Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

riddles · 18-08-2019 9:21am

volchitsa wrote: »

I won't bother with the rest (you are so egregiously misrepresenting what happened that I don't see the point - you can lead a horse to water and all that). Anyway people have already pointed out problems with your post.

However just on the bit in bold above: while the Thatcherite notion of running a country's economy just like a family's income is intuitively pleasing, it fails on examination - because a family which borrows in order to spend more is always at risk of storing up trouble for itself, since the money spent is lost to that family. Whereas a country which borrows to spend on its economy can get much of that back through increased spending by its citizens. A trickle-up effect if you like, or maybe trickle-around . (Unlike the trickle-down effect, which has been shown not to work.)

My point being that staying out of debt is not in itself a solution for a country, because an urban family doesn't have the means to invest in its own production.
For a country, it all depends on how the borrowing is used. All too often (not just in Ireland) it has been exploited by politicians to "buy" popularity and thus votes. That's why the Keynesian view was discredited, not because it was fundamentally mistaken.

“For a country, it all depends on how the borrowing is used. All too often (not just in Ireland) it has been exploited by politicians to "buy" popularity and thus votes”

I think our level of national insolvency confirms this point.

Stop moaning ffs · 18-08-2019 9:24am

riddles wrote: »

“For a country, it all depends on how the borrowing is used. All too often (not just in Ireland) it has been exploited by politicians to "buy" popularity and thus votes”

I think our level of national insolvency confirms this point.

There’s probably a good debate to be had about this in a different thread though. Don’t really see how it relates to brexit?

Stop moaning ffs · 18-08-2019 9:31am

The majority of people in Northern Ireland want the border placed in the sea. This keeps trade going and stops thousands of job losses and business closures.
The ones against the border in the sea? The DUP. Because somehow it cuts them off from Britain and ruins their British cosplay notions.

When will this bunch of homophobic throwbacks be made to pay for trying to wreck Northern Ireland and the GFA?

https://twitter.com/suntimesireland/status/1162996866109366272

riddles · 18-08-2019 9:35am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

There’s probably a good debate to be had about this in a different thread though. Don’t really see how it relates to brexit?

Our economy is currently in a position of strength. We are still borrowing a lot of money to fund day to day expenditure. A downturn linked to Brexit will be difficult for us to absorb given our level of indebtedness. Is our political system capable of anything other than reaction?

Of course there’s no link between this and Brexit.

devnull · 18-08-2019 9:36am

Gina Miller's seen legal advice that says that MPs must have a chance to discuss No Deal even if Parliament is prorogued and must be allowed to hold the government to account.

https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1163000083073380353

That would leave the Tories with the option of an election tactic to make No Deal happen and stop Parliament stopping them the better one for them, not that it is a good one for the people of the UK.

volchitsa · 18-08-2019 10:38am

riddles wrote: »

Our economy is currently in a position of strength. We are still borrowing a lot of money to fund day to day expenditure. A downturn linked to Brexit will be difficult for us to absorb given our level of indebtedness. Is our political system capable of anything other than reaction?

Of course there’s no link between this and Brexit.

We all know that Brexit is a problem for Ireland, nobody denies that. It was Britain's decision and they made it without a second's thought for Ireland's best interests. Which is their right of course, but let's not pretend Ireland's priorities would be any higher up their list tomorrow or on Nov 1st.

As for your attempt to blame Germany for Ireland's financial problems as an explanation for why Ireland should throw its lot in with the U.K. rather than the E.U., well, it beggars belief really.

And we really should get back on topic now.

jm08 · 18-08-2019 11:14am

Melanchthon wrote: »

Whats the point of the European Parliament then in your view and as you said this is already the direction it is heading in, so presumably you oppose this?

The power struggle in the EU is between the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. The biggest supporters of the Council of Ministers retaining power are the UK, Poland and Hungary. Juncker (a former PM of Luxembourg) was selected by the European Parliament and Cameron & Erdogan were the only two European Leaders who opposed his appointment. The Poles and Hungarians in particular do not want the European Parliament to have more power because its full of liberals who tend to object and censure these countries over the rule of law, corruption etc. Erdogan and Kaczyński could veto any such censure at Council level.

It would be a step in the right direction of having a more functional EU parliament with more principled MEP's, the fact this was blocked previously was a disgrace and the lack of outcry highlights how disengaged Europeans are from the Parliament

The UK packs the European Parliament with self serving members (UKIP/Brexit) whose only interest is disruption. People tend to get the politicians they deserve (by voting for them). How could anyone elect Ann Widdecombe to anything is just beyond me. Compare her to Marian Harkin, Mairead McGuinness or Guy Verhofstad.

Balls to that its not like current commissioners tend to be the cream of the crop in being experts tends to be a patronage appointment, your making an argument against democracy as a whole there, in many countries ministers are selected from politicians who have stood in election and that functions as a system.

Thats a load of waffle. Any country with any sense sends their best people to the Commission. Are you trying to say that appointing Peter Sutherland to EU commissioner was some sort of a patronage thing? Or perhaps Chris Patten. These are substantial people.

Go to google there is plenty of good analysis of the flaws of CAP and you know it if your as interested in the EU as you say.

There are plenty of flaws with CAP, but it is reformed every couple of years. The only countries which seems to have a difficulty with CAP are those with little agriculture who are dependent on food imports (i.e., England who would prefer a lot more EU money going into Science research etc).

Ok a couple of things, Germany actually has low investment in infrastructure and its causing issues, again something you would know if your as knowledgeable as you say, in fact with its current slow down there is talk of using badly needed infrastructure projects as an stimulus package.

All those surpluses over the last few years (supposedly breaking EU law) will come in very handy now.

Frank Bullitt · 18-08-2019 11:19am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The majority of people in Northern Ireland want the border placed in the sea. This keeps trade going and stops thousands of job losses and business closures.
The ones against the border in the sea? The DUP. Because somehow it cuts them off from Britain and ruins their British cosplay notions.

When will this bunch of homophobic throwbacks be made to pay for trying to wreck Northern Ireland and the GFA?

https://twitter.com/suntimesireland/status/1162996866109366272

They don't want to be treated any differently from the rest of the U.K...which is tragic because the rest of the U.K would consider them Irish, and not British. :rolleyes:

Stop moaning ffs · 18-08-2019 11:24am

Gintonious wrote: »

They don't want to be treated any differently from the rest of the U.K...which is tragic because the rest of the U.K would consider them Irish, and not British. :rolleyes:

Oh I’m we’ll aware of that, they take their british cosplay intensely seriously.
However, the majority of people in the north seem to be normal and rational and pragmatic (in a bit of a shock to myself I have to say) so how is it the DUP are ignoring their own base and farmers and industry and insisting on this nonsense?
They arent listening to or representing their own people. It’ll never cease to amaze me unless and until they’re taken down at the next election

Stop moaning ffs · 18-08-2019 11:33am

Barclay has signed that law that removes the EU rules come October 31st.
This is just showboat theatrics though right? To show the Eu they really mean it.

Frank Bullitt · 18-08-2019 11:37am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Oh I’m we’ll aware of that, they take their british cosplay intensely seriously.
However, the majority of people in the north seem to be normal and rational and pragmatic (in a bit of a shock to myself I have to say) so how is it the DUP are ignoring their own base and farmers and industry and insisting on this nonsense?
They arent listening to or representing their own people. It’ll never cease to amaze me unless and until they’re taken down at the next election

The DUP only have a very narrow agenda to keep to. They were effectively against peace in the North, against any form of progression on civil rights (I can imagine the meetings they are going to have in relation to abortion and gay marriage). Not only that, but they landed themselves in a very nice position in Westminster when May came calling to get their help to form a government.

They aren't even in touch with their own base because they are permanently stuck in the past.

briany · 18-08-2019 11:40am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The majority of people in Northern Ireland want the border placed in the sea. This keeps trade going and stops thousands of job losses and business closures.
The ones against the border in the sea? The DUP. Because somehow it cuts them off from Britain and ruins their British cosplay notions.

When will this bunch of homophobic throwbacks be made to pay for trying to wreck Northern Ireland and the GFA?

https://twitter.com/suntimesireland/status/1162996866109366272

A border in the Irish sea would cut NI off from Britain, if only symbolically. But, y'know, symbols are big up that way.

I think we need to look a little bit more analytically at the pros and cons of a sea border vs. a land border because if an NI Unionist looks at this thread, the conclusion they'll draw is that we're saying 'land border=bad, sea border=good', rather than saying, in a more detached way, the reasons why one is better than the other.

We can say that a land border contravenes the GFA for the Nationalists. They can say a sea border contravenes it for the Unionists. We can say a land border would be bad for all-Ireland trade. They can say a sea border would be very bad for trade with the UK mainland. Round and around we go.

Calina · 18-08-2019 11:43am

jm08 wrote: »

The power struggle in the EU is between the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. The biggest supporters of the Council of Ministers retaining power are the UK, Poland and Hungary. Juncker (a former PM of Luxembourg) was selected by the European Parliament and Cameron & Erdogan were the only two European Leaders who opposed his appointment. The Poles and Hungarians in particular do not want the European Parliament to have more power because its full of liberals who tend to object and censure these countries over the rule of law, corruption etc. Erdogan and Kaczyński could veto any such censure at Council level.

You mean Victor Orban, not Recep Erdogan. The latter is president of Turkey which has no say in who is president of the European Commission.

jm08 · 18-08-2019 11:46am

Calina wrote: »

You mean Victor Orban, not Recep Erdogan. The latter is president of Turkey which has no say in who is president of the European Commission.

Orban is the person I meant. Thanks for spotting that.

Stop moaning ffs · 18-08-2019 11:53am

briany wrote: »

A border in the Irish sea would cut NI off from Britain, if only symbolically. But, y'know, symbols are big up that way.

I think we need to look a little bit more analytically at the pros and cons of a sea border vs. a land border because if an NI Unionist looks at this thread, the conclusion they'll draw is that we're saying 'land border=bad, sea border=good', rather than saying, in a more detached way, the reasons why one is better than the other.

We can say that a land border contravenes the GFA for the Nationalists. They can say a sea border contravenes it for the Unionists. We can say a land border would be bad for all-Ireland trade. They can say a sea border would be very bad for trade with the UK mainland. Round and around we go.

Brilliant point.
It sort of goes a good way to explain their mouthpieces like foster and Wilson saying it’s dublin tearing up the GFA.

Experience_day · 18-08-2019 12:18pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Barclay has signed that law that removes the EU rules come October 31st.
This is just showboat theatrics though right? To show the Eu they really mean it.

Doesn't really mean anything until they actually leave.

KildareP · 18-08-2019 12:20pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Brilliant point.
It sort of goes a good way to explain their mouthpieces like foster and Wilson saying it’s dublin tearing up the GFA.

End of the day though this decision on a border is faced entirely on the outcome of another decision made solely by the UK.

If a border has to go somewhere - which it does - then they can't say "No, sovereignty!" when objecting to a sea border but complain when ROI shouts "No, sovereignty!" in return for the land border.

Irish Praetorian · 18-08-2019 12:26pm

Melanchthon wrote: »

Of course the mods will forgive you don't worry about that your on their side of the argument and I am at most quasi- Eurosceptic.

As someone who often gets to straddle both sides in quite a few Politics forum arguments, and has occasionally ventured onto the more euro-sceptic position in this debate, I'm not sure moderation is the biggest hurdle that such posters face.

There seems to be something of a pattern among what we might call the pro-Brexit posters in this debate which goes something like this; show up to the thread with the usual UKIP/Brexit party slogans and cliches, proceed to get called out by other posters and asked to elucidate their point on a more substantial level, either make a piss-poor attempt to defend their previous positions and/or stick religiously to the kind of cliche/vapid point they initially made, fall back on vague truisms or the blindingly obvious when pressed further (sure don't we all want a kinder/better governance), plead persecution when noone is taken in by their wet-paper arguments, devolve into an ad-hominen back and forth and then finally claim persecution and bias on the part of the mods when their behaviour is reprimanded.

As someone who came to this forum initially to make a very unpopular argument, more or less without any other poster's support, I have very little time for people claiming bias and persecution when they take on a very difficult argument and then decide to screw it up and get into flame wars. It's really not hard; stick to the substantial points of contention, content yourself with factual and plausible assertions, do not feel the need to respond to posts/comments that you feel fall beneath the mark (there is a rather helpful report function).

I actually got to thinking about this when I was pondering back over the body of Brexiteer arguments as expressed through things like Question Time. It is quite staggering to think about the utter lack of substantial data and evidence to support a move like the UK leaving the European Union. Again and again during the debate, vivid but vapid cliches about how 'French Vintners' and 'German Car Manufacturers' were going to ensure a free-trade deal, or how the majority of the worlds growth was outside the EU, or the atleast true but largely irrelevant claim of how significant the UK's economy is/was, were served up as though they constituted some enormous compelling body of evidence. And the cherry on the cake has been to see these arguments abandoned one by one with barely a whimper of protest, to the point that now the argument for going through with Brexit is that 'well of course people voted for it' - like an execution going ahead because 'well the jury voted for it' when it turns out the primary witness was a serial liar, the evidence was completely fabricated and victim who was supposed to have been cut into a thousand pieces turns out to be alive and well.

McGiver · 18-08-2019 12:31pm

volchitsa wrote: »

As for your attempt to blame Germany for Ireland's financial problems as an explanation for why Ireland should throw its lot in with the U.K. rather than the E.U., well, it beggars belief really.

And we really should get back on topic now.

Actually, it's not completely OT. All europhobes fascists, crackpots, populists etc in the whole Europe, from Ireland, through UK, France, to Italy, Poland and Hungary have one thing in common - German bashing. It's also distinctive feature in the Brexiteers narrative. The reason is very simple - Russian disinformation and leverage of nascent anti-German sentiments, they're really good at it. They will never get over German unification and how successful Germany ended up after them defeating them in the Ww2 and occupying quarter of the German territory for 40 years. They're definitely behind this. Follow the Russians, Cambridge Analytica, LeaveEU, Trump - they are involved in all this.
No conspiracy theory, this is a fact confirmed by investigative journalists and intelligence agencies (esp. in the Eastern part of the EU).

Sam Russell · 18-08-2019 12:34pm

briany wrote: »

A border in the Irish sea would cut NI off from Britain, if only symbolically. But, y'know, symbols are big up that way.

I think we need to look a little bit more analytically at the pros and cons of a sea border vs. a land border because if an NI Unionist looks at this thread, the conclusion they'll draw is that we're saying 'land border=bad, sea border=good', rather than saying, in a more detached way, the reasons why one is better than the other.

We can say that a land border contravenes the GFA for the Nationalists. They can say a sea border contravenes it for the Unionists. We can say a land border would be bad for all-Ireland trade. They can say a sea border would be very bad for trade with the UK mainland. Round and around we go.

The border required by the exit of the UK from the EU can be considered in a few ways.

Assume the UK exits the EU SM and CU, which means that there must be a hard border somewhere between GB and Ireland, depending on the status of NI with respect to the SM and CU.

1. If the current checks at Larne and Belfast for agriculture products are maintained (and tightened up), and NI continues to maintain an all Ireland agriculture regime, them the current milk and meat regime can continue. That means milk lorries can continue to collect milk from both sides of the border, and pigs anfd lambs can continue to crisscross the border as of now. So everyone wins and no-one loses. That requires NI to remain in the CU and SM for agriculture. Not really a biggie for anyone in NI if it allows farming to continue as of now.

2. If exports from NI to GB can continue unhindered through either Dublin or Belfast, again no-one loses, so everyone wins. Sixty percent of those exports currently pass through Dublin.

3. If imports from GB into NI only go through Dublin, then all inspections required are done in Dublin Port. Goods destined for NI would require inspection that they comply with SM and CU as much as necessary to comply with the GFA. Now that means imports cannot go through Larne or Belfast, unless inspected as per Dublin. Now that is not a biggie.

Now all that remains is the VAT regime. Currently, if goods are purchased in NI for export to Ireland VAT is paid in NI, or for registered traders, is paid in Ireland and reported on the VAT return. If the UK are out of the EU, that changes, and all taxpayers can claim VAT back on export, but if a personal export, will not be required to declare it on import (unless it exceeds a value).

The NI and Irish VAT systems have to remain in close couple to prevent VAT fraud, and keep rules closely coupled with information flowing to keep traders honest.

All in all, not a huge problem compared to a land border on or near the invisible border.

Fionn1952 · 18-08-2019 12:36pm

jm08 wrote: »

Calina wrote: »

You mean Victor Orban, not Recep Erdogan. The latter is president of Turkey which has no say in who is president of the European Commission.

Orban is the person I meant. Thanks for spotting that.

Aye, thanks for the clarification....Sunday mornings aren't my best thinking time, so the aul noggin was hurting trying to work out how Erdogan could veto anything!

18-08-2019 12:58pm

Gintonious wrote: »

They don't want to be treated any differently from the rest of the U.K...which is tragic because the rest of the U.K would consider them Irish, and not British. :rolleyes:

Most people in the rest of the UK already considers them as Irish alresdy, so no change there.

briany · 18-08-2019 1:17pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Most people in the rest of the UK already considers them as Irish alresdy, so no change there.

I could imagine a London barstooler characterising the conflict as "Paddies fighting other Paddies over who's a Paddy."

18-08-2019 1:23pm

briany wrote: »

I could imagine a London barstooler characterising the conflict as "Paddies fighting other Paddies over who's a Paddy."

Yep! That's why most people in the UK don't care about NI, it's only because of the Unionists propping up the current government that it has become an issue. A majority government would have probably accepted the border in the Irish sea.

Charles Babbage · 18-08-2019 1:23pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

3. If imports from GB into NI only go through Dublin, then all inspections required are done in Dublin Port. Goods destined for NI would require inspection that they comply with SM and CU as much as necessary to comply with the GFA. Now that means imports cannot go through Larne or Belfast, unless inspected as per Dublin. Now that is not a biggie.

This most certainly is a biggie.

Now all that remains is the VAT regime. Currently, if goods are purchased in NI for export to Ireland VAT is paid in NI, or for registered traders, is paid in Ireland and reported on the VAT return. If the UK are out of the EU, that changes, and all taxpayers can claim VAT back on export, but if a personal export, will not be required to declare it on import (unless it exceeds a value).

The NI and Irish VAT systems have to remain in close couple to prevent VAT fraud, and keep rules closely coupled with information flowing to keep traders honest.

All in all, not a huge problem compared to a land border on or near the invisible border.

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.

Sam Russell · 18-08-2019 1:29pm

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.

brickster69 · 18-08-2019 1:33pm

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 ?

Stop moaning ffs · 18-08-2019 1:38pm

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?

Bit cynical · 18-08-2019 1:47pm

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.

Varta · 18-08-2019 2:24pm

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.

brickster69 · 18-08-2019 2:28pm

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.

Strazdas · 18-08-2019 2:28pm

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.

Varta · 18-08-2019 2:31pm

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.

Tell me how · 18-08-2019 2:40pm

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.

Bit cynical · 18-08-2019 3:05pm

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.

Tropheus · 18-08-2019 3:07pm

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.

BonnieSituation · 18-08-2019 3:09pm

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?

Bit cynical · 18-08-2019 3:09pm

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.

Bit cynical · 18-08-2019 3:14pm

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.

Imreoir2 · 18-08-2019 3:18pm

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.

Stop moaning ffs · 18-08-2019 3:19pm

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

Bit cynical · 18-08-2019 3:23pm

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.

Imreoir2 · 18-08-2019 3:28pm

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.

lawred2 · 18-08-2019 3:30pm

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

Bit cynical · 18-08-2019 3:33pm

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.

BonnieSituation · 18-08-2019 3:36pm

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?

prawnsambo · 18-08-2019 3:43pm

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.

Bit cynical · 18-08-2019 4:00pm

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.

BonnieSituation · 18-08-2019 4:06pm

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.

18-08-2019 4:12pm

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.

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Comments