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

Professor Moriarty

RobMc59 wrote: »

If you're referring to retaining money the UK has paid into the Galileo project that's all well and good but are you sure the EU can take up the slack if they exclude the UK from sensitive security matters thus loosing the services of GCHQ and the UK expertise in that field?

That's the calculated risk. Personally, I think it's the EU flexing it's muscles and giving an example of what is to come.

[Deleted User]

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

As I said earlier: impoverishing the UK will hurt the EU.

Especially Ireland.

And yet you continue to pretend it is somehow justifiable.

The whole basis of trade is that it is not a zero sum competition: both sides win. The UK will be a major trading partner. We do not want them to fail or to hurt, we want them to prosper and buy our sh!t.

RobMc59 wrote: »

If you're referring to retaining money the UK has paid into the Galileo project that's all well and good but are you sure the EU can take up the slack if they exclude the UK from sensitive security matters thus loosing the services of GCHQ and the UK expertise in that field?

The answer to both of these is that there are trade offs.
It isn't necessarily easy to make the comparisons and to for example put a monetary value on trade vs security.

Ireland and the rest of the EU have decided that the integrity of the EU would be at risk from too many concessions to the UK and that therefore negotiating a trade deal with the UK should not be at any cost.

Ireland loses in all scenarios and unfortunately it is mostly out of our hands.

EdgeCase

Just think about this from an Irish point of view for a moment and a purely economic and self-interested one and forget the notions of neighbourly relations.

What has given anyone the impression that the British government, certainly as it is formed at the moment, would do anything in anyway to help Ireland's position?

They have attempted to use us as a pawn in negotiations and are willing to risk huge problems in Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK even though they often forget that (it's Irish if it's causing problems.. it's British if they want it..) and also undermine decades of tireless work done by Irish and British governments and officials to stabilise that place.

Do you seriously think the Tories would be going out of their way to ensure a level playing field for little old Ireland or, do you think the more likely reality is they want a one-foot-in-one-foot-out agreement with the EU that would potentially dramatically undermine Ireland's FDI strategy ?

In some ways the worst case scenario for Ireland could actually be a ridiculously soft Brexit that turned the UK into an on-shore/off-shore tax and regulatory haven. That's precisely what the Tories were aiming for.
If the UK were to achieve that kind of scenario, they would do huge damage to Ireland, the Netherlands, Denmark and plenty of other attractors of FDI and business-friendly EU nations.

That's also why EFTA is loathed to take them in.

When you strip away the rhetoric, the UK is basically looking for a one-way relationship with the EU where it gets all the benefits but shirks all of the responsibility and refuses to corporate with harmonisation of anything designed to ensure a level playing field (i.e. 'red tape').

Ireland needs to look after its own interests here, and I think that is what we are doing. I don't really think you can trust the current generation of British politicians to have any particular interest in anything other than self-serving nationalism and we really do not come out well in that.

Also the talk of Ireland leaving with the UK is equally ludicrous.
What would we do? Become some kind of subservient afterthought that goes around begging for crumbs from its former ruler? We'd be straight back fo our 1950s which were absolutely not something that anyone should be looking back on with nostalgia. They were terrible!

RobMc59

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Sure. At this stage I'm wondering if you are wilfully misunderstanding me. In the post you just quoted and in my earlier reply to you, I've made it abundantly clear that we should take advantage of the UK as long it doesn't harm us. I already gave an example - the Gallileo project.

If you're referring to retaining money the UK has paid into the Galileo project that's all well and good but are you sure the EU can take up the slack if they exclude the UK from sensitive security matters thus loosing the services of GCHQ and the UK expertise in that field?

steddyeddy

Of course we should take advantage of the UK if it doesn't harm us. I mean how much care have they shown towards Ireland and the peace process in Northern Ireland?

Professor Moriarty

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

As I said earlier: impoverishing the UK will hurt the EU.

Especially Ireland.

And yet you continue to pretend it is somehow justifiable.

The whole basis of trade is that it is not a zero sum competition: both sides win. The UK will be a major trading partner. We do not want them to fail or to hurt, we want them to prosper and buy our sh!t.

Sure. At this stage I'm wondering if you are wilfully misunderstanding me. In the post you just quoted and in my earlier reply to you, I've made it abundantly clear that we should take advantage of the UK as long it doesn't harm us. I already gave an example - the Gallileo project.

Zubeneschamali

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It fascinates me that some people are upset over the word 'wound'. What else would you try to do to a competitor (without harming yourself obviously) ?

As I said earlier: impoverishing the UK will hurt the EU.

Especially Ireland.

And yet you continue to pretend it is somehow justifiable.

The whole basis of trade is that it is not a zero sum competition: both sides win. The UK will be a major trading partner. We do not want them to fail or to hurt, we want them to prosper and buy our sh!t.

cml387

I heard Sam Gylmah's interview on Radio 4 this morning.

He made a very well argued case for why he couldn't support May's deal.
Admittedly he was remainer, but his case was a persuasive one and his call for another referendum adds to the growing swell of opinion that it may be the only way out.

Regrettably I think he should stay away from his twitter feed for a few days though.

steddyeddy

marno21 wrote: »

When you hear these kinds of stories it makes you wonder if the 4.5-7% hit to GDP predicted by the Bank of England this week in the event of a No Deal Brexit is a little on the conservative side.

You don't know the half of it. The UK is also without the European Medicines Agency. This means that there could be a delay in accepting legislation for new medicine and therefore a delay in getting new medication. A no deal Brexit is suicide for the UK.

marno21

steddyeddy wrote: »

I was at Glaxosmithkline yesterday for a short collaboration discussion when the subject of Brexit came up. They make several tons of penicillin and other drugs a year for export but before they export them for sale they have to send them to Italy for further processing.

They said any sort of Brexit that puts tariffs or delays on exporting will cost the company 6 million a week for one plant alone. In other words if Brexit happens it will be rendered nonviable to operate in the UK. This is Glaxosmithkline, one of the biggest pharmaceutical plants in the world.

When you hear these kinds of stories it makes you wonder if the 4.5-7% hit to GDP predicted by the Bank of England this week in the event of a No Deal Brexit is a little on the conservative side.

RobMc59

zapitastas wrote: »

I think the fact that British diplomats spent a considerable period of time touring Europe in an attempt to undermine Irish interests has certainly painted the British establishment in a certain light. How would you describe that approach to diplomacy

It makes the UK appear insincere and possibly untrustworthy,although Ireland's determination has probably proven to be a godsend to the EU as it has completely hamstrung the UK-if not for the backstop the brexiteers probably would have got what they want which would have been a serious blow to the future of the EU as others would have been encouraged.

zapitastas

Folkstonian wrote: »

That’s quite troubling language you have elected to use which to my mind puts you in the same bracket as the ‘extreme brexiteers’ who apparently believe the EU is a strategic enemy. Two sides to the same coin.

Regardless of what form Brexit takes on Britain and the EU will still share the same fundamental values and interests vis a vis the rest of the world and the complex challenges posed by Russia, Saudi Arabia, China etc

Talk of ‘wounding as much as possible’ a friendly country and a geographic neighbour, especially given the way the rest of the world is right now, is just utterly terrifying.

I think the fact that British diplomats spent a considerable period of time touring Europe in an attempt to undermine Irish interests has certainly painted the British establishment in a certain light. How would you describe that approach to diplomacy

Professor Moriarty

RobMc59 wrote: »

Would it be a reasonable assumption that your brexit wishlist would be:1-the TM deal to go through.2-no deal brexit. 3-UK remain.
I ask this as UK remaining would be a blow to Ireland's ambitions in regards to picking up services and manufacturing in your opinion.

My personal preference would be a decisive victory for Remain. Not least because I have some good English friends and I don't want them affected. Also, no form of Brexit is a positive for Ireland's economy. Nor is it a positive for the EU project. Nor is it a positive for peace in NI.

RobMc59

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It fascinates me that some people are upset over the word 'wound'. What else would you try to do to a competitor (without harming yourself obviously) ? When it comes to business, there is no sentiment. Sure, it's not language you would use diplomatically but this is an internet discussion.

I find it equally fascinating that people are offended by the idea that Ireland should try to take advantage of a 'friendly' country. Apart from the Labour spokesman on NI, I haven't seen or heard any consideration or acknowledgement on the friendly British media or from friendly British politicians for Ireland's plight as a result of Brexit. None whatsoever.

Would it be a reasonable assumption that your brexit wishlist would be:1-the TM deal to go through.2-no deal brexit. 3-UK remain.
I ask this as UK remaining would be a blow to Ireland's ambitions in regards to picking up services and manufacturing in your opinion.

steddyeddy

I was at Glaxosmithkline yesterday for a short collaboration discussion when the subject of Brexit came up. They make several tons of penicillin and other drugs a year for export but before they export them for sale they have to send them to Italy for further processing.

They said any sort of Brexit that puts tariffs or delays on exporting will cost the company 6 million a week for one plant alone. In other words if Brexit happens it will be rendered nonviable to operate in the UK. This is Glaxosmithkline, one of the biggest pharmaceutical plants in the world.

Professor Moriarty

UsedToWait wrote: »

I think the Prof's language reflects, as your compatriot seems to have only realised, the fact that Irish people have looked on, first with a sense of confusion, and lately with a sense of exasperation, as your countrymen have fallen under the spell of vested interests and vulture capitalists.

You mention Russia as one of our common foes, yet you've allowed dirty Russian money to buy up much of the speculative property in London, and to influence, unchecked, the social media messages your people are targeted with on a daily basis.

The time for nicities and diplomatic language is finished, as regards commenting on the political morass your country has descended into.

It fascinates me that some people are upset over the word 'wound'. What else would you try to do to a competitor (without harming yourself obviously) ? When it comes to business, there is no sentiment. Sure, it's not language you would use diplomatically but this is an internet discussion.

I find it equally fascinating that people are offended by the idea that Ireland should try to take advantage of a 'friendly' country. Apart from the Labour spokesman on NI, I haven't seen or heard any consideration or acknowledgement on the friendly British media or from friendly British politicians for Ireland's plight as a result of Brexit. None whatsoever.

Dyr

20silkcut wrote: »

There is a lot of potential for dark arts and manipulation in terms of what is presented to us on twitter feeds , Facebook timelines and you tube recommended videos etc. You will find the amount of people who will stray from what they are fed and seek the real truth will be a tiny proportion.

That manipulation was absolutely prevalent in the previous generation of media formats.

Like I said, the real risk is that we've also allowed huge monopolies to spring up in the format, that said I can still find content that I find worth viewing

UsedToWait

Folkstonian wrote: »

That’s quite troubling language you have elected to use which to my mind puts you in the same bracket as the ‘extreme brexiteers’ who apparently believe the EU is a strategic enemy. Two sides to the same coin.

Regardless of what form Brexit takes on Britain and the EU will still share the same fundamental values and interests vis a vis the rest of the world and the complex challenges posed by Russia, Saudi Arabia, China etc

Talk of ‘wounding as much as possible’ a friendly country and a geographic neighbour, especially given the way the rest of the world is right now, is just utterly terrifying.

I think the Prof's language reflects, as your compatriot seems to have only realised, the fact that Irish people have looked on, first with a sense of confusion, and lately with a sense of exasperation, as your countrymen have fallen under the spell of vested interests and vulture capitalists.

You mention Russia as one of our common foes, yet you've allowed dirty Russian money to buy up much of the speculative property in London, and to influence, unchecked, the social media messages your people are targeted with on a daily basis.

The time for nicities and diplomatic language is finished, as regards commenting on the political morass your country has descended into.

Professor Moriarty

20silkcut wrote: »

There is a lot of potential for dark arts and manipulation in terms of what is presented to us on twitter feeds , Facebook timelines and you tube recommended videos etc. You will find the amount of people who will stray from what they are fed and seek the real truth will be a tiny proportion.

Present company excluded, of course.

EdgeCase

The big issue from a business point of view is that this kind of political instability in the UK is not likely to go away anytime soon.

I could see a lot of companies deciding to give the UK a skip for the next while. Who wants to expose their company to the kinds of risks being whipped up by politics in the UK at present, particularly when in many cases, there's absolutely no reason to.

20silkcut

Bambi wrote: »

I'd disagree, the propensity for manipulation in physical media was far far greater through the entry barrier brought about by the costs of production, distribution and the format restrictions that these they had. It meant that they were very easily monopolized by vested interests. The digital media boom is the opposite in terms of production and distribution but its now also in danger of becoming monopolized and held captive to the agenda of a small few

There is a lot of potential for dark arts and manipulation in terms of what is presented to us on twitter feeds , Facebook timelines and you tube recommended videos etc. You will find the amount of people who will stray from what they are fed and seek the real truth will be a tiny proportion.

Professor Moriarty

CelticRambler wrote: »

You are the one talking about punishment and wounding. Those are sentiments straight out of the Koran, the Torah and the Old Testament ...

Yep. And any London job that goes to Frankfurt is lost to Dublin. Same as the EMA and the EYO and dozens of other offices and agencies that have not relocated to Dublin. It's all part of the fair fight - accepting that you can't win every contract, but finding some other way to benefit from the new arrangement. All those new jobs in Frankfurt represent a new market for Irish exports.

Indeed. The next big issue in terms of Brexit will be manufacturing jobs. We might pick up some of those especially in pharma. I know of one such company that is closing their UK facility because of Brexit though they won't say it publicly. They aren't relocating the jobs anywhere unfortunately, though they have a presence in Ireland, they've just decided to write Britain off.

In all of this, let's not forget that Britain is damaging an institution that has been very good for Ireland, is damaging our economy and endangering peace on our island.

Dyr

Tell me how wrote: »

Of course, the propensity for misinformation and manipulation is even greater in digital media so I'm not expecting any moment of uniform awareness any time soon.
I think it is quite dangerous in fact and is likely to get worse as even people who think they are informed don't realise that they are in some form of echo chamber unbeknownst to themselves.

I'd disagree, the propensity for manipulation in physical media was far far greater through the entry barrier brought about by the costs of production, distribution and the format restrictions that these they had. It meant that they were very easily monopolized by vested interests. The digital media boom is the opposite in terms of production and distribution but its now also in danger of becoming monopolized and held captive to the agenda of a small few

CelticRambler

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Frankly, your comparison of the EU's need to ensure that Brexit is not seen as a positive by member countries with biblical nonsense is extremely tenuous at best.

You are the one talking about punishment and wounding. Those are sentiments straight out of the Koran, the Torah and the Old Testament ...

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Anyway, how can you possibly say that the UK will never be a competitor to the EU? You do realise that London is losing jobs to Frankfurt and Dublin as we speak?

Yep. And any London job that goes to Frankfurt is lost to Dublin. Same as the EMA and the EYO and dozens of other offices and agencies that have not relocated to Dublin. It's all part of the fair fight - accepting that you can't win every contract, but finding some other way to benefit from the new arrangement. All those new jobs in Frankfurt represent a new market for Irish exports.

Professor Moriarty

Folkstonian wrote: »

That’s quite troubling language you have elected to use which to my mind puts you in the same bracket as the ‘extreme brexiteers’ who apparently believe the EU is a strategic enemy. Two sides to the same coin.

Regardless of what form Brexit takes on Britain and the EU will still share the same fundamental values and interests vis a vis the rest of the world and the complex challenges posed by Russia, Saudi Arabia, China etc

Talk of ‘wounding as much as possible’ a friendly country and a geographic neighbour, especially given the way the rest of the world is right now, is just utterly terrifying.

How about the various threats the UK have made to the EU in the past two years? What about the spiteful rhetoric across the media? What about the British Foreign Minister's nasty jibes in and out of office? And so on. If the UK is a friendly country, I haven't seen much evidence.

I'm talking about taking advantage of the UK's weakness not to be uneccessarily punitive but to promote the EU's economic interests. And I would expect the UK to do the same. That doesn't mean not having a collaborative relationship when it suits both parties.

CelticRambler

briany wrote: »

There has long been this idea that as the older generations die off, the younger generations with their more liberal, progressive ideas will make their society a more liberal and progressive place, but what seems to happen in actuality is that the younger people just become more conservative and traditional, what they would call 'sensible', as they age.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's possible but I do think that younger generations are more exposed to alternative viewpoints than older generations. I would imagine that the readerships of The Telegraph and The Express, for example, are mostly over 50. I don't think that many younger people are reading them or will do so in the future.

What briany describes has been found to be the case in real-life studies, possibly because younger people are facing a more uncertain future than their parents and therefore seek reassurance in a more rigidly-defined social code. And while the readership of print media may be declining, many young people - most, in my experience - get their news in bite-sized, sensational snippets liked and shared and re-tweeted through social media. There, we're back to the polar opposites: stories can be voted up or down according to the user's subjective opinion about the topic, but rarely graded for the quality of the journalism.

Professor Moriarty

CelticRambler wrote: »

Firstly, your use of the phrase "as an example to others" can be interpreted as "our way is the One True Path and if you don't follow it, you should be punished" (as opposed to the simpler, less fundamentalist "you will burn in Hell for your foolish sinfulness" which is what most forecasters are proclaiming).

Secondly, saying the EU should "wound a competitor". That is exactly the same "them vs us" mentality that has the UK (and the US) in its current position, and is neither socially responsible nor economically justified. Sure, there are some businesses that go all out to wound or kill their competition, but the most successful usually engage in a fair fight. That works at a micro level, where local [insert any SME] coordinates or collaborates with their competitors to share days off or sudden, excessive demand or complementary areas of experience, and it works the same at the macro, global level.

The UK is not, and will never be, a competitor to the EU in any sense. It is a sovereign state (contrary to the oft-repeated Brexiteer claims) that has been - until now - part of a socio-economic club with considerable membership benefits.

Frankly, your comparison of the EU's need to ensure that Brexit is not seen as a positive by member countries with biblical nonsense is extremely tenuous at best.

Anyway, how can you possibly say that the UK will never be a competitor to the EU? You do realise that London is losing jobs to Frankfurt and Dublin as we speak?

Folkstonian

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would encourage the EU to make it as difficult as possible. Two reasons. As an example to others and to wound them as much as possible without inflicting economic self-harm. If the opportunity presents itself, you should wound a competitor.

That’s quite troubling language you have elected to use which to my mind puts you in the same bracket as the ‘extreme brexiteers’ who apparently believe the EU is a strategic enemy. Two sides to the same coin.

Regardless of what form Brexit takes on Britain and the EU will still share the same fundamental values and interests vis a vis the rest of the world and the complex challenges posed by Russia, Saudi Arabia, China etc

Talk of ‘wounding as much as possible’ a friendly country and a geographic neighbour, especially given the way the rest of the world is right now, is just utterly terrifying.

CelticRambler

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would encourage the EU to make it as difficult as possible. Two reasons. As an example to others and to wound them as much as possible without inflicting economic self-harm. If the opportunity presents itself, you should wound a competitor.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So making business difficult for a competitor equates to religious fundamentalism? You'll have to explain that.

Firstly, your use of the phrase "as an example to others" can be interpreted as "our way is the One True Path and if you don't follow it, you should be punished" (as opposed to the simpler, less fundamentalist "you will burn in Hell for your foolish sinfulness" which is what most forecasters are proclaiming).

Secondly, saying the EU should "wound a competitor". That is exactly the same "them vs us" mentality that has the UK (and the US) in its current position, and is neither socially responsible nor economically justified. Sure, there are some businesses that go all out to wound or kill their competition, but the most successful usually engage in a fair fight. That works at a micro level, where local [insert any SME] coordinates or collaborates with their competitors to share days off or sudden, excessive demand or complementary areas of experience, and it works the same at the macro, global level.

The UK is not, and will never be, a competitor to the EU in any sense. It is a sovereign state (contrary to the oft-repeated Brexiteer claims) that has been - until now - part of a socio-economic club with considerable membership benefits.

Tell me how

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yes, tripe swallowed whole. You get the same rubbish in The Telegraph and The Express. Of course, there's nothing stopping people not buying these papers but they continue to buy them.

The numbers buying all papers are dwindling.

Of course, the propensity for misinformation and manipulation is even greater in digital media so I'm not expecting any moment of uniform awareness any time soon.
I think it is quite dangerous in fact and is likely to get worse as even people who think they are informed don't realise that they are in some form of echo chamber unbeknownst to themselves.