Brexit discussion thread II

steddyeddy · 15-10-2017 03:37PM

MPs say they'll block a no deal brexit. I think there's a fundamental missunderstanding at play here. A no deal scenario isn't something imposed on the UK. No deal simply means the absense of an agreement on all the terms like divoirce bill, border and citizen's rights. It's not something that can be blocked.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-41627340

solodeogloria · 15-10-2017 03:58PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Will it? You're assuming that the economy isn't going to shrink after Brexit, something that Economists seem likely. The UK is a massive benefactor of EU scientific investment. The government won't be able to match this as there are farming subsidies to consider. Science will be seen as expendable by comparison. This is something which genuinely worries people.

Good afternoon!

With all due respect. "EU funding" in respect to Britain is simply UK taxpayers money redistributed by the EU.

You're missing a very clear point. If the UK pays £13.7bn into the European Union coffers every year, and gets £4.5bn back. That isn't "European money". That is British taxpayers money.

All the farming subsidies, science funding, structural funds and so on come out of this £4.5bn of UK taxpayers money. Why is this so difficult to understand?

After this there's still £8bn more that can be spent on other things when it is repatriated.

Pointing out that the EU is kind enough to give Britain back £4.5bn of its own money isn't news and it isn't somehow a massive argument for staying in.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The Rape of Lucretia · 15-10-2017 04:03PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

MPs say they'll block a no deal brexit. I think there's a fundamental missunderstanding at play here. A no deal scenario isn't something impose on the UK. No deal simply means the absense of an agreement on all the terms like divoirce bill, border and citizen's rights. It's not something that can be blocked.

Are there not two things on which to 'deal' - the divorce settlement, and the future relationship?
The UK forgot about the former and thought all negotiations would be about the latter, or, thought all would be negotiated as one deal, and that the divorce bill and implications would be lost in the Overall Deal and so hidden from their citizens.
To Brexit, a deal of some sort, on the divorce details, is mandatory - if not, will EU countries not vote against a no-deal, and so the UK doesnt Brexit. As Junker said, they cannot just walk away from the bar and expect those still there to pay for their drinks.

No deal on the future relationship is certainly possible (assuming they have Brexited). This is the detail on future trade rights, citizens rights, travel, etc. But that would mean there is no trade, no travel, etc AT ALL. So some form of deal or deals will be done. But may be done piecemeal, over years, after the Brexit. These are the elements the May wants to handle during the transition phase.

At the moment, not dealing with the divorce properly, means the EU has no interest, quite rightly, in entertaining talks on the post divorce phase. The UK surely understands this, but in the madness that is Brexit, is stuck between a rock - not being able to openly admit to voters the price and detail of the divorce in isolation in order to make progress with the EU, and a hard place - no progress possible with the EU since they dont want the divorce cost spelled out without the fog of disguise that would be the post-divorce deal benefits in the eyes of UK Brexiteers.

Calina · 15-10-2017 04:10PM

Brexit happens unless the Article 50 period is extended. Exit deal will need ratification on both sides.

If it is not ratified, Brexit happens with no exit arrangements.

Broadly, there is a greater risk of the UK not ratifying for internal reasons although there are 27 countries on the other side. They gave Barnier very strict framework to operate in so I see the EU not agreeing as lower risk. Walking out on negotiations is being used as a bargaining chip by sone British commentators and the UK lacks a clear negotiating policy.

No deal does not mean Brexit does not happen. It means the UK is in dire straits.

The Rape of Lucretia · 15-10-2017 04:17PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

With all due respect. "EU funding" in respect to Britain is simply UK taxpayers money redistributed by the EU.

You're missing a very clear point. If the UK pays £13.7bn into the European Union coffers every year, and gets £4.5bn back. That isn't "European money". That is British taxpayers money.

No argument. It is indeed British and Northern Irish money. As is the further £21.4bn that comes into the UK economy by virtue of being a full-member-with-opt-outs of the EU.

I cannot understand why, to their own disadvantage, a false calculation is presented on the economic benefits of EU membership. This simple, 'we pay in this, and we get this back', is like saying "I handed over a tenner to my newsagent this morning and he gave me €8 back - I am never going to that news agent again!". Leaving out of my logic the fact that he gave me a newspaper, which I wanted, and so did benefit from the deal, not lose out to the tune of €2 as the simpler statement suggests.

I can only conclude that it is indeed anti foreigner feeling, old Empire jingoism, distrust of these bad egg Germans that we gave a good thrashing to in 1918 and 1945 to put them back in their box, and a selfishness, shortsighted, unwillingness to be part of the construction of a greater Europe.
And so the money equation is deliberately bent in order to sway along the uneducated Sun and Mail demographic who have no capability to judge what is good for themselves anyway, but are let down by their political leadership, who do know better, yet exploit them.

There is no such thing as an rational, intelligent, informed, Brexit voter.

fash · 15-10-2017 04:20PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

After this there's still £8bn more that can be spent on other things when it is repatriated.

In theory there was £8bn - except now hundreds of millions/billions have to be spent on customs infrastructure and new civil service departments. There is the fall in the value of sterling to consider - knocking the equivalent of another few billion/year off UK tax intake and then there is lower tax intake due to lower volumes of trade. That is before the cost of repatriating millions of OAPs from Spain is taken into consideration and kicking out those young Eastern European workers - knocking a dent into tax take and increasing costs.
The markets that the UK will want to plug into (using its new found freedom) are both small and/or far away and will have entirely different regulatory environments and standards making exporting high value goods difficult and the transportation costs will be prohibitive for low value goods.
Let's see what happens...

Sand · 15-10-2017 04:46PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I really find posts like this amusing, especially on an Irish forum. It’s like Cabinteely fans calling Man United ****. It’s just petty school yard “my Dad’s harder than your dad”.

Its not though, is it? Making an observation that the UK military is not a "great loss" to the EU is just that. Its not a loss (NATO) and its not great relative to the only realistic military scenario for the EU (Russia).

The UK, France, Italy, Spain and Poland have been involved in the exact same form of conflicts for the past 20 years, so I’m not sure why the others would be any better equipped than the uk. The UK doesn’t block at coordination either, it is very involved in eu military cooperation. What it does block, is an eu army, which lets face it, Ireland will block as well. ( but still hide behind, no doubt).

The UK has the smallest number of active tanks of all the nations you listed there. The UK continues to prioritise 'expeditionary warfare' and cap badges, at the expense of useful military capability. Despite already having the least amount of tanks, the UK apparently plans to further cut its armoured infantry brigades from 3 to 2.

The UK has removed itself from future EU defence planning. I don't think we will see an EU army. That's an entirely illogical British fear - there is no political unity to order an EU army into battle. What we could see is greater co-ordination and integration of EU forces to get better effect for every euro spent. The Netherlands and Germany already have significantly integrated their armies, and other states like Romania and the Czech Republic are seeking similar partnerships to get more effect for less spending.

And of course, the uk has one of only two nuclear capabilities in the region.

Yes, but that's not really a practical option for any military conflict short of a nuclear war which is to be avoided at all costs and again, the UK is still in NATO (for now at least). As it stands, a nuclear strike on the EU is a nuclear strike on NATO with all that follows from that. So nothing is lost.

Enzokk · 15-10-2017 08:16PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

With all due respect. "EU funding" in respect to Britain is simply UK taxpayers money redistributed by the EU.

You're missing a very clear point. If the UK pays £13.7bn into the European Union coffers every year, and gets £4.5bn back. That isn't "European money". That is British taxpayers money.

All the farming subsidies, science funding, structural funds and so on come out of this £4.5bn of UK taxpayers money. Why is this so difficult to understand?

After this there's still £8bn more that can be spent on other things when it is repatriated.

Pointing out that the EU is kind enough to give Britain back £4.5bn of its own money isn't news and it isn't somehow a massive argument for staying in.

Those numbers seem good but it seems to suggest that everything will stay the same and the UK received no benefit from being in the EU. We have already seen the currency fall (maybe because it was overvalued) and we have seen growth slow from projections. Unless all of this is just a coincidence and unrelated to the Brexit vote it seems you are safe to assume the UK economy will benefit from leaving the EU when you factor in all that extra money the UK will have. I think you can send £350m (or less) per week to the NHS and you are free to argue for it again.

I am just wondering, you mentioned two things that are contradictory in some of your previous posts. You agreed that both the Leave and Remain campaigns were not truthful during the referendum, but you also mentioned that,

solodeogloria wrote:

I think the main arguments for leaving still largely hold though.

So which main argument from leave do you still believe to hold that are not part of the lies? What are those arguments that still convince you, from the campaign, that leaving the EU is now the right thing to do?

ancapailldorcha · 15-10-2017 08:31PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

With all due respect. "EU funding" in respect to Britain is simply UK taxpayers money redistributed by the EU.

You're missing a very clear point. If the UK pays £13.7bn into the European Union coffers every year, and gets £4.5bn back. That isn't "European money". That is British taxpayers money.

All the farming subsidies, science funding, structural funds and so on come out of this £4.5bn of UK taxpayers money. Why is this so difficult to understand?

After this there's still £8bn more that can be spent on other things when it is repatriated.

Pointing out that the EU is kind enough to give Britain back £4.5bn of its own money isn't news and it isn't somehow a massive argument for staying in.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Tell me, how many Polish Universities are getting EU science funding? Lithuanian Universities? It makes sense to invest your resources in a manner which yields the best result meaning that the UK's largely excellent Universities are the ones which will benefit most. 4 of the world's top 5/6 Universities, including my employer are British.

Following on from that, you're assuming that this money will be available year after year and you've provided nothing whatsoever to substantiate this assertion.

By the way, I would appreciate it if you would back up your claim that most remainers are Euro-federalists.

steddyeddy · 15-10-2017 08:56PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

With all due respect. "EU funding" in respect to Britain is simply UK taxpayers money redistributed by the EU.

You're missing a very clear point. If the UK pays £13.7bn into the European Union coffers every year, and gets £4.5bn back. That isn't "European money". That is British taxpayers money.

All the farming subsidies, science funding, structural funds and so on come out of this £4.5bn of UK taxpayers money. Why is this so difficult to understand?

After this there's still £8bn more that can be spent on other things when it is repatriated.

Pointing out that the EU is kind enough to give Britain back £4.5bn of its own money isn't news and it isn't somehow a massive argument for staying in.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

A huge missunderstanding on the part of Brexit voters. Grants and subsidies from the EU are only part of the benefit.

The major economic benefit is being in the single market. We're about to find out how much that benefit is worth soon.

16-10-2017 12:25AM

I have access to only a piece of this Daily Telegraph article. But apparently, Britain is £490 billion 'poorer' than previously thought. Also FDI by companies is plummeting.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/10/15/britains-missing-billions-revised-figures-reveal-uk-490bn-poorer/

BoatMad · 16-10-2017 02:03AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Tell me, how many Polish Universities are getting EU science funding? Lithuanian Universities? It makes sense to invest your resources in a manner which yields the best result meaning that the UK's largely excellent Universities are the ones which will benefit most. 4 of the world's top 5/6 Universities, including my employer are British.

Following on from that, you're assuming that this money will be available year after year and you've provided nothing whatsoever to substantiate this assertion.

By the way, I would appreciate it if you would back up your claim that most remainers are Euro-federalists.

You'd be more believable if you fact checked your own argument

Uk has 3 universities in the worlds top 10 and 2 in the top 6 ( times education supplement )

Uk universities have been and were huge beneficiaries of EU funding and more importantly multilateral initiatives

All of which are being removed from uk institutions. I have two friends that are professors in uk universities and they view the damage as incalculable

BoatMad · 16-10-2017 02:10AM

Ted Plain wrote: »

Firstly, I would like to thank all contributors to this thread. It is endlessly long, but full of quality, thought provoking posts.

There are so many permutations that I don't even know where to begin in commenting.

Although at first I was far from happy with the Brexit outcome, I now now seeing no other outcome as a hard, dirty Brexit.

It will hurt Ireland, but it will hurt the UK massively more.

I read an article in spiegel.de last week and they hit upon the Brexiteer fallacy that the German car manufacturers would put pressure on the German government to intervene so as to protect German car exports to the UK. Seemingly not. They recognise that the EU market is more important and if the cost of Brexit is no more exports to the UK then so be it.

I'm also going to give you a bit of gossip here in so far as my missus works for a big international company based in city centre Dublin and they are upgrading to a bigger office. A London agency has just reserved 100,000 sq. ft on behalf of a client, which is diminishing the available office space on offer. Make of that what you will.

There is a blackly comedic quality to the slogan about giving £350 million a week to the NHS. The way I can see things panning out is that the US-UK trade deal will involve the Americans dictating that the NHS is disbanded and that the market be opened up to American health insurance. Trumpcare!

Another facet of the whole thing is that old enemies of the UK will have their say when it comes to EU or WTO negotiations. All the losers of the Yalta Conference will have grounds to want to extract vengeance on a weakened victor, not to mention Argentina. All other potential suitors will smell blood and the UK will end up with bad deals all around.

My last thought for now turns to what it is exactly that the UK intends to trade with the rest of the world and how they will have a better deal than they do at present. These countries don't eat mince pies, sausage rolls and Stilton so what exactly do they have to offer? I'm sure they don't need Canary Wharf repackaged futures or any of that sort of nonsense. A trade deal with the US and, say, Brazil, will involve having to accept -aside from the famous chlorine US chicken - Brazilian and Argentinian foot and mouth beef and US hormone-fed GMO Frankenstein BSE beef. This will result in all exports from the UK into Europe being stopped with immediate effect.

My last thought for now turns to Shell and Unilever. These two titans are jointly HQed in the UK and the Netherlands. I believe that the loss of these two alone would plunge any country into recession.

I see nothing but a calamitous, catastrophic cluster****.

Brexit will destroy UK farmers , who will become subsidy junkies with no market access.

It will be study material for generations of students

The last time the UK " won " it endured a decade of austerity followed by the country needing the imf in the early 70s.

They still convinced them selves of course that they " won" , while they use the " losers " cars , aeroplanes , trans etc.

" fog in channel, continent cut off " , but as Rees-moog said recently but remember " agincourt " , oh right that's fine then

There isn't a single truthful brexit argument

Junkyard Tom · 16-10-2017 02:23AM

BoatMad wrote: »

They still convinced them selves of course that they " won" , while they use the " losers " cars , aeroplanes , trans etc.

That's the odd thing about economic optimism with Brextremists. Britain sold off an awful lot of its manufacturing industry so there's going to be little in the way of 'Britain's interests first' when it comes to the crunch. I'm not sure there's any good reason the entire Mini™ range of cars couldn't be manufactured in Austria.

murphaph · 16-10-2017 09:09AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I have access to only a piece of this Daily Telegraph article. But apparently, Britain is £490 billion 'poorer' than previously thought. Also FDI by companies is plummeting.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/10/15/britains-missing-billions-revised-figures-reveal-uk-490bn-poorer/

It's available on some other media outlets now. This is pretty shocking and really should see Brexit halted if at all possible. They're talking about that being equivalent to 25% of GDP wiped off the books.

http://m.independent.ie/world-news/europe/britain/new-figures-show-britain-500bn-poorer-than-thought-36230217.html

Enzokk · 16-10-2017 09:10AM

So let's get this straight. The UK has made projections on the most optimistic of figures from the OBR and there is less money available to spend than thought. Now it seems that there is a £490 billion hole in the finances as well.

An people still think it is a good idea to cause more uncertainty to Brexit?

https://twitter.com/exitthelemming/status/919829318259404800

What would scare me the most about these stories is that they are not just reported in what people would consider to be liberal newspapers.

Trying to make sense of the UK productivity puzzle

Enzokk · 16-10-2017 09:17AM

murphaph wrote: »

It's available on some other media outlets now. This is pretty shocking and really should see Brexit halted if at all possible. They're talking about that being equivalent to 25% of GDP wiped off the books.

http://m.independent.ie/world-news/europe/britain/new-figures-show-britain-500bn-poorer-than-thought-36230217.html

I think the timing of David Davis and Theresa May going to the EU for talks is no coincidence when these stories came out. There has to be a give from the UK and I think we may see the end of the current government as any compromise will be seized on by the zealous Brexiteers in the Conservative party.

ambro25 · 16-10-2017 09:19AM

Enzokk wrote: »

So let's get this straight. The UK has made projections on the most optimistic of figures from the OBR and there is less money available to spend than thought. Now it seems that there is a £490 billion hole in the finances as well.

An people still think it is a good idea to cause more uncertainty to Brexit?
<...>

I wonder how much of this has anything to do with Theresa's jetting off to Brussels in extremis today?

EDIT - snap your later post

Professor Moriarty · 16-10-2017 10:10AM

ambro25 wrote: »

I wonder how much of this has anything to do with Theresa's jetting off to Brussels in extremis today?

EDIT - snap your later post

I'd say they've gone over to plead for help in extricating themselves from this mess of their own making now that they've found a gaping hole in their accounts. I hope they're told to foxtrot oscar. Best for all concerned if the Tories are left to twist in the wind.

Nody · 16-10-2017 10:21AM

I think this is the worst part from the Independent's version of the article:

The revision is disturbing given that foreign direct investment into Britain has collapsed, plummeting from a net £120bn in the first half of last year to a net outflow of £25bn this year.

That's a drop of 145 billion GBP of investment in UK in 1 year; but hey project fear was all wrong stating that investments would be reduced and the economy would take a hit so has to be fake news as clearly as the Brexiteers stated it would not happen.

On another fun note this morning Dominic Cummings, also known as the brains behind Brexit, had a few choice comments on how things have been going so far:

Dominic Cummings told Prospect that Theresa May and Mr Davis "have provided a case study of grotesque uselessness" in the way they are dealing with the Brexit process.

Michael Gove, predicted there would be an "inevitable inquiry" into why Brexit occurred, and said that "schoolchildren will shake their heads in disbelief that such characters could have had leading roles in government".

called Mr Davis "lazy as a toad" and declared that the Government decision to leave the European Atomic Energy Community was made by "morons" who were "near-retarded on every dimension".

The scary part is I can't really disagree with anything he's stated either...

Professor Moriarty · 16-10-2017 10:25AM

Nody wrote: »

I think this is the worst part from the Independent's version of the article:
That's a drop of 145 billion GBP of investment in UK in 1 year; but hey project fear was all wrong stating that investments would be reduced and the economy would take a hit so has to be fake news as clearly as the Brexiteers stated it would not happen.

Jaysus. That's an eye-watering reversal. Still, when they join NAFTA the FDI will pour in again. Tally ho.

Enzokk · 16-10-2017 10:49AM

Nody wrote: »

I think this is the worst part from the Independent's version of the article:
That's a drop of 145 billion GBP of investment in UK in 1 year; but hey project fear was all wrong stating that investments would be reduced and the economy would take a hit so has to be fake news as clearly as the Brexiteers stated it would not happen.

On another fun note this morning Dominic Cummings, also known as the brains behind Brexit, had a few choice comments on how things have been going so far:

The scary part is I can't really disagree with anything he's stated either...

But with a remit to leave the EU that is to leave all of the EU. David Cameron really screwed up by not clarifying the question as at the moment if the UK doesn't leave the EU in total there will still be resentment on how great it could have been had the right people been in charge.

steddyeddy · 16-10-2017 12:16PM

This is a huge development. Project fear becomes project fact. It certainly puts the debate about the Brexit divorce bill into perspective.

Professor Moriarty · 16-10-2017 12:19PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

This is a huge development. Project fear becomes project fact. It certainly puts the debate about the Brexit divorce bill into perspective.

She's buying Juncker dinner and ringing Macron and Merkel to plead her case. An EU source said that she's wasting her time. Schadenfreude is ugly but when it comes to hypocritical Tories, it's allowed.

ambro25 · 16-10-2017 12:26PM

Nody wrote: »

<...> That's a drop of 145 billion GBP of investment in UK in 1 year <...>

£2.8bn-a-week's worth of investment down the populist tubes, for the sake of party politics...well, f*** me! :mad:

The worst is not that, Nody: the worst is the combination of the £500bn chasm in the UK's finances and the capacity to plug that chasm vanishing through lack of investment. At the macro scale, that's not a hiccup, it's a bloody heart attack. A vicious circle if ever there was one.

Oh well, at least now there are independent numbers to back my business gut feel of the past few months. Vindication never tasted so bitter

I think Osbourne's proposed emergency budget of 2016 is going to look fairly benign, by the time Spreadsheet Phil unveils his next budget.

Lemming · 16-10-2017 12:33PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

She's buying Juncker dinner and ringing Macron and Merkel to plead her case. An EU source said that she's wasting her time. Schadenfreude is ugly but when it comes to hypocritical Tories, it's allowed.

When I read that she was going I thought that she's making the exact same mistakes that Cameron made in attempting to love-bomb the Germans, as if they control the EU. Simple continuation of "we have no clue how the EU works" stuff. Then I read that eye-watering article linked about regards 25% of GDP basically wiped out. TBH, I couldn't have imagined that level of financial carnage. It only takes a few percent to make itself felt, but that amount is very much into the "experts, who knew right?!!!!" territory of face-palm reactions. What's even more terrifying is that the UK hasn't even left yet.

Whilst I'm sure this revelation should stiffen a few more spines and open a few more eyes, I still believe that at this juncture, the UK needs Brexit. Cancelling A50 will simply see another re-run of the last 40 years only it'll be far more poisonous and vitriolic as the cancer continues to fester and ravage the national psyche.

Capt'n Midnight · 16-10-2017 12:42PM

Round up of bad news. Young people in the UK don't have a lot to look forward to. Reminds me of how things used to be

Financial regulator warns of growing debt among young people "There has been a clear shift in the generational pattern of wealth and income, and that translates into a greater indebtedness at a younger age.

"That reflects lower levels of real income, lower levels of asset ownership. There are quite different generational experiences," he said.

Vauxhall plans 400 job cuts at Ellesmere Port as sales fallHe told the BBC: "The depreciation of sterling since the Brexit vote has meant that the cost of importing components has gone up, so it's a more costly plant."

The Bank of England should hold off from raising interest rates next month, according to a forecasting body. However, the EY Item Club said such a move risked hurting the UK's "fragile economic outlook".

BCC: 'Robust' manufacturing fails to boost UK growth BCC director general Dr Adam Marshall said: "The uninspiring results we see in our third-quarter findings reflect the fact that political uncertainty, currency fluctuations and the vagaries of the Brexit process are continuing to weigh on business growth prospects.

UK farmers will 'grow more food' if no Brexit deal - minister Agricultural products are one of the UK's most important exports while the UK sources roughly 70% of the food it imports from the EU,
^^^^^
This one is just wishful thinking. The UK imports over half of it's food and feed.
by the mid-2040s, the country will only be able to produce enough food to feed 53% of its population.

Professor Moriarty · 16-10-2017 12:46PM

Lemming wrote: »

When I read that she was going I thought that she's making the exact same mistakes that Cameron made in attempting to love-bomb the Germans, as if they control the EU. Simple continuation of "we have no clue how the EU works" stuff. Then I read that eye-watering article linked about regards 25% of GDP basically wiped out. TBH, I couldn't have imagined that level of financial carnage. It only takes a few percent to make itself felt, but that amount is very much into the "experts, who knew right?!!!!" territory of face-palm reactions. What's even more terrifying is that the UK hasn't even left yet.

Whilst I'm sure this revelation should stiffen a few more spines and open a few more eyes, I still believe that at this juncture, the UK needs Brexit. Cancelling A50 will simply see another re-run of the last 40 years only it'll be far more poisonous and vitriolic as the cancer continues to fester and ravage the national psyche.

I dunno. I think if they cancel and return to the fold, they might do so with a different perspective and with their tail between their legs. Except for Major's bastards of course. They'll always dine out on eurosceptism.

carrickbally · 16-10-2017 12:49PM

How do I stop all the posts being emailed to me?

FrancieBrady · 16-10-2017 12:50PM

carrickbally wrote: »

How do I stop all the posts being emailed to me?

Go into your setting and turn off notifications

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments