Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[ccc]

2 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Oh not that "use the facilities" line again, when "use the facilities" appears to be "have any relationship whatsoever with members of the club." By that logic a typical club wouldn't have any relationship whatsoever with any other organistion. No co-operation with any other clubs, not even bringing outside help to mend its leaky roof.

Apparently these are the very same facilities that we have paid for over the past 40+ years. But now us wanting to leave means they have zero link to us at all. Pretty amazing really...

[Confusion of VIs]

1 minute ago, Riedquat said:

Oh not that "use the facilities" line again, when "use the facilities" appears to be "have any relationship whatsoever with members of the club." By that logic a typical club wouldn't have any relationship whatsoever with any other organistion. No co-operation with any other clubs, not even bringing outside help to mend its leaky roof.

Now you are just being silly, no one thinks that we won't continue trading with the EU.

 

[Riedquat]

1 minute ago, IMHAL said:

Do you realise what you have just said?

Yes. And it's entirely consistent. Meeting a customer's requirements is not the same as having their regulations as your own. But hey, that's not as simple as "duh, regulations or no regulations", is it, and Remainers do love oversimplifying.

[IMHAL]

5 minutes ago, ccc said:

Its not up to me how we do it. That's up to the tools that run this country. We voted to leave the EU. Lets do it. What's so difficult about that to understand ?

Get used to it. You are now officially a racist and a xenophobe.

Can't be arsed to explain again.

Edited December 7, 2017 by IMHAL

[Riedquat]

1 minute ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Now you are just being silly, no one thinks that we won't continue trading with the EU.

The way some of you lot go on I'm not so sure about that. Of course a lot of people don't think we won't trade, which is why we don't think Brexit is the whopping great disaster many want to believe it'll be. An awful lot of Remain arguments read like "we won't be able to have anything to do with the EU at all if we leave."

[Confusion of VIs]

5 minutes ago, ccc said:

Apparently these are the very same facilities that we have paid for over the past 40+ years. But now us wanting to leave means they have zero link to us at all. Pretty amazing really...

About as amazing as my bank not giving me a share of the bank when I moved my account after 20 year with them.

 

 

[IMHAL]

27 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

What nonsense. The world is full of countries that have trade deals and don't share regulations. You have to meet the regulations of any product you sell to another country of course, and there'll be wrangling about how much you change your own rules to get a deal (since stuff should go in both directions), but you appear to be saying "This is how things are and this is how they can only be." One set of absolute rules, always applied.

 

19 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Yes. And it's entirely consistent. Meeting a customer's requirements is not the same as having their regulations as your own. But hey, that's not as simple as "duh, regulations or no regulations", is it, and Remainers do love oversimplifying.

In order to trade you have to agree a regulatory allignment and that comes as a part of the trade deal.  There is no short cut and no weasly words can get around it.

Edit - we are talking about a free trade deal with no border issues here I assume

Edited December 7, 2017 by IMHAL

[Confusion of VIs]

4 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The way some of you lot go on I'm not so sure about that. Of course a lot of people don't think we won't trade, which is why we don't think Brexit is the whopping great disaster many want to believe it'll be. An awful lot of Remain arguments read like "we won't be able to have anything to do with the EU at all if we leave."

I haven't seen anything that daft posted.

Assuming we leave properly (I.e. it's not a Brexit in name only)we will continue trading with the EU like any other third country. This will make trade a little more expensive and bureaucratic and encourage firms to move UK elements of their supply chains back into the EU.

For most people the resulting loss of jobs/GDP, whether it be 2% or 8%,  is a bad thing. Even a large majority of Leavers agree with this, they just don't believe it will happen.

  

 

   

[HairyOb1]

1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

People leaving? There's one advantage.

Yes, all those highly educated scientists moving their operations to universities in mainland Europe, that's a good thing isn't it.

What a crock of shite.

1 hour ago, pig said:

Are you the poster insisting the UK collapsed when it joined the EU ?

He is indeed.

20 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The way some of you lot go on I'm not so sure about that. Of course a lot of people don't think we won't trade, which is why we don't think Brexit is the whopping great disaster many want to believe it'll be. An awful lot of Remain arguments read like "we won't be able to have anything to do with the EU at all if we leave."

No one thinks trade will stop, not one of us have said it, not one of us think it.  However, it will be to our detriment, as the EU have consistently made out.  We will not get a free trade deal, as to offer us one, would leave us better off, out than in, itself an EU red line.  Given they've held firm to this line, I can only deduce they mean it, therefore we will be worse off.  we will probably leave key EU institutions and/or have to pay to stay in them.  

Anyone suggesting this isn't going to harm us, isn't right in the head.

Edited December 7, 2017 by HairyOb1

[HairyOb1]

If you were a UK company that traded mostly with the EU, say 80% of your goods went to the EU (a surprisingly large number of businesses and numbers), would you stay outside the EU, and pay tariffs on 80% of your goods pushing the prices up, or would you move the operation and operate to the EU's trade agreements for the other 20% (which you already do at no extra cost)?

What would you do, if that was your business model?  Me?  I'd be off to Spain, Portugal or somewhere else that incentivises moving there, and saves you money, so you don't have to put up your costs.

Then look at the surrounding losses, not just to jobs directly, but jobs indirectly when these companies move, as the localised spending is removed also.

I really don't think people are thinking about this clearly.

[kzb]

1 hour ago, pig said:

Are you the poster insisting the UK collapsed when it joined the EU ?

Possibly certain people interpret me that way. 

All I ever said was that 1973-1975 is when things started to go pear-shaped for UK.  From the war to the early-mid 1970's was a golden age of continuous growth and full employment.  We've never had full employment since.

Joining the EEC with its higher food and goods prices was not the only problem, the oil shocks were probably more important.  But we got a "double whammy".  But let's not start this again.

[HairyOb1]

9 minutes ago, kzb said:

Possibly certain people interpret me that way. 

All I ever said was that 1973-1975 is when things started to go pear-shaped for UK.  From the war to the early-mid 1970's was a golden age of continuous growth and full employment.  We've never had full employment since.

Joining the EEC with its higher food and goods prices was not the only problem, the oil shocks were probably more important.  But we got a "double whammy".  But let's not start this again.

...and again, I proved you wrong with every false line you wrote.  Do not get going on this again, as it is embarrassing for you.

[rollover]

 

Quote

 

Jean-Claude Juncker 'fears Theresa May's Government will collapse next week without Brexit deal'

Telegraph

 

If this happens then this will be the end of Brexit. And everything will go back to normal.

[kzb]

2 minutes ago, rollover said:

If this happens then this will be the end of Brexit. And everything will go back to normal.

Is that what you want?  What are you doing on a contrarian house price crash forum?

[GrizzlyDave]

BERLIN, Dec 7 (Reuters) - The leader of Germany’s Social Democrats (SPD) called on Thursday for closer integration in the European Union, with the aim of achieving a “United States of Europe” by 2025, while countries who are not on board should leave the bloc. 

With that in mind, Martin Schulz told a party congress that he wants the EU to agree to a new constitutional treaty which creates a federal Europe, which can act together in policy in areas including domestic and foreign security, tax and monetary affairs and asylum and international development. 

“This constitutional treaty must then be presented in all member states and those that do not agree would automatically leave the EU,” he said.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-politics-spd-europe/german-spd-leader-seeks-united-states-of-europe-by-2025-idUSA5N1JY01W

[rollover]

6 minutes ago, kzb said:

Is that what you want?  What are you doing on a contrarian house price crash forum?

Yes, I definitely prefer it to the turmoil Brexit is in now. What do you want from the current situation?

[Riedquat]

43 minutes ago, HairyOb1 said:

Yes, all those highly educated scientists moving their operations to universities in mainland Europe, that's a good thing isn't it.

What a crock of shite.

He is indeed.

No one thinks trade will stop, not one of us have said it, not one of us think it.  However, it will be to our detriment, as the EU have consistently made out.  We will not get a free trade deal, as to offer us one, would leave us better off, out than in, itself an EU red line.  Given they've held firm to this line, I can only deduce they mean it, therefore we will be worse off.  we will probably leave key EU institutions and/or have to pay to stay in them.  

Anyone suggesting this isn't going to harm us, isn't right in the head.

In the short term at least I think most people agree that we will be worse off. In the long term opinion differs. The big difference is I've not been remotely persuaded that we'll be worse off enough for it to matter (most of the wealth is squandered anyway), so it's not a consideration very high up my priorities, even if the results will be a measurable fact of the type some people think are the only things that matter. The word "harm" is over-egging it, and if it exposes some of the badly-papered over cracks so much the better.

[GrizzlyDave]

https://mobile.twitter.com/martinschulz/status/938748359720013824

 

[HairyOb1]

9 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

BERLIN, Dec 7 (Reuters) - The leader of Germany’s Social Democrats (SPD) called on Thursday for closer integration in the European Union, with the aim of achieving a “United States of Europe” by 2025, while countries who are not on board should leave the bloc. 

With that in mind, Martin Schulz told a party congress that he wants the EU to agree to a new constitutional treaty which creates a federal Europe, which can act together in policy in areas including domestic and foreign security, tax and monetary affairs and asylum and international development. 

“This constitutional treaty must then be presented in all member states and those that do not agree would automatically leave the EU,” he said.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-politics-spd-europe/german-spd-leader-seeks-united-states-of-europe-by-2025-idUSA5N1JY01W

Happy days.  Just hoping we're dragged along.  If not, then my German passport aligns me anyway.

[IMHAL]

11 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

BERLIN, Dec 7 (Reuters) - The leader of Germany’s Social Democrats (SPD) called on Thursday for closer integration in the European Union, with the aim of achieving a “United States of Europe” by 2025, while countries who are not on board should leave the bloc. 

With that in mind, Martin Schulz told a party congress that he wants the EU to agree to a new constitutional treaty which creates a federal Europe, which can act together in policy in areas including domestic and foreign security, tax and monetary affairs and asylum and international development. 

“This constitutional treaty must then be presented in all member states and those that do not agree would automatically leave the EU,” he said.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-politics-spd-europe/german-spd-leader-seeks-united-states-of-europe-by-2025-idUSA5N1JY01W

I guess the guy is entitled to his opinion.

[GrizzlyDave]

1 minute ago, HairyOb1 said:

Happy days.  Just hoping we're dragged along.  If not, then my German passport aligns me anyway.

He is right - certainly the Eurozone need to do this.

This is one of the many Reasons I voted leave. Because the EU is only going to move closer together, and hard as it is to leave now; it will be impossible to leave later.

one shot.

[HairyOb1]

1 minute ago, Riedquat said:

In the short term at least I think most people agree that we will be worse off. In the long term opinion differs. The big difference is I've not been remotely persuaded that we'll be worse off enough for it to matter (most of the wealth is squandered anyway), so it's not a consideration very high up my priorities, even if the results will be a measurable fact of the type some people think are the only things that matter. The word "harm" is over-egging it, and if it exposes some of the badly-papered over cracks so much the better.

Losing key staff to orgs in Europe. Harmful to economy.  Losing key scientists to Unis in Europe.  Harmful to economy.  GDP contracts 2-10%. Harmful to economy.  Inward investment reduces.  Harmful to economy.  Multiple organisations switching to Europe.  Harmful to economy.  Losses of upwards of 200k jobs. Harmful to economy.  Lower tax take. Harmful to economy.

Any brain drain on a large scale is harmful.

Anyone saying it's not going to harm us, even at the lower end of the scale of some views, is, as I said, not really all-square upstairs.

[HairyOb1]

Just now, GrizzlyDave said:

He is right - certainly the Eurozone need to do this.

This is one of the many Reasons I voted leave. Because the EU is only going to move closer together, and hard as it is to leave now; it will be impossible to leave later.

one shot.

It genuinely does.  I think, like him, get a central core in on a new EU, then get countries who want to join, rather than force anyone.  Suits my agenda massively.

[GrizzlyDave]

2 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

I guess the guy is entitled to his opinion.

Of course the leader of Germany’s second largest party is entitled to an opinion.

[Riedquat]

2 minutes ago, HairyOb1 said:

Losing key staff to orgs in Europe. Harmful to economy.  Losing key scientists to Unis in Europe.  Harmful to economy.  GDP contracts 2-10%. Harmful to economy.  Inward investment reduces.  Harmful to economy.  Multiple organisations switching to Europe.  Harmful to economy.  Losses of upwards of 200k jobs. Harmful to economy.  Lower tax take. Harmful to economy.

Any brain drain on a large scale is harmful.

Anyone saying it's not going to harm us, even at the lower end of the scale of some views, is, as I said, not really all-square upstairs.

It really depends upon the scale though, doesn't it?  You've not persuaded me at all that any of that adds up to anything significant. A 2% drop in GDP is very definitely "so what?" territory. That takes us back to, when? Certainly not a time when life was much harder. Could probably say the same about 10%, although you may be starting to edge into genuine concern area there. And how much of it is just the turmoil of change? Not wanting change because you don't like the end result is fine, and you truly seem to like the EU, so that's a valid objection on your part, but there's a lot of "prefer to stay put no matter what than face the hassle of moving."