BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Don't talk to them then. You're not going to solve the clusterf of Brexit on here, however angry you get. I'm angry too, but try to channel that into refining my argument rather than invective. Dicks will be dicks whatever you say.Joelsim wrote:Just bored of speaking to dicks.0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bompington wrote:
It seems to me that the "control your own destiny" myth is mostly popular among people who have difficulty coping with the globalised, interdependent world we live in today. Those who voted Brexit seem to be those who feel like they're the losers, whether economically or just emotionally.Coopster the 1st wrote:Yet, you and many others want to remain under the leadership of these people rather than control our own destiny :roll:
They haven't worked out that nobody is completely "in control of their own destiny": we all agree to share control in certain ways: in our relationships, at work, politically.
I suspect that the Brexitomane cry of "Hooray, now we have control of our own destiny" will start to sound a bit thin once reality begins to bite.
We have voted to remove one level of bureaucracy, I cannot see how this is a bad thing. Less is definitely more in this instance. So we are increasing out control. The current EU-Canadian trade deal failure demonstrates this perfectly.
It turns out you voted to swap one level of bureaucracy for another.
The failure of the EU-Canada trade deal demonstrates how unlikely we are to get a deal with our largest trading partner in the forseeeable future. Especially as our crack team keep acting like they owe us a favour.
It's actually going to increase the amount of bureaucracy that a lot of companies have to comply with anyway, if they want to sell anything to Europe. As they'll have to comply with whatever our new requirements are plus the EU requirements. I'd rather just have the one set.
There will be no extra bureaucracy as the companies are already complying with the EU regulations as of today. They are not going to change come Brexit day. They may diverge over time but that time measurement is in decades.
And those exporting companies still have to comply with the myriad of rules for exports to non-EU countries.0 -
briantrumpet wrote:
Don't talk to them then. You're not going to solve the clusterf of Brexit on here, however angry you get. I'm angry too, but try to channel that into refining my argument rather than invective. Dicks will be dicks whatever you say.Joelsim wrote:Just bored of speaking to dicks.
You're right.
Sorry, just can't be doing with muppets anymore. Way past that. The evidence is there every day, and every day a little more. Yet the knobs still ignore it, which leads me to believe they have another motive.0 -
Good news indeed.Coopster the 1st wrote:briantrumpet wrote:Brexit collateral damage: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... tell-lords - still, we'll be in "control of our own destiny", even if we do cause a bigger clusterf for our neighbours. Not that England has ever caused any problems like that before...
That reads very much like the Irish will be looking for the EU to have positive discussions towards the outcome of Brexit rather than the punishment agenda being pushed by the EU leaders.
And here are 3 more countries (Sweden, Finland and Denmark) looking for positive discussions to take place rather than the disruptive ones being pushed by the EU (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... t-britain/)
Then there is the Lithuania election where their government have been elected on a ticket to reduce emigration. As the UK is the largest recipient of Lithuanian emigrants this definitely looks like support for the UK on ending free movement into the UK.
So the EU says one thing, but the governments who will be accepting the consequences of how the EU leaders negotiate are telling them how they should act. The EU definitely sound united on Brexit
Feels like a good news day all round to me
Let's not forget that both Hollande and Merkel are posturing as expected in the lead up to the Brexit negotiations, but perhaps more importantly have general elections next year and are in precarious political positions so are looking to shore up a bit of voter support by talking tough."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You might well be right. Collect evidence, marshal your facts, refine your argument, channel your anger into cold logic.Joelsim wrote:briantrumpet wrote:
Don't talk to them then. You're not going to solve the clusterf of Brexit on here, however angry you get. I'm angry too, but try to channel that into refining my argument rather than invective. Dicks will be dicks whatever you say.Joelsim wrote:Just bored of speaking to dicks.
You're right.
Sorry, just can't be doing with muppets anymore. Way past that. The evidence is there every day, and every day a little more. Yet the knobs still ignore it, which leads me to believe they have another motive.
And ignore the dicks. The world is full of them.0 -
Abour 2-3% according latest estimates. Massive eh. Pretty much in line with recent historical average and yet more 'proof' that we are doomed :roll:bobmcstuff wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:And more good news
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... orker-pool
Wage rises coming to the lower paid in society when unlimited EU migration stops. And the 'experts' told us in the run up to the referendum that immigration did not cause a suppression of wages
The comments are hilarious as Guardian readers get stuck with conflicting views of wage rises good/Brexit bad :d
It'll have to be a pretty big pay rise to cancel out the inflation caused by the 20% devaluation of the pound..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
briantrumpet wrote:
You might well be right. Collect evidence, marshal your facts, refine your argument, channel your anger into cold logic.Joelsim wrote:briantrumpet wrote:
Don't talk to them then. You're not going to solve the clusterf of Brexit on here, however angry you get. I'm angry too, but try to channel that into refining my argument rather than invective. Dicks will be dicks whatever you say.Joelsim wrote:Just bored of speaking to dicks.
You're right.
Sorry, just can't be doing with muppets anymore. Way past that. The evidence is there every day, and every day a little more. Yet the knobs still ignore it, which leads me to believe they have another motive.
And ignore the dicks. The world is full of them.
Evidence and facts doesn't work.
It's very simple. If you're in favour of Brexit then you are either stupid or a c*nt.0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bompington wrote:
It seems to me that the "control your own destiny" myth is mostly popular among people who have difficulty coping with the globalised, interdependent world we live in today. Those who voted Brexit seem to be those who feel like they're the losers, whether economically or just emotionally.Coopster the 1st wrote:Yet, you and many others want to remain under the leadership of these people rather than control our own destiny :roll:
They haven't worked out that nobody is completely "in control of their own destiny": we all agree to share control in certain ways: in our relationships, at work, politically.
I suspect that the Brexitomane cry of "Hooray, now we have control of our own destiny" will start to sound a bit thin once reality begins to bite.
We have voted to remove one level of bureaucracy, I cannot see how this is a bad thing. Less is definitely more in this instance. So we are increasing out control. The current EU-Canadian trade deal failure demonstrates this perfectly.
It turns out you voted to swap one level of bureaucracy for another.
The failure of the EU-Canada trade deal demonstrates how unlikely we are to get a deal with our largest trading partner in the forseeeable future. Especially as our crack team keep acting like they owe us a favour.
It's actually going to increase the amount of bureaucracy that a lot of companies have to comply with anyway, if they want to sell anything to Europe. As they'll have to comply with whatever our new requirements are plus the EU requirements. I'd rather just have the one set.
There will be no extra bureaucracy as the companies are already complying with the EU regulations as of today. They are not going to change come Brexit day. They may diverge over time but that time measurement is in decades.
And those exporting companies still have to comply with the myriad of rules for exports to non-EU countries.
OK... so in that case what are we gaining by not having to comply with the EU ones any more?
You can't say that we benefit by not having to comply with EU regulation any more and then say it's fine because we're going to comply with it anyway.0 -
Maybe but you appear to be speculating and no more.briantrumpet wrote:
You seem to be ignoring the possibility that they consider the EU project a good thing because of the interests of the citizens of the separate nations, overall, and in the long term. The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.Stevo 666 wrote:EU leaders more concerned about 'the project' than the best interests of their citizens. And you wonder why a significant number of people are anti EU, not just in the UK."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
They work better than name-calling. Take a lie down.Joelsim wrote:Evidence and facts doesn't work.0 -
Aren't we all?Stevo 666 wrote:Maybe but you appear to be speculating and no more.0 -
Jez mon wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:briantrumpet wrote:Brexit collateral damage: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... tell-lords - still, we'll be in "control of our own destiny", even if we do cause a bigger clusterf for our neighbours. Not that England has ever caused any problems like that before...
That reads very much like the Irish will be looking for the EU to have positive discussions towards the outcome of Brexit rather than the punishment agenda being pushed by the EU leaders.
And here are 3 more countries (Sweden, Finland and Denmark) looking for positive discussions to take place rather than the disruptive ones being pushed by the EU (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... t-britain/)
Then there is the Lithuania election where their government have been elected on a ticket to reduce emigration. As the UK is the largest recipient of Lithuanian emigrants this definitely looks like support for the UK on ending free movement into the UK.
So the EU says one thing, but the governments who will be accepting the consequences of how the EU leaders negotiate are telling them how they should act. The EU definitely sound united on Brexit
Feels like a good news day all round to me
All it will take is one country to veto it, and we're back at square one...
Just because one country wants a good deal and another wants freedom of movement restrictions, doesn't mean that were gonna get membership of the common market without freedom of movement.
I have no expectation of membership to the common market as we will not accept freedom of movement. The EU have made this position clear.
The EU needs to stay as a united voice. One country veto'ing a deal that puts another EU country into recession is not going to help maintain that unity. The internal disagreements taking place in the cabinet are small fry to the ones that will occur on the EU side of the negotiations once A50 is started.0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Abour 2-3% according latest estimates. Massive eh. Pretty much in line with recent historical average and yet more 'proof' that we are doomed :roll:bobmcstuff wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:And more good news
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... orker-pool
Wage rises coming to the lower paid in society when unlimited EU migration stops. And the 'experts' told us in the run up to the referendum that immigration did not cause a suppression of wages
The comments are hilarious as Guardian readers get stuck with conflicting views of wage rises good/Brexit bad :d
It'll have to be a pretty big pay rise to cancel out the inflation caused by the 20% devaluation of the pound...
It will be if wage growth and GDP growth don't keep up. I think the important bit is what's causing the inflation (based on what the FT has to say on the matter) - in a growing economy you have rising wages which pushes prices up but with a currency devaluation there's nothing on the other side to balance it.0 -
It really isn't rocket science. You've either lost the ability to think clearly, or you're choosing to ignore what's happening.
Not really sure I need to take a lie down, there are some people who just need to take a dose of reality and/or get over their prejudices.
It's foul.0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bompington wrote:
It seems to me that the "control your own destiny" myth is mostly popular among people who have difficulty coping with the globalised, interdependent world we live in today. Those who voted Brexit seem to be those who feel like they're the losers, whether economically or just emotionally.Coopster the 1st wrote:Yet, you and many others want to remain under the leadership of these people rather than control our own destiny :roll:
They haven't worked out that nobody is completely "in control of their own destiny": we all agree to share control in certain ways: in our relationships, at work, politically.
I suspect that the Brexitomane cry of "Hooray, now we have control of our own destiny" will start to sound a bit thin once reality begins to bite.
We have voted to remove one level of bureaucracy, I cannot see how this is a bad thing. Less is definitely more in this instance. So we are increasing out control. The current EU-Canadian trade deal failure demonstrates this perfectly.
It turns out you voted to swap one level of bureaucracy for another.
The failure of the EU-Canada trade deal demonstrates how unlikely we are to get a deal with our largest trading partner in the forseeeable future. Especially as our crack team keep acting like they owe us a favour.
It's actually going to increase the amount of bureaucracy that a lot of companies have to comply with anyway, if they want to sell anything to Europe. As they'll have to comply with whatever our new requirements are plus the EU requirements. I'd rather just have the one set.
There will be no extra bureaucracy as the companies are already complying with the EU regulations as of today. They are not going to change come Brexit day. They may diverge over time but that time measurement is in decades.
And those exporting companies still have to comply with the myriad of rules for exports to non-EU countries.
OK... so in that case what are we gaining by not having to comply with the EU ones any more?
You can't say that we benefit by not having to comply with EU regulation any more and then say it's fine because we're going to comply with it anyway.
Any company that still exports into the EU will have to comply with whatever EU regulations there are. The same as if they are exporting to the US, etc. The local chippy will not be affected
The benefit I was originally referring to was the removal of the layer of EU political bureaucracy. See the Canadian trade as the perfect example of this. I fully expect 10 years after Brexit when we are on the outside looking in, we will see what a burden this has been on the UK.0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:Jez mon wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:briantrumpet wrote:Brexit collateral damage: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... tell-lords - still, we'll be in "control of our own destiny", even if we do cause a bigger clusterf for our neighbours. Not that England has ever caused any problems like that before...
That reads very much like the Irish will be looking for the EU to have positive discussions towards the outcome of Brexit rather than the punishment agenda being pushed by the EU leaders.
And here are 3 more countries (Sweden, Finland and Denmark) looking for positive discussions to take place rather than the disruptive ones being pushed by the EU (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... t-britain/)
Then there is the Lithuania election where their government have been elected on a ticket to reduce emigration. As the UK is the largest recipient of Lithuanian emigrants this definitely looks like support for the UK on ending free movement into the UK.
So the EU says one thing, but the governments who will be accepting the consequences of how the EU leaders negotiate are telling them how they should act. The EU definitely sound united on Brexit
Feels like a good news day all round to me
All it will take is one country to veto it, and we're back at square one...
Just because one country wants a good deal and another wants freedom of movement restrictions, doesn't mean that were gonna get membership of the common market without freedom of movement.
I have no expectation of membership to the common market as we will not accept freedom of movement. The EU have made this position clear.
The EU needs to stay as a united voice. One country veto'ing a deal that puts another EU country into recession is not going to help maintain that unity. The internal disagreements taking place in the cabinet are small fry to the ones that will occur on the EU side of the negotiations once A50 is started.
All leaders of EU member states who have expressed an opinion on the subject have said the same thing - that the UK's membership of the single market depends on freedom of movement. AFAIK, not a single country has ruled out the UK staying in the single market. It's only our own government who are such a bunch of f**kheads that they think they can insult the EU and then demand special treatment who are putting our membership of the single market in jeopardy.
And no, the EU failing to come to some sort of agreement about a trade deal with the UK is not good for us. Not good at all.0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bompington wrote:
It seems to me that the "control your own destiny" myth is mostly popular among people who have difficulty coping with the globalised, interdependent world we live in today. Those who voted Brexit seem to be those who feel like they're the losers, whether economically or just emotionally.Coopster the 1st wrote:Yet, you and many others want to remain under the leadership of these people rather than control our own destiny :roll:
They haven't worked out that nobody is completely "in control of their own destiny": we all agree to share control in certain ways: in our relationships, at work, politically.
I suspect that the Brexitomane cry of "Hooray, now we have control of our own destiny" will start to sound a bit thin once reality begins to bite.
We have voted to remove one level of bureaucracy, I cannot see how this is a bad thing. Less is definitely more in this instance. So we are increasing out control. The current EU-Canadian trade deal failure demonstrates this perfectly.
It turns out you voted to swap one level of bureaucracy for another.
The failure of the EU-Canada trade deal demonstrates how unlikely we are to get a deal with our largest trading partner in the forseeeable future. Especially as our crack team keep acting like they owe us a favour.
It's actually going to increase the amount of bureaucracy that a lot of companies have to comply with anyway, if they want to sell anything to Europe. As they'll have to comply with whatever our new requirements are plus the EU requirements. I'd rather just have the one set.
There will be no extra bureaucracy as the companies are already complying with the EU regulations as of today. They are not going to change come Brexit day. They may diverge over time but that time measurement is in decades.
And those exporting companies still have to comply with the myriad of rules for exports to non-EU countries.
OK... so in that case what are we gaining by not having to comply with the EU ones any more?
You can't say that we benefit by not having to comply with EU regulation any more and then say it's fine because we're going to comply with it anyway.
Any company that still exports into the EU will have to comply with whatever EU regulations there are. The same as if they are exporting to the US, etc. The local chippy will not be affected
The benefit I was originally referring to was the removal of the layer of EU political bureaucracy. See the Canadian trade as the perfect example of this. I fully expect 10 years after Brexit when we are on the outside looking in, we will see what a burden this has been on the UK.
Can you give a specific example of a layer of bureaucracy that will be removed?You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:
Any company that still exports into the EU will have to comply with whatever EU regulations there are. The same as if they are exporting to the US, etc. The local chippy will not be affected
The benefit I was originally referring to was the removal of the layer of EU political bureaucracy. See the Canadian trade as the perfect example of this. I fully expect 10 years after Brexit when we are on the outside looking in, we will see what a burden this has been on the UK.
I hope you're right.
Personally I think there's a decent chance we will still be haggling over trade terms with the EU at that point (who are our largest trading partner by some margin). OK hopefully ten years is an exaggeration, but certainly a long time.
I agree that CETA makes the EU look bad, but to me it also looks like very bad news for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in anything resembling a sensible time frame.0 -
Jez mon wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:bompington wrote:
It seems to me that the "control your own destiny" myth is mostly popular among people who have difficulty coping with the globalised, interdependent world we live in today. Those who voted Brexit seem to be those who feel like they're the losers, whether economically or just emotionally.Coopster the 1st wrote:Yet, you and many others want to remain under the leadership of these people rather than control our own destiny :roll:
They haven't worked out that nobody is completely "in control of their own destiny": we all agree to share control in certain ways: in our relationships, at work, politically.
I suspect that the Brexitomane cry of "Hooray, now we have control of our own destiny" will start to sound a bit thin once reality begins to bite.
We have voted to remove one level of bureaucracy, I cannot see how this is a bad thing. Less is definitely more in this instance. So we are increasing out control. The current EU-Canadian trade deal failure demonstrates this perfectly.
It turns out you voted to swap one level of bureaucracy for another.
The failure of the EU-Canada trade deal demonstrates how unlikely we are to get a deal with our largest trading partner in the forseeeable future. Especially as our crack team keep acting like they owe us a favour.
It's actually going to increase the amount of bureaucracy that a lot of companies have to comply with anyway, if they want to sell anything to Europe. As they'll have to comply with whatever our new requirements are plus the EU requirements. I'd rather just have the one set.
There will be no extra bureaucracy as the companies are already complying with the EU regulations as of today. They are not going to change come Brexit day. They may diverge over time but that time measurement is in decades.
And those exporting companies still have to comply with the myriad of rules for exports to non-EU countries.
OK... so in that case what are we gaining by not having to comply with the EU ones any more?
You can't say that we benefit by not having to comply with EU regulation any more and then say it's fine because we're going to comply with it anyway.
Any company that still exports into the EU will have to comply with whatever EU regulations there are. The same as if they are exporting to the US, etc. The local chippy will not be affected
The benefit I was originally referring to was the removal of the layer of EU political bureaucracy. See the Canadian trade as the perfect example of this. I fully expect 10 years after Brexit when we are on the outside looking in, we will see what a burden this has been on the UK.
Can you give a specific example of a layer of bureaucracy that will be removed?
MEP's0 -
finchy wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:Jez mon wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:briantrumpet wrote:Brexit collateral damage: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... tell-lords - still, we'll be in "control of our own destiny", even if we do cause a bigger clusterf for our neighbours. Not that England has ever caused any problems like that before...
That reads very much like the Irish will be looking for the EU to have positive discussions towards the outcome of Brexit rather than the punishment agenda being pushed by the EU leaders.
And here are 3 more countries (Sweden, Finland and Denmark) looking for positive discussions to take place rather than the disruptive ones being pushed by the EU (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... t-britain/)
Then there is the Lithuania election where their government have been elected on a ticket to reduce emigration. As the UK is the largest recipient of Lithuanian emigrants this definitely looks like support for the UK on ending free movement into the UK.
So the EU says one thing, but the governments who will be accepting the consequences of how the EU leaders negotiate are telling them how they should act. The EU definitely sound united on Brexit
Feels like a good news day all round to me
All it will take is one country to veto it, and we're back at square one...
Just because one country wants a good deal and another wants freedom of movement restrictions, doesn't mean that were gonna get membership of the common market without freedom of movement.
I have no expectation of membership to the common market as we will not accept freedom of movement. The EU have made this position clear.
The EU needs to stay as a united voice. One country veto'ing a deal that puts another EU country into recession is not going to help maintain that unity. The internal disagreements taking place in the cabinet are small fry to the ones that will occur on the EU side of the negotiations once A50 is started.
All leaders of EU member states who have expressed an opinion on the subject have said the same thing - that the UK's membership of the single market depends on freedom of movement. AFAIK, not a single country has ruled out the UK staying in the single market. It's only our own government who are such a bunch of f**kheads that they think they can insult the EU and then demand special treatment who are putting our membership of the single market in jeopardy.
And no, the EU failing to come to some sort of agreement about a trade deal with the UK is not good for us. Not good at all.
The UK won't accept EU freedom of movement so that rules us out of the single market.
So that moves us onto a trading relationship with the EU. This is where the problem occurs for the EU as there are many countries that want a positive trading relationship with the UK post Brexit. However the EU leadership, the political fluff, want to play hardball.0 -
There is nothing that rules us out of the single market. Polls are showing that most people want to prioritise SM membership over immigration. The government could accept that, rather than base their policy on avoiding Tory voters switching to UKIP.
Anyway, as I said, an EU which is divided on a trade deal with the UK is not good news for us. Why do you think so many countries want a deal with the EU?0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:I agree that CETA makes the EU look bad, but to me it also looks like very bad news for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in anything resembling a sensible time frame.
I agree this is not going to be easy. I never expected it to be.
The difference with CETA and an UK-EU trading agreement is that CETA failing has not loss anyone any money. They were only going to gain with it being signed.
Any deviation the EU takes with the negotiation from what we have today means that an EU country loses something(yes, there is also likely to be a negative for the UK). It could be the French wine growers, the German coffee supplies, etc.
The UK population is aware of this, we've had the scare stories on steroids. (Well not all of us, some are still in denial
) 0 -
Well have to see what happens to inflation and wages.bobmcstuff wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Abour 2-3% according latest estimates. Massive eh. Pretty much in line with recent historical average and yet more 'proof' that we are doomed :roll:bobmcstuff wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:And more good news
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... orker-pool
Wage rises coming to the lower paid in society when unlimited EU migration stops. And the 'experts' told us in the run up to the referendum that immigration did not cause a suppression of wages
The comments are hilarious as Guardian readers get stuck with conflicting views of wage rises good/Brexit bad :d
It'll have to be a pretty big pay rise to cancel out the inflation caused by the 20% devaluation of the pound...
It will be if wage growth and GDP growth don't keep up. I think the important bit is what's causing the inflation (based on what the FT has to say on the matter) - in a growing economy you have rising wages which pushes prices up but with a currency devaluation there's nothing on the other side to balance it.
We've been there before in the period just after the GFC and survived it."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The number of countries wanting one is likely to decline when they see Canada wasting 7 years of hard work.finchy wrote:There is nothing that rules us out of the single market. Polls are showing that most people want to prioritise SM membership over immigration. The government could accept that, rather than base their policy on avoiding Tory voters switching to UKIP.
Anyway, as I said, an EU which is divided on a trade deal with the UK is not good news for us. Why do you think so many countries want a deal with the EU?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:I agree that CETA makes the EU look bad, but to me it also looks like very bad news for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in anything resembling a sensible time frame.
I agree this is not going to be easy. I never expected it to be.
The difference with CETA and an UK-EU trading agreement is that CETA failing has not loss anyone any money. They were only going to gain with it being signed.
Any deviation the EU takes with the negotiation from what we have today means that an EU country loses something(yes, there is also likely to be a negative for the UK). It could be the French wine growers, the German coffee supplies, etc.
The UK population is aware of this, we've had the scare stories on steroids. (Well not all of us, some are still in denial)
I also agree that keeping open trade with the EU would be the best for everybody. But I think you're underestimating the political will in the EU to make sure we don't leave with no penalty. And then it only takes the Walloons to get uppity again and it's back to square one.
Anyway, since when has politics been based on economic rationality?0 -
finchy wrote:There is nothing that rules us out of the single market. Polls are showing that most people want to prioritise SM membership over immigration. The government could accept that, rather than base their policy on avoiding Tory voters switching to UKIP.
Anyway, as I said, an EU which is divided on a trade deal with the UK is not good news for us. Why do you think so many countries want a deal with the EU?
Unfortunately, no matter what people say it has no influence on whether we get a trade deal or not. We accept free movement or we don't. Or we pay stupid money to 'protect' our prime revenue earners, far more than we pay now and I'm not even sure that's possible.
And while we do this we have a country where morons can promote their racist views and get away with it as if it is right.
On another note, my own personal business has been hit hard by Brexit. A business that was growing hugely has suddenly come to a stop. I rely on people going away, and to be honest it's way poorer this half-term than I would've expected. probably 50% down on estimation. Something to do with a weak pound.
With regard to CETA, do you know why it's been stalled? Because it prioritised multinationals over local businesses.0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:Well have to see what happens to inflation and wages.
We've been there before in the period just after the GFC and survived it.
The problem is, where do we go if we have another big economic crisis? Interest rates are down at 0.25% so cutting them to stimulate lending isn't as viable as in 2008. More QE? Possibly, but how much longer can this policy be carried on? George Osborne's economic plans were based on sustained high levels of immigration and increasing personal debt, so I'm not sure how many options the government will have if the next recession comes within the next couple of years.0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
The number of countries wanting one is likely to decline when they see Canada wasting 7 years of hard work.finchy wrote:There is nothing that rules us out of the single market. Polls are showing that most people want to prioritise SM membership over immigration. The government could accept that, rather than base their policy on avoiding Tory voters switching to UKIP.
Anyway, as I said, an EU which is divided on a trade deal with the UK is not good news for us. Why do you think so many countries want a deal with the EU?
If reports are true that the deal would have seen Canadian companies being able to sue EU member states for policies which affect their profits (I don't have the time to research whether or not this really is the case), then maybe they could just adjust their demands accordingly.0 -
And here's what Theresa May privately thought about Brexit before the vote.0
-
finchy wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Well have to see what happens to inflation and wages.
We've been there before in the period just after the GFC and survived it.
The problem is, where do we go if we have another big economic crisis? Interest rates are down at 0.25% so cutting them to stimulate lending isn't as viable as in 2008. More QE? Possibly, but how much longer can this policy be carried on? George Osborne's economic plans were based on sustained high levels of immigration and increasing personal debt, so I'm not sure how many options the government will have if the next recession comes within the next couple of years.
That's the whole point. Inflation on the up means they'll have to increase the interest rate at some point. Add the loss of spending power when that happens to the increase in the cost price of most purchases and it spells utter disaster. And we haven't even left yet.
The whole thing is unbelievably narrow-minded and ridiculous.0
