Brexit or Bust !!

MDS posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

SamClaus posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

.

 

Over the past 2 years, it has become clear that the EU wants (for political reasons only) to avoid Brexit 

 

Er, while there are political reasons, I think the EU also values the UK's net (and considerable) financial contribution plus a whole host of other areas where the UK play a strong part in the EU eg security.  

If the UK is so valued - then shouldn’t they have considered our value in previous decades when faced with the UK’s various attempts at reform and most particularly when faced with Cameron’s (pre-referendum) requests for reform? I have no doubt they want our money, but they certainly don’t want our Anglo-Saxon culture, opinions and ways of doing things.

And in any case, political union (or even club membership) isn’t necessary in order to establish cooperation on matters of security, education, science et al - if it weren’t for the political imperatives imposed by the Brussels elites.

And finally, it is widely accepted that the EU is a political project - that says it all ...

jfritzen posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

SamClaus posted:

 

It’s a club that nobody is allowed to leave. That (imho) is enslavement ...

You mean like this? Always read the contract!

Oh thanks for that insight - much appreciated. Really.

Contracts are no substitute for trust, cooperation etc - but I see what you mean. 

ynwa250505 posted:

You might think that, but consider the following ...

Over the past 2 years, it has become clear that the EU wants (for political reasons only) to avoid Brexit and keep the UK in the EU, when all the UK has ever wished to do is just trade. Both May’s “deal” and “remain” achieve the EU’s objective and if they do achieve it, then (in the future) only the EU can release us.

It’s a club that nobody is allowed to leave. That (imho) is enslavement ...

I am unclear in what way or ways the EU has tried to stop the UK leaving. Yes, they have not bent over backwards to make it easy with a great preferential deal at no cost to Britain, but why should they? Why should they do anything other than say “if you want to leave, there’s the door, be so good as to shut it behind you” while demanding payment of any committed expenditure.

I am also at a loss of what this is. Just a simple exit agreement, fulfill your obligations and you are free to leave. Like any membership.

If you just run out without an exit agreement ("no deal"), just like running out of the restaurant without paying for the food. There are disadvantages to this - like if you after a few years think it might be a good idea with a simple trade deal or at least something other than default WTO-tariffs with your nearest neighbors in Europe - then that runner will pose a bit of a problem. 

I think that Theresa May is partly to blame. She has tried so hard to hide the real world from the British public who have been left with a rosy fantasy view of Brexit where you can have everything for free ... and then some. And then suddenly in late november ... reality bites.

jlarsson posted:

I think that Theresa May is partly to blame. She has tried so hard to hide the real world from the British public who have been left with a rosy fantasy view of Brexit where you can have everything for free ... and then some. And then suddenly in late november ... reality bites.

 

I agree. HMG has in my view been far too slow to explore the wide and deep nature of Brexit, and in explaining that to the public.  Of course, as usual whenever politicians get themselves into difficulties of their own making they then look for other parties to blame. First off we saw quite a bit of mud-slinging at civil servants (who politicians know cannot speak publicly to defend themselves). More recently the EU has been painted as the bogey-man who unreasonably (sic) won't let the UK cherry-pick how it leaves. And TM has been blaming the Labour party for seeking to 'play politics' with Brexit.  It's a pity that Yes Minister and In The Thick Of It isn't still running. Their script writers would have a field-day, though they might struggle to invent plots sillier than the real politicians.   

ynwa250505 posted:

It’s a club that nobody is allowed to leave. That (imho) is enslavement ...

Can someone point me to a figure of profit and loss statement for being in the EU club?

So far from what I read, UK is better off staying but I have not seen any numbers of what they spend and what they have been getting ££ wise.

Curious to see the hard numbers.

kuma posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

It’s a club that nobody is allowed to leave. That (imho) is enslavement ...

Can someone point me to a figure of profit and loss statement for being in the EU club?

So far from what I read, UK is better off staying but I have not seen any numbers of what they spend and what they have been getting ££ wise.

Curious to see the hard numbers.

Kuma, I don't think its straight forward.

The Gov pays our membership fee, c. £9bn pa.

We contribute to many of the sub-clubs eg EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency), The European Space Agency, Galileo (European version of GPS).......and about another 497 such sub-clubs.

We benefit as a Nation from the output of these organisations. But I don't think there are any accounts, mainly because the benefits are somewhat intangible.

In addition, Many of our private  businesses benefit from the trading arrangements of Club Membership and it's virtually impossible to pin down these benefits, nevermind put a value on them.

Then the supporters of Brexit mention "Freedom" if we leave. You can't put a price on freedom as such.

I consider that as a nation we are far better off in financial terms inside the Club rather than outside of it. But I can't provide the balance sheet to prove it ! Perhaps others can ?

As for "freedom" ......  I don't feel at all oppressed in our current membership. Sure, a (good) few things i'd like to change, but I'd be a lot less happy living in relative poverty under the "Rules" of JRM, Boris, Gove, Redwood and the other Eurosceptics.

ynwa250505 posted:

SamClaus posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

4. I don’t know that tune, but if we are not out of the EU on March 30th, the only tune to be played by the UK will be “Chain Gang” - because that’s where we will be in perpetuity. You may not mind enslavement, but the majority of us don’t ...

A bit over the top, eh?

You might think that, but consider the following ...

Over the past 2 years, it has become clear that the EU wants (for political reasons only) to avoid Brexit and keep the UK in the EU, when all the UK has ever wished to do is just trade. Both May’s “deal” and “remain” achieve the EU’s objective and if they do achieve it, then (in the future) only the EU can release us.

It’s a club that nobody is allowed to leave. That (imho) is enslavement ...

Hmm, as I said, a bit over the top.

Of course the EU wants to avoid Brexit - and not for "political reasons" (whatever that means...), but for the simple reason that in today's world it's probably better to face together the myriad issues that we're going to have to face in the future. As has been said before, Britain knew full well that the Common Market (as it was known at the time) was not going to remain simply a "Common Market" for ever (see the declarations of the founders) - claiming that what "the UK has ever wished to do is just trade" is disingenuous at the very least.

ynwa250505 posted:

I have no doubt they want our money, but they certainly don’t want our Anglo-Saxon culture, opinions and ways of doing things.

That's total nonsense. Travel to France, Germany - anywhere in Continental Europe - and you will find "our Anglo-Saxon culture" is highly-prized. It's even been suggested that "Anglo-Saxon" influence was behind the European constitution of 2004.

Don Atkinson posted:

I consider that as a nation we are far better off in financial terms inside the Club rather than outside of it. But I can't provide the balance sheet to prove it ! Perhaps others can ?

As for "freedom" ......  I don't feel at all oppressed in our current membership. Sure, a (good) few things i'd like to change, but I'd be a lot less happy living in relative poverty under the "Rules" of JRM, Boris, Gove, Redwood and the other Eurosceptics.

Don,

Everything has a price. Many business owners/financial institutions are predicting a nagtive financial effect. If so let's the numbers.

I understand there is an intangible thing wrapped up in this exit ( immigration issues etc ) but as a country, she should be fiscally responsible first.

If I were in the UK, from a tax payer's perspective, I sure want to see the hard numbers. Ideology is important but to a point. It needs to make sense from a fiscal impact and its sustainability into a future.

SamClaus posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

I have no doubt they want our money, but they certainly don’t want our Anglo-Saxon culture, opinions and ways of doing things.

That's total nonsense. Travel to France, Germany - anywhere in Continental Europe - and you will find "our Anglo-Saxon culture" is highly-prized. It's even been suggested that "Anglo-Saxon" influence was behind the European constitution of 2004.

Although maybe it's our Celtic culture that they prize?

Just watched the totally disgusting scenes at Anna Soubry's interview with the BBC tonight. 

It appears that the bully boys on the far right of the Brexit camp now feel empowered to do and say what they want, no matter how depraved and disgusting their behaviour. Just a few individuals on this occasion, but nevertheless absolutely appalling and a sad reflection on our society.   

Just watched ”Brexit: the uncivil war”. I dont know about the actual persons in the film. But the software stuff (about Cambridge Analytica and AIQ) seemed well researched and I found no real errors (you can find these companies own presentations from various conferences on youtube).

Yes I watched it, too. Interesting - and a good reason for not permitting ANY campaigning for a confirmatory referendum!

kuma posted:

If I were in the UK, from a tax payer's perspective, I sure want to see the hard numbers. Ideology is important but to a point. It needs to make sense from a fiscal impact and its sustainability into a future.

Very good point, Kuma

There are many fairly foreseeable cost projections from various sources,

they tend to figure out around the estimates below

Cost per person per year:

EU membership = £190

A soft Brexit = £800

A hard Brexit = £1200

No Deal Brexit = £2000

They all point to the fact that being a member of the EU equates to a substantial bargain for each and every one of us : )

Debs

Kevin-W posted:

winkyincanada posted:

 Perhaps preemptively put in place a mechanism for the censure (or at least entitlement to rebuttal) of outrageous and untrue claims from either "side". For example, want to say something on the side of a bus? Then the opposite side gets automatically get half the bus as well, to display their rebuttal.

Indeed. And if the Government spends £9 million on putting a leaflet through every householder's door (as it did in 2016) it might be a good idea for the opposing side to be given £9m for its rebuttal?

Surely that £9 million is just a down-payment on the cost of rebuttal of the social media campaign that will no doubt be orchestrated and funded by Putin and the Russians, or is this taking conspiracy theory just a little too far - perhaps it is, but you never know?

Maybe the Government should just provide the Brexit campaign with a couple of campaign buses to offset the £9 million leaflet campaign - the Brexit campaign already has a number of senior Government representatives and in particular a certain BJ who has been proven to be a dab hand at coming up with what the Brexit campaign deems to be suitable (if rather dodgy and economic with the truth plain or just plain untruthful) campaign slogans.    

Hmack posted:

Just watched the totally disgusting scenes at Anna Soubry's interview with the BBC tonight. 

It appears that the bully boys on the far right of the Brexit camp now feel empowered to do and say what they want, no matter how depraved and disgusting their behaviour. Just a few individuals on this occasion, but nevertheless absolutely appalling and a sad reflection on our society.   

Agree disgusting but what to do:  On one hand if the police arrest them all the protesters & rent-a-mobs on both sides will be revolting over civil rights issues,  but do nothing & it'll just get worse until it gets really ugly & the police are forced into doing something.     A quick workaround is for the media to stop using College Green for these interviews.  But in the meantime the law on insulting, racial & obscene language in a public place needs clarifying.

Thanks for those figures Debs. I thought Kuma was asking for sight of the forecasts for each and every business, plus the audited checks on these figures

I'm fairly confident those estimates you posted are reasonable. I suspect one or two on this forum might challenge them, and a few others will declare that "freedom" is worth the £2000 - £190 = £1810 estimated cost per person per year following a No Deal Brexit.

FWIW, i'm not part of either group.

naim_nymph posted:

they tend to figure out around the estimates below

Cost per person per year:

EU membership = £190

A soft Brexit = £800

A hard Brexit = £1200

No Deal Brexit = £2000

They all point to the fact that being a member of the EU equates to a substantial bargain for each and every one of us : )

Deb,

Those figures you quote are unreal as the ones I saw in the Guardian last year. ( they were the % how much the Brexit deal will cost to your NHS ) 

Do all the Brexit option yearly cost level out over time. Those figures are huge holes to clime out of especially the outlook of global economic condition is iffy. ( including imminent ending of US 10 year old bull market )

How about the figure a tax payer benefit from paying in £190/year? Just what do YOU get from paying an extra £190?\

Curious to hear from pro Brexit folks how they can justify the extra cost.

Don Atkinson posted:

Thanks for those figures Debs. I thought Kuma was asking for sight of the forecasts for each and every business, plus the audited checks on these figures  

That would be good if we can get them!

Seriously if you think Deb's cost estimates are *reasonable* this is sheer madness! 

Let's hear from Pro Brexit folks to see if they counter.

naim_nymph posted:

kuma posted:

If I were in the UK, from a tax payer's perspective, I sure want to see the hard numbers. Ideology is important but to a point. It needs to make sense from a fiscal impact and its sustainability into a future.

Very good point, Kuma

There are many fairly foreseeable cost projections from various sources,

they tend to figure out around the estimates below

Cost per person per year:

EU membership = £190

A soft Brexit = £800

A hard Brexit = £1200

No Deal Brexit = £2000

They all point to the fact that being a member of the EU equates to a substantial bargain for each and every one of us : )

Debs

Annual cost per person? Foreseeable? Which year? Ongoing annual costs or one-offs? I don’t believe such figures are capable of identification - these “estimates” are simply a figment of somebody’s imagination skewed to support a particular point of view. For example, what are the underlying assumptions? How are the numbers calculated? Who/where are the “various sources”? Let’s have that data out in the open rather than relying on anecdotal claims a la Project Fear.

As to a UK taxpayer’s perspective, nobody voted to leave based on an economic assessment. If that had been the basis, then surely the economic disasters forecast by the IMF, our Government, BoE, EU and all the other “experts” would have persuaded people in sufficient numbers to vote remain? That didn’t happen because economic issues have never been the basis for voting leave - consequently the fear-based economic narrative used by the Remain campaign missed the target completely. And as we all now know - the cataclysmic economic projections had no merit whatsoever - rather like the propaganda being peddled above ...

Brexit was a political, personal and ideological choice for most of the electorate not one measured in cold pounds and pence; not least because the estimates for various options are rarely trusted.

I don't think those sort of numbers, will change many opinions.

Bruce

ynwa250505 posted:

naim_nymph posted:

kuma posted:

If I were in the UK, from a tax payer's perspective, I sure want to see the hard numbers. Ideology is important but to a point. It needs to make sense from a fiscal impact and its sustainability into a future.

Very good point, Kuma

There are many fairly foreseeable cost projections from various sources,

they tend to figure out around the estimates below

Cost per person per year:

EU membership = £190

A soft Brexit = £800

A hard Brexit = £1200

No Deal Brexit = £2000

They all point to the fact that being a member of the EU equates to a substantial bargain for each and every one of us : )

Debs

Annual cost per person? Foreseeable? Which year? Ongoing annual costs or one-offs? I don’t believe such figures are capable of identification - these “estimates” are simply a figment of somebody’s imagination skewed to support a particular point of view.

We are already paying the price of this stupid Brexit folly. 

Brexit will cost most people very dearly, it has already incurred inflationary costs due mainly to collapse of the Pound, to raise average extra costs per person per year to around £400 [ on top of the bargain £190 EU fee ] so we are already paying around 600 quid each!

Most people in the UK by now have already been ripped-off a cool £1000 so far since 2016, and with the possible threat of far worse to come.

Any Brexit is an economic folly, and the No Deal Brexit a financial disaster for UK people.

 

....claims a la Project Fear

You mean Project Dear, Brexit is a very expensive folly.

As to a UK taxpayer’s perspective, nobody voted to leave based on an economic assessment. 

How do you know, have you asked everyone of the 17.4 million?

naim_nymph posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

naim_nymph posted:

kuma posted:

If I were in the UK, from a tax payer's perspective, I sure want to see the hard numbers. Ideology is important but to a point. It needs to make sense from a fiscal impact and its sustainability into a future.

Very good point, Kuma

There are many fairly foreseeable cost projections from various sources,

they tend to figure out around the estimates below

Cost per person per year:

EU membership = £190

A soft Brexit = £800

A hard Brexit = £1200

No Deal Brexit = £2000

They all point to the fact that being a member of the EU equates to a substantial bargain for each and every one of us : )

Debs

Annual cost per person? Foreseeable? Which year? Ongoing annual costs or one-offs? I don’t believe such figures are capable of identification - these “estimates” are simply a figment of somebody’s imagination skewed to support a particular point of view.

We are already paying the price of this stupid Brexit folly. 

Brexit will cost most people very dearly, it has already incurred inflationary costs due mainly to collapse of the Pound, to raise average extra costs per person per year to around £400 [ on top of the bargain £190 EU fee ] so we are already paying around 600 quid each!

Most people in the UK by now have already been ripped-off a cool £1000 so far since 2016, and with the possible threat of far worse to come.

Any Brexit is an economic folly, and the No Deal Brexit a financial disaster for UK people.

 

....claims a la Project Fear

You mean Project Dear, Brexit is a very expensive folly.

As to a UK taxpayer’s perspective, nobody voted to leave based on an economic assessment. 

How do you know, have you asked everyone of the 17.4 million?

You think it is a stupid folly - that is fair enough - but let's not forget that you are in the minority.

It is pointless simply reiterating your various unsubstantiated financial fantasies - feel free to substantiate these ...

No, of course I haven't asked all 17.4m - but I know my reasons and they are the same as every leave voter that I have spoken to and every leave voter that I have read/seen/heard in/on newspaper/TV/radio and nobody voted leave for economic reasons. Feel free to rebut that ...

ynwa250505 posted:

naim_nymph posted:

ynwa250505 posted:

naim_nymph posted:

kuma posted:

If I were in the UK, from a tax payer's perspective, I sure want to see the hard numbers. Ideology is important but to a point. It needs to make sense from a fiscal impact and its sustainability into a future.

Very good point, Kuma

There are many fairly foreseeable cost projections from various sources,

they tend to figure out around the estimates below

Cost per person per year:

EU membership = £190

A soft Brexit = £800

A hard Brexit = £1200

No Deal Brexit = £2000

They all point to the fact that being a member of the EU equates to a substantial bargain for each and every one of us : )

Debs

Annual cost per person? Foreseeable? Which year? Ongoing annual costs or one-offs? I don’t believe such figures are capable of identification - these “estimates” are simply a figment of somebody’s imagination skewed to support a particular point of view.

We are already paying the price of this stupid Brexit folly. 

Brexit will cost most people very dearly, it has already incurred inflationary costs due mainly to collapse of the Pound, to raise average extra costs per person per year to around £400 [ on top of the bargain £190 EU fee ] so we are already paying around 600 quid each!

Most people in the UK by now have already been ripped-off a cool £1000 so far since 2016, and with the possible threat of far worse to come.

Any Brexit is an economic folly, and the No Deal Brexit a financial disaster for UK people.

 

....claims a la Project Fear

You mean Project Dear, Brexit is a very expensive folly.

As to a UK taxpayer’s perspective, nobody voted to leave based on an economic assessment. 

How do you know, have you asked everyone of the 17.4 million?

You think it is a stupid folly - that is fair enough - but let's not forget that you are in the minority.

It is pointless simply reiterating your various unsubstantiated financial fantasies - feel free to substantiate these ...

No, of course I haven't asked all 17.4m - but I know my reasons and they are the same as every leave voter that I have spoken to and every leave voter that I have read/seen/heard in/on newspaper/TV/radio and nobody voted leave for economic reasons. Feel free to rebut that ...

A lot of the Leavers that I have spoken to thought they were going to be SUBSTANTIALLY better off to the tune of £350m each week.