Brexit: The Last Stand (No name calling)

FrancieBrady · 25-10-2016 04:01PM

So the story now seems to be that Brexit will get better, all we have to do is give it time.

demfad · 25-10-2016 04:06PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

eu politicians have a different driver. their main objective is to protect the eu, each state will be concentrating on protecting their state's best interests. The two are not the same. I thought a grown up like you would understand that.

You don't get it, we have just been here. Do you understand the difference between the divorce proceedings of the UK from the EU and the subsequent trade deal. You understand that these are not one and the same thing? It is the EU States that must ratify the trade deal? They do NOT negotiate with the UK. Why don't you inform yourself about what is actually instore for the UK that way reason can inform your argument rather than prejudice.

yes, there will. how much of a price is in question and it is in everyone's best interests that this price is not too high. The UK wants to trade with the eu and the eu wants to trade with the UK, correct?

Yes trade will have to continue well spotted. The price will be high enough so that NO EU State will follow England's moronic lead. A high price for England. A workable price for the EU. All good? ;-)

you do know article 50 hasn't been invoked yet, don't you?

By delaying invoking article 50, I meant delaying a deadline for invoking it. You know this, you have accepted that this was leverage for an interim deal in another post. Stop playing silly buggers.

You seem to have missed half of my points out for some reason, were the words too big?

No. They were just too ill-informed, sorry.

Dyr · 25-10-2016 04:10PM

last brexit on the left

The hills have aye's (scotland only)

demfad · 25-10-2016 04:17PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So the story now seems to be that Brexit will get better, all we have to do is give it time.

Current Investment in the UK cant be measured now but will become apparent in a few years. As it is largely based on access to the single market it apperas calm but we can assume tumble weeds are blowing.....the tsunami will become apparent in a few years when FDI is revealed to have dried up completely.

demfad · 25-10-2016 04:18PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Brexit side need a figurehead in a flagship role, it ishow the country reunifies itself. Short of giving Nigel farage a position (which would be stupid) then Boris is the man.

Lol lol

He voted Brexit in order to shore up EU sceptic Tory MP votes to suceed in his Party leadership bid. He doesn't even believe in it FFS!
He is a suitable figurehead for Brexit allright. Can't you just picture his blond mane up ahead as he and his the flagship dissapears over the Falls?
With Englishmen like you cheering him on!??

A Dub in Glasgo · 25-10-2016 04:23PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

I'm confident and hopeful as an Irish person living in the UK of a good outcome for the UK and the EU.

I am also an Irish person living in the UK and there is little evidence for your confident and hopeful stance

Fratton Fred · 25-10-2016 04:35PM

demfad wrote: »

I'm sorry?

If the UK did not think any differently then why did they not withhold the date for invoking article 50 as leverage for the interim deal?
I missed that, please explain.

It is imperative on every UK citizen who wishes their country well to create such a storm as to the idiocy of Brexit that the beast collapses.
Do you consider yourself a patriot? Defending something you are ill-informed about that could be detrimental to your country. Is this your patriotism?

what the actual **** are you on about?

catbear · 25-10-2016 04:37PM

Fox had intended to begin negotiating free-trade deals with states like Australia before the Article 50 period comes to an end, which would lay the foundations for deals to be signed shortly after Britain completes its exit.

Ciobo said a UK-Australia trade deal would be negotiated as "efficiently and promptly as possible" once Brexit is officially completed but said legal restrictions meant formal talks cannot begin while Britain remains in the EU.

A YouGov survey published last month revealed that Brits who voted Leave in the June referendum believed striking a deal with Australia should be Britain's number one priority when it comes to post-Brexit trade deals.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-liam-fox-eu-australia-trade-deals-2016-10??r=US&IR=T

Another dose of reality for the Brexiteers to swat away.

Fratton Fred · 25-10-2016 04:54PM

demfad wrote: »

Lol lol

He voted Brexit in order to shore up EU sceptic Tory MP votes to suceed in his Party leadership bid. He doesn't even believe in it FFS!
He is a suitable figurehead for Brexit allright. Can't you just picture his blond mane up ahead as he and his the flagship dissapears over the Falls?
With Englishmen like you cheering him on!??

you appear to have lost the plot. Big time.

Fratton Fred · 25-10-2016 05:02PM

demfad wrote: »

You don't get it, we have just been here. Do you understand the difference between the divorce proceedings of the UK from the EU and the subsequent trade deal. You understand that these are not one and the same thing? It is the EU States that must ratify the trade deal? They do NOT negotiate with the UK. Why don't you inform yourself about what is actually instore for the UK that way reason can inform your argument rather than prejudice.

so the eu will not take in to consideration the wishes of its member states and will want to teach the British a lesson regardless of the cost?

That should terrify Ireland.

demfad wrote: »

Yes trade will have to continue well spotted. The price will be high enough so that NO EU State will follow England's moronic lead. A high price for England. A workable price for the EU. All good? ;-)

So they would seek to penalise their biggest export partner?

That doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

FrancieBrady · 25-10-2016 05:12PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so the eu will not take in to consideration the wishes of its member states and will want to teach the British a lesson regardless of the cost?

That should terrify Ireland.

So they would seek to penalise their biggest export partner?

That doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

As nobody else on the planet seems to have your viewpoint, could you map out in some sort of realistic detail how you see this all progressing.

demfad · 25-10-2016 05:13PM

catbear wrote: »

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-liam-fox-eu-australia-trade-deals-2016-10??r=US&IR=T

Another dose of reality for the Brexiteers to swat away.

How long will British people put up with this? Some of them are informed and are organising. It's noticible that much talk on news sites comments sections is getting more militant. Many will meekly stay on bended knee alas, confused in misguided loyalty.

swampgas · 25-10-2016 05:19PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so the eu will not take in to consideration the wishes of its member states and will want to teach the British a lesson regardless of the cost?

So they would seek to penalise their biggest export partner?

That doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

Of course they will take it into consideration. But they haven't a lot of room for manoeuvre, as the UK wants to cross a very significant EU red line.

The UK continues to insist that freedom of movement must go, a fundamental pillar of the EU. There is either freedom or there isn't. It has a lot of value to many people in the EU, it has special significance to people who lived under communist regimes in Eastern Europe until relatively recently. IMO there is no way a consensus will emerge among the EU-27 (in the short term anyway) that would allow the UK to opt out of freedom of movement.

If the UK insists on rejecting freedom of movement, then the EU must (for its own survival) reject free market access. It's really that simple.

If the exporters get hurt, they get hurt - there is more than economics at stake here.

Calina · 25-10-2016 05:34PM

The EU is the member states.

Iwasfrozen · 25-10-2016 05:41PM

swampgas wrote: »

Of course they will take it into consideration. But they haven't a lot of room for manoeuvre, as the UK wants to cross a very significant EU red line.

The UK continues to insist that freedom of movement must go, a fundamental pillar of the EU. There is either freedom or there isn't. It has a lot of value to many people in the EU, it has special significance to people who lived under communist regimes in Eastern Europe until relatively recently. IMO there is no way a consensus will emerge among the EU-27 (in the short term anyway) that would allow the UK to opt out of freedom of movement.

If the UK insists on rejecting freedom of movement, then the EU must (for its own survival) reject free market access. It's really that simple.

If the exporters get hurt, they get hurt - there is more than economics at stake here.

What's the "more" ? If countries want to opt out of free movement then let them.

130Kph · 25-10-2016 05:45PM

Brexit Bake Off: Cheesecake means cheesecake

Nate--IRL-- · 25-10-2016 05:45PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What's the "more" ? If countries want to opt out of free movement then let them.

They already can - by using article 50.

Nate

Iwasfrozen · 25-10-2016 05:46PM

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

They already can - by using article 50.

Nate

I mean let them without leaving the EU

demfad · 25-10-2016 05:47PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so the eu will not take in to consideration the wishes of its member states and will want to teach the British a lesson regardless of the cost? That should terrify Ireland.

The EU has to take into consideration the wishes of its member states otherwise the trade deal won't pass and the UK will be dumped into WTO rules. You seem to think that this will always be to the UK's advantage?
The UK economy will be disintegrate on WTO rules. There will be a lot of shrapnel but the EU has plenty of time to FIREWALL itself. So for the UK to get this deal passed it will have to offer Spain joint sovereignty on Gibralter. It may not have to pay an economic price there. Belgium will require tariffs lowered on some EU agricultural imports and so on......England will get some deals on things the EU cant produce or needs, otherwise NON!

The EU must be vigilant and make sure that the UK pays a big price for that interim deal. Because when the trade deal falls apart that is what the UK will ask (beg) the EU to let them keep. It must be soft Brexit with a big big price tag.

Wisest move for UK now. NO BREXIT.

So they would seek to penalise their biggest export partner?

That doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

The UK is not the EU's biggest export partner. The UK is part of the EU. You could take any one of the larger States out and make that claim. Article 50 hasnt been invoked-UK is still in EU- remember?

As an integrated part of a single market with a population of 60 million obviously the UK has a lot of intertrade inside the single market.
But even in 9 years when trade negotiations end the UK will be a smaller economy. It will fade thereafter as it struggles to get bad trade deals.

The EU will keep what it needs in UK trade. The rest will go.

Your country is going down the drain and you are cheerleading.

Fratton Fred · 25-10-2016 05:54PM

swampgas wrote: »

Of course they will take it into consideration. But they haven't a lot of room for manoeuvre, as the UK wants to cross a very significant EU red line.

The UK continues to insist that freedom of movement must go, a fundamental pillar of the EU. There is either freedom or there isn't. It has a lot of value to many people in the EU, it has special significance to people who lived under communist regimes in Eastern Europe until relatively recently. IMO there is no way a consensus will emerge among the EU-27 (in the short term anyway) that would allow the UK to opt out of freedom of movement.

If the UK insists on rejecting freedom of movement, then the EU must (for its own survival) reject free market access. It's really that simple.

If the exporters get hurt, they get hurt - there is more than economics at stake here.

so what you're saying, is that if the UK concedes on the freedom of movement demands, then they could get some pretty sizeable concessions from the eu?

Fratton Fred · 25-10-2016 05:56PM

demfad wrote: »

As an integrated part of a single market with a population of 60 million obviously the UK has a lot of intertrade inside the single market.
But even in 9 years when trade negotiations end the UK will be a smaller economy. It will fade thereafter as it struggles to get bad trade deals.

The EU will keep what it needs in UK trade. The rest will go.

Your country is going down the drain and you are cheerleading.

I'm certainly not cheerleading, I just disagree with your view which is, lets face it, made up of your own wishful thinking.

demfad · 25-10-2016 05:58PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'm certainly not cheerleading, I just disagree with your view which is, lets face it, made up of your own wishful thinking.

Antagonism can't replace strong argument. May and her 3 mice will learn this soon enough.

Iwasfrozen · 25-10-2016 06:01PM

Look at it this way.

Is the German Chancellor's position in danger if the UK is allowed undermine the EU? Not really.

Is the German Chancellor's position in danger if she fails protect trade with Germany's third latest trading partner? You better bloody believe it.

Politics will politic but those markets will stay open because if they don't heads will roll on both sides.

swampgas · 25-10-2016 06:02PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so what you're saying, is that if the UK concedes on the freedom of movement demands, then they could get some pretty sizeable concessions from the eu?

Possibly. I'm no expert

But then the political problem for May is that a sizeable chunk of the electorate expect immigration to be severely curtailed.

IMO she has to choose between getting a deal, probably involving free travel and making large financial contributions to the EU, and avoiding really really upsetting those who voted out based on immigration.

Fratton Fred · 25-10-2016 06:03PM

demfad wrote: »

Antagonism can't replace strong argument.

demfad wrote: »

May and her 3 mice will learn this soon enough.

no irony there then

FrancieBrady · 25-10-2016 06:06PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Look at it this way.

Is the German Chancellor's position in danger if the UK is allowed undermine the EU? Not really.

Is the German Chancellor's position in danger if she fails protect trade with Germany's third latest trading partner? You better bloody believe it.

Politics will politic but those markets will stay open because if they don't heads will roll on both sides.

What are you basing this on?
Seems to be a consensus that German industry will live with it, the EU being the more important project.
The EU project would suffer if too much concession is given to what are basically bully tactics.

Iwasfrozen · 25-10-2016 06:10PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What are you basing this on?
Seems to be a consensus that German industry will live with it, the EU being the more important project.
The EU project would suffer if too much concession is given to what are basically bully tactics.

The consensus according to who?

Germany is an exporting country, and exporting countries are reliant on markets to sell their goods. Yes the EU market is important, no one said it isn't. But so is the British market. The third most important in fact.

swampgas · 25-10-2016 06:13PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The consensus according to who?

Germany is an exporting country, and exporting countries are reliant on markets to sell their goods. Yes the EU market is important, no one said it isn't. But so is the British market. The third most important in fact.

True. But EU cohesion and equal treatment for all members trumps that.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/06/german-industry-cannot-save-britain-from-hard-brexit-warns-merke/

Fratton Fred · 25-10-2016 06:14PM

swampgas wrote: »

Possibly. I'm no expert

But then the political problem for May is that a sizeable chunk of the electorate expect immigration to be severely curtailed.

IMO she has to choose between getting a deal, probably involving free travel and making large financial contributions to the EU, and avoiding really really upsetting those who voted out based on immigration.

it is a ****ty stick she has picked up, but she is no fool and never shys away from the tough decisions. She also isn't about to let the British finance industry move to Frankfurt.

She knows staying in the single market is important and will do what she can to retain that. She is a Tory remember and they usually do whatever the CBI want them to do.

Christy42 · 25-10-2016 06:18PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The consensus according to who?

Germany is an exporting country, and exporting countries are reliant on markets to sell their goods. Yes the EU market is important, no one said it isn't. But so is the British market. The third most important in fact.

Britain is betting it's entire economy on a deal being done. Germany does not.

Seriously by this logic the UK should demand 1 million euro a year in tributes from Germany for allowing free trade because the German's benefit from it.

Sure this entire argument goes down the drain as quickly as the UK economy when you consider whst the UK will lose if they lose that financial passport but you seem happy enough to ignore that. So should the UK demand a tribute in addition to everything else it wants in these negotiations? What would a fair amount be?

Brexit: The Last Stand (No name calling)

Comments