Brexit thread - what happens next

do_ron_ron · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:30

ljt said:
Shocking and sad. I really don't understand that mentality. I'd rather see a potential trade partner with a strong economy and populace than dictate more favourable terms for myself just because I happen to be in a better position at the time of negotiation. I can't accept it's human nature to do that either, because that's tarring everyone with same brush.

It is reality. Did the British Empire do any different or any empire before that? It is human nature. Sad but true.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what it means by skilled labour? I think engineers, doctors/consultants, scientists etc when I hear skilled labour? I can't believe there are no English doctors, engineers, scientists etc!

If that is what is meant by skilled labour then granted, I accept we may need more than we have "locally" so to speak, but this might be the kick up the bum we need to focus on getting more people into those fields?

We are talking about diplomats, international lawyers specialising in these type of negotiations. There was a Youtube video posted way back in the thread where a Professor gives a talk on this subject. It is 24 mins long but very informative about the deals.

Arazi · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:37

do_ron_ron said:
No a Dulwich whelp. Same background. Public school, City, Politics. Just like your average Joe, right?

I was aiming at the spineless part of his post, i couldn't give a **** what school he went to, in other words Farage has more balls than any other of the current so called elite spineless dross.

Does that clear it for you?

w1lliam · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:38

do_ron_ron said:
It is reality. Did the British Empire do any different or any empire before that? It is human nature. Sad but true.

.

We didn't just boss people around. Extra judicial killings, grotesque shades of mass murder, enslavement, the list really does goes on and on.

Add cannibalism to that list. And genocide. And pretty much every major crime against humanity. Honestly, we have an appalling history.

But we won the wars and now we have our freedom.

Also this :mad:

V F · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:41

Did anyone see Anna Soubry at the protest to cancel leave, outside Westminster with her huge pink bag and coat...

stewski · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:41

w1lliam said:
We didn't just boss people around. Extra judicial killings, grotesque shades of mass murder, enslavement, the list really does goes on and on.

Add cannibalism to that list. And genocide. And pretty much every major crime against humanity. Honestly, we have an appalling history.

But we won the wars and now we have our freedom.

Also this

Continuing on from that and after the apparent rise in hate crimes.
Google: akala frankie boyle youtube

For an interesting summation of structural racism in Britain today.

Cern · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:42

Robbo said:
That is generally what politicians do though, look at both campaigns, one was led by a serving Prime Minister.

The lies, deception and whipping up hatred were predominantly on the Brexit side. No plan was presented for life after Brexit and STILL there's no plan.

The Remain side were guilty of scaremongering (even if much of it seems to be coming true) and bullying. Little spotlight was put on the benefits of EU membership, even though there are many for all walks of life, rich and poor.

Neither side covered themselves in glory. It was a truly awful campaign all round and not conducted in a manner befitting a decision which has such huge consequences and changes to our economy, society and international relations. The deeply poor way the campaigns were run without rigorous examination of all the issues does huge damage to our democracy and discredits the result.

Simply put, whilst it was democracy it certainly wasn't as good democracy (and I would genuinely have felt the same whatever side won).

Caged · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:42

Rincewindle said:
Then you should read back a page or 2 instead of cherry picking comments that suit your argument

I quoted an entire post of yours where you were wrong but tried using it to support an unrelated statement anyway. It was hardly cherry picking.

Darujhistan · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:46

Arazi said:
Same here.

I always get the feeling he could make any man **** his pants in around 5 seconds, and when he stands up in his little corner where he sits in the commons you feel the anticipation in the air

Yes, everyone listens, if only we had more like him on all sides of the house, we'd be far better off.

He's risen above the cattle market and that's not easy to do.

If only he were involved in the Brexit talks, he would tear through any nonsense from Juncker et al.

I just hope we have the right intellects for the job.

Robbo · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:47

Cern said:
The lies, deception and whipping up hatred were predominantly on the Brexit side. No plan was presented for life after Brexit and STILL there's no plan.

The Remain side were guilty of scaremongering (even if much of it seems to be coming true) and bullying. Little spotlight was put on the benefits of EU membership, even though there are many for all walks of life, rich and poor.

Neither side covered themselves in glory. It was a truly awful campaign all round and not conducted in a manner befitting a decision which has such huge consequences and changes to our economy, society and international relations. The deeply poor way the campaigns were run without rigorous examination of all the issues does huge damage to our democracy and discredits the result.

Simply put, whilst it was democracy it certainly wasn't as good democracy (and I would genuinely have felt the same whatever side won).

I agree, it was dreadful. It rapidly descended into a point scoring, rent-a-quote contest, and was deliberately misleading people in both directions. I actually think if Remain had put their case forward properly, they would have probably won.

Arazi · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:49

PapaLazaru said:
Bit like the leave campaign.

Was the leave campaign the Prime Minister?

Mauller · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:49

Cern said:
The lies, deception and whipping up hatred were predominantly on the Brexit side.

I wouldn't exactly say that. From the start and even before then, Ukip and the leave side of the campaign were aiming for controlled Migration. But as with ukip before the referendum campaigning began, the media played a big part in painting their idea for controlled migration as no migration along with all the racial hatred to go with it.

It was only once a large number of Tories started backing leave and made their own major leave party separate from what Ukip were doing that the media toned down the racism side of the controlled migration.

Trifid · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:50

do_ron_ron said:
In the nature of negotiating a small trade bloc always comes out weakest, so basically for example, America would dictate terms to us. And they all take time as well as has been mentioned already we have no skilled people because the EU has been doing it for us for the last 40 years.

If the trade deal offered is no good then we don't need to accept it*. Remember, we don't have a deal with America now so there would be nothing to lose for that trade. On the flip side, the deal the EU would negotiate on our and the rest of the Europe's behalf may not be optimal for the UK.

*The exception for trade deals and that is with the EU. Unfortunately we need a deal that includes services (and financial services passporting) in order to not cause great pain for our pockets. There is only one get out clause here and that is EFTA and to accept the freedom of movement as a net positive for the UK economy and a net positive on your personal freedom.

Darujhistan · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:51

I agree, it was dreadful. It rapidly descended into a point scoring, rent-a-quote contest, and was deliberately misleading people in both directions. I actually think if Remain had put their case forward properly, they would have probably won.

They would have. Instead they carpet bombed project fear for a month when everyone North and South of the border had heard it all before.

All they talked about was money, that doesn't resonate with everyone.

w1lliam · 28 Jun 2016 at 21:55

stewski said:
Continuing on from that and after the apparent rise in hate crimes.
Google: akala frankie boyle youtube

For an interesting summation of structural racism in Britain today.

I've never seen this.

Wow.

kitch9 · 28 Jun 2016 at 22:04

Robbo said:
I agree, it was dreadful. It rapidly descended into a point scoring, rent-a-quote contest, and was deliberately misleading people in both directions. I actually think if Remain had put their case forward properly, they would have probably won.

Remain were campaigning on short term scare issues and leave on a long term gamble.

I'm sick of short termism in politics, glad leave one.

V F · 28 Jun 2016 at 22:07

kitch9 said:
Remain were campaigning on short term scare issues and leave on a long term gamble.

Only a 5 year window. Though you could say 4 since that year is the build up to the election.

Mauller · 28 Jun 2016 at 22:07

kitch9 said:
Remain were campaigning on short term scare issues and leave on a long term gamble.

I'm sick of short termism in politics, glad leave one.

That is the problem with politics and the character of many politicians, they only care about the short term gains to improve their own image. Rather than the long term gains that help the people and the country as a whole.

It is pretty much the reason why cameron lost his spine and decided to stand down instead of calling article 50 and dealing with the outcome.

V F · 28 Jun 2016 at 22:08

Mauller said:
That is the problem with politics and the character of many politicians, they only care about the short term gains to improve their own image. Rather than the long term gains that help the people and the country as a whole.

What Clint Eastwood said about them in 2012 was true but the majority dissed him. Same applies to British politics.

rubberduck · 28 Jun 2016 at 22:43

As far as I can tell the basis for that Minford chap's argument is that he takes some historic data (obviously from the UK being in the EU) and applies some numerical corrections to those numbers based on a model of what it might be like if we weren't in the single market. He then claims how much richer we would be... Am I missing something but surely if we leave the single market then the numbers on which he was basing his study would change drastically and so even if his correction model was 'spot on' the result would still be irrelevant as it would have to be based on new numbers as a result of UK leaving the EU? Or maybe I'm just not an expert like he is.....

Darujhistan · 28 Jun 2016 at 22:44

Mauller said:
That is the problem with politics and the character of many politicians, they only care about the short term gains to improve their own image. Rather than the long term gains that help the people and the country as a whole.

It is pretty much the reason why cameron lost his spine and decided to stand down instead of calling article 50 and dealing with the outcome.

Democracies biggest failing is short-termism, but then that's only really a reflection of human nature in the end.