The Positive Brexit Thread

[Fen Canary 783]

10 hours ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

It was abundantly clear that the Leave bus was trying to hoodwink gullible Brexiteers. You were probably one of them. 

I wasn’t hoodwinked in the slightest. I believe leaving the EU was the right thing to do. I don’t like the fact I can’t vote out the EU commission if I disagree with the decisions they make. I abhor their treatment of the Greeks, forcing on them extreme austerity for the next 2 generations. They constantly threaten the Italians for breaking budget rules the French ignore with impunity. The far right is becoming a powerful bloc in Germany, with close to 20% now fans of AfD. 

I don’t agree that an unskilled European should have more right to reside here than a skilled worker from anywhere else in the world. Immigration, especially the low skilled variety from Eastern Europe, has been used as a tool to create competition for jobs and suppress wages in large parts of the country. 

In 1980, when the EU was much smaller, it was worth around 30% of the worlds GDP, today it is only around 16%. The percentage of Britain’s exports to the EU has also been steadily falling in that time, now so that we export more to non EU countries than to EU ones. I don’t see the benefit of remaining tied to a trading bloc that an ever dwindling amount of our exports are going to, and that represents an ever decreasing percentage of the worlds economy, and one that will likely shrink further if the German Auto Industry starts struggling in the face of (at the moment) superior Japanese technology around electric vehicles 

[Yellow Fever 3,732]

1 hour ago, Herman said:

But he was attacked hours later by Brexit-backing Mr Johnson, who said: "People should think very hard before they make these kinds of warnings.

"No, I don't believe that leaving the EU would cause World War Three to break out on the European continent."

It's in the small article you posted.

It's quite difficult to realise that some people like SC are quite so thick as to keep posting links to articles that simply disprove their argument.

Perhaps on the sole subject of SC Jools is right.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

35 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

I wasn’t hoodwinked in the slightest. I believe leaving the EU was the right thing to do. I don’t like the fact I can’t vote out the EU commission if I disagree with the decisions they make. I abhor their treatment of the Greeks, forcing on them extreme austerity for the next 2 generations. They constantly threaten the Italians for breaking budget rules the French ignore with impunity. The far right is becoming a powerful bloc in Germany, with close to 20% now fans of AfD. 

I don’t agree that an unskilled European should have more right to reside here than a skilled worker from anywhere else in the world. Immigration, especially the low skilled variety from Eastern Europe, has been used as a tool to create competition for jobs and suppress wages in large parts of the country. 

In 1980, when the EU was much smaller, it was worth around 30% of the worlds GDP, today it is only around 16%. The percentage of Britain’s exports to the EU has also been steadily falling in that time, now so that we export more to non EU countries than to EU ones. I don’t see the benefit of remaining tied to a trading bloc that an ever dwindling amount of our exports are going to, and that represents an ever decreasing percentage of the worlds economy, and one that will likely shrink further if the German Auto Industry starts struggling in the face of (at the moment) superior Japanese technology around electric vehicles 

You eloquently explained the reasons for your wishes to leave, I respect that.

[Yellow Fever 3,732]

45 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

I wasn’t hoodwinked in the slightest. I believe leaving the EU was the right thing to do. I don’t like the fact I can’t vote out the EU commission if I disagree with the decisions they make. I abhor their treatment of the Greeks, forcing on them extreme austerity for the next 2 generations. They constantly threaten the Italians for breaking budget rules the French ignore with impunity. The far right is becoming a powerful bloc in Germany, with close to 20% now fans of AfD. 

I don’t agree that an unskilled European should have more right to reside here than a skilled worker from anywhere else in the world. Immigration, especially the low skilled variety from Eastern Europe, has been used as a tool to create competition for jobs and suppress wages in large parts of the country. 

In 1980, when the EU was much smaller, it was worth around 30% of the worlds GDP, today it is only around 16%. The percentage of Britain’s exports to the EU has also been steadily falling in that time, now so that we export more to non EU countries than to EU ones. I don’t see the benefit of remaining tied to a trading bloc that an ever dwindling amount of our exports are going to, and that represents an ever decreasing percentage of the worlds economy, and one that will likely shrink further if the German Auto Industry starts struggling in the face of (at the moment) superior Japanese technology around electric vehicles 

There is a very obvious flaw in your percentage argument called the emergence of China and India etc. 

[Herman 9,692]

16 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

It's quite difficult to realise that some people like SC are quite so thick as to keep posting links to articles that simply disprove their argument.

Perhaps on the sole subject of SC Jools is right.

I'm not sure why he is doing it. If it's a remain supporter pretending to be a thick leaver then he is doing a bang up job. But then again, after these few years, I have come across thousands that seem to be doing exactly the same thing.

[Fen Canary 783]

33 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

There is a very obvious flaw in your percentage argument called the emergence of China and India etc. 

That isn’t a flaw, it’s a fact. There are now many more large markets outside the EU than there was 40 years ago, and as a consequence the EU’s share of the world GDP is shrinking considerably. Therefore I think being remained tied into an ever decreasing trading bloc seems to me to be the wrong decision. I believe striking trade deals with these emerging markets, ones more aligned to the UKs economy than EU wide ones, will be a more beneficial long term. Don’t forget also the UK is around 20% of the entire EU GDP, so these percentages will drop even further once we completely leave 

[Surfer 1,547]

A drop of ~ 20% apparently. Still a stupid idea to cut off European trade (not to mention services) integration for a mythical ability to "cut a better deal" with "emerging" China, India and Mexico.

[Yellow Fever 3,732]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

That isn’t a flaw, it’s a fact. There are now many more large markets outside the EU than there was 40 years ago, and as a consequence the EU’s share of the world GDP is shrinking considerably. Therefore I think being remained tied into an ever decreasing trading bloc seems to me to be the wrong decision. I believe striking trade deals with these emerging markets, ones more aligned to the UKs economy than EU wide ones, will be a more beneficial long term. Don’t forget also the UK is around 20% of the entire EU GDP, so these percentages will drop even further once we completely leave 

Yes but as a bigger block we have much more leverage to do much better trade deals with China and India than little old UK alone. As just the UK we will get a far inferior deal. 

However. Nothing about being in the EU stops us for selling into these markets anyway. I know, I do it.

However the EU isn't an ever decreasing trade block. No more than the US is. Both shrink in global percentages as developing countries ramp up. All that happens is the UK becomes ever smaller and a less significant market either in or out of the EU, but the EU remains a larger block comparable to China that can negotiate better terms.

If you dont hang together you'll surely hang seperately.

Anyway, as with the US trade deal the Brexiters are already finding out the hard way. Enjoy.

Edited March 13, 2020 by Yellow Fever
Ought to add. Go and take a look at the DECREASING share of global GDP of countries like the USA, Japan etc. Obviously not worth bothering with to keep true to your EU arguement.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

13 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes but as a bigger block we have much more leverage to do much better trade deals with China and India than little old UK alone. As just the UK we will get a far inferior deal. 

However. Nothing about being in the EU stops us for selling into these markets anyway. I know, I do it.

However the EU isn't an ever decreasing trade block. No more than the US is. Both shrink in global percentages as developing countries ramp up. All that happens is the UK becomes ever smaller and a less significant market either in or out of the EU, but the EU remains a larger block comparable to China that can negotiate better terms.

If you dont hang together you'll surely hang seperately.

Anyway, as with the US trade deal the Brexiters are already finding out the hard way. Enjoy.

Yes. Of all the Brexit ‘arguments’ the trade one is the most absurd. The UK is giving up its full, free and frictionless access to the world’s largest single market which happens to be as close geographically as it could be when it is an accepted fact that not only trade in goods but even trade in services is easier and therefore more profitable the physically closer the traders are.

Plus access to about 70 trade deals around the world, including the largest in history, with Japan, and with emerging market countries.

it is no coincidence that during the referendum campaign Brexiters were extolling the single market and saying it would be crazy to cut the UK off from it. It was only once it dawned on them that the EU was not going to cave in and allow continued access without accepting freedom of movement, and once the fundamentalist crazies had taken over the Tory party that crashing out without a deal and somehow trying to make up for that by doing a trade deal with Paraguay or Botswana was claimed to be the panacea they had argued for all along.

 

 

 

[Fen Canary 783]

12 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes but as a bigger block we have much more leverage to do much better trade deals with China and India than little old UK alone. As just the UK we will get a far inferior deal. 

However. Nothing about being in the EU stops us for selling into these markets anyway. I know, I do it.

However the EU isn't an ever decreasing trade block. No more than the US is. Both shrink in global percentages as developing countries ramp up. All that happens is the UK becomes ever smaller and a less significant market either in or out of the EU, but the EU remains a larger block comparable to China that can negotiate better terms.

If you dont hang together you'll surely hang seperately.

Anyway, as with the US trade deal the Brexiters are already finding out the hard way. Enjoy.

 

22 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes but as a bigger block we have much more leverage to do much better trade deals with China and India than little old UK alone. As just the UK we will get a far inferior deal. 

However. Nothing about being in the EU stops us for selling into these markets anyway. I know, I do it.

However the EU isn't an ever decreasing trade block. No more than the US is. Both shrink in global percentages as developing countries ramp up. All that happens is the UK becomes ever smaller and a less significant market either in or out of the EU, but the EU remains a larger block comparable to China that can negotiate better terms.

If you dont hang together you'll surely hang seperately.

Anyway, as with the US trade deal the Brexiters are already finding out the hard way. Enjoy.

Free trade with the EU is a great thing, and in an ideal world the UK would still trade as freely as possible after Brexit. However while free trade, or as close to it, is the desirable outcome after talks finish, to me it isn’t worth paying into the EU budget, being under the the EU commission, abiding by EU budget rules, being prevented from striking trade deals with outside nations without adding in other EU nations interests, or being able to control immigration from EU countries just to achieve it. Also regards to to having more leverage as part of a big bloc, that may well be true, however because there’s almost 30 other countries interests to protect, the UK would invariably have to compromise on certain sectors in order to appease foreign groups such as the German car industry or French agriculture to get a deal. While as a single nation we may have less clout, we should be able to strike deals more aligned to the national interest. Finally trade isn’t a zero sum game, only Donald Trump seems to see it as a competition. It’s usually set up to be beneficial for both parties, so if the other nation does try and bully the UK then we can simply walk away from talks and find a more willing partner

[Fen Canary 783]

11 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Yes. Of all the Brexit ‘arguments’ the trade one is the most absurd. The UK is giving up its full, free and frictionless access to the world’s largest single market which happens to be as close geographically as it could be when it is an accepted fact that not only trade in goods but even trade in services is easier and therefore more profitable the physically closer the traders are.

Plus access to about 70 trade deals around the world, including the largest in history, with Japan, and with emerging market countries.

it is no coincidence that during the referendum campaign Brexiters were extolling the single market and saying it would be crazy to cut the UK off from it. It was only once it dawned on them that the EU was not going to cave in and allow continued access without accepting freedom of movement, and once the fundamentalist crazies had taken over the Tory party that crashing out without a deal and somehow trying to make up for that by doing a trade deal with Paraguay or Botswana was claimed to be the panacea they had argued for all along.

 

 

 

We’re not losing access to those 70 trade deals though, as around 50 have signed agreements to carry on trading on those terms once the UK leaves, with a view to moving towards a more free trade agreement in the future

[SwindonCanary 455]

"Yes but as a bigger block we have much more leverage to do much better trade deals with China and India than little old UK alone. As just the UK we will get a far inferior deal. " But I'd much rather it was our trade deals and not the thoughts of the unelected  in the EU. 

[Yellow Fever 3,732]

24 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

 

Free trade with the EU is a great thing, and in an ideal world the UK would still trade as freely as possible after Brexit. However while free trade, or as close to it, is the desirable outcome after talks finish, to me it isn’t worth paying into the EU budget, being under the the EU commission, abiding by EU budget rules, being prevented from striking trade deals with outside nations without adding in other EU nations interests, or being able to control immigration from EU countries just to achieve it. Also regards to to having more leverage as part of a big bloc, that may well be true, however because there’s almost 30 other countries interests to protect, the UK would invariably have to compromise on certain sectors in order to appease foreign groups such as the German car industry or French agriculture to get a deal. While as a single nation we may have less clout, we should be able to strike deals more aligned to the national interest. Finally trade isn’t a zero sum game, only Donald Trump seems to see it as a competition. It’s usually set up to be beneficial for both parties, so if the other nation does try and bully the UK then we can simply walk away from talks and find a more willing partner

Please identify what exactly are the UKs interests that don't align with the EUs bearing in mind our main export is services (and which doesn't get covered in trade deals)

As is surely obvious outside services and a few niche areas most external trade partners are looking greedily at selling into the UK. Our farmers and manufacturers won't know how to compete ... or to quote the Brexit economist Minford... the destruction of UK manufacturing. Yes Brexiters are generally protectionist not free marketers.

Brexit was a romantic idea for internal consumption only. Makes no sense in the real world and has brought wry smiles of humour when discussed in the boardrooms of Asia.

That said, interesting experiment. Poor sods.

Edited March 14, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

30 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

We’re not losing access to those 70 trade deals though, as around 50 have signed agreements to carry on trading on those terms once the UK leaves, with a view to moving towards a more free trade agreement in the future

I don’t think it is as high a number as that, and most of those deals are very small beer. At a glance only those with Norway/Iceland and South Korea are sizeable, and the Japan deal is not there. The reality is that all estimates, including the government’s, agree that in the short-term and medium-term and quite possibly the long-term the UK simply will not do trade deals that make up for cutting itself off from the single market. There will be a substantial hit to GDP for years to come.

[Fen Canary 783]

26 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I don’t think it is as high a number as that, and most of those deals are very small beer. At a glance only those with Norway/Iceland and South Korea are sizeable, and the Japan deal is not there. The reality is that all estimates, including the government’s, agree that in the short-term and medium-term and quite possibly the long-term the UK simply will not do trade deals that make up for cutting itself off from the single market. There will be a substantial hit to GDP for years to come.

Personally I don’t believe leaving will damage the GDP long term, short term hit maybe but much past that I don’t think leaving will hurt the economy. Ultimately though it’s all guess work as we don’t know what trade deals the UK will sign or with whom, or how the Eurozone will hold up if Germany or Italy slides into recession as has been looking likely. 

However all it boils down to is majority of people who voted were either willing to take a chance that things would improve, or believed that the financial hit was a price worth paying to be outside the EU. Many see the EU as a protectionist, corrupt, wasteful organisation, with an unaccountable commission and president, and were willing to risk being worse off financially to be outside it.

To put it in another context, we could argue that the Republic of Ireland would be in a much stronger position financially if had remained part of the UK, however if you asked the Irish they would much rather be less well off and have their own parliament, than richer and still sending MPs to Westminster 

[Herman 9,692]

"However all it boils down to is majority of people who voted were either willing to take a chance that things would improve, or believed that the financial hit was a price worth paying to be outside the EU."

I'm sorry but this is nonsense. All through the referendum NO downsides were shown from the Leave campaign. It was all "easiest deal in history" type guff. The remain side were warning you that we would not get anything that was being promised yet every time we were told to stop scaremongering with the cries of "Project Fear". As Purple says it was only when reality hit did the goalposts move to "we all knew there would be an economic hit" and "we definitely voted to be poorer". It was and always will be a con job.

[Herman 9,692]

Where the brexiter argument always falls down and it's a massive contradiction.

"We export more now to non-EU countries so it's no point being in the EU."

"We want to trade more freely with non-EU countries."

[Fen Canary 783]

26 minutes ago, Herman said:

"However all it boils down to is majority of people who voted were either willing to take a chance that things would improve, or believed that the financial hit was a price worth paying to be outside the EU."

I'm sorry but this is nonsense. All through the referendum NO downsides were shown from the Leave campaign. It was all "easiest deal in history" type guff. The remain side were warning you that we would not get anything that was being promised yet every time we were told to stop scaremongering with the cries of "Project Fear". As Purple says it was only when reality hit did the goalposts move to "we all knew there would be an economic hit" and "we definitely voted to be poorer". It was and always will be a con job.

It wasn’t the Leave campaigns job to point out any downsides though was it, they were there to point out the EUs faults and promote the benefits to leaving as they saw them, likewise it was the Remain camps job to promote the benefits of EU membership and highlight what they saw as the downside of leaving. Remember the Remain side had said the country would be in recession in the days immediately following a Leave vote, and that unemployment would skyrocket and stock market collapse, when in fact the opposite happened, so they were just as guilty as the Leave camp for exaggerating their positions. Ultimately after a couple of months of constantly hearing both sides of the argument on the television, radio and newspapers etc, more people who voted decided they wanted to Leave the EU than Remain in it. 

[Herman 9,692]

22 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

The leave bus never said anything of the sort. It gave an alternative option for the £350 million, not a prediction of where it would be spent. The articles Swindon has quoted predicted what would happen, and all have been proven to be absolute rubbish 

https://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-04-15/vote-leave-unveils-first-billboard-of-referendum-campaign/

 

[Fen Canary 783]

20 minutes ago, Herman said:

Where the brexiter argument always falls down and it's a massive contradiction.

"We export more now to non-EU countries so it's no point being in the EU."

"We want to trade more freely with non-EU countries."

As a percentage our exports to the EU have been dropping for 30 years, so now less than half our exports go there despite it’s protectionist tariffs regarding other nations. Remaining tied into a trading bloc that an ever decreasing amount of our exports go to, while having to apply punitive tariffs onto other markets that collectively make up an increasing majority of our trade seems to me to be the wrong thing to do. I’ll agree a good trade deal with the EU would be preferable to WTO terms, although the danger of these have been massively overstated with the average tariff being around 2-3%, but an EU deal shouldn’t be forced through at any cost

[Fen Canary 783]

8 minutes ago, Herman said:

https://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-04-15/vote-leave-unveils-first-billboard-of-referendum-campaign/

 

Again, this was a suggestion, it implied we COULD use the money saved from leaving the EU to better fund the NHS. It could have said a number of uses for the money, but they used the one that carried the most powerful message, in much the same way the Remain camp threatened a shortage of drugs and NHS workers if we left. If the bus had said we WILL give all extra monies to the NHS then you’d have a point but they didn’t 

[Yellow Fever 3,732]

7 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Personally I don’t believe leaving will damage the GDP long term, short term hit maybe but much past that I don’t think leaving will hurt the economy. Ultimately though it’s all guess work as we don’t know what trade deals the UK will sign or with whom, or how the Eurozone will hold up if Germany or Italy slides into recession as has been looking likely. 

However all it boils down to is majority of people who voted were either willing to take a chance that things would improve, or believed that the financial hit was a price worth paying to be outside the EU. Many see the EU as a protectionist, corrupt, wasteful organisation, with an unaccountable commission and president, and were willing to risk being worse off financially to be outside it.

To put it in another context, we could argue that the Republic of Ireland would be in a much stronger position financially if had remained part of the UK, however if you asked the Irish they would much rather be less well off and have their own parliament, than richer and still sending MPs to Westminster 

 

Frankly the Brexit argument was never about economics (that never stacked up)  - it was about immigration.

On 'economics'  and trade the brexiters are still confused & conflicted even amongst themselves.

Most are simply protectionist - wanting to 'protect' their particular industry or sector from overseas competition. Others - notably the RWNJ in the Tory party are free market buccaneers - remove all tariffs and limits to trade - so what the social consequences in our rural and manufacturing centres. Survival of the fittest. 

Easy examples of the conflict inherent in the Brexit position are a US 'deal' - no we don't want 'chlorinated chicken, their cheap food, hormone beef, higher price NHS drugs etc. Actually they don't want everything the US does! In fact there is almost no deal to be done at all.

India - says yes we will do a deal but we want much easier access for our workers to come to the UK (oops - that 'immigration' word again). No you shout.

Then we have my favourites - Australia and NZ. All the cheap lamb they can export to us. Coupled with the 'clearance' of the Welsh (let alone the English) highland farming communities. No they shout!

I could go on but you get the point. The UK will find (indeed has) itself 'on the menu' for potential trade partners. Please choose what industries or sectors you are prepared to damage for your poor  'deals'! 

The immigration argument I understood - even if it was noticeable that the 'fear' of immigration was strongest in areas that generally had the least (Wales etc and our own East coast).  Yes there were some clear hotspots where the government had failed to react with better services etc but generally it was as ever much overplayed. Older people no doubt didn't like the 'speed of change' or the globalization of their communities. That however has always been the way of the world - these communities themselves are very different to what they were 100 years ago. I bet many hated the switch off of analogue TV as well etc.

Anyway - None of it matters much at present - the coronavirus will cause much ructions and a new world to emerge. Personally I suspect within 5 to 10 years the 'insular' Brexity position will become untenable and with the passing of the more elderly somewhat economically cocooned generation (hastened sadly by the virus) no doubt the UK will rejoin some form of European trade block somewhat chastened. It's just the way of the maturing modern world same as children grow into adults. Brexit I'm sure will be seen eventually just as a childish tantrum.

Edited March 14, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[kick it off 1,948]

7 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Personally I don’t believe leaving will damage the GDP long term, short term hit maybe but much past that I don’t think leaving will hurt the economy. Ultimately though it’s all guess work as we don’t know what trade deals the UK will sign or with whom, or how the Eurozone will hold up if Germany or Italy slides into recession as has been looking likely. 

However all it boils down to is majority of people who voted were either willing to take a chance that things would improve, or believed that the financial hit was a price worth paying to be outside the EU. Many see the EU as a protectionist, corrupt, wasteful organisation, with an unaccountable commission and president, and were willing to risk being worse off financially to be outside it.

To put it in another context, we could argue that the Republic of Ireland would be in a much stronger position financially if had remained part of the UK, however if you asked the Irish they would much rather be less well off and have their own parliament, than richer and still sending MPs to Westminster 

I don't agree with a vast majority of what you post, as I don't buy in to this whole grit our teeth and it will be fine argument, and as far as I'm concerned, the UK has cut off it's nose to spite it's face - there's little value to leaving the EU and a lot of hardship that will come from it. The younger generation have lost an incredible amount of opportunity and access that I enjoyed and indeed participated in when I was younger - Multilateral youth exchanges, European Voluntary Service and various other schemes.

Having said that, I fully respect your viewpoint and the way you have expressed it.

Swindon et al take note - It isn't because you voted leave that you are ridiculed, it's because you can't explain with any modicum of credibility why you did it. Fen Canary is able to give his opinion in a reasonable and sensible way that is at least based on logic and has therefore been treated like an adult by the rest of us who are capable of reasoned discussion instead of petulant and childish "Tick tock" ****e that SC favours.

Edited March 14, 2020 by kick it off

[Herman 9,692]

"Let's give..." is not a suggestion.

There is a massive shortage of nurses, especially now a lot of EU staff have either gone home or haven't come.

If we crashed out with no deal there would have been a shortage of drugs and this is still on the cards believe it or not.

Mark Carney, vilified by leavers, stopped his predictions coming true by working hard to stop his predictions coming true.

EU tarriffs are tiny and for a lot of poorer countries they are non existent. Look at the "Anything but guns" regime.Yes some time they are protectionist but we need these measures to safeguard OUR jobs. The current Brexiter plan of a no tarriff free for all WILL lead to our farms and fctories either closing or having a race to the bottom. We saw this a few years back when tonnes of Chinese steel turned up and nearly bankrupted our steel works overnight.

[Fen Canary 783]

6 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

 

Frankly the Brexit argument was never about economics (that never stacked up)  - it was about immigration.

On 'economics'  and trade the brexiters are still confused & conflicted even amongst themselves.

Most are simply protectionist - wanting to 'protect' their particular industry or sector from overseas competition. Others - notably the RWNJ in the Tory party are free market buccaneers - remove all tariffs and limits to trade - so what the social consequences in our rural and manufacturing centres. Survival of the fittest. 

Easy examples of the conflict inherent in the Brexit position are a US 'deal' - no we don't want 'chlorinated chicken, their cheap food, hormone beef, higher price NHS drugs etc. Actually they don't want everything the US does! In fact there is almost no deal to be done at all.

India - says yes we will do a deal but we want much easier access for our workers to come to the UK (oops - that 'immigration' word again). No you shout.

Then we have my favourites - Australia and NZ. All the cheap lamb they can export to us. Coupled with the 'clearance' of the Welsh (let alone the English) highland farming communities. No they shout!

I could go on but you get the point. The UK will find (indeed has) itself 'on the menu' for potential trade partners. Please choose what industries or sectors you are prepared to damage for your poor  'deals'! 

The immigration argument I understood - even if it was noticeable that the 'fear' of immigration was strongest in areas that generally had the least (Wales etc and our own East coast).  Yes there were some clear hotspots where the government had failed to react with better services etc but generally it was as ever much overplayed. Older people no doubt didn't like the 'speed of change' or the globalization of their communities. That however has always been the way of the world - these communities themselves are very different to what they were 100 years ago. I bet many hated the switch off of analogue TV as well etc.

Anyway - None of it matters much at present - the coronavirus will cause much ructions and a new world to emerge. Personally I suspect within 5 to 10 years the 'insular' Brexity position will become untenable and with the passing of the more elderly somewhat economically cocooned generation (hastened sadly by the virus) no doubt the UK will rejoin some form of European trade block somewhat chastened. It's just the way of the maturing modern world same as children grow into adults.

You do seem to have cherry picked the industries that clash with ours, which you’re right certain sectors will have competition with new markets. However I’d argue many do already, farming in particular has to battle with the powerful French agricultural sector which is disproportionately helped by the CAP. NZ and Aus also have great wines, which currently have tariffs slapped on them to protect European vineyards. The way I see it all trade deals have pros and cons, and it’s the governments job to weigh up whether the positives outweigh the negatives. 

In regards to immigration I don’t see how it’s xenophobic to want to control who enters the country, and in what numbers. The reason it it predominantly working class areas that are most anti free movement laws is because they’re the ones who have been most adversely affected by them. They’ve seen their wages stagnate, and faced extra competition for jobs and public services, and have always been told there was nothing our elected politicians could do to stop it. When they finally had a chance to make MPs accountable to them they voted for it in large numbers 

[Fen Canary 783]

14 minutes ago, Herman said:

"Let's give..." is not a suggestion.

There is a massive shortage of nurses, especially now a lot of EU staff have either gone home or haven't come.

If we crashed out with no deal there would have been a shortage of drugs and this is still on the cards believe it or not.

Mark Carney, vilified by leavers, stopped his predictions coming true by working hard to stop his predictions coming true.

EU tarriffs are tiny and for a lot of poorer countries they are non existent. Look at the "Anything but guns" regime.Yes some time they are protectionist but we need these measures to safeguard OUR jobs. The current Brexiter plan of a no tarriff free for all WILL lead to our farms and fctories either closing or having a race to the bottom. We saw this a few years back when tonnes of Chinese steel turned up and nearly bankrupted our steel works overnight.

I’d like to know where all these EU nurses and doctors are that are leaving or have left the country en masse. All the times I’ve been in a hospital the nurses have been largely from the Philippines and surrounding countries, and the doctors either African, Chinese or the sub continent. I’ve never come across large numbers of EU workers within the NHS, though I’ll admit this is based purely on personal experience. 

Your point about Mark Carney is an interesting one, as you admit that his original predictions were wrong, and he was able to avoid them happening simply by doing his job. Examples like this only harden people’s opinions around “Project Fear” as none of the apocalyptic predictions have so far come to pass, and many experts seem to alter their opinion or move the goalposts almost weekly. First we were supposed to be in recession the days after the Leave vote, then when that didn’t happen it was if Mays deal was rejected. When it failed to happen again it was supposed to happen when we entered the transition period, then finally when that failed to materialise it’s now been pushed back to when we finally Leave fully. 

Finally only the most right leaning Leave voters want total tariff free trade. Many Leave voters come from traditional Labour voting areas, and are much more left wing economically and are much more protectionist, which goes back to their original concerns regarding immigration. Even the Tories now seem much more happy to splash the cash than previous incarnations of the party, so I don’t believe we’ll see the race to the bottom, hardcore capitalism like the States. The Tories hold on power now relies on keeping those labour heartlands happy, and they won’t do that with more austerity. 

[Herman 9,692]

The thing is Fen, as we have found out over the last few years, immigration could have been controlled. It is mostly in part due to succesive government domestic policies that has allowed it to grow. Our membership of the EU had little to do with the numbers. Even now EU immigration numbers are falling off a cliff while non-EU numbers are growing rapidly. Our governments could have been honest and said we needed immigration to keep the ecenomy going but they took the easy option of blaming the EU.

[Fen Canary 783]

4 minutes ago, Herman said:

The thing is Fen, as we have found out over the last few years, immigration could have been controlled. It is mostly in part due to succesive government domestic policies that has allowed it to grow. Our membership of the EU had little to do with the numbers. Even now EU immigration numbers are falling off a cliff while non-EU numbers are growing rapidly. Our governments could have been honest and said we needed immigration to keep the ecenomy going but they took the easy option of blaming the EU.

How can the UK have limited immigration from within the EU without breaking EU freedom of movement laws? Yes Blair could have placed temporary restrictions when the Eastern European bloc countries joined, but that’s long since finished. EU nationals have the right to live and work in whichever EU country they choose, I know this because many Remain voters have used it as an example of something we’re losing by leaving the EU. 

Immigration from outside the EU is a different subject altogether, as it can be and is controlled. Immigrants need certain skills and earn over a certain salary to be granted a visa to live here. Whether we think the number of visas the government dishes out to Non EU nationals is too high or low is another discussion 

[Herman 9,692]

"Your point about Mark Carney is an interesting one, as you admit that his original predictions were wrong, and he was able to avoid them happening simply by doing his job "

His predictions weren't wrong. The pound crashed through the floor costing the country and businesses billions of pounds.(Even a small company like mine had to pay extra thousands of pounds because we had orders with French companies.) He acted quickly to stop even more predicted damage from happening. He did his job by doing something he thought would be uneccessary.

[Fen Canary 783]

2 minutes ago, Herman said:

"Your point about Mark Carney is an interesting one, as you admit that his original predictions were wrong, and he was able to avoid them happening simply by doing his job "

His predictions weren't wrong. The pound crashed through the floor costing the country and businesses billions of pounds.(Even a small company like mine had to pay extra thousands of pounds because we had orders with French companies.) He acted quickly to stop even more predicted damage from happening. He did his job by doing something he thought would be uneccessary.

Again, so he was able to avoid the worst of his predictions by simply doing what he is paid to do. Yes he had to change tactics slightly to what he would have done if we had Remained, but that’s why he’s paid millions of pounds a year. The markets are always spooked by change, as we see every time there’s an uncertain outcome with elections, but apart from the pound losing some value, which while bad for yourself would have been good for exporters, Carneys predictions of economic collapse failed to happen