Brian
Eating fat, staying slim
It was about saving the tory party. That’s the main reason there was a referendum at all.
Brexit: give me a positive effect (2022 remastered edition)
- Thread starter stevec67
- Start date
- Status
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
The Establishment;
The Government
The Opposition
The House of Lords
The Treasury
The FCO
The legal system and the courts
Corporate Lawyers
Human Rights Lawyers
Global Corporations
The US political elite
The EU political elite
The borderless European and UK aristocracy
Wealthy second home owners
Etc
Etc
Etc.
Your thoughts on TTIP and the EC's part in it, the CAP and the CFP?
The Government
The Opposition
The House of Lords
The Treasury
The FCO
The legal system and the courts
Corporate Lawyers
Human Rights Lawyers
Global Corporations
The US political elite
The EU political elite
The borderless European and UK aristocracy
Wealthy second home owners
Etc
Etc
Etc.
Your thoughts on TTIP and the EC's part in it, the CAP and the CFP?
PsB
Citizen of Nowhere™
LIke Putin waving his nuclear missiles around, the UK government has been threatening this for a long time but hasn't pressed the button; which suggests there are concerns, even in Whitehall, that it might not be the brightest idea.Just as a decisive majority of the electorate in N.Ireland repeat their support for the Protocol, they get this from Tories in Westminster. Pitiful.
Colin L
High-tech low-life
What a lot of ridiculous back-tracking and horse-shit excuses. The Covid cost to the economy was nothing like the level you posited. With only a small drop in the economy the treasury is pleading poverty and won't borrow to help the economy. You think with an enormous hit to the economy they would have done differently. Any such huge reduction in private sector output would see employment protection decimated, benefits left to wither and the losses landing on the working class (as always) with an even greater share of national income going to capital and away from labour. Your "acceptable' losses would see mass unemployment, even greater poverty, riots in the streets etc...
The fact that you consider your toned down interpretation as acceptable brands you as a sociopath. Is your last name Minford?
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
That’s right is he going to take on Ireland north and south, the U.S and the EU? Now he gets to face up to Brexit consequence. Does he pull down the N.I Protocol against the wishes of the majority of parties and voters in order to appease a minority party in N.I and a faction of his unhinged backbenchers or does he face down their threats to damage democracy and watch while they then take down democratic government in N.Ireland?
ff1d1l
pfm Member
Easy to disagree substantially with and cite exeptions to that list, so easy I'm not even going to bother.
I'm not concerned with the CAP or CFP either.
What I am concerned with is your citing of TTIP as a ceding of sovereignty, which insofar as I gaf about sovereignty I'll concede, but your complete blind spot to the UK being prepared to give away just about anything to secure trade deals around the world, from New Zealand, which leaves us worse off, to TTIP alikes which I can't be bothered to look up, but which require ceding to what is effectively their own kangaroo courts.
Lets just pretend brexit never happened, and look at the UK which might have been, possibly with Magic Grandpa's rather excellent social policies enacted, post a covid he'd handled rather well. Many fewer deaths, billions still in the treasury and not stolen, Europe grateful for our vaccine efforts which we shared.
Or a shit-eating grin and a cowed wave as we spiral down the pan.
messengerman
pfm Member
TTIP was a hideous monster and we can all be glad no agreement was reached. In reality though Johnson would've signed an even worse version if Trump hadn't lost the election. Given there are no expectations in the EU that a US trade deal might be on the cards anytime soon Brexit means we'll probably suffer one before the EU does.
And when those negotiations get going between the UK and the US keep in mind we'll have a desperate government who are crap at trade deals and in a very weak negotiating position.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Well that's a bit of a muddle of a post that doesn't really stack up to considered debate, but let's take each point in turn.
You disagree substantially with my definition of the largely remain-centric 'establishment', but you 'can't be bothered' to offer any alternative. I suspect we could dock the 'be bothered' bit to get nearer the truth.
You can cite exceptions. Sure, so can I.
You're 'not concerned' about the CAP or the CFP, despite the fact that they represent both the interests of overwhelmingly powerful lobby groups within Brussels and the EU establishment, and catastrophic environmental and habitat degradation. Quite revealing, but as I've seen the sensitivity with which you photograph your environment, and I don't see you as a natural supporter of the rights of already wealthy landowners to your tax cash, I'm not convinced that I quite believe you. However, we've established that you don't 'gaf' about sovereignty, which begs the question why are you so active, impassioned and angry on the political threads? After all sovereignty boils down to the ability of the individual to hold politics to account. If you really don't gaf, why not spend more time taking beautiful photographs?
Now from where you got the impression that I have a 'blind spot' for the shortcomings of Liz Truss's trade deals (Japan, Australia & NZ), and the rollover of the EU's already flawed one's, I don't know. I suspect that one of the reasons that the EU has been so relatively ineffective at nailing trade deals over the last half century is that the proposed deals have to be approved by the member states, all of which have their own agendas, and the EP. This, dare I say, is a better system than that pursued here, where parliamentary approval is not, as far as I'm aware, required. I don't believe that is satisfactory, and FWIW, I will be lobbying my MP to the end of getting that changed. I am, like everyone here, deeply concerned about aspects particularly of the Australia deal. All of that apart, I don't think any of those FTAs come close to the buggeration of the TTIP, which would have handed unprecedented powers to vast US corporations.
You finished it all off by scraping Jeremy Corbyn off of the inside of the barrel. Notwithstanding the fact that JC is a Bennite, and thus fundamentally anti-EU, this is all entirely irrelevant to the points that I raised about the EU, or indeed to the thread.
Incidentally, an aside. New Zealand has neither kangaroos, nor kangaroo courts.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
The battleground is no longer in Europe- it’s inside Brexit Britain. Watch what’s about to happen.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Quite.
PsB
Citizen of Nowhere™
FWIW:
Why bring up TTIP six years after its demise? It was killed in 2016 by Trump's accession, but even before that there were fundamental misgivings among the governments of many member states, including large ones like Germany and France, and more broadly in European public opinion. In 2019 the EC declared it "obsolete and no longer relevant": Trump is gone, but TTIP has not been resuscitated. You seem to consider it an evil treaty that the evil Commission was pushing hard onto an unsuspecting public. An opposite view is that there were so many fundamental disagreements between what the EC wanted and what the US was willing to give, and vice versa, that an agreement was just not possible. It is an example of a monster trade deal being debated and ultimately shelved because too many things were wrong with it. Being a positive sort of pessimist, I see it as a sign that the institutional framework (Council, Commission, Parliament) + various NGOs worked, just about. Other opinions abound.
CAP: this is a bit of a relic from the early days of the EEC*, but it is still a useful tool for accession countries and for ensuring that small/medium farmers don't get totally wiped out. It redistributes money from richer countries to poorer countries, and ensures the EU produces enough of its own food. It is a large chunk of the EU's budget (around 40%) but this share is declining and the mechanisms have been reformed several times already. There is some abuse of the system, as always when large subsidies are available, but transparency has improved. The CAP is very small as a % of the EU's GDP, but it still seems to excite Brexiters in a predictable way.
I don't know enough about the CFP.
(*distant but vivid memories of being grilled on the subject of "benefits of the CAP" by two ruthless examiners in 1979 - I waffled my way through to an average mark.)
Last edited:
lawrence001
Basic Member
Charmed I'm sure!
Since you seem interested in my thought process behind these numbers I thought I'd elaborate a bit more.
If you consider the GDP at risk (a relatively recent economic concept based on VaR see https://www.moneyandbanking.com/commentary/2017/11/26/gdp-at-risk ) resulting from the Brexit vote going for leave, I was meaning that there was a small but theoretically possible chance of such a fall in output in the years following the vote (say at the 99.9% or 1 in 1000 level or lower). While it's difficult to quantify long tail events like this I had put a finger in the air figure of 25-30% on such an outcome. So my use of the word acceptable relates to the estimate of the difference in the distribution of potential output with and without Brexit.
Many economic policies will have pretty horrible looking tail numbers that's what the tail is about. You seem to be interpreting my view as if I had accepted it as a central forecast of the impact ie. E(X) or median rather than a tail event (having virtually no impact on expected output being such low probability), which would indeed be a heavy price to pay in terms of expected impact.
Anyway I'll probably get more insults for explaining my thinking further so I'll bow out now unless there seems to be some attempt to discuss things in a more civilised manner in which case I might come back.
Colin L
High-tech low-life
I think its best you do bow out (disgracefully).
Having posted this...
"Part of the reason I'm happy with the result so far is that the economic impact is not too bad. Because of my personal beliefs around sovereignty and freedom as a nation state (and race), I would have probably accepted a 25-30% fall in GDP to leave the EU and we're nowhere near that, if we are marginally down at times that's the result of Covid rather than Brexit."
...and a week later, after many posts, you try to row back on it by saying you actually meant public sector output, not GDP (still a lunatic position) .. I think your credibility is pretty much shot.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
I missed the race bit.
ff1d1l
pfm Member
He didn't win.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
It’s game on! Now which way will Big Dog and his provisional Brexit wing jump?
BBC-
The DUP will not go back into government in Northern Ireland until its concerns about post-Brexit trading arrangements are resolved, the party's leader has said.
Sir Jeffrey Donaldson was among the party leaders meeting NI Secretary Brandon Lewis in Belfast on Monday.
I've had to think about the plural of irony because there will be many of them. Ironies it is then.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Norn Ironies
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
The more you think about it, the more Brexit resembles Putin’s invasion of Ukraine- “we hold all the cards, we’ll get everything we want, they’ll be beggin us”.
instead- bogged down in the mud six years later, multiple damage, no progress and they’re fighting among themselves in the ranks
instead- bogged down in the mud six years later, multiple damage, no progress and they’re fighting among themselves in the ranks
- Status