1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Brexit Discussion - The new thread

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Feek, Sep 5, 2019.

  1. Dj_Jestar

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 28,719

    Location: Back in East London

    It's simpler than that. It's because the rags they read are espousing that rubbish about brexit and covid19. Telegraph, Times, DM, Sun are toeing the "poverty has killed more people than this virus will" line because the rich old dudes who wanted out of the EU also want their incomes and businesses kept alive, why should they lose money just because the plebs are getting sick and dieing? So the rags are telling you to keep working and spending your money. Blitz spirit tally HO, only the weak will get sick.
     
  2. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 68,468

    Interesting perspective on it.

    I probably have a weakness for assuming objectivity trumps self interest more often than it really does.
     
  3. Tony Edwards

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 4, 2018

    Posts: 4,779

    This would be an interesting time for the government to make sure that everybody got themself fit and had their unidentified underlying health conditions checked and remedied. It would cost a lot but it seems money is no object if the government wants to do it. Lets be honest they found the magic money tree when they went looking for brexit good news.
     
  4. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 47,094

    Might be more useful to cite/quote whatever is actually being referred too - otherwise there is always both the risk that you misrepresent and/or skew whatever has been said and just construct arguments against made up “brexiter” positions plus of course other readers can’t see what is being referred to. Not to mention whichever brexiters apparently aired those views don’t get to reply.

    The economy vs covid argument seems to be a false trade off, if anything risking a second wave could well be more economically damaging.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2020
  5. garnett

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 25, 2008

    Posts: 6,341

    Can anyone explain this one to me?


    This makes *no* sense.

    Surely in this time of need, the "easiest deal in history" that's going to deliver "no downsides; only upsides" and "£350m savings a week to go to the NHS" is something Brexiteers need to knuckle down & win for us?

    This tweet just sounds like excuses.
     
  6. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 47,094

    Eh? Surely whatever your beliefs re: brexit you can see the virus has delayed talks? They're planning to switch to video conferencing but that's an issue in general and has delayed EU business - apparently the commission not affected to badly compared to the Council which has more limited facilities - but almost everything has slowed right down at the moment.
     
  7. JeditOjanen

    Soldato

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 5,085

    It's actually someone making sense for once. We know that "the easiest deal in history" is a lie - unless we go full Norway and basically make the transition period permanent - but even so anything other than No Deal needs to be negotiated and we can't do that right now thanks to the pandemic.

    You should also consider that if commentators in the right wing press who pushed the narrative of Brexit are now pushing the narrative that it's fine to delay it, then the government are likely to follow suit.
     
  8. Rotty

    Don

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 40,336

    Location: Notts


    not an excuse just they have other things to concentrate on

    there will almost certainly be a delay and if Labour make a deal of that it would be pretty pathetic
     
  9. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 47,094

    Is an out of context quote from Liam Fox that keeps getting repeated by people who like to attack straw men. It ignores the context and key words "should be..." sometimes it even gets misquoted with the words "would be" or "will be" in front of it... Importantly, (that little issue of context) in the same broadcast he basically notes that it won't be easy in practice as "politics gets in the way of economics".
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2020
  10. StriderX

    Caporegime

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 25,384

    I don't see why Labour would moan, there's no positive spin on the ol' optics in the current situation, it'd be utterly self-defeating.
     
  11. Rotty

    Don

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 40,336

    Location: Notts

    you would think so but politicians don't usually miss a chance for a dig though I think it would make them look very silly
     
  12. StriderX

    Caporegime

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 25,384

    Nah Starmer is too sensible for such a whopper and Nandy would crucify him for it.
     
  13. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 47,094

    Probably, but, despite generally being very much in favour of a softer brexit (previously that's all I had in mind tbh.. as was on the fence about the whole thing to start with), this is one rather odd situation where I'd be open minded about the outside chance of just letting the clock run down being an option to seriously consider - trade deals can still be negotiated outside of a transition period, it certainly puts into doubt whether they can realistically stick with the previous position of any future negotiation with the UK (in the event of a no deal exit) still having to start with the UK accepting [insert EU regulatory alignment demands] etc...

    Depending on the higher order effects of this pandemic we might well want to have some flexibility/be very open to a range of imports that might not currently meet regulations etc.. more generally just being open to getting food from where we can could be something we soon place a lot more value on... likewise fishing might become more than an emotive issue/"only" X% of GDP to being a part of a food security issue.

    In the wider context of trade - Europe is collectively being whacked here, there are all sorts of potential nasty issues coming up with eurozone debt - global trade has taken a nose dive in recent weeks so the relative impact of tariffs is a bit lower and indeed flexibility to both lower tariffs and/or be open to relaxing regs in current climate might well outweigh the negatives. Longer term, greater flexibility in increasing trade with other parts of the world might well have a bit more importance (again though this is party dependent on how badly everyone gets hit by this thing and who the winners are). Obvs Germany stands to do relatively well out of this, lots of the rest of Europe not so much... other parts of the world might well cope better. As far as the US is concerned - geography is in their favour despite mismanagement by Trump, still plenty of risks though re: farms and labour shortages but with a lower population density could they cope better? Could we be looking to import more food from the US? (open question really, the federal government is handling this badly and perhaps the US mid west is still to be hit hard).

    Obvs this is accounting in part for possible bad outcomes that might not occur etc.. but are worth considering/being robust to. Of course there are obvious downsides re: hard exits but in the current context the relative impact of these is a bit different!

    To be clear - I think we will probably extend but I can see some potential utility in not doing so and some potential issues that might (or indeed might not) become more apparent as we get closer to the deadline for extension.
     
  14. a1ex2001

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 14, 2005

    Posts: 12,815

    Location: Here and There...

    We should extend any other choice would be madness! Negotiations have stopped our PM is out of the game for some time to come and his chief advisor has disappeared . To force through a deal now seems short sighted especially when we don’t know the financial realities of this mess yet!
     
  15. garnett

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 25, 2008

    Posts: 6,341

    No downsides; only upsides, and £350m extra a week for our NHS sounds like exactly what this situation could do with.

    Why can't the Brexiteers just get on with doing what they said? If it's as easy as they claimed, crack on.

    Like the rest of us, they've been asked to work from home, not being put into induced comas.
     
  16. Murphy

    Mobster

    Joined: Sep 16, 2018

    Posts: 4,174

    ^^That^^, Brexit is supposedly going to make the country better off and we could do with some of that right now.

    That's unless Brexit isn't going to result in what Brexiters were told it was.
     
  17. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 47,094

    They might still do that... but there is that small matter of a virus that you're deliberately ignoring... you don't think that might have impacted the ability to hold talks with the EU?
     
  18. garnett

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 25, 2008

    Posts: 6,341

    The guy who argues "out of context/not the exact words I used" any time someone dares paraphrase his thousands of posts deletes my reference to the virus lockdown in the very next line of the post he's quoted, then asserts I'm "deliberately ignoring the virus".

    :rolleyes:

    Nobody's gonna take that insincerity crown off you, dowie.
     
  19. dowie

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 47,094

    Making a vague reference to the virus yet seemingly still not accounting for that being a big reason why things might not go to schedule... any excuse to vent though eh?
     
  20. garnett

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 25, 2008

    Posts: 6,341

    Dodging having to acknowledge the gross insincerity and hypocrisy, I note, but let's move on - if it's such an easy deal, and it offers so much unbridled benefit, why postpone? It's a simple concept, why be so obtuse in not grasping it? What you're calling a "timetable" are just the default parameters of a process either side or both can opt to ignore.

    Why could it be that you Brexiteers are looking for another excuse not to deliver on those unicorns you told each other you'd be getting the UK?

    (And no venting - just laughing - Seems like more smiley help is required :))