So the new department for international trade is going to sit around twiddling its collective thumbs for two years?
The EU breaks it's own rules when it suits, this is one tha's going to be more honoured in the breach than the observance.
General / Off-Topic UK Only - POLL - How would you now vote if casting your vote again for the referendum?
- Thread starter Nerwan
- Start date
So the new department for international trade is going to sit around twiddling its collective thumbs for two years?
The EU breaks it's own rules when it suits, this is one tha's going to be more honoured in the breach than the observance.
Yaffle
Volunteer Moderator
Different things.
First of all note the word 'formal' and then note that generally promoting UK exports is entirely allowed, it's formal talks around trade (tariffs etc) that's illegal. I'd suggest that breaking the rules of the body you want to be kind to you could be diplomatically sensitive to say the least.
Apologies for slight pedantry, but the bulks of the models are predicting that we'll be "relatively worse" by 2030 (i.e. lower GDP than if we'd stayed in the EU, but still higher overall). And I'd suggest having a look at the OpenEurope model forecast. They're a mainstream organisation, frequently cited (so not nutters). They've actually attempted to model the UK implementing trade deals with the rest of the world, which others haven't - a valid criticism.
Ultimately though, I don't believe anyone has tried an economic detangling of this scale before - the models are likely to be off the mark no matter which way you look.
As I understand it (and I'm entirely happy to be corrected), the rules explicitly mean that EU members can't enter into an agreement with the UK. Formal talks around a deal which takes affect after Brexit could be permitted, if the EU were willing to entertain them. It's just a matter of interpretation.
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
I agree, but as I've said before, the longer things go on, there may be events which make a second referendum possible - e.g. another country decides to leave the EU and then the EU says they will compromise on free movement rules and a few other things. That would justify another referendum. However you may be right that by then it will be too late anyway.
I guess the question is whether the Brexit department is really the "Brexit as quick as possible dept" or the "Find as many reasons to delay hoping that something will come up dept".
I wonder if it was clear to the people voting leave who thought their jobs would be safer that the Brexit economists plan is to turn the country into a low cost labor sweatshop owned by international conglomerates?
A big shortfall in investment that lasts several years or more is very damaging for the country (especially as we've already had significant low investment since 2008 anyway). Basically we are putting economic growth drivers on hold for x number of years. The long term benefits are have to going to be pretty massive in order just to compensate for that. Realistically that is highly unlikely.
Last edited:
The EU won't be kind to Britain, it'll be looking after its own interest.
And while talks in before submitting article fifty would be in the EUs economic interest, it wouldn't be in the EUs political interest.
Last edited:
Talks are going to have to be with all kinds of nations from all over the globe. Talks lasting years, involving hundreds of delegates, which will cover everything from the quality standards of electronics to the environmental impact of our manufacturing methods to whether or not growth hormones can be given to our livestock.
And while that's going on we can't really do a whole lot but, ironically enough, rely on the goodwill of the international community we've just raised two fingers to to be patient with us and help us out if we get into economic trouble of our own making.
And after that, have another referendum for a few weeks with the Daily Mail once again talking about the deadly Muslims and national sovereignty?
And what if that referendum says "no"? Go back to all these countries and start again?
Not going to happen, and if it does happen you might as well give Michael Sheen a call and start the Apocalypse Now.
There is one way out of this mess - cancel Brexit. Unfortunately we need a competent Parliament for that, and neither the Tories nor Labour seem to be interested in either the national interest or basic common sense at the moment.
verminstar
Banned
Very strongly agree with bringing back the death penalty but not flogging fer sex offenders...well maybe but therein lies so many different variables. For peedos and rapists...castration...less punishments fer lesser crimes. Have signed numerous petitions demanding the return of this over the years. Part of my own issues with the law is that the law is way too soft and if it can't deal with the worst of the worst, then there are those who can and to hell with their human rights. Ye think they were concerned about their victims rights?
Yes you are correct, I should have made that more clear. The majority of models are from the baseline position. This type of modelling is actually more accurate than an attempt to "absolutely" model the economy as it cancels out the larger global shocks (say a major downturn from China or a civil war in Turkey).
The openeurope report you cite has a sequel which puts an estimated long term 0.5 to 1.5% loss of GDP. Given uk growth has hovered around the 1-2.5% mark for a while, this could mean being tipped back into recession or at least a significant drag.
It is also important to note how it models that the UK can offset this loss.
1. Trade. It points out how vital keeping free trade with the EU is. It also points to unilateral trade liberalisation and notes that this may have negative effects on some industries, in particular farming.
2. Immigration, it notes that in order to keep the economy going high immigration rates will be required.
3. Regulation. Here's a pertinent quote
Right, because we don't like things like maternity leave, sick pay, clean water ways, clean air and soil, a stable climate and a sea level that stays put.
The financial services industry and banking sector have proven themselves perfectly able to responsibly self regulate and haven't been caught miss-selling PPI, card protection insurance, or fiddling the LIBOR, or nearly crashing the world economy and bankers are so poorly remunerated they can barely get by without multi million pound bonuses. So yeah, lets cut financial regulation.
As to trade talks with the EU, when we negotiate with the EU they negotiate as a block. It's one of the complaints Leave had about the EU. So when we have left, we will have to negotiate with the EU commission on behalf of all 27 states. We can lobby individual states but we can't make an agreement with them, it must be with all of them. So Greece might want the Elgin marbles back, Spain might want a chat about Gibraltar and there is nothing the German car makers (our white knights according to Leave) can do about it.
Last edited:
verminstar
Banned
Hardly jumping up and down fer joy but I am happier now we made the first step away from the bloc...long way to go before we break out the bunting and the party hats though. Half the nation are running around claiming the sky is falling down and simply refuse to accept what has happened, so as a nation, we are akin to a one legged runner. It's the reason I can't really be bothered discussing it anymore because I'm already at the point where I'm ready to smash someones face in over constant insults and accusations...which is why my answer will be much shorter than of late.
I don't have the education to understand even a fraction of this stuff...all I know is what I believe and I absolutely 100% believe we better off as far away from berlin/brussels as we can get. Under no illusions that this will be easy...fairly sure we will suffer for our defiance but if I had to vote again, my vote would not change. I tried to justify that to others but they don't care or listen...all they wanna do is tell me how bad things are gonna get and how much we gonna suffer...bored listening to them now...hence I stopped same way I did in the referendum run up...project fear has turned into project doom and gloom and tbh, I'd rather sit and watch paint dry.
On the "defiance" remark, that is exactly how I see the vote would appear...they threatened us and tried to tell us what to do...even had Obama try and threaten us...and we defied them all because we don't believe their lies anymore. The world went soft and now we gonna pay the price fer that...hopefully it's not too late fer some of us to reverse that trend. Fer that reason alone, I almost hope Trump gets into power because then this planet will get a much needed enema ^^
Last edited:
Thank you for replying. I think we can safely say (and I mean no offence) that Verminstar fits nicely with the observation that anti EU sentiment and support for the death penalty are linked.
Can I ask a few other questions? They are from an article here (read after answering somas not to taint the results)
The questions are about parenting attitudes but please be assured there are no right or wrong answers.
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: independence or respect for elders?
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: obedience or self-reliance?
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: to be considerate or to be well-behaved?
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: curiosity or good manners?
Finally, what do you think of Donald Trump? Edit: see you've answered!
Last edited:
And render referendums obsolete at a stroke. That doesn't sound like an attractive option either.
Half of the population is against it, no matter what you do ^^
In all cases it's possible to have both.
The refendum is already obsolete.
Let's face one huge fact. Let's just put this out there, be honest, and say it. Let's talk about this elephant in the room:
To many many people, this was about brown-skinned people coming from North Africa and the Middle East. It was about people from Poland seeking employment here. It was about putting more into our own economy and giving £350 million more to the NHS per week rather than sending money to the EU. It was about "Freedom!" It was about "Taking back control"
ALL of these things (except maybe immigration from Eastern Europe) are not going to happen. Infact, outside of the EU, each one of these are going to get even worse. We can't stop people coming here as easily without EU border control help, we can't just toss them out without breaking UN laws, and that £350 million figure, as ludicrous as it was to begin with, is bunk. In fact our economy is already starting to nosedive by all independent indicators and we are going to have LESS to spend on services. Austerity will be extended, although it won't be called as such.
And even worse, outside of the EU we will have absolutely no say in what goes on. We will no longer have influence like this. We will be far far more beholden to mega-corporations, foreign interest groups, and the national interests of larger economic trading blocks.
Everything that was promised was a lie. When it isn't delivered, the people who voted leave will, at best, be further turned off from politics. The people that voted remain will see the damage done and see their attempts to stop it as wasted.
Avoiding brexit isn't attractive, but nothing is in this situation. Cameron basically went into a casino with the entire nation and lost, just to keep Boris from taking his rather greasy throne. Now we've got to pay up, one way or another. I suggest we pay as little as possible.
Last edited:
I seem to remember that the new Chancellor was getting annoyed at EU moves to block the euro derivatives market from London.
They tried this before, but the ECJ found that it was illegal for the EU to discriminate against a singe market member.
Of course when the UK is no longer a member and only has "access" this will not apply and discriminatory riles to poach as much financial business from London will be the order if the day.
Of course, it won't be easy to wrestle the business away from London, it has many non business advantages, but the EU will try, and there will be little we can do to stop it.
Well you can bet on this one.
The EU will make sure that EU Financial Issues are moving into the EU.
This is not so much because of Punishing UK or because of Political Interest.
Its Simply because it would be very Inpractical and Dangerous to have Financial Issues of the EU Managed by an Country outside the EU thus creating an Dependency on this Countries Government to maintain Laws etc that make sure the EU is not Damaged there.
The Announcement of UKs Government that they will make sure London Stays the Financial Center of Europe made me Laugh Pretty Hard.
No Offense. But Londons Financial Sector currently Managing the EUs Finances will Dissappear and move toward Frankfurt or one of the other Candidates.
The EU wont keep their Financial Sector in an Area which they cannot Guarantee to work by Laws and Regulations of the EU.
37% of the electorate which is only 27% of the population.
On the assumption that old people are more likely to vote Leave by 2:1 and young people Remain by 2:1
Every year about 530k people die, the majority over 65 (450k over 75), we'll use 450k as it divides neatly.
So every year 150k remain pensioners die and 300k leave pensioners die.
Every year some 700k people are born. Allowing for some mortality and other factors lets say that every year some 630k people turn 18,
Thus every year 420 Remain voters enter the electorate and 210 Leave voters.
So every year the net change in Leave is -90k and in Remain, +270k, lets call it a change of 360k in favour of Remain
The lead Leave had over remain was some 1.4 million
So just from death and aging we would expect the lead Leave had to be completely eroded by the next parliament in 2020.
verminstar
Banned
I don't really like Trump...I just think that he's better suited to the task in hand which is to give everyone a sudden jolt back to the reality that this softly softly approach isn't working. America is at war with itself, more amusing than anything else. All around the world, economies collapsing, some armies preparing fer WW3 and they chasing bloody pokemon.
Parenting attitudes and the questions you ask don't really make sense to me. I'm not really understanding why there has to be a choice when they should have all of those things...no one thing could be regarded as any more important or beneficial as any other choice, hence it's a very confusing set of questions. What's the logic behind them and why does there have to be a choice at all?
Some the answers translate into the same thing...looks like a fakebook thing like those silly survey things that do the rounds every few days. The way in which it's worded could mean that yer answers would actually contradict each other were there an attempt to answer it not thought out very carefully. My mistrust of experts means I instantly smell a red herring, regardless what you claim to the contrary. Told ye, I don't trust experts...whats the logic behind that?
Last edited: