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 X (Please read OP before posting)

johnnyskeleton

This is the tenth incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread, so Ive copied ACDs comments from the last thread to here. Same warnings etc still apply:

As we are approaching the critical end of March October 2019 period, please bear the following in mind before posting:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Ok wait hold on, just catching up on this comment

So now in order to maintain positive decision making you need 100% results.

I guess that puts pains to the brexit argument.

I'm not sure you read the stuff you post. Frankly

Had to read it again to make sure .

Gas stuff.

listermint

Bit cynical wrote: »

While Brexit will be seen as a disruptive event, in the longer term I don't think it is the case that membership of the EU is literally 100% positive for every citizen in the EU. It is a question of net benefit. Do the benefits outweigh the costs? There's no objective answer to that question; it really depends on your values.

Ok wait hold on, just catching up on this comment

So now in order to maintain positive decision making you need 100% results.

I guess that puts pains to the brexit argument.

I'm not sure you read the stuff you post. Frankly

murphaph

Bit cynical wrote: »

Like I said, it was a silly example.

But the point remains that safety and money, though perfectly valid, are not the only values that people can hold.

Funnily enough these are the two main reasons Brexiteers cite when asked why the EU should feel compelled to do a deal.

prawnsambo

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Values such as? You are keeping your statements extremely vague and I suggest the reason is that you can't defend the specifics.

To the point that success or failure for the EU depends on the subjective view of each of ~500 million people. Apparently the aims and objectives of the EU are inconsequential.

Imreoir2

Bit cynical wrote: »

However believing that one's own values are the only rational values and therefore everyone else's are insane is itself irrational.But the construction of a metric returns to the question of what your values are.

Values such as? You are keeping your statements extremely vague and I suggest the reason is that you can't defend the specifics.

[Deleted User]

Bit cynical wrote: »

However believing that one's own values are the only rational values and therefore everyone else's are insane is itself irrational.But the construction of a metric returns to the question of what your values are.

One Metric is the fact that there has been no military conflict between EEC members, one of the principal reasons for the foundation of the EEC was to prevent warbreaking out between Germany, France & the UK.

The second was to ensure food security after the post WWII shortages.
The main failure I see is that Globalisasation has concentrated power far too much into the hands of a very small number of multinational company owners.
Mostly American businesses at that.

BonnieSituation

Bit cynical wrote: »

However believing that one's own values are the only rational values and therefore everyone else's are insane is itself irrational.But the construction of a metric returns to the question of what your values are.

I'm sorry, but criticism of people for not valuing overalls societal wealth, health, well-being and safety is completely warranted.

It's up to those who hold contrary views to the well established and successful social democratic model espoused by the EU that "their way" is an improvement and to show us how and why and what they suggest we should do to implement it on its acceptance by the majority of society.

Bit cynical

BonnieSituation wrote: »

And should their insane priorities be given equal footing to our more rational ones?

However believing that one's own values are the only rational values and therefore everyone else's are insane is itself irrational.

So what metrics would you use to measure the success of the EU?

But the construction of a metric returns to the question of what your values are.

prawnsambo

brickster69 wrote: »

I take it that you cannot explain how the EU are doing sector deals with the USA and why the UK cannot do the same.

Because they aren't? Although it's classified, there have been leaks and the EU outlined some of the principles some time ago. It's far more than 'industrial and mechanical'. It includes services, textiles, pharmaceuticals, chemicals to name a few.

BonnieSituation

Bit cynical wrote: »

Again, that depends on your values. You or I may regard safety and security to be the highest good but someone else may have different priorities.

And should their insane priorities be given equal footing to our more rational ones?

So what metrics would you use to measure the success of the EU?

Bit cynical

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Thats a fairly fatous statement, I don't think anyone has suggested creating a thought police to prevent stupid ideas from being held. At the same time, however, it should be expected of the state to work damn hard to prevent such ill-informed blige from causing untold damage to the country as is happening now with Brexit.

Not all opinions are equally valid, that a large number of people support a stupid idea does not transform it into a good idea.

Like I said, it was a silly example.

But the point remains that safety and money, though perfectly valid, are not the only values that people can hold.

lawred2

Bit cynical wrote: »

There you go. But even though this is a silly example (the purple colour not being a requirement of membership), it is their right to hold that view.

Not all 'rights' are equal

Imreoir2

Bit cynical wrote: »

There you go. But even though this is a silly example, it is their right to hold that view.

Thats a fairly fatous statement, I don't think anyone has suggested creating a thought police to prevent stupid ideas from being held. At the same time, however, it should be expected of the state to work damn hard to prevent such ill-informed blige from causing untold damage to the country as is happening now with Brexit.

Not all opinions are equally valid, that a large number of people support a stupid idea does not transform it into a good idea.

Bit cynical

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Indeed, some people seem happy to trade security and prosperity for a blue passport, bizzare as that may be.

There you go. But even though this is a silly example (the purple colour not being a requirement of membership), it is their right to hold that view.

Stop moaning ffs

Tropheus wrote: »

Johnston and co may be liars, but they're not thick. They know that a no deal Brexit will be an unmitigated disaster that will see them out of power very quickly. Johnston's priority will be to keep himself in No. 10. What's happening now and up to the end of September is nothing more than posturing.

I don't accept that no deal is inevitable as some commentators are saying. It still has to get through parliament. Johnston is threatening to bypass parliament but, again, he won't do that as it will see him out of power very quickly.

He will be able to turn around and say that he wanted to leave with no deal, but parliament wouldn't let him. This may result in a general election which I can see changing things very much.

This has a long way to run yet and sod all will happen on Nov 1 bar a likely extension.

Leave is the default on the 31st and only outcome unless anything happens before in Parliament though

Imreoir2

Bit cynical wrote: »

Again, that depends on your values. You or I may regard safety and security to be the highest good but someone else may have different priorities.

Indeed, some people seem happy to trade security and prosperity for a blue passport, bizzare as that may be.

Bit cynical

BonnieSituation wrote: »

There's no objective answer as to whether the creation of the richest, safest Union in the world is a good idea?

Again, that depends on your values. You or I may regard safety and security to be the highest good but someone else may have different priorities.

Bit cynical

Tropheus wrote: »

I don't accept that no deal is inevitable as some commentators are saying. It still has to get through parliament.

I don't think this is the case. Parliament has already voted against the deal and if nothing further happens the UK is out on October 31 without a deal as that is when the extended A50 period ends.

BonnieSituation

Bit cynical wrote: »

While Brexit will be seen as a disruptive event, in the longer term I don't think it is the case that membership of the EU is literally 100% positive for every citizen in the EU. It is a question of net benefit. Do the benefits outweigh the costs? There's no objective answer to that question; it really depends on your values.

There's no objective answer as to whether the creation of the richest, safest Union in the world is a good idea? Would you give over.

What metrics should we use?

Tropheus

Johnston and co may be liars, but they're not thick. They know that a no deal Brexit will be an unmitigated disaster that will see them out of power very quickly. Johnston's priority will be to keep himself in No. 10. What's happening now and up to the end of September is nothing more than posturing.

I don't accept that no deal is inevitable as some commentators are saying. It still has to get through parliament. Johnston is threatening to bypass parliament but, again, he won't do that as it will see him out of power very quickly.

He will be able to turn around and say that he wanted to leave with no deal, but parliament wouldn't let him. This may result in a general election which I can see changing things very much.

This has a long way to run yet and sod all will happen on Nov 1 bar a likely extension.

Bit cynical

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I admire anyone with your level of devotion but if I could ask, can you outline any benefits or positive outcomes for the average Briton post brexit?

Even one?

While Brexit will be seen as a disruptive event, in the longer term I don't think it is the case that membership of the EU is literally 100% positive for every citizen in the EU. It is a question of net benefit. Do the benefits outweigh the costs? There's no objective answer to that question; it really depends on your values.

Tell me how

Varta wrote: »

Indeed, that's because he has nothing else in his armoury. I'm certain, however, that he believes that those threats and warnings will be enough to make the EU buckle and that this has always been his plan.

It's not his plan, it's Cummings's plan and therefore I think it's limited to being able to say "We tried but the EU are too inward looking to see the benefits of a new deal" and then leave with No Deal.

He just wants out.

Varta

Strazdas wrote: »

But according to the UK press today (Sunday Express for example), he is merely going there to thump the table and issue them with warnings / threats.

Indeed, that's because he has nothing else in his armoury. I'm certain, however, that he believes that those threats and warnings will be enough to make the EU buckle and that this has always been his plan.

Strazdas

Varta wrote: »

I believe we will see Johnson's plan unfold this week. On Wednesday and Thursday he meets with the two 'real' leaders of the EU. This is where he believes he will get movement from the EU and it has been the plan all along. This is the last minute EU blinking scenario talked about so often. My own belief is that they will give him nothing, but that this is the week when everything crystallises.

But according to the UK press today (Sunday Express for example), he is merely going there to thump the table and issue them with warnings / threats.

brickster69

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I admire anyone with your level of devotion but if I could ask, can you outline any benefits or positive outcomes for the average Briton post brexit?

Even one?

I take it that you cannot explain how the EU are doing sector deals with the USA and why the UK cannot do the same.

80% of the UK's trade is in services which would come under GATS ( a different agreement )

Agriculture would be roughly 2% of UK trade so could easily be left on the sidelines for the time being. Mostly UK's trade with the US could be negotiated on the largest sectors and no one could complain.

Varta

I believe we will see Johnson's plan unfold this week. On Wednesday and Thursday he meets with the two 'real' leaders of the EU. This is where he believes he will get movement from the EU and it has been the plan all along. This is the last minute EU blinking scenario talked about so often. My own belief is that they will give him nothing, but that this is the week when everything crystallises.

Bit cynical

fash wrote: »

it's no "translation error" nor "EU speech" - it is a legal word.

For example, an arbitration happens because of a clause in a contract. There has to be a dividing line between what disputes can be decided by the arbitrator and what cannot. The arbitrator gets to decide most of his limits - called the "competence-competence"

However that is still a very specialist meaning that again doesn't imply ability or competence in the normal sense of the word. I think a better word for "competence" as the EU use it would be remit.

Stop moaning ffs

brickster69 wrote: »

Is that why the EU are only negotiating a FTA on industrial and mechanical goods with the US at the moment ?

I admire anyone with your level of devotion but if I could ask, can you outline any benefits or positive outcomes for the average Briton post brexit?

Even one?

brickster69

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Sectoral trade deals are not permitted under... Wait for it... GATT 24

Oh the irony.

Is that why the EU are only negotiating a FTA on industrial and mechanical goods with the US at the moment ?

Sam Russell

Charles Babbage wrote: »

NI would need a seperate VAT territory and would probably need to be in, or effecively in, the EU VAT union. That is OK until GB decides to change their VAT rates or abolish VAT altogether.

I thought NI was a separate VAT territory currently. Perhaps I am wrong.

It would obviously need to be so if it is not currently.