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

[debtlessmanc]

2 hours ago, dugsbody said:

No-one has ever said that, fabricated strawman.

If immigration is the primary cause of higher house prices could you explain how house prices are rising in countries with shrinking populations? 

An example please?

[pig]

4 hours ago, Dave Beans said:

May did see the trade offs (a single market in goods as services; which wouldn't fly with the EU, but she sort of understood the issues), but she was never accepted as she was a remainer, and she was after a Brexit in name only.

Whereas, along comes Bojo, offering up the same deal, but with a sea border from the off, and he was seen as the saviour...

Incredible he's surrendered a 26 point lead already.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/29/boris-johnson-faces-tory-wrath-as-party-slumps-in-shock-poll

Its almost as if he was crowbarred into power, taking advantage of the disarray around there being no Brexit on offer in Britains interest ... but then got found out quicker than anticipated. I wonder if people are now starting to consider the connection between the ongoing government omnishambles and the entire Brexit enterprise,

A 'deal' makes explicit Britains loss - I think thats what did for May from all sides - whereas no deal satisfies Tufton St and sustains the perverse narrative of blaming the EU.

BJs popularity was meant to paper over the fact that half the country was ignored when determining the direction of Brexit.

 

 

[Bob8]

9 hours ago, dugsbody said:

I still don't know if you believe what I see as a pretty simple truth. Virtually every brexiter I've ever interacted with online and in person wants one thing from brexit: to end freedom of movement.

They've basically moved on from the whole facade about trade deals and sovereignty and this time next year, because freedom of movement will have been ended, will forget they ever pretended to care about the other things.

Yes, but that was more a UK Government decision to have it as unlimited as they did.

[NobodyInParticular]

8 hours ago, pig said:

A 'deal' makes explicit Britains loss - I think thats what did for May from all sides - whereas no deal satisfies Tufton St

Abbot (Tony, not Diane) has the required links.

[NobodyInParticular]

1 hour ago, Bob8 said:

Yes, but that was more a UK Government decision to have it as unlimited as they did.

But now the EU can be blamed! Hoorah and huzzah!

[dugsbody]

9 hours ago, debtlessmanc said:

An example please?

Bulgaria.

[NobodyInParticular]

8 hours ago, pig said:

BJs popularity was meant to paper over the fact that half the country was ignored when determining the direction of Brexit.

52:48 is apparently 'overwhelming'.

I'm assuming a small bounce after 1st January, to be replaced by in part hate of the EU for doing the thing we wanted to happen (trade restrictions) and in part by an erosion of Conservative support when people see empty shelves at Tesco. In some ways another COVID wave would be cover to extend furlough to hide Brexit job losses, but the kitty will probably be empty after a decade of pissing tax away... So Labour in the lead by March. It's academic without an election, though.

Still, BJ won't be the briefest ever PM now.

[dugsbody]

9 hours ago, pig said:

A 'deal' makes explicit Britains loss - I think thats what did for May from all sides - whereas no deal satisfies Tufton St and sustains the perverse narrative of blaming the EU.

That's the crux of it. And it is why I believe Boris has been approaching brexit in the same way he approaches everything else. The outcome isn't important, it is the narrative. If he can control the narrative to blame the other side, he can keep his popularity. Which is why I thought all along that leaving with no agreement but blaming the EU was the end goal.

Having said that, I just don't know any more. With covid hitting the economy and no deal end of transition really could be a severe event. Will even Boris chance that? I'm now starting to suspect he'll do a massive fudge and still try to control the narrative by selling it as a win - much like he has done by putting an internal border in the UK but somehow selling it as a win to the brexiters. 

[NobodyInParticular]

9 hours ago, debtlessmanc said:

An example please?

https://tradingeconomics.com/japan/housing-index

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/JPN/japan/population

The recovery in the Japanese housing prices started pretty much as soon as the population growth turned negative. Thus from this example we can conclude that reducing population makes house prices go up.

Edited August 30, 2020 by NobodyInParticular

[NobodyInParticular]

4 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

I thought all along that leaving with no agreement but blaming the EU was the end goal.

If that isn't the intention British negotiators are particularly useless.

[dugsbody]

4 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

https://tradingeconomics.com/japan/housing-index

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/JPN/japan/population

The recovery in the Japanese housing prices started pretty much as soon as the population growth turned negative. Thus from this example we can conclude that reducing population makes house prices go up.

As I said in another thread, this forum has pivoted from some deep discussions into the nuances of global finance, property, etc into a an immigrant bashing place. No matter how many times the studies are posted, the arguments made, people are mostly just primitive apes at the end of the day and can't see further than blaming the outgroup. Hence brexit. Hence not being even willing to understand the real causes of HPI. 

[Blink]

What happens next is the title, let's all come together and think up how to celebrate such a glorious victory for both democracy, and the people of our country.

Perhaps rename one of our royal parks as Independence Park?

Include within it a statue of Boris and all the Brexiters that thoroughly deserve the historical recognition.

[NobodyInParticular]

1 minute ago, dugsbody said:

As I said in another thread, this forum has pivoted from some deep discussions into the nuances of global finance, property, etc into a an immigrant bashing place.

My wife is an immigrant so I am somewhat sensitive to that, perhaps. She is also from a certain ethnic/religious background which makes some of the other events I've heard about rather concern me. Maybe I am also unusual in that I very much like Germany and seriously considered moving there and applying for jobs there and considered it even before Brexit.

1 minute ago, dugsbody said:

Hence not being even willing to understand the real causes of HPI. 

There are several factors, and supply and demand is one, but apart from the effect in local markets (e.g. chocolate box villages in particular) it doesn't seem to be the largest of the main ones. You'd think the last crash would have made that obvious.

[14stFlyer]

1 hour ago, NobodyInParticular said:

 

1 hour ago, dugsbody said:

I thought all along that leaving with no agreement but blaming the EU was the end goal.

If that isn't the intention British negotiators are particularly useless

 

Now who are the conspiracy theorists?

i like to think that our negotiators are trying to get the best deal for Britain, that our Home Office is trying to be as caring as it can be to genuine asylum seekers and migrants whilst keeping us as safe as it can, and yes, that even de Pfeffel himself is doing what he thinks is right for the U.K.  

I do think he is doing a bloody awful job of it, mind.  

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

13 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

And immigration will probably go up, except from non-EU nations with which there is no mutuality nor is there likely to be. Much will be lost, little if anything gained.

So another great success then: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8677837/Home-Secretary-Priti-Patel-comes-fire-deportations-crash-lowest-level-EVER.html

...and actually it wasn’t so much FOM they wanted to stop, but “people coming here”

[DarkHorseWaits-NoMore]

2 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

https://tradingeconomics.com/japan/housing-index

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/JPN/japan/population

The recovery in the Japanese housing prices started pretty much as soon as the population growth turned negative. Thus from this example we can conclude that reducing population makes house prices go up.

This is HPI 101: Low Interest Rate policy and easy credit are essential pillars for creating House Price Inflation. As Interest Rates trend to zero, asset prices will rise trending toward infinity, especially if you can introduce lacks regulations to allow more rolling Interest Only finance deals with low (or no) deposit entry requirements, effectively the price of credit evaporates. We have witnessed this first hand globaly for decades now.

 

Edit: when low IRs isn't enough, juice up lending with QE like schemes, introduuce favorable tax regulations and insentives to further distort the market into a gov't backed speculative bubble .

Edited August 30, 2020 by DarkHorseWaits-NoMore
typo's and details

[slawek]

15 hours ago, thehowler said:

Will you accept that the term "a robust LPF" is ambiguous and open to interpretation? Will you accept that it could perhaps apply to an independent body in charge of oversight, with no direct ECJ involvement?

Yes robust is vague but it constrains LPF to be on a strong side. PD provides more details.    

The problem is the UK doesn't want any rules on state aid in FTA, it hasn't proposed any so far, let alone robust ones.

Will you accept the need for LFP in FTA?

15 hours ago, thehowler said:

As I've said, repeatedly, I think there's a good chance the negotiating teams will find a way to minimize the perceived dominion of the ECJ and break the state aid/governance deadlock.

Maybe they won't.

What do you base this conviction on? You need to provide some "robust" arguments for your view to be taken seriously.

15 hours ago, thehowler said:

But 'robust' is ambiguous and in the eye of the beholder, whether you like it or not. And you've just accepted that you have no idea what the EU's red line really is.

I didn't say I have no idea. I said we don't know for sure. We have only educated guesses. My guess that LPF is the EU red line is based on 

1) Barnier says so and so far he meant what he said, contrary to BJ.

2) if you think about this it makes sense. The EU doesn't want to give access to its market a player who will undercut the companies by unfair competition.  Especially when the UK openly claims Brexit to be a chance to create  'Singapore on Thames', low tax, low regulation economy.  

15 hours ago, thehowler said:

So I'm still baffled as to why you have such an intense reaction when I say something like the EU might 'shift' focus on the talks and decry it as anti-EU.

Let me repeat. The problem I have is you are trying to present your guesses based on anti-EU views as facts.  I perceive this as a manipulative behaviour as you don't seem to be stupid.  

As far as I understand you your arguments can be summarised

1) The EU requires the UK to follows the EU framework for the state aid.

 You haven't provided any quote to support this.

2) The EU asking the UK for their proposal regarding the state aid is a sign of the EU is ready to compromise. 

The red line of the EU is robust LPF framework. How exactly this is achieved is being negotiated. Asking the UK about their proposal doesn't shift the EU red line. It would if the UK had proposed no or a weak LPF and the EU would have accepted it. At the moment the EU is not happy with a lack of the UK response.  

15 hours ago, thehowler said:

Why are you so sensitive about the idea of the EU adapting/rethinking/reconsidering in order to get to a mutually beneficial deal?

Your question embeds your view that the current EU requirements are somehow unfair, the EU blocks a mutually beneficial deal. The EU view is that  FTA without LPF is bad for them. That is why they insist on LPF.  I don't understand why it is so difficult to understand this to you, options are

1) you can't think from other person point of view

2) you are stuck in your view that the EU is an evil empire

3) you are well aware that the UK would benefit at the expense of the EU and you are simply dishonest

Which one is it?

[NobodyInParticular]

1 hour ago, 14stFlyer said:

Now who are the conspiracy theorists?

It's not conspiracy theory, it's a comment on how useless the negotiators are, in reality, but more than that, it's a comment on how weak the UK's position really is.

1 hour ago, 14stFlyer said:

i like to think that our negotiators are trying to get the best deal for Britain,

EEA membership?

 

[NobodyInParticular]

14 minutes ago, slawek said:

The red line of the EU is robust LPF framework. How exactly this is achieved is being negotiated. Asking the UK about their proposal doesn't shift the EU red line. It would if the UK had proposed no or a weak LPF and the EU would have accepted it. At the moment the EU is not happy with a lack of the UK response.  

I don't understand why so many think the EU should negotiate a deal that is bad for it, or how it can negotiate without the UK asking what it wants. It goes back to the reported May-Merkel conversation in 2017. We still seem to be at this point.

[dugsbody]

57 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I don't understand why so many think the EU should negotiate a deal that is bad for it

Because as @Bob8 puts it, they think the EU is unnecessary and therefore should prioritise short term mutual trade interests over longer term undermining the stability of the single market and the union as a whole.

The arguments have been made, all brexiters by now should know them. They don't believe them and think that the 27 other member nations must be wrong and brexiters in the UK are correct.

[StuartMc]

1 hour ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I don't understand why so many think the EU should negotiate a deal that is bad for it...

British Exceptionalism.
 

[jonb2]

22 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

It is grown in Europe, mostly Italy. So if pasta isn't getting in from Italy the rice isn't either. It could come in from other places if it can get in past all the trucks and ships stuck in customs hell.

Exactly.

Too much wishful thinking methinks. Starts with the top echelon of the Tory party and is the only thing that really does trickle down.

[thehowler]

4 hours ago, slawek said:

Will you accept the need for LFP in FTA?

My guess that LPF is the EU red line is based on 

1) Barnier says so and so far he meant what he said, contrary to BJ.

Especially when the UK openly claims Brexit to be a chance to create  'Singapore on Thames', low tax, low regulation economy. 

Your question embeds your view that the current EU requirements are somehow unfair,

Yes, of course there need to be some controls over state aid/LPF in any FTA. I've never claimed otherwise.

When you say your guess is that a "LPF is the EU red line" you should concede that you don't even know what will constitute an acceptable LPF for both sides. It's evolving. No matter how you interpret M Barnier's words - something I'm often guarded against doing as it might imply the Commission are shaping the talks. I am only saying the proposals around an acceptable LPF are subject to a degree of flux, or dare I say it, a shift as things evolve. But there will have to be some form of a protected LPF.

Who serving in the current UK govt has openly claimed that Brexit is a chance to create a "Singapore on Thames"? Please show or retract this.

I don't think the EU have been 'unfair', this is your projection. Rather I think the EU have overreached and been too ambitious in their opening gambit. (Their strict requirements on fishing aren't even mentioned in the PD - beyond saying there will have to be an agreement by a date now expired - but then it's you, not me that swears by the PD.)   I also don't think me proposing negotiators should work towards a mutually beneficial outcome represents an attack on the EU - though I can imagine it conflicts with your stated desire for the UK to enter 2021 without a deal and to suffer economic distress as some form of punishment that might beneficially influence the UK electorate.

Still puzzled by that one.

I don't think the EU is an "evil empire". I like lots of things about the EU ethos.

I don't think you like much about the current UK and it appears that you don't wish to see the UK prosper and flourish, if possible, despite the Brexit wound. This is where we chiefly differ, I imagine, but if I'm wrong please correct me.

[thehowler]

5 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I don't understand why so many think the EU should negotiate a deal that is bad for it, or how it can negotiate without the UK asking what it wants. It goes back to the reported May-Merkel conversation in 2017. We still seem to be at this point.

Who are these many posters that think the EU should negotiate a deal that is bad for it?

[longgone]

7 hours ago, dugsbody said:

As I said in another thread, this forum has pivoted from some deep discussions into the nuances of global finance, property, etc into a an immigrant bashing place. No matter how many times the studies are posted, the arguments made, people are mostly just primitive apes at the end of the day and can't see further than blaming the outgroup. Hence brexit. Hence not being even willing to understand the real causes of HPI. 

So immigrants don't move into houses or use services ?

How does it not make it more difficult for the indigenous plebs. 

Not saying brexit will change that but that's just how it is.