Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

VinLieger

youcantakethat wrote: »

It is the same now as ten years ago. A euro buys eighty something pence sterling, same as it has for most of the past 10 years.

Well thats quite easy to prove as being completely untrue

First Up

For Forks Sake wrote:

And there it will remain for the foreseeable future.

Turkey has pretty well abandoned the idea of joining the EU. It gets most of what it needs on that front from its membership of the Customs Union.

Turkey has positioned itself as a regional powerhouse/power broker and a link between Europe and Asia - and it is good at both.

The Western Balkans has a long way to go. Serbia is the only country that is even remotely ready to be a serious candidate but there are major political obstacles including its alliance with Russia and its own regional tensions - especially over Kosovo (which itself does not have a sustainable economy and only survives on foreign aid.)

Albania is still dragging itself into the 20th century and has a pitifully small and narrow economy. Macedonia and Montenegro aren't much better and both have governance problems and internal ethnic/clan allegiances that undermine the political system.

The other bit of former Yugoslavia (Bosnia and Herzegovina) is an artificial construct to cater for the irreconcilable ethnic differences (Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats). It is also held together by foreign aid.

The EU as well as others (Germany especially) are piling money, advice, technical help and training into the region. Croatia and Slovenia give practical help with EU accession issues - training, documentation etc.

But the Western Balkans will be a long time proving itself ready to be taken seriously as candidate countries.

Enzokk

youcantakethat wrote: »

It is the same now as ten years ago. A euro buys eighty something pence sterling, same as it has for most of the past 10 years.


There is more to lthe Brexit debate than money. Take immigration - the EU fails badly in this respect. Net immigration of 300,000 p.a. is unsustainable and the effects of Merkel's disastrous open door policy are plain to see.

You first point has been answered much already by me here, https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=109510656&postcount=5694, not sure if you saw it. In any case here is my reply on the exchange rate.

Enzokk wrote: »

The same with the exchange rate between two currencies, taking only a snapshot in time will not mean much. I mean I could say that it has gone from 1.74 EUR to a GBP in 2000 to 1.14 now. What does that tell me, absolutely nothing other than it changes over time. What you do see is that it was around 1.45 EUR to a GBP just before the GFC in 2007/2008. Then it went down to levels very similar to now but it picked up in value again to around 1.40 EUR to a GBP just before the Brexit result came out. Since then it has been around 1.14 EUR to a GBP again.

What does that tell me? That Brexit has had the same impact as the world financial markets almost imploding if you look at the currency exchange between the GBP and EUR. But you would be better off asking your brother in law in finance as he would have a better idea, or at least he should. Then again what do people in finance know, they were all in Enron stock when they should have known better.

As for immigration, you are either very uninformed or trying to troll here, in my opinion. I would ask what German policy on refugees has to do with EU immigration into the UK. Could you answer that relatively easy question?

woohoo!!!

So rumours abound of major shifts in both Labour and Tory positions, and all this place can talk about is Irish translators...

Peregrinus

Strazdas wrote: »

Do you know how many people work for the EU across 28 countries? 46,000.

British civil service = 410,000 workers

Fascinating trivial fact of the day: the entire EU public service employed by all the EU institutions (46,000, as stated) is smaller than the civilian staff of the UK Ministry of Defence, where 57,000 civil servants are employed to administer armed forces containing 135,000 active service personnel - a ratio of one civil servant for every 2.4 service personnel

woohoo!!!

woohoo!!! wrote: »

So rumours abound of major shifts in both Labour and Tory positions, and all this place can talk about is Irish translators...

The Express's top headline for Brexit is the EU's plot to keep the UK in the EU with a 21-month extension. So I'm sure we'll spend an eternity on here explaining that Parliament has to request it.

The Onion has better political insight.

brickster69

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Here's three referendums.
a choice between Remain and May’s deal
a choice between Remain and Hard Brexit
a choice between hard Brexit and May’s deal

I have an idea. Why not make it really simple so that everyone can understand next time.

Leave the EU or stay in the EU

Cryptopagan

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

How many times do I have to point out that Norway is a complete non-starter because of all the UK's Red Lines.

Here's three referendums.
a choice between Remain and May’s deal
a choice between Remain and Hard Brexit
a choice between hard Brexit and May’s deal

First decide what result you want and then choose the right choice and then choose the words to use and order to ask the question.

The red lines are May's positions, and May's positions also rule out remaining, asking for an extension, and holding another referendum. The only option apart from her deal which she pointedly refuses to rule out, is leaving with no deal. When speculating about a second referendum, we are in the realm of things that will not happen unless parliament defies May's position, so it's not implausible to include Norway, unicorns, and whatever else you are having on the menu of the potential questions.

Enzokk

brickster69 wrote: »

I have an idea. Why not make it really simple so that everyone can understand next time.

Leave the EU or stay in the EU

Unless you specify what leaving means you cannot give that choice because it is exactly why we are where we are now. You have to explain how things will change before you offer people a choice otherwise there will be chaos.

Cryptopagan

brickster69 wrote: »

I have an idea. Why not make it really simple so that everyone can understand next time.

Leave the EU or stay in the EU

Because that was the question last time and look where it got us. If there is a second referendum, it has to ask the public not just do they want to leave, but, realistically, what terms they want to leave on.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: This thread is about Brexit, not the Irish language.

lawred2

brickster69 wrote: »

I have an idea. Why not make it really simple so that everyone can understand next time.

Leave the EU or stay in the EU

Is it your implicit contention that everyone understood that exact same question the last time?

Peregrinus

brickster69 wrote: »

I have an idea. Why not make it really simple so that everyone can understand next time.

Leave the EU or stay in the EU

Attempting to oversimplify the issue is what has got the UK into the present shambles in the first place. If they've learned nothing else in the UK in the past three years, they should have learned at least that.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

woohoo!!! wrote: »

So rumours abound of major shifts in both Labour and Tory positions, and all this place can talk about is Irish translators...

Looks like Labour looking for confirmatory referendum. Choice will be (i) May's deal or (ii) Remain in EU.
Sounds like this will be the position after 12 March (and even if May's deal goes through?)

Cryptopagan

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Looks like Labour looking for confirmatory referendum. Choice will be (i) May's deal or (ii) Remain in EU.
Sounds like this will be the position after 12 March (and even if May's deal goes through?)

Yeah, seems it will put its proposal for an alternative, softer Brexit before parliament first, and once that's rejected, throw its support behind a referendum on May's deal. Given that parliament can't agree on anything other than not wanting no deal, perhaps enough MPs will welcome the chance to pass this decision to the public.

Enzokk

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Looks like Labour looking for confirmatory referendum. Choice will be (i) May's deal or (ii) Remain in EU.
Sounds like this will be the position after 12 March.

Well the defections has forced their hand, they had to move to this. It is interesting that even when senior Labour Shadow Cabinet ministers were confirming that they are moving towards a second referendum there was still "Labour sources" stating that this isn't true. You know Jeremy Corbyn had to be dragged to this point, kicking and screaming, and the only thing that got him there was the potential loss of a GE with the defections from Labour.

https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/1100297815547437057

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

Well the defections has forced their hand, they had to move to this. It is interesting that even when senior Labour Shadow Cabinet ministers were confirming that they are moving towards a second referendum there was still "Labour sources" stating that this isn't true. You know Jeremy Corbyn had to be dragged to this point, kicking and screaming, and the only thing that got him there was the potential loss of a GE with the defections from Labour.

https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/1100297815547437057

It's completely mad. They're doing this in order to prevent further splits in the party and immediately somebody splits and denies that they're doing it.

Enzokk

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's completely mad. They're doing this in order to prevent further splits in the party and immediately somebody splits and denies that they're doing it.

It is, and you still have MPs like Caroline Flint who seems intent on Brexit even if it costs her constituents. I mean they have been decimated by Thatcher in the 80's and is one of those coal mining areas that has been left behind, but leaving the EU is really the way to go?

https://twitter.com/CarolineFlintMP/status/1100164863488348160

I feel MPs like her will need to make a choice, either support Brexit and campaign for it along with Kate Hoey, or back remaining or a soft as possible Brexit. The vote in her constituency in the last election was interesting, the Tory vote increased almost exactly by the same vote that UKIP had in 2015. She increased her vote as well so you know she picked up some of that vote. What would happen in a new election? With Nigel's new party and UKIP there as well, does she really think those voters that want to abandon the EU will automatically go for a Tory vote when there is 2 other anti-EU parties?

woohoo!!!

Deleted User wrote: »

The Express's top headline for Brexit is the EU's plot to keep the UK in the EU with a 21-month extension. So I'm sure we'll spend an eternity on here explaining that Parliament has to request it.

The Onion has better political insight.

Not that, labour 2nd ref position and allegations that Remain Ministers putting it up to May to take No deal off the table. I wouldn't use the Express to wipe my...

prawnsambo

Well this is a bit of a change in voting intentions.

Enzokk

And to show why Labour would suddenly change their thinking on the second referendum,

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1100160928899915777

That is just a confirmation of the polls where if Labour assisted the Tories in getting Brexit through that they would lose a lot of support. Now it seems to have finally gotten through that you can try to appease 3.8m Leave Labour voters or you can try to work with the majority of 8.9m voters that do not want to leave the EU. In a lot of those areas the Conservatives are the reason why people are struggling and they still remember their policies in the 80's, so those people will all of a sudden vote Conservative?

seamus

Enzokk wrote: »

Well the defections has forced their hand, they had to move to this. It is interesting that even when senior Labour Shadow Cabinet ministers were confirming that they are moving towards a second referendum there was still "Labour sources" stating that this isn't true. You know Jeremy Corbyn had to be dragged to this point, kicking and screaming, and the only thing that got him there was the potential loss of a GE with the defections from Labour.

https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/1100297815547437057

This is more posturing because it's not a legal referendum. Internationally, it won't be recognised as a valid poll.

Why?

Because a referendum absolutely MUST have a "do nothing" option. There must be an option for the population to reject the proposals on the table and continue on as before.

This is essential to safeguard democracy. The example I always give is that a parliament/prime minister could hold a referendum asking, "Should the prime minister be voted in for life or until they turn 100"?

In effect, forcing through a dictatorship and giving the public no option to say, "Do not change the current system".

The original referendum had a "do nothing" option (Remain), but they distorted the referendum to make it appear like this was a fork in the road and they had to pick a direction.

Now, the fact that the referendum in the UK would be advisory only and not binding does change this somewhat, since nobody is bound by the outcome.

However, especially given the UK's insistence on treating the original referendum as binding, this creates a precedent. So I would expect either way that a deal/remain referendum would be subject to considerable legal challenges and delays from within and without to the extent that the EU would likely refuse an extension to allow the UK to hold it.

It would have to be a No Deal/Deal/Remain referendum.

woohoo!!!

seamus wrote: »

It would have to be a No Deal/Deal/Remain referendum.

I've always thought that any second referendum, if held, would be no deal/May's deal exit. A re-run with remain is not going to pass, politically.

Enzokk

seamus wrote: »

This is more posturing because it's not a legal referendum. Internationally, it won't be recognised as a valid poll.

Why?

Because a referendum absolutely MUST have a "do nothing" option. There must be an option for the population to reject the proposals on the table and continue on as before.

This is essential to safeguard democracy. The example I always give is that a parliament/prime minister could hold a referendum asking, "Should the prime minister be voted in for life or until they turn 100"?

In effect, forcing through a dictatorship and giving the public no option to say, "Do not change the current system".

The original referendum had a "do nothing" option (Remain), but they distorted the referendum to make it appear like this was a fork in the road and they had to pick a direction.

Now, the fact that the referendum in the UK would be advisory only and not binding does change this somewhat, since nobody is bound by the outcome.

However, especially given the UK's insistence on treating the original referendum as binding, this creates a precedent. So I would expect either way that a deal/remain referendum would be subject to considerable legal challenges and delays from within and without to the extent that the EU would likely refuse an extension to allow the UK to hold it.

It would have to be a No Deal/Deal/Remain referendum.

Okay, but if the options are May's deal (Brexit) or Remain (do nothing as we will keep our current status as EU members), does that not address what you post?

seamus

Enzokk wrote: »

Okay, but if the options are May's deal (Brexit) or Remain (do nothing as we will keep our current status as EU members), does that not address what you post?

No, because "do nothing" means, "Pass no legislation, make no changes".

Which means "No Deal", because the UK's legal departure from the EU has already been put into law.

In order to remain in the EU, the UK parliament now needs to pass a new law. Because May was stupid enough to enshrine leaving into UK law before any deal had been arranged.

Tacitus Kilgore

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I've always thought that any second referendum, if held, would be no deal/May's deal exit. A re-run with remain is not going to pass, politically.

Surely no brexit/May's deal would be a far less ridiculous option? there is very little real appetite for no deal outside of a few lunatics and disaster capitalists - especially considering the fact that probably half of "no-deal" pushers actually think that no deal is the status quo, or at very least that everything carries on as usual except blue passports and white dog shit


Pulling the trigger of the gun to their own head should not be a choice on any referendum.

Peregrinus

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I've always thought that any second referendum, if held, would be no deal/May's deal exit. A re-run with remain is not going to pass, politically.

Which is ironic, since "remain" is almost certainly more popular than either of the other two options. Which raises the question of whether a referendum that doesn't include a "remain" option is going to pass, politically.

Leroy42

The HMG is holding an emergency meeting today with business leaders when it realised it would not have enough pallets in a no deal situation!

https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-michael-gove-ministers-to-hold-emergency-meeting-over-no-deal-chaos-2019-2?r=US&IR=T

youcantakethat

VinLieger wrote: »

Well thats quite easy to prove as being completely untrue

No actually, the following is the sterling euro exchange rate ten years ago.

Month Rate (£1 = €)
Sept 2009 1.1604
August 2009 1.1568
July 2009 1.1747
June 2009 1.1354
May 2009 1.117
April 2009 1.0656
March 2009 1.1324
February 2009 1.1291
February 2009 1.0666
January 2009 1.0768
December 2008 1.0768
December 2008 1.1942

Now, as of this morning, the exchange rate is still 1 Pound sterling equals
1.16 Euro. So sterling has actually strengthened slightly compared to this month ten years ago. Then you had to give 1.0666 euro to buy a pound, now you have to give 1.16 euro to buy a pound. Plus bank commission of course.

To listen to the brainwashed masses here you would think sterling had collapsed !

If you want to look at a currency exchange rate that has shifted significantly, look at the euro dollar rate. Despite Trump running the USA, our euro now only buys 1.14 dollars. Back in the glory days not too long ago we used to get 1.6 dollars to the euro....hence you do not hear of too many of us going on shopping trips to New York now, or bringing the kids to Florida. How people forget. Without the UK contributing to Europe economically and militarily and politically, the Eurozone will only get worse.

lawred2

youcantakethat wrote: »

No actually, the following is the sterling euro exchange rate ten years ago.

Month Rate (£1 = €)
Sept 2009 1.1604
August 2009 1.1568
July 2009 1.1747
June 2009 1.1354
May 2009 1.117
April 2009 1.0656
March 2009 1.1324
February 2009 1.1291
February 2009 1.0666
January 2009 1.0768
December 2008 1.0768
December 2008 1.1942

Now, as of this morning, the exchange rate is still 1 Pound sterling equals
1.16 Euro. So sterling has actually strengthened slightly compared to this month ten years ago. Then you had to give 1.0666 euro to buy a pound, now you have to give 1.16 euro to buy a pound. Plus bank commission of course.

To listen to the brainwashed masses here you would think sterling had collapsed !

If you want to look at a currency exchange rate that has shifted significantly, look at the euro dollar rate. Despite Trump running the USA, our euro now only buys 1.14 dollars. Back in the glory days not too long ago we used to get 1.6 dollars to the euro....hence you do not hear of too many of us going on shopping trips to New York now, or bringing the kids to Florida. How people forget. Without the UK contributing to Europe economically and militarily and politically, the Eurozone will only get worse.

Why are you focusing post crash?

2007 would be a better barometer. And the comparison for both should be against USD.

GBP vs USD Sep 2007 2.07
EUR vs USD Sep 2007 1.41

GBP vs USD Feb 2019 1.32 -37%
EUR vs USD Sep 2019 1.14 -20%

That's real devaluation for all of us. But moreso for the UK.

Also for the specific impact of Brexit on GBP - you'd be better focusing on 2016 to now.

And it's probably also worth keeping in mind that Brexit hasn't actually happened yet.