Jump to content
Jools

The Positive Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Herman said:

No. 

We’ll agree to differ on that point the , I’m merely going of anecdotal evidence of Irish I’ve worked with in the past on that one.

The French and Dutch rejections of the Lisbon Treaty then Herman, which their politicians simply ignored. Do you believe that’s the correct thing to do in a democracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

I really do struggle to understand why some on here are still banging on about their perceived myths of the EU institutions. They'd be better trying to work out how to get their imaginary unicorns to fly.

It's as if they have secret doubts about their sanity and need to keep reminding themselves of the why they made the decision they did. Well it's better than facing the truth.

I’ve said numerous times my reasons for Leaving, in that the percentage of our trade that’s with the EU has been falling for many years, so that it’s now below half and dropping still, and also the EU’s percentage of the world economy has fallen from over 30% to around 16% currently. To Remain wedded to an organisation that’s less economically powerful than it was, and whose significance to our export market is falling send the wrong thing to do, especially with all the baggage such as free movement laws and costs involved with being a member.

Seeing as I’m not actually responsible for negotiations, the limit of my power and other Leave voters was to vote in the referendum and then subsequent elections to make it happen, which we did. We can’t do much else now but wait until the next General Election to judge the government on how they’ve performed with the task

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BigFish said:

More progress

So the EU doesn't have an Exceutive President and is not a superstate.

Sounding more like a trading block to longer this debate goes on

Why does a trading bloc need a 700 strong parliament, its own currency, its own central bank, budgetary rules its states must follow, it’s own courts (that deal with legal issues other than trade such as human rights) and free movement of people? 

Almost sounds like it’s trying to be something else again doesn’t it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't the Lisbon treaty they rejected. It was the constitution and because of the French and Dutch it never got approved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Why does a trading bloc need a 700 strong parliament, its own currency, its own central bank, budgetary rules its states must follow, it’s own courts (that deal with legal issues other than trade such as human rights) and free movement of people? 

Almost sounds like it’s trying to be something else again doesn’t it?

Well no, as has already been explained to you it is smaller in size than two metropolitan councils and costs less than £250 a head, while the benefits in terms of cost avoidance through frictionless borders far exceed this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Seeing as I’m not actually responsible for negotiations, the limit of my power and other Leave voters was to vote in the referendum and then subsequent elections to make it happen, which we did. We can’t do much else now but wait until the next General Election to judge the government on how they’ve performed with the task

Ah, Brexiteer cop out gambit, not in my control. I know what I voted against but I have no idea what I voted for.

Its not really going very well is it, or going at all? The UK government still hasn't drafted its proposed treaty and talks have stopped. The decision on whether to extend or not is required by the end of June in order to get any agreement ratified. You don't even know what the "it" is that you voted for the government to make it happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

As you're so keen on Wikipedia

The president of the European Commission is the head of the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Union. The president of the Commission leads a cabinet of commissioners, referred to as the college, collectively accountable to the European Parliament. The president is empowered to allocate portfolios amongst, reshuffle or dismiss commissioners as necessary. The college directs the Commission's civil service, sets the policy agenda and determines the legislative proposals it produces.

 

The problem is that if the Commission is indeed just the civil service, and Parliament has the power, why is it Leyen or Juncker are household names and whoever is in charge of the parliament relative unknowns. Why is the head of the civil service giving speeches on proposed laws, budgets and future policy direction? A civil service is there to do the bidding of elected representatives, not to create it’s own policy. It always gives the impression that almost all the EU’s direction comes from the Commission then is simply rubber stamped in the parliament in much the same way the Chinese Communist Party gathering merely approves anything Xi proposes, albeit in a much less authoritarian manner. 

It would be like the unelected Lords making the rules and the Commons simply approving them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Herman said:

It wasn't the Lisbon treaty they rejected. It was the constitution and because of the French and Dutch it never got approved.

The constitution was the treaty in all but name, even EU leaders admitted as such. They merely changed the title to avoid it having to go back to any future referendum 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Well no, as has already been explained to you it is smaller in size than two metropolitan councils and costs less than £250 a head, while the benefits in terms of cost avoidance through frictionless borders far exceed this.

 

Size is irrelevant, why does it need its own currency, central bank, budgetary and free movement laws and courts for issues other than trade disputes if it’s simply a trading bloc? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Ah, Brexiteer cop out gambit, not in my control. I know what I voted against but I have no idea what I voted for.

Its not really going very well is it, or going at all? The UK government still hasn't drafted its proposed treaty and talks have stopped. The decision on whether to extend or not is required by the end of June in order to get any agreement ratified. You don't even know what the "it" is that you voted for the government to make it happen.

You can’t cut out the part of my post explaining why I voted the way I did, then accuse me of not knowing what I voted for. 

Also tell me, what can the working man do now to influence trade talks and future relationships with the EU and other countries? We voted for the parties we believed best served our interests, now all we can do is wait and see what they come back with. If enough feel they’ve done a bad job then they’ll have the power to replace them with somebody else next election. Our vote is the only power we have, and large swathes of the Remain vote wanted to trample over that when the referendum didn’t go their way 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Why does a trading bloc need a 700 strong parliament, its own currency, its own central bank, budgetary rules its states must follow, it’s own courts (that deal with legal issues other than trade such as human rights) and free movement of people? 

Almost sounds like it’s trying to be something else again doesn’t it?

I promised myself I wouldn't look at this endless ground-hog day nonsense anymore but my phone beeped.

An example of your nonsense which just has to be corrected  - "that deal with legal issues other than trade such as human rights"

For the record. Look it up if you don't believe me.

The European Convention of Human Rights (and its Court) ECHR & ECtHR is NOTHING to do with the EU.

This is is the problem - you keep coming out with statements that are demonstrably false, easily researchable  - indeed were clarified years ago and are well known and understood by any rational 'Leaver' and 'Remainer' alike.

We've also done to death trade deals.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

The constitution was the treaty in all but name, even EU leaders admitted as such. They merely changed the title to avoid it having to go back to any future referendum 

Which EU leaders or do you mean the leaders of indivdual states?

Anyway, I don't see what relevance this has to do with what we did. It just smells of someone desperately searching historical moments to prove they were right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Herman said:

Which EU leaders or do you mean the leaders of indivdual states?

Anyway, I don't see what relevance this has to do with what we did. It just smells of someone desperately searching historical moments to prove they were right.

It was a reply to an earlier post where somebody said the countries of the EU were happy to pool sovereignty for the “greater good” or something similar. My response was that those nations clearly weren’t happy doing that but it happened anyway. Those voters were simply ignored, which is the sort of behaviour I’d expect in a banana republic rather than a supposed trading bloc of first world European nations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I promised myself I wouldn't look at this endless ground-hog day nonsense anymore but my phone beeped.

An example of your nonsense which just has to be corrected  - "that deal with legal issues other than trade such as human rights"

For the record. Look it up if you don't believe me.

The European Convention of Human Rights (and its Court) ECHR & ECtHR is NOTHING to do with the EU.

This is is the problem - you keep coming out with statements that are demonstrably false, easily researchable  - indeed were clarified years ago and are well known and understood by any rational 'Leaver' and 'Remainer' alike.

We've also done to death trade deals.

Ok I’ll admit I had that wrong, I thought the Justice Court and Human Rights Court fell under the same umbrella. However the Justice Court still hears cases other than simple trade disputes, so my point is still valid, even if I got the Courts name wrong 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Ok I’ll admit I had that wrong, I thought the Justice Court and Human Rights Court fell under the same umbrella. However the Justice Court still hears cases other than simple trade disputes, so my point is still valid, even if I got the Courts name wrong 

I appreciate the correction - but we have to agree to some basic facts! So in good faith I apologize for jumping on you.

It's just these arguments are totally circular - and I do think it all comes down to those like me who look at cold hard facts without too much 'nationalistic' or 'emotional' hang-ups and those that don't. Head vs. Heart.

Edited by Yellow Fever
ECJ hear cases that fall under EU law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I appreciate the correction - but we have to agree to some basic facts! So in good faith I apologize for jumping on you.

It's just these arguments are totally circular - and I do think it all comes down to those like me who look at cold hard facts without too much 'nationalistic' or 'emotional' hang-ups and those that don't. Head vs. Heart.

They do have a bad habit of going in circles, as people seem to reply to the question that they want to reply to, rather than the ones asked. 

The problem being there aren’t many cold hard facts to call on. Anything that might happen in the future, either positive or negative, is merely speculation after all. Some economists have predicted we’ll be worse off, but those same economists were very wrong about what would happen in the days following a Leave vote, or what would happen if we failed to join the Euro, therefore people are right to take their opinion with a pinch of salt. Economists have predicted 20 of the last 10 recessions after all, it seems to have as much foresight as astrology.  

The only facts are the value of the pound has fallen. What’s been the biggest cause of that, either Brexit itself or the Parliamentary paralysis and uncertainty that followed the vote, is again a matter of opinion. The FTSE and unemployment levels hit record highs and lows respectively, despite what was forecast to happen, though the pandemic will soon wipe out those gains. 

More people who voted, for whatever reason, decided they’d rather be outside the EU than within. Yes the vote was close, but even if it had been by a single vote it wouldn’t have mattered. When France first signed up to the Maastricht Treaty it was by a much finer margin than the UK referendum after all, but I don’t think anybody suggests the result shouldn’t have stood back then. The Tories won the last election by a landslide simply because they promised to uphold the vote. Our future relationship with the EU and the world will be decided by subsequent elections where the electorate decides which party they believe has the best foreign policy. That’s the way a democracy is supposed to work in my view, rather than the ignored referendums we’ve seen in France or the Netherlands in the past. 

I’ve gave the figures regarding our declining trade (as a percentage) with the EU, as well as it’s declining percentage of the world economy for my reasons for believing Remaining wedded to it isn’t in our long term interests, although if it was merely a trading bloc and didn’t have all the other strings attached such as free movement then most people wouldn’t worry too much about it. Some people disagree, but rather than explain why they simply tell me I’m wrong. Again, seeing as we’re discussing the future neither my nor their opinion can be wrong yet, as it hasn’t happened.

Finally, I disagree with the stereotype of all Brexit voters being some far right, ignorant racist blob of people who want a neoliberal Tory government. Most don’t, in fact large numbers come from old Labour heartlands, for whom anything to do with Thatcherism is the devil. Even Boris has realised this, and economically swing the Tories much further to the left than his predecessors. He wouldn’t hold on to his new seats up north if he didn’t after all 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do want to remind everyone of the new rules. These are the same / opposite rules as existed for everything until Jan 31 this year. As we passed that landmark all is now in the Brexit era. 

The economy is falling apart, but we officially “got Brexit done” so therefore the current economic collapse is a direct result of that. 

Can we reverse course now?

Edited by Surfer
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Surfer said:

Be happy to change the reference to Kim Jong Un or Stalin if you’d prefer ... I did also write Fascist / Communist ... but there is such an anti-German thread going on here that the adulation of Hitler as the only one that could “save the people” seemed more jarring.

To be clear it’s the adulation and reverence to the unbounded wisdom and guidance of the glorious leader I object to. As being pushed again in the Torygraph today. 

Boris is the PM. No more no less. I hope he makes a full recovery both for his sake and his family. But in the meantime the Cabinet need to take charge of administration of the country. He needs to focus on getting well. We don’t need the Cabinet wondering  “what would Boris do?” 

To prove your point look at the front pages of the Sun and Express. Real dear leader bollox. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Herman said:

To prove your point look at the front pages of the Sun and Express. Real dear leader bollox. 

Yep, it really is rather pathetic isn't it  😂

Slightly more surprising though is that the Daily Mail seems to be getting increasingly disenchanted with the government it worked so hard to elect   🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With any luck many of the red tops are facing covid extinction. No advertising revenue. Few deliveries. End is nigh.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Yep, it really is rather pathetic isn't it  😂

Slightly more surprising though is that the Daily Mail seems to be getting increasingly disenchanted with the government it worked so hard to elect   🙄

I am sure part of the reason is that 52 per cent of the Mail's readership is female, which is the highest proportion for any UK national. And traditionally who does the nursing/caring in a society? The women, either at home or professionally, with  77 per cent of the NHS staff being female.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sun headline today is surely one of the most insensitive it has run. Surely to the families and friends of those 881 reported deaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I am sure part of the reason is that 52 per cent of the Mail's readership is female, which is the highest proportion for any UK national. And traditionally who does the nursing/caring in a society? The women, either at home or professionally, with  77 per cent of the NHS staff being female.

Good point, hadn't thought of that  😀

Also the current editor is considerably less vile than his predecessor, although that hasn't appeared to make much difference until very recently!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

They do have a bad habit of going in circles, as people seem to reply to the question that they want to reply to, rather than the ones asked. 

The problem being there aren’t many cold hard facts to call on. Anything that might happen in the future, either positive or negative, is merely speculation after all. Some economists have predicted we’ll be worse off, but those same economists were very wrong about what would happen in the days following a Leave vote, or what would happen if we failed to join the Euro, therefore people are right to take their opinion with a pinch of salt. Economists have predicted 20 of the last 10 recessions after all, it seems to have as much foresight as astrology.  

The only facts are the value of the pound has fallen. What’s been the biggest cause of that, either Brexit itself or the Parliamentary paralysis and uncertainty that followed the vote, is again a matter of opinion. The FTSE and unemployment levels hit record highs and lows respectively, despite what was forecast to happen, though the pandemic will soon wipe out those gains. 

More people who voted, for whatever reason, decided they’d rather be outside the EU than within. Yes the vote was close, but even if it had been by a single vote it wouldn’t have mattered. When France first signed up to the Maastricht Treaty it was by a much finer margin than the UK referendum after all, but I don’t think anybody suggests the result shouldn’t have stood back then. The Tories won the last election by a landslide simply because they promised to uphold the vote. Our future relationship with the EU and the world will be decided by subsequent elections where the electorate decides which party they believe has the best foreign policy. That’s the way a democracy is supposed to work in my view, rather than the ignored referendums we’ve seen in France or the Netherlands in the past. 

I’ve gave the figures regarding our declining trade (as a percentage) with the EU, as well as it’s declining percentage of the world economy for my reasons for believing Remaining wedded to it isn’t in our long term interests, although if it was merely a trading bloc and didn’t have all the other strings attached such as free movement then most people wouldn’t worry too much about it. Some people disagree, but rather than explain why they simply tell me I’m wrong. Again, seeing as we’re discussing the future neither my nor their opinion can be wrong yet, as it hasn’t happened.

Finally, I disagree with the stereotype of all Brexit voters being some far right, ignorant racist blob of people who want a neoliberal Tory government. Most don’t, in fact large numbers come from old Labour heartlands, for whom anything to do with Thatcherism is the devil. Even Boris has realised this, and economically swing the Tories much further to the left than his predecessors. He wouldn’t hold on to his new seats up north if he didn’t after all 

@Fen Canary we can agree on many things

The majority of those who could be bothered to vote in 2016 voted to Leave

This is old history, who lied to whom, what your (and mine) reasons were blah blah blah. We have left, it is done, we should move on.

Johnson won an election with a single policy "get Brexit Done" in December 2019 and can rule until 2014 with an 80 seat majority when the electorate can decide again

More ancient history, it is done we left and now Covid-19 has washed away the rhetoric. Labour has a new leadership and 17 new members of the front bench. The LibDems will follow in the Summer. The economy has crashed and Sunak has delivered four budgets to borrow hundreds of £billions.

The EU economy is, and will in the future be a smaller proportion of the World Economy.

True again, but also ancient history. Particularly harsh on the UK is the unwinding o the age of empires. This and globalisation combined with the rise of China was always inevitable.

We can agree on this, but what the interpretation of this facts lead us could be very different. That the EU's share of trade is proportionally smaller doesn't make the EU poorer and leaving in itself doesn't necessarily give the UK greater opportunities from leaving. Many EU members remain amongst the wealthiest and most productive nations in the world and this will remain the case. The growth in world trade is likely to be internal and inter-regional. Gross Domestic Product is exactly that, a gross figure that is a factor of population. For example, China with a massive population has had an export led industrial revolution based on a huge and cheap labour market. Small increases in per capita wealth led to massive increases in the share of the world economy, and at the same time reduced the EU's proportional share. They are now moving to the next stage, creating a wealthy middle class who will demand goods and services. Much of this trade is unlikely to go to the UK as there is little we have that they will want. The Chinese market will grow, but this market will be served by Chinese and China's regional neighbours. The result is that while the EU market will remain prosperous, countries like China (and India, Brazil, Indonesia) will proportionly increase their share of world trade. That leaves the UK outside its traditional markets and with difficulties penetratating new markets.

When it comes to getting Brexit done is there anyone left who actually believes, with Covid-19, that an EU/UK trade deal is possible by 31st December. There may be a few who would welcome a "No Deal"/"WTO"/"Australia" deal but when the nation gets to December, exhausted by Covid-19 and a worldwide depression do the majority believe this makes sense? (Spoiler alert: YouGov's latest survey is the first to give a small majority in favour of extending the transition period)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Herman said:

To prove your point look at the front pages of the Sun and Express. Real dear leader bollox. 

Some people seem to be upset that Boris is loved and the country is rooting for him as he fights the biggest battle of his life.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

With any luck many of the red tops are facing covid extinction. No advertising revenue. Few deliveries. End is nigh.

The only people buying the Guardian is the BBC. The newspaper of the middle-class loons will be the first to fold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

Some people seem to be upset that Boris is loved and the country is rooting for him as he fights the biggest battle of his life.  

I think everyone was happy he is getting better but to suggest the nation "breathed a huge sigh of relief" or "this really is a Good Friday" when thousands are laying in morgues and even more in hospitals is just a tad OTT, don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Herman said:

I think everyone was happy he is getting better but to suggest the nation "breathed a huge sigh of relief" or "this really is a Good Friday" when thousands are laying in morgues and even more in hospitals is just a tad OTT, don't you think?

That RMT Union Bloke and the bespectacled portly lady mayoress from Derbyshire.....were hoping he didn't breathe no more.....apparently.....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

The only people buying the Guardian is the BBC. The newspaper of the middle-class loons will be the first to fold

The Guardians popularity  is massively overstated. It’s circulation is only around 10% of that of the red tops, however it’s the paper of choice for many of the left leaning middle classes who make up the majority of posters on social media sites such as Reddit and Twitter. This gives it much more influence and exposure than it’s actual readership numbers deserve. People sometimes forget that these websites don’t give an accurate picture of the population, merely an extremely loud and tech savvy minority. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...