Brexit matters

[edwin_m]

So it is up to us to put ourselves right, nobody else.

Perhaps losing your sovereignty will eventually lose you your nation?

Part of putting the damage right is to remove the cause (Brexit).

Predecessors of the EU have been around since 1952, no sign of the original six members "losing their nations".

And if "sovereignty" means a government can do what it likes with only 40% of the vote, then I'd be happy to trade some of it in for more democracy.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The OBR, the government's own independent forecaster, stands by its previous assessment that Brexit has reduced UK economic activity by 5% with others estimating more (https://obr.uk/efo/economic-and-fiscal-outlook-march-2024/ "Overall, our assumptions about the impact of Brexit appear to be broadly on track and recently published studies are also broadly consistent with these estimates.").

Where does OBR state that economic activity was reduced by 5% due to Brexit? I had an extensive look round the link you provided, and also followed through it's references to the 2023 report but couldn't see any such claim on it.

Importantly this is a worsening that continues into the future compared with what would have happened had we remained as members, whereas Covid and hopefully Ukraine will be short-term hits.

What do you mean by worsening continuing into the future? You'd expect that any hit from leaving would be one-off in the sense that the year-on-year change in GDP would only be impacted for the few years around Brexit. That would leave a permanent reduction in GDP if not made up for by any increases in future years, but it wouldn't be an increasing reduction.

Every EU member state except Sweden has suffered war with or occupation by another European country, or totalitarian government, since 1914. But none has since they joined up.

Agreed, but with the proviso that you seem to be including home-grown 'totalitarian government' in the things the EU has allegedly prevented - but to counter that, the EU evidently couldn't stop Poland or Hungary (and now maybe Slovakia?) from backsliding away from democracy, albeit not into actual totalitarian rule. But aside from that, your wider point is correct, and securing peace was one of the original motivations for the then ECSC then EEC. It's not clear to me though that the EU is still today necessary to secure peace: That seems to be as much a consequence of the spread of democracy and resultant greater reluctance to fight in any unjustified war amongst the European population. It is after all almost unheard of for two full democracies to engage in all-out war with each other.

 

[RT4038]

Part of putting the damage right is to remove the cause (Brexit).

I don't think that is likely to happen soon, but it is your right to push for it, convince sufficient of your fellow electors and vote for it when the opportunity arises.

Predecessors of the EU have been around since 1952, no sign of the original six members "losing their nations".

The United States of Europe project is for the long run. Majority voting has only been around for 30 years or so, and the pace of change gradual. Before we know it (boiling frogs syndrome), we'll be similar to the position of Louisiana. Some people will be quite happy with that, of course.

And if "sovereignty" means a government can do what it likes with only 40% of the vote, then I'd be happy to trade some of it in for more democracy.

It is your right to push for change, convince sufficient of your fellow electors and vote for it when the opportunity arises.

 

[edwin_m]

Where does OBR state that economic activity was reduced by 5% due to Brexit? I had an extensive look round the link you provided, and also followed through it's references to the 2023 report but couldn't see any such claim on it.

It's a series of updates which basically say they see no reason to change their previous projections. The most recent mention appears to be at https://obr.uk/box/the-effect-on-productivity-of-leaving-the-eu/

These point to a central estimate of an effect on potential productivity ... in the region of 4 per cent in the long run (Table A), although the range of estimates is wide.

This is March 2020 so usefully pre-Covid.

What do you mean by worsening continuing into the future? You'd expect that any hit from leaving would be one-off in the sense that the year-on-year change in GDP would only be impacted for the few years around Brexit. That would leave a permanent reduction in GDP if not made up for by any increases in future years, but it wouldn't be an increasing reduction.

The quote above mentions it being in the long run. Also we're seeing multinational businesses pulling out of the UK and UK-based businesses being less competitive internationally, with jobs and tax revenue going with them. Covid is a bit different as it won't act as a long-term drag, it affected all economies not just the UK, and we couldn't really do much to prevent it (unlike Brexit where the damage is self-inflicted).

I don't think that is likely to happen soon, but it is your right to push for it, convince sufficient of your fellow electors and vote for it when the opportunity arises.


The United States of Europe project is for the long run. Majority voting has only been around for 30 years or so, and the pace of change gradual. Before we know it (boiling frogs syndrome), we'll be similar to the position of Louisiana. Some people will be quite happy with that, of course.


It is your right to push for change, convince sufficient of your fellow electors and vote for it when the opportunity arises.

I believe that will happen in time. Polls now show a significant majority believe Brexit was the wrong thing to do, but are not in favour of re-joining because that would be in many ways a repeat of 2019 and a future Tory government would just want to reverse it. It's unlikely for many years until the majority becomes overwhelming and all major political parties are in favour.

 

[nw1]

Sounds like more and more rules, and interventions, against the natural way of people and commerce. Parts of Europe have already tried this kind of intervention in their economies, all bound together in a pact, and that went really well for individual rights, immigration and economies.

So rules to control rents or to prevent wages being suppressed are "bad" rules but rules to prevent immigration from the EU are "good" rules?
I'd say the inverse is true, but I guess we'll have to disagree.

I believe that will happen in time. Polls now show a significant majority believe Brexit was the wrong thing to do, but are not in favour of re-joining because that would be in many ways a repeat of 2019 and a future Tory government would just want to reverse it. It's unlikely for many years until the majority becomes overwhelming and all major political parties are in favour.

Which is why I think we (probably) won't rejoin, but we (probably) will get significantly closer to the EU - over a period of 10 years or so - if, and only if, the Tories are voted out, and if they remain out in 2029.

Perhaps a bit of wishful thinking rather?

(Regarding many Tory politicians considering Brexit a bad idea, but one which is difficult to reverse so they "big it up" in order not to look weak)

This is what I honestly think, but I am naturally cynical about politicians and generally believe that what they say and what they think are two different things.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

So rules to control rents or to prevent wages being suppressed are "bad" rules but rules to prevent immigration from the EU are "good" rules?

More correctly, all those rules have both good and bad consequences and it's often a value judgement whether you find the balance negative or positive. However, both experience and economic theory show that controls on prices (which is what rent and wage controls amount to) tend to be particularly pernicious in the economic harm they do because they prevent the free market from matching supply and demand. For example, rent controls usually end up causing or exacerbating shortages in places to rent. Minimum wage controls arguably do more good than harm if they are used to prevent a minority of employers from paying exceptionally and unusually low wages (which is not the case for the UK minimum wage which has increased to the point where it's become more like a Government-mandated wage for a substantial proportion of the population, but that's off-topic and a different story.)

Rules to prevent immigration are different in nature because they aren't price controls so they don't really stop the market pricing mechanism from working, and in any case their purpose isn't (usually) primarily economic, but more to ensure countries can maintain stable communities, avoid clashes of values, keep population levels stable enough that infrastructure can support the people living there, prevent people hostile to your country from entering it, etc. etc. It's also also true that immigration controls represent an interference in the free market as well as a restriction on human freedom, but set against that the benefits tend to stack up a lot more than they usually do for price controls. That's why I for one don't have any problems viewing rent controls as usually on balance harmful, wage controls as something to be careful of but can be good in the right circumstances, and immigration controls as generally on balance beneficial, while still acknowledging that all those things cause both some good and some harm.

 

[class ep-09]

Europe live: Brussels proposes free movement deal for UK’s 18- to 30-year-olds

European commission floats opening negotiations with London to allow under 30s in UK and EU the same rights they enjoyed before Brexit

www.theguardian.com

What? Our young can’t go anywhere especially to the EU !!!

They may start thinking that leaving EU and ending Freedom of Movement was stupid idea …

Sarcasm .

 

[renegademaster]

They'd have more change negotiating back the single market rather than what most people's main reason for leaving the EU

 

[edwin_m]

They'd have more change negotiating back the single market rather than what most people's main reason for leaving the EU

You can't have the single market without freedom of movement.

 

[renegademaster]

You can't have the single market without freedom of movement.

FoM will be a political dead end , especially one that would bring all the wage anxiety back but wouldnt let boomers have their dreams of retiring in Spain back. Something like what Turkey has would still be unlikely but slightly more likely

 

[edwin_m]

FoM will be a political dead end , especially one that would bring all the wage anxiety back but wouldnt let boomers have their dreams of retiring in Spain back. Something like what Turkey has would still be unlikely but slightly more likely

We've been over this numerous times and any agreement is unlikely. But the fact remains that an increasing majority considers Brexit was a bad idea, much more so amongst young people reaching voting age. I'm not saying this is a majority to re-join, as many people don't want a repeat of 2019, but it could become so in time.

Either way, it appears most people either have no problem with FoM or but would be willing to accept it to get the benefits of being back in the EU.

 

[SteveP29]

The United States of Europe project is for the long run. Majority voting has only been around for 30 years or so, and the pace of change gradual. Before we know it (boiling frogs syndrome), we'll be similar to the position of Louisiana. Some people will be quite happy with that, of course.

Had on, the leave contingent told us more than a few times that 'countries are queuing up to leave the EU'
We've left and those other countries? Nothing, nada.

So which is it, are they queuing up to leave or are they all in it for the long run?

FoM will be a political dead end , especially one that would bring all the wage anxiety back but wouldnt let boomers have their dreams of retiring in Spain back. Something like what Turkey has would still be unlikely but slightly more likely

Wage anxiety BACK?
when did it ever go away and what what's different about it now that we're out compared to when we were in?

 

[renegademaster]

Wage anxiety BACK

The whole "the warehouses only hire poles because they work for less" sentiment that existed in towns where they are big employers and voted strongly for Brexit (Think places like Boston ) , that Labour will probably soon acquire the seats for. Kier is going to be in no rush to send middle England back to the Tories