Nigel farrage – this pains me more than i can possible explain but….. – page 2 gas law questions and answers


For those wondering I think Article 24 is referring to a WTO article whereby if a nation leaves an organisation like the EU they can have a reasonable period on the same trade arrangements after leaving. In this case it would be ideal and if it’s the same thing as was considered by the civil service a couple of years back then the WTO rules define an unreasonable period as being longer than 10 years. I think this option has been held in reserve by the government but there are probably some arguments against it.

Farage is bang on. The day after Brexit, in the midst of gloating, he asked for a sensible, mature negotiation. This hasn’t happened and the EU is trying to break Britain (Junker’s words). Their attitude isn’t trying to be constructive, it’s trying to save face and now we are left with both sides with their back up against the wall. The UK is up against a wall of May’s creation with her stupid deal that only a lunatic or someone who is trying to prevent the destruction of their country through surrender would accept. The EU is up against a wall of their own egos and image. They can not show that a country can leave and sgas belfast prosper.

What the EU really, seriously needs to do is look at the rumblings in many of the member states. Even those like Poland and Romania which are recipients of EU money. Poland has lost its youth to the rest of the EU through the free movement of people. Romania is a country which is still very religious and has its own identity and doesn’t want to accept immigrants as per EU policy. Even founder states like Germany are struggling to quell the anti-EU sentiment within. The problem of course is that the anti-EU march here started just over 25 years ago in a very similar way and our established anti-EU lobby are going to these countries and telling them how to do it better. I give the EU maybe just over ten years.

Becuase my brain electricity number won’t let me sleep, is on about solving bin-packing in polynomial or even quasi-linear time and whether both would be NP complete (as bin packing is) and the impact that would have on modern cryptography. If anyone has ANY idea what the hell any of the above means, please let me know, because I really, really don’t but my brain apparently does. I do hearts for a living. This stuff is confusing me.

As for the original video, well yes, the EU SHOULD be as intransient as they can be. EU is a club, UK helped write the rules of the club and knew what leaving would entail. Why should the EU bend over to help us out exactly? By definition we can’t have better contractual terms outside of the EU than we do as part of it. If that were to be the case EVERY country would vote to leave and the EU is dead.

Let’s imagine instead of UK it was Poland wanted to leave. Would we be offering them concessions? No. We’d be in a position of power, we’d have the leverage so we’d want to get as much out the deal as possible. Now that might be a good deal for both sides, but it can’t be a deal that gives Poland all the benefits of membership (single market/customs union) without actually being a member and paying the price (contributing money/free movement of people etc), that’d be unfair to all the rest of the EU countries and again, they would all want to leave the EU and get the same deal, killing off the EU. So the 4 freedoms have to remain indivisible. If the EU don’t keep the 4 freedoms together the whole thing falls apart, EU is dead.

As I said, I’m firmly remain. I’ve no wish for gas finder map Scotland to cease existing and suddenly I become an EU citizen, I want to be governed by people that live where I live and know the things that affect me because they affect them too. I imagine the cultural difference between Glasgow and Milan is big enough that the Italians wouldn’t want to be governed by us either!! But there are things that affect all of us, we all live under one sky. So having an agreement between every country on something like climate change or that we should all be able to work and be happy and raise a family without tyranny, and having an organisation to rule over that and hold everyone accountable is good with me.

My problem is I could support leaving if at the time of the result of the referendum being known someone with brain cell one had said ok it’s taken us 40 years to get to this point, it’s going to take us 5-10 years to get out. We need to look grade 6 electricity quiz at every single law, european and british, every single rule we have and decide on a way forward on each one. And then we’ll call article 50 and that’ll be over in about 5 minutes because we’ll know exactl what’s what. It’s going to take some time but we’ll get there, carry on as normal just now and we’ll update you as we go along.

The only sensible solution that doesn’t rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish everyone is to extend article 50 for a few years until we can get it right then leave/Article 24 of WTO so we’ve got more time to work it out. But the hardcore brexiteers cry muh will of the people at that and refuse. So it’s no deal, recession, companies leaving the UK etc. We’re in for a hard few years.

No, extending article 50 is not the only sensible solution and there are many reasons why we should absolutely not do this. Just a couple – the EU have already withdrawn a lot of investment in the UK (fair enough, we’re leaving, I don’t see a problem) but that means we’ll be paying in the same with less back over the period of the extension and our overall exit bill will increase substantially. Businesses already do not know what is happening and this is causing a lot of issues. Yes a no-deal might be good for some and bad for others but at least it means those for whom it is bad are on a path and can manage that. It’s quite expensive having to prepare a business for multiple different outcomes and then maintain and adapt that prep constantly. It inhibits investment from both businesses and private electricity rate per kwh philippines individuals (I know my money has gone where it is safest and not where it works best) because of the uncertainty. Extension of article 50 almost certainly stalls the economy which puts us into a relative recession with the rest of the world. Sorry but this will probably hurt but it must be done.

We really, really need to get on with it and any idea that the EU is going to renegotiate to more favourable terms if we extend article 50 or not has been utterly shot down. They will not renegotiate, they are acting like egotistical prats, and your account of the EU saying no customs union for no free movement is plain wrong. The deal commits us to the customs union! Just with no say in the regulation of said union.

It’s a way out of deadlock IF both sides want it, but if one side doesn’t …. well, that tells us exactly what non-binding political promises in the gas 0095 download second half of the exit deal are worth, because it indicates ill-will, not either goodwill, or respect for the decision of the people of this country, but instead, an overt ill-will.Both sides do want it otherwise they wouldn’t have spent the last two year negotiating a way out of it. They’ve (the EU) have also show complete respect for the ‘will of the people’ ( IMO) and have been very accommodating when it came to UK demands, as shown by our opt-out, Cameron’s negotiations, and the WA. The intransigence of the EU narrative pushed by some hard-line Eurosceptics politicians seems odd to me as there are so many examples of the EU changing things to help out with UK domestic political problems.

EDIT: Speaking of the WA i don’t understand why people hate it so much, i mean i understand why it’s not what everyone wanted and that there’s plenty not to like about it but IDK what else were people expecting. Putting what electricity symbols ks3 was said in the lead up to the referendum as i think we can all agree politicians lie and we can all cite examples of where we were told X, Y, or Z, the fact is we signed a blank cheque when the country decided to leave, the whitepaper on leaving the EU setting out what we sought to achieve from leaving was publish over six months after the referendum and as we’ve seen parliament can’t even decide what leaving actually means some two and a bit years later.

As for what would happen if Poland left, I would like to think our response would be mature enough to say, okay, it’s a shame, I’d rather they didn’tbut the future of Poland is a decision for the Polish people and, having decided to leave, we owe no duty to bend over backwards to help, but there’s no reason to wish them ill either.Personally that’s how I see the EU treating the UK at the moment. I don’t believe they’re trying to punish the UK for electricity grid map uk leaving but they have to protect themselves. If Scotland were to leave the UK for example Westminister wouldn’t be freely giving us everything we wanted like all of the north sea oil, because Scotland is much smaller than the rest of the UK and has less leverage/weaker bargaining position. So while both sides would try to get as good a deal as possible for everyone, because as you’ve said we need to work together after the dust settles, we would have to accept concessions because the split could hurt us worse than the rest of the UK. I wouldn’t see that as the rUK trying to ruin us or being high handed, that’s how negotiations are done. Ideally both sides win but if that can’t happen then I have to work as hard as I can to make sure I come out ahead, and if that means the other side loses then that’s a shame but then’s the breaks.