Brexit Thread V - The Final Countdown?!?

[Oerdin]

This is indeed possible.

Thing is the Remainer dominated UK Parliament elected in 2015 only agreed to have
the referendum in 2016 because it was very confident that Remain would win.

Having lost in 2016, the Remainer MPs want to fix the franchise one way or another,
to make sure of the outcome on another vote, which the Leaver MPs will resist.

Let us face it. The remainers hate democracy and want to keep having elections until they get the results they want then they will declare no further votes are allowed. The Brexit vote was supposed to last 50-100 years, the remainers even said so, after they lost then suddenly they wanted revotes until their sides wins. It is garbage, from lying garbage people, and should be ignored because it is completely disingenuous.

 

[brennan]

... So thank you Junckers for being true to form and never learning from your past mistakes.

Having failed to impress anyone with bleating about the EU being a bully, Brexiteers are now trying to pass them off as being stupid.

None of this covers up the fact that we never had a strong negotiating position and the negotiations were always going to heavily favour the EU position. In other words, that the Brexit crowd lied from first principles - or were incompetent I guess, take your pick.

 

[Oerdin]

Why do you want a no-deal brexit so badly, anyway? Do you think that the ERG's proposed policies are a good idea?



So let me ask you this, would you prefer a hard border in Ireland?

It is mostly a matter of no deal being the best available option. Remaining in the EU was obviously a bad idea as it is unreformable (the UK spent decades trying to reform it without anything to show for it). The people voted to leave and that vote must be respected. So now there is just two options: The steaming pile of excrement that the European Commission dictated in bad faith or simply walking. The first is clearly not a viable option and is just a trap to short circuit Brexit will leaving the UL worse off while the second will be a harder road but the only one which will allow the UK to regain it's right to self determination. In the long run (about 10 years) the second option will undoubtedly lead to great prosperity as well so it is the obvious choice for any intelligent person.

 

[brennan]

We still have the right to self determination. It is being exemplified right now by Brexit.

 

[Lexicus]

In the long run (about 10 years) the second option will undoubtedly lead to great prosperity as well so it is the obvious choice for any intelligent person.

So I've chosen to focus on this bit of your reply because I think the word 'prosperity' is closer to the answers that I was looking for originally. Why exactly do you think that a no-deal Brexit will lead to more prosperity in 10 years? What happens for the nine years before the tenth year, when the "great prosperity" finally hits?

You also didn't answer the question about the Ireland border. You think the backstop reduces the EU to vassal status, fair enough, so you want a hard border in Ireland then? Do you think that the opinions of the Irish people actually should matter wrt to this issue or no?

 

[AmazonQueen]

It is mostly a matter of no deal being the best available option. Remaining in the EU was obviously a bad idea as it is unreformable (the UK spent decades trying to reform it without anything to show for it). The people voted to leave and that vote must be respected. So now there is just two options: The steaming pile of excrement that the European Commission dictated in bad faith or simply walking. The first is clearly not a viable option and is just a trap to short circuit Brexit will leaving the UL worse off while the second will be a harder road but the only one which will allow the UK to regain it's right to self determination. In the long run (about 10 years) the second option will undoubtedly lead to great prosperity as well so it is the obvious choice for any intelligent person.

You're much more optimistic than most of the leading Brexiteers https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ars-when-do-leavers-think-brexit-will-pay-off

 

[EnglishEdward]

How are the Remainer MPs fixing the franchise.

There is a lot of talk generally about (a) dropping voting age to 16, (b) enabling UK nationals who have been
out of the UK for more than 15 years to vote (c) enabling EU citizens resident in the UK to vote.

 

[brennan]

It's certainly a terrible affront to democracy to arrange for more people to vote. Not like proper traditional gerrymandering at all.

 

[really]

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/12/14/eu-vs-theresa-may-on-brexit-renegotiation.html

I, for one, would like to thank the unelected European Commission for being just as arrogant and dictatorial as it always is as this will help to insure no deal becomes a reality. Before the Brexit vote PM Camron had sought solutions to some pretty obvious problems but the arrogant European Commission refused to hear any of it much less deal with any practical matters sending Camron home empty handed thus insuring a Brexit win. They are now repeating the same mistake again.

It is completely obvious that that the proposed "Irish backstop" is a horrible idea designed to indefinitely trap the UK into a vassal status it cannot ever break free from, that is what it is designed to do, and as such no agreement which includes such a provision will ever pass Parliament. Rather than dealing with this reality the EC is once again demanding its way or the highway so, naturally, any same person would naturally pick self determination and democracy over such garbage. So thank you Junckers for being true to form and never learning from your past mistakes.

It was the elected heads of government or state (her peers) in the EU council who told her to get lost, not the commission (the EU civil service).

She went in with a combination of vague waffle and things that contradicted what had already been agreed.

The only way the UK is getting an agreement with the EU is to sign up to a backstop. The version agreed is very much a British solution. The EUs suggestion was pretty limited to adding some items to the list of stuff inspected on arrival into Larne or Belfast and adding customs. Stretching that to the whole of the UK wasn't something the EU wanted to do.

Getting things past the British parliament is her problem. Welcome to the world outside of the EU.

 

[Senethro]

Did the EU hurt Oerdin's favorite corporation or something?

 

[EnglishEdward]

Welcome to the world outside of the EU.

Looking forward to it, but the so called withdrawal agreement prevents wthdrawal.

 

[Arakhor]

The Brexit vote was supposed to last 50-100 years...

What nonsense is this?

 

[brennan]

Looking forward to it, but the so called withdrawal agreement prevents wthdrawal.

Breaking news: Brexiteers unhappy with reality. Nobody surprised at all.

 

[Hrothbern]

I do think that the UK is big and advanced enough to realise after Brexit the same level of GDP per Capita (in GBP) as when being an EU member.
But that will dismantle with 50/50 flipping of Tory/Labour governments much of the living and working standards. It will increase hugely inequality.

The true right wing free marketeer Brexiteers do not even need that same size of the total pancake, because their aim is to change the distribution of the pancake over the income groups so much that they will even gain when the pancake gets smaller. It will greatly affect the lower income groups and the lower middle class will be betrayed as well,
but hey... everybod has a chance to get rich... by "hard work", by winning the lottery, or becoming the star of Manchester United.

For Labour it will be fighting an uphill battle with the Tories having a head start.
The demographic/political development during the last two decades, if it continues that way, will generate more and more Labour voters... but people do flip as well when they earn more.
It needs money to invest in sectors that fit a global trade while not being in a trading block. Not easy, and it needs a real plan. Fulfilling some redistribution promises cannot change the investment needs of that economical transformation.
If Labour would be guaranteed in charge of the UK for 10 years or so it would however be doable imo.

The real issue there is that the Tories, when they are in charge during the no-deal aftermatch, will aim at a raw capitalistic FTA with the US, the weapon and security industry, the financial services London City, slash the taxes needed to attract foreign investment capital and wherever labour productivity grows not fast enough will cut standards to improve the productivity per labour cost..
The rate of the GBP will play a big role as well, and the impact of the WTO vacuum at the start of the transformation, the humiliations of the multiple FTA negotiations all over the world... the resulting dives of the GBP and the London Stock Exchange, will shellshock the parliament.

 

[really]

Looking forward to it, but the so called withdrawal agreement prevents wthdrawal.

The UK leaves the EU on March 29th next with or without a withdrawal agreement, all other things being equal. It has submitted its notice in accordance with the treaty provisions negotiated to cover such a scenario and that has been accepted.

If it wants a structured departure with a transition to a future state and further negotiations on a future trading agreement with the EU then the withdrawal agreement is the route to that.

If it wants an unstructured departure and a default relationship with the EU afterwards it has very little to do.

Complaining that the EU is being too demanding in the withdrawal agreement is really just complaining about reality.
The UK doesn't know what it wants and is negotiating with a block six or seven times bigger that does know what it wants.
Is it surprising that the EU is getting most of what it wants in the face of such an ineffective other party?

 

[Emili Ladjet]

I believe Britain will be better off out of the EU trading with the whole world without EU restraints and taxes .

Self-preservation of the Tory party will be prio 1.

Is at least primitive enough an objective to survive the idiocy of the moment.

If the hard-Brexiteers fail to topple Theresa May, they lost their chance to topple Theresa May after March 29 to take over the transition period negotiations to steer the UK towards a Canada+ FTA or an orderly WTO without an agreement on the Irish border.

May will be doing the "robot" from a lamp post!

 

[Takhisis]

It is completely obvious that that the proposed "Irish backstop" is a horrible idea designed to indefinitely trap the UK into a vassal status it cannot ever break free from, that is what it is designed to do, and as such no agreement which includes such a provision will ever pass Parliament.

So let me ask you this, would you prefer a hard border in Ireland?

Did you miss the post where the conservatives told the Irish that they should know their place?

I believe Britain will be better off out of the EU trading with the whole world without EU restraints and taxes .

But to trade without taxes you need a trade agreement or, say, membership in a (free) trade area.

 

[Lexicus]

Did you miss the post where the conservatives told the Irish that they should know their place?

I saw that, but I want to hear what @Oerdin thinks about it.

 

[innonimatu]

For Labour it will be fighting an uphill battle with the Tories having a head start.
The demographic/political development during the last two decades, if it continues that way, will generate more and more Labour voters... but people do flip as well when they earn more.
It needs money to invest in sectors that fit a global trade while not being in a trading block. Not easy, and it needs a real plan. Fulfilling some redistribution promises cannot change the investment needs of that economical transformation.
If Labour would be guaranteed in charge of the UK for 10 years or so it would however be doable imo.

The idea that demographics somehow will favor one party or another is usually proven wrong. Especially in the UK's situation, where the problem is that the tories have no vision to offer for the future, and Labour seems also to have a leader too afraid yet to push his. There are many possible surprises.

Global trade is the essential pillar of the problems with the world today. IF those problems are to be resolved or reduced at all, global trade must be reduced. Environmental problems, social problems, inequality, the power of finance and the alleged powerlessness of governments and thus of democratic politics... all of the are caused by priority being given to the "global markets" and its "needs".

You cannot ask Corbyn to have a policy that favors more global trade, that would be a contradiction. That would inevitably lead to him becoming a Tony Blair. A country needs balanced trade, but f they population want a meaningful voice on how the country is run, if they want to have their society and their lives' stability given some level of protection, they need to reduce dependency on trade.

It is very ironic that this was diagnosed by both the leftists and the conservatives as far back as the late 80s/early 90s. The shunned left wing of Labour, and James Goldsmith (that vulture businessman) ans his party to block the Maastricht Treaty, both said the same thing: global trade will destroy our society and our country. One group knew it because they knew history, the other knew it because they started it in the 1970s and say it go from national to global scale. The mass of the people, those swallowed the lies and the spending money of privatization and debt until that run out and the owners of the "markets" started collecting. And now they see it too. And the country is indeed obviously stetting itself up for destruction.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Good news (for the rest of the world anyway)!
With the latest drop in the £ against the Euro and $ theres never been a better time to visit the UK.
Its cold, wet and unfriendly just like it always was but now its cheap too.