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

[crouch]

39 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

As I have noted several times, because of the cost of many of the benefits you do expect and are used to are predicated on improved GDP to pay for them as their costs are rising relatively quickly. Absent that increased GDP they can only be paid for by increasing tax on a relatively stagnant GDP, in which case it will be an actual loss to you in terms of disposable income for no particular gain in the level of services you will receive. 

 

Irrelevant to the point at issue.

[NobodyInParticular]

Just now, crouch said:

Irrelevant to the point at issue.

That might be your opinion,  but I would have thought the threat of an actual loss was very relevant.

[crouch]

Just now, NobodyInParticular said:

That might be your opinion,  but I would have thought the threat of an actual loss was very relevant.

More or less everything is relevant to someone but the question is: is it relevant here and the answer is - no.

[NobodyInParticular]

1 minute ago, crouch said:

More or less everything is relevant to someone but the question is: is it relevant here and the answer is - no.

So neither a theoretical nor an actual loss are relevant. Well done - nothing can be possibly relevant then.

[byron78]

55 minutes ago, winkie said:

If it suits ignore it, if it doesn't make a big fuss of it.....same as its ever been.

Nothing about this is the same as it's ever been.

I cannot recall, in my 80 years, a precedent.

[Confusion of VIs]

1 hour ago, NobodyInParticular said:

That baffles me, as I do consider the record as an MP and have come close to voting against my normal political affiliations for a good constituency MP.

I voted Labour because their candidate was hard working, rational and competent whereas the Tory candidate was a "Tim nice but dim" style bumbling incompetent who would be unable to function as anything other than lobby fodder.

I did have the benefit of slightly knowing both but seeing Mr Nice but Dim's one TV interview would have told you all you needed to know about his suitability to be an MP.    

[winkie]

10 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Nothing about this is the same as it's ever been.

I cannot recall, in my 80 years, a precedent.

Maybe not in governance....but  the ordinary easily tempted common people.....we are all the same now, they are no better than the rest.......respect has to be earned.

[pig]

27 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Nothing about this is the same as it's ever been.

I cannot recall, in my 80 years, a precedent.

The difference here is that in involves the prime minister, they were always going to 'get caught' in the end, but they did it anyway.

I guess 65K excess British deaths alongside their misc bizarre actions were a bit of a shot across the bows....

[dryrot]

3 hours ago, IMHAL said:

, MARTINX9 said:

Well if this is a debate about democracy then surely the ability to vote out those who rule you and make your laws is rather important.. And also the ability to elect those decide your own trade policy, border and immigration policies and more

-------------------------------------------------------------

IMHAL said:

We do all of those and elected not to use all the powers we had to control immigration...next.

We don't elect officials. Our elected representatives give them positions.........next.

We do have elections and they do matter...next.

And Brexit has stopped this?  

When I read this stuff from Remainers it seems debate is pointless. If you simply dont accept that the was founded on the four principles - well, you live in a fantasy land. In the real world, the EU has always openly stated  these goals:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Single_Market#Four_freedoms

People

See also: Directive 2004/38/EC on the right to move and reside freely

The free movement of people means EU citizens can move freely between member states for whatever reason (or without any reason) and may reside in any member state they choose if they are not an undue burden on the social welfare system or public safety in their chosen member state.^[113] This required reduction of administrative formalities and greater recognition of professional qualifications of other states.^[114] Fostering the free movement of people has been a major goal of European integration since the 1950s.^[115]

Broadly defined, this freedom enables citizens of one Member State to travel to another, to reside and to work there (permanently or temporarily). The idea behind EU legislation in this field is that citizens from other member states should be treated equally to domestic citizens and should not be discriminated against.

The main provision of the freedom of movement of persons is Article 45 of the TFEU, which prohibits restrictions on the basis of nationality.

[NobodyInParticular]

6 minutes ago, dryrot said:

When I read this stuff from Remainers it seems debate is pointless. If you simply dont accept that the was founded on the four principles - well, you live in a fantasy land. In the real world, the EU has always openly stated  these goals:

Of course we do. And that is about workers (or was originally, but see note below). If someone does not find work (now extended also to retired or self-supporting) then you don't have to let them stay. The UK government failed to enforce that. 

To quote the part you seemingly failed to read "if they are not an undue burden on the social welfare system or public safety in their chosen member state"

Edited July 21, 2020 by NobodyInParticular
add info.

[debtlessmanc]

1 minute ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Of course we do. And that is about workers. If someone does not find work (now extended also to retired) they you don't have to let them stay. The UK government failed to enforce that. 

it was essentially impossible for a UK govt to enforce it as we have not registry of local residents and no ID card system unlike the rest of the EU

 

[byron78]

27 minutes ago, winkie said:

Maybe not in governance....but  the ordinary easily tempted common people.....we are all the same now, they are no better than the rest.......respect has to be earned.

In hindsight, little wonder we've ended up with the former mayor of "Londongrad" as our PM I suppose.

 

[dryrot]

5 hours ago, Bob8 said:

Yes.

We have elections regularly for the British Government. We actually had one in 2019.

1) We also have elections for the European Parliament, but power is kept in the national Governments, so that Parliament is rather weak. 

2) The good news is that we no longer get a say in the EU elections and and the UK no longer has a say in EU policy.

3) Good grief. Take a look at yourself.

1) Power is in the unelected EU Commission. (Agree the EU Parliament is weak.) 

2) Judging by last nights messy Euro 750bn bailout we are well out of EU policy. (Four days of wrangling and finally the EU contributors will pay for the Southern Countries -

3) the UK looks fine,thx. As the 2nd highest payers into the EU budget we would have been hammered. Thank heavens we are out!

[debtlessmanc]

10 minutes ago, dryrot said:

1) Power is in the unelected EU Commission. (Agree the EU Parliament is weak.) 

2) Judging by last nights messy Euro 750bn bailout we are well out of EU policy. (Four days of wrangling and finally the EU contributors will pay for the Southern Countries -

3) the UK looks fine,thx. As the 2nd highest payers into the EU budget we would have been hammered. Thank heavens we are out!

The frugal 4 got a rebate on their contributions to stop them objecting to the idea;. the right question is "would the UK have been given a similar larger rebate to stop any of its objections." doubt it, usually the british PM just rolled over like cameron did in 2009. On the FT the really angry people appear to be Swedes.

Edited July 21, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[NobodyInParticular]

9 minutes ago, dryrot said:

1) Power is in the unelected EU Commission. (Agree the EU Parliament is weak.) 

2) Judging by last nights messy Euro 750bn bailout we are well out of EU policy. (Four days of wrangling and finally the EU contributors will pay for the Southern Countries -

3) the UK looks fine,thx. As the 2nd highest payers into the EU budget we would have been hammered. Thank heavens we are out!

Oh god, not that canard again. The Commission is made up of people appointed by member states to carry out the wishes of the legislature of the member states  via the Council of Ministers. It's unelected, but so is Dominic Cummings or in the case of Zac Goldsmith de-elected.

[NobodyInParticular]

1 minute ago, debtlessmanc said:

The frugal 4 got a rebate on their contributions to stop them objecting to the dea;. the right question is "would the UK have been given a similar larger rebate to stop any of its objections." doubt it, usually the british PM just rolled over like cameron did in 2009.

Cameron rolled over before he was PM? How?

[NobodyInParticular]

12 minutes ago, dryrot said:

1) Power is in the unelected EU Commission. (Agree the EU Parliament is weak.) 

2) Judging by last nights messy Euro 750bn bailout we are well out of EU policy. (Four days of wrangling and finally the EU contributors will pay for the Southern Countries -

3) the UK looks fine,thx. As the 2nd highest payers into the EU budget we would have been hammered. Thank heavens we are out!

On the budget, the UK wasn't not the second highest per capita. You can't expect, say, Sweden to pay as much in total as it is smaller. Absolute figures are relevant in terms of the total leverage is gave to our leaders over EU policy, though (and it was significant).

[debtlessmanc]

5 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Cameron rolled over before he was PM? How?

Well it was Darling who was told he had to fork out in 2009 and refused (he was interviewed about it for the bbc documentary).  "After an hour of saying no, i started to wonder what aspect of the word they did not inderstand"', when "call me dave" was in power a year later he rolled over and paid it anyway.

Edited July 21, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[Bob8]

7 minutes ago, dryrot said:

1) Power is in the unelected EU Commission. (Agree the EU Parliament is weak.) 

2) Judging by last nights messy Euro 750bn bailout we are well out of EU policy. (Four days of wrangling and finally the EU contributors will pay for the Southern Countries -

3) the UK looks fine,thx. As the 2nd highest payers into the EU budget we would have been hammered. Thank heavens we are out!

Yes, the commission has the power as that is chosen by the national Governments. If the power was in the EU Parliament, then the power would be taken away from the national Government and the weight of credibility. You have the choice or the power being based around the national Governments or with the EU Parliament. Your choice mate!

I suspect you would not impressed at the EU either way. I am not overwhelmed anyway, but who cares? You see the EU as an unnecessary impediment to European co-operation and trade, which should be done by independent nations. So, unless the EU is brilliant, why have it and waste money? Ergo, those who would have liked the UK to remain in the EU must think that the EU is wonderful and Europe is just great.

- That is why when people falsely claim they have become brexiters, having been remainers, they say their Damascene moment was realising Europe was not special and the EU as messy a compromise in every way as institutions are.

...but...what if they difference in perspective is not that at all. What if it is an acceptance that we are close together and need a messy institution as things will be even messier without it and that a great deal of harmonsiation is necessary to muddle along together even imperfectly and avoid being pushed around by China or the USA. Which is why the false Damascene claims rarely ring true.

....which is why this brexit thing does not seem to be going very well

[NobodyInParticular]

1 minute ago, debtlessmanc said:

Well it was Darling who was told he had to fork out in 2009 and refused (he was interviewed about it for the bbc documentary) "after an hour of saying no, i started to wonder what aspect of the word they did not inderstant\', when "call me dave" was in power a year later he rolled over and paid it anyway.

I am pretty sure 2010 is not 2009. I hope you do better with numbers when you are involved with physics.

[debtlessmanc]

7 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I am pretty sure 2010 is not 2009. I hope you do better with numbers when you are involved with physics.

unfortunately the internet does not have that clip, anyway it happened- any comment on the event or is remembering numbers your one trick? btw feel free to criticise my grammar next...

Edited July 21, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[NobodyInParticular]

2 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

unfortunately the internet does not have that clip, anyway it happened- any comment on the event or is remembering numbers your one trick?

In terms of the interview, bear in mind the electoral cycle, as well as the point the UK was in during 2009.

[debtlessmanc]

8 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

In terms of the interview, bear in mind the electoral cycle, as well as the point the UK was in during 2009.

I suppose we should be grateful that Darling did not accuse the southern states of blowing it all on "women and wine" like the dutch finance minister has.  Did not stop the dutch getting a rebate mind.

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/jeroen-dijsselbloem-southern-europeans-spent-money-drinks-women-54214

 

 

Edited July 21, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[thecrashingisles]

5 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

I suppose we should be grateful that Darling did not accuse the southern states of blowing it all on "women and wine" like the dutch finance minister has.  Did not stop the dutch getting a rebate mind.

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/jeroen-dijsselbloem-southern-europeans-spent-money-drinks-women-54214

The UK made the mistake of threatening to leave. That's not the way to negotiate in Europe.

[NobodyInParticular]

11 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

I suppose we should be grateful that Darling did not accuse the southern states of blowing it all on "women and wine" like the dutch finance minister has.  Did not stop the dutch getting a rebate mind.

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/jeroen-dijsselbloem-southern-europeans-spent-money-drinks-women-54214

Indeed, politicians can say mindless things. I wonder if any used a racial epithet about the inhabitants of Commonwealth countries we need to do trade deals with.