Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

quokula

Bit cynical wrote: »

Yes I agree the stakes are much higher but the principle is still the same.

The principle is not remotely the same. If you're willing to walk away from buying a car, you go back home with your own car and your money. This is the equivalent of cancelling Brexit.

No deal is the equivalent of not finding an agreed price, so you leave your car there, set it on fire, then try to hitchhike home all pleased with yourself that the dealer has to deal with the smoke.

Imreoir2

tigger123 wrote: »

'If you don't sell me this car at the price I'm demanding, I'll set my family on fire'.

I bought a car here some years ago, and while I appreciate that you regularly updated my car for me and that my current car is top of the range, I am returning it. In return for my top of the range car, I want you to give me a better car than is available. If you don't then I will leave my car here and leave with nothing, and you will have lost my custom.

First Up

B0jangles wrote: »

The power of the No Deal Threat sounds like the power possessed by someone standing on a cliff edge negotiating the terms under which which they won't jump, but retaining the threat to jump as a bargaining tool.

If Britain jumps, it'll be fairly unpleasant for everyone watching, but kind of terminal for Britain.

Whoever coined the ridiculous slogan "no deal is better than a bad deal" has a lot to answer for but the Brexiteers unthinkingly adopted it as a slogan.

Even worse, they thought it meant something.

Bit cynical

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

your negotiating tactic seems to be "i will kick myself in the balls if we can't reach an agreement, see if i dont" as if that is the only alternative.

It is one way of putting it but I would still maintain that you have to be able to walk away from a deal in order to negotiate effectively and, like I said, the WA if it is implemented merely postpones problems for the UK. There's still no guarantee that a free trade deal will be agreed by the end of it. In addition, issues concerning the backstop, even if it is agreed now, will still affect negotiations since the impact of the backstop within the UK will only be felt when the transition period comes to an end.

ohnonotgmail

Bit cynical wrote: »

It is one way of putting it but I would still maintain that you have to be able to walk away from a deal in order to negotiate effectively and, like I said, the WA if it is implemented merely postpones problems for the UK. There's still no guarantee that a free trade deal will be agreed by the end of it. In addition, issues concerning the backstop, even if it is agreed now, will still affect negotiations since the impact of the backstop within the UK will only be felt when the transition period comes to an end.

you seem to have completely missed the second part of my post. so much so you didnt even quote it.

Bit cynical

B0jangles wrote: »

The power of the No Deal Threat sounds like the power possessed by someone standing on a cliff edge negotiating the terms under which which they won't jump, but retaining the threat to jump as a bargaining tool.

If Britain jumps, it'll be fairly unpleasant for everyone watching, but kind of terminal for Britain.

It is a leap into the dark, that is true, but it is probably one they must make (or at least be prepared to make) if in the long term they are to do a deal.

First Up

Bit cynical wrote:

It is a leap into the dark, that is true, but it is probably one they must make (or at least be prepared to make) if in the long term they are to do a deal.

The UK repeatedly tried - and repeatedly failed - to extract exemptions and preferential treatment while an EU member.

You think they will do better after they leave?

Bit cynical

quokula wrote: »

The principle is not remotely the same. If you're willing to walk away from buying a car, you go back home with your own car and your money. This is the equivalent of cancelling Brexit.

No deal is the equivalent of not finding an agreed price, so you leave your car there, set it on fire, then try to hitchhike home all pleased with yourself that the dealer has to deal with the smoke.

All you are saying here is that the stakes are higher which I agree with. You haven't argued though that the principle is different. You still need to be able to walk away.

Boggles

Bit cynical wrote: »

Yes I agree the stakes are much higher but the principle is still the same.

Well lets put it on par so using your analogy but we will flesh it out a little.

If you don't sell your used car, someone close to you could potentially die.

Now the principle is the same, we have just added similar pressure and personalized it so it hits home.

Are you still so keen to walk away, does that give you the upper hand?

B0jangles

Bit cynical wrote: »

It is a leap into the dark, that is true, but it is probably one they must make (or at least be prepared to make) if in the long term they are to do a deal.

But using the threat of No Deal as a negotiating tool is only as large as the value the other negotiating parties place on getting a deal with the UK.

As it stands, it looks like Britain has much much more to lose than anyone they are negotiating with - like a person who has very publically quit their job and is now hurriedly trying to negotiate the terms of a variety of part-time jobs with multiple employers who all know that they've no savings, no income and an awful lot of bills pay and mouths to feed.

ohnonotgmail

First Up wrote: »

The UK repeatedly tried - and repeatedly failed - to extract exemptions and preferential treatment while an EU member.

You think they will do better after they leave?

The UK have negotiated more opt-outs from the EU than any other EU member.

Imreoir2

Bit cynical wrote: »

It is one way of putting it but I would still maintain that you have to be able to walk away from a deal in order to negotiate effectively.

They can walk away, but not without dire consequences. Perhaps they should have thought of that before embarking on this fools errand?

RobMc59

tigger123 wrote: »

B0jangles wrote: »

I've not been paying close attention to the whole brexit car-crash lately so I'm curious - has anyone managed to produce any kind of list of concrete benefits that Brexit will bring to the UK?

I'm not talking about wooly feel-good 'take back control' type fluff, or how having no major trade agreements means Britain is totally free to make newer, better ones in the same way a person who has just been fired is free to see out new and better opportunities.

I'm talking about actual predictions based on concrete data that show things like 'X industry will grow by Y percent as a result of leaving the EU'

As I say, I haven't been keeping a close eye on it but the sense I'm getting, even from pro-brexit sources is that Brexit is basically like the Blitz - a wonderful opportunity for Britons to show what they are made of in the face of a national calamity.
Which is weird, since it's entirely self-inflicted.

Nope. Everyone knows it will have negative effects. Jacob Rees Mogg himself estimates that it will be at least 50 years before Britain feels any benefits.

Which begs the question-what are the pluses of leaving the EU?-I can't see any tbh.

begsbyOnaTrain

RobMc59 wrote: »

Which begs the question-what are the pluses of leaving the EU?-I can't see any tbh.

Depends on where you are on the spectrum. Corbyn has been open about being in the EU stifling what he wants to do with the country. Their rules don't gel with his vision.

Likewise plenty on the right would prefer a free-trading Singapore type country.

If you're economic and political aspirations differ from what's not allowed in the EU, then it's obvious. So the ability to pursue these would be "pluses" for the people involved.

First Up

ohnonotgmail wrote:

The UK have negotiated more opt-outs from the EU than any other EU member.

I'm not talking about opt outs. By definition they are options and available to any member. None of the UK's opt outs are exclusive to them.

I'm talking about the exemptions that Cameron sought from obligations that apply to all members, in particular freedom of movement.

alastair

Bit cynical wrote: »

All you are saying here is that the stakes are higher which I agree with. You haven't argued though that the principle is different. You still need to be able to walk away.

They CAN. They can opt to revoke.

begsbyOnaTrain

quokula wrote: »

Notice in the history tracker the one and only time that Corbyn was ahead of May / Boris was during the last general election. Because that's when election rules kick in, the media are forced to actually let Corbyn be heard, and people start paying attention to manifestos and policies rather than regurgitating who the Daily Mail told them to hate. I'd be surprised if we don't see a similar swing at the next election.

And he lost. Tbh I disagree with your "people start paying attention to manifestos and policies", it was clear the majority of young people thought Corbs was pro-EU even though their manifesto was clear on leaving. Regardless, I guess we'll see another performance in the coming months.

"Jeremy Corbyn has now got the lowest net satisfaction score for any leader of the Opposition Ipsos MORI has ever recorded"

RobMc59

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

Which begs the question-what are the pluses of leaving the EU?-I can't see any tbh.

Depends on where you are on the spectrum. Corbyn has been open about being in the EU stifling what he wants to do with the country. Their rules don't gel with his vision.

Likewise plenty on the right would prefer a free-trading Singapore type country.

If you're economic and political aspirations differ from what's not allowed in the EU, then it's obvious. So the ability to pursue these would be "pluses" for the people involved.

It seems to me the benefits of being in the EU far outweigh not being in it.A large trading area has more clout than a single nation and the health and safety regulations in regards to food and livestock are good compared to others.The only down side is unchecked free movement imo.

begsbyOnaTrain

RobMc59 wrote: »

It seems to me the benefits of being in the EU far outweigh not being in it.

I tend to agree, I was a reluctant Remain voter.

knipex

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Likewise plenty on the right would prefer a free-trading Singapore type country.

Singapore population is 5.64million. Of which 39% are non citizens...

How would that go down with the average Brexit voter ???

26000 Elephants

I never got why free movement has to be 'unchecked'. Fine, give everyone the right to move to and work in any other EU country, but when did that evolve into having a family of 7 adult Romanians living in another EU country, none working and all claiming ( and repatriating) benefits?

MadYaker

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Same as May was booted out over Brexit means Brexit and then offering the worlds worst WA, I also take serious the comments of EU leaders including Leo when they say the WA is closed and all that is on offer is a little side letter with warm words.

If they differ from that now, and there is no backstop, or even the NI backstop. Its bottling it.

Agri and the like is not a NI only Backstop. The NI only Backstop was full alignment until the EU said otherwise and border for all goods down the Irish sea.

I recken that is gone...no matter how you dress it.

Your mindset is incredibly depressing to read. Compromise is part of all negotiations, yet if the EU shows even the slightest hint of flexibility you immediately stick the boot in calling them bottlers and whatever else. Throw together a few world leaders like that and that’s how wars start. You’d be more in line to be thankful at least that some people are genuinely interested in making progress no?? Because Boris has made zero progress since taking office.

Calina

26000 Elephants wrote: »

I never got why free movement has to be 'unchecked'. Fine, give everyone the right to move to and work in any other EU country, but when did that evolve into having a family of 7 adult Romanians living in another EU country, none working and all claiming ( and repatriating) benefits?

It isn't uncheckes. There are provisions in EU law to check it, eg, you have to be earning within 3 months or self financing. The UK just never bothered. This is one of the reasons David Cameron ran into trouble. The rest of the EU in response to his whinging about FOM just asked why he didn't apply the rules the way the rest if the EU did.

FrancieBrady

MadYaker wrote: »

Your mindset is incredibly depressing to read. Compromise is part of all negotiations, yet if the EU shows even the slightest hint of flexibility you immediately stick the boot in calling them bottlers and whatever else. Throw together a few world leaders like that and that’s how wars start. You’d be more in line to be thankful at least that some people are genuinely interested in making progress no?? Because Boris has made zero progress since taking office.

Crypto's exuberance last night has taken a bit of a nose dive today as yet another effort by the UK gets trashed. How many chances have they been given now?

screamer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Crypto's exuberance last night has taken a bit of a nose dive today as yet another effort by the UK gets trashed. How many chances have they been given now?

Too many. Time to accept they’re so incompetent they’re going to crash out and forget about dealing with them, and try to protect ourselves best we can. Their ship is sinking, we must keep ours floating, and I think our politicians efforts would be better spent shoring up the plans and agreements with the EU for Ireland and let the uk go be damned.

Padre_Pio

screamer wrote: »

Too many. Time to accept they’re so incompetent they’re going to crash out and forget about dealing with them, and try to protect ourselves best we can. Their ship is sinking, we must keep ours floating, and I think our politicians efforts would be better spent shoring up the plans and agreements with the EU for Ireland and let the uk go be damned.

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-leaked-document-says-uk-proposal-fails-to-solve-backstop-issues-11815201

Back to square one.

The UK again fails to come up with an alternative to the backstop that they themselves proposed.
Instead of actually doing something productive, they blame Brussels for leaking this useless piece of work to the public.

3 years into this mess and newspaper headlines are the same as they were in 2016.

On the plus side, I'm sure we'll get a United Ireland within the next 20 years.

I would enjoy seeing them crash out just to see them negotiate with other large blocks. The EU has a lot to lose and it's extremely difficult. The rest won't even have anything to lose.

First Up

Padre_Pio wrote:

On the plus side, I'm sure we'll get a United Ireland within the next 20 years.

Closer economic and social integration is very likely but political unity is a long way off - and such talk is deeply unhelpful.

RobMc59

Calina wrote: »

26000 Elephants wrote: »

I never got why free movement has to be 'unchecked'. Fine, give everyone the right to move to and work in any other EU country, but when did that evolve into having a family of 7 adult Romanians living in another EU country, none working and all claiming ( and repatriating) benefits?

It isn't uncheckes. There are provisions in EU law to check it, eg, you have to be earning within 3 months or self financing. The UK just never bothered. This is one of the reasons David Cameron ran into trouble. The rest of the EU in response to his whinging about FOM just asked why he didn't apply the rules the way the rest if the EU did.

Tabloids in the UK ran stories about this almost daily in the run up to brexit,about how Britain was being invaded by hordes of Eastern European scroungers/crime gangs whilst conveniently forgetting to mention the rules weren't being applied by the UK.
All of which have encouraged the rise of right wing sentiment in the UK .

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote:

I would enjoy seeing them crash out just to see them negotiate with other large blocks. The EU has a lot to lose and it's extremely difficult. The rest won't even have anything to lose.

I do think the UK is in the far more vulnerable position than the EU, crashing out with no deal could be catastrophic for them, trade deals can take years to implement