Politics

[Spider]

I told my first missus she could improve herself by dropping a few stone and smartening up a bit and she failed to see the love in it...

 

In fact she took me to the cleaners and left me with a teabag, and had some other sap from her work installed in the house before the year was out.

 

 

You got teabagged by your missus?

 

Did she always make you turn the lights off at bedtime?

[Youri McAnespie]

She could've teabagged me to kingdom come if I'd got to nob Linda Fiorentino somewhere further down the line

[Sweep]

No ex would be telling me what to do.

And that's where the parallels with Brexit finish.......

[Youri McAnespie]

As an aside, if I was to teabag someone who was pissed up and passed put (for a photo obvs, not sexual purposes, unless...) I'd be a bit 'Blue Peter' about it, I'd draw an eye on each bollock and place them in the eyesockets, the penis could then be positioned on the forehead to be the dick of a dickhead.

[Gonk]

Yes, but we can only go out on the pull again once the Ex says it's OK for us to do so, and sadly the lads who we want to go out on the town with, are doing all they can to get us back together with the Ex

 

so we have to stay in playing cards with ourselves?

[Traf]

so we have to stay in playing cards with ourselves?

 

Yes, because we hold all the cards

[bolty58]

Righto

 

 

I knew it would eventually sink in - even for you.

[bolty58]

If it needs putting back, I presume you think that we're not "Great" at the minute then........

 

 

Britain will always be great in my eyes but we are not as great as we were, that is for certain.

[bolty58]

You're doing Bolty a disservice there, Frank. He's already stated when the 'Great' is back in Great Britain he'll be burning a trail for 'home' - he's got his eye on a lovely little thatched cottage in Costadelsolshire, reet round'corner from Mounts' traditional coach house abode.

 

Que?

Edited December 12, 2017 by bolty58

[bolty58]

Surely you thought fuck her I will find a new improved version?  Or did you just accept it and not bother getting out there and look for something better?   

 

 

Re-read his post. He already admitted that he is a sap.

[kent_white]

Britain will always be great in my eyes but we are not as great as we were, that is for certain.

Precisely - and we're substantially less influential now than we were 18 months ago.

 

Without an empire our best shot at continuing to punch above our weight was helping to shape the direction of the EU from the inside and acting as a mediator across the Atlantic. Now we've voted ourselves into an increasingly insignificant position.

 

Hopefully I'll be proved wrong about this and we're on the cusp of a glorious new age. Sometimes I allow myself to indulge in that fantasy but then remember that it's not 1922 anymore! :-)

[Guest]

Precisely - and we're substantially less influential now than we were 18 months ago.

 

Without an empire our best shot at continuing to punch above our weight was helping to shape the direction of the EU from the inside and acting as a mediator across the Atlantic. Now we've voted ourselves into an increasingly insignificant position.

 

Hopefully I'll be proved wrong about this and we're on the cusp of a glorious new age. Sometimes I allow myself to indulge in that fantasy but then remember that it's not 1922 anymore! :-)

How is influence measured?

 

A bit subjective, I imagine?

 

I would have thought that we are better regarded across the world as we are throwing off the shackles of undemocratic bureaucrats and coming out to play a full global role.

[Farrelli]

I knew it would eventually sink in - even for you.

I knew irony was too much for your old brain.

[Farrelli]

The FT is running an article today indicating that EU diplomats are irritated by David Davies comments on the trade committments following last week's negotiations.

 

DD is making a right hash of this, you cannot say one thing in Brussels then announce something else in the UK press.

[Mounts Kipper]

The FT is running an article today indicating that EU diplomats are irritated by David Davies comments on the trade committments following last week's negotiations.

 

DD is making a right hash of this, you cannot say one thing in Brussels then announce something else in the UK press.

 

Surely all meetings are minuted re-read and agreed by both parties before anything is announced.

[Farrelli]

Surely all meetings are minuted re-read and agreed by both parties before anything is announced.

I think it is the tone of his announcement and use of the word 'intent' which has annoyed them. Seems petty but DD should be aware of this by now.

[Youri McAnespie]

He's the under't thumb sap in the pub bragging to all and sundry how he's a top shagger and wears the trousers yet when he gets home he's henpecked, bollocked and blue-bollocked with sex starvation...

[Guest]

I think it is the tone of his announcement and use of the word 'intent' which has annoyed them. Seems petty but DD should be aware of this by now.

 

Just the usual EU posturing and bullying, which everyone should be aware of by now

[Farrelli]

Just the usual EU posturing and bullying, which everyone should be aware of by now

Our chief negotiator should not be winding them up over the wording of announcements. It is avoidable.

[Guest]

Our chief negotiator should not be winding them up over the wording of announcements. It is avoidable.

Sure, but that doesn't acknowledge the actuality; we are there to negotiate a fair deal for everyone and they want to smash us.

 

No wonder that they have been referred to to as "the enemy"

[kent_white]

How is influence measured?

 

A bit subjective, I imagine?

 

I would have thought that we are better regarded across the world as we are throwing off the shackles of undemocratic bureaucrats and coming out to play a full global role.

Time will tell I suppose. And yes it's purely subjective at this stage but based on what I see in the news. Like the fact that we've just lost a British judge sitting on the International Court of Justice for the first time in nearly a hundred years. And the fact that we were able to influence EU direction and now we can't - more likely we will have to acquiesce to their terms if we wish to continue trading with them.

 

I dearly hope I'm wrong and we are entering a new golden age - but unless there's some cataclysmic change in geopolitics that nobody could have predicted in the near future then I'm at a loss as to how we've not just put ourselves right down the global pecking order.

 

I think becoming increasingly isolated to the point that the union breaks up is more likely over the next 20-30 years than us rising like a phoenix from the flames. But maybe I just don't have the vision?

[jimmyjoojar]

Anyone else think DD comes across like a massive bell?

 

I wouldn't let him negotiate our office stationary order.

[mickbrown]

Anyone else think DD comes across like a massive bell?

 

I wouldn't let him negotiate our office stationary order.

 

*Raises hand.

 

Should have Boris doing it...............................

[Zico]

has this been posted yet?

 

After Brexit

Alternate forms of Brexit and their implications for the United Kingdom, the European Union and the United States

 

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2200.html

 

Key Findings

 

• The economic analysis shows that the UK will be economically worse-off outside of the EU under most plausible scenarios. The key question for the UK is how much worse-off it will be post-Brexit.
• The option of leaving the EU with no deal and entering World Trade Organization (WTO) rules would lead to the greatest economic losses for the UK. This would reduce future GDP by around five per cent over ten years, which is a loss of $140 billion.
• Under WTO rules, the EU would also lose out economically, but nowhere near the same proportion as the UK — about 0.7 per cent of its overall GDP, which is $97 billion.
• Of all the scenarios analysed, the one that would have the most benefit would be a trilateral UK-EU-U.S. agreement, essentially a TTIP-like free-trade agreement. However, this is seen as very unlikely in the current political environment.
• The U.S. will miss the influence and global perspective that the UK brings to the EU decision-making process, particularly around foreign policy, security and defence.
• It will be important for the UK to move into a 'positive-sum game' in Brexit negotiations to ensure the best possible deal for all parties. Although the EU is likely to cooperate with the UK, it may see greater benefit in adopting a 'negative sum game'.
• Overall, it is in the best interests of the UK, and to a lesser extent the EU, to work together to achieve some sort of trade deal post-Brexit.

[Salford Trotter]

<p>

 

has this been posted yet?

 

After Brexit

Alternate forms of Brexit and their implications for the United Kingdom, the European Union and the United States

 

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2200.html

 

Key Findings

 

• The economic analysis shows that the UK will be economically worse-off outside of the EU under most plausible scenarios. The key question for the UK is how much worse-off it will be post-Brexit.
• The option of leaving the EU with no deal and entering World Trade Organization (WTO) rules would lead to the greatest economic losses for the UK. This would reduce future GDP by around five per cent over ten years, which is a loss of $140 billion.
• Under WTO rules, the EU would also lose out economically, but nowhere near the same proportion as the UK — about 0.7 per cent of its overall GDP, which is $97 billion.
• Of all the scenarios analysed, the one that would have the most benefit would be a trilateral UK-EU-U.S. agreement, essentially a TTIP-like free-trade agreement. However, this is seen as very unlikely in the current political environment.
• The U.S. will miss the influence and global perspective that the UK brings to the EU decision-making process, particularly around foreign policy, security and defence.
• It will be important for the UK to move into a 'positive-sum game' in Brexit negotiations to ensure the best possible deal for all parties. Although the EU is likely to cooperate with the UK, it may see greater benefit in adopting a 'negative sum game'.
• Overall, it is in the best interests of the UK, and to a lesser extent the EU, to work together to achieve some sort of trade deal post-Brexit.

Has Mounts been consulted on this as everything that has happened so far has been as he predicted and this doesn't feel part of his master plan? Mounts will be hopping mad...not good