Jump to content

Brexit - Post Match Reaction


Guided Missile

Saints Web Definitely Not Official Second Referendum  

205 members have voted

  1. 1. Saints Web Definitely Not Official Second Referendum

    • Leave Before - Leave Now
      44
    • Leave Before - Remain Now
      10
    • Leave Before - Not Bothered Now
      2
    • Remain Before - Remain Now
      117
    • Remain Before - Leave Now
      7
    • Remain Before - Not Bothered Now
      1
    • Not Bothered Before - Leave Now
      3
    • Not Bothered Before - Remain Now
      5
    • I've never been bothered - Why am I on this Thread?
      3
    • No second Ref - 2016 was Definitive and Binding
      13


Recommended Posts

Rejoin EFTA in the meantime, then. You should remember EFTA, Whitey. I still have the stamps. Here is the free trade agreements they have and none of it involves kowtowing to Brussels, only filling in an application form:

 

Of course I remember it.

 

These countries are now part of the Schengen agreement and have to pay to get access to the EEA. Being part of the EEA is a minimu for us, I would have thought.

 

Where do you get all this 'kowtowing to Brussels'? I've never had to do any of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just don't have a clue, Whitey. The EU is a regulatory nightmare, one I am just waking up from. Alright if your selling washers, but for anything the Germans and French want to protect, you're f*****

 

I have been exporting several million £ to the EU for over 30 years and I don't have any problems. Who have you upset?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another one for you to read and the original one is here.

 

Read and learn. You're never too old!

 

PS: The UK have a very large number of lawyers and civil servants who will be out of a job, now that we have left the EU.

We shall still need them in Brussels in order to keep up to date with everything that's happening. There are no savings to be made there. Until now we have had the EU to do everything for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please don't try to lecture me on world trade. I have been selling stuff across the world for over 30 years. Nothing is as straightforward as the Single Market. Anything else costs more.

 

I export to both the EU and the US and find no issues with one over another and we don't have a trade deal with the US.

 

Furthermore, a UK trade negotiators job will be far easier than an EU negotiators job. For starters, you don't have consult 28 member states to formulate a position and then report back, only for whoever to block it.

Edited by Johnny Bognor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a Government department with offices in over 100 countries that is responsible for promoting UK Trade

https://www.gov.uk/government/organi...vestment/about

I will let you into a little secret. We do have trade relations with dozens of countries already...

https://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/con...ia-and-pacific

 

In fact, the UK are already actively involved in negotiations....

https://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/content/uk-trade-relations-commonwealth

 

 

To suggest otherwise is another Project Fear lie. Jeez, I am really starting to question whether academic acheivement correlates to intelligence

 

 

 

UKTI :lol:

 

Have you ever dealt with them? Organising trade fairs for SMEs is about their comfort zone.

 

Got a chip on your shoulder about your education, don't you pal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another one for you to read and the original one is here.

 

Read and learn. You're never too old!

 

PS: The UK have a very large number of lawyers and civil servants who will be out of a job, now that we have left the EU.

 

I've had a look at it and it only re-inforces my views. Then I looked at the 'about us' page and everything became clear.

 

 

You just don't have a clue, Whitey. The EU is a regulatory nightmare, one I am just waking up from. Alright if your selling washers, but for anything the Germans and French want to protect, you're f*****

 

 

I think our posts overlapped. As I said, I have been designing manufacturing and selling products all over the world for nearly 40 years amounting to several millions of £. We've sold in North America, Australia, New Zealand, the Middle East amongst others but the bulk of our products to the EU went to Denmark and France. I have plenty of clues and I know all about selling worldwide. (Specialist electronic products and software)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been exporting several million £ to the EU for over 30 years and I don't have any problems. Who have you upset?
Like I said, not a clue and if you aren't prepared to read and learn about the options open to the UK in those links I posted, then me posting the 50 page summary of the EU regulations covering my business and the 100's of associated regulations and guidance documents, is a waste of time. Having seen German and French companies ignore the uniform principles of the EU, to use these regulations against SME's and larger UK companies have, I think, provided me with the experience you obviously lack and from which you aren't prepared to learn. The UK regulatory authorities always applied EU law fairly. The Germans and the French? It was summed up by the German authorities, when asked why they hadn't approved one of our products for sale in Germany, after approval in the UK, asked me if I had a supply agreement in place with Bayer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

UKTI :lol:

 

Have you ever dealt with them? Organising trade fairs for SMEs is about their comfort zone.

 

Got a chip on your shoulder about your education, don't you pal?

 

Yep fair point on UKTI, but you can't disagree with the fact that we already negotiate and manage trade deals outside the EU. The assertion that we have zero experience and no people to deal with it is ridiculous.

 

I'm cool with my education, thanks. I just have a chip on my shoulder in relation to those snobby progressive types that seem to get a sense of self worth from a piece of paper ;-)

Edited by Johnny Bognor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please don't try to lecture me on world trade. I have been selling stuff across the world for over 30 years. Nothing is as straightforward as the Single Market. Anything else costs more.

Surely a business model that is built on the presumption of protectionism is flawed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, not a clue and if you aren't prepared to read and learn about the options open to the UK in those links I posted, then me posting the 50 page summary of the EU regulations covering my business and the 100's of associated regulations and guidance documents, is a waste of time. Having seen German and French companies ignore the uniform principles of the EU, to use these regulations against SME's and larger UK companies have, I think, provided me with the experience you obviously lack and from which you aren't prepared to learn. The UK regulatory authorities always applied EU law fairly. The Germans and the French? It was summed up by the German authorities, when asked why they hadn't approved one of our products for sale in Germany, after approval in the UK, asked me if I had a supply agreement in place with Bayer.

 

Links? I read the one from the lawyers.

 

Dealing with any other country involves an appreciation of the local predilections. Do you think it would be any easier to deal with someone in Argentina, say? Or Malaysia, or any one of hundreds of others. I have never had any problems in France but there again you have to know how to work the system. I suspect that you may have fallen foul of the UK's gleeful tendency to goldplate any regulations that originate in Brussels.

 

Please explain why you think life would be easier for your exporting if (when) Britain is outside the EU? Wouldn't you still have to meet the environmental and product specifications?

Edited by Whitey Grandad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep fair point on UKTI, but you can't disagree with the fact that we already negotiate and manage trade deals outside the EU. The assertion that we have zero experience and no people to deal with it is ridiculous.

 

I'm cool with my education, thanks. I just have a chip on my shoulder in relation to those snobby progressive types that seem to get a sense of self worth from a piece of paper ;-)

 

I heard on the radio that there are no more than a handful of people who could do it.

 

Miriam reckons there might be 25 and that we need at least 500:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/miriam-gonz%C3%A1lez-dur%C3%A1ntez-brexit-trade-negotiators_uk_57713ad3e4b0d257114a18b2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard on the radio that there are no more than a handful of people who could do it.

 

Miriam reckons there might be 25 and that we need at least 500:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/miriam-gonz%C3%A1lez-dur%C3%A1ntez-brexit-trade-negotiators_uk_57713ad3e4b0d257114a18b2

 

Well she's not up to the job if she thinks the EU comprises of 500m consumers post Brexit LOL

 

This was the line peddled by the remainers, forgetting the fact that this number includes UK population... unless we are no longer allowed to trade with ourselves

 

We're getting on to a SATS level maths question here...

If there are 500m consumers in the EU and one country of 60m leaves, how many consumers are left to trade with???

 

Any takers?

Edited by Johnny Bognor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well she's not up to the job if she thinks the EU comprises of 500m consumers post Brexit LOL

 

This was the line peddled by the remainers, forgetting the fact that this number includes UK population... unless we are no longer allowed to trade with ourselves

 

We're getting on to a SATS level maths question here...

If there are 500m consumers in the EU and one country of 60m leaves, how many consumers are left to trade with???

 

Any takers?

 

That's not the point and remainers have argued something very different. Its factually correct to say that the UK is either part of a single market of 500m or outside it as a market of 60m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not the point and remainers have argued something very different. Its factually correct to say that the UK is either part of a single market of 500m or outside it as a market of 60m.

 

It's factually correct to state that those outside the EU could trade with 500m consumers up until the point the UK leaves. After that, they would be trading with 440m consumers in the EU.

 

From a UK perspective, trading with the EU does not open a market of 500m people, if in fact the UK comprises of 60m of those people. The net benefit to the UK is that there are 440m consumers that we could sell to without restriction, if we stayed inside the EU. The 60m consumers in the UK are open to trade in or outside the EU. This is fairly basic stuff to be honest.

Edited by Johnny Bognor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's factually correct to state that those outside the EU could trade with 500m consumers up until the point the UK leaves. After that, they would be trading with 440m consumers in the EU.

 

From a UK perspective, trading with the EU does not open a market of 500m people, if we in fact comprise of 60m of those people. The net benefit to the UK is that there are 440m consumers that we could sell to without restriction, if inside the EU.

 

I am not aware of many people arguing that. What I heard, especially in the context of doing deals with the rest of the world, is that on paper the UK would be a more attractive trade partner if it was part of single market of 500m than if it was out as a market of 60m. Again that's not factually incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted two links. Here is the one you had trouble clicking on. If you need a hand with using the TV remote, let me know....

 

Don't be so childish. You provided a link and I clicked on it and got a blank page. Take it up with Google Chrome because it's nothing to do with the way I click on it. You could also try posting the complete text for the link and not try to disguise it behind a 'here'. Then if there are any problems the reader would have a chance finding the target through another route.

 

That document has a lot of words but doesn't actually say very much and is clearly written from a pre-determined viewpoint. They are trying to tell the US Government what their foreign policy should be for a start.

 

p.s. I have designed more infrared remote controls than you've had customers in Germany.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen on the news that the EU top-bods turned down a request from Sturgeon for a meeting

 

oh well

 

They would, wouldn't they. They can't be seen to be interfering at this stage of the process. Everything in Europe happens away from the public eye and there will he all sorts of 'meetings' taking place in broom cupboards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They would, wouldn't they. They can't be seen to be interfering at this stage of the process. Everything in Europe happens away from the public eye and there will he all sorts of 'meetings' taking place in broom cupboards.

But Junker's ordered them all not to talk to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't be so childish. You provided a link and I clicked on it and got a blank page. Take it up with Google Chrome because it's nothing to do with the way I click on it. You could also try posting the complete text for the link and not try to disguise it behind a 'here'. Then if there are any problems the reader would have a chance finding the target through another route.

 

That document has a lot of words but doesn't actually say very much and is clearly written from a pre-determined viewpoint. They are trying to tell the US Government what their foreign policy should be for a start.

 

p.s. I have designed more infrared remote controls than you've had customers in Germany.

The links were posted, both as hyperlinks and in full.Trying to disguise them with a hyperlink? That's right:lol: .

 

The paper by the two PhD's obviously have too many words for you to bother with. You're the one with the "pre-determined viewpoint" and as I said, if you're not going to read the document I refer to, to support an argument I'm wasting my time engaging with you, apart from saying we have 12,000 customers in Germany. Bye, bye and I'll look forward to revisiting this topic in a year when the UK economy is flying, the EU is in the cr@pper and your teeth are still in a glass of water at night...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not aware of many people arguing that. What I heard, especially in the context of doing deals with the rest of the world, is that on paper the UK would be a more attractive trade partner if it was part of single market of 500m than if it was out as a market of 60m. Again that's not factually incorrect.

 

The remainers and remain campaign have been banging on about 500m throughout... and continue to do so.

 

Let's quote from the horses mouth...

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

 

Just scroll down to the bit that says....

In the EU Single Market, over 1 million UK businesses trade without export or import charges, or paperwork, to 500 million customers in the EU (Sources: HMRC and Treasury).

 

Population of the EU is 500 million aprox. The UK is 65 million approx. So I make the net benefit of 435 million 'consumers' available to the UK, aside from their own.

 

However, no one really mentions this, but 66 million of these 435 million are in fact under 14 years of age and are not full on consumers. When was the last time you traded with a 3 year old?

 

So we're really looking at 369 million teenage and adult consumers, that we lose the ability to sell to.

 

The remainers have been massively overstating the single market. We're talking simple GCSE level demographics here....

Edited by Johnny Bognor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The remainers and remain campaign have been banging on about 500m throughout... and continue to do so.

 

Let's quote from the horses mouth...

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

 

Just scroll down to the bit that says....

In the EU Single Market, over 1 million UK businesses trade without export or import charges, or paperwork, to 500 million customers in the EU (Sources: HMRC and Treasury).

 

Population of the EU is 500 million aprox. The UK is 65 million approx. So I make the net benefit of 435 million 'consumers' available to the UK, aside from their own.

 

However, no one really mentions this, but 66 million of these 435 million are in fact under 14 years of age and are not full on consumers. When was the last time you traded with a 3 year old?

 

So we're really looking at 369 million teenage and adult consumers, that we lose the ability to sell to.

 

The remainers have been massively overstating the single market. We're talking simple GCSE level demographics here....

 

Does that balance out the £350million per week lie ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that balance out the £350million per week lie ?

 

We do send that gross. The lie is that we could spend that on the NHS. Only the net figure could be spent, but this has been discussed everywhere.

 

The 66m babies and children that can't really be sold to slipped under the radar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do send that gross. The lie is that we could spend that on the NHS. Only the net figure could be spent, but this has been discussed everywhere.

 

The 66m babies and children that can't really be sold to slipped under the radar.

 

The gross never gets sent, only the net. Still a large amount of money but the only question is whether the cost of membership is worth it for the benefits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do send that gross. The lie is that we could spend that on the NHS. Only the net figure could be spent, but this has been discussed everywhere.

 

The 66m babies and children that can't really be sold to slipped under the radar.

 

Mothercare and Johnson & Johnson are going to be devastated they've got no customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The links were posted, both as hyperlinks and in full.Trying to disguise them with a hyperlink? That's right:lol: .

 

The paper by the two PhD's obviously have too many words for you to bother with. You're the one with the "pre-determined viewpoint" and as I said, if you're not going to read the document I refer to, to support an argument I'm wasting my time engaging with you, apart from saying we have 12,000 customers in Germany. Bye, bye and I'll look forward to revisiting this topic in a year when the UK economy is flying, the EU is in the cr@pper and your teeth are still in a glass of water at night...

I didn't see the links on my browser, make of that what you will.

 

I read it. I don't know what a PhD has to do with anything.

 

12,000? As I thought. So, if you're selling to Germany what's the problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The remainers and remain campaign have been banging on about 500m throughout... and continue to do so.

 

Let's quote from the horses mouth...

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

 

Just scroll down to the bit that says....

In the EU Single Market, over 1 million UK businesses trade without export or import charges, or paperwork, to 500 million customers in the EU (Sources: HMRC and Treasury).

 

Population of the EU is 500 million aprox. The UK is 65 million approx. So I make the net benefit of 435 million 'consumers' available to the UK, aside from their own.

 

However, no one really mentions this, but 66 million of these 435 million are in fact under 14 years of age and are not full on consumers. When was the last time you traded with a 3 year old?

 

So we're really looking at 369 million teenage and adult consumers, that we lose the ability to sell to.

 

The remainers have been massively overstating the single market. We're talking simple GCSE level demographics here....

 

How is the statement I made incorrect - because that's how I've heard it used. Its as a clear as day but you're fumbling in the dark.

 

I was unaware of that website; compared to the deliberate, mendacious whoppers the out campaign were telling, it seems to be an innocent case of double-counting.

 

I didn't realise the UK didn't have any under-15s :lol: it was a shorthand figure that, most importantly, was applied evenhandedly both to the UK and EU.

 

With those groundrules established, a population of 53m (excluding under 15s) in the UK trades with a population of 370m in the EU (excluding the UK and under-15s), that market is still ~7x the UK market, not significantly lower than the ~7.8x (500:64) that you're getting your knickers in a twist over. Big deal. Principle stands.

 

If you want to get technical and talk about saving and consumption behavoiur across different age groups rather your cute little effort you seem proud of :lol: we can do; or if you want to talk about gravity trade models and decades of empirical research that show how trade falls starkly with distance and singlehandedly undermine most of the dimwitted, wishful little nostrums of the out campaign that the UK PLC can look outwards and trade with the rest of the world, we can do but I worry I'll be accused of patronising you pal.

 

#tiredofexperts

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listening to all the claims from the EU that the only difference with any deal will be take it or leave it and have no membership but all the things we voted against. My view is now that it would be a waste of time even negotiating with the EU. Activate article 50 and just leave after two years and manage the consequences. With nearly £100B annual trade deficit with the EU the UK is in a strong position. We don't trade, they don't trade. We pay tariffs, they pay tariffs. Playing hardball got them into this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that Angela Merkel has confirmed today in the Bundestag that (as far as she is concerned anyway) the UK will not be granted access to the EU Single Market without accepting the 'free movement' component of that concept. In truth this has been perfectly clear throughout the referendum campaign as some of us have pointed out. However, that did not stop some from attempting to dispute it of course ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that Angela Merkel has confirmed today in the Bundestag that (as far as she is concerned anyway) the UK will not be granted access to the EU Single Market without accepting the 'free movement' component of that concept. In truth this has been perfectly clear throughout the referendum campaign as some of us have pointed out. However, that did not stop some from attempting to dispute it of course ...

 

Living in dreamland to think otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that Angela Merkel has confirmed today in the Bundestag that (as far as she is concerned anyway) the UK will not be granted access to the EU Single Market without accepting the 'free movement' component of that concept. In truth this has been perfectly clear throughout the referendum campaign as some of us have pointed out. However, that did not stop some from attempting to dispute it of course ...

 

If it's been perfectly clear them might as well activate article 50 and crack on with it. The people have made their choice, like you say perfectly clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's factually correct to state that those outside the EU could trade with 500m consumers up until the point the UK leaves. After that, they would be trading with 440m consumers in the EU.

 

From a UK perspective, trading with the EU does not open a market of 500m people, if in fact the UK comprises of 60m of those people. The net benefit to the UK is that there are 440m consumers that we could sell to without restriction, if we stayed inside the EU. The 60m consumers in the UK are open to trade in or outside the EU. This is fairly basic stuff to be honest.

Just to be clear, is this the same 500 million people that Farage constantly told us could rock up on our shores at any minute?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, yes, the Heritage Foundation. It is not a "conservative" think tank. It is a corporate-funded institute (the Koch brothers, for example) that pretends to use scholarly research to push a neo-liberal agenda.

 

"Free trade" is free for whom? Free trade doesn't promote sovereignty—just the opposite. If you look at NAFTA (the North American Free-Trade Agreement), for example, the dominant power (the U.S.) uses elements of the Agreement to weaken the cultural and environmental sovereignty of the weaker signatories (Canada and Mexico)—on behalf of its multi-national corporations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, yes, the Heritage Foundation. It is not a "conservative" think tank. It is a corporate-funded institute (the Koch brothers, for example) that pretends to use scholarly research to push a neo-liberal agenda.

Total b0ll0x. To quote from their website:

 

Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

 

Governed by an independent Board of Trustees, The Heritage Foundation is an independent, tax-exempt institution. Heritage relies on the private financial support of the general public—individuals, foundations, and corporations—for its income, and accepts no government funds and performs no contract work. Heritage is one of the nation’s largest public policy research organizations. Its hundreds of thousands of individual members make it the most broadly supported think tank in America.

 

"Free trade" is free for whom? Free trade doesn't promote sovereignty—just the opposite. If you look at NAFTA (the North American Free-Trade Agreement), for example, the dominant power (the U.S.) uses elements of the Agreement to weaken the cultural and environmental sovereignty of the weaker signatories (Canada and Mexico)—on behalf of its multi-national corporations.

Quite like the EU, then, except with no freedom of movement.

 

Anyway, you didn't get to vote in the referendum, so back in your box...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Total b0ll0x. To quote from their website:

 

 

 

I'd suggest you stick to what you know, pal. The Heritage has long ditched it's dispassionate, scholary, conservative leanings and become a political attack dog for the Tea Party and hard right. Quoting it uncritically just makes you look a bit silly. Which is a surprise no one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd suggest you stick to what you know, pal. The Heritage has long ditched it's dispassionate, scholary, conservative leanings and become a political attack dog for the Tea Party and hard right. Quoting it uncritically just makes you look a bit silly. Which is a surprise no one.

Hamilton was saying it is a neo-liberal institution, you're saying it is neo-conservative. I am not really arguing with you, as you may be right, but our Canadian pensioner is wrong, either way. The only thing I took from the site was (in my opinion) an excellent paper published by two PhD's about the need for a trade deal if the UK exits the EU, one which I bet you haven't read, pal....

PS. It's scholarly, BTW. You know...it means the ability to spell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hamilton was saying it is a neo-liberal institution, you're saying it is neo-conservative. I am not really arguing with you, as you may be right, but our Canadian pensioner is wrong, either way. The only thing I took from the site was (in my opinion) an excellent paper published by two PhD's about the need for a trade deal if the UK exits the EU, one which I bet you haven't read, pal....

PS. It's scholarly, BTW. You know...it means the ability to spell.

 

I am aware how it's spelt. No it means the ability to understand one's sources, recognise their limitations and think critically through their implications. In essence, the exact opposite to what you've done on this thread, pal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hamilton was saying it is a neo-liberal institution, you're saying it is neo-conservative. I am not really arguing with you, as you may be right, but our Canadian pensioner is wrong, either way. The only thing I took from the site was (in my opinion) an excellent paper published by two PhD's about the need for a trade deal if the UK exits the EU, one which I bet you haven't read, pal....

PS. It's scholarly, BTW. You know...it means the ability to spell.

 

Wouldn't that be 'orthography'? I suppose only the scholarly would know that ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listening to all the claims from the EU that the only difference with any deal will be take it or leave it and have no membership but all the things we voted against. My view is now that it would be a waste of time even negotiating with the EU. Activate article 50 and just leave after two years and manage the consequences. With nearly £100B annual trade deficit with the EU the UK is in a strong position. We don't trade, they don't trade. We pay tariffs, they pay tariffs. Playing hardball got them into this mess.

 

I think most OUTERS with any economic knowledge that of course does not include Farage think the consequences will be horrific so are not taking your advice

 

It is the foreign investment which is key because if it continues as it has your scenario is probably correct but if it is not there is less employment being in the single market is key I just cannot emphasise it enough it is the largest single market in the world and will grow even when we leave.

 

I knowit is exhilarating to win: to sit up in the palm tree, survey the turmoil below and feel a sense of empowerment. After a while though, a palm tree is an uncomfortable place. It’s easy to poke holes in the status quo. It’s easy to promise people the moon (assuming one has the requisite pragmatic attitude to telling the truth). But now the Leave camp must lead both its supporters and the British people as a whole down from the palm tree. The problem is there is no ladder. More fundamentally there is no clarity whether to go North, South, East or West of the tree.

 

So far all the Bexiteers have managed to do is to own up that many promises will remain unfilled. But that will have to change soon. Otherwise, like a coconut, one simply falls out of the tree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lighthouse changed the title to Brexit - Post Match Reaction

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})