-
@Snowy said in British Politics:
@MajorRage said in British Politics:
I strongly believe that the EU will implode without the UK.
I try to stay out of these the politics threads, but that is an interesting comment.
Do you think that there will be Fraxits, Gerxits, Itaxits, Spanxits, etc? Will the other big players also want to leave?
I realised I never actually answered your question. And the answer is no. Purely because the governments won't ask the question. All candidates that want to ask the question are (rightly or wrongly) framed as far-right or right-wing.
I think the EU is adamant that seeing the UK suffer is the best solution to keeping it all together. And I think they couldn't be more wrong.
-
Some very interesting insights there MR. Thanks.
From so far away (in SA) the UK leaving the EU just seems completely economically daft to me.
But clearly both from what I see in the media (and it depends of course what you watch and read!) and from your insights shared here, I have a very simplistic view of the issues at play.I fully understand your sentiment - I'm sure shared by most in the UK - that resolution one way or another can't come soon enough.
My question is, assuming a no-deal crash-out for the UK, do you foresee a worsening of relations between the UK and the Continent in the short term? i.e. restrictive travel / border controls, tit-for-tat tariffs etc? And if so, how long before the situation calms down again? It strikes me that tensions could run quite high in case of a no-deal?
-
@Billy-Webb I've already experienced some post Brexit vote travel issues and I'm sure this will worsen as the whole thing unravels. How long this will last I just don't know. I'd like to think that there are ties that bind us all to a totally different degree than the EU and that this will eventually out. Whether this hope for accord will be shared by the authorities or not is another thing. I'm pretty sure that any woes that befall our major EU partners in the foreseeable future will be blamed on the UK and Brexit.
As for the economics being worse or better, I don't see as how anyone could have a totally informed view (from near or far). The whole money side of things is chock full of multi-layered bureaucracy with one payment being offset by another rebate ad infinitum. The only sure thing is that there have been a lot of lies and half-truths spouted by all and sundry.
-
@Billy-Webb Those are the questions that are up in the air. One of the many issues is that there seems to be a real lack of pragmatism in what is portrayed to the average punter. You either sell scare mongering, or unrealistic scenarios. Here's my view on what the issues you state. I'd welcome other peoples views too on what they think:
Economically daft. Well, yes .. if you are of the view that the UK should meander along the same path (which I am, honestly). Like very big change there are opportunities, such as there are restrictions. Remember, Switzerland isn't in the EU. But it's right in the middle of it!
Relations. They can't get much lower than they are now. But you must remember that no-deal etc is very bad for the EU too. UK stores are chock full of EU products. EU tourist spots are chock full of Brits. The EU is very reliant on UK for services too. Financial / Law / Insurance are huge. People don't like signing contracts with EU domiciles on these things as the laws are not business friendly. The UK's are. So I actually see a lot of the jobs moving now, moving back in the medium term.
Travel / Border Controls - yes and no. Getting in and out will be as easy as it is now. I've not got a European passport, but the longest I've waited to get in/out anywhere of Europe (including the UK) in the last 2 years is 15 mins. UK border entry will still be a piece of cake. Setting up shop here will be much more difficult. Is that a bad thing? I'm not sure. I think most EU nations will reciprocate.
Tarriffs ... this is the big unknown. As it's not as simple as simply saying we are tariff free. I think they'll be applied but the hit won't be anywhere near what people are expecting. There will be a lot of horseplay, and I think if it goes no-deal both sides will blame the shit out of each other. French wine, German cars both rely on the UK market to name just two. UK tourism, services for the other way. I expect these will be sorted pretty bloody quickly.
The small business owners will be the ones who will suffer the most - on both sides.
Above are just my views based on my own research. It's not rosey, but its pragmatic. Both sides need each other.
-
Thanks guys - really nice to get some insights from closer to the action.
@MajorRage said in British Politics:
Above are just my views based on my own research. It's not rosey, but its pragmatic. Both sides need each other.
It's actually an almost rosey view i.m.o.
And I say almost because despite both sides needing each other, the risk I guess is that politicians looking to score points could get in the bloody way of pragmatism winning the day. -
There's no doubt that a no-deal will hurt the UK in the short-term but it's the longterm pain that Europe will feel. Hopefully Trump isn't just bluster and is happy to put through a favourable deal with the UK even if it is just to poke Merkel/Marcon and whomever the current EU commission head is in the eye. The harder the EU make it, the worse it will be for them in the long run. Democratic sovereign nation vs a European super state increasingly under German control...optics aren't great.
-
@Rembrandt Can you define what you mean by short-term? And why do you think it will only have a short-term impact - what are the factors that will put a stop to the hurt? Is the longterm pain that you say Europe will feel based on any analysis or just gut feel? I'm interested in why you think the EU will have it harder in the long run if they play hardball and why anyone would assume the EU position isn't based on any sort of rigorous analysis. It seems to me to be a bit of an arrogance to presume that their stance is based solely on ideology, without any data to back it up.
As for the optics, I'm pretty confident the Europols don't give a hoot. Nobody is going to lose any votes domestically from giving the UK a kick in the nuts. And the Eurocrats certainly don't care, because they don't have to answer to anyone - isn't one of the drivers for Brexit exactly that point?
-
@JC said in British Politics:
@Rembrandt Can you define what you mean by short-term? And why do you think it will only have a short-term impact - what are the factors that will put a stop to the hurt? Is the longterm pain that you say Europe will feel based on any analysis or just gut feel? I'm interested in why you think the EU will have it harder in the long run if they play hardball and why anyone would assume the EU position isn't based on any sort of rigorous analysis. It seems to me to be a bit of an arrogance to presume that their stance is based solely on ideology, without any data to back it up.
As for the optics, I'm pretty confident the Europols don't give a hoot. Nobody is going to lose any votes domestically from giving the UK a kick in the nuts. And the Eurocrats certainly don't care, because they don't have to answer to anyone - isn't one of the drivers for Brexit exactly that point?
It is obvious that nobody really knows what the impact will be. Remainers or Brexiteers. as for your point about no consequences for Europols/Eurocrats, nope, you are wrong. Brexit is an consequence. It is an illusion built up by Euro enthusiasts that Brexit doesnt matter or have consequence.
-
@MajorRage Is Boris serious about finding a solution though?
Why hasn't anyone tabled a proper proposal for the border yet - they've had months to at least come up with some sort of feasible workaround but nothing concrete has been proposed yet. There must be a technological solution that can track freight without requiring physical inspection at the border. So why hasn't anyone in the UK put the effort into working it out?
-
@MajorRage Is Boris serious about finding a solution though?
Why hasn't anyone tabled a proper proposal for the border yet - they've had months to at least come up with some sort of feasible workaround but nothing concrete has been proposed yet. There must be a technological solution that can track freight without requiring physical inspection at the border. So why hasn't anyone in the UK put the effort into working it out?
It’s not just the UK that has this problem. In all negotiations there is a requirement for the two sides to come together. The issue that has chimed with most of the populace has sod all to do with freight and all to do with people. EU won’t play ball on one without the other, UK government can’t say sod it lets have a hard border as the DUP won’t prop them up. Not simple at all.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in British Politics:
@JC said in British Politics:
@Rembrandt Can you define what you mean by short-term? And why do you think it will only have a short-term impact - what are the factors that will put a stop to the hurt? Is the longterm pain that you say Europe will feel based on any analysis or just gut feel? I'm interested in why you think the EU will have it harder in the long run if they play hardball and why anyone would assume the EU position isn't based on any sort of rigorous analysis. It seems to me to be a bit of an arrogance to presume that their stance is based solely on ideology, without any data to back it up.
As for the optics, I'm pretty confident the Europols don't give a hoot. Nobody is going to lose any votes domestically from giving the UK a kick in the nuts. And the Eurocrats certainly don't care, because they don't have to answer to anyone - isn't one of the drivers for Brexit exactly that point?
It is obvious that nobody really knows what the impact will be. Remainers or Brexiteers. as for your point about no consequences for Europols/Eurocrats, nope, you are wrong. Brexit is an consequence. It is an illusion built up by Euro enthusiasts that Brexit doesnt matter or have consequence.
You're right, they don't know. Which is why I asked Rembrandt what his definition was, and what it was based on. The question still stands.
I never said there were no consequences, I said they didn’t care. But the personal consequences for the Europols - in terms of votes - are potentially better if they play harder. And for the Eurocrats, nope, hard or easy Brexit their jobs and pensions are secure.
As for the consequences for the EU itself, yes they are real. But many of them already became inevitable the moment the leave vote was won. Their negotiating team now have the job of making sure the damage is mitigated as much as possible.
For all their faults the EU team are not irrational. They want what's best for their side, and their strategy will be reflective of that. It makes no sense for them to screw themselves over just to punish the UK. But they are punishing the UK nevertheless, so it follows that their analysis is telling them that there is more upside in doing that than letting the UK down easy. What appears to us to be malicious is from their point of view just pragmatic.
-
@MajorRage Is Boris serious about finding a solution though?
My view: NO. He doesn't give a fig.
Either he gets Europe to agree to his current view and he gets what he wants and looks like a political grandmaster, or he crashes the UK out, cements his position as the pro-UK-before-Europe strong guy and gets to implement his view anyway.
In both scenarios he will view it as a win. Whether it actually is, only history will be able to tell. -
@Billy-Webb That's my view as well. Neither side can move on the backstop at this point as they've spent too much capital on it. Unless Boris get's rolled it's looking like no deal.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in British Politics:
@JC said in British Politics:
@Rembrandt Can you define what you mean by short-term? And why do you think it will only have a short-term impact - what are the factors that will put a stop to the hurt? Is the longterm pain that you say Europe will feel based on any analysis or just gut feel? I'm interested in why you think the EU will have it harder in the long run if they play hardball and why anyone would assume the EU position isn't based on any sort of rigorous analysis. It seems to me to be a bit of an arrogance to presume that their stance is based solely on ideology, without any data to back it up.
As for the optics, I'm pretty confident the Europols don't give a hoot. Nobody is going to lose any votes domestically from giving the UK a kick in the nuts. And the Eurocrats certainly don't care, because they don't have to answer to anyone - isn't one of the drivers for Brexit exactly that point?
It is obvious that nobody really knows what the impact will be. Remainers or Brexiteers. as for your point about no consequences for Europols/Eurocrats, nope, you are wrong. Brexit is an consequence. It is an illusion built up by Euro enthusiasts that Brexit doesnt matter or have consequence.
You're right, they don't know. Which is why I asked Rembrandt what his definition was, and what it was based on. The question still stands.
I never said there were no consequences, I said they didn’t care. But the personal consequences for the Europols - in terms of votes - are potentially better if they play harder. And for the Eurocrats, nope, hard or easy Brexit their jobs and pensions are secure.
As for the consequences for the EU itself, yes they are real. But many of them already became inevitable the moment the leave vote was won. Their negotiating team now have the job of making sure the damage is mitigated as much as possible.
For all their faults the EU team are not irrational. They want what's best for their side, and their strategy will be reflective of that. It makes no sense for them to screw themselves over just to punish the UK. But they are punishing the UK nevertheless, so it follows that their analysis is telling them that there is more upside in doing that than letting the UK down easy. What appears to us to be malicious is from their point of view just pragmatic.
They aren't irrational, but I think they are all trying to project being on the same wavelength/page without actually being so.
No-deal Brexit is almost unavoidable now.
-
For all their faults the EU team are not irrational. They want what's best for their side, and their strategy will be reflective of that. It makes no sense for them to screw themselves over just to punish the UK. But they are punishing the UK nevertheless, so it follows that their analysis is telling them that there is more upside in doing that than letting the UK down easy. What appears to us to be malicious is from their point of view just pragmatic.
I disagree. While in a vaccum it makes rational sense (we need to punish them to teach the others a lesson), their ultimate reasoning for any decision is that keeping the union of 28-states in tact is of paramount importance - and that at it's root of is the irrationality.
While the car salesman and divorce analogies have been done to death it's the only way I can see to make the point. Imagine negotiating a divorce with someone whose ultimate unequivocal belief is that marriage is a sin and they will have no part of it? Any rational, mutually beneficial economic argument will fall on deaf ears simply because one side is dogmatically irrational.
-
Corbyn all over the new today about his plan to stop a no-deal Brexit.
I'm not sure what planet this guy lives on. If only he realised that if he departed and a more centreist leader was in place, that any of this would have any chance of a show of making any sort of progress.
No-Deal or Corbyn PM? Give me the former every single time.
-
@MajorRage said in Brexit:
No-Deal or Corbyn PM? Give me the former every single time.
I am not a fan of Corbyn. In fact, if "fan" was one end of the spectrum, I'd be off the other end.
But as someone who always and still believes Brexit is a bad idea, I'd take Corbyn and revocation of Article 50 any day of the week.Corbyn won't last long. But a hard Brexit is going to last a long, long time.
Brexit