Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

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


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, thehowler said:

Alarm among some of the more neutral pundits today over Gove's article in The Times and his Marr appearance...he's been cited as one of the few ministers arguing powerfully in cabinet for a deal.

Gove lays out the party line...EU have pulled the rug on FTA talks...we've been a loyal partner for 45 years but they won't treat us like Canada...fundamental change needed now from EU.

Question now is whether a move on fish - high-fiving with Macron - will be enough of a smokescreen for the UK govt to move on LPF. But this insistence on citing Canada is worrying, suggests that the UK are more inflexible on subsidy control than I'd thought.

By the way, Marr is wrong on Afghanistan, as per below, I think. I believe they have zero tariffs on all exports to EU outside munitions...EU initiative to help their economy.

(Trade and trade contracts are complex and nuanced. It's not a subject that crosses over easily into snappy political soundbites and panel groups with voters. Sadly this is a large part of the reason why the Brexit debate has always been so debased and inaccurate - politicians reach for quick and relatable comparisons - Canada for instance - that aren't factually correct and are easily ridiculed).

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_but_Arms

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 136.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GrizzlyDave

    9502

  • Confusion of VIs

    7449

  • jonb2

    5738

  • thehowler

    5261

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I do.   https://twitter.com/housepricemania

1409 pages....you guys should have your own forum !!!

Oh OK. Shame that really, but hey it looks like @IMHAL helped us both out. Nice repost though, thanks ! Any thoughts ?  

Posted Images

I still think there's a good chance we'll swerve no deal, but a few things to bear in mind if we don't.

1 - if the Scots go for independence and we're trading with EU on WTO there will have to be border controls with England. EU would insist on it. Hard border at Gretna Green.

2 - the UK govt are already briefing that they won't go to the EU first, asking for new talks. This makes sense, it would only result in an even weaker negotiating position. So they will take the hurt. And the hurt will get easier, with time, as UK business leaves or adjusts to the new normal. With every passing day, there will be less of a pressing incentive to do a deal. We could be out in the cold for a long time.

3 - Brexit fans will suggest that the WA was a form of contract promising best endeavours to get a FTA/future relationship. They will say this covenant has been broken and the WA therefore needs to be amended or annulled. Signs that the govt are already doing this - and I don't even want to think about what's in the looming finance bill.

4 - with no FTA there will be no political starting point to engage with Europe. The UK will be poorer - the govt seem reconciled to this now - and it will feel less European. Its role on the world stage could well diminish, rapidly. It's likely we'll see a lot more immigration from Canada/US/OZ and India. It's likely our business/institutions will begin to evolve away from Europe, taking advantage of what they can glean from around the world.

5 - with no FTA in place, the EU are losing their main negotiator and the work he's done to forge the new relationship that would have been symbolized in the FTA - Barnier has to retire in January.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

How little you understand. They will never get used to it. There would be bombs on street corners, and violence against infidels everywhere. You want them all locked up?

If muslims feel entitled to do that to people who are not muslims, then it's back to wars of religion. 

The Muslim track record against infidels is pretty poor in the last 500 years, except for the Armenian genocide. 

It's a mistake for liberals to pander to extremists. They just demand more and more subjugation. 

And at some level most muslims know that this is an irreligious country largely Christian.  And if they stay here, their children are going to be irreligious too. 

Trying to make a career out of being holier than thou strikes most English as a bit of a joke... or having a screw loose. Not the respect extremists demand. Instead they are figures of fun. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

... It's a mistake for liberals to pander to extremists. They just demand more and more subjugation. ...

Yep, tell that to the Tory party, with reference to the thread we are posting in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I still think there's a good chance we'll swerve no deal, but a few things to bear in mind if we don't.

1 - if the Scots go for independence and we're trading with EU on WTO there will have to be border controls with England. EU would insist on it. Hard border at Gretna Green.

Makes sense. Would be a body blow to our whole believe in the invincible Great Britain.

 

2 - the UK govt are already briefing that they won't go to the EU first, asking for new talks. This makes sense, it would only result in an even weaker negotiating position. So they will take the hurt. And the hurt will get easier, with time, as UK business leaves or adjusts to the new normal. With every passing day, there will be less of a pressing incentive to do a deal. We could be out in the cold for a long time.

Re the hurt getting less. That is speculation. It may well get worse and there may be more incentive to do a deal, sooner than later.

 

3 - Brexit fans will suggest that the WA was a form of contract promising best endeavours to get a FTA/future relationship. They will say this covenant has been broken and the WA therefore needs to be amended or annulled. Signs that the govt are already doing this - and I don't even want to think about what's in the looming finance bill.

Brexiteers will say anything to justify their position and cover their failures.

 

4 - with no FTA there will be no political starting point to engage with Europe. The UK will be poorer - the govt seem reconciled to this now - and it will feel less European. Its role on the world stage could well diminish, rapidly. It's likely we'll see a lot more immigration from Canada/US/OZ and India. It's likely our business/institutions will begin to evolve away from Europe, taking advantage of what they can glean from around the world.

Sounds like project fear becoming project reality. Maybe this should be viewed as a clean slate from which we can start afresh, this time with altered expectations.

 

5 - with no FTA in place, the EU are losing their main negotiator and the work he's done to forge the new relationship that would have been symbolized in the FTA - Barnier has to retire in January.

People are expendible, they will find a repacement, he is simply doing the bidding.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thehowler said:

I still think there's a good chance we'll swerve no deal, but a few things to bear in mind if we don't.

1 - if the Scots go for independence and we're trading with EU on WTO there will have to be border controls with England. EU would insist on it. Hard border at Gretna Green.

2 - the UK govt are already briefing that they won't go to the EU first, asking for new talks. This makes sense, it would only result in an even weaker negotiating position. So they will take the hurt. And the hurt will get easier, with time, as UK business leaves or adjusts to the new normal. With every passing day, there will be less of a pressing incentive to do a deal. We could be out in the cold for a long time.

3 - Brexit fans will suggest that the WA was a form of contract promising best endeavours to get a FTA/future relationship. They will say this covenant has been broken and the WA therefore needs to be amended or annulled. Signs that the govt are already doing this - and I don't even want to think about what's in the looming finance bill.

4 - with no FTA there will be no political starting point to engage with Europe. The UK will be poorer - the govt seem reconciled to this now - and it will feel less European. Its role on the world stage could well diminish, rapidly. It's likely we'll see a lot more immigration from Canada/US/OZ and India. It's likely our business/institutions will begin to evolve away from Europe, taking advantage of what they can glean from around the world.

5 - with no FTA in place, the EU are losing their main negotiator and the work he's done to forge the new relationship that would have been symbolized in the FTA - Barnier has to retire in January.

No deal will not stay no deal.  It depends if London gives Edinburgh the right to hold another referendum.  Edinburgh might just hold one anyway and if it's a yes vote, it may put pressure on Westminster to grant independence, or they may just ignore it.  

The UK will agree a basic FTA to start with (at some point), but talks with the EU will never stop.  The UK will also be looking to regain certain single market rights over subsequent years, but the EU will want to avoid the numerous Bilaterals much like it has with Switzerland.  As long as the UK remains outside of the regulatory framework of the SM, then there will be hard border with Scotland; if they gain independence.

All ifs and buts, but the UK stance won't change until at least Boris has gone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The French govt should put those cartoons on giant posters on every street corner, then the extremist nutcases who can't handle a joke about Mohamed will have to get used to it.

Maybe we can start showing kiddie port on BBC so we can all get used to it? 

Somethings will always be offensive, normalizing it doesn't stop it being offensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

No deal will not stay no deal.  It depends if London gives Edinburgh the right to hold another referendum.  Edinburgh might just hold one anyway and if it's a yes vote, it may put pressure on Westminster to grant independence, or they may just ignore it.  

The UK will agree a basic FTA to start with (at some point), but talks with the EU will never stop.  The UK will also be looking to regain certain single market rights over subsequent years, but the EU will want to avoid the numerous Bilaterals much like it has with Switzerland.  As long as the UK remains outside of the regulatory framework of the SM, then there will be hard border with Scotland; if they gain independence.

All ifs and buts, but the UK stance won't change until at least Boris has gone.

Obviously there will be no end of deals, not just because of Scotland but also Ireland... there is still a UK-EU land border, as well as the ferry crossings to Dublin... Anything short of full SM membership causes "issues" and there will be political and economic pressure to negotiate for better or different or preferential deals. And of course the same with the Dover-France crossings... and airlines... It will drag on for years and years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Maybe we can start showing kiddie port on BBC so we can all get used to it? 

Somethings will always be offensive, normalizing it doesn't stop it being offensive.

Offending muslims by not believing in mohammed is not illegal; it's freedom of thought. It's not even immoral not to be a believer. 

Kiddy porn on the other hand is illegal. And immoral. 

So you're suggesting that offending muslims with unbelief should be seen as illegal and immoral. 

Which is funny when you realise several muslim countries have no such qualms about suppressing Christianity.  

I guess if it came to a fight between the believers and the unbelievers, you would agree with weakening your own side (while saying nothing about theirs). That's what I call a real liberal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Offending muslims by not believing in mohammed is not illegal; it's freedom of thought. It's not even immoral not to be a believer. 

Kiddy porn on the other hand is illegal. And immoral. 

So you're suggesting that offending muslims with unbelief should be seen as illegal and immoral. 

Which is funny when you realise several muslim countries have no such qualms about suppressing Christianity.  

I guess if it came to a fight between the believers and the unbelievers, you would agree with weakening your own side (while saying nothing about theirs). That's what I call a real liberal. 

There is a difference between not believing inn a particular sky fairy and deliberatly insulting a group of people in a way that you know for certain will provoke them to extream reactions. 

I say this as a huge fan of my own sky fairy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

There is a difference between not believing inn a particular sky fairy and deliberatly insulting a group of people in a way that you know for certain will provoke them to extream reactions. 

I say this as a huge fan of my own sky fairy.

No there isn't, not if their offended ness is caused by your disbelief being voiced. 

The only difference is they get violent if you don't believe or bow down before their sky fairy. 

But you of course are not allowed to believe in your own sky fairy if you're in their country. That reality always has to be ignored by those trying to suppress free speech and even freedom of thought in the name of appeasing religious extremists threatening violence. 

I don't believe kow towing to violent religious extremists works. It just en courages even more extremism. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Offending muslims by not believing in mohammed is not illegal; it's freedom of thought. It's not even immoral not to be a believer. 

Kiddy porn on the other hand is illegal. And immoral. 

 

In this country its most certainly illegal, immoral too, if you have morals.

If someone wants to deliberately/knowingly offend someones core belief, just to prove a point, then they have to accept the consequences. Just as the be-header faced the consequences.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

No there isn't, not if their offended ness is caused by your disbelief being voiced. 

The only difference is they get violent if you don't believe or bow down before their sky fairy. 

But you of course are not allowed to believe in your own sky fairy if you're in their country. That reality always has to be ignored by those trying to suppress free speech and even freedom of thought in the name of appeasing religious extremists threatening violence. 

I don't believe kow towing to violent religious extremists works. It just en courages even more extremism.

Would you agree that there's a difference between intelligent satire like the Life of Brian and something that serves no purpose other than causing offence?

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

In this country its most certainly illegal, immoral too, if you have morals.

If someone wants to deliberately/knowingly offend someones core belief, just to prove a point, then they have to accept the consequences. Just as the be-header faced the consequences.

 

Surely the problem here is the number of people who believe the nonsense? If only one or two people believed their prophet flew to heaven on a winged horse we could all have a good laugh about it, but if one billion do we have to take it seriously? The fact that Mormons believe the stuff they do just goes to show people will believe batshit crazy stuff if you call it a religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

In this country its most certainly illegal, immoral too, if you have morals.

If someone wants to deliberately/knowingly offend someones core belief, just to prove a point, then they have to accept the consequences. Just as the be-header faced the consequences.

 

You what? 

Producing a picture of Muhammed, to the extreme a stick man with the name above it harms nobody in the process.. Unlike say producing "kiddy porn". 

If someone chooses to find that offensive, then walk away. Where does it stop? Personally I'm not an arsenal fan. Can I ban all associated imagery? What if I call supporting spurs a religion? (we suffer enough). 

Vegans would have a field day.. Casual massacre at the KFC, my religion bruv. 

"they have to accept the consequences" just like someone who decapitated someone? Good equivalence there... Scary world if we are advocating murder for offending people. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

UK Farmers concerned over low quality meat imports after Brexit

Earlier this week, MPs rejected the latest attempt to require imported food to meet domestic legal standards from Jan. 1, 2021. They struck down a House of Lords amendment to the Agriculture Bill to force trade deals to meet Britain's animal welfare and food safety rules.

The Agriculture Bill is designed to prepare the British farming industry for the new situation when Britain no longer has to follow the laws and rules of the EU next year.

A major discussion in the parliament has been securing a post-Brexit U.S. trade deal. Due to Britain's position, campaigners have warned that it could be forced to accept lower standards to secure that future U.S. trade deal.

"It would reduce livestock production to significantly lower welfare standards than would be permissible here...So they could effectively put cheap beef, cheap poultry into our markets, produce the standards that we are not allowed to produce here and undercut our producers," said West.

A saturated meat market could be devastating for British farm businesses already struggling with the transition of Britain out of the EU.

people

After all the rapid anti American food stuff on the BBC have yuor say website about this i thought i would look into it. Would also like to hear from anyone who has recently lived in the USA too on there feelings. My fist thoughts were, surely the middle class Americans must have a choice to avoid Hormone beef and pork, and chlorinated chicken. And guess what, they do, even without any country of origin labelling. they do it through branding and true label statements. 

So the have 1. Organic Everyhing , meat, fruit and veg. This by law has none of the crap project fear say we cant avoid if we do a deal with the USA. But.................it al costs more because any organic stuff is properly monitored. So the producers have to pay to be certified, and they suprise suprise, actually employ people to go and inspect these farmers are doing stuff right. 

2. The have "Grass Fed Beef" , "Pasture Raised Pork" and "Armish raised Chicken".  These are not "organic" products, but from what i read are pretty much on par with UK meat.  Cows out to pasture then fed hay in winter, pigs fed corn and veg and also left to free range forage naturally, Free range chickens pretty much. They also have big statements on the packaging like "Hormone Free" "Chlorine free" " antibiotic free" . 

3.Also what made me laugh out load was how upset the Yanks are that "Grass Fed Beef" is only 20% American raised. Any grass fed beef can be shipped to the USA and produced over there, then it can legally be called "USA grass fed beef" They get the majority from Austrailia and Argentina. 80% of the USA $500m Grass fed beef market is not from America. PMSL. 

So no reason, if competitive, British farmers can export British grass fed beef carcuses out to the USA to be produced and sold as USA grass fed beef!  And supposedly a pound of grass feed beef retails for 2.5 x the price of USA hone grown Hormone Frankenbeef. So what we take as normal here, is luxury stuff min the USA. 

So we couldn't have "British beef" for sale, but we could have "Devon Grass fed beef" "Hormone Free" , or "Oxford Free Range Pork" , or Yorkshire Free Range Chicken, or Kent Farm Carrots "no pesticides".

The big question is, and this is the kicker, when you have 3 choices of 8oz rump steaks to choose from, Aberdeen Angus beef rumpsreak, hormone free £9 , Bedfordshire grass fed beefsteak for £6, and Uncle joes Farm Steak for £2.50 (this is USA fraken beef, will have no other clues to it's origin / hormone / Antibiotic ). Which will you buy? And will 4 x 8oz steaks for £10 be too tempting to pass up. 

Must admit. I awlays buy the cheapest British rump steak in Aldi, if they had one for 1/2 the price but i wasnt sure where it came from or how it was produced, as long as the law said it had to be fit for human consumption, if was 1/2 the price, i would probably buy it. 

But if it was only say 20% cheaper, @ £4.80 , i would probably stick with the £6 grass fed option, wether it came from UK, USA, Austrailia, or Argentina, I would care not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Would you agree that there's a difference between intelligent satire like the Life of Brian and something that serves no purpose other than causing offence?

Causing offence to whom?

Who should judge what is offensive?

How to define between mockery and purposeful satire?

 

The truth is never offended by examination.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

After all the rapid anti American food stuff on the BBC have yuor say website about this i thought i would look into it. Would also like to hear from anyone who has recently lived in the USA too on there feelings. My fist thoughts were, surely the middle class Americans must have a choice to avoid Hormone beef and pork, and chlorinated chicken. And guess what, they do, even without any country of origin labelling. they do it through branding and true label statements. 

So the have 1. Organic Everyhing , meat, fruit and veg. This by law has none of the crap project fear say we cant avoid if we do a deal with the USA. But.................it al costs more because any organic stuff is properly monitored. So the producers have to pay to be certified, and they suprise suprise, actually employ people to go and inspect these farmers are doing stuff right. 

2. The have "Grass Fed Beef" , "Pasture Raised Pork" and "Armish raised Chicken".  These are not "organic" products, but from what i read are pretty much on par with UK meat.  Cows out to pasture then fed hay in winter, pigs fed corn and veg and also left to free range forage naturally, Free range chickens pretty much. They also have big statements on the packaging like "Hormone Free" "Chlorine free" " antibiotic free" . 

3.Also what made me laugh out load was how upset the Yanks are that "Grass Fed Beef" is only 20% American raised. Any grass fed beef can be shipped to the USA and produced over there, then it can legally be called "USA grass fed beef" They get the majority from Austrailia and Argentina. 80% of the USA $500m Grass fed beef market is not from America. PMSL. 

So no reason, if competitive, British farmers can export British grass fed beef carcuses out to the USA to be produced and sold as USA grass fed beef!  And supposedly a pound of grass feed beef retails for 2.5 x the price of USA hone grown Hormone Frankenbeef. So what we take as normal here, is luxury stuff min the USA. 

So we couldn't have "British beef" for sale, but we could have "Devon Grass fed beef" "Hormone Free" , or "Oxford Free Range Pork" , or Yorkshire Free Range Chicken, or Kent Farm Carrots "no pesticides".

The big question is, and this is the kicker, when you have 3 choices of 8oz rump steaks to choose from, Aberdeen Angus beef rumpsreak, hormone free £9 , Bedfordshire grass fed beefsteak for £6, and Uncle joes Farm Steak for £2.50 (this is USA fraken beef, will have no other clues to it's origin / hormone / Antibiotic ). Which will you buy? And will 4 x 8oz steaks for £10 be too tempting to pass up. 

Must admit. I awlays buy the cheapest British rump steak in Aldi, if they had one for 1/2 the price but i wasnt sure where it came from or how it was produced, as long as the law said it had to be fit for human consumption, if was 1/2 the price, i would probably buy it. 

But if it was only say 20% cheaper, @ £4.80 , i would probably stick with the £6 grass fed option, wether it came from UK, USA, Austrailia, or Argentina, I would care not.

You can buy great food in the US, but not in the "normal" shops and not at "normal prices. The largest (but by far not the dearest) quality food chain is probably Whole Foods and the prices are astronomic compared to the average US supermarket. Probably over 3 times as much on average but you could easily find examples at 10 times. E.g. Last time I was over there, in 2018, I saw 8oz of organic dog biscuits on sale for $12.

  

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Causing offence to whom?

Who should judge what is offensive?

How to define between mockery and purposeful satire?

 

The truth is never offended by examination.

I'm not advocating censorship, but sometimes expressing something simply to make a point about free speech shows a lack of confidence rather than the reverse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

You can buy great food in the US, but not in the "normal" shops and not at "normal prices. The largest (but by far not the dearest) quality food chain is probably Whole Foods and the prices are astronomic compared to the average US supermarket. Probably over 3 times as much on average but you could easily find examples at 10 times. E.g. Last time I was over there, in 2018, I saw 8oz of organic dog biscuits on sale for $12.

  

 

 

 

That's interesting, but what i am curious about about, is to you average / below average Yank, how expensive would our cheapest food be, compared to theirs? Bare in mind for all unprocessed food we pay not tax, no VAT.  Do Yanks have to pay state tax for all food? 

So assume Yanks would consider Aldi UK bog standard stuff "high quality" , no hormones, no chlorine, no antibiotics, no puss, no diseased animals , pretty well cared for and grown food with low levels of pesticides used, what would the say to our prices?  As "take home with tax prices?  @ $1.28/GBP

Aldi Value salted Butter , £1.45 250g block , $1.86

200g Rump steak , grass fed, £5 , $6.40  (About $13 a pound)

800g (31-32 oz) Thick White Toasty sliced bread £0.49  , $0.62 

4 pints of whole milk full fat (4% fat) £1  , $1.28 ,  $2.13 a US Gallon, $0.53 a quart gallon.

Is this expensive to your average Yank, or high end middle class prices?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 439 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.