Since this thread is wandering into IMHO or GD territory already…
I would not be surprised at a new Scottish independence referendum succeeding (so it can rejoin the EU). The Welsh seem less restive, and somehow I doubt NI will leave Mother England until there are 50%+1 Catholic voters in Ulster. But losing Scotland would be a blow.
As for “failing backwater,” well, that may be strong. But does anyone think Britain now wields the same influence it did in 1993, 1981, 1955, 1945, 1919? Pretty clearly the answer is no. Putting yourselves literally back on an island is not going to make the rest of the world afeared; Britain’s voice is stronger with Europe than without.
The pound will cease to be a reserve currency. All that finance that flows through London will go away. The oligarchs who inflate the London real estate market will decamp. Perhaps the average voter doesn’t care about these things, but wait until the collapse.
I almost wish the no-deal crash on Britain so all the donkeys will discover the consequences of their ignorance; except for the terrible consequences for my English friends. However, I fear we’ll find out anyway.
1066 represents the invasion, seizure and occupation of England by a foreign power, the Duke of Normandy. Hardly a shining example of being a “world powerhouse”.
EVen 500 years ago, I don’t think anybody would have fingered England as a “world powerhouse” (or even a “European powerhouse”) in 1519. Spain, France and the Empire were all much more signficant players politically, economically and militarily. England could, with a bit of effort, dominate its immediate smaller neighbours, Scotland and Ireland, but that was about the limit of it.
The rise of English power didn’t really start until the late sixteenth century, and I don’t think it became (the then equivalent of) a superpower until the 18th century, by which time it had become Great Britain. And it was in decline as a superpower from fairly early on in the 20th century.
I’ve already said that I accept correction on some of the earlier points I made, and I genuinely appreciate that. I just don’t really understand the vitriol. But if it helps our politicians to realise the foolishness of the positions they are taking, it’s all to the good I suppose.
You’d understand the vitriol if you’d spent over two years warning people that this precise situation was the only possible outcome of Brexit, have that dismissed as scaremongering using bad faith arguments, and then be called traitor, undemocratic, citizen of nowhere, wrecker, euro-lover, whenever you continue to warn about the dangers, have your friends lose their jobs or leave the country for fear of their livelihoods, and when the expected happens, be told it’s your fault for not ‘getting behind Brexit’, whatever the toss that means.
And then to be told that ‘No deal’ is either desirable, or remotely manageable…or that May’s deal is remotely superior to what we currently enjoy in the EU…
To have the rational, open, evidence-based, cosmopolitan, forward-thinking, confident, world-leading country you thought you were proud of to be revealed as a fantasy…
It tends to rub you the wrong way, to put it delicately.
The English voted for the Brexit because some private persons didn’t say “Cheerie, Good Show Mates” to completely wrong assertions?
It is very sad if you decided to cut off your noses and engage in immiseration for yourselves over a dislike of expressions of some private non government persons.
Or the 1000 years mistake…
***Some ***of the earlier points…? You mean your series of the tabloid assertions blaming cabals of Brussels politicians for everything contrary to all facts?
It is in any case it is hardly our fault that you have all been sold, I think your English expression is “a load of the complete bollocks” - look at the nonsensical statement about the EU small claims resolution facility ! - you speculated it has to be hugely expensive, and complain about it replacing your super excellent English ones, and not having an Opt Out …
But in fact it’s a clearinghouse for referral to the local / national alternative dispute resolutions services, particularly for the online selling and help reduce the consumer side risk and costs for intra-EU trading only.
Only a small reflection on this subject would lead to the realization that the national opt outs for the claim that they only trade locally (but online) would end up completely rendering it inutile as every local company will assert “I am local only” to hide behind their local preference - and would require to keep honest, a huge bureaucracy to control.
It is not even to argue that the EU facility and operation is excellent, just the arguments against it are just weird non factual whining.
The social-political arguments like that of Steophan here, subjective as they can be, at least can be understood. Even sympathized with…
The economic trade arguments and the sheer, complete nonsense and incoherence in assertions, contre all objective fact and the physical evidence, these… they are not understandable really.
For anyone understanding the physical logistics, it is not a great surprise.
The prediction of chaos for No Deal is the lack of the time to actually mitigate what are the hard physical constraints and also the non bilateral legal issues that go beyond just EU-UK…
Although maybe there are the excellent and the smooth preparations that will minimize the chaos of the supply chain disruptions, since at every turn there seems to be the evidence of the poor and the late planning - again from my private job since this December I know among the large industrials there is a degree of … not quite panic, but close given very little confident proof of good preparations, and lots of public signs of great disarray on the UK government side from the political to the practical.
I am sorry you have been subjected to that. It is not an agenda I have pushed (I do think a bit more positivity will help, but I’m not “blaming” people for pointing out problems).
No, it is just a small part among many issues I think.
I don’t make a habit of reading the tabloids and when I do, I certainly don’t believe or trust them. That may be true for a significant proportion of Leave voters but you can leave me out of that group. And to be clear, I am not blaming Brussels for what they have done in the last 2 years of negotiations (that is understandable and predictable), rather the way the organisation has evolved (or failed to) over the 40 years prior to that.
This is not a fair characterisation of my point and you have not demonstrated it is in any way “nonsensical”. Let me put it very simply: why have a regulation that requires a business dealing only with consumers based in its own country to route any complaints through a European clearing house before they come back to that country’s already-established, independent ombudsman? That is what is nonsensical about this particular situation. You can argue that that is a small price to pay for the other supposed benefits of EU membership if you like, but you cannot convincingly claim that this in itself is a good thing.
There is nothing sneering or condescending about explaining the horrific implications of a no-deal Brexit to people who apparently don’t understand them and think that we will somehow “muddle through” and sneak stuff through while nobody’s looking.
Most of the people who believe that the moon landings are fake have never watched Capricorn One. Ramira isn’t saying that your direct source is the tabloids; what she’s saying is that your conclusions and reasoning are tabloid-worthy and in fact the same ones the tabloids come up with.
Given that you appear to despise tabloids, that might be a reason to reconsider your logic, rather than to entrench further. If someone told me my line of reasoning sounded like something out of… Jean-Marie Le Pen, to mention someone known internationally and that I find revolting, I’d certainly rethink it.
I have already rethought and acknowledged that. Having said that, if there were another referendum I would still vote to leave the EU. It is possible to do this in a sensible way and I think our politicians will eventually wake up to that.
I have no problem with Europe, Europeans, or immigration, in general, I just don’t like the EU as an institution. Yes, it has done some good in the past but it’s had its time and is no longer needed. I don’t see any point in debating the matter though because this is one of those things on which neither side is going to change its mind.
Unless you are setting up like the China an English Only internet, the online sales are not something that is clearly dealing only with consumers based in their own country.
So why have a regulation requiring the online sales plateform to include a link to the online automated coordination platform - because of the problems observed in the resolving between the online consumers and the online sellers across the free trade region to promote greater ease of the resolution - and why apply to all, because it is the simpler, less bureaucratic solution than trying to distinguish between those who truly are 100% purely domestic (and never ever would ever consider responding to a foreign online order) and those that in fact have the exposition to the online consumers not in the great nation of England… so that over time more fluidity in resolution of problems and so the consumers can more easily have trust.
Online sales.
Accessible electronic link requirement.
the terrible horrible burden of it.
What is nonsensical is to pretend that it is an effective or efficient thing to have online sales and pretend that the assertion of Only Domestic is not something that will be completely abused - and so that the solution you are asserting is easier would not in fact be more complicated and expensive with oversights and controls in the cases of the cross-border online transactoins (or you are expecting your English National Internet and Great Internat Wall of England to prevent the dirty foreigners from using the English internet?)…
For persons who believe that the international trade rules set by the American promoted WTO are to be applied on your self-decided exit due to cabals in Brussels, yes I suppose it is impossible to expect any rationale argument or facts will get through.
The next few days decide the fate of the Withdrawal Agreement that May has negotiated over the past two years. That compromise has flaws that offend many factions and so is expected to fail. At the same time there are amendments being proposed to prevent the Government from crashing out with No Deal before the March 29 deadline. If the Government cannot pass its Withdrawal Agreement and cannot pursue No-Deal, then that is deadlock. I would expect May to ask for a delay Brexit in order to come up with another plan. That has always been an option. Or she might resign and let one of her colleagues have a go, but they would also want a delay. She keeps her cards closely to her chest.
Labours Corbyn has stated he will raise a no confidence motion in the Government based on the failure of the flagship policy so there would be a General Election, but is seems doubtful that there are the numbers. Whether a divided Labour party in power would improve the situation is doubtful.
All this amounts to a great deal of political uncertainty.
The UK is caught by two political innovations and an election that resulted in a government that has a very slim majority: the use of simple majority Referendum to introduce a political imperative and the introduction of fixed term five year Parliaments.
These have created a situation where a lame government is forced to pursue a flagship policy it cannot deliver yet can hang on for a the full term. The politics of the UK has become dominated by the internal politics of a dysfunctional Conservative Party.
Having all parties shackled to delivering a Brexit policy in some form or another means an awful lot of other government business and important policies are effectively sidelined. The governance of the country and the management of the economy suffer. Everyone is completely exhausted by the Brexit debate.
I expect the deadline will be avoided by a delay of a year or two that effectively kicks the can down the road so there is time for another deal to be negotiated by May or her replacement.
It’s a Channel 4 drama starring Benedict Cumberbatch about how Brexiteers won the referendum.
It was broadcast on Channel 4 in the UK on Jan 7, and will be broadcast on HBO in the US on Jan 19.
I’ve seen it, and it’s pretty good. It’s similar in some ways to The Big Short. It shows how big data from social networks, outright lies, and financing by shady billionaires resulted in Vote Leave winning the referendum.
It depends on what the referendum question is, surely?
If the choice was Deal or cancel Brexit, I don’t blame you for opting for the Deal.
If it’s between No Deal or cancelling Brexit, I can’t consider anybody who votes for No Deal simply because it’s the ‘leave’ option to be remotely sound in their arguments.
On June 23rd 2016 we opted to go through a door. We’ve opened the door, and found a gaping precipice. May’s Deal is a very rickety bridge that proposes to cross it, but it might break while we’re on it, and it has rusty nails and grease all over it too.
Anyone who sees the bridge collapse on its own and decides to dive into the precipice is insane.
Best to close the door, and, if you find a better plan to cross it in the future, then reopen the door.
**What ‘sensible way’ do you have in mind?!
**
‘Norway’? ‘Canada’? ‘No deal’?
How are you going to arrange the Irish border?
Do you think having only WTO agreements is profitable?
Please bear in mind that we’ve spent nearly 2 years discussing Brexit options and there is no agreement on any of them.
We’ve had David Davis and Dominic Raab resign as Brexit Secretaries, without achieving anything.
We’ve had a number of Cabinet Ministers resign over Brexit.
We’ve had the DUP announce they will not support the Government’s position.
We’ve had a leadership challenge to Theresa May.
Isn’t this massive evidence that there is no simple, sensible way to leave the EU?
This is a very worrying view to take.
Firstly **the EU is an incredibly successful trading bloc - one of the largest in the World and with many, many existing trade agreements.
It has enormous influence and can negotiate from a position of strength.
**You intend to leave all that and start paying tariffs to every country in the World, whilst we try to negotiate hundreds of brand new trade deals…
Bear in mind that the Leave campaign concentrated on just three points:
we can get £350 million a week from ‘somewhere’ (this lie was supported by Boris Johnson, whose ‘economic ability’ consists of losing £300,000 on unused water cannon for London and wasting £37 million on a bridge that was never built.)
we can take back control (code for ‘keeping foreigners out’)
we can change the colour of our passports
Nothing about the resulting economic disruption, massive changes to cope with immediate trade problems - here’s an example of how well Brexit is going:
No really - what’s a “sensible” way to leave a customs and trade union that you do most of your international trading with, and which you rely on heavily for imports and exports? What outcome could come from it that would make sense for the UK? I mean, if we set our baseline as “hard brexit with no fucking plan whatsoever” (i.e. what we’re careening towards now), then sure, you can do better than that, but better than the status quo? Good luck.
And given that the current mess came about because of a referendum, what you seem to be saying is that you’ve learned nothing from the last two years. And this is where I start to get frustrated, because when people like you fail to learn from events like this, everyone suffers as a result.
I’m not going to continue to debate with you, because a) while you have demonstrated a great deal of knowledge on the general issues, on this specific issue you don’t know what you are talking about, b) I don’t wish to go into more detail about the subject as I would prefer the nature and place of my employment to remain relatively anonymous, c) it appears you refuse to even consider the possibility you might be wrong about anything, and d) you persist with the snide and uncalled for insults, unlike everyone else in the thread who appears to be capable of discussing the issues without resorting to that. But again, I do thank you for your contribution which has been informative and helped me refine my own views.
I agree, except I don’t think there has been much actual suffering yet (a bit like how traffic often flows more smoothly when a set of traffic lights are turned off) - admittedly this is probably more good luck than good judgement.
[quote=“GreenWyvern, post:153, topic:827260”]
Has anyone watched Brexit: The Uncivil War?
It’s a Channel 4 drama starring Benedict Cumberbatch about how Brexiteers won the referendum.
It was broadcast on Channel 4 in the UK on Jan 7, and will be broadcast on HBO in the US on Jan 19.
I’ve seen it, and it’s pretty good. It’s similar in some ways to The Big Short. It shows how big data from social networks, outright lies, and financing by shady billionaires resulted in Vote Leave winning the referendum.
Highly recommended.
Trailer
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the reminder, I really enjoyed The Big Short so I will try to get to this on catch-up.
Of course it would depend on the question. Based on the current situation, and the education I have received in this thread, I think if it was “leave with no deal” vs “stay in” as a binary choice, I would reluctantly have to vote for the latter (but not so reluctantly that I would consider abstaining). I don’t really care about any personal or political embarrassment this might cause, I would just be disappointed that we couldn’t make it work.
Actually, I hope there isn’t another public vote at all, since the politicians and negotiators should be much more informed about the issues than the general public, and are therefore in a far better position to sort things out one way or the other.
Not simple of course, but May’s way seems the only sensible option and it is being blocked by idiots who think they can somehow make personal or political gain if it happens. They also know that openly supporting no Brexit is political suicide (apart from the Lib Dems, who have already committed political suicide anyway so it seems like a reasonable thing for them to do), so May must eventually prevail, albeit there is likely to be further delay.
No, I would prefer a gradual transition away from the EU which will involve keeping similar trading deals in the short term. That is roughly what May’s plan entails, no?
I agree with your insinuation that Johnson is a buffoon who shouldn’t be in charge of a stall at a church fete let alone a government department/city, but speaking for myself I was convinced by none of those points at the time (though sadly I suppose many people were). Though I do think in the long term we will save some money from not subsidising the EU. But it seemed at the time the points made by the remain campaign were weaker still. They more or less expected to win by default, right up to when they didn’t.
I agree this is a disappointing use of public money and this should all have been resolved much sooner.
I personally am not looking for something “better than the status quo”, I accept a small economic hit in the short term (in the long-term I think there won’t be much difference) as an acceptable price of ‘smaller government’.
And I have learned a lot in the last 2 days, but my basic position hasn’t changed. There haven’t really been any “events” yet. I believe that May’s deal will eventually pass one way or another, then we can pretty much carry on as normal, and over the coming years the UK will gradually drift away from the EU in terms of laws, regulations etc.
You won’t get ‘smaller government’. Brexit is bigger government. By not merging regulatory bodies with those of the EU27, we’re duplicating work and cost, while making everything much less effective. And, we’ll have to simply adopt what the EU decides anyway, with no say.
More and more I’m convinced that, if we leave, we’ll just be back in in a decade or so’s time, minus all the opt-outs, rebate and special treatment we’ve had for forty years. Yes, even Schengen and the currency, because we deserve it for our obtuseness.
:eek: