Brexit discussion thread III

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Nothing to do with "doctrine". The EU is 27 countries that can each decide for themselves if they are better off inside or outside the EU.

yet if someone leaves, they should be made an example of to warn off the rest from leaving?

First Up wrote: »

A 70% hike in beef prices in the UK (as a result of tariffs imposed by the UK government) would be an interesting outcome of Brexit. You think the government that did it would be rewarded at the ballot box?

it wouldn't be a 70% increase, it would mean more British beef is bought and a lot less Irish beef.

It would also mean Ireland competing for UK business on a level playing field with Argentina and Brazil

Christy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's fine assuming no Eurosceptic parties wield power if/when a Brexit deal is reached. That would then be their opportunity to bring the house of cards down. Depending on your perspective, it could be argued that, as an entity, the EU is in a much more precarious position than the UK

It could be argued but it would an incredibly weak argument. People keep arguing that different countries will argue but all the arguments are internal to the UK so far. It is hard to keep pushing the point that the EU is on the verge of squabbling when they have been so united so far and the Kingdom anything but United.

Amusingly enough a cake and eat it scenario would be self defeating for the UK. Even if they got a better deal than any of the current EU countries it would cause the other countries yo fight for those deals and potentially bring down the EU. No EU means no customs union and we are back to a hard Brexit with a few gravy years.

The cake and eat it scenario is dependent on the EU remaining strong while giving the UK incredibly nice trade deals.

Edit: Wrong quote. On mobile. It was meant to be quoting the one you were saying that it could be argued that the EU is much more divided.

oscarBravo

Aegir wrote: »

yet if someone leaves, they should be made an example of to warn off the rest from leaving?

It's an emotive way of phrasing it, but: yes, of course.

Any organisation that offers non-members better terms than it offers members won't have members. Therefore an organisation that depends on membership needs to make it clear to its members that they're welcome to leave, but that they'll necessarily lose the benefits of membership if they do so.

Calling that "making an example" of them is really just petulant foot-stamping.

Sam Russell

First Up wrote: »

A 70% hike in beef prices in the UK (as a result of tariffs imposed by the UK government) would be an interesting outcome of Brexit.

I think a 70% tariff on Irish beef would result in many Irish beef animals realising they would be financially better off in NI and voluntarily emigrating there through one of the 300 crossing points or through one of the many gaps in hedges and across the odd ditch. I am sure some owners would be surprised at the savvy of such animals.

Not sure what magic solution the Brexiteers could think up would manage that.

Capt'n Midnight

Water John wrote: »

Poland and Hungary would be stretching the EU ATM. Not exactly paragons of democracy. Also the EU has never dealt with the internal beaurocrats desire for further integration, a position only backed by about 17% of the population.

Checks and balances, it wouldn't be a functioning democracy if differing views couldn't be aired.

We've even had referendums over this stuff. It's not like the UK where Westminster can overrule locally elected regional parliaments and completely ignore stuff like the 96% remain vote from Gibraltar.

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

yet if someone leaves, they should be made an example of to warn off the rest from leaving?

it wouldn't be a 70% increase, it would mean more British beef is bought and a lot less Irish beef.

It would also mean Ireland competing for UK business on a level playing field with Argentina and Brazil

You reflect the UK's inflated sense of its own importance. If someone leaves a club, the remaining members are entitled to tidy up after them and set the terms for future relations.

Britain imports a lot of food (it can't feed itself). Tariff increases raise prices and/or reduce choice. And any imposition or increase in tariffs on imports would be matched by similar tariffs on UK exports - nearly half of which go to the EU.

Capt'n Midnight

Aegir wrote: »

yet if someone leaves, they should be made an example of to warn off the rest from leaving?

Rules are rules.

They knew they were entitled to nothing if they left.
Everything they get will have to be negotiated.

If you quit your job you aren't entitled to redundancy or a golden handshake or future bonuses or indeed anything not previously agreed.

it wouldn't be a 70% increase, it would mean more British beef is bought and a lot less Irish beef.

It would also mean Ireland competing for UK business on a level playing field with Argentina and Brazil

It also means we'll stop importing UK beef. The UK is handy because it's close and English speaking so naturally it's our biggest market, at the moment. But sterling has fallen so there's that too.

And we import about half what we export so it's not as bad as the headline figure, even before you take into account other export markets.

We know there won't be any winners in this. But to suggest that a return to the trade wars of the 1930's would cripple our economy is fantasy.



On present trends even the 7% drop in our economy predicted over the next few years because of Hard Brexit is less than the growth difference between our economies over the same time.

An Irexit would be like quitting a permanent job to go back to work for an employer who will at best pay you less in the future, hasn't had a good track record, and is now showing signs of mental instability and you won't get a written contract worth a damn.

Skedaddle

The UK will absolutely need an agreement on food imports and exports. There are a couple of issues, primarily that the UK cannot easily source food of the same quality at the same kinds of prices without doing so and they are already suffering from inflationary pressures on consumer spending power.

If they impose any kind of big tariff, they will simply end up costing UK consumers a lot more money and making it difficult for people on fixed incomes to feed themselves.

Secondly the UK is a huge exporter of branded food products TO Ireland. We are actually one of their largest export destinations due to proximity. Any cutting off of the Republic of Ireland will cost the UK manufacturing and services economy billions upon billions.

The politics of this don't reflect the reality that supply chains can't just be changed by snapping your fingers either. So there will be considerable and very prolonged disruption.

Also, are companies just going to be able to unilaterally breech contracts with suppliers? Again, that could cause chaos as they won't necessarily even be able to just swap sources at the drop of a hat.

Econ_

The EU are not a sovereign state that you can ordinarily 'negotiate' with - they are an international treaty organisation underpinned by rules. This is something that many in Britain have yet to grasp - they are not just asking for a 'good deal', they are asking for the unraveling of rules that constitute the EU's very existence.

Water John

Tusk going to ask May today, 'does she have a better solution to preventing a hard border between NI and ROI'.

Plain question that needs an answer, now.

briany

Water John wrote: »

Tusk going to ask May today, 'does she have a better solution to preventing a hard border between NI and ROI'.

Plain question that needs an answer, now.

Is the Norway option still on the table?

Skedaddle

Also the EU negotiators can only work within what's possible and within certain terms of reference. They can't redesign the EU and they can't just change EU fundamentals without someone going for complete treaty change and renegotiating everything with 27 sovereign states.

Water John

What is the Norway option? That has a border with Sweden, if that is what you are referring to.
Pol Corr on BBC says tomorrow is D day for May. D standing for 'detail'.

Tigerandahalf

What is the Labour party position at the moment?
Tories could be wiped out if they go ahead with a hard brexit. Cost of food would explode in the UK, especially fresh produce.

briany

Water John wrote: »

What is the Norway option? That has a border with Sweden, if that is what you are referring to.
Pol Corr on BBC says tomorrow is D day for May. D standing for 'detail'.

The Norway option is a way of having a minimal or 'transparent' border infrastructure where commercial freight passes along designated routes and is monitored electronically.

It does also, however, allow for the free movement of non-commercial vehicles and the people they carry (or at least this is my understanding). I know that the free movement of people into the UK is something of a red line for the more hardcore wing of the Brexit movement, but something they're probably going to have to agree to, even if in a limited fashion, in order to make Brexit work.

First Up

Tusk didn't waste any time giving TM a taste of what's ahead at their meeting today. He used the pre-meeting photo shoot to spell out a few realities (instead of the usual banalities). Theresa looking a bit stunned at his forthrightness.

It will be interesting to hear what she has to say after.

Leroy42

Certainly the type of language has changed from the EU side. They appear, IMO, to be fed up with this game and just want the UK to make a decision.

I don't believe for a second that the EU have any real desire for fight for NI to remain in the EU, it is more that they want to force the UK to actually decide what it is that they want.

Either stay in or leave.

2ygb4cmqetsjhx

I think the chances of Brexit happening at this point are about 1%. It's simply not possible. Or it will be a Brexit in name only.

PeadarCo

PeadarCo wrote: »

You are aware the year is 2018. Its a long time that Irelands economy was reliant on agriculture. The agri sector contributes a relatively small percentage to overall Irish GDP.

https://tradingeconomics.com/ireland/gdp-from-agriculture

and about the biggest contribution to GDP comes out of companies registered at the offices of a law firm on Sir John Rogerson's Quay. Using GDP to measure Ireland's economy is incredibly flawed.

First Up wrote: »

You reflect the UK's inflated sense of its own importance. If someone leaves a club, the remaining members are entitled to tidy up after them and set the terms for future relations.

Britain imports a lot of food (it can't feed itself). Tariff increases raise prices and/or reduce choice. And any imposition or increase in tariffs on imports would be matched by similar tariffs on UK exports - nearly half of which go to the EU.

Oh please, get over yourself. The UK doesn't feed itself, that is vastly different to not being able to feed itself. This is just more hyperbolic bull**** along with a statement a few pages back about the UK starving.

This is just a chicken and egg argument. The EU needs to sell and the UK needs to buy. which is more important, the buyer or the seller?

Who needs who more, the Manchester restaurant or the Irish farmer? Cutting that relationship could put both out of business, but the UK can handle losing 1000 restaurants much better (due to simple factors like size) than Ireland can losing 1000 beef farms.

Leroy42

Noemi Gorgeous Sailing wrote: »

I think the chances of Brexit happening at this point are about 1%. It's simply not possible. Or it will be a Brexit in name only.

Oh I don't agree at all. They seem hell bent on going ahead, the more evidence is stacked against them the more the want it.

Take JRM this morning. If the EU demand a border (we will skip the contradiction inherent in his claiming to be taking back control yet powerless against the EU) Ireland will suffer, he said. When clearly it is the actions of the UK that have lead to even a possible border being discussed. Everything that has happened is down to the UK.

But they see it all as some sort of great punishment from the EU, totally ignoring they created the process and with the red lines, picked the direction.

May has followed this path right from the start, so much so that any concession will now be seen as a capitulation and see her removed as PM.

It has gone far beyond the point of whether Brexit is the right or wrong way to go, now it is about power.

briany

Noemi Gorgeous Sailing wrote: »

I think the chances of Brexit happening at this point are about 1%. It's simply not possible. Or it will be a Brexit in name only.

It's looking to be a Brexit in name only at this stage. If you can spin it to have the red top readers believe they have a victory over the EU then that'll be the key. If this group is satisfied then most of the hardcore Brexit politicians will be, also, since they're probably overstating their own personal desire for Brexit in order to gain political capital.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

and about the biggest contribution to GDP comes out of companies registered at the offices of a law firm on Sir John Rogerson's Quay. Using GDP to measure Ireland's economy is incredibly flawed.



Oh please, get over yourself. The UK doesn't feed itself, that is vastly different to not being able to feed itself. This is just more hyperbolic bull**** along with a statement a few pages back about the UK starving.

This is just a chicken and egg argument. The EU needs to sell and the UK needs to buy. which is more important, the buyer or the seller?

Who needs who more, the Manchester restaurant or the Irish farmer? Cutting that relationship could put both out of business, but the UK can handle losing 1000 restaurants much better (due to simple factors like size) than Ireland can losing 1000 beef farms.

When the argument gets down to who will my decision hurt more, me or you, then you really need to look at the decision in the 1st place?

What comfort will the ex workers of the closed restaurants around the UK take from the knowledge that there are loads of ex beef farmers in Ireland?

Christy42

Aegir wrote: »

and about the biggest contribution to GDP comes out of companies registered at the offices of a law firm on Sir John Rogerson's Quay. Using GDP to measure Ireland's economy is incredibly flawed.



Oh please, get over yourself. The UK doesn't feed itself, that is vastly different to not being able to feed itself. This is just more hyperbolic bull**** along with a statement a few pages back about the UK starving.

This is just a chicken and egg argument. The EU needs to sell and the UK needs to buy. which is more important, the buyer or the seller?

Who needs who more, the Manchester restaurant or the Irish farmer? Cutting that relationship could put both out of business, but the UK can handle losing 1000 restaurants much better (due to simple factors like size) than Ireland can losing 1000 beef farms.

Indeed. If only there were other places that Irish beef could be sold tariff free?

Certainly there will be more competition for the beef farms after Brexit but they will have more cheap options (remembering that buying/selling through tariffs will still happen - people will still buy beef in the UK but prices might go up a bit) than the Manchester restaurant. This is the big advantage of the EU. You are right that the UK is bigger than Ireland but it is not bigger than the EU. Brexit won't ruin Ireland and short of a military invasion the UK can't ruin Ireland. They are simply not powerful enough and we have other outlets for our goods.

They can certainly make things uncomfortable and give the economy a knock but ruin is not happening.

I think others are right in the Brexit in name only. The way I reckon it will happen is a transition stage where the UK stays a CU+ member till deals are finalised and departments are ready. As they are non urgent funding for these projects will be quietly lowered to pointless levels. After a few years the leaving could simply be forgotten about.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

When the argument gets down to who will my decision hurt more, me or you, then you really need to look at the decision in the 1st place?

What comfort will the ex workers of the closed restaurants around the UK take from the knowledge that there are loads of ex beef farmers in Ireland?

probably the same as a beef farmer in Cavan will take from the knowledge that in Manchester, there is a restaurant going out of business.

the problem comes when the people making the decisions are doing so for ideological reasons and are happy to sacrifice the odd restaurant or beef farm in the name of "Sovereignty" or "Ever Closer Union".

Sam Russell

Christy42 wrote: »

I think others are right in the Brexit in name only. The way I reckon it will happen is a transition stage where the UK stays a CU+ member till deals are finalised and departments are ready. As they are non urgent funding for these projects will be quietly lowered to pointless levels. After a few years the leaving could simply be forgotten about.

I do not see it that way at all.

The EU do not want the transition to go beyond the end of the current budget cycle. That takes us to Dec 2020. The EU have exhausted their patience with the UK.

NI will remain in the SM and CU for most economic activity owing to the need for no border on the Island of Ireland.

If the UK want access to the CU and the SM (Brexit in name only) then they will continue to pay into the budget at similar or higher levels than currently (because the EU will be expanding their reach through new programmes) and the current rebate will cease to apply.

I could even see them having to accept Schengen, and ID cards for everyone.

Water John

I'd say, that Cavan bullock might get a Fermanagh passport.

Andrew Hammond LSE sets out today in The Irish Examiner exactly what TM needs to achieve in her speech tomorrow. It's her third time of trying and needs to get it right, this time. I highly doubt it myself, if she can or will achieve that. I'll, in fact, be highly surprised if it isn't, just more waffle.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/analysis/theresa-mays-speech-her-last-chance-to-set-out-specifics-on-brexit-830339.html

Last chance saloon.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

probably the same as a beef farmer in Cavan will take from the knowledge that in Manchester, there is a restaurant going out of business.

the problem comes when the people making the decisions are doing so for ideological reasons and are happy to sacrifice the odd restaurant or beef farm in the name of "Sovereignty" or "Ever Closer Union".

What are you talking about? You claimed that Brexit will hurt Ireland more. I said so what. That was not in the campaign. I never heard Bojo claim that yes, you may lose your job, services will be cut, but guess what, those guys in Ireland are going to hurt more.

The problem comes when after a decision is made, people are too embarrassed to admit it was a mistake and to row back. For that is what is happening.

No matter how much the folly is pointed out, they simply claim something else. The latest being that sure the UK will suffer (sorry did we forget to mention that!) but boy, Ireland will suffer more.

So at least whilst you sit in your soon to be repossessed house and wait for the food bank to open, you can console yourself with the idea that the Irish are losing more (of course they can freely more to any one of 27 other countries get find work)

murphaph

Aegir wrote: »

No, I didn’t think you would somehow.

I would hate to see SF in power for a number of reasons but it's clearly not the same as the DUP at Westminster. Northern Ireland is part of the UK, not Ireland.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

What are you talking about? You claimed that Brexit will hurt Ireland more. I said so what. That was not in the campaign. I never heard Bojo claim that yes, you may lose your job, services will be cut, but guess what, those guys in Ireland are going to hurt more.

The problem comes when after a decision is made, people are too embarrassed to admit it was a mistake and to row back. For that is what is happening.

No matter how much the folly is pointed out, they simply claim something else. The latest being that sure the UK will suffer (sorry did we forget to mention that!) but boy, Ireland will suffer more.

So at least whilst you sit in your soon to be repossessed house and wait for the food bank to open, you can console yourself with the idea that the Irish are losing more (of course they can freely more to any one of 27 other countries get find work)

here you. Here is my original point. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106300306&postcount=5044

I don't wish ill on anyone, i just wish the whole thing could go away. I'm not sure that is a generally accepted position on here though.

PeadarCo

Aegir wrote: »

here you. Here is my original point. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106300306&postcount=5044

I don't wish ill on anyone, i just wish the whole thing could go away. I'm not sure that is a generally accepted position on here though.

You referenced the impact that a drop in beef exports would have in Ireland. As I have already pointed out the agri sector has a whole contributes a small percentage to Ireland overall GDP. I'd accept if it was 60/70 years ago you'd have a good point. But the beef/suckle sector has been in decline for a long time at least at farm level and the numbers involved in sucklers and you'll notice that Ireland economy hasn't been unduly affected.

Yes Ireland will be hit by Brexit but suggesting that a massive hit to the beef sector in Ireland is going to have massive reverberations on the rest of the economy shows a complete lack of understanding of the modern economy of Ireland and its agri sector.

MrPudding

Aegir wrote: »

yet if someone leaves, they should be made an example of to warn off the rest from leaving?

I really don't understand what is so difficult about this concept for people to understand, at this stage I can only assume it is willful ignorance.

Let's try again, even though I am sure this analogy has been made to you before.

Imagine, Aegir, that you are a member of a gym. You grow unhappy with it, for a variety of reasons and decide to leave. So you following the relevant procedure, because of course you have contractual obligations and leaving without satisfying those obligations is a dick move. Now you are no longer a member. Awesome, you got what you wanted.

Now, if you rock up to the gym and try to use the facilities what is going to happen? Well, you aren't a member anymore, so obviously you aren't entitled to use the facilities anymore, that would be crazy, if that work why would anyone be a member and pay the fees.

So you have ended your membership and are no longer paying the fees. As a result, you are not entitled to use the facilities. Is that you being punished or made an example of, or is it simply the natural consequence of cancelling your membership of the club?

MrP

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

Oh please, get over yourself. The UK doesn't feed itself, that is vastly different to not being able to feed itself. This is just more hyperbolic bull**** along with a statement a few pages back about the UK starving.

Yes indeed the UK used to be able to feed itself but it was in the 18th century, the diet was a bit more restricted and not everyone could afford to eat.

Taking back control of the dinner table would be an interesting challenge. The National Farmers Union doesn't think its possible, although some say that if you abandon the notion of a balanced diet and skip meat, fruit and vegetables most days, you could flll up on bread mostly.

Nody

briany wrote: »

The Norway option is a way of having a minimal or 'transparent' border infrastructure where commercial freight passes along designated routes and is monitored electronically.

It does also, however, allow for the free movement of non-commercial vehicles and the people they carry (or at least this is my understanding). I know that the free movement of people into the UK is something of a red line for the more hardcore wing of the Brexit movement, but something they're probably going to have to agree to, even if in a limited fashion, in order to make Brexit work.

It is not unhindered movement of non commercial vehicles either; there are customs duty controls etc. done on a regular basis due to differences in duty (for example diapers and butter have massive difference that it's even gone up truck fulls worth of smuggling of it). It is how ever currently one of the lightest controlled borders but Norway is also in the EEA and not a completely third party country like UK is going for.

CelticRambler

Water John wrote: »

I'd say, that Cavan bullock might get a Fermanagh passport.

I'd say the Cavan bullock will keep his Irish passport and end up being part of the 6% of the EU's beef exports that used to be provided by British farmers, a percentage that the Brits doubled from 2015 to 2016, thanks to the EU signing trade deals with various Asian countries.

Once again, Brexit makes no economic sense for any business in the UK, nor for anyone who works for any business in the UK. But Brexit was never about good economic sense - it was (and still is) all about impractical ideology and nostalgic symbolism.

The hard Brexiteers want to "take back control" but don't know what they want to control. Immigrants? Yes, but not the Irish, only Europeans. And maybe not the AfricanAmericanAsians because they'll be needed to pick the fruit and veg that no Brit will get out of bed for. And this control will be enforced at the frictionless border that they don't want but that's being imposed upon them by Big Bad Brussels. :rolleyes:

Import duties? No, Brexit Britain will be tarif-free to allow unfettered growth, and the WTO will tear up it's rule book because ... well, just because ... But don't worry, Britain will ensure there's no race to the bottom because high standards will be guaranteed by reducing the amount of regulation that every Tom, Dick and Harry has to comply with. And that'll all be checked at the non-existent frictionless border too. :rolleyes:

And as for existing treaties and international agreements, well Britain's never needed a written consitution and everything's been tickety-boo forever, so these silly bits of paper really aren't worth bothering about ... :rolleyes:

I don't think it'll happen, but I can see a hard UK Brexit coming about simply through the stupidity of the current government, and possibly a pseudo-United Ireland arising on the 30th March because of the DUP's intransigence. If that should be the case - including grounded aircraft and Operation Stack being the top stories on Sky all day, every day for a week (not to mention the shortages of bread and milk :pac: ) - a lot of minds will suddenly become very focused on what the "hard" in hard Brexit meant, and a Westminster delegation will hurry off to Brussels with several hampers of cake, crisps and humble pie.

Water John

If TM doesn't get her act together and I actually don't think it's possible now, for her to do so, the cohort of Tory anti-Brexiteers will have to put their country before party and I think they will. They know, from the voices of John Major and Ken Clarke, that they would be doing, right.

MrPudding

CelticRambler wrote: »

If that should be the case - including grounded aircraft and Operation Stack being the top stories on Sky all day, every day for a week (not to mention the shortages of bread and milk :pac: ) - a lot of minds will suddenly become very focused on what the "hard" in hard Brexit meant, and a Westminster delegation will hurry off to Brussels with several hampers of cake, crisps and humble pie.

I currently commute weekly between Caen and Portsmouth... I am starting to get a little concerned, if I am being honest.

MrP

murphaph

Aegir wrote: »

and about the biggest contribution to GDP comes out of companies registered at the offices of a law firm on Sir John Rogerson's Quay. Using GDP to measure Ireland's economy is incredibly flawed.



Oh please, get over yourself. The UK doesn't feed itself, that is vastly different to not being able to feed itself. This is just more hyperbolic bull**** along with a statement a few pages back about the UK starving.

This is just a chicken and egg argument. The EU needs to sell and the UK needs to buy. which is more important, the buyer or the seller?

Who needs who more, the Manchester restaurant or the Irish farmer? Cutting that relationship could put both out of business, but the UK can handle losing 1000 restaurants much better (due to simple factors like size) than Ireland can losing 1000 beef farms.

Irish beef farmers have at least got an emergency exit called the single market to aim for. I just came out of my local supermarket here in Berlin and as is often the case, the premium beef is Irish beef. They have only begun to tap the vast continental market. Some food industries will fold over Brexit but overall it's a storm we can weather.

MrPudding

MrPudding wrote: »

I really don't understand what is so difficult about this concept for people to understand, at this stage I can only assume it is willful ignorance.

Let's try again, even though I am sure this analogy has been made to you before.

Imagine, Aegir, that you are a member of a gym. You grow unhappy with it, for a variety of reasons and decide to leave. So you following the relevant procedure, because of course you have contractual obligations and leaving without satisfying those obligations is a dick move. Now you are no longer a member. Awesome, you got what you wanted.

Now, if you rock up to the gym and try to use the facilities what is going to happen? Well, you aren't a member anymore, so obviously you aren't entitled to use the facilities anymore, that would be crazy, if that work why would anyone be a member and pay the fees.

So you have ended your membership and are no longer paying the fees. As a result, you are not entitled to use the facilities. Is that you being punished or made an example of, or is it simply the natural consequence of cancelling your membership of the club?

MrP

that's a crap analogy. The EU isn't a club.

What you are suggesting is little more than isolationism.

LeinsterDub

Aegir wrote: »

that's a crap analogy. The EU isn't a club.

What you are suggesting is little more than isolationism.

Do you have a better analogy so? Perhaps one that will help us understand your position.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

that's a crap analogy. The EU isn't a club.

What you are suggesting is little more than isolationism.

Ah, it most certainly is. You need to request to join, there are rules, and being a member you get privileges others don't. Sounds like a club to me.

Isolationism, yeah that pretty much sums the UK stance up. They want to be on their own, to make their own rules, regulations and trade with who they want, when they want.

Rjd2

Water John wrote: »

If TM doesn't get her act together and I actually don't think it's possible now, for her to do so, the cohort of Tory anti-Brexiteers will have to put their country before party and I think they will. They know, from the voices of John Major and Ken Clarke, that they would be doing, right.

Clarke and Major are two of the most vocal remainers in politics, probably more PRO EU than numerous Labour people. Yesterday the Major speech was no more than preaching to the converted. For the mood to genuinely turn, its those in the centre and the likes of Corbyn to speak out on the down side of Brexit.

Leroy42

I really don't see the point. The likes of Soubry has been trying, but it seems people just are willing to listen. Why bother when all you are going to get is grief. When even the likes of Major, hardly a colossus of a PM but hardly a disaster either, is almost laughed at by Brexiteers for pointing out the obvious then what hope the rest.

Sometimes people need to live by their decisions. At that is the real angst at the EU draft yesterday. It shows up the real choices that the UK, not the unicorn in the sky ramblings of JRM, Bojo, Fox, Davies and May. And people don't like it.

But rather than question how the hell it got to this point to the people that led them here, it is far easier to attack the EU for a power grab.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Ah, it most certainly is. You need to request to join, there are rules, and being a member you get privileges others don't. Sounds like a club to me.

Isolationism, yeah that pretty much sums the UK stance up. They want to be on their own, to make their own rules, regulations and trade with who they want, when they want.

of course it isn't a club, it is a political and economic union. if it were a club, then it wouldn't need to talk to other clubs and rely on their business to help keep it going.

There are no analogies for the EU, because it is unique.

listermint

Aegir wrote: »

of course it isn't a club, it is a political and economic union. if it were a club, then it wouldn't need to talk to other clubs and rely on their business to help keep it going.

There are no analogies for the EU, because it is unique.

If its such a good idea then, as i said last year. They can leave already.

Id be glad of it at this point, its the only sure fire way they can live by their convictions. And we can all see what being in a single market actually means.

Theyll be teaching this stupidity in Finance and Economics courses the world over for decades to come.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

of course it isn't a club, it is a political and economic union. if it were a club, then it wouldn't need to talk to other clubs and rely on their business to help keep it going.

There are no analogies for the EU, because it is unique.

Where is that in the definition of a club?

Club: an organization of people with a common purpose or interest, who meet regularly and take part in shared activities https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/club

LeinsterDub

Aegir wrote: »

of course it isn't a club, it is a political and economic union. if it were a club, then it wouldn't need to talk to other clubs and rely on their business to help keep it going.

There are no analogies for the EU, because it is unique.

Clubs talk to each other all the time time to arrange fixtures, competitions, training or fundraising.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Where is that in the definition of a club?

Club: an organization of people with a common purpose or interest, who meet regularly and take part in shared activities https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/club

ok, it isn't a gym.

FFS, we've now just got to the point where even you just argue for the sake of arguing.

Leroy42

No, you are the very one that asks people to back up any claims they make. All I am looking for is fact based discussion. You were given an analogy, which you refuted for the stated reason that the EU is not a club.

that's a crap analogy. The EU isn't a club.

Hence I showed why it was a club. So the analogy stands.

Care to comment on it or simply rubbish it for another made up reason?

J Mysterio

Rjd2 wrote: »

Clarke and Major are two of the most vocal remainers in politics, probably more PRO EU than numerous Labour people. Yesterday the Major speech was no more than preaching to the converted. For the mood to genuinely turn, its those in the centre and the likes of Corbyn to speak out on the down side of Brexit.

I wouldnt dismiss it like that at all. Yesterday was a very powerful speech by Major and he eviscerated Brexit, the Brexiteers and the Prime Minister. That's highly unusual for a former PM and especially for a former Tory PM.

All this is helpful, each voice of stature is needed by the UK in a desparate attempt to stop it destrying itself. It's almost too late.

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

There are no analogies for the EU, because it is unique.

As a political construct it is unique and possibly the greatest in history having emerged from (and ended) centuries of tribalism and war.

There is one economic comparison, where massive economies of scale and prosperity have been made possible by the creation of a single market for goods, capital and people.

Its called the USA.