Jump to content
Jools

The Positive Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

The cutting of Entrepreneur’s Relief from £10m to £1m with immediate effect will have quite material tax effects on individuals looking to sell their businesses. Ridiculous decision.

I’ll agree that’s not something I thought was a good idea either, but on the whole I thought it wasn’t a bad budget. He seemed to realise continued austerity wouldn’t see him in power for too long 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

What don’t you like about the budget Han? Which areas do you think are under/over funded, and where would you have directed the funds instead?

In case you haven't noticed @Fen Canary the UK has left the EU, so your tired rehash of abstract arguments from the campaign do not add anything to the debate. The question is where the country is now, and where it goes from there.

So where are we now? The government's own figures show an economy that is damaged, and damaged by the vote to Leave the EU. Even the most optimistic forecasts, and remember these exclude the impact of Covid-19, show weaker growth than any five year period since records began. We are already worse off than forecast back in the heady days of the 2010s, the deficit was not eradicated, the surplus never happened, private sector investment is low, areas of public investment are down to the bare bones (as 100,000 staff vacancies in the NHS illustrates), employment is often precarious and productivity remains stubbornly low.

It is worth remebering that this budget is already six months late, and the government was forced to have it otherwise it would have ceased to function in April. Sunak read out what he was given, but it is clearly driven by panic on two fronts. One is that a disorderly Brexit on its own would push the country into recession, the other is the Virus. As a result Johnson is driven to abandon Conservative economic orthodoxy and increase borrowing while already running a deficit. Or "throwing money around like a drunken sailor" as one right wing think-tank put it. While a return to Keynesism is welcome it is clear that very few of the infrastructure promises are shovel ready and can be delivered anytime soon. In all likelihood if anything is to be built it is likely to be a string of white elephants.

The budget does nothing to address the Social Care crisis, even though Johnson said he had a plan ready to go. It does nothing to address climate change or invest in green industries. And it does nothing to return the public realm to the state it was in 2015, let alone 2010 when the Tories came to power. Idiots like @SwindonCanary will take it on face value but it seems that the only plan Johnson/Cummings have to avoid a double dip recession (one now due to the virus, one in 2021) is to run them both together into a fully fledged depression.

Edited by BigFish
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

It wasn't commented on because nobody knew about it until well after the referendum. Stop trying to rewrite history. Some of us followed it,

Representatives from CA regularly appeared at Vote Leave events. A quick check on YouTube and you’ll see them numerous times. It only became a problem after Leave won the referendum. As I said targeted ads had been used numerous times before the vote, most notably helping Obama win the presidential election. Do you believe his victory shouldn’t have stood either? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BigFish said:

In case you haven't noticed @Fen Canary the UK has left the EU, so your tired rehash of abstract arguments from the campaign do not add anything to the debate. The question is where the country is now, and where it goes from there.

So where are we now? The government's own figures show an economy that is damaged, and damaged by the vote to Leave the EU. Even the most optimistic forecasts, and remember these exclude the impact of Covid-19, show weaker growth than any five year period since records began. We are already worse off than forecast back in the heady days of the 2010s, the deficit was not eradicated, the surplus never happened, private sector investment is low, areas of public investment are down to the bare bones (as 100,000 staff vacancies in the NHS illustrates), employment is often precarious and productivity remains stubbornly low.

It is worth remebering that this budget is already six months late, and the government was forced to have it otherwise it would have ceased to function in April. Sunak read out what he was given, but it is clearly driven by panic on two fronts. One is that a disorderly Brexit on its own would push the country into recession, the other is the Virus. As a result Johnson is driven to abandon Conservative economic orthodoxy and increase borrowing while already running a deficit. Or "throwing money around like a drunken sailor" as one right wing think-tank put it. While a return to Keynesism is welcome it is clear that very few of the infrastructure promises are shovel ready and can be delivered anytime soon. In all likelihood if anything is to be built it is likely to be a string of white elephants.

The budget does nothing to address the Social Care crisis, even though Johnson said he had a plan ready to go. It does nothing to address climate change or invest in green industries. And it does nothing to return the public realm to the state it was in 2015, let alone 2010 when the Tories came to power. Idiots like @SwindonCanary will take it on face value but it seems that the only plan Johnson/Cummings have to avoid a double dip recession (one now due to the virus, one in 2021) is to run them both together into a fully fledged depression.

 

Share this post


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

In case you haven't noticed @Fen Canary the UK has left the EU, so your tired rehash of abstract arguments from the campaign do not add anything to the debate. The question is where the country is now, and where it goes from there.

So where are we now? The government's own figures show an economy that is damaged, and damaged by the vote to Leave the EU. Even the most optimistic forecasts, and remember these exclude the impact of Covid-19, weaker growth than any five year period since records began. We are already worse off than forecast back in the heady days of the mid-eighties, the deficit was not eradicated, the surplus never happened, private sector investment is low, areas of public investment are down to the bare bones (as 100,000 staff vacancies in the NHS illustrates), employment is often precarious and productivity remains stubbornly low.

It is worth remebering that this budget is already six months late, and the government was forced to have it otherwise it would have ceased to function in April. Sunak read out what he was given, but it is clearly driven by panic on two fronts. One is that a disorderly Brexit on its own would push the country into recession, the other is the Virus. As a result Johnson is driven to abandon Conservative economic orthodoxy and increase borrowing while already running a deficit. Or "throwing money around like a drunken sailor" as one right wing think-tank put it. While a return to Keynesism is welcome it is clear that very few of the infrastructure promises are shovel ready and can be delivered anytime soon. In all likelihood if anything is to be built it is likely to be a string of white elephants.

The budget does nothing to address the Social Care crisis, even though Johnson said he had a plan ready to go. It does nothing to address climate change or invest in green industries. And it does nothing to return the public realm to the state it was in 2015, let alone 2010 when the Tories came to power. Idiots like @SwindonCanary will take it on face value but it seems that the only plan Johnson/Cummings have to avoid a double dip recession (one now due to the virus, one in 2021) is to run them both together into a fully fledged depression.

Tell me, how can the economy be that damaged by leaving the EU when we’ve left in name only so far? We’re still paying into the budget, still in the customs union and single market, still have free movement etc. The only thing that’s changed is we no longer have MEPs. So any problems we have can’t be blamed on the Leave vote in my eyes, as we haven’t left in any meaningful way 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Tell me, how can the economy be that damaged by leaving the EU when we’ve left in name only so far? We’re still paying into the budget, still in the customs union and single market, still have free movement etc. The only thing that’s changed is we no longer have MEPs. So any problems we have can’t be blamed on the Leave vote in my eyes, as we haven’t left in any meaningful way 

The economy has been damaged in three main ways. 1) Private sector investment collapsed due to the uncertainty. 2) The government had needed to increase expenditure on preparing for and mitigating the risks of Brexit (there are literally thousands of civil servants working full time on this). 3) It has squeezed all all other government economic planning. That is while ignoring the spike in inflation and the collapse of the pound.

Edited by BigFish

Share this post


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

Representatives from CA regularly appeared at Vote Leave events. A quick check on YouTube and you’ll see them numerous times. It only became a problem after Leave won the referendum. As I said targeted ads had been used numerous times before the vote, most notably helping Obama win the presidential election. Do you believe his victory shouldn’t have stood either? 

This isn't true. Nobody knew anything about CA and its involvement until well after. Why do you think we had numerous court cases, commitee meetings, police investigations , massive fines and the eventual dismemberment of CA. As I have said the targetted ads were the smaller of the problem. The chronic misuse of personal data which allowed them to target people was the bigger of the problem.

And using Obama is classic whataboutery. It has zero to do with the referendum.

Share this post


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

The economy has been damaged in three main ways. 1) Private sector investment collapsed due to the uncertainty. 2) The government had needed to increase expenditure on preparing for and mitigating the risks of Brexit (there are literally thousands of civil servants working full time on this). 3) It has squeezed all all other government economic planning. That is while ignoring the spike in inflation and the collapse of the pound.

In the three years  from the referendum the number of UK jobs created by foreign investment fell by 19 per cent.

In the same three years foreign capital investment in greenfield projects fell by 30 per cent from $120bn to $83.5bn.

In the  same three years about one in five overseas investors either cancelled or put on hold potential projects.

This analysis, based on government and other official and trade figures, is from the FT.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

The day Sinn Fein stops being under the guidance of the IRA army council is the day I’ll stop referring to them as anything other than the political wing of a paramilitary group. 

As regards to shrinking GDP, do you think it’s economically sensible to remain wedded to a bloc of nations whose share of the worlds wealth is decreasing, and neglecting those economies that a rising rapidly? The EU has around 70 trade deals with other countries, around 40 of which have already agreed to keep trading with the UK on the same terms once we’ve left. Long term I think it’s far better to be able to trade on our own terms with who we desire than be locked into ones for the EU as a whole. 

Maybe I have bought into a dream of those deals going more smoothly than they will, but you’ve also bought into the dream of an EU that exists as it is today, rather than an extremely fractured organisation I think it will become. Nobody has a crystal ball unfortunately, but if the referendum hadn’t been upheld the damage to democracy would have been much greater than a few tariffs on EU produce 

Fen - The EU GDP was not shrinking but growing (present circumstances excluded for everybody). When you're at the 'top' it's always harder work to go higher.

A few pertinent facts on the EU we left (yes taken from an EU Commission site but no reason to doubt them factually unless you're of the tin-hat brigade). 

  • The EU is the largest economy in the world. Although growth is projected to be slow, the EU remains the largest economy in the world with a GDP per head of €25 000 for its 500 million consumers.
  • The EU is the world's largest trading block. The EU is the world’s largest trader of manufactured goods and services.
  • The EU ranks first in both inbound and outbound international investments
  • The EU is the top trading partner for 80 countries. By comparison the US is the top trading partner for a little over 20 countries.
  • The EU is the most open to developing countries. Fuels excluded, the EU imports more from developing countries than the USA, Canada, Japan and China put together.

As I'm sure you can see - economically and trade  Brexit was the politics of the mad-house! We had the best 'deal' ever but where too foolish to recognise it. And that's what the world globally thinks of us now - foolish.

I like the romantic dream of independence - independence for Cornwall too (although oddly Norfolk is probably the best placed UK county to make a go of true independence aka Luxembourg). However I also live in the  real world. 

Anyway - Another season in the EPL. OTBC.

Edited by Yellow Fever
  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Fen - The EU GDP was not shrinking but growing (present circumstances excluded for everybody). When you're at the 'top' it's always harder work to go higher.

A few pertinent facts on the EU we left (yes taken from an EU Commission site but no reason to doubt them factually unless you're of the tin-hat brigade). 

  • The EU is the largest economy in the world. Although growth is projected to be slow, the EU remains the largest economy in the world with a GDP per head of €25 000 for its 500 million consumers.
  • The EU is the world's largest trading block. The EU is the world’s largest trader of manufactured goods and services.
  • The EU ranks first in both inbound and outbound international investments
  • The EU is the top trading partner for 80 countries. By comparison the US is the top trading partner for a little over 20 countries.
  • The EU is the most open to developing countries. Fuels excluded, the EU imports more from developing countries than the USA, Canada, Japan and China put together.

As I'm sure you can see - economically and trade  Brexit was the politics of the mad-house! We had the best 'deal' ever but where too foolish to recognise it. And that's what the world globally thinks of us now - foolish.

I like the romantic dream of independence - independence for Cornwall too (although oddly Norfolk is probably the best placed UK county to make a go of true independence aka Luxembourg). However I also live in the  real world. 

Anyway - Another season in the EPL. OTBC.

Good point, well made @Yellow Fever. I am still waiting for @Fen Canary to explain what it is about the first trade deal in history to make both sides worse off that he finds so compelling?

Share this post


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

The economy has been damaged in three main ways. 1) Private sector investment collapsed due to the uncertainty. 2) The government had needed to increase expenditure on preparing for and mitigating the risks of Brexit (there are literally thousands of civil servants working full time on this). 3) It has squeezed all all other government economic planning. That is while ignoring the spike in inflation and the collapse of the pound.

The problem with that argument though is that a majority of that uncertainty wasn’t caused by the vote itself, but all the political wrangling afterwards of people refusing to accept the result and using every trick in the book to try and overturn the decision. It has taken up almost all government debate for the best part of 3 years because we didn’t have losers consent, which is essential in a functioning democracy. Also yes the pound dropped, as happens with every unexpected result/election, but that in theory isn’t catastrophic as while imports become slightly more expensive exports should become more competitive 

Share this post


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

Fen - The EU GDP was not shrinking but growing (present circumstances excluded for everybody). When you're at the 'top' it's always harder work to go higher.

A few pertinent facts on the EU we left (yes taken from an EU Commission site but no reason to doubt them factually unless you're of the tin-hat brigade). 

  • The EU is the largest economy in the world. Although growth is projected to be slow, the EU remains the largest economy in the world with a GDP per head of €25 000 for its 500 million consumers.
  • The EU is the world's largest trading block. The EU is the world’s largest trader of manufactured goods and services.
  • The EU ranks first in both inbound and outbound international investments
  • The EU is the top trading partner for 80 countries. By comparison the US is the top trading partner for a little over 20 countries.
  • The EU is the most open to developing countries. Fuels excluded, the EU imports more from developing countries than the USA, Canada, Japan and China put together.

As I'm sure you can see - economically and trade  Brexit was the politics of the mad-house! We had the best 'deal' ever but where too foolish to recognise it. And that's what the world globally thinks of us now - foolish.

I like the romantic dream of independence - independence for Cornwall too (although oddly Norfolk is probably the best placed UK county to make a go of true independence aka Luxembourg). However I also live in the  real world. 

Anyway - Another season in the EPL. OTBC.

Yes the EU is a large bloc, and I never said it’s GDP was shrinking, I said it was shrinking as a percentage of world GDP. In the 90’s it was around a third of the worlds economy, it’s now down to around 15% and falling still, and around a fifth of that is the UK. Therefore I don’t think we should be putting all our eggs in the basket of a bloc that is becoming less important as the years roll on.  We’ll always trade with Europe, therefore it’s governments job to get the best trading terms possible. However that doesn’t mean you accept those terms at any cost. Trade deals have to work for both parties, and the UK electorate decided that the free trade with the EU wasn’t worth all the other things that came with it, such as paying into the budget, having the EU Commission and accepting free movement of people. Therefore it’s now the governments job to get the best trade deal it can with the EU where those things aren’t included. If one doesn’t exist then we have to fall back on WTO terms. 

Ultimately I think money will prevail and some kind of deal will be struck, not quite free trade but something close to it so both sides can claim victory. The UK is a big market for German cars, French produce etc, and the City isn’t going to want to lose access to the EU, and their interests will trump anything the voters want 

Share this post


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

This isn't true. Nobody knew anything about CA and its involvement until well after. Why do you think we had numerous court cases, commitee meetings, police investigations , massive fines and the eventual dismemberment of CA. As I have said the targetted ads were the smaller of the problem. The chronic misuse of personal data which allowed them to target people was the bigger of the problem.

And using Obama is classic whataboutery. It has zero to do with the referendum.

I don’t think it’s whataboutery, I’m just interested to see if you genuinely believe what they did was wrong, or if you only believe it’s wrong because you didn’t get the result you wanted. 

Companies have been selling our private data for a long time, and it’s not something I’m comfortable with at all. I think these tech giants in particular need to be banned from holding any of our personal data, let alone selling it, but that’s an argument for parliament to discuss and laws passed accordingly. 

However back to the subject, both sides were found guilty of bending/breaking the rules. There was a Leave group fined for an overspend (I forget which), as there was a Remain group too (Led by Donkeys I think it was called). There was also Cameron’s pro EU pamphlet sent to every household in Britain that wasn’t part of the Remain camps cost. Nobody is claiming it was a squeaky clean campaign, but it was no better or worse than any of the elections I can remember. It’s actually probably been worse as at least in the elections the losing side have never tried to ignore and overturn the result. Thankfully that part of it is now largely put to bed with the large Tory majority, and it’s now their job to follow through on their election promises and get the best deal that’s possible while still leaving the EU. If they don’t then those new seats they’ve picked up will turn back to red very quickly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in 5 years yes they will. But 5 years is a long time away. 

Share this post


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

I don’t think it’s whataboutery, I’m just interested to see if you genuinely believe what they did was wrong, or if you only believe it’s wrong because you didn’t get the result you wanted. 

Companies have been selling our private data for a long time, and it’s not something I’m comfortable with at all. I think these tech giants in particular need to be banned from holding any of our personal data, let alone selling it, but that’s an argument for parliament to discuss and laws passed accordingly. 

However back to the subject, both sides were found guilty of bending/breaking the rules. There was a Leave group fined for an overspend (I forget which), as there was a Remain group too (Led by Donkeys I think it was called). There was also Cameron’s pro EU pamphlet sent to every household in Britain that wasn’t part of the Remain camps cost. Nobody is claiming it was a squeaky clean campaign, but it was no better or worse than any of the elections I can remember. It’s actually probably been worse as at least in the elections the losing side have never tried to ignore and overturn the result. Thankfully that part of it is now largely put to bed with the large Tory majority, and it’s now their job to follow through on their election promises and get the best deal that’s possible while still leaving the EU. If they don’t then those new seats they’ve picked up will turn back to red very quickly 

Please read up about this properly. You won Brexit but this stuff is stil important.

CA STOLE millions of Fakebook account holders data without any form of consent, purely for political purposes. It was a massive scandal.

Vote Leave and Leave EU both got large fines for campaign overspending.

Cameron's leaflet was a government document. It had nothing to do with the remain campaign.

Led By Donkeys didn't get fined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

The problem with that argument though is that a majority of that uncertainty wasn’t caused by the vote itself, but all the political wrangling afterwards of people refusing to accept the result and using every trick in the book to try and overturn the decision. It has taken up almost all government debate for the best part of 3 years because we didn’t have losers consent, which is essential in a functioning democracy. Also yes the pound dropped, as happens with every unexpected result/election, but that in theory isn’t catastrophic as while imports become slightly more expensive exports should become more competitive 

No problem with the argument, it is 100% bang on, if the vote had been for Remain none of that would have happened. In fact if there had been a Leave Plan none of it would have happened. So it is 100% down to the vote.

For the third time of asking @Fen Canary we are all still waiting for you to explain what it is about the first trade deal in history to make both parties worse off that you find so enticing?

Share this post


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

The problem with that argument though is that a majority of that uncertainty wasn’t caused by the vote itself, but all the political wrangling afterwards of people refusing to accept the result and using every trick in the book to try and overturn the decision. It has taken up almost all government debate for the best part of 3 years because we didn’t have losers consent, which is essential in a functioning democracy. Also yes the pound dropped, as happens with every unexpected result/election, but that in theory isn’t catastrophic as while imports become slightly more expensive exports should become more competitive 

There is some small truth, although most of the wrangling problem was that the Leave vote was in effect for two irreconcilable aims, because of the cake-and-eat-it lies fed to voters, and politicians then had to try, to change the analogy, to square a circle that could not be squared. As events have proved.

But overall overseas investors make long-term decisions based on long-term prospects, and to that extent the short-term wrangling was a side issue. The assumption was that sooner or later the UK would leave the EU (it being the official policy of both major parties) and so those investors decided to invest elsewhere, because they knew a UK out of the EU would be less advantageous a place in which and from which to do business.

Share this post


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

No problem with the argument, it is 100% bang on, if the vote had been for Remain none of that would have happened. In fact if there had been a Leave Plan none of it would have happened. So it is 100% down to the vote.

For the third time of asking @Fen Canary we are all still waiting for you to explain what it is about the first trade deal in history to make both parties worse off that you find so enticing?

Because it isn’t just a trade deal is it. If it was, and we had no EU budget, no EU commission, no EU President, no freedom of movement laws etc then it wouldn’t have ever been an issue, but it’s not. If the only options available is to Remain in the EU, or Leave on WTO terms then I’d still vote Leave every time. If I don’t like the direction the country is heading in I can vote out domestic politicians. If I don’t like the direction the EU is heading in I’ve got no way of removing the Commission. To me having that ability is more important than saving a few % on tariffs. I understand some people believe the money is more important, and that’s fine, but to me personally it isn’t. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

In the three years  from the referendum the number of UK jobs created by foreign investment fell by 19 per cent.

In the same three years foreign capital investment in greenfield projects fell by 30 per cent from $120bn to $83.5bn.

In the  same three years about one in five overseas investors either cancelled or put on hold potential projects.

This analysis, based on government and other official and trade figures, is from the FT.

It makes sense a number of investors have held back, as for 3 years the country has been stuck in limbo, they had no idea what was going to happen so understandably weren’t willing to invest until they knew what they were investing into. Don’t forget also that the Chinese economy has slowed in that time, so most countries would have seen less foreign investment in that timeframe compared to the decade previous, it’s not a situation unique to the UK. During that time though even with all the uncertainty the economy still grew faster than many EU countries, and the jobless figures remained low and people in work grew. Now investors will soon have some clarity, regarding the UKs future direction it will be interesting to see what happens regarding investment. Nissan have recently announced they’re investing in Sunderland after all

Share this post


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

Because it isn’t just a trade deal is it. If it was, and we had no EU budget, no EU commission, no EU President, no freedom of movement laws etc then it wouldn’t have ever been an issue, but it’s not. If the only options available is to Remain in the EU, or Leave on WTO terms then I’d still vote Leave every time. If I don’t like the direction the country is heading in I can vote out domestic politicians. If I don’t like the direction the EU is heading in I’ve got no way of removing the Commission. To me having that ability is more important than saving a few % on tariffs. I understand some people believe the money is more important, and that’s fine, but to me personally it isn’t. 

I guessed you wouldn't be able to answer and like most Leavers would resort to a string of sound bites you have picked up over the years, without any comprehension of what you are writing. I don't believe you even understand what you mean by "WTO terms" and I don't believe you have any vision for the future of the UK. That is the reason you enter these debates only to regurgitate the arguments of the last three years rather than write about what we, as a nation, do now. You don't have a clue what happens now do you? Like you never had a clue about the workings of the EU and the impact of leaving.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

It’s interesting though that you consider it fine for the Irish to vote Sinn Fein, and all the baggage that accompanies them, to stir up the status quo, yet are dead against Brexit happening when many voters would have ticked Leave for the same reason. Why should one vote be respected and the other not? 

That's such a bizarre response I'm struggling to know quite where to start. I think essentially you're doubling down on the living in the past/backward looking previously mentioned.

Of course I consider it fine for the Irish to vote for Sinn Fein and the English to vote leave - in the sense that there is little point in holding elections unless you allow people to make their own decisions about who to vote for. Doesn't mean to say that I agree/approve of them, or think that they've made a wise decision. As it happens if you took any notice of what Sinn Fein actually campaigned on it was actually slightly mundane but important practical issues especially to the younger voters, so I don't find anything particularly shocking in them voting SF rather than the same old duo that totally ignored them.

I would very much like to see the UK put our tired and failed two party system in the bin and bring in some new thinking into our Parliament but it seems that we are not going to be so fortunate - probably because we're too arrogant to admit that we're just not very good at most things any more and perish the thought that we could actually learn something from other countries.

'To stir up the status quo' was the most bizarre bit - you are surely not suggesting that it is always wrong, or always right, to attempt to stir up the status quo?? Many of the major advances in our society and civilisation have come about directly from people stirring up the status quo, and equally there have been other groups who've caused great damage by trying to undermine\change the status quo. Most of politics involves trying change the status quo in smaller and more specific areas, so surely whether we're  talking about really big changes to the status quo or small scale reform  makes very little difference - you take a view on whether you agree with a specific change in a particular scenario - sometimes it's yes, sometimes it's no. Surely no one ever says all change is good or no change is good, that would be ridiculous.

 

Share this post


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

Tell me, how can the economy be that damaged by leaving the EU when we’ve left in name only so far? We’re still paying into the budget, still in the customs union and single market, still have free movement etc. The only thing that’s changed is we no longer have MEPs. So any problems we have can’t be blamed on the Leave vote in my eyes, as we haven’t left in any meaningful way 

No we haven't but everyone knows we are going to, and therefore the sensible businesses which plan ahead have factored it into their plans and started to act on it. So some have already moved part, or even all, their business to the EU to avoid the disruption that will occur when we leave 'for real', only nine months away now.

More serious than those immediately uprooting are those who are switching their future investment to the EU, or elsewhere. Business investment in the UK has completely fallen off a cliff, so whilst businesses are still in the UK their growth is going to be elsewhere, or even they have assets like production lines which they can work for their remaining life but the new\replacement production lines will be built elsewhere. The car industry is a high profile example of this but the same thing is happening all over the place.

There are many reasons why Brexit has already badly damaged our economy but the final one I'd highlight is the uncertainty it has brought for both consumers and businesses. We have now left, we are about 14 weeks away from a decision as to whether the two parties are going to continue to strike a trade deal (which no one seriously believes is possible in the timescale) or leave on WTO terms, and just over 9 months before we completely leave the EU. Yet we still haven't got the faintest idea what things will look like on 1st Jan 2021, so how do we plan for the total unknown either as individuals or a businesses? What we do in the vast majority of cases in to hunker down, spend as little as possible and try and build a rainy day fund in the hope that we can survive the sh*tstorm that is approaching in a few months time - except of course for those amongst us who've just gone and blown the rainy day fund on filling their home with toilet rolls!!

Seriously though, great uncertainty is very bad for the economy whether from a personal or business perspective and let's not fool ourselves - that uncertainly is going to persist way beyond 1st Jan 2021. Brexit isn't going to be truly 'done' for many years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, BigFish said:

I guessed you wouldn't be able to answer and like most Leavers would resort to a string of sound bites you have picked up over the years, without any comprehension of what you are writing. I don't believe you even understand what you mean by "WTO terms" and I don't believe you have any vision for the future of the UK. That is the reason you enter these debates only to regurgitate the arguments of the last three years rather than write about what we, as a nation, do now. You don't have a clue what happens now do you? Like you never had a clue about the workings of the EU and the impact of leaving.

I answered your question, the fact you don’t agree with my response doesn’t make it wrong. I said if it was a case of just a trade deal, like Canada has, then I don’t think anybody would have been against it, but it isn’t. There are so many things extra that come with it, such as the free movement laws, paying into the EU budget, the EU Commission etc that it has to be looked at as a whole. I personally don’t think that all the extra obligations is a price worth paying just for a free trade deal, especially as the average tariff with the WTO is only around 3%, though I’m well aware this can vary between sectors. 

Responses like yours are the reason the debate has become so polarised, and attitudes hardened during the last few years since the vote. Rather than accept people can have different viewpoints on the same subject, largely due to their lived experiences, you simply denounce them as clueless and think that your opinion is the only correct one. Different parts of the debate mean more to different people. You clearly care more about the monetary side of things than the democratic side, whereas others may think that getting away from an EU commission  they can’t directly elect is more important than paying an extra few % on imported goods. Some believe that the extra money spent on EU tariffs will be offset by the ability to trade freely with other countries in the future. Others want immigration from within the EU to be bound by the same rules as those from outside the EU, which won’t be possible if we continued to accept free movement laws as the price for a trade deal. It’s complicated situation, and there’s no doubt there was an element of risk attached to leaving, but in my view it was a risk worth taking. You could also say there would have been a risk in staying, as it would only take France or Germany to tip into recession and our contributions would have jumped considerably. 

Share this post


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

No we haven't but everyone knows we are going to, and therefore the sensible businesses which plan ahead have factored it into their plans and started to act on it. So some have already moved part, or even all, their business to the EU to avoid the disruption that will occur when we leave 'for real', only nine months away now.

More serious than those immediately uprooting are those who are switching their future investment to the EU, or elsewhere. Business investment in the UK has completely fallen off a cliff, so whilst businesses are still in the UK their growth is going to be elsewhere, or even they have assets like production lines which they can work for their remaining life but the new\replacement production lines will be built elsewhere. The car industry is a high profile example of this but the same thing is happening all over the place.

There are many reasons why Brexit has already badly damaged our economy but the final one I'd highlight is the uncertainty it has brought for both consumers and businesses. We have now left, we are about 14 weeks away from a decision as to whether the two parties are going to continue to strike a trade deal (which no one seriously believes is possible in the timescale) or leave on WTO terms, and just over 9 months before we completely leave the EU. Yet we still haven't got the faintest idea what things will look like on 1st Jan 2021, so how do we plan for the total unknown either as individuals or a businesses? What we do in the vast majority of cases in to hunker down, spend as little as possible and try and build a rainy day fund in the hope that we can survive the sh*tstorm that is approaching in a few months time - except of course for those amongst us who've just gone and blown the rainy day fund on filling their home with toilet rolls!!

Seriously though, great uncertainty is very bad for the economy whether from a personal or business perspective and let's not fool ourselves - that uncertainly is going to persist way beyond 1st Jan 2021. Brexit isn't going to be truly 'done' for many years.

Our car industry has been disappearing for years, being in the EU did nothing to prevent that, though Nissan have recently announced large investment in their Sunderland plant. It’s also true that business investment has been falling, but that’s true of many major nations, and is more to do with the slowdown in China than anything else. If business investment in the UK had tumbled whilst rapidly climbing in the EU then you may have a point but it hasn’t been, it’s been falling across the board. Unfortunately since the QE programs too many people have decided it’s easier to get rich by inflating asset bubbles than it is by investing in the productive economy.

I believe you’re right in that this won’t be settled for a few years yet, or even if it was the right thing to do. I believe it was personally, and long term I think we’re better off outside than in, but I understand many others think differently 

Share this post


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

That's such a bizarre response I'm struggling to know quite where to start. I think essentially you're doubling down on the living in the past/backward looking previously mentioned.

Of course I consider it fine for the Irish to vote for Sinn Fein and the English to vote leave - in the sense that there is little point in holding elections unless you allow people to make their own decisions about who to vote for. Doesn't mean to say that I agree/approve of them, or think that they've made a wise decision. As it happens if you took any notice of what Sinn Fein actually campaigned on it was actually slightly mundane but important practical issues especially to the younger voters, so I don't find anything particularly shocking in them voting SF rather than the same old duo that totally ignored them.

I would very much like to see the UK put our tired and failed two party system in the bin and bring in some new thinking into our Parliament but it seems that we are not going to be so fortunate - probably because we're too arrogant to admit that we're just not very good at most things any more and perish the thought that we could actually learn something from other countries.

'To stir up the status quo' was the most bizarre bit - you are surely not suggesting that it is always wrong, or always right, to attempt to stir up the status quo?? Many of the major advances in our society and civilisation have come about directly from people stirring up the status quo, and equally there have been other groups who've caused great damage by trying to undermine\change the status quo. Most of politics involves trying change the status quo in smaller and more specific areas, so surely whether we're  talking about really big changes to the status quo or small scale reform  makes very little difference - you take a view on whether you agree with a specific change in a particular scenario - sometimes it's yes, sometimes it's no. Surely no one ever says all change is good or no change is good, that would be ridiculous.

 

I was more trying to make the point how for many people trying to overturn the referendum result is a legitimate thing to do, as they see it as nothing more than a protest vote, yet other votes that fall into the same category, and I class the Sinn Fein vote as that, should be respected. It wasn’t aimed at you personally, more a generalisation, though I admit I could have worded it more clearly in my original post 

Share this post


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

Because it isn’t just a trade deal is it. If it was, and we had no EU budget, no EU commission, no EU President, no freedom of movement laws etc then it wouldn’t have ever been an issue, but it’s not. If the only options available is to Remain in the EU, or Leave on WTO terms then I’d still vote Leave every time. If I don’t like the direction the country is heading in I can vote out domestic politicians. If I don’t like the direction the EU is heading in I’ve got no way of removing the Commission. To me having that ability is more important than saving a few % on tariffs. I understand some people believe the money is more important, and that’s fine, but to me personally it isn’t. 

Too big problems with this:

If I don’t like the direction the country is heading in I can vote out domestic politicians. - no you can't or at least you're in a very small and lucky minority if you live in an area where your vote has any effect whatsoever. The current government was elected by 42.6% of the voters - which was actually pretty high, many UK governments get in on votes in 35 -39% range. No government since the war has got over 50% so I'm afraid that the idea of any real democratic accountability in the UK is a myth.

If I don’t like the direction the EU is heading in I’ve got no way of removing the Commission. To me having that ability is more important than saving a few % on tariffs. - of course you haven't, any more than you have any way of removing the Civil Service in this country which is the direct equivalent. What you have got however, is the ability to vote for your MEP under a genuinely democratic system which means that your vote carries the same weight as everybody else's - a much better and accountable system than we have for UK elections, so unlike the UK you do actually stand an equal chance (along with all the voters) of getting rid of someone you don't like.

 

 

Share this post


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

It’s also true that business investment has been falling, but that’s true of many major nations, and is more to do with the slowdown in China than anything else.

No, I'm sorry it really isn't - business investment in the UK has been falling markedly ever since the referendum.

The slowdown in China is much more recent (last year) and its main impact has not been on investment so much as current exports. Hence with regard to China, Germany has suffered much more than the UK due to the impact on their much bigger manufacturing/exporting base. Investment less so as the China/Trump trade war is seen as a temporary blip before a return to business as usual (granted its taking a while!) whereas Brexit is a permanent change to the trading relationships which to a greater or lesser extent retricts the UK's access to a massive and our closest market.

Let us also not forget that all this talk about free trade deals only affects a small part of our economy, 80% of our economy is in services of one sort or another. Free trade deals do nothing for services, the single market does. So if you are part of that 80% of the UK's economy where does your future lie, with 65m customers for services in the UK or the 500m customers for services in the EU?

Share this post


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

Too big problems with this:

If I don’t like the direction the country is heading in I can vote out domestic politicians. - no you can't or at least you're in a very small and lucky minority if you live in an area where your vote has any effect whatsoever. The current government was elected by 42.6% of the voters - which was actually pretty high, many UK governments get in on votes in 35 -39% range. No government since the war has got over 50% so I'm afraid that the idea of any real democratic accountability in the UK is a myth.

If I don’t like the direction the EU is heading in I’ve got no way of removing the Commission. To me having that ability is more important than saving a few % on tariffs. - of course you haven't, any more than you have any way of removing the Civil Service in this country which is the direct equivalent. What you have got however, is the ability to vote for your MEP under a genuinely democratic system which means that your vote carries the same weight as everybody else's - a much better and accountable system than we have for UK elections, so unlike the UK you do actually stand an equal chance (along with all the voters) of getting rid of someone you don't like.

 

 

Our electoral system is definitely flawed when governments can gain an absolute majority on less than half the votes, and yes until the last election many seats were considered safe and hadn’t changed hands for years. Electoral reform should definitely be on the cards, however it’s unlikely as the three biggest parties currently in Westminster would lose seats because of it. 

I don’t agree with comparing the Civil Service to the EU Commission either. MPs are above the civil service, and are accountable for its successes/failures (such as the windrush scandal). They also have no say over who becomes PM, whereas the Commission have much more power and choose the President. If the EU President could be removed by the electorate you could argue she’s accountable for them but she can’t.

Finally, we only get to vote in around 10% of MEPs. While this is correct for our population, and giving the UK more would be grossly unfair to other countries, it does mean we can be outvoted even on matters that may affect the national interest. In much the same way Scotland understandably gets angry that it’s wishes can get overruled due to England’s larger population, the same scenario happens within the EU parliament. Whilst you could argue that you only elect one seat out of 650 at Westminster, I’m comfortable with this level of representation at a national level, less so at a multinational level, rightly or wrongly

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...