the vote was based on a lie though. they should do a vote now that more people know about the consequences, take the deal or stay in the eu

 

I would rather leave with no deal, the only way you will get a good deal is when everything is on the table at the same time, as soon as we leave with no deal then the UK gov and the EU will I'm sure come to a deal very quickly. May screwed up by giving the EU what they wanted first.

Where I live 57% voted leave, if you came to visit where I live you would be able to see why we voted leave. Ever expanding EU https://www.euronews.com/2019/10/18/france-denmark-and-netherlands-block-albania-s-eu-membership-bid might be one of the problems.

— Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

the question was 'Should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU?'. how was it based on a lie ?

why should they do a vote now after 3 1/2yrs of remainers kicking the can down the road causing Chaos ?

 

regarding a second referendum
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/dec/13/eu-ireland-lisbon-treaty

 

The Chinese are a greater threat to peace than Putin with their 9-Dash line.

 

one benefit, maybe ask your neighbours

no he didn't have time to start from scratch, but I'm sure if he did have time he would have got a better deal

we were told the EU wouldn't change the deal, he got them to change it.

 

yes I think it would be, a clean break, the EU wants us firstly to remain and if not leave with a deal to keep us tied within the EU , the reason they don't want a no deal is https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-to-become-economic-competitor-after-brexit-merkel-warns/

EU is always trying to expand, Turkey and the Balkan states of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania are now waiting in line to join the EU, that's what another 90 million people also The Ukraine want to join the EU (population 45m)

 

I find the Labour narrative around this most helping/convincing/interesting.

I'll take a few stabs at it once I've layed it out - but all of the following is not my interpretation, but their 'narrative'.

First - lets start with the EU liberal elites stance on the matter.

- Brexit is a late backlash on Thatchers course of liberalizing the work force (Sounds odd, but in concept is right (not taking into account blame game aspects)).

Former industrial regions in the UK where shafted by pretty much all the UKs political planning. EU then 'sponsored' those through fonds to keep the regions afloat (something the EU does, more so than the tories would). But the anger (no perspective) kept accumulating, and then evaporated in a notion of 'we want back our flag'. Meaning social security structures, opportunities - Britannia for the poorer brits.

The iffy thing is, that by voting their flag back - those poorer working communities in britain shot themselves in the foot. Because they eliminated actual social support structures, and will not get any back mid term (Britain has to make sure it gets competitive at the international stage, which means fucking over workers rights, and cutting social security nets. But it will also bring new 'opportunities'.).

- Here is the labour argument. 'The current EU deal means, a Trump trade deal to follow'. I listened to a labour speech yesterday that layed out, that the economies of the EU and the US are structured very differently (US: work two jobs, be poor still, no security nets), and that they fear - that the UK will be shifting to a US style economy in the mid term future (you are orienting yourself towards the new shiny). The argument here goes, if you wanted to superseed EU standards in workers or consumer rights, you could already do that. You couldnt undercut them to make deals with countries that didn't meet those standards (costing you business), and that (cutting social expenses, cutting workers rights, lowering standards) is now whats behind much of the 'opportunity' the Tory party is selling.
--

Now there also are regions in the UK (think border countries with the EU) that just plainly net profit from EU trade, so those (Scottland and Ireland) are your internal strugglers, because regardless of what deal the UK strikes, those countries will be off worse because of regionality and not being allowed to freely trade with their neighbor countries anymore (if you put in tariffs there is a process, there is overhead, wares don't move so freely anymore - this hurts profit).
--

Also on the level of the Tories there is this narrative of the EU is set out to produce deeper and deeper integration between member state (banking union, military union, monetary union - and the big fear for them 'social security union' (Meaning - 'We have to pay for the poorer countries within the EU). Now - it has to be noted, that this was a future fear, and not a practice, all things considered currently, because the UK 'net profited' from EU trade relations. (And if you do so, you also have to pay for the streets in Italy kind of thing.) They were whats called a 'net payer' (all rich countries within the EU are (means: payed more into EU funds, than taking out of them, but those are just the political funds, not private business)), but in whole their business profited from free trade within the EU. Just that poorer working communites (or large parts of middle classes ) didnt share in the profits. But thats a UK policy problem. Within the EU economic system the big profits went to the rich countries.
--


Those are the three main battle lines. Its important to understand, that individual businesses profit more or less from the EU market, so there are battle lines within that as well. For example. If you are a sub standard industrial producer, pumping out the greats copper cook ware, made in rural town over the hill - the prospects of making cuts on worker payments, and then doing great trade deal with Bangalore India (sorry for the cultural racism) sound much better, than if you were a car manufacturer for instance (Aston Martin (Ford) wont be expanding in India or Eastasia, when producing in 'Stratford upon Aven').
----

So mid term benefits for leaving are mainly in lowering production cost, and social spending - trying to facilitate a new boom, that within the EU standards regime wouldnt have been possible. But that means, lowering working costs, and social standards.

Long term benefits as in 'political independance' are arguable though. Its jut that the people that provoked brexit would actually not benefit at all.

Geo-security wise, it wouldnt change much. Partnerships with the EU (inside or outside NATO) are till expected, with the EU now having to spend more for 'security' than they did in the past.

From a trade perspective it makes both the UK and the EU a less dominant trading partner losing both of them 'importance' in the process. But then 'economic growth' nowadays is mostly in Bangalore, and Bangladesh, and if you have identified those as your future markets you don't care about your standards, to meet theirs. (Provocatively said. ) Also, if you think that Daddy US will now foot your bills, that kind of might level that out for the UK. For a while. Or not.

For the EU - hard Brexit would be equivalent to -3-4% GDP (so recession basically), for the UK it would be -5-6%.

If you only see it from the perspective of economic wellbeing in the timeframe Millennials are in their productive age, Brexit was as spanner thrown into the european economy, by the US. So everyone but those countries will benefit relatively speaking.

If you can see it more long term, or are part of the particular interests profiting from individual trade deals with those countries (

), it may be different.

edit: Hard Brexit basically just means an economic shock, and countries being miffed at each other politicly for a while (more sustained economic shock).

There were statements made in the parliamental debate I watched, that Theresa May was perceived as 'would have not risked that', while BoJo is perceived as gung ho. Whatevs. Lets do it.

But that also is diplomacy 1x1 (poker player attitude gains you more debating success, at a slightly higher risk) - and something that anyone involved (anyone but the average public shmuck ) knows as well. So deals still are likely.

But to be very honest, I don't know what Labour is doing at the moment. (Why? What?) To me the notion of a second referendum is still a little delusional - so... UK needs even more time?

 

Tell that to the climate kids. *wink*

 

Even if Brexit goes through EU still owns our Military effectively November 1st.

Another Hong Kong situation especially for Northern Ireland where I Live.

An imaginary border because Europe wants an Authoritarian Single Market.

Nationalists sold out to EU.
Loyalists are the real Nationalists.
Republic of Ireland laughable what Republic you did not want British Rule but yet sold out to Europe.

Bottom line EU owns our Military and Assests including Intelligence thanks to the traitor May but hell they all traitors.

Yes Jeremy we do want a Trump Trade Deal.

 

We dont need a faceless corrupt organisation to make 'good' laws for us. What are your thoughts on the fact just today, the EU chose NOT to debate the jailing of the Catalan separatists?