Brexit thread - what happens next

Status
Not open for further replies.
n111ck said:
Do you have anything original to add or are you limited to just repeating the same 'jokes' that have been used to better effect by others hundreds of times in this thread alone? :D
Click to expand...

Brexit is a running joke that'll never stop giving. As per GD custom: Post the Express, prepare for stress! Unfurl the Fail, expect poo in the mail! :p
 
Tefal said:
not undemocratic...but it is impossible.

we can't negotiate until after article 50 is triggered.

Europe is refusing to, and its against the rules.
Click to expand...

Just coming back to this one, as I work closely alongside a lawyer I mentioned this to him.

He said no, in regards the against the rules.

Its not, nothing in the rules says you cannot pre negotiate anything IN fact you could negotiate the whole thing, trigger A50 and then they could immediately ratify it. There is some added complexity if certain areas are included in the deal though (which are the ones we would be most interested in negotiating) that would mean in all likelyhood the Eu parliament would be directly involved, precisely those who say no negotiation.

So you could in theory negotiate with all the member states and agree a full proposition, but if (as is almost 100% likely) that would cut across areas that the EU parliament would have some say over then they could refuse.

This sounds logical, in that Junker said no negotiation before A50 triggered, he can't for example stop Merkel (should she so choose) from agreeing what Germany would accept as part of our exit. There could be a crack there depending if the member states did start to edge towards exit themselves in that they may be far more willing to go against Junker and come to the table with agreed propositions.

I hadnt considered this at all.
 
Last comment from lawyery coworker, I wish I had never asked now

It seems the legal world is a bit split on whether you can or cannot revoke an A50 notification as the Act itself makes no specific provision in regards should someone wish to.

There are other articles that then could take precedence, no one actually knows which would as its never been tested.
Some argument over a67 and a68 of vienna convention which would seem to conflict if its possible or not. At least I think thats what he said, im giving up ;)
 
dalehitchy1 said:
And the most second famous line... The EU is crumbling. Guess you read the daily mail / sun. They have been crumbling and about the collapse for the past 20 years but they are still here with no other country planning to leave.

Edit: Why someone seems so happy about the EU possibily crumbling anyway I dont know. If you think it crumbling will improve your life and others over the next 50 years it won't. There would be serious consequences. But I wouldn't expect you to think of them as you read the daily mail and can't think past the headline they write.
Click to expand...

Let's be quite candid about this. The likes of Rupert Murdoch has worked tirelessly to bring an end to the EU project ever since it's birth, so to see its impending demise written about in his papers his nothing new.
 
At least he's not from the LSE ;) But it seems the Nobel prize doesn't guarantee agreement between these number crunchers:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...omists-believe-the-uk-is-better-off-in-the-eu

Let's be frank, you can take a room full of so called experts on any subject and there will be wild disagreements. It doesn't need an expert to see the Euro and the EU are in serious trouble. Once the Common Market was deemed old hat and moves put afoot to politicize things into a totally different beast with dead leg members, disparate wages, raw materials and skills it started to unravel.
 
Chris Wilson said:
At least he's not from the LSE ;) But it seems the Nobel prize doesn't guarantee agreement between these number crunchers:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...omists-believe-the-uk-is-better-off-in-the-eu

Let's be frank, you can take a room full of so called experts on any subject and there will be wild disagreements. It doesn't need an expert to see the Euro and the EU are in serious trouble. Once the Common Market was deemed old hat and moves put afoot to politicize things into a totally different beast with dead leg members, disparate wages, raw materials and skills it started to unravel.
Click to expand...

Quite.

Anyone who works in a profession will agree that its rare that all experts agree. If you go with the one that seems to have more concensus your probably on the most likely side, but not necessarily.

The thing is with economists etc when they look backwards they tend to be pretty spot on (well its not hard is it) when they look forwards or start to predict then they are just making educated guesses rather than uneducated that a layman would make.
 
Experts will always disagree, especially in fields where there's lots of room for interpretation such as economics, politics, history etc.

The problem surrounding Brexit is not that there's been disagreements with and between experts, but that experts have been derided because they are experts. Which is perverse to say the least and doesn't set a very good precedent moving forwards. In fact, it moves society back towards the Dark Ages.
 
Skunkworks said:
Pick one:

A) I believe the Nobel prize-winning economist when he says the EU is crumbling.

B) I’m a hypocrite who also only believes experts when it coincides with what I want to hear.
Click to expand...

No reason why both (A) and (B) can't both be true in your example:

I believe the Nobel prize-winning economist when he says the EU is crumbling - I’m a hypocrite who also only believes experts when it coincides with what I want to hear.
 
Chris Wilson said:
The figures for some other EU countries wanting a referendum seem fairly similar to those we saw over here. They couldn't resist saying those who wanted to leave were ill educated, I am sure you are hoping we thickos are not contaminating the minds of morons elsewhere in the EU? ;)

Calling the AfD small, and far right is probably doing them a disservice. They grow stronger by the month and by every report of atrocities carried out by those of ethnic origin. As does Marine in France. Cracks are appearing all over the place, and soon the house of cards will fall!
Click to expand...

Dream on. In case you missed it, in France, the article also said that both major parties are in favour of the EU, unlike Britain were the Tories were riven with an anti-EU for decades. The situation bears little similarity with the UK. Your attempt at reverse snobbery is poor. Everybody has the vote.
I think you fail to understand post war Germany and their tolerance. You will get a few morons, mainly Osties who are intolerant. I think you are another one of those people who think that any enterprise will fail because it does not include Britain. Remember which country was begging to get into the EU.
 
I can only say time will tell then. Early days, several EU member elections coming up, as are the mid Right. Turkey talking of unleashing yet more migrants. Germans' tolerance is finite, and getting thin. We'll just have to wait and see... I'll dream on :)
 
AfD and FN wouldn't possibly desire the fall of a perfectly useful apparatus such as the EU, they can mould into the authoritarian structure it was always meant to be.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Just coming back to this one, as I work closely alongside a lawyer I mentioned this to him.

He said no, in regards the against the rules.

Its not, nothing in the rules says you cannot pre negotiate anything IN fact you could negotiate the whole thing, trigger A50 and then they could immediately ratify it. There is some added complexity if certain areas are included in the deal though (which are the ones we would be most interested in negotiating) that would mean in all likelyhood the Eu parliament would be directly involved, precisely those who say no negotiation.

So you could in theory negotiate with all the member states and agree a full proposition, but if (as is almost 100% likely) that would cut across areas that the EU parliament would have some say over then they could refuse.

This sounds logical, in that Junker said no negotiation before A50 triggered, he can't for example stop Merkel (should she so choose) from agreeing what Germany would accept as part of our exit. There could be a crack there depending if the member states did start to edge towards exit themselves in that they may be far more willing to go against Junker and come to the table with agreed propositions.

I hadnt considered this at all.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like Junker is some sort of Hitler with the generals, like Merkel, plotting in the background. Merkel or others might say, informally, we may accept this and that but with elections coming up in two of the three main countries of the EU I would not expect any major announcements/concessions.
 
do_ron_ron said:
You make it sound like Junker is some sort of Hitler
Click to expand...

TBH he doesn't act far from this. He is incredibly focussed on what he thinks the Eu is about, even as a pro european I can see that.

And the point of my post was specifically to respond to the incorrect statement that we couldn't negotiate.
With the countries (leaders) we can, with the Eu we cannot (on Junkers orders)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom