Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

CelticRambler · 01-12-2018 07:55PM

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.

Because (a) competition drives innovation; and (b) business is full of sentiment. Pop over to the Work & Jobs forum to see just how deeply sentiment affects business.

When you wound (or kill) your competition, you don't simply take over their market share, you open up your market to other competitors. If you want a natural analogy, "survival of the fittest" rarely depends on wounding the competitor. Most animal disputes are resolved through posturing and body-language alone.

The advantage for the species (or industrial sector, for the business equivalent) is that it maintains its access to the available resources (market) and collectively prevents its territory being colonised by an outsider.

But as I said before, Britain is not a competitor to the EU. It is a small island nation with diminishing influence in the world. Other states in a similar situation have chosen to align their objectives in a socio-economic union for mutual benefit. They compete non-destructively against each other within that union, and that competition raises the standard of their game when played against other coalitions.

RobMc59 · 01-12-2018 07:57PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

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.

The EU flexing it's muscles will affect Ireland most in this scenario-cyber security and indeed defence which is currently provided by the UK in the mutual interest of both countries.

murphaph · 01-12-2018 08:01PM

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.

You really don't understand us. We would almost exclusively prefer for Brexit to be cancelled. If it must go ahead then we are no longer in the same club. Brexit does not and never did have the slightest consideration for Ireland. You can't expect Ireland to do anything but try to minimise the damage by "poaching" business from the UK. It's only fair.

Calina · 01-12-2018 08:09PM

RobMc59 wrote: »

The EU flexing it's muscles will affect Ireland most in this scenario-cyber security and indeed defence which is currently provided by the UK in the mutual interest of both countries.

This sounds awfully like a threat. Or blackmail.

Or, the attitude of men I have known who tried to manufacture a situation where their employer couldn't afford to lose them.

They never were indispensable.

Plus to be frank, the UK is a textbook example of failure in cybersec right now.

murphaph · 01-12-2018 08:09PM

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?

Brexit is lose-lose. The EU will just have to make do without GCHQ. The question however is given the economic damage Brexit will do to the UK economy, how effective can GCHQ remain in the future? This stuff costs money made in the real economy.

RobMc59 · 01-12-2018 08:12PM

murphaph wrote: »

Brexit is lose-lose. The EU will just have to make do without GCHQ. The question however is given the economic damage Brexit will do to the UK economy, how effective can GCHQ remain in the future? This stuff costs money made in the real economy.

I believe mainland Europe has its own system-it's Ireland that will be hit hardest in this scenario along with the UK.

Folkstonian · 01-12-2018 08:25PM

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.

Nobody is misinterpreting you. The adversarial nature of your language has gone far beyond anything I’ve seen from even the most ardent hard-Brexit supporting columnists/ commentators in the british press, which is really going some.

One minute you are saying that the EU need to cut Britain adrift regardless of a change in public opinion in the U.K., only to change your mind the same evening and state that a cancellation of Brexit is in everyone’s best interest. You are a regular contributor here but I have literally no idea what you actually think.

Folkstonian · 01-12-2018 08:31PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

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?

Well, the government have stated that they will not put a hard border in place under any circumstances, for one thing.

blanch152 · 01-12-2018 08:43PM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Well, the government have stated that they will not put a hard border in place under any circumstances, for one thing.

Technically, as it is an external EU border, it will be the EU putting in place a hard border.

UsedToWait · 01-12-2018 08:45PM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Well, the government have stated that they will not put a hard border in place under any circumstances, for one thing.

True
In other words, the British government have wilfully misrepresented the realpolitik of the implications of anything other than a soft-boiled Brexit, without a care for the potential repercussions on this perfidious isle.

edit: and this with the overwhelming 52-48 'will of the people'

prawnsambo · 01-12-2018 08:47PM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Well, the government have stated that they will not put a hard border in place under any circumstances, for one thing.

They wanted to time-limit the backstop. That would end the open border as both jurisdictions would have to have border checks.

Professor Moriarty · 01-12-2018 08:58PM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Nobody is misinterpreting you. The adversarial nature of your language has gone far beyond anything I’ve seen from even the most ardent hard-Brexit supporting columnists/ commentators in the british press, which is really going some.

One minute you are saying that the EU need to cut Britain adrift regardless of a change in public opinion in the U.K., only to change your mind the same evening and state that a cancellation of Brexit is in everyone’s best interest. You are a regular contributor here but I have literally no idea what you actually think.

Where did I say they should be cut adrift regardless of a change in public opinion?

Enzokk · 01-12-2018 08:59PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that the EU goes to war with the UK or that they punish Britain unnecessarily. Nor would I suggest destabilising the country. All of those actions would be self-defeating. Brexit should be seen by the EU as the existential threat that it is and also as an opportunity to hamstring a competitor wherever it is in their interest.

Once the UK exits the EU and the real talks begin I think the UK will start to understand just how much the EU will negotiate for its own side. I don't even think the EU will need to go out to harm the UK, all they need to do is stand their ground in the trade talks and it will seem like they are out to get the UK. It will not be the case I don't think, just normal trade talks.

Tell me how wrote: »

Virtually nonexistent threat at this point I suspect given that all major parties support upholding the democratic vote of the referendum.
But, there may be some fringe activists such as Tommy Robinson and his ilk who try to instigate some form of anarchy.

But, while there might be a non-existent threat at this point, the impact of Brexit on UK society has the potential to promote a much more agitated and divisive society.

(As an aside, if you asked me to predict whether the US or UK is closer to civil war, I'd go with the former given the influence of gun culture and the NRA to manipulate.)

I don't know if Tommy Robinson is concerned about Brexit, it doesn't involve Muslims so I doubt he is too concerned to fight it.

Anthracite · 01-12-2018 09:11PM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Well, the government have stated that they will not put a hard border in place under any circumstances, for one thing.

But they know that by not facilitating NI staying in the single market, they will be forcing the ROI to put one there? There is no virtue or honour in that position.

I'd also be curious to see how long such a resolution would last when the WTO comes knocking and asks why the UK it isn't regulating its borders.

Professor Moriarty · 01-12-2018 09:14PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am not willfully misunderstanding you, you are saying two contradictory things: we should "wound" the UK, and we should not do anything that harms ourselves.

"Wounding" or "punishing" the UK will harm us so we should not do it.

I never suggested they should be punished. That's your word. You are misunderstanding me. Anything that disadvantages your competitors without disadvantaging yourself is fine as far as I'm concerned.

Water John · 01-12-2018 09:14PM

Every gobdaw would start dumping excess production in the UK and the UK could do nothing about it, if it doesn't maintain its border.

Professor Moriarty · 01-12-2018 09:21PM

Anthracite wrote: »

But they know that by not facilitating NI staying in the single market, they will be forcing the ROI to put one there? There is no virtue or honour in that position.

I'd also be curious to see how long such a resolution would last when the WTO comes knocking and asks why the UK it isn't regulating its borders.

People should check out Jacob's views on this if they'd like to see what a threat looks like.

An Ciarraioch · 01-12-2018 09:58PM

Irish nurses being told they would have to apply for EU settled status, despite bilateral agreements:

http://twitter.com/irishinbritain/status/1068540231316635654

Capt'n Midnight · 01-12-2018 10:38PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am not willfully misunderstanding you, you are saying two contradictory things: we should "wound" the UK, and we should not do anything that harms ourselves.

"Wounding" or "punishing" the UK will harm us so we should not do it.

You seem to be forgetting that the UK has shown no such consideration to us at any point.

Excluding the border, has there been any UK coverage of what a Hard Brexit would do to us economically ?

It's all been "they need us more than we need them". Suggestions that we should exit the EU too show close to zero knowledge of how different we are to them in many ways.

Yes it would benefit us in the short term through trade to give the UK what they want. But anyone familiar with UK history knows that paying the Dane-geld or a policy of Appeasement or the EU granting them concessions means you haven't sorted the problem. You've kicked the can. And Once you open a can of worms, the only way to recan them is to use a bigger can

I still say we should adopt a policy of "Mutually Assured Destruction" if they continue on a course that would devastate us.

If it's win-win great. But make it extremely clear that as a matter of national security that we will veto any option that hurts us even if the veto hurts us too.

Zubeneschamali · 01-12-2018 11:09PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

You seem to be forgetting that the UK has shown no such consideration to us at any point.

I am not "forgetting" that. It is entirely irrelevant.

The UK is quite entitled to leave under A50. I think it is a supremely stupid and self destructive idea, but they are quite entitled to do it under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty.

The EUs interest is not in stopping them, and not in "wounding" them for doing something the EU does not want them to do. The EUs interest (and mine, and yours) is to make sure that if the UK leaves, the impact to trade and our bank balances is as small as possible.

Professor Moriarty · 01-12-2018 11:18PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am not "forgetting" that. It is entirely irrelevant.

The UK is quite entitled to leave under A50. I think it is a supremely stupid and self destructive idea, but they are quite entitled to do it under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty.

The EUs interest is not in stopping them, and not in "wounding" them for doing something the EU does not want them to do. The EUs interest (and mine, and yours) is to make sure that if the UK leaves, the impact to trade and our bank balances is as small as possible.

The EU very much has an interest in stopping them but they can't prevent Brexit. The EU should ensure that when they leave they are worse off than when they were in the EU. Which will happen naturally under the terms of the current deal or a hard Brexit. It is in the EU's interest to ensure that the UK doesn't have its cake and eat it.

Nate--IRL-- · 01-12-2018 11:21PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

..................The EUs interest (and mine, and yours) is to make sure that if the UK leaves, the impact to trade and our bank balances is as small as possible.

And if circumstances dictate that this happens at the UKs expense so be it. Ireland should seek every advantage in the national interest.

Nate

Capt'n Midnight · 01-12-2018 11:48PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The UK is quite entitled to leave under A50. I think it is a supremely stupid and self destructive idea, but they are quite entitled to do it under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty.

The EUs interest is not in stopping them, and not in "wounding" them for doing something the EU does not want them to do. The EUs interest (and mine, and yours) is to make sure that if the UK leaves, the impact to trade and our bank balances is as small as possible.

Absolutely, but you can't fix stupid.

The UK has several options.

Remain - is the preferred option for everyone in the EU 27 , most MP's , and half the country, and half the countries.

May's Deal - the can is kicked, the UK looses all opt outs. And they still have to negotiate a deal that's got to get through 37 Vetoes

Existing off the shelf Deal given to third party - May's deal is better than them. Really. ( Switzerland and Norway are introductory offers and aren't available to existing customers)

No Deal - Disaster capitalists benefit. And 52% of the electorate go 'I never thought leopards would eat MY face,' sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party

First Up · 01-12-2018 11:52PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am not "forgetting" that. It is entirely irrelevant.

The UK is quite entitled to leave under A50. I think it is a supremely stupid and self destructive idea, but they are quite entitled to do it under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty.

The EUs interest is not in stopping them, and not in "wounding" them for doing something the EU does not want them to do. The EUs interest (and mine, and yours) is to make sure that if the UK leaves, the impact to trade and our bank balances is as small as possible.

The EU very much has an interest in stopping them but they can't prevent Brexit. The EU should ensure that when they leave they are worse off than when they were in the EU. Which will happen naturally under the terms of the current deal or a hard Brexit. It is in the EU's interest to ensure that the UK doesn't have its cake and eat it.

The EU is not a debating society and Brexit is not about proving who is right and who is wrong. Nor is it anyone's intention or in anyone's interest that the UK is impoverished.

The EU is a voluntary arrangement and its only focus (and responsibility) is the interests of its members. The UK has chosen to forfeit the benefits of membership, in exchange for a marginal increase in autonomy (in a world in which autonomy is becoming ever less useful.) But that's its entitlement and it is not the EU's problem where it goes from here.

There is nobody in the EU that I talk to (and I talk to a lot) who talks about punishing the UK. They do however talk a lot about how the EU best uses the situation to the benefit of the 27 member states.

An Ciarraioch · 02-12-2018 12:03AM

Remain on 55% in the latest YouGov poll:

http://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1068987728971345920

flatty · 02-12-2018 12:06AM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Indeed, which is why not inflicting self-harm would be important. An example of what I'm talking about is the Gallileo row. The EU naturally intends to kick the UK out and is refusing to refund funds that Britain contributed. Nothing personal, just business. As a prime example of how many in Britain view the EU, here is The Sun's comment on the matter:

"THE EU’s repugnant arrogance in excluding us from the Galileo security satellite should open even Remainers’ eyes. Brussels is prepared to endanger millions to teach Brexit Britain a lesson.Last year there was outrage at the merest hint of us using our security strength as a bargaining chip, even as the Government ruled it out.German-backed EU bureaucrats are doing far worse.So be it. We are Europe’s main security power. They have much to lose.Theresa May is demanding back the £1billion we put into this system.But that is chicken feed next to our £39billion divorce bill. She must insist not a penny is paid until we are reinstated in Galileo and a trade deal is signed.We were naive to imagine Brussels would be a friendly partner after Brexit.Its powerful bureaucrats are now nakedly and dangerously hostile."

I can't believe you are quoting The Sun as gospel. Sweet Lord. Its some kind of modern day godwinism

Professor Moriarty · 02-12-2018 12:12AM

First Up wrote: »

The EU is not a debating society and Brexit is not about proving who is right and who is wrong. Nor is it anyone's intention or in anyone's interest that the UK is impoverished.

The EU is a voluntary arrangement and its only focus (and responsibility) is the interests of its members. The UK has chosen to forfeit the benefits of membership, in exchange for a marginal increase in autonomy (in a world in which autonomy is becoming ever less useful.) But that's its entitlement and it is not the EU's problem where it goes from here.

There is nobody in the EU that I talk to (and I talk to a lot) who talks about punishing the UK. They do however talk a lot about how the EU best uses the situation to the benefit of the 27 member states.

Indeed. It is an act of national self-harm that is regrettable but the EU must now maximise all opportunities and diminish all threats that the situation offers to ensure EU cohesion and to protect trade.

Professor Moriarty · 02-12-2018 12:15AM

flatty wrote: »

I can't believe you are quoting The Sun as gospel. Sweet Lord. Its some kind of modern day godwinism

Unfortunately, many Sun, Telegraph and Express readers see these papers as their bible. The oped pieces are the gospel.

Water John · 02-12-2018 12:20AM

I think the MOS and Telegraph are urging readers to support TM's Deal.

Professor Moriarty · 02-12-2018 12:24AM

Water John wrote: »

I think the MOS and Telegraph are urging readers to support TM's Deal.

I dunno. Most of the Telegraph opeds are very anti May and are pushing for renegotiation. The MOS was always relatively pro soft Brexit.

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Comments