-
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
Leave or Remain?
- Thread starter andy w
- Start date
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
The "Chequers Deal" doesn't actually exist as a deal, it is a proposal by (a part of) one side. How likely it is to become a real deal, and in what form it would end up, is a matter of conjecture at this stage.
After more than two years of the top brains in the Leave camp working on this, we seem to be in a poor position.
But, "we just want out, whatever the cost", so, it doesn't really matter.
After more than two years of the top brains in the Leave camp working on this, we seem to be in a poor position.
But, "we just want out, whatever the cost", so, it doesn't really matter.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
The checkers deal isn't a deal, it's a plan for a deal, an as far as I'm aware the EU is yet to accept it? It's the whole nonsense about the phrase though, it implies that we would strike a deal worse than WTO. As WTO is the no deal scenario any deal is bound to be better as it is against WTO that we will measure it. I think our government are quite frankly crap but even I don't think they'd strike a deal worse than WTO?
proactive
Enjoying a drop of red.
Apart from the fact there's no such thing as a Chequers deal, only a proposal as part of a belated negotiation process, then no deal would be worse, yes.
No deal would create all sorts of short to medium term issues that would impact on our trading and the consequential damage that would do to the economy. Unless people like the idea of another recession and yet more austerity.
It would also almost certainly mean a closed border in Ireland. Doesn't take much imagination to see where that would lead to in Northern Ireland with the loony tunes fanatics they have on the outer edges of both sides of the argument over there.
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
'No Deal' would be a total fiasco. Some people would find "benefits" from it*, but the general population would suffer for some time to come. We would find out just how much of a friend the USA really is.
The putative Chequers Deal is essentially a 'Norwegian' solution - being subject to most EU regulation, but them not having to listen to all the whingeing about it.
* Greater excuse for 'selling' off more of the family silver to themselves and their friends at knock-down prices, so that we can buy the services back at inflated prices.
The putative Chequers Deal is essentially a 'Norwegian' solution - being subject to most EU regulation, but them not having to listen to all the whingeing about it.
* Greater excuse for 'selling' off more of the family silver to themselves and their friends at knock-down prices, so that we can buy the services back at inflated prices.
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
At the risk of repeating what has already been said, the 'Chequers Deal' is not a 'deal' but an opening gambit.
Let's say i owned a Gym that offered a special membership deal to married couples that was maybe a bit more expensive than standard membership, but offered some benefits that standard members were not party to.
Like, i don't know, not having to use 'Withnail's Gym' credits to buy a coffee, your own cash could be used; perhaps you could pass freely into the Sauna without any checks on your Membership status, whereas other members had to show their Membership cards which inevitably lead to a bit of a line.
Then comes marriage break down - yes, i know, boo-feckin-hoo, you never thought it would happen to you. Nobody does.
So the problem now is, both of you want the Gym Membership, but neither of you wants to a) pay the subscription, or b) be the signatory to the contract.
Two years later, after much bile and discord, you come to an agreement between yourselves that one of you will pay half the fee - this on the agreement that one can use the Gym on Monday/Wednesday/Friday, and the other Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday - and that is finally settled.
Please excuse 'Withnail's Gym' for thinking WTaF? to these proposals.
Now for starters i want to know where the rest of my money is. Secondly, i want to know why you think you can now keep spending your own money when everybody else has to use 'Withnail's Gym' credits.
And there's a line for the Sauna - please get to the back of it.
Let's say i owned a Gym that offered a special membership deal to married couples that was maybe a bit more expensive than standard membership, but offered some benefits that standard members were not party to.
Like, i don't know, not having to use 'Withnail's Gym' credits to buy a coffee, your own cash could be used; perhaps you could pass freely into the Sauna without any checks on your Membership status, whereas other members had to show their Membership cards which inevitably lead to a bit of a line.
Then comes marriage break down - yes, i know, boo-feckin-hoo, you never thought it would happen to you. Nobody does.
So the problem now is, both of you want the Gym Membership, but neither of you wants to a) pay the subscription, or b) be the signatory to the contract.
Two years later, after much bile and discord, you come to an agreement between yourselves that one of you will pay half the fee - this on the agreement that one can use the Gym on Monday/Wednesday/Friday, and the other Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday - and that is finally settled.
Please excuse 'Withnail's Gym' for thinking WTaF? to these proposals.
Now for starters i want to know where the rest of my money is. Secondly, i want to know why you think you can now keep spending your own money when everybody else has to use 'Withnail's Gym' credits.
And there's a line for the Sauna - please get to the back of it.
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
It was interesting to observe the erstwhile 'Minister for Brexit', safely ensconced now on his Back Seat, bumbling and bluffing about Operation Stack.
They deal with it don't they David?
Not. A. Problem.
Thick. As. Mince.
They deal with it don't they David?
Not. A. Problem.
Thick. As. Mince.
Tilly
Well-Known Forumite
Exchange and Mart
H and E
Spangles
Johnnies
Dutch Caps
Crumpet
Rubber Flange
Dr Whites
Dr No
Doctor Doctor
Knock Kock
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
Why wait for 1984? You can panic now, and avoid the rush...
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
There was a LibDem presence en ville today in BTTF Sq - was in a bit of a rush but they seemed to be trying to gauge whether Stafford had changed its collective mind - totting up the potential swing away from this madness.
I was so bold as to say i voted 'Remain' and would so do very much so again. If not more so.
I was then asked if i would like to join the Liberal Democrats.
I said not really, no.
Does anyone know what the eventual outcome of this piss poor Poll was?
I was so bold as to say i voted 'Remain' and would so do very much so again. If not more so.
I was then asked if i would like to join the Liberal Democrats.
I said not really, no.
Does anyone know what the eventual outcome of this piss poor Poll was?
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
They have a long way to come back from their Quisling days...
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
It is one of the sorrier stories of the 'teens.
The first real shot at coalition Government - scuppered by an abandonment of a 'red line' and a vilified apology; holed below the water line by a Fourth Estate not worthy of the elevation; wreck scattered on the sea floor by a misguided sense of loyalty; reputation not possible to be reassembled from the wide dispersal of the wreckage.
We are now where we are.
She sells sea shells on the sea shore.
And no one to save us.
The first real shot at coalition Government - scuppered by an abandonment of a 'red line' and a vilified apology; holed below the water line by a Fourth Estate not worthy of the elevation; wreck scattered on the sea floor by a misguided sense of loyalty; reputation not possible to be reassembled from the wide dispersal of the wreckage.
We are now where we are.
She sells sea shells on the sea shore.
And no one to save us.
