The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

[HPC Pollster]

Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?

[Errol]

Leave with no deal. We should never have been trying to get a 'deal' with the EU in the first place. We should have left in the week after the Referendum and then proceeded from there. This isn't a negotiation. We are leaving.

[Errol]

So currently at 62% to leave.

Edited November 18, 2018 by Errol

[jonb2]

On 16/11/2018 at 12:05, Errol said:

Leave with no deal. We should never have been trying to get a 'deal' with the EU in the first place. We should have left in the week after the Referendum and then proceeded from there. This isn't a negotiation. We are leaving.

Straight from the Putin play-book eh Errol?

• Germany should be offered the de facto political dominance over most Protestant and Catholic states located within Central and Eastern Europe. Kaliningrad oblast could be given back to Germany. The book uses the term "Moscow–Berlin axis".^[9]
• France should be encouraged to form a "Franco–German bloc" with Germany. Both countries have a "firm anti-Atlanticist tradition".^[9]
• The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.^[9]
• Finland should be absorbed into Russia. Southern Finland will be combined with the Republic of Karelia and northern Finland will be "donated to Murmansk Oblast".^[9]
• Estonia should be given to Germany's sphere of influence.^[9]
• Latvia and Lithuania should be given a "special status" in the Eurasian-Russian sphere.^[9]
• Poland should be granted a "special status" in the Eurasian sphere.^[9]
• Romania, Macedonia, "Serbian Bosnia" and Greece – "Orthodox collectivist East" – will unite with "Moscow the Third Rome" and reject the "rational-individualistic West".^[9]
• Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.^[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

I've got to give it to Putin, he's a lot more effective than your average politician at playing on the world stage, at home - not so much.

[renting til I die]

Oh goody, another Brexit thread in the Brexit Crash Forum!

Article 50 never said anything about having 2 years to 'make' an exit deal. The 2 years is to get your shit together so you can leave. There never was a 'deal' to be had and 'no deal' (nonsense!) just means 'to leave'!

Once you have left then maybe there is the opportunity to make new deals with the EU and, of course, anyone you like.

[Errol]

16 hours ago, jonb2 said:

Straight from the Putin play-book eh Errol?

Give it a rest. Is everyone who voted to leave acting under the control of Russia?

Did everyone who voted to join in the 70s act under the control of the EU?

And with regard to leaving the EU, I don't think it involves being cut off from Europe at all. Strong relations and excellent trading and cooperation should continue as before. No change.

We just don't want to be in the EU club, that's all. We can have relations with the EU in the same way we have relations with the US or anywhere else.

Edited November 19, 2018 by Errol

[jonb2]

48 minutes ago, Errol said:

Give it a rest. Is everyone who voted to leave acting under the control of Russia?

Did everyone who voted to join in the 70s act under the control of the EU?

And with regard to leaving the EU, I don't think it involves being cut off from Europe at all. Strong relations and excellent trading and cooperation should continue as before. No change.

We just don't want to be in the EU club, that's all. We can have relations with the EU in the same way we have relations with the US or anywhere else.

These are the agencies we will leave

https://www.richardcorbett.org.uk/brexit-european-agencies/

Oh, and this

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/15/withdrawal_agreement_brexit/

So much for your idea of "Strong relations and excellent trading and cooperation should continue as before. No change."

A sad, friendless, isolated and divided nation. Much poorer. And because of Brexit, even more hunger.

https://news.trust.org/item/20181116164946-0fe24/

Yup, Putin will be laughing his socks off. Whatever drugs you are on, I want some.

[AThirdWay]

So, once we have left with no deal, how do we trade?

We're months, if not years, away from agreeing a list of WTO tariff schedules, at the mercy of objections from any one of 160-odd other members. A hard border is a pre-requisite for WTO. We're no where near implementing that at the moment, and impossible to get the infrastructure/manning in place in 5 months.

WTO doesn't cover services, what happens when we can't flog off that particular golden egg? What happens to that egg-bound goose?

 

Edited November 20, 2018 by AThirdWay

[AThirdWay]

On 19/11/2018 at 12:35, Errol said:

Give it a rest. Is everyone who voted to leave acting under the control of Russia?

It remains to be seen if they were voting under the influence of Russia, yes? Kremlin money/propaganda may have played a part.... Jus' sayin'...

Edited November 20, 2018 by AThirdWay

[Steppenpig]

Ah good, been waiting to see an update on this. The poll last year ended up 65% leave, so it looks like there's been a drift to remain of a couple of points, similar to what the opinion polls suggest for the general population.

[tomandlu]

Personally, I'd have preferred a ranking rather than 'pick one'.

1. Remain
2. Leave w/o deal
3. Leave w/ deal

[Errol]

The people still asking for Brexit are clearly under mind control from enemy forces.

This thread needs input from the British propaganda unit!

 

Inside The British Army's Secret Information Warfare Machine

They are soldiers, but the 77th Brigade edit videos, record podcasts and write viral posts. Welcome to the age of information warfare...

“A document will come from the Ministry of Defence that will have broad guidance and themes to follow.” 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-22/inside-british-armys-secret-information-warfare-machine

Edited November 23, 2018 by Errol

[AThirdWay]

On 23/11/2018 at 12:47, Errol said:

The people still asking for Brexit are clearly under mind control from enemy forces.

It is accepted, even by the most ardent brexiters, that leaving the EU will damage our country (Rees Mogg has said it might be 50 years before we feel the benefit!).

The main positive quoted is that we will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the EU has managed. Shall we think on that for a moment? Presumably we have had our best negotiating team at the table during UK/EU negotiations, and it is widely recognised, by both sides, that the deal thrashed out is poor for the UK. How in the world can our 2nd tier negotiating teams, without the clout of the largest trading bloc in the world behind them, expect to get a better deal with these countries?

So, as far as I can see, we are facing inarguable short-term (estimates between 2-10 years) damage and arguably long-term damage going forward (Rees Moggs 50 years?).

Arguing that "we should never have been trying to get a 'deal' with the EU in the first place", combined with your pro-Russia bias, will inevitably lead to accusations that you are playing Putin's tune. What other conclusion could one come to when you seek to weaken your own country financially and undermine your own government while promoting the Russian narrative?

Genuine question btw!

[Steppenpig]

6 hours ago, AThirdWay said:

It is accepted, even by the most ardent brexiters, that leaving the EU will damage our country..

We accept gdp will be between 4% and 10% lower than it would otherwise be. Not the same thing at all.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Steppenpig

[Bruce Banner]

On 22/11/2018 at 15:34, tomandlu said:

Personally, I'd have preferred a ranking rather than 'pick one'.

1. Remain
2. Leave w/o deal
3. Leave w/ deal

Agreed, that would be my order of choice.

[AThirdWay]

22 hours ago, Steppenpig said:

We accept gdp will be between 4% and 10% lower than it would otherwise be. Not the same thing at all.

Recessions aren't damaging?

[Quiet Guy]

On 18/11/2018 at 20:47, renting til I die said:

Once you have left then maybe there is the opportunity to make new deals with the EU

I expect the EU will do everything it can to make the Brexit process as unpleasant as possible. Making an example of us to discourage any other members states from resisting Brussels will be the order of the day, not making new alliances. Just to be clear: I'm in favour of Brexit and value the long term advantages of sovereignty before short term economic discomfort.

[gp_]

Quote

The main positive quoted is that we will be able to negotiate better trade deals than the EU has managed. Shall we think on that for a moment? Presumably we have had our best negotiating team at the table during UK/EU negotiations, and it is widely recognised, by both sides, that the deal thrashed out is poor for the UK.

The problem was that the negotiations were run by a remainer, Theresa May, who started by stating that she would accept any deal she was given. Not the way to get a good deal.

There is no reason to think that being part of a larger block makes it easier to negotiate deals. It makes it harder because you have more interests to satisfy before you can agree a deal, and more potential conflicts with the people you are negotiating with. We could easily do a free trade deal with India for example, which would be enormously beneficial,  but which the EU has never managed to do.

 

Quote

Recessions aren't damaging?

A short term recession for long term gain. Yes. I do not believe the impact would be anything like 10% and is unlikely to be even near 4%. No deal would mean we can add a huge stimulus to the economy by spending the money we give the EU under the deal which would offset the damage from disruption.

 

Quote

Rees Mogg has said it might be 50 years before we feel the benefit!)

No, what he actually said was "No, not at all - and I always said that the benefits will become clear to all our grandkids by 2068".  In other words he is confident that when people look back on it in 50 years time it will clearly be the right decision.

 

[AThirdWay]

4 hours ago, gp_ said:

A short term recession for long term gain. Yes. I do not believe the impact would be anything like 10% and is unlikely to be even near 4%. No deal would mean we can add a huge stimulus to the economy by spending the money we give the EU under the deal which would offset the damage from disruption.

It's obvious to all that there will be considerable short term pain.

It looks like we contribute around £7.4bn pa, once you take off rebates and EU spending in the UK (yes, I know WE can decide where that EU money will be spent post Brexit, but farming and sciences have been assured support).

https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_Kingdom

Roughly 1% of government spending then, or about 1.5% of spending on health, care and education. So there is no "huge stimulus" in the short term. Even going by your figures, there will be short of a 2% reduction in government income, probably more if we can't negotiate a passport deal for services.

Can you quantify this long term gain? Your essentially telling me that we can use the money that will not exist to stimulate the economy!

 

[24gray24]

Point 1 if our trade with Europe goes down then Europe loses more than we do. Because Europe sells more to us than vica versa.  If it's recession for us then it's worse recession for them. Point 2. Pm mays deal says they get to keep all their advantages and we need their permission to change anything. It's a deal to make exit impossible.  It's a con. Point 3 it's Europe that's bankrupt not uk. Italy? Deutsche bank etc.point 4 only 3 countries pay in large amounts : Germany hollandaise and us. If one leaves it's over for Europe not us. Point 5. We Should ask the germans and Dutch to come with us.   Please corectify  if facts  above wrong.

[AThirdWay]

20 hours ago, 24gray24 said:

Point 1 if our trade with Europe goes down then Europe loses more than we do. Because Europe sells more to us than vica versa.  If it's recession for us then it's worse recession for them. Point 2. Pm mays deal says they get to keep all their advantages and we need their permission to change anything. It's a deal to make exit impossible.  It's a con. Point 3 it's Europe that's bankrupt not uk. Italy? Deutsche bank etc.point 4 only 3 countries pay in large amounts : Germany hollandaise and us. If one leaves it's over for Europe not us. Point 5. We Should ask the germans and Dutch to come with us.   Please corectify  if facts  above wrong.

I'll give it a shot, corectifications are:

Point 1. As a percentage of total exports, the UK is the massive loser. It will be a far worse recession for us.

Point 2. Not impossible to exit, but I agree with the rest of your point. Not sure why you're surprised though, you were told in 2016 that the UK gov. weren't up to the task!

Point 3. Looking at the latest figures, we appear to be a within a percentage point of the EU debt level as a percentage of GDP, massively disadvantaged when you factor in personal debt. So you are wrong when looking at total national debt.

Point 4. It looks like there are currently 10 net contributors to the EU budget, so I would say you're wrong again. https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-one-biggest-contributors-eu-budget/?gclid=Cj0KCQiArqPgBRCRARIsAPwlHoVcDPq1Ci8G3JqzbuBG_RlrufU02FOclNzsgESy7RWZufb-rATmSToaApEAEALw_wcB

If the UK contributes about 13% of the EU budget, then the remaining members will have to find <0.5% of the total budget. Quite a task for those members that currently contribute <2% admittedly, but not impossible if proportionally spread across 27 member states.

Point 5. You could ask, but they would politely refuse. They are not in the business of self-harm.

 

[gp_]

@AThirdWay in the event of a hard Brexit we save the £39bn agreed in the deal. That is enough for a huge stimulus.

The long term gains do not come mainly fiscal changes, but from better policies, trade deals, etc. We already have some of the gains (one I did not even expect) in the lowest unemployment in 40+ years and an end to growth in zero hours contracts.

It is impossible to quantify, and in any case long term macro economic forecasts are pretty much useless. The fact is that the productive capacity of the economy will not changes, we will have a more equal wealth distribution, and we get rid of a layer of our political structure pretty much dedicated to rentier capitalism (they pretend they are pro-free market, but in practice it is warped).

[gp_]

Quote

As a percentage of total exports, the UK is the massive loser. It will be a far worse recession for us.

It will be worse for Ireland - see the forecasts done for the EU Parliament. You also need to look at how the pain will be spread. It will hit the affluent a lot more than the poor (generally true of the disadvantages of leaving). Why do you think the Bank of England is worrying about "wage inflation" even though average (mean) pay growth is fairly weak?

Quote

Not impossible to exit, but I agree with the rest of your point. Not sure why you're surprised though, you were told in 2016 that the UK gov. weren't up to the task!

Because it was planned remainers unwilling to contemplate a real Brexit.

 

Quote

Looking at the latest figures, we appear to be a within a percentage point of the EU debt level as a percentage of GDP, massively disadvantaged when you factor in personal debt.

The Eurozone is extremely fragile because it does not have a sufficiently centralised government to deal with this. The people who came up with the idea of a single currency expected it to be a stepping stone to political union which has not happened. Its needed, and will happen, but its happening far too slowly.

Because of that the odds of a crises are determined by the weakest Eurozone countries, but the average.

The UK deal with things going wrong and absorb shocks far better than the Eurozone. We can (and do) tax prosperous regions freely to popup weaker ones - the Eurozone cannot. We can print money to pay debt if necessary - the ECB can but a government unable to pays its debts cannot.

[AThirdWay]

1 hour ago, gp_ said:

@AThirdWay in the event of a hard Brexit we save the £39bn agreed in the deal. That is enough for a huge stimulus.

The long term gains do not come mainly fiscal changes, but from better policies, trade deals, etc. We already have some of the gains (one I did not even expect) in the lowest unemployment in 40+ years and an end to growth in zero hours contracts.

It is impossible to quantify, and in any case long term macro economic forecasts are pretty much useless. The fact is that the productive capacity of the economy will not changes, we will have a more equal wealth distribution, and we get rid of a layer of our political structure pretty much dedicated to rentier capitalism (they pretend they are pro-free market, but in practice it is warped).

Not sure why you think we won't have to pay the £39bn? It's certainly not the opinion of Sir Amyas Morse, head of the NAO, although I appreciate the HoLs thinks otherwise.

If we didn't, please remember that UK has to agree WTO schedules before we can trade. They have to be agreed by all states, and I would imagine that EU states will demand their pound of flesh (or £39bn worth of flesh) before agreeing to any deal. Remember, in many areas we have no WTO agreement as we were bundled into the EU's agreement. We are also bound to treat every member equally, so we are limited in how we can 'punish' the EU. In the words of the WTO boss, leaving on WTO rules would be a “complete betrayal” of voters.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/09/13/a-no-deal-wto-option-would-result-in-serious-economic-damage-for-key-uk-industries/

Your £39bn would seem like a bargain compared to the no-deal disaster.

Every examination I've read regarding a no deal Brexit has businesses going to the wall, so I.m not entirely sure what you mean by "the productive capacity of the economy will not change". Do you mean the theoretical production capacity? If so, so what? Without a market, that capacity is useless. And why would you think wealth distribution would equalise?  You'll need to expand on that I'm afraid.

I'm sorry, but you're going to have to come up with something more.... grounded... than this.

 

Edited December 7, 2018 by AThirdWay

[AThirdWay]

1 hour ago, gp_ said:

It will be worse for Ireland - see the forecasts done for the EU Parliament. You also need to look at how the pain will be spread. It will hit the affluent a lot more than the poor (generally true of the disadvantages of leaving). Why do you think the Bank of England is worrying about "wage inflation" even though average (mean) pay growth is fairly weak?

What is this, "it will be worse for Ireland"? So what? The Eire GDP growth is stellar compared to the UK's, they are in a FAR better position to weather Brexit even before you factor in possible EU grants!

The ECB is, at least, as capable of weathering Brexit as the BoE and far better placed. To think otherwise is delusional.

1 hour ago, gp_ said:

Because it was planned remainers unwilling to contemplate a real Brexit.

Tin foil hat time! This is down to the predicted ineptitude of UK.GOV, and the predicted determination of the EU to abide by it's founding principles.

1 hour ago, gp_ said:

The UK deal with things going wrong and absorb shocks far better than the Eurozone. We can (and do) tax prosperous regions freely to popup weaker ones - the Eurozone cannot. We can print money to pay debt if necessary - the ECB can but a government unable to pays its debts cannot.

This, I'm afraid, is complete nonsense. How can you claim that "we can (and do) tax prosperous regions freely to popup weaker ones - the Eurozone cannot" in the SAME THREAD that has a link to the different amount of monies paid in by each member of the EU? In addition each NCB provides reserves to the ECB, it therefore has a far higher capacity of currency support than the BoE, especially if we have just walked away from our international commitments. What do you think returns on gilts/bonds would need to be if we walk away from the EU without making the payments we had agreed?