The Observer's view...

[OhSusana]

Brilliant; cuts through the issues like a knife through butter. So true, but also so sad. Britain is destroying itself.
The final few words are telling -
" she remains in denial. She has learned nothing – and has absolutely nothing new to offer. Mrs May is in a very deep hole, but she will not stop digging."

[Dominic]

The Observer has always been very pro Remain though, like the Guardian.

[Jim B]

I did read the article in its entirety and it confirmed everything I've posted about Salzburg over the last few days. Well if Mrs May is in denial she's in very good company of the many leavers who post on here.

Jim

[Jimgym]

The Guardian's sister Sunday paper The Observer said voters should not turn their backs on Europe, urging a Remain vote like its sibling. It said: "For an international, liberal and open Britain, we need to be part of the EU".
So not impartial at all.

[Dominic]

Actually Dominic I think the paper may be owned by the Guardian. But that doesn't detract from it's views, which are pretty much what has been said on here by JimB and others.

It doesn't detract from its views at all. I was referring to your comment about it not being pro or anti Brexit.

[OhSusana]

Apparently it's the oldest Sunday paper in the world!
I can't find much out about its new editor. Simply no bio anywhere. Other than he did a "politics degree". He's not really a journalist.

[Jim B]

I read a very similar article on the BBC WeB Site which said more or less the same as the Guardian article. The Reporter had even ran the mentioned algorithms in the report and said none of them add up to the figures mentioned.

Looks like more smoke and mirrors though no doubt will fool those who want to be fooled.
Jim

[Jim B]

Below is a post that explains what the UKs position will be under WTO rules and consequences. I've read several similar reports giving exactly the same scenario after a no deal Brexit.

Jim


if its No deal its WTO and we will be the only country bar one that does not have bilateral trade agreements in place on such trade-facilitating measures as customs co-operation and data exchange standards, which leaves the UK looking pretty vulnerable and seriously on the back foot right from the very start for any JRM fantasies of fantastic future trade deals plus any proposed tariffs MUST of course be agreed upon by all WTO 164 member countries first anyway and some are already lining up to submit possible objections. As for the new trade deals, well Canada is reckoned to probably be the easiest and this will take about two years, something with the EU 8-10 and then we have another 60 (SIXTY!) or so to do all around the world. In the meantime everything we export around the world will have the highest tariffs it is possible to apply we have no say on it, because perversely the UK is under a Most Favoured Nation rule, this is a WTO rule that says that you cannot discriminate in your tariff arrangements outside of a free trade agreement (we don't have any zilch). If you want to have tariffs of ten per cent for oranges from Brazil, say, then you have to have them at the same level for the United States. Essentially, it bans favouritism so those trading dreams can go in the bin where they belong. WTO boss, Roberto Azevedo, has already said “The consumer in the UK will have to pay those duties (tariffs), the UK is not in a position to decide ‘I’m not charging duties here’. That is impossible that is illegal” And as someone in the EU pointed out we are quite literally 'giving up a three-course meal for the promise of a packet of crisps' because as Bryce Baschuk, a Bloomberg Correspondent writing specifically about the WTO has commented "There are no sharks in Lake Geneva, but the WTO is full of them. They smell blood in the water and they're going to demand their pound of flesh.” Welcome to your new 164 WTO dictators Brexiters well done!

[holitec]

Yeah, WTO is much more preferable than having the ability to trade with 27 member European countries right on the UK's own doorstep, with complete freedom of movement, no paperwork, no Customs, no Import Duty, No VAT...yeah, much more preferable.

HIC, you know that is not true - try shipping a container to Cyprus, you get Customs fees, Clearing agent fees (yes it needs clearing), loads of paperwork to submit. Try shipping a vehicle to Cyprus, if it is new (less than 5000kms or 6 months old), you have to pay VAT, even if you bring it in VAT paid and can prove it. Oh, and get stung "Excise duty" as well (just another name for import duty) - yes I did complain to the EU, who informed me that it is illegal to charge duty, but there was nothing they could do about it now, but it will be addressed soon. Actually, I find it almost as easy to import from outside the EU to Cyprus under WTO (which I do quite a bit). Cyprus may be a special case though, other countries may have simpler rules. Also, if the "new" goods are in a container for a business you have to pay VAT on import and produce the invoices - hence why I always bring them in a personal possessions as I pay VAT on them as the delivery address is to the UK, otherwise you pay VAT twice. Small shipments are easier, but large shipments are a different ball game.


Digby

[Jim B]

Not much of a response from the Leavers; must all be digging for victory.
Jim

[tyelaw47]

Well Jim B I don't try to discuss things that I have no knowledge whatsoever about as in import and export etc. It is good to see a balanced opinion from Holitec though so is he right or is HIC right? Both of them apparently have some experience in this field but surely they can't both be right?

[Jimgward]

Finland charges large fees on new cars - unless they are electric or hybrid. Other countries do the same.

However, freedom to move goods is ‘generally’ extremely easy in the EU - I bring in goods from Finland and pay no VAT on them. I also charge services fees with no VAT.
My better half invoices companies all across the EU with almost zero problems. She invoices companies in Israel and the USA and HMRC, the banks and all sorts are causing problems making it so difficult. She now gets almost a letter a week from HMRC and has to fill in all sorts of things, from money laundering declarations on.....

[Jim B]

Holitec
Port fees and import duty are two different things. The clearance is done by the Port Authority and does involve loads of paperwork but that's due to the bureaucracy of the Port, nothing to do with import duty or VAT.

When I moved to Cyprus in 2003 I shipped a car at the same time. When I went to customs for a clearance certificate they wanted £14,500 duty on a car worth about 20k. Just over a year ago I brought a car in from the UK and it cost about 2K which included shipping, port fees, registration and number plates. Yes it was over six months old and so was the first car. Cyprus is gradually falling into line in relation to car imports.
I've also sent lots of stuff over with Lee's Containers and never paid any VAT or import on any of it and that's all brand new stuff. I would guess if you're buying stuff VATfree you have to pay the VAT somewhere.

Jim

[Jimgym]

Not much of a response from the Leavers; must all be digging for victory.
Jim

Probably because we are utterly bored to death of the constant posting of negative articles from Pro Remain publications such as the Guardian and Observer. I could of course be wrong on that point but very much doubt it.

[Jim B]

My post wasn't from the Observer or the Guardian.

If you block all the posts from the usual suspects like HIC, Jim Ward, OS, WHL, LOFOS 5, Uncle D Dominic and me then you won't subject yourself to all our boring and negative posts; just an idea

Jim

[Jimgym]

My post wasn't from the Observer or the Guardian.

If you block all the posts from the usual suspects like HIC, Jim Ward, OS, WHL, LOFOS 5, Uncle D Dominic and me then you won't subject yourself to all our boring and negative posts; just an idea

Jim

I don't see constant negative posts from Dominic, WHL, LOFOS 5, OS, Uncle D or Jim Ward so I have no need to block them.

Sometimes less really is more. Just a thought.....

[Jim B]

Allan
You see, it's articles like the one below in the Independent that the Brexit Press don't print because they don't want to publish anything negative. There is only a very limited press that is not under the control of the three media barons who are pushing for Brexit.

Jim


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... ssion=true

[Jimgym]

Probably because we are utterly bored to death of the constant posting of negative articles from Pro Remain publications such as the Guardian and Observer.

For someone who claims to be bored with Brexit you seem transfixed by these threads...and regularly post on them

Lloyd, you constantly snipe at those who support Brexit when they don't post, then when they do, you snipe again. I've absolutely no idea why you think I am "transfixed" as I've posted a very few times lately on Brexit threads, usually in response to your comment about me and others NOT posting to defend the latest Brexit hysteria. Jim B said, and I quote "Not much of a response from the Leavers; must all be digging for victory", hence my response. I do hope that has cleared things up for you, anything else you need to know, please ask me rather than making things up.

[Jimgym]

Allan
You see, it's articles like the one below in the Independent that the Brexit Press don't print because they don't want to publish anything negative. There is only a very limited press that is not under the control of the three media barons who are pushing for Brexit.

Jim


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... ssion=true

A limited press?? Such as The Observer, The Guardian, The Times, Mail on Sunday, F.T. Daily Mirror who all came down on the Remain side.

[Jim B]

I think the Daily Mail outsells the lot of them put together
and maybe I should have said the popular ( or gutter depending on your viewpoint) press owned by the media barons.