Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[StreetCowboy]

50 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

In simple terms that are easy to understand - YES

 

As a follow on to that, it is obvious to those that can think logically, that there are certain aspects of the EU that would be beneficial to the both the UK and the EU to remain partners. These can be discussed after the UK leaves. 

 

You are not applying logic, you are applying hyperbole. WTO is the default leave position, it is up to both the UK and the EU to come up with a Trading Agreement that is better than WTO rules. It would appear to me that the EU has no intention of negotiating this as they are still trying to keep the UK shackled to Brussels and the ECJ.

 

Now let me ask you to put your logical thinking to good use and answer this.

 

In 2016 

 

The EU exported some £300 - 350 Billion worth of goods and services to the UK.

 

The UK exported some £200 - 250 Billion worth of goods and services to the EU.

 

If the EU wants the UK to pay to access the EU market, why should the UK not demand that the EU pay to access the UK market ?

Is GBP 300 billion a large fraction of the UK's exports?  Could we replace those exports by a small increase in exports to other markets?

 

Is GP 250 million a large fraction of the EU's exports?  Could they replace those exports by a small increase in exports to other markets?

 

SC

[Eloquent pilgrim]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

OK, in my professional life I used to be a computer programer,so I'm used to thinking and deducting logically. Forgive me if I say I can't quite get my head round some of the leavers thinking as I can't find the logic in it. To try and help me getter a better understanding of the leaver mindset can I ask the leavers on here a few questions?

 

Firstly - do you consider the vote was to leave the EU completely and absolutely - no future CU or FTA, trade on WTO  only - even if that option does major damage to our economy, peoples jobs and peoples lives ? 

 

Your vainglory that your past professional life somehow gives you a superior ability to think and deduce, than others, is affectation.

 

However, to answer your questions:

 

Firstly - Yes …… although you have loaded that question with more project fear by adding       “- even if that option does major damage to our economy, peoples jobs and peoples lives ?” 

 

So, what you have added to a simple question is, of course, merely conjecture and speculation, and as such is subjective, and hardly befitting of a mind that can think and deduce logically

 

Secondly, well, I could only see one question although you said you wanted to ask leavers a few questions .

[The Renegade]

16 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

Is GBP 300 billion a large fraction of the UK's exports?  Could we replace those exports by a small increase in exports to other markets?

 

Is GP 250 million a large fraction of the EU's exports?  Could they replace those exports by a small increase in exports to other markets?

I will ignore that you got them around the wrong way and totally avoided the question. Which was

 

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

Now let me ask you to put your logical thinking to good use and answer this.

 

In 2016 

 

The EU exported some £300 - 350 Billion worth of goods and services to the UK.

 

The UK exported some £200 - 250 Billion worth of goods and services to the EU.

 

If the EU wants the UK to pay to access the EU market, why should the UK not demand that the EU pay to access the UK market ?

And I will throw this in for free. If both markets had the ability to offset these in other markets, you can bet your last satang that they would have already done so.

Edited June 2, 2018 by The Renegade

[tebee]

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

In simple terms that are easy to understand - YES

 

As a follow on to that, it is obvious to those that can think logically, that there are certain aspects of the EU that would be beneficial to the both the UK and the EU to remain partners. These can be discussed after the UK leaves. 

 

You are not applying logic, you are applying hyperbole. WTO is the default leave position, it is up to both the UK and the EU to come up with a Trading Agreement that is better than WTO rules. It would appear to me that the EU has no intention of negotiating this as they are still trying to keep the UK shackled to Brussels and the ECJ.

 

Now let me ask you to put your logical thinking to good use and answer this.

 

In 2016 

 

The EU exported some £300 - 350 Billion worth of goods and services to the UK.

 

The UK exported some £200 - 250 Billion worth of goods and services to the EU.

 

If the EU wants the UK to pay to access the EU market, why should the UK not demand that the EU pay to access the UK market ?

I'm quite happy to agree that the WTO option is the default one and not a good one.

 

But to negotiate a new trade agreement takes on average 7 - 10 years

 

So we either need a lengthy transition period or we adopt an existing one.

 

The problem we have is that the UK government has not yet said what it wants from a trade agreement and what compromises it is prepared to make to get one.

 

The EU suggested the Recent Canada agreement would be a good match to TM's red lines - as far as I'm aware the UK has neither accepted or rejected this  officially, but seems  to be  looking for some sort of closer union.

 

Any trade agreement will need some sort of supranational authority to oversee disputes . These do incur a slight loss of sovereignty, but even the WTO has one. To set a new one up however will take several years.

 

Yes both   sides have much to lose if we don't come to some agreement - but that means it's equally in the EU's interest not to be intranagent, but as I said above they still have no idea what the UK wants - probably because the UK has no idea what it wants either.  

[tebee]

41 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

Your vainglory that your past professional life somehow gives you a superior ability to think and deduce, than others, is affectation.

 

However, to answer your questions:

 

Firstly - Yes …… although you have loaded that question with more project fear by adding       “- even if that option does major damage to our economy, peoples jobs and peoples lives ?” 

 

So, what you have added to a simple question is, of course, merely conjecture and speculation, and as such is subjective, and hardly befitting of a mind that can think and deduce logically

 

Secondly, well, I could only see one question although you said you wanted to ask leavers a few questions .

I'm trying to explain why I can't interalize the leave view rather than claiming any innate superiority.

 

The government's own calculations   suggest going the WTO route would result in a GDP loss of around 8% - if it were cost free I would be a lot less diligent in opposing it, though I still wouldn't like it .

 

Source https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/Exiting-the-European-Union/17-19/Cross-Whitehall-briefing/EU-Exit-Analysis-Cross-Whitehall-Briefing.pdf

 

I'm sorry I didn't make it clear, will be asking the other questions later in seperate posts. Too much at  once leads to messy replies where it is not clear exactly what people are replying too.

 

 

[Eloquent pilgrim]

25 minutes ago, tebee said:

I'm trying to explain why I can't interalize the leave view rather than claiming any innate superiority.

 

The government's own calculations   suggest going the WTO route would result in a GDP loss of around 8% - if it were cost free I would be a lot less diligent in opposing it, though I still wouldn't like it .

 

Source https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/Exiting-the-European-Union/17-19/Cross-Whitehall-briefing/EU-Exit-Analysis-Cross-Whitehall-Briefing.pdf

 

I'm sorry I didn't make it clear, will be asking the other questions later in seperate posts. Too much at  once leads to messy replies where it is not clear exactly what people are replying too.

 

 

tebee, I don't want to play grammar police, but for a man with a career in computer programming, why don't you have a spell check on whatever device you are using

 

interalize ….. I assume internalise

seperate …. separate, obviously

in your previous comment, intranagent …. I assume intransigent

 

Come on buddy, sort yourself out  ??  ✌️✌️

[dick dasterdly]

5 hours ago, The Renegade said:

Anyone who is older than a millennial never charged into anything.

 

Remainers do not know what to do, because they never thought for a second that the vote would be leave. In addition, it is not really a case of not knowing what to do, it is more a case of a Remainer, the UK PM still trying desperately to keep the UK joined at the hip to the EU.

 

With all the Trade wars currently escalating around the world, what's not to like about trading under WTO rules ?

"Anyone who is older than a millennial never charged into anything.

 

Remainers do not know what to do, because they never thought for a second that the vote would be leave. In addition, it is not really a case of not knowing what to do, it is more a case of a Remainer, the UK PM still trying desperately to keep the UK joined at the hip to the EU."

 

Agree entirely.

 

Personally, I thought about it in detail as I like some things about the eu and, funnily enough, trust them more than the brit. govts.!  Which is why I decided to not vote.

 

The actions of both the eu and the uk govts. have turned me into a 'leave immediately' voter.

[dick dasterdly]

19 hours ago, tebee said:

Industrialists warn May they will not invest if Brexit uncertainty persists

 

 

https://www.ft.com/content/f12785b0-642b-11e8-90c2-9563a0613e56?utm_campaign=e2938434b7-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_05_31_05_27

Makes sense - it's the uncertainty that is the 'killer'.

 

Time for the uk. govt. to give up on 'negotiations' (ha ha...) - and make it clear that the UK is leaving at the end of the Article 50 time period.  No payment to the eu and no further negotiation, unless they are prepared to genuinely negotiate.

 

Unfortunately, the uk govt. for some reason (?)  has made no effort to prepare for this...

[The Renegade]

47 minutes ago, tebee said:

The government's own calculations   suggest going the WTO route would result in a GDP loss of around 8% - if it were cost free I would be a lot less diligent in opposing it, though I still wouldn't like it .

tebee. 

 

Lets assume that the PROJECTION of an 8% decrease in GDP is correct. How would that affect you personally ?

 

I would like to direct you to Robert Kennedy's 1968 speech on why measuring GDP is measuring the wrong criteria.

 

You could also try the explanation provided by the Economist.

 

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2016/05/08/why-gdp-is-a-poor-measure-of-progress

[The Renegade]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

But to negotiate a new trade agreement takes on average 7 - 10 years

Garbage.

 

How long would it take to transfer the current arrangement into a FTA ?

 

Days ? Weeks ?

[tebee]

31 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

tebee, I don't want to play grammar police, but for a man with a career in computer programming, why don't you have a spell check on whatever device you are using

 

interalize ….. I assume internalise

separate …. separate, obviously

in your previous comment, intranagent …. I assume intransigent

 

Come on buddy, sort yourself out  ??  ✌️✌️

Sorry I'm dyslexic ( as a lot of computer programmers are )  and if the Chrome spellchecker  does not underline it in red I can't tell its wrong. Sometimes it lags behind - it's only just underlined  "separate" above and is still not underlining intranagent or interalize

[tebee]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

Garbage.

 

How long would it take to transfer the current arrangement into a FTA ?

 

Days ? Weeks ?

But we can't transfer the current arrangement into a FTA (  at least one that would be acceptable to a Brexiter ) as that would mean accepting SM, CU and the supremacy of the  ECJ as  our current arrangements derive from them. 

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, tebee said:

But we can't transfer the current arrangement into a FTA (  at least one that would be acceptable to a Brexiter ) as that would mean accepting SM, CU and the supremacy of the  ECJ as  our current arrangements derive from them. 

Who says ?

 

Has Canada accepted the SM, CU or the ECJ ?

 

Would the US have accepted the SM, CU or the ECJ under TTIP ?

 

These are excuses doled out by remainers as to why the UK must stay shackled to Brussels and the ECJ

[tebee]

Just now, The Renegade said:

Who says ?

 

Has Canada accepted the SM, CU or the ECJ ?

 

Would the US have accepted the SM, CU or the ECJ under TTIP ?

 

These are excuses doled out by remainers as to why the UK must stay shackled to Brussels and the ECJ

Canada has not - but Canada has no access to the EU market for services - which is why I assume, the Canada-style deal offered was not accepted .

 

[The Renegade]

8 minutes ago, tebee said:

Canada has not - but Canada has no access to the EU market for services - which is why I assume, the Canada-style deal offered was not accepted .

 

Let's try again.

 

How long do you think it would take to set up a '' Mutual Access Deal '' for Finance & Services based on the current set-up ?  7 or 8 years or a few weeks ?

 

The EU are dragging their feet on this as they are hoping to steal € clearing from the UK.

 

You can look it up. The UK has already taken the EU to Court over this and will do so again. Why ? Simply because the basis of the EU's claim that € clearing must be taken within the EU. Which is garbage because € clearing also takes place in NY, HK, Singapore and others.

[tebee]

17 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Let's try again.

 

How long do you think it would take to set up a '' Mutual Access Deal '' for Finance & Services based on the current set-up ?  7 or 8 years or a few weeks ?

 

The EU are dragging their feet on this as they are hoping to steal € clearing from the UK.

 

You can look it up. The UK has already taken the EU to Court over this and will do so again. Why ? Simply because the basis of the EU's claim that € clearing must be taken within the EU. Which is garbage because € clearing also takes place in NY, HK, Singapore and others.

I'd go with 7-8 years.

 

Euro clearing - although significant, is only a small part of our services export economy, just solving that won't save the rest of the jobs.

 

It's not a trivial task to set up that sort of treaty - off the top of my head some of the things that would need to be agreed.

 

Common standards.

Similar tax regimes.

Consumer protection.

Financial guarantees

legal enforcement of transnational agreements.

Mutual recognition of standards.

Mutual recognition of qualifications.  

Visa waivers for posted staff.  

Dispute resolution 

 

All of the above are solved by single market membership - leaving it means you have to arrange equivalent provisions in each treaty you negotiate.

 

Also this sort of treaty will undoubtedly have provisions for some sort of regulatory alignment making it difficult to leverage savings  by simplifying regulations.    

 

If this sort of thing was simple and easy why haven't we got this sort of treaty with every country in the rest of the world yet?

 

 

[The Renegade]

5 minutes ago, tebee said:

t's not a trivial task to set up that sort of treaty - off the top of my head some of the things that would need to be agreed.

 

Common standards.

Similar tax regimes.

Consumer protection.

Financial guarantees

legal enforcement of transnational agreements.

Mutual recognition of standards.

Mutual recognition of qualifications.  

Visa waivers for posted staff.  

Dispute resolution 

And you are missing the most obvious part. You come across as one of those people who have a brain but not an ounce of common sense. Or someone who clutches at anything in their desire to keep the UK shackled to Brussels and the ECJ.

 

There is no need to set these up, which is what takes the time, they are already set up and only need transferred to an FTA.

 

Having said that, I could give you at least 100 examples of all these being ignored within the EU.

[tebee]

4 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

And you are missing the most obvious part. You come across as one of those people who have a brain but not an ounce of common sense. Or someone who clutches at anything in their desire to keep the UK shackled to Brussels and the ECJ.

 

There is no need to set these up, which is what takes the time, they are already set up and only need transferred to an FTA.

 

Having said that, I could give you at least 100 examples of all these being ignored within the EU.

But you can't just transfer them like that without accepting complete regulatory alignment and the supremacy of the ECJ - in which case we might as just well join the EAA.

[nauseus]

38 minutes ago, tebee said:

But you can't just transfer them like that without accepting complete regulatory alignment and the supremacy of the ECJ - in which case we might as just well join the EAA.

Or the YMCA. ?

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, candide said:

https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/06/24/480949383/britains-google-searches-for-what-is-the-eu-spike-after-brexit-vote

?

You are nearly two years late with this worn out link. These searches were mostly made by remainers, judging by the high hit locations of London and N.I. and their knowledge about the EU demonstrated in TV interviews just after the vote! Wink all you want but the proof is there! ?

[The Renegade]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

But you can't just transfer them like that without accepting complete regulatory alignment and the supremacy of the ECJ - in which case we might as just well join the EAA.

When you continually hark on about the supremacy of the ECJ, it is clear that you have no idea what an FTA is.

 

Quick suggestion for you, go and research how many Countries have FTA's with the EU and then tell me how many of them the ECJ has supremacy ?

 

There is nothing stopping the UK's current arrangement with the EU being converted, very quickly, into an FTA

 

Except the EU of course who are trying to keep the UK under the thumb of Brussels and the ECJ.

 

Quote

The best outcome would be a UK-EU free-trade agreement. It is also the most likely. It would be the most bizarre trade negotiation ever conducted were the negotiators to sit down to discuss raising tariffs. In view of the high-level of existing integration and the fact that the UK has signed onto the EU acquis for standards, technical barriers to trade would be minimal. Achieving a high quality FTA is therefore quite feasible. It could also be negotiated quickly for the same reasons. But even a high-quality FTA would still see the UK outside the Single Market and its trade would, for example, be subject to FTA-specific rules of origin.

 

https://policyexchange.org.uk/a-uk-eu-free-trade-agreement-will-be-the-most-unusual-in-history/

 

Your a right barrel of pessimism, doom & gloom and falsehoods rolled into one.

[The manic]

On 5/2/2018 at 7:13 PM, Kieran00001 said:

 

Regarding the hospital in London where Arabic was the main language, that is illegal and I don't believe it for a second, it throws into disregard all else you have said.  Post a link about this baby dying in a hospital with staff who cant read English, I can't find anything about it.

Illegal things happen..sometimes not polo y...the hospital is a famous London hospital in the Kensington area of London. Regarding the deaths of patients in the UK at the hand of both immigrants and non immigrant staff do your own research. The language,poor hygiene and Lack of compassion is a recurring problem with third world workers in the NHS.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14921565

It's been a problem for years...the actual case I was referring to seems to have disappeared.  As does truth when issues of immigration and the NHS arise....but it will surface again...Meanwhile..good luck

Edited June 2, 2018 by The manic

[The manic]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5797349/PETER-OBORNE-chilling-perils-EUs-latest-bid-kill-democracy.html

[adammike]

3 hours ago, The Renegade said:

Let's try again.

 

How long do you think it would take to set up a '' Mutual Access Deal '' for Finance & Services based on the current set-up ?  7 or 8 years or a few weeks ?

 

The EU are dragging their feet on this as they are hoping to steal € clearing from the UK.

 

You can look it up. The UK has already taken the EU to Court over this and will do so again. Why ? Simply because the basis of the EU's claim that € clearing must be taken within the EU. Which is garbage because € clearing also takes place in NY, HK, Singapore and others.

True but the courts judgment in favour of the UK was based on the fact that the UK is a member of the EU.The case against was based on the fact that the UK is not a country in the euro zone.That all changes whenever the UK leaves the EU.

[The Renegade]

10 minutes ago, adammike said:

True but the courts judgment in favour of the UK was based on the fact that the UK is a member of the EU.The case against was based on the fact that the UK is not a country in the euro zone.That all changes whenever the UK leaves the EU.

Unless the EU stops NY, HK, Singapore and others from clearing €'s it does not have a legal leg to stand on.

 

Quote

Why ? Simply because the basis of the EU's claim that € clearing must be taken within the EU. Which is garbage because € clearing also takes place in NY, HK, Singapore and others.

 

[billd766]

4 hours ago, tebee said:

I'd go with 7-8 years.

 

Euro clearing - although significant, is only a small part of our services export economy, just solving that won't save the rest of the jobs.

 

It's not a trivial task to set up that sort of treaty - off the top of my head some of the things that would need to be agreed.

 

Common standards.

Similar tax regimes.

Consumer protection.

Financial guarantees

legal enforcement of transnational agreements.

Mutual recognition of standards.

Mutual recognition of qualifications.  

Visa waivers for posted staff.  

Dispute resolution 

 

All of the above are solved by single market membership - leaving it means you have to arrange equivalent provisions in each treaty you negotiate.

 

Also this sort of treaty will undoubtedly have provisions for some sort of regulatory alignment making it difficult to leverage savings  by simplifying regulations.    

 

If this sort of thing was simple and easy why haven't we got this sort of treaty with every country in the rest of the world yet?

 

 

 

Because for the last 40 years we have been shackled to the EU and THEY are/were the final arbiters.

 

NO country within the EU was ALLOWED to make its own independent deal. EU rules prevailed.

 

WHEN we leave the EU we can make deals with any country we want without having 27 vetos to stop us.

[soalbundy]

18 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Because for the last 40 years we have been shackled to the EU and THEY are/were the final arbiters.

 

NO country within the EU was ALLOWED to make its own independent deal. EU rules prevailed.

 

WHEN we leave the EU we can make deals with any country we want without having 27 vetos to stop us.

WHEN is good, if a hard brexit is so easy and everything will be hunky dory afterwards why hasn't HMG made any provisions for a hard brexit? because it won't happen, there will be a 'yes minister' solution. The civil service will probably have more say than the government and they are anonymous, difficult to attack a grey suite that can't be sacked but that's what the politicians are for, cannon fodder. 

[Eloquent pilgrim]

47 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

WHEN is good, if a hard brexit is so easy and everything will be hunky dory afterwards why hasn't HMG made any provisions for a hard brexit? because it won't happen, there will be a 'yes minister' solution. The civil service will probably have more say than the government and they are anonymous, difficult to attack a grey suite that can't be sacked but that's what the politicians are for, cannon fodder. 

Are you referring to a grey hotel suite, a grey passage of music or a grey suite of furniture ??

[soalbundy]

6 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Are you referring to a grey hotel suite, a grey passage of music or a grey suite of furniture ??

The school master in you is coming out again but despite the superfluous 'e' you knew what I meant so give me an 'A' minus 

[metisdead]

Some troll posts and the replies have been removed.