Brexit, what genuine effects have people experienced?

winjim

✊🏻✊🏾 🌈 😷
If something is coming from California, it isn't coming from the EU. Simple
The UK has different importing and VAT rules and procedures now than it did as a member of the EU.

How are you getting on with that watch? I did tag you earlier but you haven't replied yet. You seemed to think it was an easy job so I expect you got it sorted ages ago and have forgotten all about it by now.
 

Pale Rider

Legendary Member
How are you getting on with that watch? I did tag you earlier but you haven't replied yet. You seemed to think it was an easy job so I expect you got it sorted ages ago and have forgotten all about it by now.
Let's all club together and buy @Bollo a Casio.

It's immediately available, will last longer, keep better time, have more features, be far more robust, and be cheaper to run.

And he will be able to wear it in Knightsbridge with no fear of it being ripped from his wrist.
 

Craig the cyclist

Well-Known Member
The UK has different importing and VAT rules and procedures now than it did as a member of the EU.

How are you getting on with that watch? I did tag you earlier but you haven't replied yet. You seemed to think it was an easy job so I expect you got it sorted ages ago and have forgotten all about it by now.
There are no changes to importing from California. So it wasn't Brexit related, but got put down as such.

Oh, the watch, I don't know, I couldn't give a shit about his watch. It was just a silly example he found to demonstrate his point. He could order one through Harrods quite simply.
 
Why not? It's not a done deal by any means, the idea that Johnson has 'got brexit done' is nonsense. There will be years of horsetrading to come, the deal allows for that, albeit going the wrong way, in that divergence in standards will lead effectively to cancellation of parts of the deal. Nothing is settled forever, if the will is there, the deal can be renegotiated. It's a lose/lose deal, so why wouldn't it be changed?
I think that, politically, the whole deal will not (not the same as can not) be renegotiated, but that elements of it will be considered separately once the fuller impact on both sides is clearer.

Neither party will want to be seen as climbing down. They are, primarily, politicians with egos.
 

winjim

✊🏻✊🏾 🌈 😷
Let's all club together and buy @Bollo a Casio.

It's immediately available, will last longer, keep better time, have more features, be far more robust, and be cheaper to run.

And he will be able to wear it in Knightsbridge with no fear of it being ripped from his wrist.
OK but I think he wanted a red one.

1614084902111.png
 

GetFatty

Senior Member
There are no changes to importing from California. So it wasn't Brexit related, but got put down as such.

Oh, the watch, I don't know, I couldn't give a shit about his watch. It was just a silly example he found to demonstrate his point. He could order one through Harrods quite simply.
So what were our rules for importing from California as part of the EU and how have they not changed now? I would expect that at the very best we are on the oh so popular WTO rules
 

winjim

✊🏻✊🏾 🌈 😷
So what were our rules for importing from California as part of the EU and how have they not changed now? I would expect that at the very best we are on the oh so popular WTO rules
I think there have been some changes to the way we collect VAT. I don't think it's anything major but it's not true to say that nothing has changed. But @monkers is right, Craig's clearly just out for an argument, as evidenced by the watch thing.
 

monkers

I'm still watching you ...
Well, don't forgive me then. Just answer the question.

You have put up several long posts explaining the unlawful nature of the referendum, Brexit and put up arguments using all manner of treaties and bills and what have you. Which is great and all very illuminating and really shows you spend a lot of time reading around the subject. Sadly it doesn't mean a thing. If it did then at least one of the clever lawyers, barristers, politicians, activists or EU member states would have spotted it.

But anyway, you can simply avoid having to answer any of that by saying I am being snarky and you don't want to answer.
I have explained to you no less than three times now - it's a matter for the sovereign people of the Republic of Ireland through their constitutional arrangements, not Gina Miller, not UK lawyers, not me.

Leo Varadker's government seemed to have chosen not to pursue a claim (AFAIK).

You've managed to miss the crux of my post - the hypocrisy of a good many brexiters.

The UK EU referendum failed to respect the rights of the people of Northern Ireland to self-determination of their future - this was the very essence of the Belfast Agreement. It was an 'external impediment' and therefore a breach of the treaty.

The UK EU referendum was an 'external impediment' on the Republic of Ireland. The RofI had held a referendum and amended the constitution in order to facilitate the signing of the Belfast Agreement.

The UK EU referendum broke the pledge to remain in the EU until the political and territorial future of Northern Ireland was determined by referendum at a time of their own choosing. This was an 'external impediment on their rights'.

There is no reason for you to question me further, and no reason for me to respond.
 
Last edited:

Bollo

Failed Tech Bro
Location
Winch
There are no changes to importing from California. So it wasn't Brexit related, but got put down as such.

Oh, the watch, I don't know, I couldn't give a **** about his watch. It was just a silly example he found to demonstrate his point. He could order one through Harrods quite simply.
Before your post gets deleted - I gave a not-entirely-the-end-of-the-world example of a direct negative effect.

You cockily claimed you could solve my problem and invited me to give details. I didn't ask you to do that.

So I did give details.

You stated there wasn't a problem, but now you're saying that there is a problem but you don't care. At least you're telling the truth now. Keep pretending that facts are fiction and fiction facts. You're not very good at this and you've been found out.
 

Craig the cyclist

Well-Known Member
I have explained to you no less than three times now - it's a matter for the sovereign people of the Republic of Ireland through their constitutional arrangements, not Gina Miller, not UK lawyers, not me.

Leo Varadker's government seemed to have chosen not to pursue a claim (AFAIK).

You've managed to miss the crux of my post - the hypocrisy of a good many brexiters.

The UK EU referendum failed to respect the rights of the people of Northern Ireland to self-determination of their future - this was the very essence of the Belfast Agreement. It was an 'external impediment' and therefore a breach of the treaty.

The UK EU referendum was an 'external impediment' on the Republic of Ireland. The RofI had held a referendum and amended the constitution in order to facilitate the signing of the Belfast Agreement.

The UK EU referendum broke the pledge to remain in the EU until the political and territorial future of Northern Ireland was determined by referendum at a time of their own choosing. This was an 'external impediment on their rights'.

There is no reason for you to question me further, and no reason for me to respond.
Yes, you keep telling me it isn't for individuals but governments, I get that.

Why do you think the government in the republic haven't gone down your well defined and quite straightforward path of 'external impediment'? Is it because they haven't noticed what you have, or some other reason?
 
Top Bottom