Support NeoGAF

[scamander]

I am (or was) a strong remainer, but with recent comments from the EU, I'm starting to feel like they can go and fuck themselves. This was a democratic vote, and instead of respecting the will of the British people, the EU wants to punish them.

Yeah, because it is unreasonable to expect the UK to honour the contracts it made. Honestly, after 30 years of British governments and media using the EU as scapegoat for their own incompetence, blackmailing the EU to get special treatment after special treatment and after the aggressive behaviour of your current government, all I will say is:

Likewise

We respect your choice, but we won't soften the blow for you at the expense of the EU's stability. The British people have made their bed, the British people shall lie in it.

 

[GAMEPROFF]

World super power of where?? Colonise Asian and African countries again?

Its pretty obivious that he is sarcastic

 

[Tosyn_88]

Looks like you've been suckered in by what the tories have been saying over and over again.

I think people forget that if the UK leaves without consequences, it will essentially mean that the EU is going to suffer gravely for it in every imaginable way. This is a proper divorce we are talking about and no matter how you see it, someone will get hurt, the UK wants to eat its cake and have it as well which is impossible. The UK will be trying to escape with least possible damage and the EU will be trying to kick em out with the least possible damage to itself, that is what this is all about. If one side comes out the least damaged, the other side will come out with more damage

 

[Tosyn_88]

Yeah, because it is unreasonable to expect the UK to honour the contracts it made. Honestly, after 30 years of British governments and media using the EU as scapegoat for their own incompetence, blackmailing the EU to get special treatment after special treatment and after the aggressive behaviour of your current government, all I will say is:

Likewise

We respect your choice, but we won't soften the blow for you at the expense of the EU's stability. The British people have made their bed, the British people shall lie in it.

Absolutely and I am saying that as a person who be personally affected by the UK's future so of course I want the best for the UK, but I am also aware of the ripple effect can cause for the EU, so of course the EU has to take a hard stance, it isn't personal, it is all just about the survival of both economies

 

[Chinner]

I'm really hoping the German and French elections get the right results. We need a united EU more than ever. We need a climate with stability and tolerance for others as there are threats in the world working against this. The fact that the UK government intend to lick Trumps asshole rather than be an equal with our European allies is depressing enough.

The British public need to realise they can't live a fantasy land, and I'm afraid we all need a harsh reality to wake us up.

 

[Zaph]

....WHAT?

WHAT?

fuck me, maybe I need to leave the country, the idiots are in charge!

There's no opposition.

Brexit opinion polls are more a question of faith in the current parties. Tories have gone full hard Brexit, Labour is a disaster, and Lib Dems are irrelevant.

Unless you're in Scotland, the public doesn't see anyone credible still shouting the facts and realities of what Brexit means, so they're doubling-down on Leave, because even if they did change their mind, there's nobody to guide them out of this mess.

 

[Aureon]

This is what's confusing me. That seems perfectly reasonable, and I can't see the problem with May going to the British people and saying we'll continue our regular contribution up to the end of the current accounting period. We're already paying our current contribution so we can clearly afford it.

This framing of the issue by Juncker, and the use of phrases like "the cost of Brexit to the British Treasury would be very hefty”, is needlessly combative. He always seemed like a massive plonker though so I can't say I'm surprised.

If the UK leaves before 2021, the payment for the period of (leaving-2021) will be expected as a lump-sum payment at the date of leaving.

Please consider the fact that british politicians in charge have actively demonized and antagonized the EU administration at every turn. Expecting complete fairness from the other side would be unjustified.

 

[MilkyJoe]

If your breaking up with me then I am taking all the stuff back... waaahh....

 

[Engell]

Well you have to start negotiations somewhere..
You don't know how to haggle?...

https://youtube.com/watch?v=u75XQdTxZRc

 

[QuicheFontaine]

If the UK leaves before 2021, the payment for the period of (leaving-2021) will be expected as a lump-sum payment at the date of leaving.

Please consider the fact that british politicians in charge have actively demonized and antagonized the EU administration at every turn. Expecting complete fairness from the other side would be unjustified.

Er, why? Is there a problem with just paying annually as we already do?

 

[EGM1966]

I'm really hoping the German and French elections get the right results. We need a united EU more than ever. We need a climate with stability and tolerance for others as there are threats in the world working against this. The fact that the UK government intend to lick Trumps asshole rather than be an equal with our European allies is depressing enough.

The British public need to realise they can't live a fantasy land, and I'm afraid we all need a harsh reality to wake us up.

Wouldn't disagree with a single word here.

Between Brexit and Trump win there's just the terrible realization of a slide backwards that's going to have major global repercussions for a long time. Hopefully enough happens elsewhere to counter this some.

 

[blazeuk]

The whole thing will drag on so long that these payments would likely have been paid without argument anyway, if they're for projects across the EU the main thing will be the British government ensuring that the money is being spent where it's agreed and that money isn't diverted away from the UK if that's where it was intended to go.

If the UK leaves before 2021, the payment for the period of (leaving-2021) will be expected as a lump-sum payment at the date of leaving.

Is there a specific clause for that? I imagine the whole thing is up for negotiation or the UK could just continue paying on it's usual timetable until the final payment in 2021.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

I am (or was) a strong remainer, but with recent comments from the EU, I'm starting to feel like they can go and fuck themselves. This was a democratic vote, and instead of respecting the will of the British people, the EU wants to punish them.

It's all starting to feel like being a member of the mafia, and if you want to leave.. well you have to pay your security money. Forever.

They are respecting the will of the British people.

You guys voted to leave the EU and take back control, don't expect the EU to cater to your personal interests.

Like the entitlement in this post really irk me. Do you think the EU should help the UK against their own interests?

 

[Stiflers Mom]

I have become increasingly of the opinion that the EU is, despite overt messages to the contrary, prepared to negotiate on the single market.room).

Then you will have every other western EU country wanting to have the same deal in a year, and the EU goes down the shitter.

Yeah, because it is unreasonable to expect the UK to honour the contracts it made. Honestly, after 30 years of British governments and media using the EU as scapegoat for their own incompetence, blackmailing the EU to get special treatment after special treatment and after the aggressive behaviour of your current government, all I will say is:

Likewise

We respect your choice, but we won't soften the blow for you at the expense of the EU's stability. The British people have made their bed, the British people shall lie in it.

and this

 

[TatteredHat]

This is just a negotiating tactic. And a possible way for everyone to come out of this like winners.

I have become increasingly of the opinion that the EU is, despite overt messages to the contrary, prepared to negotiate on the single market.

Negotiating on the single market would be playing into the hands of every single rising populist politician in the EU, do you really think that they would want that?

 

[Aureon]

The whole thing will drag on so long that these payments would likely have been paid without argument anyway, if they're for projects across the EU the main thing will be the British government ensuring that the money is being spent where it's agreed and that money isn't diverted away from the UK if that's where it was intended to go.



Is there a specific clause for that? I imagine the whole thing is up for negotiation or the UK could just continue paying on it's usual timetable until the final payment in 2021.

At some point the actual residuals that will go on for a while (Pension liabilities, long-term debt, etc) will have to be paid.

There will be substantial negotiation on the when and the exactly what of the payment. The EU will, obviously and righly so, the best terms for themselves, and the UK will do the same.

 

[witchedwiz]

Yeah, because it is unreasonable to expect the UK to honour the contracts it made. Honestly, after 30 years of British governments and media using the EU as scapegoat for their own incompetence, blackmailing the EU to get special treatment after special treatment and after the aggressive behaviour of your current government, all I will say is:

Likewise

We respect your choice, but we won't soften the blow for you at the expense of the EU's stability. The British people have made their bed, the British people shall lie in it.

exactly this...
sorry uk govt , but there's no weaseling out..

 

[TimmmV]

I am (or was) a strong remainer, but with recent comments from the EU, I'm starting to feel like they can go and fuck themselves. This was a democratic vote, and instead of respecting the will of the British people, the EU wants to punish them.

It's all starting to feel like being a member of the mafia, and if you want to leave.. well you have to pay your security money. Forever.

This idea that just because there was a "democratic vote" there can therefore be no negative/punishing consequences is really getting on my tits.

The UK agreed to certain costs, so they should pay for them. I think it would be entirely reasonable for the UK and EU to come to some form of compromise that the UK be entitled to the benefits of each project as long as they fund it (instead of just cutting the UK off after whatever agreed leave date), but the attitude that the UK can just piss off and leave everyone else with the bill for things that the UK agreed to pay is fucking nonsense.


Given that some of that money is MEP pension contributions, I wonder if Farage & co will be fine with forgoing their pensions to get the settlement bill down?

 

[Peter Ian Staker]

and has struck an agreement on the rights of EU nationals.

I think this may be the real important part.

The Uk was already going to pay its contribution for a while anyway until it left.

Refusing to negotiate without agreeing on freedom of movement will turn this process into a mess.

 

[Charles Brandon]

Negotiating on the single market would be playing into the hands of every single rising populist politician in the EU, do you really think that they would want that?

Well

1. There aren't many populist nations in the EU that actually want to leave the EU
2. I don't see why the EU would want to force nations to stay in the union. If they don't want to be in it, what is to be gained by threats?

but that is just my opinion. If you read my other posts you'll see i acknowledge this point. The EU will have to 'punish' the UK in some way but that doesn't necessarily mean that they have to deny them access to the single market. See the title of this thread for an alternative punishment. The EU has said repeatedly that the UK can not be better off outside the the EU in terms of the relationship between the two but that does not mean the UK has to be economically devastated. Allowing the UK access to the single market, with no vote on policy and with a stiff and severe financial penalty would still be "worse" off.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

I am sure the Tories are going to enjoy explaining to people why they are going to be paying money into EU structures they will then gain nothing from.

But hey it's the 'democratic will of the British people', right, so the Tories can do whatever they like and assume that is what people voted for.

 

[Chinner]

I am sure the Tories are going to enjoy explaining to people why they are going to be paying money into EU structures they will then gain nothing from.

But hey it's the 'democratic will of the British people', right, so the Tories can do whatever they like and assume that is what people voted for.

They wil remain quiet while the press flips out. You know, like how they didn't condemn comments by the press calling our judges 'enemies of the people".

 

[Armaros]

Well

1. There aren't many populist nations in the EU that actually want to leave the EU
2. I don't see why the EU would want to force nations to stay in the union. If they don't want to be in it, what is to be gained by threats?

but that is just my opinion. If you read my other posts you'll see i acknowledge this point. The EU will have to 'punish' the UK in some way but that doesn't necessarily mean that they have to deny them access to the single market. See the title of this thread for an alternative punishment. The EU has said repeatedly that the UK can not be better off outside the the EU in terms of the relationship between the two but that does not mean the UK has to be economically devastated. Allowing the UK access to the single market, with no vote on policy and with a stiff and severe financial penalty would still be "worse" off.

And you think a bill that the UK owes is in anyway comparable to freedom of movement?

 

[Charles Brandon]

And you think a bill that the UK owes is in anyway comparable to freedom of movement?

Whether it is or not is not really the point. Nevertheless, free movement can still be retained, with certain controlling powers repatriated to the UK, such that it remains largely unchanged yet still fulfils the mandate given to the UK gov't to 'take back control'.

People need to stop thinking rigidly and in absolute terms.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Whether it is or not is not really the point. Nevertheless, free movement can still be retained, with certain controlling powers repatriated to the UK, such that it remains largely unchanged yet still fulfils the mandate given to the UK gov't to 'take back control'.

People need to stop thinking rigidly and in absolute terms.

But the UK did not want free movement. They voted against that. Free movement means that EU citizens can move to the UK and work there. And that is the exact thing the UK wants out of. You can't have free movement without actual free movement, that makes no sense.

It would also be nice of the UK would actually explain what they want, because almost a year later we still have no clue.

 

[Stiflers Mom]

Whether it is or not is not really the point. Nevertheless, free movement can still be retained, with certain controlling powers repatriated to the UK, such that it remains largely unchanged yet still fulfils the mandate given to the UK gov't to 'take back control'.

People need to stop thinking rigidly and in absolute terms.

If this happens, a lot of people will vote for Germany to get out of the EU as well. Like probably most people will in every other member country.

 

[Charles Brandon]

But the UK did not want free movement. They voted against that. Free movement means that EU citizens can move to the UK and work there. And that is the exact thing the UK wants out of. You can't have free movement without actual free movement, that makes no sense.

No, they voted for "control". Maybe.

More accurately, they voted to leave the EU and what that actually means is open to interpretation. We have already seen HM Gov't ostensibly construe the leave vote as "leave at all costs" but if "leave" is all we want to do then we can do that without leaving the single market or affecting freedom of movement.

But that is not realistic because, obviously, immigration was a big part of the public concern over the vote. However, I have not heard many people say that they want all immigration banned and/or they want people sent back. Most people who voted leave seemed only to want some form of control over immigration, some ability to tailor it to our social and economic needs.

So why not make a compromise?

Free movement is still the rule but now the UK can put in a cap or it can protect certain sectors. Restrictions already operate on free movement, why not allow the UK a few more. But not for free. The UK has to suffer, so they pay £60b, so they lose their seat at the table, so that lose x and pay y. It's a worse postion than they were in before. But it is not such a lethal kicking that it is going to fuck Britain's economy, damage the EU's economy and harm relations irreparably between the two.

We can still all come out of this as friends and partners.

People talk about getting revenge on the UK and making the UK reap what they sow but you are talking about people's lives being ruined over pettiness and lost pride. For what? So the EU can say that no-one fucks with the EU? Is that what the EU is about? Join us but if you ever want to leave we will kick you so hard you'll never get back up and fuck all the real people that affects, even if some of them will be in the EU.

This is not a zero-sum game. People need to calm down with the rhetoric and the demands because the situation some of you are advocating is one where everyone loses.

 

[anonymous_abc]

Er, why? Is there a problem with just paying annually as we already do?

If you leave anything permanently you are typically expected to pay all outstanding obligations. No one want's to go around running after the money once you have bailed.
But I'm sure it could be negotiated in good faith.

 

[Charles Brandon]

If this happens, a lot of people will vote for Germany to get out of the EU as well. Like probably most people will in every other member country.

I don't actually believe that but, if the people don't actually want to be in the EU then what is the EU for? If there is no popular mandate even in Germany then surely the whole thing is dead already?

 

[QuicheFontaine]

If you leave anything permanently you are typically expected to pay all outstanding obligations. No one want's to go around running after the money once you have bailed.
But I'm sure it could be negotiated in good faith.

I'm sure the EU has plenty of funding agreements with non-member states.

There's plenty of actual issues to address. There's really no need to go actively trying to create problems where there really aren't any.

 

[Dehnus]

it is stupid (both sides) we need to agree a trade deal, but no, all the fucking twats want to do now if argue over money....sigh. it is just like any divorce... party A wants xyz, party B does not want to give xyz...

in the end both will agree to split xyz.... but it is the time wasted on deciding over xyz that is stupid, media reports suggest until December!

You keep comparing it to a divorce and blame the EU.

But would your spouse like it if you kept calling her NAZI the whole time? And that she spends your money, and that her kids are in "your part" of the house using up "your resources". Also you send her emails that you blame her for EVERYTHING that is wrong on a daily basis and compare her mother to Satan itself, while your mother has a newsletter that is send all over the block that says she is a slut and that you'd be so much better off if you were allowed to sleep around and start separate living contracts with other women?

Yeah... erm.. I'd kick you too the curb too mate, and take as much as I could too. The germans are just fucking sick of the behaviour of the English. It isn't that they were against it, nor was it that they never cooperated on anything and started COD wars and other crap on their own against EU members even... No.. it was the constant insults and NAZI comparisons while rediculing people and attacking them whent he camaras are on.. but when the Cameras are off.. the English were all buddy buddy.

So yes it is a divorce and a messy one, but the English will have to learn one way that you can't act like that and get what you want. You can leave if you are cordial and nice, but even now the insults are flying towards the Germans like a petulant husband that screams that the spouse is a "slut". So no.. I cannot blame the EU for getting in on that fight after Boris Johnson just compared the EU with something you need to be liberated from and then insults a Swedish MEP in the process several times.

I would also tell you to "GET THE FUCK OUT THEN! By the way here is the bill for that wallpaper you wanted so badly."

If anything you'd think that by now the English would at least behave more cordial and diplomatic to get the best deal they want. BUT NOOOOPE! The insults and scapegoat train has no stops!

 

[Dehnus]

I don't actually believe that but, if the people don't actually want to be in the EU then what is the EU for? If there is no popular mandate even in Germany then surely the whole thing is dead already?

Okay let's disband then, as a Norwegian I have little problems due to that and only profit (as all those right wingers will buy more oil making us richer! ).

But don't come whining to us to live in Norway when your wars start again as "Prime Minister Von Boom Boom" just taxxed Peugeot too much and "President Le BAMBAM" of France decides it is time to go to war after 4 years of anti French and German rethoric going back and forth. After ofcourse Germany follows the 2% rule and now has 3 aircraft carriers, 5000 Tanks and a Shitload of planes with Nuclear Booms hanging underneath...


aaaa good times.. good times. Things were so nice when those two beat the crap out of each other every 10 years.

Luckily they will need Oil to run those things. GO NORWAY! *Waves flag*.

 

[Charles Brandon]

You keep comparing it to a divorce and blame the EU.

But would your spouse like it if you kept calling her NAZI the whole time? And that she spends your money, and that her kids are in "your part" of the house using up "your resources". Also you send her emails that you blame her for EVERYTHING that is wrong on a daily basis and compare her mother to Satan itself, while your mother has a newsletter that is send all over the block that says she is a slut and that you'd be so much better off if you were allowed to sleep around and start separate living contracts with other women?

Yeah... erm.. I'd kick you too the curb too mate, and take as much as I could too. The germans are just fucking sick of the behaviour of the English. It isn't that they were against it, nor was it that they never cooperated on anything and started COD wars and other crap on their own against EU members even... No.. it was the constant insults and NAZI comparisons while rediculing people and attacking them whent he camaras are on.. but when the Cameras are off.. the English were all buddy buddy.

So yes it is a divorce and a messy one, but the English will have to learn one way that you can't act like that and get what you want. You can leave if you are cordial and nice, but even now the insults are flying towards the Germans like a petulant husband that screams that the spouse is a "slut". So no.. I cannot blame the EU for getting in on that fight after Boris Johnson just compared the EU with something you need to be liberated from and then insults a Swedish MEP in the process several times.

I would also tell you to "GET THE FUCK OUT THEN! By the way here is the bill for that wallpaper you wanted so badly."

If anything you'd think that by now the English would at least behave more cordial and diplomatic to get the best deal they want. BUT NOOOOPE! The insults and scapegoat train has no stops!

Your problem is that you are confusing some aspects of the press with the views of the entire population. And it is not true that the UK (not the English) the UK did no cooperate on anything. The UK played a large role in the EU and was instrumental in many EU initiatives.

Okay let's disband then, as a Norwegian I have little problems due to that and only profit (as all those right wingers will buy more oil making us richer! ).

But don't come whining to us to live in Norway when your wars start again as "Prime Minister Von Boom Boom" just taxxed Peugeot too much and "President Le BAMBAM" of France decides it is time to go to war after 4 years of anti French and German rethoric going back and forth. After ofcourse Germany follows the 2% rule and now has 3 aircraft carriers, 5000 Tanks and a Shitload of planes with Nuclear Booms hanging underneath...


aaaa good times.. good times. Things were so nice when those two beat the crap out of each other every 10 years.

Luckily they will need Oil to run those things. GO NORWAY! *Waves flag*.

You are missing the point. I don't want the EU to disband. I am rabidly pro-EU. But I don't really see the merit in forcing nations to remain in the EU against their will. Fortunately, there are very few nations, if any, outside the UK that actually want to leave.

 

[DarthMasta]

I don't actually believe that but, if the people don't actually want to be in the EU then what is the EU for? If there is no popular mandate even in Germany then surely the whole thing is dead already?

There are lots of people who truly believe in a more united Europe, but I'd wager they're not the majority, the majority are people who realize EU countries are on their own largely irrelevant in this world of giant nations and giant trading blocks.

 

[Dehnus]

If you leave anything permanently you are typically expected to pay all outstanding obligations. No one want's to go around running after the money once you have bailed.
But I'm sure it could be negotiated in good faith.

With Boris "English is our language! You can't use it!" Johnson? .. Yeah good luck with that thing about good faith . I'm sure in between the insults towards Merkel in the Sun and May calling her some nice things? The Germans would be very willing to and kind to give a "payment plan".

As after all that is also how it works when you lease a car. You go inside, call the dealership owner a "NAZI!" then Flip off her spouse and call him a "Fat Fuck!". That is how you'll get that fantastic deal on that new BMW you've been wanting .

 

[Charles Brandon]

There are lots of people who truly believe in a more united Europe, but I'd wager they're not the majority, the majority are people who realize EU countries are on their own largely irrelevant in this world of giant nations and giant trading blocks.

That's true that's still a pro-EU argument. I don't believe necessarily in a true, united European state but I do believe in an economic union and I do believe in european justice as a safeguard against tyrannical national governments.

 

[Dehnus]

Your problem is that you are confusing some aspects of the press with the views of the entire population. And it is not true that the UK (not the English) the UK did no cooperate on anything. The UK played a large role in the EU and was instrumental in many EU initiatives.



You are missing the point. I don't want the EU to disband. I am rabidly pro-EU. But I don't really see the merit in forcing nations to remain in the EU against their will. Fortunately, there are very few nations, if any, outside the UK that actually want to leave.

I do get your point, I just don't get the point of the leavers and how they still behave. People compare it so often to a divorce, but it hardly is close to that. We are talking about billions here and politicians that only seem to work for their image in their home regions. I mean take Johnson, what did he have to gain with acting like an oaf as he did?

If they want a good deal, you will have to stay polite, I am not blaming you in any of this and I agree with you. I just find the notion of it being a "divorce" laughable. You simply cannot act like that. There are serious consequences at stake, and a whole lot of insecure men that don't want to loose face in their home region (they are called politicians ).

There is a reason why Norwegian envoys to the EU stay polite, we don't want to fight with our neighbours, we want them to pay for our products!

 

[ClosingADoor]

No, they voted for "control". Maybe.

More accurately, they voted to leave the EU and what that actually means is open to interpretation. We have already seen HM Gov't ostensibly construe the leave vote as "leave at all costs" but if "leave" is all we want to do then we can do that without leaving the single market or affecting freedom of movement.

But that is not realistic because, obviously, immigration was a big part of the public concern over the vote. However, I have not heard many people say that they want all immigration banned and/or they want people sent back. Most people who voted leave seemed only to want some form of control over immigration, some ability to tailor it to our social and economic needs.

So why not make a compromise?

Free movement is still the rule but now the UK can put in a cap or it can protect certain sectors. Restrictions already operate on free movement, why not allow the UK a few more. But not for free. The UK has to suffer, so they pay £60b, so they lose their seat at the table, so that lose x and pay y. It's a worse postion than they were in before. But it is not such a lethal kicking that it is going to fuck Britain's economy, damage the EU's economy and harm relations irreparably between the two.

We can still all come out of this as friends and partners.

People talk about getting revenge on the UK and making the UK reap what they sow but you are talking about people's lives being ruined over pettiness and lost pride. For what? So the EU can say that no-one fucks with the EU? Is that what the EU is about? Join us but if you ever want to leave we will kick you so hard you'll never get back up and fuck all the real people that affects, even if some of them will be in the EU.

This is not a zero-sum game. People need to calm down with the rhetoric and the demands because the situation some of you are advocating is one where everyone loses.

You are now filling in the blanks of the Leave vote yourself. We don't know what the people wanted, because the only question was to stay in the EU or not. A totally irresponsible question like that, because like you now say, there are a ton of ways to explain this. So for all the talk about the people having made a decision that should be respected, suddenly it is now fine to just fill in what to do without asking them.

The UK already had control over immigration. There seems to be this thinking that anybody could just move to the UK and claim benefits or something, while reality didn't work that way. It also ignored the amount of people from non-EU countries that the UK had 100% control over but for some reason didn't mind doing anything about.

Why not make a compromise you ask. Because that free movement is one of the most important pillars of the EU. It is one of the foundations of the union. But the UK wants a special position, claim the benefits of that free movement, but doesn't want any of the downsides that can come with it. Yet you ask the EU to give in and have them let their way. Why should the EU accept this?

You want the UK to protect certain sectors, to cap the numbers and put in restrictions. But that is not free movement. What you are asking for is regular immigration and visa-free travel. Which is no problem, since we have that with a ton of countries already.

The 60 billion is not a fine, it is not meant to make the UK suffer. It is simply the bill they already agreed to pay before deciding to leave. So there is zero reason to scrap the bill. It is like you ordering a steak in a restaurant, changing your mind midway while it is being prepared and saying: I'm not paying. It does't work that way, you already agreed to buy it.

You complain about peoples lives being ruined. Yet it is the UK that wants to slam the door shut and sent people away. Is not going along with that pettiness? I don't think so. That is the EU saying: this is our union, this is what it is based on and we are not about the change that because you say so.

How about before we go around blaming the EU once again, the UK this time puts forward a plan for what it wants. Because until now the only thing we have heard is complaints and wanting special treatment. The UK government needs to make clear what they actually want, and until then the EU is fully within its rights to say: these are the things we have agreed upon and they don't change.

 

[Izuna]

If UK pays it, Europe would be automatically saved, wouldn't it?

 

[Charles Brandon]

You are now filling in the blanks of the Leave vote yourself. We don't know what the people wanted, because the only question was to stay in the EU or not. A totally irresponsible question like that, because like you now say, there are a ton of ways to explain this. So for all the talk about the people having made a decision that should be respected, suddenly it is now fine to just fill in what to do without asking them.

The UK already had control over immigration. There seems to be this thinking that anybody could just move to the UK and claim benefits or something, while reality didn't work that way. It also ignored the amount of people from non-EU countries that the UK had 100% control over but for some reason didn't mind doing anything about.

Why not make a compromise you ask. Because that free movement is one of the most important pillars of the EU. It is one of the foundations of the union. But the UK wants a special position, claim the benefits of that free movement, but doesn't want any of the downsides that can come with it. Yet you ask the EU to give in and have them let their way. Why should the EU accept this?

You want the UK to protect certain sectors, to cap the numbers and put in restrictions. But that is not free movement. What you are asking for is regular immigration and visa-free travel. Which is no problem, since we have that with a ton of countries already.

The 60 billion is not a fine, it is not meant to make the UK suffer. It is simply the bill they already agreed to pay before deciding to leave. So there is zero reason to scrap the bill. It is like you ordering a steak in a restaurant, changing your mind midway while it is being prepared and saying: I'm not paying. It does't work that way, you already agreed to buy it.

You complain about peoples lives being ruined. Yet it is the UK that wants to slam the door shut and sent people away. Is not going along with that pettiness? I don't think so. That is the EU saying: this is our union, this is what it is based on and we are not about the change that because you say so.

I think there are some contradictions here.

You say that the principal of free movement in inviolable but you admit that it is already subject to restrictions.

You say that I am filling in the blanks of the referendum result and I am absolutely doing that because no-one, least of the people who voted for it, knows what that actually meant. Therefore the result should be interpreted in such a way that it meets the concerns of the voters - controls on immigration and sovereignty - without pointlessly wrecking trade. You can have both. You can have both!

The £60b is an opening position. It is not an objective number, it is the product of a method sure but I'm sure you could come up with dozens of different methods of calculating what the UK owes, if anything.

You say people voted to slam the door and send people away. There is no evidence for that. There is no support in the UK for sending EU migrants back at all. There was no public clamour to end immigration full stop. Control was what people wanted, that is not the same thing nor, objectively, is it entirely unreasonable.

How about before we go around blaming the EU once again, the UK this time puts forward a plan for what it wants. Because until now the only thing we have heard is complaints and wanting special treatment. The UK government needs to make clear what they actually want, and until then the EU is fully within its rights to say: these are the things we have agreed upon and they don't change.

This I do agree with.

 

[Xando]

If they pay it we should give that money to greece.


To be honest as reality sets in and is different with what most leave voters wanted i think it's getting more and more likely May is just gonna walk away from the negotiations without any deal

 

[tuxfool]

You say that the principal of free movement in inviolable but you admit that it is already subject to restrictions.

You're free to move where you want, you're not free from the consequences of that. That isn't a contradiction.

here is no support in the UK for sending EU migrants back at all. There was no public clamour to end immigration full stop.

bullshit.

 

[Charles Brandon]

You're free to move where you want, you're not free from the consequences of that. That isn't a contradiction

No. You are free to move wherever you want if you've got a job, if you don't commit crimes and, in 2005, if you dont come from Hungary and want to move to Germany, for example. There are restrictions.

bullshit.

No it isn't. Yes there are racists but most people just wanted control. That was their slogan "control" not "send them back".

 

[Dierce]

The EU should raise the bill to 200 billion euros and then negotiate it down to 100 billion, still coming out ahead.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

No it isn't. Yes there are racists but most people just wanted control. That was their slogan "control" not "send them back".

What does "control" means in this instance?

 

[Charles Brandon]

The EU should raise the bill to 200 billion euros and then negotiate it down to 100 billion, still coming out ahead.

That's what they are doing but they started with 60.

What does "control" means in this instance?

I would interpret control as the ability to put caps on migration, if required, and possibly protect certain labour markets. It does not mean that free movement must be stopped, it means it can be if necessary.

 

[Charles Brandon]

dp

 

[tuxfool]

No it isn't. Yes there are racists but most people just wanted control. That was their slogan "control" not "send them back".

Control is merely dogwhistling.

Control is is just an attempt to shield their xenophobic sentiments in a cloak of respectability.

 

[Charles Brandon]

Control is merely dogwhistling.

That sort of attitude is what lead to this fucking mess in the first place

 

[tuxfool]

That sort of attitude is what lead to this fucking mess in the first place

Calling a spade a spade is what led to what?