nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Rhineshark

kuro68k wrote: »

The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.

1. The EU
2. Remainers
3. Ireland
4. Corbyn

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

murphaph

RobMc59 wrote: »

That is sadly the attitude prevalent on this thread which discourages British posters from joining in the discussion and it is reduced to an being an echo chamber of "brit bashers".

Give it a rest Rob. I would have been called a west Brit by many on here and never had a problem with the UK or its peoples. I've family there. My mother went to school there. The UK is unrecognisable to me today. It has become a place I don't much like the look of. Brexit is nasty stuff in many respects.

prawnsambo

RobMc59 wrote: »

That is sadly the attitude prevalent on this thread which discourages British posters from joining in the discussion and it is reduced to an being an echo chamber of "brit bashers".

I've had discussions with brexiters on twitter. Not just here. And I've yet to hear anything from them that isn't cobbled together rubbish from brexit central, the tabloid press or just plain fantasy.

Like the current mot du jour: 'WTO rules'. When you point out that yes, Britain is a member of the WTO, but no, they haven't an agreed schedule of tariffs and quotas, because countries (including their erstwhile colonies) don't want their EU quotas pro-rata handed over to the UK, they go silent. Or that the WTO is 163 countries, all with a veto, who would make negotiating with the EU look like a walk in the park.

Captain Obvious

Shelga wrote: »

It’s not ‘Brit bashing’- it’s frustration at people who don’t think there are any downsides to Brexit whatsoever, and if only someone who ‘believed’ more was in charge, everything would be great. I’m talking about people who still think that now, not in 2016. How can these people be thought of as anything other than absolute simpletons, or incredibly arrogant, or both?

The James O'Brien show this last week has been depressing in that regard.

Enzokk

RobMc59 wrote: »

That is sadly the attitude prevalent on this thread which discourages British posters from joining in the discussion and it is reduced to an being an echo chamber of "brit bashers".

Honestly, what serious discussions can be had when Brexit will deliver this:

The UK would be significantly worse off under all possible Brexit scenarios in 15 years’ time, according to a benchmark economic analysis produced by a range of government departments including the Treasury.

UK significantly worse off under all Brexit scenarios – official forecast

But we are wrong when we shake our heads at the continued insistence from those in the UK to continue with the folly that is Brexit, yes we are the ones stopping serious discussions with people about Brexit.

Shelga

RobMc59 wrote: »

That is sadly the attitude prevalent on this thread which discourages British posters from joining in the discussion and it is reduced to an being an echo chamber of "brit bashers".

It’s not ‘Brit bashing’- it’s frustration at people who don’t think there are any downsides to Brexit whatsoever, and if only someone who ‘believed’ more was in charge, everything would be great. I’m talking about people who still think that now, not in 2016. How can these people be thought of as anything other than absolute simpletons, or incredibly arrogant, or both?

Enzokk

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's just the latest in a long line of financial institutions moving capital out of London. Remember Braclays moved €250 billion of assets to Dublin just a couple of months ago? And there's Bank of America and Merill Lynch and Lloyds and a whole host of insurance companies, hedge funds and other ancillary institutions as well. Dublin even picked up a gold vault recently. Some of it may be reversible, but the vast majority is gone and staying gone.

Seems that this is known to people but are being kept quiet for the fear of the press.

https://twitter.com/SebDance/status/1068426316783988736

RobMc59

boggerman1 wrote: »

Watching question time last nite and even though it won't be good for this country I hope to god the Brits crash out,fall off a cliff and the rest.the level of ignorance displayed by those on the panel and particularly by the audience was astonishing.as for that guy from the pub chain if I ever in Dublin again I wouldn't go within an asses roar of his establishment

That is sadly the attitude prevalent on this thread which discourages British posters from joining in the discussion and it is reduced to an being an echo chamber of "brit bashers".

LeinsterDub

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's just the latest in a long line of financial institutions moving capital out of London. Remember Braclays moved €250 billion of assets to Dublin just a couple of months ago? And there's Bank of America and Merill Lynch and Lloyds and a whole host of insurance companies, hedge funds and other ancillary institutions as well. Dublin even picked up a gold vault recently. Some of it may be reversible, but the vast majority is gone and staying gone.

Indeed even if they decide to stay they are still hopelessly divided and what's to say in 2 years time ukip isn't holding the balance of power demanding a other referendum. Safer to go to places with support for the EU in the 70's or higher

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

Surely even with a comprehensive trade deal that will include services you will see London lose a lot of business. Companies will be making plans to stay in the EU and with the uncertainty of whether such a deal can be concluded at all, nevermind with a deadline always looming, even the mighty City of London will face pain when the UK eventually leaves.

That's just the latest in a long line of financial institutions moving capital out of London. Remember Braclays moved €250 billion of assets to Dublin just a couple of months ago? And there's Bank of America and Merill Lynch and Lloyds and a whole host of insurance companies, hedge funds and other ancillary institutions as well. Dublin even picked up a gold vault recently. Some of it may be reversible, but the vast majority is gone and staying gone.

boggerman1

Watching question time last nite and even though it won't be good for this country I hope to god the Brits crash out,fall off a cliff and the rest.the level of ignorance displayed by those on the panel and particularly by the audience was astonishing.as for that guy from the pub chain if I ever in Dublin again I wouldn't go within an asses roar of his establishment

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

That's good-triglycerides will reduce!:)

Cut out the one-liners please.

RobMc59

Peregrinus wrote: »

What's new will be tariffs. Fisheries is to be excluded from the UK/EU customs union, so that EU consumers will have to bear tariffs on the fish they import from EU fisheries, and UK fisherman will suffer tariffs on the fish they export to the EU (which is most of the fish they catch).

Brexit was sold as a good deal for the UK fishing industry on the basis that UK fishers would have exclusive acccess to UK fishing grounds, but still have tariff-free access to their markets in the EU. In the real world, getting the first but not the second is a mixed blessing. It's a disaster for UK shellfish, inshore and freshwater fishers, and for the UK fish farming industry, since they already had exclusive access to the waters they fish; for them it's all downside. More mixed for the mackerel fishers, etc; they'll have their own grounds, but the market price for what they catch will slump if they are cut off from their retail markets. Expect lots of marketing campaigns encouraging Britons to eat oily fish.

That's good-triglycerides will reduce!:)

Enzokk

prawnsambo wrote: »

He also inexplicably leaves out the period from 1972 to 1993. For the record, UK GDP grew by 62% in that period.

Lies, damned lies and statistics, right?

The article makes good reading for Frankfurt,

London to lose €800bn to Frankfurt as banks prepare for Brexit

London will lose up to to €800bn (£700bn) in assets to rival financial hub Frankfurt by March 2019 as banks start to transfer business to the German city before Brexit day.

The lobby group Frankfurt Main Finance released the figure after it was confirmed that 30 banks and financial firms had chosen the city as the site of their new EU headquarters.

But with several banks – including JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – planning to spread their operations across a number of cities including Dublin and Paris, the lobby group believes the number of firms committed to expanding or setting up offices in Frankfurt will be closer to 37.

Ultimately it will mean draining billions of pounds worth of assets from London to companies’ German operations within months.

Surely even with a comprehensive trade deal that will include services you will see London lose a lot of business. Companies will be making plans to stay in the EU and with the uncertainty of whether such a deal can be concluded at all, nevermind with a deadline always looming, even the mighty City of London will face pain when the UK eventually leaves.

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

For someone that has a history degree he seems to not have a grasp of history at all. The UK had a postwar recovery as did all other countries. Someone on a reply also points out that the US GDP grew by 154% in the period 1948-1972 and then only 89% between 1993 and 2017. The obvious conclusion then should be that the US should leave the EU as well as they are obviously holding them back.

He also inexplicably leaves out the period from 1972 to 1993. For the record, UK GDP grew by 62% in that period.

Enzokk

One of those morning recapping what was said yesterday.

Theresa May appeared before the Liaison Committee yesterday morning. I would class this as a typical May performance where she avoids answering questions with straight answers but also adds sprinkles of unicorns and wanting her cake as well.

Liaison Committee - Parliament TV

As an example she is asked about Freedom of Movement. She insists that it will end and when it is pointed out to her that the plan seems to be to allow immigrants that earn more than £30K pa to obtain visas to settle in the UK and any arrangements will most likely be on a reciprocal basis with the other countries, it will mean UK students and young people will lose their right to go to the EU to work in those countries like they do now. She doesn't say this will happen but seems to be under the impression that this will continue after Brexit somehow.

This exchange starts at 09h23 where Pete Wishart a SNP MP asks the questions.

Then starting at 09h37 you have Dr Julien Lewis once again asking questions about who will put up a border if there is no deal. I find this frustrating because she isn't forthright with the MP or the country on this. She knows the UK cannot put up a border between NI and Europe but she has also been big on talking about the Union so she cannot be seen to be the one breaking up the Union by putting up a border between NI and the rest of the UK. So she waffles her way through line of questioning.

Then Yvette Cooper asks her question right after at 09h45 and asks her questions about security and what is and what is not in the agreements she has got from the EU. She also goes on to ask the PM about the customs union and amazingly the PM has a solution where the UK will not be aligned to the common external tariff but will not have rules of origins checks. Her solution is Chequers, which in case we forget has been demolished by her own party and rejected by the EU as well. This starts around 09h48.

Those are some of what I found interesting but Theresa May has a gift to bore you to death with the way she answers questions.

In other tweets, John Redwood has waded himself into statistics to show categorically that leaving the EU is not just the people's choice but the EU have been holding the UK back.

https://twitter.com/johnredwood/status/1068039025381044226

For someone that has a history degree he seems to not have a grasp of history at all. The UK had a postwar recovery as did all other countries. Someone on a reply also points out that the US GDP grew by 154% in the period 1948-1972 and then only 89% between 1993 and 2017. The obvious conclusion then should be that the US should leave the EU as well as they are obviously holding them back.

hometruths

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

May is a committed unionist. She would never sanction something like this, and even if she tried it she would lose all the support she has as the party is very vocal about its support for the union. There was a story back in March where she reportedly warned one of her colleagues to be careful about the prospect of a border poll as she was concerned they might not win it.

Anyway the GFA is clear that it is the Secretary of State that sanctions a border poll, and only when it is believed that it's likely to return a pro-Unity vote.

You make two valid points, but surely if TM is warning govt colleagues that they might not win a border poll (and the polls are shifting that way) then the SoS for NI might feasibly believe the same thing?

Akrasia

EdgeCase wrote: »

I know this may sound a bit harsh but I'm now of the opinion that Brexit has to happen and if it's a crash out, so be it. They will just have to learn the hard way that there are consequences to political decisions and that they are not just having a debate in the pub. This is the real world.

If Brexit doesn't happen, the outcome is likely to be never ending instability in the UK and that has an issue for the EU. It's not as if the result were reversed that the Brexiteer politics would go away. You'd just have a slight bit of calm and then they would be back ranting and raving again in a few months time.

You can warn people of the risks of a decision they are taking, but you can't prevent them from taking it. The British electorate are perfectly entitled to chose something that is enormously damaging to their own interests - that's democracy.

I mean you can explain hundreds of times that fire is hot but if someone's determined to stick their finger into it, what can you do?

Brexit isn't just children putting their fingers in the fire, its negligent abusive parents telling their children to put their fingers in the fire. The Brexit campaign was fundamentally corrupt and the people of Britain have been systematically brainwashed by anti EU lies over decades in their media.

If they crash out and their economy collapses and there are food shortages etc, this won't teach them a lesson, it will reinforce their belief that the EU was out to get them all along.

The UK politicians need to sell the benefits of the EU to the people instead of talking about how the EU is always holding them back and interfering in their freedom.

Every time TM opens her mouth she makes everything worse

eire4

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes, but you could do that without brexiting, and without buggering up the Scottish fishing industry.

Well the Scots will take care of that part I imagine within a few years by leaving the UK and It seems having a straight forward path to rejoining the EU as an independent Scotland.

Peregrinus

Spook_ie wrote: »

Be no harm in encouraging a healthier diet, that goes for Ireland to.

Yes, but you could do that without brexiting, and without buggering up the Scottish fishing industry.

Spook_ie

Peregrinus wrote: »

What's new will be tariffs. Fisheries is to be excluded from the UK/EU customs union, so that EU consumers will have to bear tariffs on the fish they import from EU fisheries, and UK fisherman will suffer tariffs on the fish they export to the EU (which is most of the fish they catch).

Brexit was sold as a good deal for the UK fishing industry on the basis that UK fishers would have exclusive acccess to UK fishing grounds, but still have tariff-free access to their markets in the EU. In the real world, getting the first but not the second is a mixed blessing. It's a disaster for UK shellfish, inshore and freshwater fishers, and for the UK fish farming industry, since they already had exclusive access to the waters they fish; for them it's all downside. More mixed for the mackerel fishers, etc; they'll have their own grounds, but the market price for what they catch will slump if they are cut off from their retail markets. Expect lots of marketing campaigns encouraging Britons to eat oily fish.

Be no harm in encouraging a healthier diet, that goes for Ireland to.

Peregrinus

RobMc59 wrote: »

Countries will still buy mackrel and Britain will still buy fish from the Scandinavian countries-nothing new there.

What's new will be tariffs. Fisheries is to be excluded from the UK/EU customs union, so that EU consumers will have to bear tariffs on the fish they import from EU fisheries, and UK fisherman will suffer tariffs on the fish they export to the EU (which is most of the fish they catch).

Brexit was sold as a good deal for the UK fishing industry on the basis that UK fishers would have exclusive acccess to UK fishing grounds, but still have tariff-free access to their markets in the EU. In the real world, getting the first but not the second is a mixed blessing. It's a disaster for UK shellfish, inshore and freshwater fishers, and for the UK fish farming industry, since they already had exclusive access to the waters they fish; for them it's all downside. More mixed for the mackerel fishers, etc; they'll have their own grounds, but the market price for what they catch will slump if they are cut off from their retail markets. Expect lots of marketing campaigns encouraging Britons to eat oily fish.

Spook_ie

nc6000 wrote: »

Sky News is free if you have a dish. BBC & ITV are both available if you have an aerial. Any debate really needs to be on either of these stations.

Sky News is FTA on UK digital terrestrial tv Freeview on channel 233

https://www.freeview.co.uk/#Y2FD9HxmY4Jca638.97

Peregrinus

blanch152 wrote: »

Ireland didn't exist before the British organised us.

We are like India and Pakistan and other made-up countries created by British colonialism. There was no single Irish identity or single Irish political unit before the British created one.

Gotta point out that Ireland was a single kingdom before Great Britain was (1542 versus 1707). And the "United Kingom" which May regards as so "precious" dates only from 1801. And, even then, its territorial extent has varied over time.

Mr.Nice Guy

EdgeCase wrote: »

I know this may sound a bit harsh but I'm now of the opinion that Brexit has to happen and if it's a crash out, so be it. They will just have to learn the hard way that there are consequences to political decisions and that they are not just having a debate in the pub. This is the real world.

If Brexit doesn't happen, the outcome is likely to be never ending instability in the UK and that has an issue for the EU. It's not as if the result were reversed that the Brexiteer politics would go away. You'd just have a slight bit of calm and then they would be back ranting and raving again in a few months time.

You can warn people of the risks of a decision they are taking, but you can't prevent them from taking it. The British electorate are perfectly entitled to chose something that is enormously damaging to their own interests - that's democracy.

I mean you can explain hundreds of times that fire is hot but if someone's determined to stick their finger into it, what can you do?

The problem with this is that Ireland will be hammered by a No Deal Brexit. It will topple us into a recession, and with the political vacuum north of the border could well lead to an increase in tensions.

Someone saying 'give me a great deal or I'll shoot myself in the head' is not so amusing when you're stood beside the person and the bullet will likely go through them and hit you as well. That is where we are, unfortunately.

Shelga

Folkstonian wrote: »

Deary me. You could always start watching TF1 as opposed to BBC1 if you are so disgusted

I do need to stop watching it because it is enraging, and life is too short!

nc6000

Spook_ie wrote: »

Thought sky news was FTA

Sky News is free if you have a dish. BBC & ITV are both available if you have an aerial. Any debate really needs to be on either of these stations.

Folkstonian

Shelga wrote: »

Every week when I watch it I just think, jesus just let them leave with no deal and face the consequences. The average QT audience member’s ignorance and stupidity makes me despair. I know the right-wing media in the UK bears a lot of the responsibility, but if people are still saying they just need a PM who ‘believes’ in Brexit and everything will be great- seriously, just let them destroy their country. Most of Europe just does not care anymore. Their arrogance is disgusting.

I left the UK two years ago, after living there for five years, and every day I am thankful for my timing. It’s not a nice place to be right now, and it’s such a shame.

Deary me. You could always start watching TF1 as opposed to BBC1 if you are so disgusted

josip

EdgeCase wrote: »

...They will just have to learn the hard way that there are consequences to political decisions and that they are not just having a debate in the pub. ..

The problem is they won't learn.
The EU will be blamed for all the downsides of leaving.
I've given up on them.
Intelligent people I work with, some of whom have retirement homes in Portugal/Spain admitted to voting leave and talked about "the country being full'.
Best left to themselves from now on.

nc6000

Captain Obvious wrote: »

This is quite amazing.

https://twitter.com/antoniafrances/status/1068120540622319617

Complete disinformation campaign with actors and all.

Wow, I saw her on Newsnight earlier in the week. I'm surprised the BBC were fooled like that.

Anthracite

Shelga wrote: »

The amount of clapping on Question Time this Wetherspoons guy is getting for saying that the UK will immediately be better off after a no deal is quite scary.

Part of me so badly wants to see these people proved spectacularly wrong.