A+A on Brexit - The Return of the Living Dead

recedite

robindch wrote: »

their aerobic explanations to the effect that the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals after it's insulted most of their trading partners, and after their trading partners have explained to them that no, the UK will do much better staying where it is.

If the UK has free trade now, for example within the EU, then that is the default position. It is unlikely that trading partners would enact specific legislation to rescind that free trade. The situation is analagous to the threat made prior to the Scottish referendum that an independent Scotland would not be in the EU and would have to re-apply for membership. In fact there is no specific rule one way or another, therefore if both parties are happy enough for the status quo to remain, they need only agree to leave it so.

BoatMad

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Why should the US care what the rest of the world thinks? So a bunch of spineless neo liberals nearly wet themselves in their efforts to loudly proclaim their opposition to Trump, why should yanks take any notice? It is bandwagoning, or rather, virtue signalling, on behalf of EU politicians, showing how progressive and anti- insert liberal buzzword- they are. Varadkar is a wimp.

The UK should leave, business will continue as is, trade deals will be renegotiated, billions will not be tossed into the garbage on the basis of insults as you put it.

Yes , trade deals will be re-negotiated that's the key word. But to suggest that the uk will be allowed unfettered access to previous EU markets while not being subject to its costs is naive in the extreme. , the U.K. Needs access to continents, markets far more then the reverse.

JPNelsforearm

BoatMad wrote: »

Yes , trade deals will be re-negotiated that's the key word. But to suggest that the uk will be allowed unfettered access to previous EU markets while not being subject to its costs is naive in the extreme. , the U.K. Needs access to continents, markets far more then the reverse.

The status quo, or something approaching that, as regards trade, is in everyone's interests, you think the EU business community will let some spiteful politicians throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because the Brits had the temerity to withdraw from their cosy political club? What sort of a message does that send? The EU isnt unified nor strong enough to take on an independent Britain with half the member states having massive youth unemployment and recession. There will be horse trading, but ultimately a consensus will emerge, just like when Trump gets elected, the world will not implode when Britain leaves the EU.

Trade is essential, the social engineering crap that comes with EU membership is not.

BoatMad

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

The status quo, or something approaching that, as regards trade, is in everyone's interests, you think the EU business community will let some spiteful politicians throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because the Brits had the temerity to withdraw from their cosy political club? What sort of a message does that send? The EU isnt unified nor strong enough to take on an independent Britain with half the member states having massive youth unemployment and recession. There will be horse trading, but ultimately a consensus will emerge, just like when Trump gets elected, the world will not implode when Britain leaves the EU.

Trade is essential, the social engineering crap that comes with EU membership is not.

you still have not answered my point, take Norway for example, in order to have unfettered access to EU marketplace , it implements all EU directives

the UK is fooling itself if it thinks that it can cherry pick the best bits

leaving aside that the UK is the author of an extremely large body of eu directives anyway including many social ones .

The EU will not and CAN not allow the UK to profit from Brexit, policy will be driven by that alone. the EU will have to clearly demonstrate to its members that there are consequences to " exit". That is a bigger prerogative then " trade"

JPNelsforearm

BoatMad wrote: »

The EU will not and CAN not allow the UK to profit from Brexit, policy will be driven by that alone. the EU will have to clearly demonstrate to its members that there are consequences to " exit". That is a bigger prerogative then " trade"

And surely this is more than enough reason, to leave, what is the EU, La Cosa Nostra? Membership for life?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk321Xwr0AM

BoatMad

And surely this is more than enough reason, to leave, what is the EU, La Cosa Nostra? Membership for life?

this isn't a brexit thread and yes it was designed as a membership in perpetutity . lets get back to republican confections

robindch

BoatMad wrote: »

this isn't a brexit thread [...]

This thread is

seamus

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

And surely this is more than enough reason, to leave, what is the EU, La Cosa Nostra? Membership for life?

Well no, it's an economic union. It doesn't make any sense for the union to negotiate trade deals with non-members that result in a net deficit to the union.

The UK won't be "punished" for exiting, they'll simply be treated the exact same any other non-member. Which is to say that the cost of exporting UK goods to the EU will go up.

Bristolscale7

There are a number of advantages to a successful Brexit vote:
1. The U.K. will realize that it has about the level of clout internationally as Canada, maybe less.
2. The eurocrats in Brussels that have been busy digging the democratic deficit since the collapse of the wall get a bloody nose. The "bicycle theory" of European integration will be refuted.
3. The Scots will demand another referendum and perhaps this time summon the courage to vote for independence.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

If the UK has free trade now, for example within the EU, then that is the default position. It is unlikely that trading partners would enact specific legislation to rescind that free trade.

No. It means that the UK will no longer be party to existing free trade agreements. In an ideal world, and aside from any possible retribution (which seems a distinct possibility to me), it seems likely that the UK will be forced into the same place as Switzerland - with the EU trading access to EU markets for the UK's compliance with existing EU legislation.

Effectively, the UK becoming a party to existing free-trade and free-movement agreements negotiated amongst EU members, but not being a party to the negotiations which produced those agreements. It's a lose-lose situation for the UK and reasonably well explained by this guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsNXmfqQqOU

robindch

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

There are a number of advantages to a successful Brexit vote:
1. The U.K. will realize that it has about the level of clout internationally as Canada, maybe less.
2. The eurocrats in Brussels that have been busy digging the democratic deficit since the collapse of the wall get a bloody nose. The "bicycle theory" of European integration will be refuted.
3. The Scots will demand another referendum and perhaps this time summon the courage to vote for independence.

I would adjust (2) to suggest that the EU might realizes the need to spend far more money on getting a positive message out there, instead of its current policy of leaving the meme-field to the deluded, the foolish and the faintly sinister.

As regards a future Scottish exit, one can't help but admire the irony of the majority English view during the Scottish referendum - that Scotland should stay because it's a valued member of a strong union.

seamus

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

2. The eurocrats in Brussels that have been busy digging the democratic deficit since the collapse of the wall get a bloody nose.

One of the funny things about public perception of what the EU is and how it operates, is how that perception changes depending on where you're standing on the EU.

Small countries think that Germany and France are lording it over them and steamrolling their wishes.

The UK thinks that Germany & France are holding them to ransom and forcing them to pay for the small countries.

Germany & France think that they're being held to ransom by the small countries who use their combined over-represented power to overrule the bigger countries and bleed them dry.

Italy apparently just does whatever the fnck it likes.

Bristolscale7

The idea that the EU suffers from a democratic deficit is as widely accepted among political scientists as climate change is among climatologists. The issue is whether or not you think it's useful to have--for example, EU institutions can force theocracies like 1980s Ireland out of the stone age.

MrPudding

My postal vote for the referendum arrived today, and is back in the post.

I think something the brexiters seem to be ignoring, and something the inners are not, in my opinion, making enough of is how difficult it will be for the remaining states to give the UK a good deal, even if they wanted to... France and Germany will be in an election cycle and the incumbents will be fighting anti-Eu parties. They can't afford to give the UK a good deal because to do so would give too much ammo to the anti-EU crowd. Suicide. So even if we leave aside petty vindictiveness, and I am sure there will be plenty of that, I don't see how th UK can actually get a good deal.

I think both side of this referendum have been fairly full of sh1t, but seriously, the brexit guys are fcuking unbelievable, even for politicians.

"We could give an extra £350m per week to the NHS." Yeah, nice mental reservation. You could, but you won't because you are part of a party that is cutting, in real terms, funding to the NHS. Why would you suddenly come over all generous? Oh, and it is £350m per week either.

"We could cut VAT from energy bills." Yes you could, but you fcuking won't because that would actually help poor people, so that isn't going to happen. Another nice mental reservation.

"We could help the steel industry" Really? Surely if you wanted to help the steel industry you wouldn't have vetoed the EU proposal to increase tariffs on Chinese steel to stop them dumping below cost steel on the market...

The list goes on. We could do this, we could so that, we will just negotiate a trade deal... Each day they are getting more like those creationist morons. Every day another expert or organisation come out in favour of remaining and suggesting that leaving would be bad. This couldn't possibly be because leaving would actually be bad, it is a conspiracy.

One thing I am impressed with on the brexit side is Ian Duncan Smith. I had not realised how good an actor he is. It takes serious skill to keep a straight face whilst suggestig that those that want to remain are elitists that don't have the interests of the average working man at heart, you know, like he does...

MrP

recedite

robindch wrote: »

it seems likely that the UK will be forced into the same place as Switzerland - with the EU trading access to EU markets for the UK's compliance with existing EU legislation.

That Swiss chap says they pay 60% of the rate the UK currently pays for free trade access to EU markets. That's a 40% saving available to the UK then.

Norway is a better example.
Free trade, and they are only signed up to 21% of the EU rules and regulations.
Norway retains control of its fisheries, which would be an advantage the UK could also have in the event of a Brexit. If the UK chose to remain completely outside the EEA/EFTA that Norway and Switzerland are a part of, then they could regain control over immigration from within the EU, but they would then also have to negotiate new separate trade deals.

I agree though that a lot of Brits who want more immigration controls probably don't really understand the situation. If they want less immigrants from the former British colonies, then that is already under their own control.
If they want less from the EU, but they found themselves remaining within the EEA after a Brexit, then they would have to accept the free movement of EU citizens just as they do now, and as Norway does now.

ShooterSF

If they leave what are the chances of them moving towards freedom of movement agreements with the commonwealth??

As someone whose Irish mother was born in the England...

Kiwi in IE

ShooterSF wrote: »

If they leave what are the chances of them moving towards freedom of movement agreements with the commonwealth??

As someone whose Irish mother was born in the England...

That'd be great! My family would then have freedom of movement in all of Europe and the Commonwealth! What more could you want?

For the record however, I'm hoping they choose not to leave.

recedite

ShooterSF wrote: »

If they leave what are the chances of them moving towards freedom of movement agreements with the commonwealth??

Very small
However there is a large number of people, especially in the major cities where significant immigrant populations from Asia and the West Indies have settled in the past, who are opposed to the "preferential" treatment that EU immigrants have nowadays over non-EU immigrants. So they want easier immigration from commonwealth countries, but not from EU countries.

Once you go outside the cities, people want stricter limits to all immigration, both EU and non-EU.

In order not to offend either group, the politicians focus their ire on the EU migrants such as Romanians. Because this is the lowest common denominator. But this ends up offending other EU countries.

Bristolscale7

Latest poll has leave campaign ahead by three points.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/04/poll-eu-brexit-lead-opinium

MrPudding

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

Latest poll has leave campaign ahead by three points.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/04/poll-eu-brexit-lead-opinium

I almost hope the vote is to leave just to show people what would happen. I hate the fact that is the vote is to remain the brexiters won't know how wrong they were. That said, I have a similar view on religious people, it irritates me that when they die they won't realise they were wrong.

MrP

robindch

MrPudding wrote: »

I almost hope the vote is to leave just to show people what would happen.

Absolam

MrPudding wrote: »

I almost hope the vote is to leave just to show people what would happen. I hate the fact that is the vote is to remain the brexiters won't know how wrong they were. That said, I have a similar view on religious people, it irritates me that when they die they won't realise they were wrong.

I'd rather they didn't find out what would happen, because Ireland would have to find out along with them and I don't see that being a positive experience for Ireland.

Hotblack Desiato

robindch wrote: »

As regards a future Scottish exit,

Sexit?

recedite

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

Latest poll has leave campaign ahead by three points.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/04/poll-eu-brexit-lead-opinium

I see Boris has taken to being photographed with beer :pac: If it works for Nigel Farage...

However I would expect the "stay" campaign to unleash a wave of previously silent high profile people in the last few days before the referendum, all warning of dire consequences in the event of a Brexit. The power of fearmongering is known to be at its most potent in the last week of any campaign.
No amount of beer photos will overcome the last minute jitters and the fear of stepping into the unknown that people are always so susceptible to.

MrPudding

Absolam wrote: »

I'd rather they didn't find out what would happen, because Ireland would have to find out along with them and I don't see that being a positive experience for Ireland.

Deep down I hope we don't find out, but sometimes one just thinks a lesson needs to be learned. It it is a pretty tough lesson for everyone else, and that is the problem.

MrP

robindch

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

3. The Scots will demand another referendum and perhaps this time summon the courage to vote for independence.

Aaaand, they're off:

"Major and Blair say an EU exit could split the UK"

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36486016

Cabaal

I'm still waiting until the week of the vote when large company's will step in and voice their concerns (just like they did with Scotland), can see a few company's upping sticks and leaving UK if they exit.

robindch

Cabaal wrote: »

I'm still waiting until the week of the vote when large company's will step in

There's already been some of that - JPMorgan and CitiBank to name but two:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-citigroup-idUKKCN0YU2DC
http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/03/news/economy/brexit-jpmorgan-jamie-dimon/

JPNelsforearm

Brexit=The End of Western civilisation....


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2016/jun/13/eu-referendum-live-labour-remain-campaign-final-10-days-vote#comments



lol

#unbiasedcoverage


Wont be the population replacement and mass immigration, it'll be an independent Britain that leads to the downfall of the west...

robindch

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

The End of Western civilisation....

lol

Mr Tusk actually said - referring to the general policy of many nations since the Second World choosing to increase their degree of economic and other types of co-operation:

Donald Tusk wrote:

Why is it so dangerous? Because no one can foresee what the long-term consequences would be. As a historian I fear that Brexit could be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also of western political civilization in its entirety.

I've highlighted the word which you deliberately omitted.

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

#unbiasedcoverage

No comment needed :rolleyes:

recedite

robindch wrote: »

I've highlighted the word which you deliberately omitted.No comment needed :rolleyes:

Was it not the Guardian headline that omitted the word "political"?
Not that "political civilisation" means anything anyway.

JPNelsforearm

robindch wrote: »

Mr Tusk actually said - referring to the general policy of many nations since the Second World choosing to increase their degree of economic and other types of co-operation:I've highlighted the word which you deliberately omitted.No comment needed :rolleyes:

Direct your ire at the Grauniad online editors:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

robindch

recedite wrote: »

Was it not the Guardian headline that omitted the word "political"?

The Guardian omitted it, but so did JPNelsforearm - I'm assuming, optimistically in hindsight, that JPNelsforearm went to the necessary trouble of fact-checking a story before posting it for pooh and giggles.

recedite wrote: »

Not that "political civilisation" means anything anyway.

Well, it's kind of the point which Mr Tusk is making.

silverharp

has this been talked about much?


http://uk.businessinsider.com/green-eu-referendum-not-legally-binding-brexit-2016-6

really crucial detail about the upcoming EU referendum has gone virtually unmentioned and it is probably the most crucial detail: Parliament doesn't actually have to bring Britain out of the EU if the public votes for it.

recedite

If you want to get technical about it, the parliament is only "advised" by the referendum, but equally the monarch is only "advised" by the PM. So the Queen would have the ultimate say over it. In practice however, they operate a system of precedent known as "the unwritten constitution of the UK" which basically means that if there are no surprise moves by anybody, then nobody's head gets chopped off and everybody is happy.

robindch

silverharp wrote: »

has this been talked about much?

Nope, and I've seen it referred to only rarely - the fact that referendum is not legally binding upon the government of the day.

Given that around two-thirds of MP's don't want to leave, then, if the leave-side win, MP's will be required to vote against their conscience (avoid the usual jokes here). I can't be the only one wondering if, in this case, MP's might show some spine and defy a popular, but insane, political choice - and what instability might follow from that.

The likely departure of Scotland hasn't made many headlines either.

MrPudding

recedite wrote: »

If you want to get technical about it, the parliament is only "advised" by the referendum, but equally the monarch is only "advised" by the PM. So the Queen would have the ultimate say over it. In practice however, they operate a system of precedent known as "the unwritten constitution of the UK" which basically means that if there are no surprise moves by anybody, then nobody's head gets chopped off and everybody is happy.

Damned parliamentary convention. It does many things, including prevent me from having a meaningful vote in a general election simply because I happen to live in the constituency of the

Speaker of the House.

MrP

recedite

MrPudding wrote: »

Damned parliamentary convention. It does many things, including prevent me from having a meaningful vote in a general election simply because I happen to live in the constituency of the Speaker of the House. MrP

Well Mr. P, if you don't like the democratic deficit, you can always Leave the constituency. Or if you're not that bothered by such things and just want to make a few quid for a while, you can Remain.

MrPudding

recedite wrote: »

Well Mr. P, if you don't like the democratic deficit, you can always Leave the constituency. Or if you're not that bothered by such things and just want to make a few quid for a while, you can Remain.

I like where I live so I will do the British thing. Just have the occasional moan about it but otherwise not do anything.

MrP

recedite

MrPudding wrote: »

..so I will shall do the British thing..

MrP

FYP

robindch

It's impossible to say whether the current climate of xenophobia and hatred whipped up by the majority of the brexit crew has contributed directly to yesterday's murder of Labour MP Jo Cox, but indirectly?

The line between that hatred and the alleged murderer allegedly shouting "put Britain first" seems, to say the least, plausible:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36555996

Akrasia

Latest poll shows the Leave side with a 6 point lead with 1 week to go.

The Leave side also have an older demographic which are more likely to vote

This is a bit worrying so close to the vote

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-poll-brexit-lead-ipsos-mori-who-will-win-leave-campaign-remain-european-union-a7084951.html

Mark Hamill

smacl

robindch wrote: »

It's impossible to say whether the current climate of xenophobia and hatred whipped up by the majority of the brexit crew has contributed directly to yesterday's murder of Labour MP Jo Cox, but indirectly?

The line between that hatred and the alleged murderer allegedly shouting "put Britain first" seems, to say the least, plausible:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36555996

I'd guess it would be potentially damaging to the leave vote, insofar as many more conservative types would want to distance themselves from this type of barbarity and vote accordingly. It is interesting that while one of the big moans by the brexit crew is 'all these immigrants taking our jobs' the feedback I'm getting from most of the companies I work with in the civil engineering sector in the UK is that they're struggling to find suitable employees, employ a lot of Europeans because of the local skilled labour shortage, and will find things very hard going if the European migrant labour force disappears. i.e. all these bloody migrants coming over and taking the jobs we either can't or won't do :rolleyes:

silverharp

robindch wrote: »

It's impossible to say whether the current climate of xenophobia and hatred whipped up by the majority of the brexit crew has contributed directly to yesterday's murder of Labour MP Jo Cox, but indirectly?

The line between that hatred and the alleged murderer allegedly shouting "put Britain first" seems, to say the least, plausible:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36555996

the Britain first seems to be debunked at this stage, the witness has a sign on his shop window saying nobody said anything like this. I assume he is fed up of reporters calling in.
Also I think the view of painting this as in equals good people and out equals bad people could be counter productive. its a democratic process and there are arguments on either side.

robindch

silverharp wrote: »

Also I think the view of painting this as in equals good people and out equals bad people could be counter productive.

I'm not sure that's happening to any serious extent, though in my own experience, the people who strongly support "out" seem to be motivated primarily by fear, ignorance and very often hatred of people from other countries.

silverharp wrote: »

its a democratic process and there are arguments on either side.

There are no especially good reasons that I can think of to leave the world's largest trading bloc - all the more so if one expects to join it again shortly afterwards. And it is most unlikely to achieve any of the headline items which the "out" side are telling their supporters it will achieve.

silverharp

robindch wrote: »

I'm not sure that's happening to any serious extent, though in my own experience, the people who strongly support "out" seem to be motivated primarily by fear, ignorance and very often hatred of people from other countries.There are no especially good reasons that I can think of to leave the world's largest trading bloc - all the more so if one expects to join it again shortly afterwards. And it is most unlikely to achieve any of the headline items which the "out" side are telling their supporters it will achieve.

its a trading block with strings. the success of the EU is tied up now with the success of the Euro and lord knows what will happen to it in the next 10 years , there are reasons to want to distance themselves from it. At the end of the day if someone is gloomy about the whole EU/Euro project, voting to leave it makes sense whether there net benefits or not. Its all a big guess one way or the other.

pH

robindch wrote: »

It's impossible to say whether the current climate of xenophobia and hatred whipped up by the majority of the brexit crew has contributed directly to yesterday's murder of Labour MP Jo Cox, but indirectly?

The line between that hatred and the alleged murderer allegedly shouting "put Britain first" seems, to say the least, plausible:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36555996

https://twitter.com/Palomafaith/status/743800447232778240

recedite

robindch wrote: »

And it is most unlikely to achieve any of the headline items which the "out" side are telling their supporters it will achieve.

Nor is a Brexit likely to bring any of the calamities which the "in" side are threatening will happen.
IMO the outcome will make very little difference in the long term, one way or the other. The UK has already opted out of the euro currency, the Schengen common travel area, and has negotiated derogations on lots of EU legislation, especially anything to do with labour law. After leaving the EU they wouldn't be in a very different position to Norway and Switzerland, which position vis a vis the EU is not very different to the UK position today.
All they ever really wanted anyway was to be part of the EC free trade area, originally known as "the common market", which they can negotiate for during the 2 year wind down period (as specified by the EU for any state leaving the EU, in TEU Article 50).

However, its not in the interests of either campaign to admit this. The "in" campaign prefer to exaggerate the perils of leaving, while the "out" campaign for their part exaggerate the benefits of leaving.

pH

recedite wrote: »

Nor is a Brexit likely to bring any of the calamities which the "in" side are threatening will happen.
IMO the outcome will make very little difference in the long term, one way or the other. The UK has already opted out of the euro currency, the Schengen common travel area, and has negotiated derogations on lots of EU legislation, especially anything to do with labour law. After leaving the EU they wouldn't be in a very different position to Norway and Switzerland, which position vis a vis the EU is not very different to the UK position today.
All they ever really wanted anyway was to be part of the EC free trade area, originally known as "the common market", which they can negotiate for during the 2 year wind down period (as specified by the EU for any state leaving the EU, in TEU Article 50).

However, its not in the interests of either campaign to admit this. The "in" campaign prefer to exaggerate the perils of leaving, while the "out" campaign for their part exaggerate the benefits of leaving.

You can't post anything as reasonable as this, everyone knows that brexit is all about being racist and killing MPs.

It's entirely possible and reasonable to also think that whilst the overall ideas and goals of the EU are laudable, the current implementation is bloody awful, very undemocratic almost impossible to reform at this stage.

Anyway here's the crowdfunded "brexit the movie", yea I know it's an hour of racist hate-mongering and fear of those living in other countries, but I missed the call for killing those who disagree, perhaps someone could provide me with the timestamp?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0

MrPudding

robindch wrote: »

I'm not sure that's happening to any serious extent, though in my own experience, the people who strongly support "out" seem to be motivated primarily by fear, ignorance and very often hatred of people from other countries.

To be honest, this is pretty much my experience so far too. Anyone I have thus far met that is voting leave fits the bill of "Little Englander" to a tee.

I am manning the "In Desk" in my town centre tomorrow, so it will be interesting to see what kind of characters I meet.

robindch wrote: »

There are no especially good reasons that I can think of to leave the world's largest trading bloc - all the more so if one expects to join it again shortly afterwards. And it is most unlikely to achieve any of the headline items which the "out" side are telling their supporters it will achieve.

I don't think there really are any good reasons.

MrP