Brexit is off ?

Well, I don't see anything new or exciting in the Investers' post. Just the same mis-use of the term "The people" as in their paragraph No 2. and few other whinges about Remainers insisting that the Government implement the proper legal process.

Don Atkinson posted:

Well, I don't see anything new or exciting in the Investers' post. Just the same mis-use of the term "The people" as in their paragraph No 2. and few other whinges about Remainers insisting that the Government implement the proper legal process.

Fair enough, just another example of polarised views. FWIW I believe the Supreme Court will throw out May's appeal. A one line Act will be introduced to Parliament which will be accepted with a massive majority and the switch will be thrown. Meanwhile, any shred of confidence or credibility in the EU will deteriorate rapidly as populism spreads. Just my opinion.

andarkian posted:

Those who want to dictate to government the terms of trade which are acceptable to us seem to ignore the fact that the EU is the other trade partner who has to agree the terms."

The only people who want to dictate to the government are the ultra Tory/UKIP quitters, they are insisting on a so called hard Brexit, and they are in the minority.

The majority of people, the more pragmatic and reasoned are simply asking that Parliament debates the way forward, with regards our relationship with the EU. They are not dictating anything to anybody, quite the opposite.

Our negotiations with the EU will be difficult, but, both sides will have to compromise, to come up with a solution beneficial to all.

fatcat posted:

andarkian posted:

Those who want to dictate to government the terms of trade which are acceptable to us seem to ignore the fact that the EU is the other trade partner who has to agree the terms."

The only people who want to dictate to the government are the ultra Tory/UKIP quitters, they are insisting on a so called hard Brexit, and they are in the minority.

The majority of people, the more pragmatic and reasoned are simply asking that Parliament debates the way forward, with regards our relationship with the EU. They are not dictating anything to anybody, quite the opposite.

Our negotiations with the EU will be difficult, but, both sides will have to compromise, to come up with a solution beneficial to all.

I think you will find that only the hard line ultra Remoaners are categorising Brexit. Brexiteers want Brexit - end of! What we want has been ultra clear since day one. The EU is a crumbling wreck whose headline sponsors may no longer be in power before Article 50 has run its course. The whole effete bunch of them in Brussels are running round in Emperor's new clothes. They may still be wheeled around in their 7 series BMWs, chomp down their expense account Michelin meals while paying no taxes at all, but the gravy train is running out of track.

andarkian posted:

I think you will find that only the hard line ultra Remoaners are categorising Brexit. Brexiteers want Brexit - end of! What we want has been ultra clear since day one. The EU is a crumbling wreck whose headline sponsors may no longer be in power before Article 50 has run its course. The whole effete bunch of them in Brussels are running round in Emperor's new clothes. They may still be wheeled around in their 7 series BMWs, chomp down their expense account Michelin meals while paying no taxes at all, but the gravy train is running out of track.

..........hmmm.... sounds very much like my "suggestion" in the "sleep-walking" thread that :-

"we close the Channel Tunnel at 23:59 tonight. We tell the EU Council of Ministers that if they want to  continue trading with us, they can send somebody over by plane or ferry early next week to hear our terms and sign the deal - or not. Doesn't bother us either way"

And as a development, (following last night) we will be signing a new trade deal with the USA late January 2017. If that means we decide to change any EU deal next week, so be it.

....many a true word was said in jest, springs to mind !

Don Atkinson posted:

And as a development, (following last night) we will be signing a new trade deal with the USA late January 2017. If that means we decide to change any EU deal next week, so be it.

I'm assuming here you are referring to Trump's speech that Britain can be front of the queue for a trade deal?

Given that (and I think you are being sarcastic anyway) ... you have to realise that Trump said Britain can be front of the queue, but didn't suggest what form of trade deal he would be offering to Britain.   Given his promotion of US manufacturing... don't expect low tariffs / free trade being on offer - he just wants to make sure that the British still continue to buy from American companies!

"Front of the queue" for trade negotiations means about as much as "Brexit means Brexit"; "Make America great again" and "Take back control".

andarkian posted:

I think you will find that only the hard line ultra Remoaners are categorising Brexit. Brexiteers want Brexit - end of! What we want has been ultra clear since day one. 

So no free trade?  No customs union?  No banking passport?

What are your plans for the 1.2million Britains living and working in the EU?

And yes ... Brexiteer's want (Hard) Brexit ... but what about the rest of the 17,410,742 people who aren't so hard line about leaving the EU and voted to leave for a variety of reasons?

Eloise 

 

So no free trade?  No customs union?  No banking passport?

What are your plans for the 1.2million Britains living and working in the EU?

And yes ... Brexiteer's want (Hard) Brexit ... but what about the rest of the 17,410,742 people who aren't so hard line about leaving the EU and voted to leave for a variety of reasons?

Eloise, you were wrong in your hope, assumption and self justification of winning the Referendum, why should I assume you are any more prescient about the views of the Brexiteers themselves? As for the 1.2 million Britains, did I tell you that I have a Belgian pension?  Just like I was prepared to take the hit on my stocks and shares post Brexit, I would take the hit on that as well, though it is a reciprocal arrangement with the U.K., as are the rights of Europeans in this country.  Anything else you would like me to correct you on?

andarkian posted:

Eloise 

So no free trade?  No customs union?  No banking passport?

What are your plans for the 1.2million Britains living and working in the EU?

And yes ... Brexiteer's want (Hard) Brexit ... but what about the rest of the 17,410,742 people who aren't so hard line about leaving the EU and voted to leave for a variety of reasons?

Eloise, you were wrong in your hope, assumption and self justification of winning the Referendum, why should I assume you are any more prescient about the views of the Brexiteers themselves? As for the 1.2 million Britains, did I tell you that I have a Belgian pension?  Just like I was prepared to take the hit on my stocks and shares post Brexit, I would take the hit on that as well, though it is a reciprocal arrangement with the U.K., as are the rights of Europeans in this country.  Anything else you would like me to correct you on?

Perhaps you could answer my question?

Yes I hoped that the UK would remain part of the EU.  But your reasons for voting "Leave" are not necessarily the same as the other 17,410,741 people.  As for why "more prescient about the views of the Brexiteers themselves" perhaps because I actually have talked to some.  The reason different people I have talked to voted to leave have varied; and I assume that the dozen or so are representative across the UK.

You said "I think you will find that only the hard line ultra Remoaners are categorising Brexit. Brexiteers want Brexit - end of!" and that is categorically NOT true as even the different Leave campaign groups had/have different ideas about what leaving the EU would look like.  Borris Johnson's comments are very different from Nigel Farage and both represent different elements of the Leave campaign and different people voted for different reasons!

So to reiterate my questions ... do you think the UK should cut off access to the common market; leave the customs union and give up the banking passport agreements?  What do you suggest happens to the 1.2million Britains living and working the EU?

I'm not debating what would happen to the UK economy as a result of such decisions ... just asking if that is what you think should happen?

As for your Belgian pension ... well woopeedoo for you ... thats gone UP in purchasing power!

Eloise posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

And as a development, (following last night) we will be signing a new trade deal with the USA late January 2017. If that means we decide to change any EU deal next week, so be it.

I'm assuming here you are referring to Trump's speech that Britain can be front of the queue for a trade deal?

Given that (and I think you are being sarcastic anyway) ... you have to realise that Trump said Britain can be front of the queue, but didn't suggest what form of trade deal he would be offering to Britain.   Given his promotion of US manufacturing... don't expect low tariffs / free trade being on offer - he just wants to make sure that the British still continue to buy from American companies!

"Front of the queue" for trade negotiations means about as much as "Brexit means Brexit"; "Make America great again" and "Take back control".

Yes, I was being sarcastic.

Eloise posted:

andarkian posted:

Eloise 

So no free trade?  No customs union?  No banking passport?

What are your plans for the 1.2million Britains living and working in the EU?

And yes ... Brexiteer's want (Hard) Brexit ... but what about the rest of the 17,410,742 people who aren't so hard line about leaving the EU and voted to leave for a variety of reasons?

Eloise, you were wrong in your hope, assumption and self justification of winning the Referendum, why should I assume you are any more prescient about the views of the Brexiteers themselves? As for the 1.2 million Britains, did I tell you that I have a Belgian pension?  Just like I was prepared to take the hit on my stocks and shares post Brexit, I would take the hit on that as well, though it is a reciprocal arrangement with the U.K., as are the rights of Europeans in this country.  Anything else you would like me to correct you on?

Perhaps you could answer my question?

Yes I hoped that the UK would remain part of the EU.  But your reasons for voting "Leave" are not necessarily the same as the other 17,410,741 people.  As for why "more prescient about the views of the Brexiteers themselves" perhaps because I actually have talked to some.  The reason different people I have talked to voted to leave have varied; and I assume that the dozen or so are representative across the UK.

You said "I think you will find that only the hard line ultra Remoaners are categorising Brexit. Brexiteers want Brexit - end of!" and that is categorically NOT true as even the different Leave campaign groups had/have different ideas about what leaving the EU would look like.  Borris Johnson's comments are very different from Nigel Farage and both represent different elements of the Leave campaign and different people voted for different reasons!

So to reiterate my questions ... do you think the UK should cut off access to the common market; leave the customs union and give up the banking passport agreements?  What do you suggest happens to the 1.2million Britains living and working the EU?

I'm not debating what would happen to the UK economy as a result of such decisions ... just asking if that is what you think should happen?

As for your Belgian pension ... well woopeedoo for you ... thats gone UP in purchasing power!

Its not just about you, andarkian. Its about ALL of us. And we have opinions which are just as valid, even if they are different to your personal opinions.

Eloise posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

And as a development, (following last night) we will be signing a new trade deal with the USA late January 2017. If that means we decide to change any EU deal next week, so be it.

I'm assuming here you are referring to Trump's speech that Britain can be front of the queue for a trade deal?

 

I have the impression that a lot of parties are currently trying to destabilize the EU: Nationalistic Brits, Trump, Putin, Le Pen, Wilders, Erdogan. Some from the inside, some from the outside. Do they all want to go back to 1914? Has peace in Europe become too boring?

jfritzen posted:

Eloise posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

And as a development, (following last night) we will be signing a new trade deal with the USA late January 2017. If that means we decide to change any EU deal next week, so be it.

I'm assuming here you are referring to Trump's speech that Britain can be front of the queue for a trade deal?

 

I have the impression that a lot of parties are currently trying to destabilize the EU: Nationalistic Brits, Trump, Putin, Le Pen, Wilders, Erdogan. Some from the inside, some from the outside. Do they all want to go back to 1914? Has peace in Europe become too boring?

Tell you what Eloise, let's just suck it and see and I'll leave all the worrying of every eventuality in the world to yourself.

To keep it musical:

"Eloise, I couldn't please her if I tried!"

On the other hand...

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."  George Santayana.

Or, perhaps even more apposite here:

"People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors."  Edmund Burke

jfritzen posted: 

I have the impression that a lot of parties are currently trying to destabilize the EU: Nationalistic Brits, Trump, Putin, Le Pen, Wilders, Erdogan. Some from the inside, some from the outside. Do they all want to go back to 1914? Has peace in Europe become too boring?

It is not the EU that has maintained peace in Europe. That would be the United nations and NATO. An attack on a NATO member constitutes an attack against all NATO members.

It's the EU that has maintained the integrity of Europe after the breakup of the Eastern Bloc.  It has been a stabilising force to maintain a state of defused political tension between the member states.  Without the EU the possibility would have existed for separate political blocks to have arisen within the NATO countries, leading to groups secession from NATO (after the Russian threat receded) and thus leading to the breakup of NATO, similar to that of the Eastern Bloc.

Whist not a particularly likely scenario this would have been entirely possible.

Southweststokie posted:

jfritzen posted: 

I have the impression that a lot of parties are currently trying to destabilize the EU: Nationalistic Brits, Trump, Putin, Le Pen, Wilders, Erdogan. Some from the inside, some from the outside. Do they all want to go back to 1914? Has peace in Europe become too boring?

It is not the EU that has maintained peace in Europe. That would be the United nations and NATO. An attack on a NATO member constitutes an attack against all NATO members.

Peace is when nations talk about differing interests at a round table on a regular basis and find agreements before conflicts arise. That table is the EU. When the NATO has to be called for help, it's already too late.

jfritzen posted:

Peace is when nations talk about differing interests at a round table on a regular basis and find agreements before conflicts arise. That table is the EU. When the NATO has to be called for help, it's already too late.

Yes it's called the United Nations which was formed after WWII.

Adam Meredith posted:

andarkian posted:

Brexiteers want Brexit - end of!

This reminds me of conversations with believers. "Do you believe in God?".

To quote Professor Joad of The Brains Trust "it all depends what you mean by ... "

In the debate about Europe I knew what the status quo was.

Many people didn't like it. It's just that not-staus-quo is an inchoate idea that will find it's difficult to materialise.

In the real world it needs to do this - less so in sloganeering.

 

 

You would have had a great time on the Titanic not even bothering to get out of your deckchair as you would have preferred the status quo.

The Referendum was an inchoate idea when Cameron called it. It has now moved to an inchoate conclusion as the Electorate who chose to vote (this is for Eloise) rejected the status quo ante, with the missing but assumed last word being ''bellum' which  is very apposite given the depths of feelings. 

Southweststokie posted:

jfritzen posted:

Peace is when nations talk about differing interests at a round table on a regular basis and find agreements before conflicts arise. That table is the EU. When the NATO has to be called for help, it's already too late.

Yes it's called the United Nations which was formed after WWII.

Its not black and white.  

The EU (and before that the EEC and the ECSC - which was actually created to help make war in Europe unthinkable) has been part of the method by which peace has existed across Europe for the longest period in history.  Would peace of existed without the EU?: maybe.  Will peace end if the EU breaks up?: possibly but unlikely.  But its not even EU per se which has lead to peace, but the general working together across Europe for the betterment of all.  

The EU HAS been a steading force in Eastern Europe following the breakdown of the former Communist Regime which dominated that region. But part of that steading force has been through the free immigration which has caused some people so much anguish in the UK.

What would have happened without the EU is open to debate and you cannot take one thing away and say that is the cause.  The EU, NATO and the UN have all played their part in keeping the peace.

Adam Meredith posted

 

Well, that's clarified a lot.

A cat is - a cat.

Not-a-cat - well, it's pretty much anything (apart from a cat).

- although it looks like, after months/years of tough negotiations and all that, it will be a cat, again.

Yep, I admit I had no idea what 'inchoate' meant until I looked it up in the dictionary after Adam's post. It means the outcome is not fully formed or clear. I think I used it correctly. 

I really like the "Titanic" analogy. Life jackets and lifeboats are for wusses, let's just jump in, the water's lovely!

sjbabbey posted:

I really like the "Titanic" analogy. Life jackets and lifeboats are for wusses, let's just jump in, the water's lovely!

Those who believe HMS Britannia is sinking anyway have nothing to lose by jumping into the water, lifeboats or not, for them after years and years of the political self serving elite politicians ignoring their concerns and telling them they know what is best for them (by that I mean for themselves not Joe Public). As their plight just gets worse and worse as time passes they felt they had nothing to lose by kicking the establishment the only way they could, by voting Leave. That is why the referendum result was such a shock, to me included, because those in power just don't want to hear what the man in the street thinks or is concerned about, real or perceived and haven't done for years, it does not agree with their desires and as such is just swept under to carpet. The problem for the political elite now is that the number of disaffected members of the public is becoming so large they can no longer be ignored.

Southweststokie posted:

sjbabbey posted:

 

Those who believe HMS Britannia is sinking anyway have nothing to lose by jumping into the water, lifeboats or not, for them after years and years of the political self serving elite politicians ignoring their concerns and telling them they know what is best for them (by that I mean for themselves not Joe Public). As their plight just gets worse and worse as time passes they felt they had nothing to lose by kicking the establishment the only way they could, by voting Leave. That is why the referendum result was such a shock, to me included, because those in power just don't want to hear what the man in the street thinks or is concerned about, real or perceived and haven't done for years, it does not agree with their desires and as such is just swept under to carpet. The problem for the political elite now is that the number of disaffected members of the public is becoming so large they can no longer be ignored.

I wish that your final sentence were indeed true. However, given that it looks like we are likely to have a Conservative government dominated by its more right wing for quite a few years to come, I doubt that they will be inclined to take much notice of the disaffected members of the public. After all, it's precisely this faction of the Conservative party who've got what they wanted.

sjbabbey posted:

Southweststokie posted:

sjbabbey posted:

 

Those who believe HMS Britannia is sinking anyway have nothing to lose by jumping into the water, lifeboats or not, for them after years and years of the political self serving elite politicians ignoring their concerns and telling them they know what is best for them (by that I mean for themselves not Joe Public). As their plight just gets worse and worse as time passes they felt they had nothing to lose by kicking the establishment the only way they could, by voting Leave. That is why the referendum result was such a shock, to me included, because those in power just don't want to hear what the man in the street thinks or is concerned about, real or perceived and haven't done for years, it does not agree with their desires and as such is just swept under to carpet. The problem for the political elite now is that the number of disaffected members of the public is becoming so large they can no longer be ignored.

I wish that your final sentence were indeed true. However, given that it looks like we are likely to have a Conservative government dominated by its more right wing for quite a few years to come, I doubt that they will be inclined to take much notice of the disaffected members of the public. After all, it's precisely this faction of the Conservative party who've got what they wanted.

Nicely observed sj.

And for the benefit of those who think that kicking the "Establishment" in the goolies by way of voting Leave will be beneficial for Joe Public, think again, very very carefully.