Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

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


Recommended Posts

 

If being part of a bigger union has no benefits above free trade, why not just have a free trade and no union?

If being part of a bigger union has additional benefits above those from free trade, why not allow free trade with an external state, as then all member states get the benefits of free trade with each other, free trade with the external state AND the additional benefits within their union.

Please note I did not vote for Brexit and think it is a bad idea, however I think the fact the EU is reluctant to have free trade with an ex-state who's market is VERY aligned is more a case of sour grapes than good economic practice.

It's about having a level playing field rather than a race to the bottom. 

 

Macron is facing so many problems, you could write a book on it, but yes the final straw for the average french person would be les Rosbif escaping relatively unscathed. Read the franch press, huge problems with illegal migration, shanty towns in paris being knocked down, springing up in the Place de la republique only to be dispersed by riot police.

Islamic extremist beheading Teachers, there has also been a speight of medieval churches being torched by migrants being threatened with deportation.

Then the internal problems, very minor attempts to reform pensions causing huge protests and, indirectly, the Gilet Jaunes. growing defecit, tourist trade decimated.

Quite obvious what his latest scam is, be beastly to the British, suck up to Joe Biden as the new face of the EU in america and try to get the rest of the EU to pay for the french nuclear deterrent.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/10/emmanuel-macron-brexit-nuclear-britain-president-france

I have a very worrying suspicions that Le Pen may actually win the next election and that has everyone scared.

Citation for it being migrants burning down churches? 

 

Per head it looks like Scotland is quite a bit more generous than England...

from BBC, ref only...

Last year, Northern Ireland spent the most per head, at £11,590, followed by:

  • Scotland at £11,247
  • Wales at £10,656
  • England at £9,296

For the whole of the UK, spending per head was £9,584.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38077948

 

 

Ah, I see you didn't bother to read the part I wrote about things like population density. Wales is less densely populated than England, but more than Scotland. Low, and behold, its per capita spending is between that of England and Scotland. It's not the SNP being spendthrift, it's that Scotland is big as one of the major factors. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 142.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GrizzlyDave

    9502

  • Confusion of VIs

    7633

  • jonb2

    5790

  • thehowler

    5648

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

 

It's about having a level playing field rather than a race to the bottom. 

Citation for it being migrants burning down churches? 

Ah, I see you didn't bother to read the part I wrote about things like population density. Wales is less densely populated than England, but more than Scotland. Low, and behold, its per capita spending is between that of England and Scotland. It's not the SNP being spendthrift, it's that Scotland is big as one of the major factors. 

https://rmx.news/article/article/france-rwandan-migrant-confesses-to-setting-nantes-cathedral-on-fire

https://www.20minutes.fr/faits_divers/2313491-20180726-orleans-incendie-criminel-degradations-tags-haineux-eglise

https://www.intoleranceagainstchristians.eu/index.php?id=12&case=2095

https://www.intoleranceagainstchristians.eu/index.php?id=12&case=2812

https://international.la-croix.com/news/religion/four-churches-in-france-vandalized-over-the-past-week/9442

it may be that the perpertrators are not known in all cases, but there is little doubt who the french public blames, that is a problem for Macron

 

Edited by debtlessmanc
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

There's only one instance of a church being burned down by an immigrant in those links. 

In France and the UK there's quite a lot of vandalism, including arson, against synagogues by native born, white right-wing nut jobs, but it doesn't seem to cause as much general anger. I find it concerning, though, given some family background on the wrong end of it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

There's only one instance of a church being burned down by an immigrant in those links. 

In France and the UK there's quite a lot of vandalism, including arson, against synagogues by native born, white right-wing nut jobs, but it doesn't seem to cause as much general anger. I find it concerning, though, given some family background on the wrong end of it. 

There was vandalism by migrants in the links. But again you are shooting the messenger. It is irrelevant what i think i dont vote in france- it is what the french voter thinks that will get le pen elected. The comments under eg l le figaro articles make it plain what they think.

on the antisemitism issue, Jews are fleeing france

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2019/11/french-jews-fleeing-country/

 

Edited by debtlessmanc
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

If being part of a bigger union has no benefits above free trade, why not just have a free trade and no union?

If being part of a bigger union has additional benefits above those from free trade, why not allow free trade with an external state, as then all member states get the benefits of free trade with each other, free trade with the external state AND the additional benefits within their union.

Please note I did not vote for Brexit and think it is a bad idea, however I think the fact the EU is reluctant to have free trade with an ex-state who's market is VERY aligned is more a case of sour grapes than good economic practice.

How did you read my post and still ask those questions. The answers are literally explained in my post....

Please re-read.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

It's about having a level playing field rather than a race to the bottom. 

Citation for it being migrants burning down churches? 

Ah, I see you didn't bother to read the part I wrote about things like population density. Wales is less densely populated than England, but more than Scotland. Low, and behold, its per capita spending is between that of England and Scotland. It's not the SNP being spendthrift, it's that Scotland is big as one of the major factors. 

No, I read it but discounted it. Population density might explain higher expenditure - though the even higher NI figure runs contrary to this argument - but if so that won't be changing and the SNP will have to carry on paying it.

Perhaps fairer to say geography makes it harder for the SNP to be thrifty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

You are in denial. The xenophobic and hatred of others is well documented in the UK. I am not saying that the UK is much worse than other countries but you can't say that doesn't exist and it wasn't a factor for some to vote for Brexit, especially when it was openly exploited by Farage.

Just a quick google search 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-36633388

https://irr.org.uk/article/post-brexit-racism/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369183X.2018.1451308

I listed it as one of the reason for anti-immigration views among people in the UK, mostly in England. I agree that blaming immigration for economic hardship was also a reason, albeit this was mostly a misplaced blame.    

You believe brexiters want all immigrants out? 

Rather than  just want no more? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

How is that relevant?  You should focus on facts. 

It is funny that you are trying to defend that there is no racism/xenophobia in the UK and then asking a question which can be considered as a racist microaggression by some. 

It's no good trying to play the race card. 

I left your previous post unanswered because I thought something might have been lost in translation. 

But there you go. We have different views. You think brexiters are xenophobic, I think it's far more nuanced, partly a question of numbers and quite a lot a complaint about wages. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

You seem to be under the misapprehension that Scotland needs Westminster's approval. 

Er, no. The SNP wants actual independence. 

Which has nothing to do with what is caught and what is sold. A red herring. 

It's far from clear that this is true as GERS has methodological flaws, including Scotland nominally paying interest on debt it did not incur. 

 

Way to miss the point as I was only talking about GDPR. But then most of your post was the standard ill-researched and inaccurate anti EU nonsense. 

Thanks for the put down. 

To clarify:  you believe

1. No Westminster approval is required for Scottish independence.  Correct?

2. Scotland could have independence and take on  none of the national debt? 

3. Scotland could at the same time keep the pound.

4. Scotland would be economically viable without English subsidies. 

5. 6 Scottish famines owning most of the fish quota is not relevant. 

6. The SNP will win a referendum for independence ? 

I must say I have doubts about 1,3,4,6. But you seem very gung-ho. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

There was vandalism by migrants in the links.

One instance, the others unattributed/unknown. Fifty years ago it would have been blamed on Communists. 

 

But again you are shooting the messenger.

No, just pointing out that I'm unconvinced by the attribution. 

 

It is irrelevant what i think i dont vote in france- it is what the french voter thinks that will get le pen elected. The comments under eg l le figaro articles make it plain what they think.

on the antisemitism issue, Jews are fleeing france

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2019/11/french-jews-fleeing-country/

Yes, it's very sad. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

How did you read my post and still ask those questions. The answers are literally explained in my post....

Please re-read.

Ok I reread it, and no it doesn't answer all those questions. My main question, if being part of a union is so great, why do you need to punish a departing member, as even with a free trade deal they are still worse off than when they were in the Union, and other countries will see that.

It sounds like the free trade deal is pretty much there, with likely UK concessions on level playing field, the only thing that will scupper it is bloody fish. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Thanks for the put down. 

To clarify:  you believe

1. No Westminster approval is required for Scottish independence.  Correct?

Technically it is possible for Scotland to declare it independently. I'm not saying this is likely or wise or woukd necessarily get through the Scottish courts, but if it can be argued that the Act of Union has been breached, yes. That would be the hurdle. 

 

2. Scotland could have independence and take on  none of the national debt? 

Yes. This is part of the Act of Union. Again, I am not saying it is likely, just that it is technically the case. 

 

3. Scotland could at the same time keep the pound.

I have made no comment on this. I think it would be very difficult to virtually impossible to do so. 

 

4. Scotland would be economically viable without English subsidies. 

Long term, yes. Short term could be difficult without a central bank. Finland and Sweden manage to be viable, and they have low average population densities but with a small number of significant cities, so there's no a priori reason for not being successful. Yes, Finland has a land border with one other EU nation, but it's otherwise relatively isolated. Another comparator would be Norway, and Scotland, in its economic zone, has similar amounts of oil and gas. However, past reserves were not earmarked for Scotland or invested in the same way so that benefit is a bit lost given the progress to decarbonisation. 

 

5. 6 Scottish famines owning most of the fish quota is not relevant. 

I don't see what it is relevant to. You've lost me there. 

 

6. The SNP will win a referendum for independence ? 

Polling currently suggests it would. 

 

I must say I have doubts about 1,3,4,6. But you seem very gung-ho. 

I'd have my doubts over 3, and there are a lot of factors affecting 4. 1 and 2 are technically possible, but whether they are practical is another matter. 

Edited by NobodyInParticular
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

No, I read it but discounted it. Population density might explain higher expenditure - though the even higher NI figure runs contrary to this argument - but if so that won't be changing and the SNP will have to carry on paying it.

Perhaps fairer to say geography makes it harder for the SNP to be thrifty.

Yes, the latter would be more accurate. Saying not thrifty suggests there is some failure in management as opposed to geographical challenges.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Ok I reread it, and no it doesn't answer all those questions. My main question, if being part of a union is so great, why do you need to punish a departing member, as even with a free trade deal they are still worse off than when they were in the Union, and other countries will see that.

It sounds like the free trade deal is pretty much there, with likely UK concessions on level playing field, the only thing that will scupper it is bloody fish. 

Why do you think the UK is being punished? It is leaving to become a third country, and being a third country doesn't entitle it to more than a WTO arrangement unless a trade deal is arranged. The EU is negotiating based on its standard terms (cf. Canada, Japan, etc.) for anything meaningful which includes state aid, governance, and other level playing field requirements. So it's not punishing the UK, just offering the standard free trade but third country package, pretty much. Funnily enough, that's what some said they wanted (Canada style deal) but by not agreeing to the level playing field requirements to get that, it's not come to fruition. And the EU hasn't exactly hidden the requirements away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

No, I read it but discounted it. Population density might explain higher expenditure - though the even higher NI figure runs contrary to this argument - but if so that won't be changing and the SNP will have to carry on paying it.

Perhaps fairer to say geography makes it harder for the SNP to be thrifty.

NI is a special case, so I put that to one side.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Ok I reread it, and no it doesn't answer all those questions. My main question, if being part of a union is so great, why do you need to punish a departing member, as even with a free trade deal they are still worse off than when they were in the Union, and other countries will see that.

That is up to the remaining 49 member states in the USA, not you. If they think it is in their best long term interests that a physical neighbouring state who has told them that their rules are bad and they can do better by being out of the rules based union but then still wants maximum access to the union markets, then I for one as a remaining member of the 49 states would be very wary about how much access to our markets I gave the departing state. 

I really did explain this already in my post, I promise. I just don't think you absorbed what I was saying.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops, ... I did it again!

German ambassador to UK rejects ministers’ claims Pfizer approval is win for Britain

The German ambassador to the UK has criticised Boris Johnson’s government for claiming the approval of the vaccine developed by Pfizer and BioNTec was a huge “national” win for Britain.

Mr Hancock claimed Brexit had helped “speed up” the vaccine approval process by freeing the UK from European regulatory processes. “We do all the same safety checks and the same processes, but we have been able to speed up how they’re done because of Brexit.”

“Whilst until earlier this year we were in the European Medicines Agency (EMA), because of Brexit we’ve been able to make a decision to do this based on the UK regulator, a world-class regulator, and not go at the pace of the Europeans, who are moving a little bit more slowly,” he told Times Radio.

However, Dr June Raine, chief executive of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which approved the vaccine, contradicted Mr Hancock’s claims. Dr Raine made clear that the MHRA were working under EU rules and procedures and were not able to go any faster because of Brexit.

Yahoo

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

It's no good trying to play the race card. 

I left your previous post unanswered because I thought something might have been lost in translation. 

But there you go. We have different views. You think brexiters are xenophobic, I think it's far more nuanced, partly a question of numbers and quite a lot a complaint about wages. 

 

I didn't say Leavers were xenophobic. I said some Leavers were. That was one of many factors, not marginal btw.  I also said, among others thing, that people voted for Brexit because they were not happy about their wages and incorrectly blamed immigration for it.

From my post you picked one thing, xenophobic/racist element in Brexit, and started to claim that that is not true. I provided numerous examples to contradict you claim but you still can't accept the reality and try personal attacks that I somehow play the race card here. You seem very desperate to deny that Brexit was partially driven by xenophobic/racist. In fact those feelings were intentionally exploited by people like Farage so he gets what he wanted. He tries now to exploit ant-lockdown sentiment to get enough support for the right wing movement he became an agent of. He is like a dark creature who feeds on dark side of human nature.     

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

I really did explain this already in my post, I promise. I just don't think you absorbed agree with what I was saying.

 

Made an edit, that is probably a fairer representation all round :)

Anyway, my view now is that a deal will be done, but the leaders of the coastal states are having a big shout about not giving in on fish quotas, such that when compromises are made they can say to their fishing towns "We were on your side and tried our hardest, honest".  It is all about future votes when you are a politician...

I still wish we were staying in the EU but now we are out I hope we make the best of it that we can.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

You believe brexiters want all immigrants out? 

Rather than  just want no more? 

 

 

1) some leavers are not bothered by immigration at all

2) some leavers wants less immigrants, because they blame immigrants for their economic situation wrongly

3) some leavers wants less immigrants because they somehow spoil the country, they make it less "British"

4) some leavers wants less immigrants by only those who are less useful, a form of racism   

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Made an edit, that is probably a fairer representation all round :)

But it isn't up to you to agree. In my hypothetical scenario the 49 US states that remain as a union realise that by allowing the powerful state that has left the union full access to their markets while not sharing in the costs of running those markets and being able to differ on the rules of the markets so as to undercut the other 49 isn't a good thing for the group in the long term. So they decide there will be strict conditions for allowing the 50th state outside access to their markets. 

It isn't your choice to make for them, it is theirs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

But it isn't up to you to agree. In my hypothetical scenario the 49 US states that remain as a union realise that by allowing the powerful state that has left the union full access to their markets while not sharing in the costs of running those markets and being able to differ on the rules of the markets so as to undercut the other 49 isn't a good thing for the group in the long term. So they decide there will be strict conditions for allowing the 50th state outside access to their markets. 

It isn't your choice to make for them, it is theirs. 

OK, your hypothesis in this example is that being in a union has a cost, and the only benefit is free trade.  That is one thing I disagree with. There are other benefits to being in the union.

I also disagree that this case is similar to UK/EU because we will compromise on "level playing field".  A level playing field on the basis of no  state aid is never going to happen unless the EU agrees to give up their huge state subsidy of the agricultural industry (Hint: there would be French tractors blocking the streets of Brussels!), but some agreement will be made to protect both sides, but still allow both sides to do things to compete with the state aid that happens in the rest of the world.

I'm just arguing against the "there will be no trade deal, we are doomed" sentiment that is prevalent on this forum.

I'm not arguing against the "Brexit was a stupid idea" sentiment

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

But there you go. We have different views. You think brexiters are xenophobic, I think it's far more nuanced, partly a question of numbers and quite a lot a complaint about wages.

The sheer hypocrisy of certain Remainers really is a sight to behold. Quite how they don't recognise just how bigoted they are when they spend so much effort insisting people who don't agree with them must be doing it for bigoted reasons demonstrates a truly monumental lack of self awareness.

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.



×
×
  • 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.