Britain just signed the biggest-ever Brexit trade deal

[RayC]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

 

 

No more than I expected from you.

 

A typical response from someone unable to justify their position. 

[CG1 Blue]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

Those were just two studies, among literally hundreds of others. The overwhelming body of evidence suggests that Brexit has had a negative effect. There are very few studies which suggest otherwise.

There may be a minimal negative effect - possibly. Possibly not. Looking at other major EU economies I'd say Brexit has had no economic effect on the UK. 

 

Think about who may have vested interests in carrying out studies to show a negative effect of Brexit. There are loads of groups who are anti-Brexit and they can spin the numbers to back up their claims. 

 

If the economic effect of Brexit is tiny/zero, no pro-Brexit groups are going to waste their time and resources on studies. 

 

So these studies are one sided. Anti-Brexit groups trying to make themselves feel better. 

 

Furthermore it's impossible to judge economic impacts at this point in time - because too many other factors are at play. Covid hangover and wars for a start. 

[Roo Island]

11 hours ago, Theforgotten1 said:

No , but we should of left it completely , no the half arse leave that the mps gave us because they thought they knew best and wanted to keep their fingers in the pie

Been in the UK now for 6 months. I've yet to meet anyone who says it was a good idea. None.

[Roo Island]

9 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

I think most understand that now.

Most, but not all. Those with ties to the schengen area are really suffering. Owners of second homes, relatives there, etc

[RayC]

38 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

There may be a minimal negative effect - possibly. Possibly not. Looking at other major EU economies I'd say Brexit has had no economic effect on the UK. 

 

The correct comparison is between where the UK is now i.e. out of the EU and where it might have been if we had remained a member. 

 

Of course, it is impossible to be categorical about this but the overwhelming body of evidence, which has modelled various scenarios, has concluded that Brexit has had a negative economic effect.

 

It is also surely beyond argument that UK SMEs who export to the EU have been negatively affected by Brexit.

 

38 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

 

Think about who may have vested interests in carrying out studies to show a negative effect of Brexit. There are loads of groups who are anti-Brexit and they can spin the numbers to back up their claims. 

 

If that is the case then it shouldn't be too difficult to debunk the various studies' conclusions and/or methodologies. However, pro-Brexit groups remain quiet.

 

38 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

If the economic effect of Brexit is tiny/zero, no pro-Brexit groups are going to waste their time and resources on studies. 

 

So these studies are one sided. Anti-Brexit groups trying to make themselves feel better. 

 

If you were to conduct a study in that way, you would introduce bias at the outset i.e. by assuming that the effect is tiny.

 

The point of the studies is not to prove that the economic effect is large or tiny, but to ascertain what is the economic effect. Assuming that the methodology is sound - and as I implied previously, the pro-Brexit camp hasn't come up with many objections - only then can you conclude whether the effect is tiny or large.

 

38 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Furthermore it's impossible to judge economic impacts at this point in time - because too many other factors are at play. Covid hangover and wars for a start. 

 

Every economy in the world suffered an economic hit from COVID, and the war in Ukraine affects the economies of most EU member states more than it does the UK.

 

When will the economic benefits of Brexit start to become apparent? When do we draw a line in the sand and say, 'Ok let's judge Brexit'? 15 years? 20 years? 70 years? Someone stated in another thread that Rees-Moog had thrown that timescale out there. I often think that UK governments are too short-termist, but a pay back period of 70 years is a bit much.

[Scouse123]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Those were just two studies, among literally hundreds of others. The overwhelming body of evidence suggests that Brexit has had a negative effect. There are very few studies which suggest otherwise.

No point talking about it now, we have the worst deal possible.

 

Half in and half out, whereby we are still bound by countless rules and regulations plus the ECHR, but none of the so-called benefits it was supposed to bring.

 

I wouldn't want to rejoin where the French and Germans would attempt to give us an even worse deal than we previously had, in an attempt to penalise us.

[Will B Good]

2 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

No point talking about it now, we have the worst deal possible.

 

Half in and half out, whereby we are still bound by countless rules and regulations plus the ECHR, but none of the so-called benefits it was supposed to bring.

 

I wouldn't want to rejoin where the French and Germans would attempt to give us an even worse deal than we previously had, in an attempt to penalise us.

 

 

 

The ECHR doesn't has anything to do with the EU......does it?

 

 

 

[Scouse123]

2 hours ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

 

The ECHR doesn't has anything to do with the EU......does it?

 

 

 

 

No, you are right, they are separate issues but out of EU and out of ECHR if we are taking back our borders.

 

UK law should trump ECHR.

 

Brexit does not prevent cases from being taken to the ECHR, but the repeal of the Human Rights Act might render ECHR decisions less effective and the UK will not be bound by changes to EU law.

 

Anyway, the way Starmer is sucking up to France and Germany, things will definitely get worse for the UK.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 29 by Scouse123

[Scouse123]

I fail to see the point of going on and on about Brexit, it's done, it is time to move on and make the best of it instead of the constant bleating by remoaners, about ifs, buts and why for.

[Roo Island]

Sheeple fall for propaganda.

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-propaganda-disinformation-rt/

 

Russia's state media actively promoted Brexit supporters and undermined Hillary Clinton's 2016 U.S. presidential bid as part of a yearslong campaign to sow doubt among Western democracies, according to almost two dozen current and former journalists for RT, the Kremlin-backed outlet.

The strategy, outlined in a report from the Oxford Internet Institute published Monday, involved Moscow using RT's global network of news sites in more than 30 languages to push anti-West narratives, sow conspiracy theories to cast doubt on traditional media outlets and foment controversy to boost Russia's presence on the global stage, based on anonymous interviews with the RT journalists.

[RayC]

9 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

No point talking about it now, we have the worst deal possible.

 

Half in and half out, whereby we are still bound by countless rules and regulations plus the ECHR, but none of the so-called benefits it was supposed to bring.

 

I wouldn't want to rejoin where the French and Germans would attempt to give us an even worse deal than we previously had, in an attempt to penalise us.

 

The current deal is bad but a 'No Deal' would have been even worse. Even Johnson realised that.

 

If we did rejoin then it would almost certainly be on worse terms than we left. We wouldn't have the same opt-outs that we enjoyed before we left. 

 

It makes the decision to leave all the more sad.

[RayC]

6 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

I fail to see the point of going on and on about Brexit, it's done, it is time to move on and make the best of it instead of the constant bleating by remoaners, about ifs, buts and why for.

 

There are a number of reasons for going on about it but, perhaps, the main one is to remind politicians that it is never too late to correct an obvious mistake.

[Scouse123]

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

There are a number of reasons for going on about it but, perhaps, the main one is to remind politicians that it is never too late to correct an obvious mistake.

 

 

It was a vote by the British people, now you are asking politicians to override democracy.

[Scouse123]

9 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

The current deal is bad but a 'No Deal' would have been even worse. Even Johnson realised that.

 

If we did rejoin then it would almost certainly be on worse terms than we left. We wouldn't have the same opt-outs that we enjoyed before we left. 

 

It makes the decision to leave all the more sad.

 

Again, the British people voted to leave and that's it.

[RayC]

1 minute ago, Scouse123 said:

 

It was a vote by the British people, now you are asking politicians to override democracy.

 

We have a parliamentary democracy and elect politicians every five years to make these decisions on our behalf. Imo there should never have been a referendum. It was a dereliction of duty by the 'Boy David', who put potential personal political gain before the needs of the country.

 

Nevertheless, I agree that having been foolish enough to call the referendum, the result can hardly be ignored. 

 

I've always thought that 3 parliamentary terms (15 years) is a sufficient time for any Brexit related changes to be made and the effects to become clear, so let's wait until 2035 before posing the question again. Hopefully, the damage done over the 15 years can be rectified.

[RayC]

15 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

Again, the British people voted to leave and that's it.

 

See my reply to your other post.

 

The decision should be set in stone forever more. 

[simple1]

23 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

It was a vote by the British people, now you are asking politicians to override democracy.

 

True, but quite a lot of misinformation by some politicians; the British people were conned.