Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

FrancieBrady

It is going to be a fascinating couple of weeks in an Irish context and maybe something we haven't seen before will happen. A DUP climbdown.

It is either that or they go against nearly every other section of the society in which they live. Business - Farming -and the community in general.

It is as clear a definition of being in a political bunker as you will get.

DOCARCH

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/foster-annoyed-at-ni-business-leaders-support-for-brexit-deal-1.3700531

Ms Foster privately told chamber members she was unhappy with the attitude taken by business, and that they did not understand the threat the agreement posed to the union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

You can't eat flags!

Ideology vs. reality....

Donald Trump

Folkstonian wrote: »

I hope you realise you come across as poorly in your little tit-for-tat exchange as the poster you’re replying to?

Britain and Europe aren’t going to war.

Wars, when they are fought, aren’t won by comparing values found on internet spreadsheets. They tell nothing of the real world frictions that every nation faces. It comes across as infantile and petty

The French military has serious mechanical reliability problems at the moment especially amongst it’s helicopter fleet, it’s one of the main reasons the RAF has become a key ally in West Africa for them with chinooks doing a substantial amount of their heavy lifting

Britain, similarly has gaps in its defence capabilities (not least a total reliance on the US navy in anti submarine patrol aircraft) that the MoD are scrambling to patch up

That’s the real world

As clearly stated, posters suggestion is ludicrous.


I merely asked what they based their suggestion on rather than jingoistic nonsense. Because even if one was of the crazy thought that military force was way to go, they'd have to have some "facts" to justify their own logic of how a favourable outcome would be attainable



And I further posted a satirical video that his position reminded me of. Just in case people thought I was of the opinion that it was a seriously debatable topic



So if you took my position/reply as being something to do with internet spreadsheets then I apologise for not making it more clear. At the same time, you criticized me for thinking I was doing something, and continued it on yourself by adding more details so I'm not too sure what to make of it. Posters suggestion of using military to force EU to concede some terms in a deal should be rightly treated with contempt

hill16bhoy

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Britain have been humiliated on the world stage by the communist EU.

Could you elaborate on this "Communist EU", please?

Who are they and what is it?

Is it led by Hank Scorpio?

Capt'n Midnight

RobMc59 wrote: »

Yes,I am one of the people from across the water and correct me if I'm wrong but the DUP is the largest political party in NI so there is obviously significant support for them-i do of course realise there is animosity between unionist and republicans which doesn't exist across the water as what religious persuasion a person is doesn't exist except perhaps in Scotland.

In NI recording religious persuasion is a mandatory requirement for any business with more than 10 employees.
British as Finchley don't cha know.

In the assembly elections the DUP got 28.1% of the vote last time out, just 0.2% more than SF.

The days of full on Gerrymandering have gone but the recent boundary changes aid the Tories and the DUP.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I know what your point was.

The reason that this happened was because FPTP entrenched your vote.

Why would anyone in Larne vote for the UUP candidate knowing that Sammy Wilson will romp home?

So you have moderates on both sides voting for the extremes to ensure their vote counts.

Yes FPTP and Safe Seats means there is no room in the centre for politicians or voters. All centrist voters can do is vote against the worst extremist by voting for the lesser of two evils.
Centrist politicians who want to get in to power have to choose a side. In the US the choice is between two right wing parties. And the scary thing there is how little overlap there is now, you could imagine the moderates on both sides agreeing on many things.

Here and on the continent parties have significant overlaps. So voters and politicians have choices. We don't really have safe seats. A poor candidate parachuted in can loose out to someone from the same party.

Folkstonian

Donald Trump wrote: »

As clearly stated, posters suggestion is ludicrous.


I merely asked what they based their suggestion on rather than jingoistic nonsense. Because even if one was of the crazy thought that military force was way to go, they'd have to have some "facts" to justify their own logic of how a favourable outcome would be attainable



And I further posted a satirical video that his position reminded me of. Just in case people thought I was of the opinion that it was a seriously debatable topic



So if you took my position/reply as being something to do with internet spreadsheets then I apologise for not making it more clear. At the same time, you criticized me for thinking I was doing something, and continued it on yourself by adding more details so I'm not too sure what to make of it. Posters suggestion of using military to force EU to concede some terms in a deal should be rightly treated with contempt

No I didn’t continue anything on, you appeared to be making a counter argument based on a table showing numbers of tanks, planes, boats, whatever, . I simply gave two contemporary examples demonstrating how the ‘I have more guns than you’ argument has no real weight in real life, on any side

I don’t think that’s a particularly strong counter to the pathetic argument of ‘Britain is the hardest in Europe’ that your quoted poster was making, that’s all.

As an aside, british and French capabilities (and interests) are increasingly interconnected. I wonder what the effect of Brexit will be on them and whether they will continue to develop or slowly diverge

Capt'n Midnight

Rhineshark wrote: »

The last ten pages or so is like a flashback to 2016. It is remarkable that the oft-debunked arguments really don't seem to have changed a bit.

Last night I was looking for a quote from the morning after the referendum about how it's only nine thirty and already Cameron's resigned and there's a demand for a UI and an independent Scotland.

Since then we've had more resignations and little else.

A ream of paper costs about a fiver, which is about a fiver more than the agreement is worth unless it gets through the HoC where the DUP, Scottish Tories, ERG, SNP and Labour all have their reasons to block it.

And like the "will of the people" those reasons are often contradictory.


Brexit wasn't about immigration, but lots of people vote leave to block immigration , others voted leave because it would mean more immigration.

Silent Running

To the people that think that armed conflict is the only option: the war is ongoing and Russia and China are leading the way, it is being fought with bits and bytes. And they seem to be making some ground on The West.

It could be argued that Brexit happened as a result of this cyber war. The same could be argued as being responsible for Trump, but my feeling is that he was pitched against a hateful character.

RobMc59

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

In NI recording religious persuasion is a mandatory requirement for any business with more than 10 employees.
British as Finchley don't cha know.

In the assembly elections the DUP got 28.1% of the vote last time out, just 0.2% more than SF.

The days of full on Gerrymandering have gone but the recent boundary changes aid the Tories and the DUP.


Yes FPTP and Safe Seats means there is no room in the centre for politicians or voters. All centrist voters can do is vote against the worst extremist by voting for the lesser of two evils.
Centrist politicians who want to get in to power have to choose a side. In the US the choice is between two right wing parties. And the scary thing there is how little overlap there is now, you could imagine the moderates on both sides agreeing on many things.

Here and on the continent parties have significant overlaps. So voters and politicians have choices. We don't really have safe seats. A poor candidate parachuted in can loose out to someone from the same party.

Using your own statistics the DUP has the largest percentage of votes and my comments about "people across the water "not being interested in peoples religious preferences meant exactly what it said that people across the water aren't obsessed with peoples religious persuasion -unlike NI.

charlie14

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I know what your point was.

The reason that this happened was because FPTP entrenched your vote.

Why would anyone in Larne vote for the UUP candidate knowing that Sammy Wilson will romp home?

So you have moderates on both sides voting for the extremes to ensure their vote counts.

So yes, the DUP share went up but don't forget that was after the bloody nose they got at the last Stormont elections. So of course wavering Unionists would back the winning horse; it's a tough one to properly quantify. There's no doubt that the unionist vote is going down. But let them have it...

Anything about voting patterns in NI, as you say is tough to properly quantify, but I would be of the opinion that the unionist vote going down is much more to do with births than moderation.
When people look for evidence of moderation in unionist voting, (or indeed nationalist voting), I`m not convinced it actually exists or is growing. Other than Alliance or other fringe parties like the Green`s, PPP etc, voters that declare themselves as unionist or nationalist may have what appears to be moderates within their ranks when it comes to internal politics, but when the serious issues come around they quickly swings to the "them or us" of the DUP and SF.

EdgeCase

DOCARCH wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/foster-annoyed-at-ni-business-leaders-support-for-brexit-deal-1.3700531

Ms Foster privately told chamber members she was unhappy with the attitude taken by business, and that they did not understand the threat the agreement posed to the union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

You can't eat flags!

Ideology vs. reality....

At the end of the day, businesses have a legal and financial duty to their shareholders and a moral duty to their employees to do their utmost to stay solvent and turn a profit and keep in business.

Their role is not to weigh in behind political philosophies they are intent on some kind of economic suicide mission.

ancapailldorcha

Back on topic please.

Rjd2

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/mars-bars-brexit-no-deal-gove

Wickham the author would be very much in the know when it comes to the Tories.

Basically its a report of why Raab and Esther left and ultimately why Gove decided to stay.

Highlight....:pac:

According to an industry insider present, the environment secretary was left reeling by a briefing from the Food and Drink Federation that of the 21 ingredients that make up a Mars bar manufactured at their factory in Slough, two imported products go off within a few days.

In the event of no-deal, gridlock at the port of Dover would effectively shut down one of the country’s main routes for food imports. The ingredients couldn’t be stockpiled. The experts told Gove the UK’s entire supply of Mars bars would run out within two weeks.

The striking case study helps explains the former Vote Leave campaigner’s decision to stay in the government on Friday.

Has Gove ever eaten a Mars bar? Absolute muck. :pac:

EdgeCase

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

A falling currency is not a good thing (ask people of Venezuela) especially if your country is a net importer (and the UK is).

A falling pound literally makes everyone holding pounds poorer, its a stealth brexit tax on top of the 500 million a week the UK economy is already haemorrhaging.

Those rabbiting on that it's a good thing also completely misunderstand the British economy, which is hugely dependent on goods imports and makes a huge chunk of its income effectively on flow of transactions and integration into supply chains for goods and services.

Disrupting the currency and causing instability disrupts those flows as suddenly key goods or services become more expensive for UK companies that are plugged into those chains and their costs go up and they're in big trouble.

While it impacts lots of other things the biggest impact is the rising cost of energy as oil and gas are priced in USD not GBP and many other aspects of integrated chains are priced in EUR.

Currency devaluation would really only help a manufacturing economy like China and even there it's of limited use if you have to purchase your raw materials and energy in a hard currency.

The instability of GBP at present is also causing huge risks for companies on right margins. It's impossible to plan when Sterling's bouncing up and down like a yo-yo and that increases business costs as you're constantly having to hedge against currency movements.

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1063737676455653376
Words have completely failed me.

EdgeCase

Well there are quite a few Brexiteers who seem to be of the opinion that the UK should be outside the EU in an arrangement where it has direct control of EU internal policies but not subject to any of them. It's some kind of mentality that is starting to sound like bewildered imperialism.

Sam Russell

On Thursday 15th Nov, GBP was 0.87p to the Euro, today, 17th Nov, it is 0.89 p to the Euro - that is a drop of 3% in a little over 24 hours. This is huge to a low margin business.

Stable exchange rates are vital for business, as is a stable future so investments can be planned with some certainty. The current UK environment is anything but stable.

Three years ago, before the announcement of the Brexit In/Out referendum, 17th Nov 2015, it was at 70p to the Euro, that is a massive 22% of a drop. How can any business take comfort in such volatility. The GBP is in the banana republic soft currency realm.

Spook_ie

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/mars-bars-brexit-no-deal-gove

Wickham the author would be very much in the know when it comes to the Tories.

Basically its a report of why Raab and Esther left and ultimately why Gove decided to stay.

Highlight....:pac:





Has Gove ever eaten a Mars bar? Absolute muck. :pac:

Anyone know what 2 ingredients?

fash

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Britain have been humiliated on the world stage by the communist EU. The UK is a permanent seat holder of the UN Security Council and is getting humiliated like this. They have only one real course of action to save face here and the credibility as a power on the world stage and that’s to get rid of May, go for a no deal and severe security ties with the EU citing the unfriendly threats they’ve made to them. A few months of military brinkmanship would seen see the EU offer a simple free trade deal.

Please explain how the proposed agreement is not a massive victory for the UK:
Access to the Customs Union with unprecedentedly limited rules, which GB can leave at any time it chooses simply limiting the SM/CU to Northern Ireland;
Precedent setting inclusion of future trade agreement aspects into the Withdrawal agreement;
Precedent setting minimal checks for access to the SM (currently between NI and GB - but possible between UK and SM);
It can even get NI out of the SM/CU by coming up with any other solution which will achieve a soft border and got the EU to concede that it must make good faith efforts to agree such a solution and that it subject to third party determination outside issues of EU law;
There is even the possibility that the UK can engineer a situation to dump NI (which let us not forget is a parasite which costs significantly more than the red bus NHS promise) onto the EU if it wants;
Special status for Northern Ireland allowing privileged access to the SM which will undoubtedly lead to greater FDI;
A "settlement of accounts" which is a fraction of what the EU wanted and that spread out over years; and
No more freedom of movement.

Seriously, why this that not considered an spectacular victory by the UK as opposed to "humiliation"?

I understand that Boris etc. wants to pretend it is bad to allow him to boo from the sidelines and why the DUP, but why otherwise is it considered bad?

RobMc59

Lets hope either this deal is accepted or if TM gets her marching orders the country has an option to revoke brexit -whatever the outcome,the constant bickering and petty point scoring on this forum isn't getting anyone anywhere.

Folkstonian

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1063737676455653376
Words have completely failed me.

No MEPs and no voice on the european council whilst still required to adhere to European law and regulation was her actual point.

She argued that May’s current deal is worse than remaining because the only thing that changes for Britain is the loss of its voice

I don’t think it’s necessary to wilfully manipulate the points made by brexiters to successfully debate them. But I think that’s twitter politics in a nutshell.

hill16bhoy

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1063737676455653376
Words have completely failed me.

It's like this whole thing is a thought experiment to test the gullibility of the human mind and the psychogical depths people will plumb to convince themselves that they are right in the face of all evidence.

A thought experiment to see how far a transparently insane political agenda can be carried.

Keep saying obviously ridiculous, nonsensical things, keeping ramping up the levels of craziness, and surely everybody will see that the whole thing is a farce...?

Surely?

No.

The answer of Brexit, like Trump, is that with the right marketing and propaganda, you can indeed fool enough of the people to allow you to impose total and utter craziness on them.

LeinsterDub

Folkstonian wrote: »

No MEPs and no voice on the european council whilst still required to adhere to European law and regulation was her actual point.

She argued that May’s current deal is worse than remaining because the only thing that changes for Britain is the loss of its voice

I don’t think it’s necessary to wilfully manipulate the points made by brexiters to successfully debate them. But I think that’s twitter politics in a nutshell.

Leaving the EU always meant no MEPs etc. I would agree that May's deal means losing it's voice. But every deal would. Perhaps in context her point would seem less silly but it's still silly to be talking about MEPs etc.

Strazdas

Folkstonian wrote: »

No MEPs and no voice on the european council whilst still required to adhere to European law and regulation was her actual point.

She argued that May’s current deal is worse than remaining because the only thing that changes for Britain is the loss of its voice

I don’t think it’s necessary to wilfully manipulate the points made by brexiters to successfully debate them. But I think that’s twitter politics in a nutshell.

It's an absolutely valid point and I agree with her - what she's not adding though is it has been caused by Vote Leave and the Brexiteers

Folkstonian

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Leaving the EU always meant no MEPs etc. I would agree that May's deal means losing it's voice. But every deal would. Perhaps in context her point would seem less silly but it's still silly to be talking about MEPs etc.

I absolutely agree that Britain is going to lose its voice in Europe regardless of the type of Brexit we end up with, that is unless the SMCU option gains more traction in the coming weeks

But I think Brexiters probably envisaged that when they lost their influence in Europe, it would be a price worth paying for leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ, customs union and so on

I don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years.

It is quite funny that in such a politically divided country, people are now united in confusion, disappointment and even amusement at quite how badly Mrs May has done!

I found this blog post from the spectator eye-opening and baffling in equal measure

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/

I mean, when it’s spelled out so plainly, I begin to admire May’s audacity to actually bring it to the house and ask them in a vote whether it’s any good!

Strazdas

Folkstonian wrote: »

I absolutely agree that Britain is going to lose its voice in Europe regardless of the type of Brexit we end up with, that is unless the SMCU option gains more traction in the coming weeks

But I think Brexiters probably envisaged that when they lost their influence in Europe, it would be a price worth paying for leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ, customs union and so on

I don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years.

It is quite funny that in such a politically divided country, people are now united in confusion, disappointment and even amusement at quite how badly Mrs May has done!

I found this blog post from the spectator eye-opening and baffling in equal measure

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/

I mean, when it’s spelled out so plainly, I begin to admire May’s audacity to actually bring it to the house and ask them in a vote whether it’s any good!

The Brexiteers gambled on the roulette wheel and lost. They thought the UK could maintain full access to the Single Market and yet be free to sign global trade deals and also be outside the EU. A dream result so to speak, a win-win-win situation.

Problem is it was little more than a mirage being peddled by fantasists (just as the Remain crowd were warning them). All that has happened this week is that the Brexit dream has crashed into reality.

FrancieBrady

Folkstonian wrote: »

I absolutely agree that Britain is going to lose its voice in Europe regardless of the type of Brexit we end up with, that is unless the SMCU option gains more traction in the coming weeks

But I think Brexiters probably envisaged that when they lost their influence in Europe, it would be a price worth paying for leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ, customs union and so on

I don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years.

It is quite funny that in such a politically divided country, people are now united in confusion, disappointment and even amusement at quite how badly Mrs May has done!

I found this blog post from the spectator eye-opening and baffling in equal measure

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/

I mean, when it’s spelled out so plainly, I begin to admire May’s audacity to actually bring it to the house and ask them in a vote whether it’s any good!

They should be congratulating May for getting what she has got.
And I think that is sinking in. Lucky they have a few weeks to lick their wounds and realise that. Sense should prevail and they'll be glad to take this deal.

20silkcut

Folkstonian wrote: »

I absolutely agree that Britain is going to lose its voice in Europe regardless of the type of Brexit we end up with, that is unless the SMCU option gains more traction in the coming weeks

But I think Brexiters probably envisaged that when they lost their influence in Europe, it would be a price worth paying for leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ, customs union and so on

I don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years.

It is quite funny that in such a politically divided country, people are now united in confusion, disappointment and even amusement at quite how badly Mrs May has done!

I found this blog post from the spectator eye-opening and baffling in equal measure

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/

I mean, when it’s spelled out so plainly, I begin to admire May’s audacity to actually bring it to the house and ask them in a vote whether it’s any good!

Can’t read that article

PeadarCo

Folkstonian wrote:

I don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years.

Which sums up the debacle. A lot of Brexiters can't see the obvious. The EU is the UKs biggest trade partner and will continue to be in the event of a hard brexit. The minute the UK it becomes a rule taker not a rule maker with the EU regardless of the deal or suffer the economic fallout. That will be the case with every major trade block. The vote to take by "control" was a form of control that the UK lost the ability to excert on an international stage decades ago.

Folkstonian

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They should be congratulating May for getting what she has got.
And I think that is sinking in. Lucky they have a few weeks to lick their wounds and realise that. Sense should prevail and they'll be glad to take this deal.

Of course you do.

Not sure there is much evidence that the people who really matter are slowly coming round to the idea though. MPs seem very entrenched in their positions on both sides of the house.

We’ll see what happens