EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[Puffing Devil]

On what basis do you say it "will not payback for over 50 years"?

Where is the evidence and facts to support that statement? And I don't count as evidence someone misquoting what one politician has said.

Given that I'm happy with the status quo, and we were examing your support of Brexit and defence of the RM interview, perhaps you could provide the evidence and facts for your payback period? You're supporting change - I'm happy to keep what we have. Unless, of course, your blank ballot means that you're not really supportive of the change. Which then begs the question, why go to such great lengths to support Brexit?

Still waiting for that tangible benefit, by the way......

 

[nidave]

On what basis do you say it "will not payback for over 50 years"?

Where is the evidence and facts to support that statement? And I don't count as evidence someone misquoting what one politician has said.

You have no evidence and facts that it won't be a disaster. You have hope and wish. We know what we had with the EU - in a few days we are going into unknown territory - we have seen the impact of the uncertainty before we actually leave, we have seen the goss incompetence of UK politicians who have no idea what they are doing. We have companies saying they are leaving the UK or have already left, we have jobs being lost which without brexit would most likely still be there.
We have spent as much (nearly) on getting ready for brexit than all the contributions to the EU since we joined.
N. Ireland business have a lot more paperwork to transport goods within the UK
It will be a disaster - it already is a disaster.

 

[TrafficEng]

How about stay in the EU where we are part of the largest trading bloc in the world. A bloc which stands up to the USA.

What is the importance of standing up to the USA? What about China, Russia, India, Brazil?

How much has France stood up to the USA over their proposals for a 'Google Tax'? What level of support has France had from the EU to implement this policy as soon as possible?

 

[nidave]

What is the importance of standing up to the USA? What about China, Russia, India, Brazil?

How much has France stood up to the USA over their proposals for a 'Google Tax'? What level of support has France had from the EU to implement this policy as soon as possible?

The USA is demanding we reduce (for starters) Food safety, Workers rights, environmental rights, equipment used in infrastructure - they have basically said we can have a trade deal with them nor china - not both. The EU have been big enough to say no to a lot of these demands

The Google tax is not currently within the EU remit - nothing to do with the EU - tax i mostly down to member states (with a few exeptions)

 

[overthewater]

I have one Question:

Should the UK have to take and apply EVERY SINGLE RULE and operation If we had stayed in the EU: like EU Army, Euro etc etc etc, IF NOT why not, especially then why should the UK be in a club and not follow all the rules, If you say oh we can change them, its only the UK that want them changed.

 

[TrafficEng]

We have spent as much (nearly) on getting ready for brexit than all the contributions to the EU since we joined.

This is another (very) inaccurate claim.

The USA is demanding we reduce (for starters) Food safety, Workers rights, environmental rights, equipment used in infrastructure - they have basically said we can have a trade deal with them nor china - not both.

The USA have asked for these issues to be discussed as part of the trade negotiations, which is not the same as "demanding". It isn't unusual for a party at the start of a negotiation to ask for things it knows it won't get, but asks anyway to have something to negotiate away. Standard business practice.

...they have basically said we can have a trade deal with them nor china - not both.

Source?

The EU have been big enough to say no to a lot of these demands

The EU don't have a trade deal with the US though.

The Google tax is not currently within the EU remit - nothing to do with the EU - tax i mostly down to member states (with a few exeptions)

Placing what amounts to a tariff on a service provided via international trade is nothing to do with the EU?

Maybe that is why France didn't have the EU standing up for it against the mighty USA. Or perhaps the protection afforded by being in the EU club isn't as good as it is claimed to be.

 

[edwin_m]

On what basis do you say it "will not payback for over 50 years"?

Where is the evidence and facts to support that statement? And I don't count as evidence someone misquoting what one politician has said.

We don't know if it will pay back or not in what period. But the onus is on someone proposing change to outline the benefits that will result compared with not changing. That case has categorically not been made for Brexit.

If even one of the strongest supporters of Brexit is saying that the benefits might not appear for 50 years, by which time most people who voted in 2016 will be dead, then it's hard to believe there is any benefit at all.

 

[Cowley]

Indeed. Especially when you bear in mind that most of the younger people who will still be voting in 50 years time don’t want it to happen anyway.

 

[dgl]

One more thing, people keep saying that it's the older generation that voted for Brexit and in some aspects that is true, however, the people that actually had to live through the wars and were old enough to understand what was going on generally are remainders. They saw what happened when nationalism took hold and realised that nationalism is not the answer and that working together for a common cause works out better. Not only that but when you have got countries like America trying to call the shots isn't it much better to be the bigger party that can throw a bit of muscle around rather than being told to sit down and shut up by the bigger boys?

Also remember that whilst a lot of brexiteers seem to think that it was better in their day was it really?, Only the colonies really brought British and they only did until better products came along (e.g. the Toyota Land Cruiser), not to mention our big debt to our so called allies America who originally only joined the war to make a few bucks. Our products just weren't up to the standards people started to expect.
Also remember we originally weren't allowed to join the EEC as we were the poor guys of Europe and this only really changed when we were finally allowed to join the EEC and it saved us.

We just have to hope that Brexit doesn't undo all of this, and that countries like America don't just see us as a money making exercise for them and we get all the pain for none of the rewards.
Unfortunately I don't think that is going to happen, we will end up having a bigger trade deficit than we have ever had and UK manufacturing will bear the brunt of our misfortune.

As for a song for Brexit,

 

[furnessvale]

If even one of the strongest supporters of Brexit is saying that the benefits might not appear for 50 years, by which time most people who voted in 2016 will be dead, then it's hard to believe there is any benefit at all.

Indeed. Sod the kids, what's all this nonsense about global warming. It won't happen in my lifetime.

 

[Peter Kelford]

So its going to take approx 50 years to get back all the opportunities we had while a member of the EU

It might do. It might not. Nobody knows.

A 50-year period after which we'll see the benefits of Brexit is like saying that in 1900 we should have foreseen the entire collapse of the British Empire. In the economy and society, cycles only take a decade or two so there's no point looking two or three cycles ahead and saying that there's going to be benefits. If the UK is doing well in 2070, it's more than likely due to something else not a 50-year old prophecy.

Which is why Mogg was telling Guru-Murthy to stop being a plank for suggesting he should resign in year 1 if Brexit isn't going well. The question was idiotic.

How much has France stood up to the USA over their proposals for a 'Google Tax'? What level of support has France had from the EU to implement this policy as soon as possible?

They're currently negotiating via the OECD.

 

[edwin_m]

Indeed. Sod the kids, what's all this nonsense about global warming. It won't happen in my lifetime.

Completely false comparison. Climate change is likely to be very damaging according to the overwhelming majority of scientists, so it's right to be doing something about it now. Any benefit of Brexit doesn't appear for 50 years even according to one of its chief proponents, and nobody has provided any evidence or explanation of how that benefit actually arises. So in view of the obvious downsides and risks, to an unbiased observer it is the height of folly to be embarking on something that will distract from real concerns like climate change, and indeed worsens the situation if it replaces short-distance trade with longer-distance.

 

[Peter Kelford]

Completely false comparison. Climate change is likely to be very damaging according to the overwhelming majority of scientists, so it's right to be doing something about it now. Any benefit of Brexit doesn't appear for 50 years even according to one of its chief proponents, and nobody has provided any evidence or explanation of how that benefit actually arises. So in view of the obvious downsides and risks, to an unbiased observer it is the height of folly to be embarking on something that will distract from real concerns like climate change, and indeed worsens the situation if it replaces short-distance trade with longer-distance.

The only economists who say that the UK is likely to be better off with Brexit is...Economists for Free Trade, a small protest-minded organisation. No other economists say that Brexit is good.

 

[nidave]

This is another (very) inaccurate claim.

You are incorrect.

Brexit is likely to have cost the UK more than £200 billion in lost economic growth by the end of this year — a figure that almost eclipses the total amount the UK has paid toward the European Union budget over the past 47 years.

Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-will-cost-uk-more-than-total-payments-to-eu-2020-1?r=US&IR=T

The USA have asked for these issues to be discussed as part of the trade negotiations, which is not the same as "demanding". It isn't unusual for a party at the start of a negotiation to ask for things it knows it won't get, but asks anyway to have something to negotiate away. Standard business practice.

Wrong

The 500-page tome from the US Trade Representative (USTR) published this week firmly espouses the virtues of free trade and less regulation, just as Donald Trump proposed slapping a further $100bn (£71.5bn) of import levies on Chinese goods.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...chlorine-washed-chicken-tariffs-a8292006.html

Ministers have been warned that the UK’s efforts to strike a US trade deal after Brexit could “severely limit” Britain’s ability to negotiate an equivalent agreement with the EU, according to a leaked government paper.

https://www.ft.com/content/778b2d6c-e830-11e9-a240-3b065ef5fc55

There are many more.

Source?

The US is also pursuing a clause that allows it to withdraw from a US-UK agreement if the UK agrees to an agreement with certain countries such as China.

http://theconversation.com/brexit-britains-weakness-exposed-in-us-trade-deal-documents-113077

The EU don't have a trade deal with the US though.

And? This is because the EU won't accept demands by the USA

Placing what amounts to a tariff on a service provided via international trade is nothing to do with the EU?

Maybe that is why France didn't have the EU standing up for it against the mighty USA. Or perhaps the protection afforded by being in the EU club isn't as good as it is claimed to be.

If you don't understand the full reach of the EU and its powers in individual member nations says a lot. You might want to see what they can and can't do in each individual member nation. They are working towards a common google tax but low tax countries blocked it - funny, you seem to keep saying the EU has full control over all decisions. - You are just wrong.

 

[SteveP29]

Every time I buy oranges, rice

Seriously?
You're getting shirty about a kilo of rice for 45p?
Honestly?
Burn the house down because you don't like the colour of the curtains?

Wait till that kilo is a Pound after your glorious Brexit (after we've paid import tariffs) and then I might have some sympathy.

https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/300843799

 

[nidave]

Seriously?
You're getting shirty about a kilo of rice for 45p?
Honestly?
Burn the house down because you don't like the colour of the curtains?

Wait till that kilo is a Pound after your glorious Brexit (after we've paid import tariffs) and then I might have some sympathy.

https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/300843799

also, oranges have higher tariffs when the EU crop is available - so we source them from EU countries - with no tariff during this time, also sourced closer, therefore, reducing food miles rather than other further countries and fresher. - so the outrage at oranges is unfounded and misdirected.

The EU also imposes no tariffs on the poorest countries in the world as a measure to help them with exports

 

[TrafficEng]

You are incorrect.

On the contrary. The claim you are referencing is that Brexit has 'cost' the UK circa £200bn by the end of 2020.

Your assertion was "We have spent as much (nearly) on getting ready for brexit...".

The fact is we have spent nowhere near £200bn "getting ready for brexit".

The £200bn figure is a theoretical estimate of what the UK economy has 'lost' in the period from 2016 if our economy (GDP) had grown at the average rate for the G7 economies.

Whilst that is superficially attractive (for those who want to vastly inflate the 'cost' of Brexit), the approach is fundamentally flawed. I won't spend time explaining why here, but FullFact have done a helpful explainer on why comparing UK GDP growth to the G7 average is not very sensible in this kind of situation.

Saying the UK is growing faster or slower than other economies isn’t very illuminating. It’s also relevant to ask where the UK is growing from.
https://fullfact.org/economy/uk-economic-growth-within-g7/

Brexit uncertainty has undeniably 'cost' the UK some GDP growth. But if Remainers are willing to agree not to perpetuate exaggerated claims about the amount the UK has spent on Brexit then I'll be more than happy to agree not to claim Brexit has been a total success if our GDP growth reverts to the mean any time over the next couple of years.

Wrong

The first link (and the headline it contains) describes a US document as a "wish list" (not 'demands'). The document is not even directed specifically to the UK, but is a general discussion about world trade.

The second link is paywalled, so I can't comment on the validity of what you've quoted.

And? This is because the EU won't accept demands by the USA

I was under the impression failure to make trade deals led to a progression of increased costs, starvation, famine, anarchy, and ultimately nuclear war. Maybe I've misunderstood what some Remainers have been saying over the last three years about the absolute necessity of avoiding "No Deal" at any cost.

If you don't understand the full reach of the EU and its powers in individual member nations says a lot.

It was a question. Posed to try to establish whether you appreciated the nature of the 'Google Tax' and how that related to the EU's competences regarding taxation and international trade.

You might want to see what they can and can't do in each individual member nation. They are working towards a common google tax but low tax countries blocked it

Which low tax countries would that be? Did the EU stand up against them on behalf of France?

- funny, you seem to keep saying the EU has full control over all decisions. - You are just wrong.

I don't believe I've ever claimed that. Could you give an example please? I will happily go back and correct myself if appropriate.

 

[Puffing Devil]

On the contrary. The claim you are referencing is that Brexit has 'cost' the UK circa £200bn by the end of 2020.
Your assertion was "We have spent as much (nearly) on getting ready for brexit...".
The fact is we have spent nowhere near £200bn "getting ready for brexit".
The £200bn figure is a theoretical estimate of what the UK economy has 'lost' in the period from 2016 if our economy (GDP) had grown at the average rate for the G7 economies.
Whilst that is superficially attractive (for those who want to vastly inflate the 'cost' of Brexit), the approach is fundamentally flawed. I won't spend time explaining why here, but FullFact have done a helpful explainer on hy comparing UK GDP growth to the G7 average is not very sensible in this kind of situation.
Brexit uncertainty has undeniably 'cost' the UK some GDP growth. But if Remainers are willing to agree not to perpetuate exaggerated claims about the amount the UK has spent on Brexit then I'll be more than happy to agree not to claim Brexit has been a total success if our GDP growth reverts to the mean any time over the next couple of years.
The first link (and the headline it contains) describes a US document as a "wish list" (not 'demands'). The document is not even directed specifically to the UK, but is a general discussion about world trade.
The second link is paywalled, so I can't comment on the validity of what you've quoted.
I was under the impression failure to make trade deals led to a progression of increased costs, starvation, famine, anarchy, and ultimately nuclear war. Maybe I've misunderstood what some Remainers have been saying over the last three years about the absolute necessity of avoiding "No Deal" at any cost.
It was a question. Posed to try to establish whether you appreciated the nature of the 'Google Tax' and how that related to the EU's competences regarding taxation and international trade.
Which low tax countries would that be? Did the EU stand up against them on behalf of France?
I don't believe I've ever claimed that. Could you give an example please? I will happily go back and correct myself if appropriate.

Rather than arguing the toss, you'd make a much better case if you could just address the question that you've been dodging for the past few days, namely:

Let's have a tangible benefit of Brexit.

If you choose not to answer or continue to obfusticate, I'll happily draw the conclusion that you don't have one.

 

[TrafficEng]

Rather than arguing the toss, you'd make a much better case if you could just address the question that you've been dodging for the past few days, namely:

Let's have a tangible benefit of Brexit.

If you choose not to answer or continue to obfusticate, I'll happily draw the conclusion that you don't have one.

No. I have no obligation to answer your questions, especially those framed in a pejorative way. It would be appreciated if you don't ask again. Thanks.

Minimum number of characters.

 

[Puffing Devil]

No. I have no obligation to answer your questions, especially those framed in a pejorative way. It would be appreciated if you don't ask again. Thanks.
Minimum number of characters.

Excellent - you've made yourself completely clear. No benefit, no need to engage with you anymore.

I would be interested if anyone else could let me know how my question was framed in a pejorative way. I thought it was direct, though inoffensive. I'd rather avoid causing offence in the future and maybe secure an answer from a Brexit Advocate; at the moment it feels like I'm searching for a unicorn at the end of a rainbow.

 

[NoMorePacers]

Excellent - you've made yourself completely clear. No benefit, no need to engage with you anymore.

I would be interested if anyone else could let me know how my question was framed in a pejorative way. I thought it was direct, though inoffensive. I'd rather avoid causing offence in the future and maybe secure an answer from a Brexit Advocate; at the moment it feels like I'm searching for a unicorn at the end of a rainbow.

Couldn’t be because all arguments in favour of Brexit are down the lines of either “hopes and dreams”, or “bloody Polish people” now could it?

 

[Doppelganger]

Excellent - you've made yourself completely clear. No benefit, no need to engage with you anymore.

I would be interested if anyone else could let me know how my question was framed in a pejorative way. I thought it was direct, though inoffensive. I'd rather avoid causing offence in the future and maybe secure an answer from a Brexit Advocate; at the moment it feels like I'm searching for a unicorn at the end of a rainbow.

And yet Brexiteers demand that everyone gets behind this leap into the dark, but are unwilling to say why.

If they are unable to give a valid tangible benefit of this endeavour, then why should those not in favour suddenly see the light and change their minds?

 

[AM9]

And yet Brexiteers demand that everyone gets behind this leap into the dark, but are unwilling to say why.

If they are unable to give a valid tangible benefit of this endeavour, then why should those not in favour suddenly see the light and change their minds?

As the UK stumbles its way through the next 2-3 years, no doubt many (previously) outspoken leavers will suddenly become mute.

 

[bramling]

As the UK stumbles its way through the next 2-3 years, no doubt many (previously) outspoken leavers will suddenly become mute.

Why shouldn’t they? Now the leave side is to a greater or lesser extent getting what it wants, there’s no need to keep going on about it. The focus should rightly be on making things work. It’s already refreshing that since the election the news hasn’t been completely dominated by Brexit, and a domestic agenda is starting to form again. Like it or not life outside the EU is now the new norm.

As an aside it was pleasing to hear on TV this morning some serious talk about population growth, and in particular the choices the nation faces in regard to controlling this.

 

[nidave]

Why shouldn’t they?

Why should they? Why do others who don't agree in any way with brexit and the mess it's making of the country have to change our stance - why dont you just change your views and become a remainer and fight to rejoin the EU to share the benefits of being an EU member

 

[overthewater]

I'm NOT one bit surprised no one wants to answer this question, but it speak volumes.

I have one Question:

Should the UK have to take and apply EVERY SINGLE RULE and operation If we had stayed in the EU: like EU Army, Euro etc etc etc, IF NOT why not, especially then why should the UK be in a club and not follow all the rules, If you say oh we can change them, its only the UK that want them changed.

 

[Esker-pades]

I have one Question:

Should the UK have to take and apply EVERY SINGLE RULE and operation If we had stayed in the EU: like EU Army, Euro etc etc etc, IF NOT why not, especially then why should the UK be in a club and not follow all the rules, If you say oh we can change them, its only the UK that want them changed.

The EU Army isn't a thing yet.

But, given the choice, probably yes.

I'm NOT one bit surprised no one wants to answer this question, but it speak volumes.

Or, people have other stuff to do.

 

[transmanche]

I have one Question:

Should the UK have to take and apply EVERY SINGLE RULE and operation If we had stayed in the EU: like EU Army, Euro etc etc etc, IF NOT why not, especially then why should the UK be in a club and not follow all the rules, If you say oh we can change them, its only the UK that want them changed.

I'm NOT one bit surprised no one wants to answer this question, but it speak volumes.

To be honest, it didn't look like q question. It looked like two rhetorical questions followed by an assertion. If you actually want an answer, can you try rephrasing the question?

 

[overthewater]

That is the Question. Do people believe that staying in the EU, should result in UK staying "AS IS" on the current agreement if so why? Why is the UK not more fully integrated into the EU? Surly if UK is part of this club it should follow all the rules..

 

[Doppelganger]

That is the Question. Do people believe that staying in the EU, should result in UK staying "AS IS" on the current agreement if so why? Why is the UK not more fully integrated into the EU? Surly if UK is part of this club it should follow all the rules..

Like Denmark, who have an opt out to join the Euro, like Ireland who aren't in Schengen?