Hard Brexit

[Seymour M Hersh]

13 minutes ago, houstonjambo said:

 

Havent said it would. You’re not so clueless to suggest we will be trading on the same favourable terms come March next year?

 

 

So if they add tariffs we won't because that wouldn't be cricket?  Of course we would ergo both parties would be cutting their noses despite themselves. Do you really think the German car manufacturers will go for that? 

[Seymour M Hersh]

10 minutes ago, houstonjambo said:

 

The EU will be worse off than us? Sorry, I absolutely refuse to accept that. Can you provide some figures to back up that assertion?

 

Can you provide figures that say otherwise? Thought not.

[JackLadd]

14 minutes ago, houstonjambo said:

 

The EU will be worse off than us? Sorry, I absolutely refuse to accept that. Can you provide some figures to back up that assertion?

 

 

They do 60bn more trade with us then we do with them so it stands to reason. Obviously it is spread more evenly across the whole eu which softens the impact. On the plus side, the bail outs and corruption are no longer our baby. There would have been way more hardship had the SNP succeeded in wrenching us from the Union that tops up the SNP's mismanagement with Barnet loot. 

Edited July 9, 2018 by JackLadd

[Captain Sausage]

2 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Can you provide figures that say otherwise? Thought not.

 You made the claim. Back it up. 

[jake]

Just now, houstonjambo said:

 

So it’s your understanding that it’s inpossible to know what comes next. Under any circumstance. Because it hasn’t happened yet. 

 

Cool. 

No.

It's my position that I believe looking at what's unfolding in Europe means we have won a watch with brexit.

 

You disagree.

 

That's cool.

We had a vote.

That's even cooler.

 

 

[Captain Sausage]

4 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

So if they add tariffs we won't because that wouldn't be cricket?  Of course we would ergo both parties would be cutting their noses despite themselves. Do you really think the German car manufacturers will go for that? 

 

I don’t think they’ll have much choice. If the EU rolled over, what’s to stop everyone leaving? Of course we will be hit with punitive tariffs. 

[JackLadd]

Just now, houstonjambo said:

 

I don’t think they’ll have much choice. If the EU rolled over, what’s to stop everyone leaving? Of course we will be hit with punitive tariffs. 

 

EU are WTO signatories. 

[jake]

95 billion .

That's German exports to the UK.

 

Anyone know what the French export?

Spanish etc.

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 minute ago, houstonjambo said:

 You made the claim. Back it up. 

 

I didn't make that claim but thought you might want to convince why they won't be worse off. And as an aside who has just posted "You cant provide facts for things that haven’t yet happened"?

[The Mighty Thor]

9 minutes ago, ...a bit disco said:

"Attention all rats. Your ship is sinking. I repeat, your ship is SINKING!"

 

It's the political equivalent of the vermin emptying Hampden at 4.05pm

[Captain Sausage]

8 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

I didn't make that claim but thought you might want to convince why they won't be worse off. And as an aside who has just posted "You cant provide facts for things that haven’t yet happened"?

 

But you can easily point to evidence to support your conjecture surely. 

 

Will the EU be worse off? Of course. 

Will Britain be even worse off? Of course. 

 

It is pretty simple. We have no alternative to replace that trade tariff free. The EU does. 

[Captain Sausage]

13 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

 

EU are WTO signatories. 

 

So why have tariffs in the first place? Do the US get the same deals as German imports to France? Of course not. 

[Ibrahim Tall]

10 minutes ago, jake said:

95 billion .

That's German exports to the UK.

 

Anyone know what the French export?

Spanish etc.

 

 

People in the UK will still buy German and French cars, Spanish fruit and vegetables etc. That won’t change or else part of the ‘Brexit means Brexit’ involves restarting British Leyland and massively improving the UK climate.

[Governor Tarkin]

1 hour ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

 

But fair. He literally doesn't care about the consequences one teeny, tiny bit.

 

@jake: your "kick in the baws of the establishment" has helped the establishment like it's never been helped before, and kicked the poor in the baws like they've never been kicked before.

 

Congrats. 

 

Jake strikes me as a bit of an idealist, Shaun. That he often doesn't appreciate the bigger picture is neither here nor there on that score.

 

The way some folk on here like to cry outrage and clip him about the chops with their 'superior intellect' is a bit shit tbh.

 

Of course some have made an internetz forum career out of this sort of behaviour and so it's expected. Others (like Justin Z who I originally quoted), should - and usually do - know better.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Terrific article from Polly Toynbee about what will happen after Brexit,  in particular a No deal. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/09/cabinet-brexiteer-vision-chilling-neo-thatcherite?CMP=share_btn_tw

[jake]

37 minutes ago, Ibrahim Tall said:

 

People in the UK will still buy German and French cars, Spanish fruit and vegetables etc. That won’t change or else part of the ‘Brexit means Brexit’ involves restarting British Leyland and massively improving the UK climate.

Of course they will.

That's my point.

The German economy relies on our market to the tune of 95 billion euros.

To suggest we will be frozen out is not true.

 

[jake]

https://www.adamsmith.org/stuck-in-the-middle-with-eu/

[jake]

24 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Jake strikes me as a bit of an idealist, Shaun. That he often doesn't appreciate the bigger picture is neither here nor there on that score.

 

The way some folk on here like to cry outrage and clip him about the chops with their 'superior intellect' is a bit shit tbh.

 

Of course some have made an internetz forum career out of this sort of behaviour and so it's expected. Others (like Justin Z who I originally quoted), should - and usually do - know better.

 

I don't take it personally or at least I no.longer do.

And I am idealistic about some things.

 

Honestly I feel I'm the realist regarding the EU.

 

Anyway it's fair to say I do enjoy arguing about this subject and I do accept I'm not as academically adept as others.

That does not mean I don't have a grasp of the subject.

 

Anyway your post is appreciated.

[...a bit disco]

[Cade]

Jezza Hunt the new Foreign Sec?!

 

 

Edited July 9, 2018 by Cade

[shaun.lawson]

6 minutes ago, Cade said:

Jezza Hunt the new Foreign Sec?!

 

 

 

I swear Bobby Ewing's gonna appear in the shower at any moment.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Has a government ever had such a dearth of talent?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Bet you that Chris Grayling gets the health gig

[Governor Tarkin]

20 minutes ago, Cade said:

Jezza Hunt the new Foreign Sec?!

 

 

 

[Cade]

Matt Hancock (no, me either) moves from Culture&Sport to Health

 

Jeremy Wright, the Attorney General, goes to Culture&Sport.

 

 

 

 

[Boris]

43 minutes ago, jake said:

https://www.adamsmith.org/stuck-in-the-middle-with-eu/

I had a wee skim read of that Jake. Seems dependent on eea membership? This government doesn't want that as it, iirc allows freedom of movement. 

 

I could quite easily be wrong though. 

[Governor Tarkin]

So who's going to meet Trumpy when this government implodes?

[Martin_T]

Pragmatism always trumps idealism from my perspective. A perfect political ideology has yet to be found or certainly has yet to be successfully implemented.

 

Brexit, like it or not is being driven by the hard right, 'populist' movement, what we know of this movement so far is that it is anti immigration, nationalist and has a seemingly in built intolerance to multi lateral agreements and institutions (Paris climate change agreement, the EU, the Iran nuclear deal etc). This just seems to me to be a very regressive and confrontational way of government.

 

As a young father, in the somewhat unfortunate position of also having a debilitating and degenerative health condition, the world just seems to be a less fair and less secure place for the direction that politics is currently headed.

 

Maybe I live in a middle class bubble, but the world didn't seem all that bad when our EU membership was a given.

[Victorian]

The dregs of the Tory Pandora's Box of maniacs have all been let loose today to spout their utter pish.

 

Desmond Swayne,  Bill Cash,  Peter Bone,  Owen Paterson,  Bernard Jenkin,  Jacob Rabid-Dogg.

 

People vote for these ****ing goons.

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

Not quite sure where to put this. Here, I guess...?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2018/jul/09/england-team-world-on-side-political-turmoil-world-cup

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

Terrific article from Polly Toynbee about what will happen after Brexit,  in particular a No deal. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/09/cabinet-brexiteer-vision-chilling-neo-thatcherite?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

Well there's an oxymoron! 

[John Findlay]

1 hour ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Has a government ever had such a dearth of talent?

If Labour win the next GE. You will really see a dearth of talent.

[Governor Tarkin]

24 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

Not quite sure where to put this. Here, I guess...?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2018/jul/09/england-team-world-on-side-political-turmoil-world-cup

 

"Etonian warlords"

 

 

[gashauskis9]

Just need one more resignation then we’ll have three liars on the shirk.  It is indeed coming home!

[Ulysses]

11 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

 

PS your second referendum suggestion makes sense - it offers a real and simple choice, once a deal is made with the EU. Until that point what on earth would be a second referendum question?

 

 

Another poster described my suggestion as a second referendum as well, but I don't think it is.  When I see the term "second referendum", it's being used by people seeking a re-run of the Brexit referendum offering voters the chance to reverse the result, and I don't agree with that.  On the other hand, because any negotiated settlement with the EU is likely to include concessions that some voters won't like, there should be a referendum on the terms of exiting the EU, offering voters a choice between approving the settlement as negotiated or else declining it in favour of a no-deal exit - of course that assumes there's an agreement to vote on.

 

My opinion is that a reasonable agreement would probably secure a solid approval from voters, but it doesn't matter whether I'm right or wrong about that.  Regardless of the result, it would have the advantage of being endorsed by the electorate.

[Francis Albert]

18 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Well there's an oxymoron! 

Generally I'd agree but it is not the worst Polly Toynbee I have seen, The choice does seem to me something very like Remain (which is the only place the May "deal" will lead - it is not a deal it is in effect a starting  negotiating position) or a clean break, involving maybe but by no means necessarily "chlorinated chicken" which I have been eating for decades with no ill effect or noticeable lesser quality. It is actually a bit of a cheek that anyone in the UK should be using the threat of the danger of food standards (Solmonella, Mad Cows' disease etc) as a reason for not diluting our standards.

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Generally I'd agree but it is not the worst Polly Toynbee I have seen, The choice does seem to me something very like Remain (which is the only place the May "deal" will lead - it is not a deal it is in effect a starting  negotiating position) or a clean break, involving maybe but by no means necessarily "chlorinated chicken" which I have been eating for decades with no ill effect or noticeable lesser quality. It is actually a bit of a cheek that anyone in the UK should be using the threat of the danger of food standards (Solmonella, Mad Cows' disease etc) as a reason for not diluting our standards.

 

When has rank hypocrisy ever bothered Toynbee?

[Ulysses]

8 hours ago, Boris said:

 

But this is where it is a scam...if they had said Hard Brexit, would they have won?

 

Isn't that why it's a wise idea to offer voters the opportunity to say yes or no to whatever exit deal is negotiated between the EU and the UK?

[Ulysses]

3 hours ago, houstonjambo said:

 

The EU will be worse off than us? Sorry, I absolutely refuse to accept that. Can you provide some figures to back up that assertion?

 

 

At a much earlier point in the Brexit debate I pointed out that in absolute cash terms the EU 27 economy would lose more money than the UK economy following a no-deal Brexit.  But in percentage terms the effect on the UK's economy would be quite a bit higher, because the EU 27 has a much bigger economic base. 

[Boris]

10 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Isn't that why it's a wise idea to offer voters the opportunity to say yes or no to whatever exit deal is negotiated between the EU and the UK?

Well, quite.

 

That then raises the question of what happens next, so a simple yes no doesn't answer the question in full. 

 

For example Remainers and brexiteers could vote no to a soft brexit deal, but for different reasons. One of the reasons we are where we are is due to the ambiguity of the question asked originally, or rather the ambiguity of what leave actually meant.

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Ibrahim Tall said:

 

.......part of the ‘Brexit means Brexit’ involves restarting British Leyland and massively improving the UK climate.

 

 

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Jake strikes me as a bit of an idealist, Shaun. That he often doesn't appreciate the bigger picture is neither here nor there on that score.

 

The way some folk on here like to cry outrage and clip him about the chops with their 'superior intellect' is a bit shit tbh.

 

Of course some have made an internetz forum career out of this sort of behaviour and so it's expected. Others (like Justin Z who I originally quoted), should - and usually do - know better.

 

 

 

jake didn't vote Leave to go against the interests of people.  Nobody voted Leave (or Remain for that matter) to go against the interests of people.

[Ulysses]

1 hour ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

I swear Bobby Ewing's gonna appear in the shower at any moment.

 

 

[Francis Albert]

16 minutes ago, Boris said:

Well, quite.

 

That then raises the question of what happens next, so a simple yes no doesn't answer the question in full. 

 

For example Remainers and brexiteers could vote no to a soft brexit deal, but for different reasons. One of the reasons we are where we are is due to the ambiguity of the question asked originally, or rather the ambiguity of what leave actually meant.

The suggestion is a simple vote on "yes we accept the deal" or "no we leave without a deal" At the end of the negotiations that seems the obvious and only choice. Of course we could apply to rejoin later  if that is what we wanted.

[shaun.lawson]

Absolute work of art, this thread. And it's still going strong.

 

 

[Adam_the_legend]

1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Well there's an oxymoron! 

 

This! Anyone having to resort to a Polly Toynbee article is scraping the barrel. Car crash of a woman. 

[Adam_the_legend]

51 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Another poster described my suggestion as a second referendum as well, but I don't think it is.  When I see the term "second referendum", it's being used by people seeking a re-run of the Brexit referendum offering voters the chance to reverse the result, and I don't agree with that.  On the other hand, because any negotiated settlement with the EU is likely to include concessions that some voters won't like, there should be a referendum on the terms of exiting the EU, offering voters a choice between approving the settlement as negotiated or else declining it in favour of a no-deal exit - of course that assumes there's an agreement to vote on.

 

My opinion is that a reasonable agreement would probably secure a solid approval from voters, but it doesn't matter whether I'm right or wrong about that.  Regardless of the result, it would have the advantage of being endorsed by the electorate.

 

The ill educated racist morons as some on here would say?? I think it’s safe to say based on the referendum that even something supported by “the electorate” would never be accepted. 

[JackLadd]

I watched some cnn earlier and Corbyn was described as loony left by a us democrat pundit. Lawson would have this old hippy trot as pm. 

[Norm]

12 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

I watched some cnn earlier and Corbyn was described as loony left by a us democrat pundit. Lawson would have this old hippy trot as pm. 

To be fair, Thatcher would probably be considered a loony lefty by American Democrats. Say what you like about the old milk snatching boot, she at least agreed with free healthcare and the NHS. Even that itself is enough to have you labeled a lefty loony in the States. 

[shaun.lawson]

33 minutes ago, Normthebarman said:

To be fair, Thatcher would probably be considered a loony lefty by American Democrats. Say what you like about the old milk snatching boot, she at least agreed with free healthcare and the NHS. Even that itself is enough to have you labeled a lefty loony in the States. 

 

Correct. 

 

Try again, Jack.