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

[GrizzlyDave]

1 minute ago, dugsbody said:

No, I'm still going to challenge this. I disagree that the EU has anything much at all to do with any of those problems from a causal view. In fact I've said numerous times, we'd probably be better off as a country if we went "more EU, less UK gov". You took your chance to say screw you to something, and chose the wrong thing. 

Can you not see any negatives caused by FoM? Increased population density, greater competition for poorly paid jobs, strain on our infrastructure and services. That alone is reason to leave. Having no control over who and how many is completely bonkers.

Then you move into the anti state aid roles which prohibit our governement directly supporting our industries at a time of need.

All led by an unelected president, an unelected Council, and a parliament that spends half the time on the train moving between two different offices in different countries! Bonkers, plain bonkers!

[dugsbody]

5 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

Can you not see any negatives caused by FoM? Increased population density, greater competition for poorly paid jobs, strain on our infrastructure and services. That alone is reason to leave. Having no control over who and how many is completely bonkers.

Can you see the negatives caused by FoM within the UK? Why should people from Boston where the wages are much lower be allowed to move without control to London, increasing our population density, greater competition for (all) jobs, strain on our infrastructure and services? That alone is reason to end freedom of movement in the UK. People have no right to just get up and move where they want, we need control.

If that sounds nuts to you, that's how I feel about your statement about EU FoM. 

The EU isn't perfect but on balance it is good for Europe and good for the UK. Pretty much all of the UK problems have been domestically created, but brexiters are too nationalistic to admit this. They need an external enemy. Pity we're leaving.

Edited December 6, 2017 by dugsbody

[Futuroid]

You know, I thought Theresa May promised a red, white and blue Brexit.

Now it looks like we're getting an orange one! 

 

[GrizzlyDave]

4 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Can you see the negatives caused by FoM within the UK? Why should people from Boston where the wages are much lower be allowed to move without control to London, increasing our population density, greater competition for (all) jobs, strain on our infrastructure and services? That alone is reason to end freedom of movement in the UK. People have no right to just get up and move where they want, we need control.

If that sounds nuts to you, that's how I feel about your statement about EU FoM. 

The EU isn't perfect but on balance it is good for Europe and good for the UK. Pretty much all of the UK problems have been domestically created, but brexiters are too nationalistic to admit this. They need an external enemy. Pity we're leaving.

Boston and London are in the same country, so FoM makes perfect sense.

As a UK governement we could help decentralise and encourage business to Boston to counter the desire for SE migration, but that is another matter.

I agree the EU isn’t to blame for all of it, again ONE SHOT mate. In 22 years of being old enough to vote this was the ONE SHOT for me to say no.

 

[Futuroid]

9 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

I favour a soft brexit; as I think it is the only form of brexit that is deliverable. I think the DUP and EU are doing a very good job of looking g after their interests, but May and DD are tragic.

i thought the EU project was about trade.

Oh Dave, oh Dave, where does trade end and politics begin?

This is especially true when you are talking about services - which might involve people. 

As for soft Brexit - it's the only form that is deliverable without crashing the UK economy. Hard Bexit could be delivered but will cause a severe economic shock.

[Futuroid]

7 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

How about rich members funding poor members; widespread social programs and reform packages. All of this is social engineering - and way way beyond a trading club. Which is why I quite liked the EEC but not the EU.

Dave, how are you in favour of Corbyn (who proposes to get rich citizens funding poor citizens), but you aren't in favour of this at an international level... cognitive dissonance of olympic standard..?  

[GrizzlyDave]

5 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

Oh Dave, oh Dave, where does trade end and politics begin?

This is especially true when you are talking about services - which might involve people. 

As for soft Brexit - it's the only form that is deliverable without crashing the UK economy. Hard Bexit could be delivered but will cause a severe economic shock.

 

Hard Brexit won’t be implemented by HOP. Remainers will prevent that from happening. It’s either soft or no brexit.

[Futuroid]

1 minute ago, GrizzlyDave said:

 

Hard Brexit won’t be implemented by HOP. Remainers will prevent that from happening. It’s either soft or no brexit.

Farage knew this, which is why he talked about the Norway option as being likely. Turns out he didn't spend all of his time in the European Parliament in the bar after all. The only way hard Brexit would have flown would have been if May didn't activate Article 50 and put in place a 5+ year plan to implement it. The biggest irony is that it was the Hard Brexiteers who were the most vocal forcing May's hand. I heard one US friend describe Brexit as being like a tantrum from a 4yr old, the negotiations are proving that day after day!

The current Irish border debacle shows up David Davis, Theresa May and everyone else involved in the Brexit negotiations to be the intellectual and political minnows they really are.

[GrizzlyDave]

4 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

Dave, how are you in favour of Corbyn (who proposes to get rich citizens funding poor citizens), but you aren't in favour of this at an international level... cognitive dissonance of olympic standard..?  

Well I guess I would rather the money went to places like Botswana than Bulgaria - and was truely spent on the global poor.

Bill Gates certainly is of the view that we need to improve Africa tremendously to address the migrant crisis.

[GrizzlyDave]

4 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

Dave, how are you in favour of Corbyn (who proposes to get rich citizens funding poor citizens), but you aren't in favour of this at an international level... cognitive dissonance of olympic standard..?  

Well I guess I would rather the money went to places like Botswana than Bulgaria - and was truely spent on the global poor.

Bill Gates certainly is of the view that we need to improve Africa tremendously to address the migrant crisis.

[dugsbody]

25 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

Boston and London are in the same country, so FoM makes perfect sense.

As a UK governement we could help decentralise and encourage business to Boston to counter the desire for SE migration, but that is another matter.

The EE states and the UK are in the same union so FoM makes perfect sense.

The EU does help decentralise by having the richer countries pay more and using those funds to build up infrastructure in the poorer countries, which will counter the desire for migration. The whole union benefits from this.

[GrizzlyDave]

10 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

The EE states and the UK are in the same union so FoM makes perfect sense.

The EU does help decentralise by having the richer countries pay more and using those funds to build up infrastructure in the poorer countries, which will counter the desire for migration. The whole union benefits from this.

A union of trade that has morphed into a super nation with no opportunity to vote on it. And no I was too young to vote when Maastricht was going on, but I was promised a vote on the Lisbon Treaty.

One shot mate. One shot.

Edited December 6, 2017 by GrizzlyDave

[IMHAL]

1 hour ago, GrizzlyDave said:

It’s not just our government though is it. The Dutch aren’t happy, or the Germans, or the French, or the Italians, or the Austrians.

Wealth redistribution and globalisation (EU and non EU) has seen 20+ years of stagnant wages and eroded living standards.

I agree it’s not just the EU to blame, also our lazy government. But there was one chance and one opportunity to push the Button against more of the same tulip. And we took it.

 

So you did take the red pill..... and down the rabbit hole we go.

 

[pig]

1 hour ago, GrizzlyDave said:

If only Cameron had been clear about leaving the single market before the vote... Oh hang on a sec...

 

He also said WW3 would happen.* 

Leavers however, sensibly rubbishing Project Fear , reassured us no such  stupidity would happen and we’d obviously  be the new jolly Norway, Lichtenstein or whatever.

*mind you if you count the Cold War as WW3 we are neck deep in WW4.

[GrizzlyDave]

15 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

So you did take the red pill..... and down the rabbit hole we go.

 

Yep

[GrizzlyDave]

7 minutes ago, pig said:

He also said WW3 would happen.* 

Leavers however, sensibly rubbishing Project Fear , reassured us no such  stupidity would happen and we’d obviously  be the new jolly Norway, Lichtenstein or whatever.

*mind you if you count the Cold War as WW3 we are neck deep in WW4.

I think Norway is the most likely outcome right now.

[Riedquat]

2 hours ago, Futuroid said:

Oh Dave, oh Dave, where does trade end and politics begin?

This is especially true when you are talking about services - which might involve people. 

As for soft Brexit - it's the only form that is deliverable without crashing the UK economy. Hard Bexit could be delivered but will cause a severe economic shock.

The existence of a grey, overlapping area is different from "it's all the same." So whilst politics are unavoidable where trade occurs the question is whether the preferred direction is to minimise them or deliberately aim for more than trade. A lot of dissatisfaction with the EU is that it's gone a long way along the latter and a lot of people want the former.

[Futuroid]

Oh dear. The only question now is who is going to go first, DD or TM?

David Davis admits UK Government has not done Brexit impact assessments for different economic sectors

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-brexit-impact-assessments-uk-economy-sectors-industry-eu-withdrawal-mps-select-committee-a8094481.html

[Futuroid]

27 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The existence of a grey, overlapping area is different from "it's all the same." So whilst politics are unavoidable where trade occurs the question is whether the preferred direction is to minimise them or deliberately aim for more than trade. A lot of dissatisfaction with the EU is that it's gone a long way along the latter and a lot of people want the former.

Of course. But during the referendum campaign there was only black and white, no grey. It was all so cut and dried, and so easy - we could have it all.

What many people think of as legislation driven by "political" ideal, is in many cases due to harmonisation of rules and regulations to facilitate trade.

How could a "common market" possibly work without freedom of movement for example?  Employers who could set up shop in a lower wage country would be able to sell their products or services into the market at a lower price, making employees in the target market unemployed and giving them no right to either "follow their job" or relocate to another country where there may be jobs. 

[Confusion of VIs]

3 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

Can you not see any negatives caused by FoM? Increased population density, greater competition for poorly paid jobs, strain on our infrastructure and services. That alone is reason to leave. Having no control over who and how many is completely bonkers.

Then you move into the anti state aid roles which prohibit our governement directly supporting our industries at a time of need.

All led by an unelected president, an unelected Council, and a parliament that spends half the time on the train moving between two different offices in different countries! Bonkers, plain bonkers!

We did have control over the damaging aspects of FoM (benefit tourism and people unable to find permanent employment) we just decided not to enforce it. Also FoM was always going to balance out as the EE states became richer, this is already happening and we will not be far from balance by the time we actually leave. 

It only prohibits the beggar thy neighbour form of state aid (propping up uneconomic businesses without addressing why they are uncompetitive) which is a good thing.

 

[Futuroid]

All that time we thought they were doing nothing and just winging it, they were...

"Davis says ministers took decision to leave customs union without analysis of economic impact"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/dec/06/david-davis-questioned-by-brexit-committee-about-impact-assessments-politics-live?page=with:block-5a27c5e84cd919066cd81b90#block-5a27c5e84cd919066cd81b90

[IMHAL]

3 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

All that time we thought they were doing nothing and just winging it, they were...

"Davis says ministers took decision to leave customs union without analysis of economic impact"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/dec/06/david-davis-questioned-by-brexit-committee-about-impact-assessments-politics-live?page=with:block-5a27c5e84cd919066cd81b90#block-5a27c5e84cd919066cd81b90

 

And I thought 'I'm sorry I havn't got a clue' was just a Radio 4 comedy programme.

[Social Justice League]

With a bit of luck, any BREXIT will be voted on again and the people will say no thanks this time.

[Social Justice League]

1 minute ago, IMHAL said:

 

And I thought 'I'm sorry I havn't got a clue' was just a Radio 4 comedy programme.

"Davis says ministers took decision to leave customs union without analysis of economic impact" "

 

lol, can't believe I'm reading that......lol.

Hilarious nonsense, all this.

[sPinwheel]

Davis is prepared to walk away. 

I don't know if he's competent enough to find the exit door.

Probably get locked in a cupboard.