RayC

"No" what exactly? When the UK was part of the EU it was obliged to use the metric system. However, there were exceptions to this rule e.g. pints for beer (or spirits!). Retailers were also free to use imperial units alongside the metric measurement. Post-Brexit retailers can now use imperial measurements in splendid isolation. Forgive me for being underwhelmed by this achievement.

I started on p.5 and got to p.20 before giving up. Achievements include reintroducing blue passports; suggesting that imperial measurements might be used instead of metric and the 'jewel in the crown' (pun intended), enabling businesses to use a crown symbol on pint glasses. And to think that the government of the UK allowed such banality to be published under its' name.

Fair play to you for at least trying to justify Brexit with some evidence in this thread. However, in this particular instance it's a bit disingenuous to suggest that these 71 trade deals were somehow a consequence of Brexit. They were almost entirely roll-overs. The Brexit achievements amount to a slightly wider ranging deal with Japan, deals with Oz and NZ which seem to favour them more than us and some deals with a handful of islands with whom we have next to no trade. I don't understand how you can dismiss trade relations with the world's biggest economy in such an apparently flippant manner.

It simply isn't true to say that membership of the EU would have prevented the UK following a vaccination programme of its' own choosing.

Care to elaborate.

I agree that we haven't had a decent government in a long while. I'd also suggest that no government during my adult life has been particularly adept at long-term planning. You are also, of course, correct that what is posted here or - more often than not - in the media is opinion. However, most media opinion from reputable sources is backed by evidence supporting their view. I would also suggest that 'Remainers' on this board back up their arguments with links more often than not. It's possible that the evidence is flawed, but the onus is then on those opposing the proposition to point the flaws. Unfortunately, the Brexiter argument presented in this forum almost invariably amounts to no more than the use of emotive words such as 'mafia', 'corrupt', etc. When challenged to back up these assertions with evidence, nothing is usually forthcoming.

If that's 'Hear, hear' you agree with me then great. Thanks. On the other hand, if you are suggesting that the EU is a mafia club dominated by France and Germany then maybe you'd like to address my challenge to Kwasaki? (I suspect that the answer will be 'No' but go on prove me wrong????)

Can you detail the contents of this new found post-Brexit freedom? Personally, I feel a lot less free. Unless I receive an impossible-to-refuse job offer my working days are behind me. Just as well as the number of job opportunities within the EU member states open to Brits is significantly reduced. I feel sorry for the Brits of working age who don't have the opportunities which I had.

You are the one complaining that the EU is a mafia club dominated by France and Germany.

Just realized that I greatly exaggerated the figure. Of the 5.5 million Brits abroad, 1m are pensioners. The majority of the remaining 4.5m are presumably working and paying local income tax. Unless they are renting out their homes in the UK or have significant investment income, they are probably unaffected. I would hazard a guess that removing the tax allowance from this group would raise +/-£4-5 million. Not a drop in the ocean but a lot less significant.

There are an estimated 5.5m Brits abroad so - assuming that they are all have £12,500 income - abolishing the tax-free allowance would raise +/-£13.75 billion. Hardly a trivial sum so it's a valid concern. However, imo the easier target are the non-doms. Abolishing their status - assuming that they don't all leave - would raise +/-£18 billion and very few of the electorate would have much sympathy for them.

Err .. you're forgetting something .... I suppose as the late Mr. Loaf said: "Two out of three ain't bad".

Can you identify any proposals originating from Brussels, which were strongly supported by either France or Germany, but were opposed by the rest of the EU member states but which, nevertheless, subsequently passed into law?

No doubt Brexiters will agree that is because of the effects of Covid and the war in Ukraine!

Given that there is a labour shortage, many UK workers seem to be either unable and/or unwilling to fill these vacancies. If these vacancies are not filled by UK workers then the choice is simple; either (1) import labour as we were doing pre-Brexit to fill the roles (2) leave the vacancies unfilled and watch the economy contract. The latter seems to be the current default mode.

Yet labour shortages have intensified post-Brexit https://www.ft.com/content/a9677ee4-281d-4d0d-8456-661982890304 Maybe hod carriers in Cricklewood need to be a bit more flexible and look for work slightly further afield e.g. in Ealing.

Wasn't the single market and freedom of movement great? I remember being interviewed for a job which would have required me to be physically present in Prague. The job required fluent English. The interview took place in Brussels.

Incorrect. Statistical methods such as regression analyses allow us to do just that. No doubt true. But the other side of the coin is that there are Brexiters - including many of this board - who refuse to accept that Brexit has had a detrimental effect on the UK economy.

The addition of "sole" changes the meaning significantly. You originally concluded: "... which shows Brexit isn't the reason for the current U.K economic condition." I'll agree that it isn't the sole reason but it is a major contributory factor.

Surprisingly I broadly agree with you. Mine is a typical response of those who did not believe - or were skeptical about - the claimed benefits of Brexit. I also agree that it is time for the UK - I'd say government rather than people - to deal with the self-inflicted problems caused by Brexit and reap the rewards from leaving the EU. The thing is that - based on the evidence to date - successive UK governments have been unable to identify - let alone implement - any of these perceived benefits. Of course - given that Brexiters are unable and/or unwilling to take accountability and responsibility for their action - the UK's current position can be attributed even in part to a failure of Brexit per sec, rather it is simply the consequence of Russian warmongering, a worldwide virus and the dastardly EU being nasty. I think that I'll continue to point the finger and keep moaning.

No matter how many times you repeat this mantra, it still remains untrue. Covid and the war in Ukraine have negatively affected economies but the fact remains that so has Brexit, as the link which I posted earlier demonstrates.

If the company in question were paying less than the minimum wage and/or advertising that they would only employ Polish workers then they were breaking the law.

I would say that most sensible people realised that you couldn't have the benefits of belonging to the world's biggest trading bloc without the accompanying obligations and responsibilities. Always someone else's fault. The EU did what it felt necessary to protect its' members' interests. Anyway, why didn't the UK government(s) plan for the worse-case scenario given that it appears to be common knowledge how badly the EU was likely to behave? Where is the plan for implementing these Brexit benefits?

We had to implement 3% of EU regulation against our will. Similar to Germany. The price that we paid is not worth it.

No matter how often you stick your head in the sand, the fact remains that Brexit has contributed to the UK's current economic problems. To date, there have been few, if any, economic benefits associated with the decision to leave the EU. The Brexiter retort that the economic benefits will take time to filter through and has been hampered by Covid, the war in Ukraine, etc is empty rhetoric. There is no plan (or timeline) to realise these benefits for the simple reason that so few exist a plan is unnecessary. https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/#assumptions