Consequences Of Brexit [Part 9] Read First Post Before Posting

[Mister M]

28 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Only an anti British person would ask that question.  You do not deserve the courtesy of an answer. 

It was a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

[Litotes]

50 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Only an anti British person would ask that question.  You do not deserve the courtesy of an answer. 

I disagree - I think you are being racist suggesting someone is anti-British.

Do you have an answer?

[andyofborg]

1 hour ago, Mister Gee said:

You’ve only been on here since Sunday.

he's regenerated

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

What worries me is Boris gave MPs less than a few hours to peruse a 2,000 page document before the all-important vote.

How on earth were they expected to give informed consent under those circumstances?

God knows what sneaky legislation was slipped in there that we won't find out about until it smacks us in the face. 

That's their job Anna.  It's what they get paid to do and it's why they have teams and teams of advisors and assistants working for them.

 

Contents of the wording of the deal would have been well established in the lead up to it. You don't seriously think that Boris rocked up a couple of hours before desperately trying to run copies on the photocopier.  That's not how it works.

 

The discussions and reams of paperwork have been going on for years.  Lawyers up and down the country have been scrutinising, researching and advising their clients on the various different scenarios for months.

 

Fact is thst there are thousands of statutes, clauses,  subclauses, rules which affect our lives everyday which the man on the street generally don't care a jot about and certainly won't put the effort in to actually read them.   

 

Brexit won't be any different.   

 

Perhaps those moaning about lack of time should have spent more effort in supporting the negotiations and engaging in the transition rather than protesting,  blocking, disrupting and litigating  every 5 seconds to seek to desperately overturn the referendum result.  

Edited January 1, 2021 by ECCOnoob

[tinfoilhat]

3 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

That's their job Anna.  It's what they get paid to do and it's why they have teams and teams of advisors and assistants working for them.

 

Contents of the wording of the deal would have been well established in the lead up to it. You don't seriously think that Boris rocked up a couple of hours before desperately trying to run copies on the photocopier.  That's not how it works.

 

The discussions and reams of paperwork have been going on for years.  Lawyers up and down the country have been scrutinising, researching and advising their clients on the various different scenarios for months.

 

Fact is thst there are thousands of statutes, clauses,  subclauses, rules which affect our lives everyday which the man on the street generally don't care a jot about and certainly won't put the effort in to actually read them.   

 

Brexit won't be any different.   

Ah, so all the stuff about netscape was put in to test everyone was reading it properly.

[ECCOnoob]

3 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Ah, so all the stuff about netscape was put in to test everyone was reading it properly.

For all I know it might have a legitimate purpose  being in there. It might be incorporated text from an already pre standing and established historical agreement. I don't know I wasn't part of the negotiations nor am I a government lawyer.

 

Just because a few pot stirring newspapers and some tech nerds start wetting themselves with excitement because they spot reference to outdated software doesn't mean it's necessarily incorrect. Even if it was an outdated reference it was used in a general narrative context as one of several examples of internet browser and email client software which did not in any way impact the primary subject of the rest of the paragraph.

 

Good grief there is legislation still being used to this very day which goes back 30, 50, 70+ years . It's filled with their outdated references, names and terminology.  Doesn't mean it's not valid legislation or statue.  

 

Anyway doesn't this Netscape reference just prove my point that clearly it is being read in detail otherwise it would have never been spotted and hyped up all over the papers.

[tinfoilhat]

Just now, ECCOnoob said:

For all I know it might have a legitimate purpose  being in there. It might be incorporated text from an already pre standing and established historical agreement. I don't know I wasn't part of the negotiations nor am I a government lawyer.

 

Just because a few pot stirring newspapers and some tech nerds start wetting themselves with excitement because they spot reference to outdated software doesn't mean it's necessarily incorrect. Even if it was an outdated reference it was used in a general narrative context as one of several examples of internet browser and email client software which did not in any way impact the primary subject of the rest of the paragraph.

 

Good grief there is legislation still being used to this very day which goes back 30, 50, 70+ years . It's filled with their outdated references, names and terminology.  Doesn't mean it's not valid legislation or statue.  

 

Anyway doesn't this Netscape reference just prove my point that clearly it is being read in detail otherwise it would have never been spotted and hyped up all over the papers.

But this is new legislation, it should be accurate. I've read the context and it's a copy and paste job, an admin error  nothing to worry about in the bigger scheme of things. But it goes to show it's a rush job, that's had bugger all scrutiny, least not from the cabinet. 

 

The GFA is about 16 pages and Rabb couldn't manage that. Do you think hes read 2000 pages?

[Frans2755]

It is a nice bright day today so I decided to go and post my parcel for a friend of mine in the UK.

At the post office the lovely lady told me I had to fill in a customs form, the same procedure if you send a parcel to the USA.

Ok, no sweat give me a form please.  She said I am not sure which form you need can you come back next week.

Looks like i had no choice and came home with the parcel. For me this is not a problem, it is not my bread and butter.

But if you have an online business I can immagine it could kill of your business.

[Pettytom]

18 hours ago, West 77 said:

Only an anti British person would ask that question.  You do not deserve the courtesy of an answer. 

If you don’t know, just say so.

 

Theres no shame in not knowing.

 

Chucking insults around is shameful though.

[RollingJ]

32 minutes ago, Frans2755 said:

It is a nice bright day today so I decided to go and post my parcel for a friend of mine in the UK.

At the post office the lovely lady told me I had to fill in a customs form, the same procedure if you send a parcel to the USA.

Ok, no sweat give me a form please.  She said I am not sure which form you need can you come back next week.

Looks like i had no choice and came home with the parcel. For me this is not a problem, it is not my bread and butter.

But if you have an online business I can immagine it could kill of your business.

@Frans2755 - you are not in the UK then?