Brexit

[Ronnie]

42 minutes ago, unfitfinlay said:

If No Deal is as bad as Yellow Hammer suggests then we're looking at some pretty horrific times ahead of us.

I'm sure it will be blamed on the EU. That's how the gutter press handles things around here.

Do you remember a couple of years ago when the Spanish lettuce crop dwindled because of flooding and they had hardly any left to export? That was presented as the greedy Spaniards eating lettuces so the hard-working British families can't have them. We've already heard Tories speaking about how 'disgracefully' the EU has been treating us. And everybody seems to have forgotten that the backstop was a proposal made by the British government, now that it's become problematic!

[Chest Rockwell]

On 9/12/2019 at 8:45 PM, Ronnie said:

Brexit won't be terribly bad for me personally, I think. Our jobs are safe. We can absorb the rising prices without having to tighten our belts.

I think you are overestimating how insulated you will be from the effects of brexit. Your money can only shield you so far in the face of further recession in the face of crumbling social infrastructure from years of austerity.

[Ronnie]

6 hours ago, Chest Rockwell said:

I think you are overestimating how insulated you will be from the effects of brexit. Your money can only shield you so far in the face of further recession in the face of crumbling social infrastructure from years of austerity.

We've always intended to move abroad by the time Ronette's 40, so within the next four years. Thankfully, her mother's Irish, so she's entitled to an Irish passport, and (by then) I would be the spouse of an EU citizen, so able to go with her. The mortgage will be paid off within the next two years (a jump of base rate to 5% will only add a further month; 10% will add only three), and the countries we're looking at are so comparatively cheap that even a collapse in the UK housing market won't prevent us from being able to afford to go.

I don't say it lightly: I hate Brexit and what it will bring. But the consequences of it to us personally are relatively minor compared with so many other people. I would still far rather that the entire con be magicked away and all this misery be avoided, but I can't pretend that we'll suffer greatly compared to people who will lose their homes in the face of expected interest-rate rises or who are already struggling to make ends meet before the imposition of tariffs raise food prices substantially. 

[AVM]

On 9/13/2019 at 11:06 PM, Richard said:

Unions worked in the 70s. Now it's vehemently anti-worker. The populace has redirected their concerns from wages to class warfare. The union culture has changed. If Brexiters thought they had a voice in unions we would still be in the EU.

That's the thing, though, we're speaking of a culture at the top of British unions - that doesn't make labour unions an irrelevance. I think Norway is a perfect example of how it can work - the average salary there is around 20% higher than it is here, something like 80% of the population are unionised and that's within an economy dominated by the service sector (much like our economy). Norway also has the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world and has the 2nd happiest population in the world. For me Norway are everything we should strive to be - their only mistake? Not taking full EU membership. 

RE Civil War - I wouldn't go that far, but there is going to be severe unrest regardless of the outcome. 

Edited September 16, 2019 by AVM

[Vamp]

Whatever mess Britain finds itself can easily be argued around anyway. They'll just say "well if the EU were reasonable we would have struck a deal," followed by "vote for us to sort it out" and that'll be it. I mean it's obviously bollocks but they'll get away with it. 

I don't really think Boris gives a stuff one way or another. His political career has largely been about putting his name in the history books, whether that's by building stupid airports or pointless bridges. He just wants to be in the history books as the PM who took Britain out of the EU. Nothing else matters. 

[Keith Houchen]

20 minutes ago, Vamp said:

He just wants to be in the history books as the PM

I'd say it just that, nothing else.

[Loki]

On 9/14/2019 at 10:39 PM, Chest Rockwell said:

I think you are overestimating how insulated you will be from the effects of brexit. Your money can only shield you so far in the face of further recession in the face of crumbling social infrastructure from years of austerity.

I think you're underestimating how much having money CAN insulate you.

If you own your own house, got private medical coverage, no debts, steady income... you can afford to blow a few hundred a week on food, a few quid more isn't going to make a difference.  If town centres fall to pieces, just order stuff delivered.  If unemployment goes through the roof, so what?

Brexit is probably going to have no effect on a majority of people in this country.  But for those it DOES effect, it will hit them heavily and in all areas of their life.  In that respect, it's just another Conservative style austerity.  But this is what we as a country voted for despite all the warnings, so fuck us basically.

Edited September 17, 2019 by Loki

[RancidPunx]

Has Boris aged a bit in recent times !!

 

That bloke in the NHS shouting at him today seemed to have aged Boris a bit in the clip I saw. Could be imagining it ! 

[Chest Rockwell]

He does look really haggard at the minute. Hopefully because he's really fucking stressed.

[David]

On 9/14/2019 at 3:13 PM, unfitfinlay said:

I agree that Brexit should happen. But only the version that was promised in 2016. You know, the one that promised us ALL the benefits of EU membership, including one-sided free movement (for us, not for them) and free trade WITHOUT contributing to the EU's budget.

Was that promised though? I recall hearing politicians say that if we voted to leave we would likely be leaving the customs union and so forth? Virtually no one, with the exception of some right-wing tosspots even hinted that we'd retain all the same benefits including one-sided free movement. Not that I heard anyway. Anyone who actually believed that is insane. It was well publicised that we'd see a lot of change if we voted to leave. 

There was the whole bus incident, but even the most feeble-minded of people must have saw it as a wider message that the people responsible wanted to take the dough being sent to the EU and spend it at home instead, with the NHS being part of that? I never assumed it meant that we'd see exactly £350 million per week all spent on the NHS, that's ridiculous. Now, I'm not arguing that they were right in saying that, but it all got rather pedantic in my opinion, which then ended up with people getting nasty and acting childish. 

I recall most of the serious, well-regarded politicians being pretty clear on what the repercussions would be if we voted to leave. It was all there for us to see before the vote. There's absolutely nothing that's come to light since then that has made me think "Shit! I never knew that would happen! I assumed we'd still have all the benefits of EU membership but less Johnny Foreigners taking our jobs!"

On 9/14/2019 at 3:13 PM, unfitfinlay said:

As for the alternative? I don't think we've got much to worry about from the Pro-Brexit lot. There's a lot who are passionate about it on social media but very few who care enough to do anything about it. Has there even been any kind of Pro Brexit event that hasn't been a fucking embarrassment numbers-wise? Remember Farage's march where even he said "fuck this?" The idea that they'll all suddenly turn to terrorism seems a bit ridiculous, even for me.

The main thing we had to worry about from the pro-Brexit lot was the fact that they managed to vote for Brexit. Events, marches, social media campaigns and all of that matter not a fucking jot in the grand scheme of things. What matters is dragging your arse to the polling station and voting one way or another, and many millions of them did exactly that.

I also don't see how we can possibly be surprised that negotiations with the EU have failed miserably. Negotiation is an impossible task if one side knows that the other has forces at play with the power to scupper them.

When a lot of our MP's are continually banging on about how a no deal Brexit is a non-starter, why the fuck would we expect the EU to take anything we say seriously? An important part of negotiations is the knowledge that both sides can walk away at any time. That threat has to be there as a basis, otherwise what's the point? It's ground zero.

As it is, the EU have been able to sit back and say "well, their own Parliament is against them and most likely won't let them walk away with no deal, with the possibility of another referendum, so let's just see how it plays out. We don't really have to concede to anything here." This has allowed them to say "Here's our terms," while our MP's in favour of another vote were never going to vote in favour of any kind of deal for the most part.

Britain has never offered anything resembling a united front in these negotiations, so they've been doomed for failure since the beginning. 

If we do exit with no deal, it'll be the fault of every single fucking MP who sits their arses in that Parliament, on both sides of this divide. They've spent so much time fucking about and trying to play silly buggers and games of one-upmanship that it's come to this point.

If we'd said "we're triggering Article 50 now, so we have x amount of time to come to an agreement, the failure of which would see us leave with no deal, which is a very real possibility. Neither side wants that, so let's sit down and work this shit out so we can carry out the democratic will of the people while at the same time ensuring that everything we've built doesn't fall apart."

It was probably too much to expect serious negotiations from the shower of shite that represents the British people though, that would be bucking the trend of a lifetime.

[unfitfinlay]

1 hour ago, David said:

Was that promised though? I recall hearing politicians say that if we voted to leave we would likely be leaving the customs union and so forth? Virtually no one, with the exception of some right-wing tosspots even hinted that we'd retain all the same benefits including one-sided free movement. Not that I heard anyway. Anyone who actually believed that is insane. It was well publicised that we'd see a lot of change if we voted to leave. 

It was in Vote Leave adverts, though admittedly they made the promises separately. For example, we'd "take control of our borders and put an end to free movement" but also "retain the right live and work in the EU."

Led by Donkey's has been really good at compiling quotes from the Leave campaigners saying stuff like "There will be no downsides to Brexit. Only considerable upsides" or that "the day after we leave, we hold all the cards and will be able to choose the path we want".

Quote

There was the whole bus incident, but even the most feeble-minded of people must have saw it as a wider message that the people responsible wanted to take the dough being sent to the EU and spend it at home instead, with the NHS being part of that? I never assumed it meant that we'd see exactly £350 million per week all spent on the NHS, that's ridiculous. Now, I'm not arguing that they were right in saying that, but it all got rather pedantic in my opinion, which then ended up with people getting nasty and acting childish. 

At the risk of sounding elitist, I think you might be over-estimating a lot of the voting public. The day after the Scottish Independence Referendum, a guy I worked with came in all excited about getting DevoMax. Because Gordon Brown said so. Nice guy but he had very little interest in politics and just believed what he saw on TV.

You might not consider Boris Johnson, Michael Gove or David Davis "serious, well regarded politicians" but a lot of people do, even now. And a lot of people took them literally. That's why they won.

Quote

 

When a lot of our MP's are continually banging on about how a no deal Brexit is a non-starter, why the fuck would we expect the EU to take anything we say seriously? An important part of negotiations is the knowledge that both sides can walk away at any time. That threat has to be there as a basis, otherwise what's the point? It's ground zero.

As it is, the EU have been able to sit back and say "well, their own Parliament is against them and most likely won't let them walk away with no deal, with the possibility of another referendum, so let's just see how it plays out. We don't really have to concede to anything here." This has allowed them to say "Here's our terms," while our MP's in favour of another vote were never going to vote in favour of any kind of deal for the most part.

 

Is No Deal really much of a threat though?

"Give us what we want or we'll destroy our own economy!" really isn't much of a negotiating strategy. I mean, no deal will hurt the EU but nowhere near as much as it'll hurt us. Even if it was, it's effectiveness is pretty much fucked considering Johnson is openly telling the media that it's a bluff.

Are the EU even dictating terms? From what I can tell, the Withdrawal Agreement was May's attempt at satisfying all the different groups in her Government. The backstop, for example, is pretty much the only way to avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland (which no one wants) without a border in the Irish Sea (which the DUP don't want) or retaining free movement across the UK (which loads of people don't want). The EU appear to be just going "Fucking hell, what do you actually want?!"

Quote

 

Britain has never offered anything resembling a united front in these negotiations, so they've been doomed for failure since the beginning. 

If we do exit with no deal, it'll be the fault of every single fucking MP who sits their arses in that Parliament, on both sides of this divide. They've spent so much time fucking about and trying to play silly buggers and games of one-upmanship that it's come to this point.

If we'd said "we're triggering Article 50 now, so we have x amount of time to come to an agreement, the failure of which would see us leave with no deal, which is a very real possibility. Neither side wants that, so let's sit down and work this shit out so we can carry out the democratic will of the people while at the same time ensuring that everything we've built doesn't fall apart."

It was probably too much to expect serious negotiations from the shower of shite that represents the British people though, that would be bucking the trend of a lifetime.

 

Nah. I'm not having this.

From the moment the result was announced, the Tory Party closed ranks and refused to let anybody else have an input. I believe that she even tried to block Parliament from being able to vote on it! It's hardly the fault of the SNP, Labour or the Lib Dems that the Tories couldn't decide what they wanted from Brexit. It was only after May lost her majority and couldn't get her deal through Parliament that she started reaching out to the opposition parties. Not for input, just to rubber stamp her deal.

There's a lot of criticism to go around - Labour's lack of a position, and the Lib Dems recent "revoke" strategy for example - but the absolute bulk of the blame is on the Tories.

[Keith Houchen]

1 hour ago, unfitfinlay said:

I believe that she even tried to block Parliament from being able to vote on it! 

Yep, that's what the Gina Miller case was about.  Parliamentary sovereignty meant parliament has the say, not the executive.  You know, Parliamentary sovereignty, the shit that snaggletooth farridge et al kept banging on about us getting back, but now they've seen what it looks like, they don't like it.  The fact that pro brexit tories voted against the withdrawal agreement shows that there is more than one way to leave, something that wasn't made clear on the ballot in the first place.

 

[David]

15 hours ago, unfitfinlay said:

It was in Vote Leave adverts, though admittedly they made the promises separately. For example, we'd "take control of our borders and put an end to free movement" but also "retain the right live and work in the EU."

Isn't that essentially true though? A big part of the voting to leave the EU for many people was putting an end to free movement of people into the UK, right? Now, the second part of the claim is maybe worded rather selectively, but it's also technically true. Even after Brexit people from the UK will "retain the right to live and work in the EU," but there will be conditions obviously, just as there are if someone from the UK wants to live and work in Canada, the US, or Australia for example. It's a massive play on the wording obviously, but that's what these people do. You ask one of them about the claim of retaining the right to live and work in the EU and they'll hit you with a technicality that they aren't taking that right away from you, and that if anyone is doing that it's the EU nations themselves, and that's why we're best off without them and so on.

I seriously doubt that someone who retires on a good pension and who wants to sell their house in the UK and up sticks to Spain, for example, will see much by way of problems. Neither will anyone doing the same coming to the UK. And I don't really see many issues for qualified individuals who wish to come to the UK for work either, or vice versa. 

Those who experience issues will be those who could previously move around unfettered with no real qualifications or means of getting a job. In either direction, I may add. 

15 hours ago, unfitfinlay said:

At the risk of sounding elitist, I think you might be over-estimating a lot of the voting public. The day after the Scottish Independence Referendum, a guy I worked with came in all excited about getting DevoMax. Because Gordon Brown said so. Nice guy but he had very little interest in politics and just believed what he saw on TV.

You might not consider Boris Johnson, Michael Gove or David Davis "serious, well regarded politicians" but a lot of people do, even now. And a lot of people took them literally. That's why they won.

Yes, well, we've been suffering the actions of fools for generations, so why should now be any different? It's part & parcel of democracy. Everyone gets a say, regardless of their intelligence or interest in the subject matter. If big Frank the mechanic from Brum wants to vote to leave because he's sick of foreigners coming to the UK and he thinks for some reason that leaving the EU will pump the brakes on immigration from India or Pakistan he's perfectly entitled to do so, and his say is just as relevant as a bicycle-riding, Waitrose-shopping berk from Essex.

Politicians lie in order to get your vote. That's how it is. It's how it always has been. We can't cry about it now because those lies have resulted in something happening that we don't like. 

15 hours ago, unfitfinlay said:

Is No Deal really much of a threat though?

"Give us what we want or we'll destroy our own economy!" really isn't much of a negotiating strategy. I mean, no deal will hurt the EU but nowhere near as much as it'll hurt us. Even if it was, it's effectiveness is pretty much fucked considering Johnson is openly telling the media that it's a bluff.

Are the EU even dictating terms? From what I can tell, the Withdrawal Agreement was May's attempt at satisfying all the different groups in her Government. The backstop, for example, is pretty much the only way to avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland (which no one wants) without a border in the Irish Sea (which the DUP don't want) or retaining free movement across the UK (which loads of people don't want). The EU appear to be just going "Fucking hell, what do you actually want?!"

No deal hurts all concerned. I'm not buying this "well, it hurts us more than the EU" carry on, because the truth is that the EU isn't some singular entity (well, not yet anyway.)

It's a collective, and a no deal Brexit will affect different member states in different ways. There are EU member states who are one bad decision away from a complete shit storm, and while the likes of Germany and France may not be as directly affected by Brexit as the UK, they will have to bear the brunt of the effect it has on smaller and less sturdy member states over due course. They will be affected indirectly.

The likes of France, Germany, and the UK have the clout to bounce back from any issues caused by Brexit fairly quickly considering the magnitude of the situation, primarily due to the fact that all three are prominent financial and economic hubs. The main difference, in my opinion, long term, is that the UK won't be saddled with the recovery and dealing of the effects of Brexit on smaller or more volatile nations like Spain and Italy, which the EU will.

This is an example of selective information, much like we've seen from the leave side, but on the side of remain. Like I said, politicians will use information in any way they can. There's a reason why political spin doctors exist.

It was much the same when we had all the talk of Somerset Capital Management "moving their offices to Ireland" in preparation for Brexit. The narrative I heard from a lot of those who favour remain was that "Jacob Rees-Mogg's firm was moving to Ireland to avoid the disaster Brexit will be on the UK."

That was absolute nonsense, of course. 

Investment firms typically have funds available to investors in key locations where financial rules and regulations differ, and with the UK leaving the EU it only makes sense to create a fund that will be available to EU investors under EU financial regulation, as it most likely will differ from future UK legislation in some ways. The fund that exists in the UK remains in the UK, there is no "moving," there is only the creation of a separate fund in an EU region to facilitate those investors, whereas previously the UK-based fund could service both UK and wider EU investors.

A rather long-winded reply, and I apologise for it, but there's an incredible amount of bullshitting and spin that comes from all sides on a near daily basis. The only real difference is that both sides of this debate are tailoring their own particular brand of spin for their audience. The leave side know who their audience is (angry working class types who grudge foreigners coming to the UK and seeming to take their jobs), and which buttons to press, while the remain side also know which buttons to press and who their audience is. The remain side have to be a bit more savvy with their spin, because they're dealing with an audience who aren't thinking with emotion for the most part.

15 hours ago, unfitfinlay said:

From the moment the result was announced, the Tory Party closed ranks and refused to let anybody else have an input. I believe that she even tried to block Parliament from being able to vote on it! It's hardly the fault of the SNP, Labour or the Lib Dems that the Tories couldn't decide what they wanted from Brexit. It was only after May lost her majority and couldn't get her deal through Parliament that she started reaching out to the opposition parties. Not for input, just to rubber stamp her deal.

Speaking as a Scot, you can rest assured that if the Conservative party released a bill to recognise the sky as being blue, the SNP would oppose it. Anyone who thinks that the SNP had any real intention of sitting down and putting their names to any kind of exit agreement is either incredibly naive or a complete fucking moron. 

This result is a bonus chance for another go-round of the doomed independence referendum. There's no way the SNP could say on one hand that the UK's leaving the EU is the one thing that could trigger an independence referendum, but on the other put their name to a sensible, multi-party leaving agreement. It would be suicide. Scottish Labour would be all over that kind of move.

In theory the idea of having all the major parties take part in an agreement that would see us leave the EU sensibly sounds fantastic, and an incredibly reasonable thing to do. But, it would never have happened.

We're not talking about sensible people here, we're talking about a group of mainly middle-aged to older men who spend their entire careers acting like children and shouting over one another. the whole political sphere is a huge game of one-upmanship. 

Labour have spent the past few years knowing that a Conservative crash & burn on this matter is probably their best chance of getting into power, so they have absolutely zero interest in seeing Brexit be a "success." Labour's approach is essentially "well, you guys wanted this so it's your fucking problem," all the while they've been slowly putting together their case for taking power in an election at some point in the near future. That's why they've been so non-committal for the most part, especially Corbyn. They know that they'll need those leave voters in further reaches of England if they're to grab power from the 'Tories, and they don't want to upset them.

The Lib Dems have nailed their colours to the mast. They want a do-over of the referendum. With that in mind, does anyone seriously think they'd be happy to play a part in a reasonable exit from the EU? It would go against everything they stand for. Their intention is to try and agitate enough to get what they want.

Nah, this is a perfect example of why politics sucks the big one. It's full of self-serving cunts, who haven't seen Brexit as a democratic decision made by the people of Britain that should be dealt with in a grown-up way and in such a manner as to try and minimise the effects it will have on everyone concerned, but as yet another opportunity to either further their own agenda or stick it to their main rivals in power.

The very fact that the last Prime Minister we had running this Brexit fiasco was someone who didn't even want to leave in the first place, followed by someone who took an age to decide which side of the fence they'd rest on based on how it would affect their career tells us all we need to know. 

It's all about their careers for these people. On all side. And seeing what they get paid and the amount of work they do, is that any surprise?

Let's reduce an MP's wage to that of the average working wage and strip away a lot of the needless benefits and expenses and see what happens. I doubt that many of these self-professed servants of the people would stick around for too long.

Edited September 19, 2019 by David

[Hannibal Scorch]

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk

[David]

4 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk

If you don't like the adult discussions stick to the children's table, chief.