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

[crouch]

1 hour ago, byron78 said:

This thread is interesting. 

I think it's quite sweet some think Brexit will ring the changes. 

I can't really see how. I would imagine it'll solidify power in the hands of those who already have if more than loosening their grip. 

Our electoral system in the UK is such that very few live in constituencies where they effectively have a "choice" who to vote for. Most are safe seats. 

If Scotland breaks away to stay in the EU our democracy will likely be even wonkier. 

The status quo is probably just going to get even more static, with even less outside influence. 

You get healthy capitalism from competition at the end of the day. The less competitive your economy, the less healthy your capitalism. 

I can't see how isolationism will deliver that. It was always the downside of Brexit for me. 

I just wanted fewer immigrants which is why I voted Leave. I'm probably a bit racist (I'm 79 this year) but at least I'm honest about it. 

 

You see you're somewhat inconsistent.

If you think that Brexit is a "biggie"; a really unusual event which will have far reaching consequences, that by definition means that we will move from the status quo. Now we may move one way or we may move another who knows? But which is more likely to produce change; the status quo (Remain) or Brexit ( a change to the status quo)? With the first there is zero chance of change; with the second "some" chance (10%; 40%; 90% - I don't know) but  relatively and by definition Brexit is more likely to produce change.

If Scotland breaks away we'll be diminished but our democracy won't be wonkier because we will still be left with our own national sovereignty based on the rule of law. The two things are distinct.

As regards competition you are absolutely right but how can opening up our trading relationships with ROW be antithetical to competition; it should ipso facto encourage competition? I don't understand this point.

How can we be isolationist in a World of rapid air travel and the internet? Isolationism is a state of mind and implies the integral value of your own culture not a disinclination to engage with others. You conflate two things.

Edited February 22, 2019 by crouch

[wish I could afford one]

1 hour ago, byron78 said:

...

I just wanted fewer immigrants which is why I voted Leave. I'm probably a bit racist (I'm 79 this year) but at least I'm honest about it. 

We could have achieved that without Brexit from both an EU and Non-EU perspective.  We actually want immigration as it helps GDP.  BTW I'm not saying a rising GDP is a good metric to measure the average persons life happiness but when we have an economy based around never ending debt increases you need never ending GDP to feed it.  Immigration is one way to help with that.

[pig]

1 hour ago, jonb2 said:

What gets me is the the Leave contingent are still hating the EU, when it's clear where the problem lies.

The Japanese warned the UK they would withdraw under certain circumstances 2.5 years ago.

https://www.businessinsider.com/japan-brexit-note-to-britain-2016-9?r=UK

In fact they stayed as long as they could. Our relationship with them has always been quite special with a lot invested in a great symbiotic deal. I have heard the Japs chose Britain because of being an island like them, having good manners like them and being honourable like them. Well 35 years down the drain. Thrown under a bus.

I am convinced we could have had some of the new electric car business if our government had been any way near intelligent enough to hold their hands.

Even a government committee came to the conclusion we would lose car manufacturing under our current trajectory. Last paragraph.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmbeis/379/37908.htm

Our problem, which is more than serious, is that our politicians completely unfit for purpose. Some Leavers here say Brexit was to change the system here. Judging by what I see, it might change, but certainly not for anything better for the people of this country.

 

 

Yes - thats what suddenly struck me, its almost a poignant sliding doors moment.

I'm sure they have as many wingnuts as we have but collectively they are going about looking after their national interest with intelligence and maturity. Whereas we're becoming increasingly unhinged pandering to the wingnuts.

[Riedquat]

5 minutes ago, wish I could afford one said:

We could have achieved that without Brexit from both an EU and Non-EU perspective.  We actually want immigration as it helps GDP.  BTW I'm not saying a rising GDP is a good metric to measure the average persons life happiness but when we have an economy based around never ending debt increases you need never ending GDP to feed it.  Immigration is one way to help with that.

That illustrates the disconnect between the politicians and the population. The politicians are just keen on carrying on trying to keep a fundamentally flawed system going, they have no real interest in dealing with the problems of it because they don't affect them personally and they're not interested in the long-term consequences.

From a purely practical point of view, yes, we could've achieved a lot more without Brexit, but when you take into account the whole picture - who's making the decisions, what those decisions are, what the likelihood of them changing is, no, we couldn't have achieved it without Brexit. We may still not but there's a chance instead of no chance.

[cock-eyed octopus]

1 hour ago, Dave Beans said:

Take Canada.  Say they want to import hamburgers into the EU.  In order to do this, their supply chain had to adhere to SU standards.  However when they come to ship then into the SU, bacause aren’t under an enforcement mechanism (EFTA court or ECJ), then goods will still get checked at the SM outer frontier.  Thus frictionless trade is not possible.

The intransigence line is easy to trot out.  What views do they need to change and what is possible within their existing treaty system?

I don't see how that makes Canada not an independent country in any meaningful sense.

Obviously total independence is philosophically impossible (try being independent of oxygen) but, as a country, we should be able to make our own decisions as to how, & if, we trade with other countries (such trade necessarily implies common standards). While we're in the EU we don't have that capability.

I've nowhere mentioned frictionless trade BTW.

 

[winkie]

1 hour ago, byron78 said:

This thread is interesting. 

I think it's quite sweet some think Brexit will ring the changes. 

I can't really see how. I would imagine it'll solidify power in the hands of those who already have if more than loosening their grip. 

Our electoral system in the UK is such that very few live in constituencies where they effectively have a "choice" who to vote for. Most are safe seats. 

If Scotland breaks away to stay in the EU our democracy will likely be even wonkier. 

The status quo is probably just going to get even more static, with even less outside influence. 

You get healthy capitalism from competition at the end of the day. The less competitive your economy, the less healthy your capitalism. 

I can't see how isolationism will deliver that. It was always the downside of Brexit for me. 

I just wanted fewer immigrants which is why I voted Leave. I'm probably a bit racist (I'm 79 this year) but at least I'm honest about it. 

You are probably old enough not to want to move much further than where you are at the moment.....

On and On .........only the beginning.

 

[OnionTerror]

13 minutes ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

I don't see how that makes Canada not an independent country in any meaningful sense.

Obviously total independence is philosophically impossible (try being independent of oxygen) but, as a country, we should be able to make our own decisions as to how, & if, we trade with other countries (such trade necessarily implies common standards). While we're in the EU we don't have that capability.

I've nowhere mentioned frictionless trade BTW.

 

Totally agree that the UK should be able to make its own trade policy.  It’s not only purely about trade, but also soft power.  That’s why I see no reason to stay in the or a customs union. We don’t need one and issues can be resolved without it.

[byron78]

46 minutes ago, wish I could afford one said:

We could have achieved that without Brexit from both an EU and Non-EU perspective.  We actually want immigration as it helps GDP.  BTW I'm not saying a rising GDP is a good metric to measure the average persons life happiness but when we have an economy based around never ending debt increases you need never ending GDP to feed it.  Immigration is one way to help with that.

Yes you're right of course. 

I can just go on why I voted Leave and why those around me my age largely did as well. 

I do think there was a swelling up of resentment by some. I know a lovely older lady, church every week, does loads for her community, but she uses the "N" word like nobodies business. She begrudges not being able to be as openly prejudice anymore and as a result can't wait until anyone with darker skin than her gets fired into the sun come Brexit. 

I'm not sure what part of the EU she thinks all these Indians and fuzzy wuzzies are coming from. Probably Greece. 

[Bruce Banner]

1 hour ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

Why is it xenophobic?

I just don't understand what you're doing here. As I've said before, I wouldn't have the temerity to go to a website in another country & voice my opinions.

And I repeat, where are you from & why are you here?

 

 

Nationalism is strong in this one .

Where are you from & why are you here?

 

[zugzwang]

39 minutes ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

I don't see how that makes Canada not an independent country in any meaningful sense.

Obviously total independence is philosophically impossible (try being independent of oxygen) but, as a country, we should be able to make our own decisions as to how, & if, we trade with other countries (such trade necessarily implies common standards). While we're in the EU we don't have that capability.

I've nowhere mentioned frictionless trade BTW.

 

We, kemo sabe? What is this 'we' of which you speak?

The population of London didn't vote Leave. The under-35s didn't vote Leave. The people of Scotland didn't vote Leave.

The assumption that deregulation and globalisation lead to optimal economic outcomes is merely the assumption of a neoclassical equilibrium with agents replaced by nations, validated erroneously by regression analysis and the scientifically illiterate belief economists share that existence proofs are proof of existence.

[byron78]

51 minutes ago, crouch said:

You see you're somewhat inconsistent.

If you think that Brexit is a "biggie"; a really unusual event which will have far reaching consequences, that by definition means that we will move from the status quo. Now we may move one way or we may move another who knows? But which is more likely to produce change; the status quo (Remain) or Brexit ( a change to the status quo)? With the first there is zero chance of change; with the second "some" chance (10%; 40%; 90% - I don't know) but  relatively and by definition Brexit is more likely to produce change.

If Scotland breaks away we'll be diminished but our democracy won't be wonkier because we will still be left with our own national sovereignty based on the rule of law. The two things are distinct.

As regards competition you are absolutely right but how can opening up our trading relationships with ROW be antithetical to competition; it should ipso facto encourage competition? I don't understand this point.

How can we be isolationist in a World of rapid air travel and the internet? Isolationism is a state of mind and implies the integral value of your own culture not a disinclination to engage with others. You conflate two things.

As I said, it's sweet. 

But I've lived through a world war and a lot of other huge "biggie" changes in my life. 

I can tell you now nothing will change. The people with the power and the money will still have the power and the money. Our electoral system still means a lot of people effectively can't vote for change. 

I think we'll end up with a Tory party that can't be voted out once Scotland leaves, which should make it cheaper and easier for the people with the power and money to doubledown on making sure the system looks after them.

Brexit is far from a revolution. My dad came back from war having killed for his country. That's when we saw the biggest change - he went to Winchester college and was "upper class" but after spending years fighting alongside the poor he demanded and supported big changes for them. 

Now that was a change. I think a lot of younger Tories forget our top rate tax was 70% or above under most Tory governments post-WW2 as a result of traditional Tories being okay with redistributing and rebuilding a more equal society (it was also 60% for most of the time under Thatcher). 

Rees Mogg is not a change like that. Rees Mogg is the sort that would happily blow things back to before WW2 and the concessions people like my father made afterwards as a consequence. 

We're going backwards not forwards and that doesn't feel like much of a revolution or a breaking of the status quo to me. 

 

[winkie]

 

[pig]

15 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Yes you're right of course. 

I can just go on why I voted Leave and why those around me my age largely did as well. 

I do think there was a swelling up of resentment by some. I know a lovely older lady, church every week, does loads for her community, but she uses the "N" word like nobodies business. She begrudges not being able to be as openly prejudice anymore and as a result can't wait until anyone with darker skin than her gets fired into the sun come Brexit. 

I'm not sure what part of the EU she thinks all these Indians and fuzzy wuzzies are coming from. Probably Greece. 

I think it actually started decades ago with ‘political correctness gone mad’ meme - a proxy for resentment over racism not being acceptable anymore.

Well I know for a fact I’ve had quite unpleasant rows with colleagues  over epithets for Asian people...

Nowadays it’s about donning a hi vis jacket and calling everybody a paedophile.

[smash]

26 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Nationalism is strong in this one .

Where are you from & why are you here?

 

I was taken aback when I read that also. Like the language of "English" should be required as a first language for what is a social media platform. Bizzare.

[crouch]

10 minutes ago, byron78 said:

As I said, it's sweet. 

But I've lived through a world war and a lot of other huge "biggie" changes in my life. 

I can tell you now nothing will change. The people with the power and the money will still have the power and the money. Our electoral system still means a lot of people effectively can't vote for change. 

I think we'll end up with a Tory party that can't be voted out once Scotland leaves, which should make it cheaper and easier for the people with the power and money to doubledown on making sure the system looks after them.

Brexit is far from a revolution. My dad came back from war having killed for his country. That's when we saw the biggest change - he went to Winchester college and was "upper class" but after spending years fighting alongside the poor he demanded and supported big changes for them. 

Now that was a change. I think a lot of younger Tories forget our top rate tax was 70% or above under most Tory governments post-WW2 as a result of traditional Tories being okay with redistributing and rebuilding a more equal society (it was also 60% for most of the time under Thatcher). 

Rees Mogg is not a change like that. Rees Mogg is the sort that would happily blow things back to before WW2 and the concessions people like my father made afterwards as a consequence. 

We're going backwards not forwards and that doesn't feel like much of a revolution or a breaking of the status quo to me. 

 

Oh I agree we're going backwards.

You're quite pessimistic but you yourself have given instances when real changes have been made; the Atlee government, so change can and does occur and of course history is replete with examples of this. I didn't say that Brexit was a revolution; I merely implied that it would be enough to precipitate significant change. There may not be change, nothing is certain and we will see; what is clear to me is that a "trigger" is needed and the staus quo is not that trigger in principle.

 

[cock-eyed octopus]

6 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Nationalism is strong in this one .

Where are you from & why are you here?

 

Born in that there Landahn, of Germanic & French (? nobody quite sure - somewhere near the Med I should think).

I'm here to learn (mostly) & contribute (very occasionally). Unfortunately most of the remain contributions seem to come from the Collected Thoughts of Rick off of The Young Ones, but I respect those with a more rational approach (Dave Beans & thehowler (where he gone?) being prime examples).

Nationalism? In what sense? I think everybody needs some sort of national identity. Mine happens to be English. I value a lot of it, but some I don't.

Sung by a West Country girl who's a s Spanish as a Spanish thing.

[wish I could afford one]

55 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

That illustrates the disconnect between the politicians and the population. The politicians are just keen on carrying on trying to keep a fundamentally flawed system going, they have no real interest in dealing with the problems of it because they don't affect them personally and they're not interested in the long-term consequences.

From a purely practical point of view, yes, we could've achieved a lot more without Brexit, but when you take into account the whole picture - who's making the decisions, what those decisions are, what the likelihood of them changing is, no, we couldn't have achieved it without Brexit. We may still not but there's a chance instead of no chance.

The politicians want to keep the system going because it very much works for them and their mates.  Remember as a politician it's about me, the party and then the proles in that order.

Brexit is not going to change that.  Sure at the 1% level the order of richest may change but they'll all still be rich.  At the bottom end the poor will still be poor but the order may again change.  If you were a semi-skilled car plant worker you might start betting on moving down the 'poor' pecking order about now - unless you retrain pretty darn quick.

There is no chance.  The immigration volumes from each country might change  but we'll still have levels similar to now...  The colour of the politicians ties might change but it'll just be more of the same...  It's what suits the 'establishment' or whatever you want to call it and it's always been thus.

I'd be interested to know what you think will actually change post Brexit for the average person on the street who just wants to be around strong family and have their 'quiet enjoyment'?  I know they certainly won't be retiring to the Costas at the bottom end of the food chain to name one...  I know they're children won't be working in IT in Malta...  I know they won't be assembling cars in some of the most efficient manufacturing facilities globally...  I'm coming up short on positives for them though.

By voting for Brexit all we've done is self harmed.  The rich will still be rich and the poor will still be poor.  It's just that the average water level of wealth will be changed.  JRM himself suggests it'll be lower for 50 or so years.  I also agree from the circles I interact with, which is part of the productive economy that exports, that it'll be lower as well.

[cock-eyed octopus]

20 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

We, kemo sabe? What is this 'we' of which you speak?

The population of London didn't vote Leave. The under-35s didn't vote Leave. The people of Scotland didn't vote Leave.

The assumption that deregulation and globalisation lead to optimal economic outcomes is merely the assumption of a neoclassical equilibrium with agents replaced by nations, validated erroneously by regression analysis and the scientifically illiterate belief economists share that existence proofs are proof of existence.

Yes, originally I spoke generally of 'any country' I could edit it if you prefer.

 

[thecrashingisles]

1 hour ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

I don't see how that makes Canada not an independent country in any meaningful sense.

Obviously total independence is philosophically impossible (try being independent of oxygen) but, as a country, we should be able to make our own decisions as to how, & if, we trade with other countries (such trade necessarily implies common standards). While we're in the EU we don't have that capability.

I've nowhere mentioned frictionless trade BTW.

While England is in the UK, it doesn't have that capability either.  While the UK contains part of the island of Ireland and maintains an open border, the UK is also further constrained by what Ireland decides.  Ultimately it all comes down to how you define "we", and the definition of "we" doesn't have to be the same for every issue.

[thecrashingisles]

4 minutes ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

 I think everybody needs some sort of national identity. Mine happens to be English.

 

A bit hypocritical to complain about the EU then when the UK is the thing that's the real cause of the disconnect between political structures and your identity.

[wish I could afford one]

30 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Yes you're right of course. 

I can just go on why I voted Leave and why those around me my age largely did as well. 

I do think there was a swelling up of resentment by some. I know a lovely older lady, church every week, does loads for her community, but she uses the "N" word like nobodies business. She begrudges not being able to be as openly prejudice anymore and as a result can't wait until anyone with darker skin than her gets fired into the sun come Brexit. 

I'm not sure what part of the EU she thinks all these Indians and fuzzy wuzzies are coming from. Probably Greece. 

So your suggesting that both yourself and many others actually voted for Brexit to fix something that Brexit won't fix?

If that's the case the Remain campaign was very poor indeed.  Both from a research of the problem and campaign around the problem perspective.  TBH it didn't inspire me one bit but I did my own research elsewhere plus had a number of biases as I knew Brexit would make my families life more difficult. 

[simvastatin]

35 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Yes you're right of course. 

I can just go on why I voted Leave and why those around me my age largely did as well. 

I do think there was a swelling up of resentment by some. I know a lovely older lady, church every week, does loads for her community, but she uses the "N" word like nobodies business. She begrudges not being able to be as openly prejudice anymore and as a result can't wait until anyone with darker skin than her gets fired into the sun come Brexit. 

I'm not sure what part of the EU she thinks all these Indians and fuzzy wuzzies are coming from. Probably Greece. 

I don’t understand her, why does she need this freedom 

[smash]

10 minutes ago, prozac said:

I don’t understand her, why does she imprison herself like that

Fixed that for you.

[Errol]

36 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

The population of London didn't vote Leave. The under-35s didn't vote Leave. The people of Scotland didn't vote Leave.

Yes, but a majority of those who voted in the largest exercise in democracy this country has ever since did vote to leave. That is all that matters. Your statement is essentially irrelevant.

[pig]

29 minutes ago, byron78 said:

As I said, it's sweet. 

But I've lived through a world war and a lot of other huge "biggie" changes in my life. 

I can tell you now nothing will change. The people with the power and the money will still have the power and the money. Our electoral system still means a lot of people effectively can't vote for change. 

I think we'll end up with a Tory party that can't be voted out once Scotland leaves, which should make it cheaper and easier for the people with the power and money to doubledown on making sure the system looks after them.

Brexit is far from a revolution. My dad came back from war having killed for his country. That's when we saw the biggest change - he went to Winchester college and was "upper class" but after spending years fighting alongside the poor he demanded and supported big changes for them. 

Now that was a change. I think a lot of younger Tories forget our top rate tax was 70% or above under most Tory governments post-WW2 as a result of traditional Tories being okay with redistributing and rebuilding a more equal society (it was also 60% for most of the time under Thatcher). 

Rees Mogg is not a change like that. Rees Mogg is the sort that would happily blow things back to before WW2 and the concessions people like my father made afterwards as a consequence. 

We're going backwards not forwards and that doesn't feel like much of a revolution or a breaking of the status quo to me. 

 

Well - that’s not a bad analysis for a Leaver !  I guess that’s experience trumping abstract argument.