BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Stevo 666 wrote:
So after telling us that we have no hope of negotiating with the much larger EU trading bloc, you're now telling us that the UK will be pushed around by a car company that has a plant near Sunderland?Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Of course the Nissan position could be more about extracting cash from the government than any real prospect of not investing:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/its-blackmail-really-nissan-employees-on-the-brexit-compensation-demand
Unless of course you take what the CEO of a large multinational says at face value?
Well yes. Brexit is a useful opportunity to exact demands out of gov't because the UK is in a weak negotiating position.
No sh!t Sherlock.
They can't do that politically, it would open the floodgates.
Let's consider another scenario.
Invoking A50 seems to keep getting pushed back, legal cases aren't going to help this move forwards.
Over the course of time, starting in the next few days, economic results turn sour and get worse and worse.
The govt is forced to shore up the finances in whatever way, tax rises, NHS cuts and so on.
More and more companies and countries show their displeasure.
More and more media starts reports on this foolhardy situation.
The 3 stooges continue to monumentally f*ck-up in speeches.
The Leave crowd start to worry in droves as actually the experts begin to be proven correct. There's nothing like an affect on personal finances to start changing people's views. Hell, 85% reduction in carrier bags since they started costing 5p demonstrates that.0 -
Name a politician who will be happy to be held responsible for the loss of 30,000 jobs in the same town?0
-
Rick Chasey wrote:Name a politician who will be happy to be held responsible for the loss of 30,000 jobs in the same town?
Boris Johnson. Michael Gove. Jeremy Hunt. David Davis. Liam Fox.0 -
Joelsim wrote:Well the ref wasn't legally binding.
That's not a realistic view. If it isn't enacted, the next one definitely will be, and would probably be more leave than the last one.
One of the reasons for the vote was disillusionment with politicians in general, and a desire to give "them" a bloody nose. The way to deal with that is not to pat them on the head and say "that's all very well, but you've made a bad choice, so we'll ignore it".0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Joelsim wrote:Well the ref wasn't legally binding.
That's not a realistic view. If it isn't enacted, the next one definitely will be, and would probably be more leave than the last one.
One of the reasons for the vote was disillusionment with politicians in general, and a desire to give "them" a bloody nose. The way to deal with that is not to pat them on the head and say "that's all very well, but you've made a bad choice, so we'll ignore it".
Like I said, when it starts hitting people in the pocket, reality will dawn.0 -
Joelsim wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:Joelsim wrote:Well the ref wasn't legally binding.
That's not a realistic view. If it isn't enacted, the next one definitely will be, and would probably be more leave than the last one.
One of the reasons for the vote was disillusionment with politicians in general, and a desire to give "them" a bloody nose. The way to deal with that is not to pat them on the head and say "that's all very well, but you've made a bad choice, so we'll ignore it".
Like I said, when it starts hitting people in the pocket, reality will dawn.
And if we haven't left, it will all be seen as the fault of the politicians not getting on with it, or the EU being unreasonable...
On both sides, there's an entrenched viewpoint that blames the others, and will continue to.0 -
Not entirely, AIUI - the 2 years could be extended or A50 could be reversed - unfortunately either requires agreement of the other EU countries, which I would concede is very, very unlikely.Ballysmate wrote:There is no going back and saying we have changed our minds.0 -
Obviously none.Rick Chasey wrote:Name a politician who will be happy to be held responsible for the loss of 30,000 jobs in the same town?
But if you read the links, nobody is talking about Nissan shutting up shop. Not even Nissan themselves. It was talking about the next incremental investment.
I also explained below that companies will weigh up all the commercial factors in those decisions. There is more to it than tariffs. See my earlier post - based on being involved in these sorts of business decisions in real life situations."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
They do not hold all of the aces. It has been said before that the EU runs a large trade surplus on goods with the UK for starters.Surrey Commuter wrote:I doubt there will be any negotiation over the big picture. They hold all the aces so if we try and cherry pick and they say no then we have a hard exit. Or we can pretend to leave and have a Norway style deal, in which they will dictate the terms. So why not have a vote on hard or soft?
About a quarter of the UK population were not entitled to vote, about a quarter did not bother to vote, another quarter voted in and a quarter voted out.
There is a chance that only 10% of the population want a hard exit.
Also as mentioned there is at least one continental bank worries about its access to the London markets. That cannot be unique."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Joelsim wrote:Well the ref wasn't legally binding.
That's not a realistic view. If it isn't enacted, the next one definitely will be, and would probably be more leave than the last one.
One of the reasons for the vote was disillusionment with politicians in general, and a desire to give "them" a bloody nose. The way to deal with that is not to pat them on the head and say "that's all very well, but you've made a bad choice, so we'll ignore it".
Only a third of the electorate voted out. Some will have done so out of a deep seated hatred of the EU, some because of their personal economic situation, some due to bigotry and some because they were dillusioned with politicians.
That would be a tiny % of people who were too dumb to realise that doing away with Brussels made them more dependent on the crooked charlatans in Westminster. In summary we have no need to worry about their views - as said above tell them they have left already.0 -
Why are so many so certain that a re-vote would return a "better" result? Not one of the Out voters that I know would change their vote and wonder why we are not out already.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
PBlakeney wrote:Why are so many so certain that a re-vote would return a "better" result? Not one of the Out voters that I know would change their vote and wonder why we are not out already.
I think most are suggesting a vote on what Brexit should look like.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Ballysmate wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:I thought brexiters believed in the primacy of parliament over being dictated to?
The reason we want the debate as opposed to the current approach is not so much about Brexit happening or not, both labour and the Tories agree to respect the result, but how the UK exits and what it decides to negotiate must be open for discussion.
It was never discussed and it's too important not to.
Can't really see the point of having an open debate on what outcome we want before we start any negotiations. Surely that weakens further any bargaining position? How could our negotiators ask for X, with the EU knowing that we would settle for Y?
Negotiations can't start before A50 is triggered and there is no going back. A fact that seems lost on the likes of Tim Farron, who would like a second referendum on the acceptance of any deal. Whatever deal we get is the deal we get. There is no going back and saying we have changed our minds.
So how d'ya think all these political parties over the centuries have campaigned and debated in public how they ought to negotiate things?
Given the vast array of possible options and outcomes for Brexit, you're happy for a cabinet to decide without drbate or discussion which option to go for, even when the cabinet which was elected was firmly part of the remain campaign?
If anything these are the more important decisions. There's not even unity amongst those who voted Brexit.
The reason for the secrecy isn't around negotiating tactics (the red line on immigration being drawn and the general behaviour of Davis is not conducive to advantageous negotiating) is to hide the fact there is a huge divide within the Tory party on what Brexit ought to look like, and with such a slender commons majority, they'd get annihilated.
With the Tories in particular, the obvious answer is always to do with party politics.
Your obsession with parliament possibly renaging on Brexit is a red herring. Both big parties have committed to Brexit.
It's a diversionary argument to make an otherwise weak case.
Not me. It is Joel's obsession. He is banking on Parliament throwing Brexit out.0 -
-
Belter. So you are now saying that not triggering article 50 will cause economic decline. Kind of goes against what you have been saying all along.Joelsim wrote:Let's consider another scenario.
Invoking A50 seems to keep getting pushed back, legal cases aren't going to help this move forwards.
Over the course of time, starting in the next few days, economic results turn sour and get worse and worse.
The govt is forced to shore up the finances in whatever way, tax rises, NHS cuts and so on.
More and more companies and countries show their displeasure.
More and more media starts reports on this foolhardy situation.
The 3 stooges continue to monumentally f*ck-up in speeches.
The Leave crowd start to worry in droves as actually the experts begin to be proven correct. There's nothing like an affect on personal finances to start changing people's views. Hell, 85% reduction in carrier bags since they started costing 5p demonstrates that.
Also if you notice you have already accepted that the UK economic results are really not materially adversely affected because we haven't left yet...
This coming from someone who predicted immediate economic Armageddon approx 2 hours after the referendum result.
I wonder which other predictions you are badly wrong in? You should join Rick in the 'crap forecaster of the decade' competition
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Bit premature for the morning of 24th June?Joelsim wrote:In two hours the UK economy has lost $350 BILLION. That’s equivalent to 40 years of EU contributions.
Sterling crashed already.
AAA rating likely to be lost immediately.
Tax rises inevitable.
And slightly misleading as the 'loss' was only a paper loss on stock market values. Funny that, as when stock prices go up, lefties are usually moaning that it's the evil rich who are benefitting it the expense of others..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
And before the "it benefits exports" chat, evidence doesn't support the theory as closely: http://www.ft.com/fastft/2016/06/29/wil ... k-exports/0
-
All I know is my next trip to the mainland EU to purchase things will cost me more. Great.
I suppose the same applies to idiots I see in the pub who smoke baccy with EU health warnings on what they bought off a lorry driver. Ho hum.
And I was hoping at some point to retire to France or somewhere conducive to easy living. Suppose that's out the window. Still don't want to retire to the peace and quiet of Wales, though.Ecrasez l’infame0 -
-
How about the 'loss' ? Or the tax rises?Rick Chasey wrote:Sterling hasn't recovered mind. FFS.
Remember your top forecasts last year were:
1. The Lib Dems would hold the balance of power after the 2015 GE.
2. Corbyn wouldn't win the Labour leadership
Got any more top tips? Then I can bet the farm against them
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
Rick Chasey wrote:Ooo interesting!
First glance looks sensible.
It does.
It also has the political benefit of distancing herself from the three monkeys.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Looks like it's an admission UK will not be part of single market according to lawyerly types.
To quote David Allen Green, who has been a superb voice of legal knowledge on this, suspect very little of actual legal or constitutional significance will be announced by May tomorrow, regardless of spin.0 -
-
Surely the logical answer to this is to p1ss off now while you still can. Same advice applies to a quite a few people on this thread - surely a win - win situation?BelgianBeerGeek wrote:All I know is my next trip to the mainland EU to purchase things will cost me more. Great.
I suppose the same applies to idiots I see in the pub who smoke baccy with EU health warnings on what they bought off a lorry driver. Ho hum.
And I was hoping at some point to retire to France or somewhere conducive to easy living. Suppose that's out the window. Still don't want to retire to the peace and quiet of Wales, though. "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
narbs wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Looks like it's an admission UK will not be part of single market according to lawyerly types.
To quote David Allen Green, who has been a superb voice of legal knowledge on this, suspect very little of actual legal or constitutional significance will be announced by May tomorrow, regardless of spin.
Sure but withdrawal of ECJ is a pretty big sign.0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
How about the 'loss' ? Or the tax rises?Rick Chasey wrote:Sterling hasn't recovered mind. FFS.
Remember your top forecasts last year were:
1. The Lib Dems would hold the balance of power after the 2015 GE.
2. Corbyn wouldn't win the Labour leadership
Got any more top tips? Then I can bet the farm against them
I put money on May as PM the day Cameron resigned & I had each way money on Uran today so I'm not always wrong.
About as wrong as everyone else most of the time.0 -
Given what happened at the last vote, do you think that would be a good idea?Surrey Commuter wrote:PBlakeney wrote:Why are so many so certain that a re-vote would return a "better" result? Not one of the Out voters that I know would change their vote and wonder why we are not out already.
I think most are suggesting a vote on what Brexit should look like.
PS - You'd have to poll the whole of the EU as they kind of get a say in negotiations.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0
