"Britain can not trade with the Single Market if she leaves the EU" so say Juncker and Tusk

Oh really - explain this then:

​

How is it that Japan, China and the United States are able to trade in the Single Market to the tune of about $2.7 Trillion a year, yet none of them pay an annual fee for the privilege, nor must they - nor do they - accept migrant workers from EU countries and none of these countries have had to give-up their national sovereignty in order to trade with the EU? How does that work?

And yet Britain is repeatedly told that it can not trade with the Single Market unless it accepts all four "freedoms".

Stupid.

"Trade with" is not the same as "be a member of, and trade in".

More silly lies to deceive the economic illiterates.

The real tragedy here is that foolish old men like you are wrecking my children's future.

Like most of your kind, you have a short and selective memory.

It was your idol, Farage, who said just before the referendum that a 48/52% result could not be considered decisive.

MY private pension has just been devalued by your ilk.

Does America feel the need to be a member of the Single Market? Does China? Or Japan? No, of course not. Those countries trade with the EU without having to accept free-flow of migrants or agree to laws made in Brussels which control the lives of their citizens. The EU only benefits multinationals, Big Business, (hence the CBI's support for it) and that is a contributory factor in the failure of both CETA - the Canadian trade treaty - and TTIP.

As for your contention "that foolish old men like you are wrecking my children's future", you may not like but are possibly familiar with this graphic used by the BBC:

​

and this:

​

Either the younger generations assumed that the case for remaining a member of the European Union was unassailable and would thus pertain so didn't bother to vote. Or they simply held no view one way or the other, forgot to vote, were washing their hair on that day or, as in your eldest's case, omitted to nominate a proxy in the event that he would be at sea - which, as it turned out, he was. I am not levelling any criticism at Alex, it's an easy omission to make and one that I have made myself in the past on more than one occasion.

And do remember that the majority of those who voted decided that they want Britain to leave the EU. It wasn't just the silver-haired voter who'd had enough, a percentage of the young also want out of Europe as exemplified by the eloquent young student who berated the Remoaners on the Question Time panel ten days ago.

If pro-EU Government ministers can accept the result and work towards getting the best deal possible in common with the majority of MPs - SNP excepted - why can't the Lib Dems?

Thank you for confirming that the majority of Leavers are geriatrics with a diminishing number of functional synapses.

"If pro-EU Government ministers can accept the result and work towards getting the best deal possible in common with the majority of MPs - SNP excepted - why can't the Lib Dems?"

It is impossible to tell what some Government Ministers really mean. The Foreign Secretary tells Turkey he wants them in the EU after writing in support of the EU then campaigning against it on the grounds inter alia that Turkey might join the EU.

But to answer your question:

1. Your fellow Farage said that 48-53% would not be decisive. You got 52%.

2.Because we are not in the Government, are not looking fo a job from May, are not terrified of the Bastards, and are free to act as our conscience dictates.

3. And my conscience tells me that leaving the EU will be, at best, the biggest national humiliation since Suez, and at worst the biggest disaster since Hastings.

Can someone enlighten me as to which laws made by the EU have caused you to vote OUT ???

I keep hearing about how we want to have control over our own laws etc etc

Farage was not part of the official Leave campaign and in any event said one thing one moment only to contradict himself later. So who knows what he meant. As for your third point, I'd venture to suggest that yours is a minority view even among Remainers.

Do I really need to remind you that you fall into the same age demographic as those you insult and I'm equally sure that you feel a tad miffed at having that pointed out to you. So let's please try to discuss issues without insulting each other. Pretty please?

They cannot reply.

Brexit is a fact free zone, viewed through rose tinted glasses, and populated with sparkly pink unicorns.

It's adherents are unable to explain why Britain exports little more than Belgium does, despite being six times larger...

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/10/18/brexit-death-of-british-business/

Take your pick: >> EU Laws

Exactly.

If a law is needed then it should be passed by our government, and tailored to the best needs of the UK.

• How about those accused or convicted of serious crimes by their home countries in the EU able to enter Britain without there being any checks whatsoever.
• Or the ability of hate preachers to (ab)use Human Rights legislation to avoid being deported and make full use of Legal Aid whilst fighting their legal battles.
• Or the destruction of home-produced overproduced crops, eggs and milk to the benefit of farmers elsewhere in Europe and with it, the setting of artificially high prices for these items.
• Or the scrapping of most of the British fishing fleet whilst the French and Spanish fish our coastal waters.
• The very existence of VAT which was introduced to pay for Britain's membership of the Common Market.
• Being told how powerful our vacuum cleaners, toasters, kettles and hair dryers can be.
• Used teabags can not be composted under EU law.
  
• Manufacturers of bottled water may not claim that drinking their product counters dehydration.
• In 2010 the EU introduced a law that decreed that diabetics were "unfit" to drive and banned them from driving. The law exists but is currently not enforced.
• All food must be sold by weight - measured in kilos - which means, for example, eggs can not be sold by the dozen.
• EU citizens working in the UK can claim child benefit even if their children are not living in this country.
  
• EU law lays down that the standard rate of VAT must be at least 15 per cent, and the reduced rate, which can only apply to certain specified goods and services, must be at least 5 per cent. It does not allow governments the freedom to decide that there should be no VAT on chosen items - hence that long argument over VAT on sanitary goods, dubbed the ‘tampon tax’.

Do I really need to go on?

I agree that Boris, Gove and others on the Leave side did not spell-out their vision of a Britain removed from the EU but we did have a very good idea of what the future held if we remained in the EU and voted on that. Strangely we don't want to be subsumed into a single country which may be called "Europe" or "Europa" - I've seen both used in this context - but what is effectively the United States of Europe. Currently the most widely spoken language in the EU is German and that is very likely to become Europa's official language with French or Italian becoming its secondary language. Europa is designed to serve the interests of multinational corporations and their shareholders first and foremost, not its citizens, and the failure of both TTIP and CETA (the trade and investment agreement with Canada) is only a temporary setback; the removal of country vetoes will sort those minor issues. Democracy? What democracy? There won't be any, not as we know it.

So YOU say - your post is a typical Brexit fact free zone full of spectacular but unsubstantiated assertions, and fools believe you because they are too slovenly to assimilate real data.

Meanwhile your Government is proposing to leave the EU without even discussing the terms in Parliament, and you have the brass neck to assert that the EU is "undemocratic".

Here's today's scare story from the 48%, which you will say is made up:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/22/leading-banks-set-to-pull-out-of-brexit-uk

Two days ago actually.

The Daily Mail ran the same story two days ago as well, however it was dismissed as nonsense by the banks in a follow up article earlier today.

Obviously in a situation as important as Brexit, strong leadership is needed, ongoing negotiations should be held at the top level only, not splashed over the front pages of the tabloid press.

Th government needs to keep the cards close to its chest when negotiating with ruthless power crazed EU fanatics.