime if they want to work or reside in the EU and will be limited to a maximum stay of 90 days within any 6 month period if a visit is intended.

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

Troy, your wife has been resident with you as the spouse of an EU national exercising their rights as a person economically active. She has the right to apply for a residence card acknowledging her presence which after 5 years of such residence qualifies her for the status of permanent resident which cannot be vitiated unless she is absent from the conferring state for more than two years. If you are economically active, or seeking to be, then you are entitled to the full rights of any citizen viz benefits, healthcare etc., and so is your spouse, if you are not and you are of independent means then access to the health care system and other benefits are restricted. You as a Brit working in Krautland, have acquired EU rights that are now exercisable in the UK under the Surinder judgement and your spouse is therefore entitled to accompany you to the UK under the European regulations and not subject to the UK immigration rules, if you wish. This will still apply to you under the transitional arrangements until I think Dec 2020. By obtaining German residence or citizenship she will of course be able to travel/live anywhere in Europe whereas if she went the Brit path then she would only be able to travel to work in Ireland. After the transitional arrangements expire Brits will be subject to a EU visa regime if they want to work or reside in the EU and will be limited to a maximum stay of 90 days within any 6 month period if a visit is intended.

Jesus, the irony of Mr Sausages lecturing Troy on hos wife's rights ...don't you think he has the nouse to already know this. Another wasted paragraph.

Obviously, he didn't, otherwise he would not have written what he did, you fucking lower class moron.