When was that?
And you realised that the world has changed bigly since whenever that was?
I dunno if you realise, Quartz, but it’s not 1870 any more. We can’t just dispatch a gunboat to force our trading terms on the natives.
Here’s ZEIT ONLINE | Lesen Sie zeit.de mit Werbung oder im PUR-Abo. Sie haben die Wahl. a commentary in German by a correspondant in London about how far from reality the British govt. apparently is regarding the position of GB vs. EU, the leverage and the demands as well as the complexities for the negotiations.
As long as the denial of reality persists both in leading politicans and the tabloid media, the reasons for the resentment that was harvested into the Brexit, as well as the real problems of the country, won’t be solved.
If GB leaves without any treaties, and then crashes in the world market, I guess everything will be blamed on the EU being mean (or German-controlled), and that’s why NHS is underfunded, or why after Thatcher privatized everything, jobs have gone. So the people using lies to lead parts of the population around can continue, and people who prefer comfortable lies to complicated facts will continue to blame everybody else but those responsible.
For much of recorded history.
Of course it has. But ISTM that you’re looking at a Day One view whereas I’m looking at the longer term.
I think there is a bit of a gap between how you/ GB thinks the world looks at GB; and how the rest of the world actually looks at, and thinks about, GB.
You’re (at least here in Europe) no longer the eccentric but charming country. You’re not a proud island nation. You’re the country where one or two dozen of politicans thought that cementing their own power position, and playing the debate game that was so much fun as young adult at Oxbridge, was a fun thing to do with the fate of a whole nation, and then running away once “their side won” the game; because a not-small part of your population has been fed a diet of lies and slander for decades and prefers that to facts, that they follow liars responsible for their problems rather than trying to adress the problems. So basically Trump-USA lite, but without the economic power of the US.
You’re the country who values their pride in being “an island and different” more than rational facts about economy.
You’re the country who has wanted special treatment during treaty negotiations, still demand special terms, and walked out of a treaty.
So why would any country want to enter a treaty with you? How can a country who would actually want to trade with you trust you that a few years down the road, the policticians won’t get into another snit and walk out again? How can any country trust you, if you keep believing in dreams you like instead of looking at reality?
Dealing with crazy people is not fun, it’s a hassle. Crazy countries with nuclear weapons like North Korea get some attention, but are mostly shunned. Crazy countries with lots of stuff like USA are watched very warily as to when they will explode (or who they will bomb next). But given the choice between rational, reliable countries to trade with, or GB, GB will loose out.
And another part of reality is: what does GB have to offer that’s so special and unique that it’s worth the hassle of special treaties and dealing with uncalculable risks, instead of buying it elsewhere? Manufacturing? Warm beer? Football hooligans? BBC? Lots of Western European countries can do manufacturing, because they have educated, skilled workers and small, specialized, inventive companies, and in addition, EU projects helping poor regions to advance, and EU treaties and less customs.
What a stupid thing to say. We also managed without electricity for much of recorded history too, should we pull the plug?
Of course it has. But ISTM that you’re looking at a Day One view whereas I’m looking at the longer term.
[/QUOTE]
Could you elaborate? You think Brexit will be worth it in the long run? How? Statistics and evidence, please, not gut feeling.
And that implies it will suck in the short-to-medium term. For how many? For how long? What will we lose?
Except, of course, that it’s true.
A lot of those to whom I spoke before the referendum seemed to think so. Myself? I don’t know. But I don’t believe that even in the short term it will be as bad as the alarmists paint.
True, perhaps, but hardly relevant. We once didn’t give the vote to women, and we had the Empire, so we must have done fine. Do you think we should remove it?
Do you think the UK can manage fine TODAY without trade agreements? Based on what?
A lot of those to whom I spoke before the referendum seemed to think so. Myself? I don’t know. But I don’t believe that even in the short term it will be as bad as the alarmists paint.
[/QUOTE]
Gut feeling again. And you wonder why Remainers are aghast at this disaster in the making.
Isn’t it amazing how much is coming out of Berlin just now.
As Yanis Varoufakis has said, this is exactly what they did to Greece as well; it’s going to be relentless, folks …
At this rate, Merkel will have mandarins running Whitehall by the Autumn.
p.s. I see the Brexit bill is now 100 euros. LOL. This is just the start.
You mean, the EU refused to give Greece a free lunch?
You never explained what was ‘mafia-like’ about telling the UK that it can’t have all the benefits and none of the responsibilities, or telling it like it is on the complexities of agreeing trade deals.
I see Brexiters are lining up their excuses already - it’s the EU’s fault, couldn’t possibly be down to the blind folly of the British, no-siree!
I’m confused. When have nations ever not had trade agreements?
Don’t worry, the former Empire is gagging to trade with us! They all are anyway, but we’ll get to negotiate new deals that are better than the ones we already have from our new position of strength as being a much smaller (and soon to be really rather desperate) market.
“What’s that you say, India? You’d like more freedom of movement between our two countries in exchange for a trade treaty? I’m sure the core Brexit vote will be just fine with that!”.
The EU wants some more cash:
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/02/brussels-hoists-gross-brexit-bill-to-up-to-100-billion-euros.html
But in terms of what the UK is currently paying:
So what they want is quite a few years of current UK current contributions.
I think it unlikely a deal will happen.
To be honest, I think the sum of money the UK will owe will be negotiated as one of the soft targets, really.
It’s the actual practical issues - like trade - where it will fall flat, but Brexiters are on a different planet and dismiss inconvenient truths as scaremongering.
As alluded to above, back when Britain was an empire, a gunboat showed up and dictated the Terms under which the British wanted to trade, and if the Brits didn’t stick to the Terms, the natives didn’t have much choice for Appeals…
I’m sure that nobody outside Britain remembers those times, and is therefore in any way wary of dealing with Britain, or wondering how to enforce treaties Britain doesn’t like and suddenly backs out of…
When did Greece leave the EU? Or are you referring to the time when Greece called for help from the EU (while debating leaving the Euro, which is not the same), and the Troika recommended a three-prong Approach:
saving/ cost-cutting;
getting rid of corruption;
starting new taxes on the rich;
and the Greek politicans only implemented the cost-cutting, hitting the poor and normal citizens hard, but for some reason didn’t bother fighting corruption, or figuring out how much Money/ land their friends owned (if you don’t even know who owns what, it’s hard to tax the rich), and then People marched in the street comparing Merkel to Hitler?
Yes, it was wrong to only cut things, yes, it’s terrible how normal citizens are suffering - but some blame rests on their own, where two consecutive govts. from different spectrums have both ignored corruption and have both not taxed the rich.
Well, it’s easy, just continue like before: before, everything was the fault of the EU, now everything is the fault of the EU. They know that People believe it over Facts, so why not Keep doing what’s working?
Take just one example, that was often used: it was not Brussels (or Berlin) that caused the NHS Problems. If anything, freedom to work meant EU doctors and nurses went to work in Britain alleviating staff shortages. And the grin with which the “winners” declared right on the same day that of course the 175 mill. Pounds paid per week, prominently featured in the Leave ads over and over again would NOT go to the NHS because why?, - I found that nauseating.
So, how is Brexit going to solve the NHS Problem, if your own politicans don’t care to spend the Money necessary on it?
I guess it’s Magic, that all foreigners stop using it (no matter actual numbers) means that suddenly there’s enough Money to treat an aging Population with reduced funds and not enough staff.
To put my last point more succinctly: Germany ‘interfering in General Election in attempt to undermine Theresa May’:
Imperial German gears up …
That’s not interfering. That’s stating that, objectively, she’s full of shit.
Honestly, the desire to prevent a longstanding ally from ruining itself over fictional promises and false lies is something we should appreciate.
And again with the German conspiracy theory, UTJ? Come on, you’re better than this.
I think this is a bit “fog in the Channel, continent cut off”. German politicians are more interested in German voters than they are in British ones, and there’s an election coming up. The leak about the dinner with Juncker was made to a print-only, German-language only paper: sure, it’s been taken note of over here but it’s biggest effect will be on its primary audience - Germans who need to know that the EU/Merkel are running a strong negotiation. Ditto a German finance minister tweeting about how Britain will be post- Brexit - is this really a Machiavellian plan to undermine Theresa May (because really, given the predictable reaction of British tabloids to threats from Germans, how would it possibly undermine her) or is it a politician posturing for a domestic audience?
I had to look up the Verhofstadt “mocking” of Theresa May. It was this one tweet: "Any Brexit deal requires a strong and stable understanding of the complex issues involved. The clock is ticking - it’s time to get real.” If that’s enough to undermine May, we’re in trouble. Again, it reads more like it was designed for domestic consumption.
There’s a good blog hereabout egocentric framing, and how it makes people suck at negotiation. (Or chess.) “If I were in my opponent’s position, what would I want and how would I get it?” is the critical question. Assuming that every EU/German utterance is solely designed to affect an election that is basically a done deal is missing out a huge element of what motivates people. Everyone involved in the negotations has their own constituency to satisfy, and that’s what will determine their red lines.
Not really, no.
Yes, the EU didn’t cause Greece’s problems - if anything, it was the other way around. Greece fairly blatantly misrepresented the state of its economy at the point it joined the euro (something it finally admitted in 2004, three years too late), which resulted in a major source of instability within the Eurozone. Unfortunately there was a limit to the extent the rest of the EU could call bullshit on Greece’s figures at the time it was being considered for admittance to the currency and so the stage was set for the later problems, exacerbated by the tax and corruption issues that were (and still are) rife in Greece. The EU has likely saved Greece from the full impact of its problems for a long time, and when told they needed to sort out their problems because the free ride was coming to an end the Greeks got all stroppy about it.
But it’s fun to blame Germany, because who doesn’t love an easy scapegoat? Certainly not Daily Mail and Telegraph readers!
The Prime Minister has assured us that “having a stronger economy” will magically provide money for the NHS, which means that nurses will no longer need to resort to food banks to survive. Because everything can be fixed by giving more tax breaks to the wealthy while blaming foreigners for any problems.
In much the same way Obama’s so-called “interference” pre-referendum was him stating, objectively, that Farage, Gove and Johnson were full of shit. Apparently it’s okay to make things up, but pointing out that people are making things up is bad.
Cite?