The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[PompeyVillan]

The old, 'it's the principal of the thing', that I don't really get. It ignores what I perceive to be the obvious reality.

International trade and politics are closely intertwined, meaning that political compromises are often struck in order to enable succesful trade deals to work. Trade is actually quite good, it keeps us nice and wealthy. 

Being the only country in the world to vote to have no trade deals isn't "taking back control" at all. It's leaving us with a desperate hand. 

So we don't EU immigration and we want to be able to sign trade deals with India, for example. India say, "Well, we're not desperate for a trade deal, most of our population don't want expensive Nissan cars built in the north of England and the EU seem a bit receptive now you're gone, but if you fancy cheap stuff from us, we insist that you allow significantly more Indian nationals into the UK."

Nope, we can't do that, that's not "taking back control". Perhaps we should strike a deal with a wealthy country, one not so far away. I know, let's pick France. They seem like they could be good trade partners. 

"We are a member of the EU, access to the single market and customs union is dependent on free movement of people". 

Ah crap, our old pals USA? "Sorry guys, we're busy brokering a deal with the EU, but if you want a trade deal we have this really crappy one that means we can buy your national health service". 

Balls, let's see if Mauritania want those Nissans. 

[Xann]

20 hours ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said:

Massive election fraud........really?

Big as a f***ing bus.

20 hours ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said:

You carry on accepting financing the luxury lifestyles of the EU officials ,I won't call them politicians, check out the pension liabilities of retired EU officials and what it will be in 10 years time  check out the AVERAGE EU pension, and then tell me you have been duped.

Duped isn't really the word, we know the bill after all, it's more a rip off. The powers that be here in UK are ignoring massive black holes in pension funds, and wilfully digging more. Let's see what leaves a bigger mess?

21 hours ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said:

And then go and tell the Greeks how good the EU is.

Ah yes, the Greeks! They should never have got in at all. If only the Greek suits hadn't got Goldmann Sachs to cook their books to qualify for entry? That'll be the same Goldmann Sachs that Tories knowingly hired afterwards to sell the Post Office, and we all got stiffed again! We might have paid those EU pension contributions a bit easier, eh? You'd think the Tories would learn, but no, they can't stop hiring the same shoddy companies for lucrative contracts, and now they're negotiating Brexit terms and a deal with Trump's camp - Magic.

21 hours ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said:

... the constant assumption that there is an intellectual discrepancy between Remainers and Leavers is...

... fact!

I really, really want to be wrong but there's a bigger than Brexit global picture of bad that's coming over the next few decades.

Mankind really needs to get its shit together and come to accords regarding population and not poisoning the place.

Meanwhile we're breaking away, fracking, dumping radioactive sludge of our coasts, selling weapons to evil people and cutting services.

 

Could go on all night, but I too am bored.

Bored of answering questions that angry Brexit voters should have asked themselves before voting *stupid.

 

*Probably - It might be inspired? Best f***ing hope so.

[WhatAboutTheFinish]

1 hour ago, PompeyVillan said:

International trade and politics are closely intertwined, meaning that political compromises are often struck in order to enable succesful trade deals to work. Trade is actually quite good, it keeps us nice and wealthy. 

I agree that they are closely linked although there does seem to be a shift today whereby trade deals seem to have become the be all and end all of political debate in the UK

To me, this seems a bit strange. I can honestly say that I don’t think I have ever heard anyone ever say ‘I’m a staunch Labour voter because I believe they are going to sign a whole bunch of lucrative international trade deals’. 

You know those things they usually bring out before elections where they get people to rank the importance of issues in deciding their vote...Health, Education, Tax etc? I’d love to see those stats for the last 50 years and see where International Trade ranks on those too.

[PompeyVillan]

19 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said:

I agree that they are closely linked although there does seem to be a shift today whereby trade deals seem to have become the be all and end all of political debate in the UK

To me, this seems a bit strange. I can honestly say that I don’t think I have ever heard anyone ever say ‘I’m a staunch Labour voter because I believe they are going to sign a whole bunch of lucrative international trade deals’. 

You know those things they usually bring out before elections where they get people to rank the importance of issues in deciding their vote...Health, Education, Tax etc? I’d love to see those stats for the last 50 years and see where International Trade ranks on those too.

You make a good point, but the reason that international trade hasn't been on the national agenda is because the EU have done a pretty good job of sorting those trade deals out. Don't forget we were an important part of the EU and helped broker the deals in terms that were favourable to us. 

But my point is, the idea of "taking back control" is a bit pointless if we're going to have to compromise on the Brexit principals that so many people voted on. IE immigration and being 'told what to do'. We may find ourselves in an international wilderness because we now must refuse to be 'told what to do', whereas the reality is that give, take and comprise are really important. And we're likely to make ourselves poorer as a result. 

I'm certain that many of the people who voted for Brexit didn't vote believing they would be making themselves poorer. And I'm quite sure they'll be shocked when we will be forced to compromise on things that make my make them uncomfortable, such as immigration, fishing rights (lol), and the shape of their bananas.

You won't find many people claiming the EU is perfect, but it's very much the best deal for the UK at the moment, with compromises that most of Europe are willing to work together on. 

Unfortunately, all along there has been a pretence that we can have our cake and eat it. We'll get £350 million a week for the NHS, we'll strike amazing trade deals in no time at all, that there will be no hard border in Northern Ireland, that WTO terms are somehow favourable. The reality is most of it is simply untrue. We're giving away one of strongest negotiation hands away and paying dearly for it (divorce bill), leaving us slightly desperate when it comes to us trying bridge the gap that leaving the single market will have. 

When UK businesses reliant on EU trade start to struggle, I would suggest that international trade deals become a bit more important to the average person and if jobs and businesses start to go down the pan I should imagine the luxury of principal will be a lot less important. 

[snowychap]

Democracy at work:

 

[colhint]

2 hours ago, Xann said:

Big as a f***ing bus.

Duped isn't really the word, we know the bill after all, it's more a rip off. The powers that be here in UK are ignoring massive black holes in pension funds, and wilfully digging more. Let's see what leaves a bigger mess?

Ah yes, the Greeks! They should never have got in at all. If only the Greek suits hadn't got Goldmann Sachs to cook their books to qualify for entry? That'll be the same Goldmann Sachs that Tories knowingly hired afterwards to sell the Post Office, and we all got stiffed again! We might have paid those EU pension contributions a bit easier, eh? You'd think the Tories would learn, but no, they can't stop hiring the same shoddy companies for lucrative contracts, and now they're negotiating Brexit terms and a deal with Trump's camp - Magic.

... fact!

I really, really want to be wrong but there's a bigger than Brexit global picture of bad that's coming over the next few decades.

Mankind really needs to get its shit together and come to accords regarding population and not poisoning the place.

Meanwhile we're breaking away, fracking, dumping radioactive sludge of our coasts, selling weapons to evil people and cutting services.

 

Could go on all night, but I too am bored.

Bored of answering questions that angry Brexit voters should have asked themselves before voting *stupid.

 

*Probably - It might be inspired? Best f***ing hope so.

You make it sound like the EU have nothing to do with Goldman Sachs. Isn't Mario Draghi, a former Managing Director now the head of the ECB. Or Issing who helped create the Euro an advisor to Goldman Sachs. I'm sure there are plenty more examples of the EU in bed with GS.

Edited October 8, 2018 by colhint
Spelling

[ml1dch]

17 minutes ago, colhint said:

I'm sure there are plenty more examples of the EU in bed with GS.

28 European countries, including some of the biggest economies in the world may have had dealings with the world's second largest investment bank?

I wonder how much the film rights will sell for.

[colhint]

May have? The head of the ECB was a former managing director. I wonder what you need for proof?

[Enda]

5 hours ago, ml1dch said:

The "third way" probably means we can't do large-scale trade with either of them!

Unless the EU signs a large free trade agreement with the US, a (bad, but improvable) draft of which already exists.

Do yiz want in on that, or think you can negotiate better with the US on your own?

[ml1dch]

4 minutes ago, colhint said:

May have? The head of the ECB was a former managing director. I wonder what you need for proof?

I fear my point may have been missed. 

No, I don't want proof. Of course every country in the EU (and pretty much every country outside the EU) has dealings with big investment banks. 

I'm just not sure why you believe that it's some kind of scandal.

[colhint]

Oh I don't, just seemed Xann did a few posts earlier with the Brits and the Greeks

[Stevo985]

13 hours ago, PompeyVillan said:

The old, 'it's the principal of the thing', that I don't really get. It ignores what I perceive to be the obvious reality.

I've had this argument with people at work who have proudly voted for Brexit (and still would if there were a second referendum)

"They impose too many rules that we have to follow!"

"Well not really. They're voted on and we're a part of that voting process"

"Yeah but we vote against the rules and still have to follow them because we lose the vote"

"Yeah that can happen, but it's only happened 2% of the time to us so it's not really an issue"

"But IT'S THE PRINCIPLE!"

"Well if we start losing lots of these votes and it becomes an issue then we can leave the EU"

"Yeah! Well that's what we've done isn't it?"

"Yeah but it's not an issue. So we've just left for no reason?"

"IT'S THE PRINCIPLE!"

 

Infuriating. It's like leaving a club because everyone COULD gang up on you. But they haven't.

[blandy]

9 hours ago, colhint said:

You make it sound like the EU have nothing to do with Goldman Sachs. Isn't Mario Draghi, a former Managing Director now the head of the ECB. Or Issing who helped create the Euro an advisor to Goldman Sachs. I'm sure there are plenty more examples of the EU in bed with GS.

There are kind of two different things here. One good, one bad. You’d hope, surely, that the head of the European Central Bank would be an experienced banker. You’d hope that people advising on banking and currency changes would have a background in those areas. Experts are useful. Like when in the U.K. if an MP has been a doctor or teacher or whatever, get them involved with health or education, because they know about those areas.

The potentially bad thing would be if the experts were all coming from the one single bank, Goldman Sachs. You’d hope there would be a range of relevant experience, different banks, different government posts, professors, civil servants.

But your point that 2 people involved with the ECB have a banking background isn’t really much of a criticism, is it?

[Xann]

9 hours ago, colhint said:

Oh I don't, just seemed Xann did a few posts earlier with the Brits and the Greeks

Spot the difference.

Asking a bank to put together a finance package for let's say a bridge or an airport that involves private and public funding.

Asking a bank to fiddle the books at national level to fraudulently gain entry to a trading block.

 

Personally I wouldn't have anyone from GS anywhere near my country's affairs, but there is a certain logic in hiring thieves to catch others.

[snowychap]

The Mechanics of a Further Referendum on Brexit

Quote

The possibility of a further referendum on Brexit is being discussed widely. The Constitution Unit has no position on Brexit or on whether such a referendum should be held. But decisions about whether there will be such a referendum and, if so, what form it will take are important and should be made in full understanding of the options and issues involved. The Unit’s report The Mechanics of a Further Referendum on Brexit is intended to inform discussion.

Published in October 2018, the report finds that a referendum would be possible if parliament wanted it, though it would raise a number of challenges. There are several points in the Brexit process at which such a vote could be triggered. The report analyses the possible timing, the referendum question, and the regulation of the ballot.

The report is written by Jess Sargeant, Alan Renwick, and Meg Russell and funded by the JRSST Charitable Trust.

Report download link via page linked above.

[choffer]

12 hours ago, snowychap said:

The Mechanics of a Further Referendum on Brexit

Report download link via page linked above.

Just a referendum though so the outcome wouldn't be binding. 

[ml1dch]

29 minutes ago, choffer said:

Just a referendum though so the outcome wouldn't be binding. 

No, it probably wouldn't be. 

But that's not because it would be a referendum (the Scottish independence referendum would have been legally binding if passed), simply that making the result of this legally binding would be a really silly thing to do whatever the potential result.

[Xann]

Quote

 

Big lie of the ‘anti‑ establishment’ Brexit vote

Attacking the establishment is a good campaigning move on account of the term’s vagueness. It is a bucket into which you can chuck all those stereotypes and sinister types that are widely distrusted. According to your perspective, the establishment may be neoliberal or lefty liberal; metropolitan elite or land-owning squireocracy; old money or new. It can span politics and the media, big business and finance, academia and the arts. It may apply to virtue-signalling professors or vice-revelling bankers; the Bob Geldofs or the Bernie Madoffs (and, of course, George Soros). The promise of Brexit was not only to take back control of our sovereignty and borders; it was to poke this lot in the eye.

To crank up the heat, Leavers’ arguments were sprinkled with the dastardly “They”: They screwed you over in the financial crisis; They look down on your provincial life; They sneer at your patriotism; They believe you are closet racists. Brexit would avenge all of this. Complacent Westminster would be rocked to its core, the greedy City convulsed, middle-class lefties forced to eat their pieties on immigration along with their quinoa.

But one of Brexit’s many con tricks is that the so-called establishment won’t get a kicking at all. The Whitehall establishment certainly won’t. Yes, there will be the return of some powers from Brussels, but when it comes to exercising those powers, the mandarins of Whitehall will remain as unaccountable to the average Briton as ever.

What about the media-arts-culture establishment, whose spiritual home is the BBC and whose patron saint is Dame Emma Thompson? Their central fear has been that Brexit will render Britain xenophobic and hostile to foreigners, but the signs are that immigration will be little affected. All probable candidates for prime minister post-May are likely to continue allowing immigration to respond to economic demand, with the only difference being that an increasing proportion will come from outside Europe. Already the number of non-EU migrants has more than made up for the fall in EU arrivals since Brexit. So the pro-immigration establishment is unlikely to get the rude awakening some anticipated.

Will the great establishment reckoning come in the field of finance? While it is true that the City has much to fear from a no-deal Brexit, the top tier may simply go elsewhere, as the Goldman Sachs boss Lloyd Blankfein hinted in a tweet last year: “Just left Frankfurt. Great meetings, great weather, really enjoyed it. Good, because I’ll be spending a lot more time there. #Brexit”. Meanwhile there are those who scent opportunity in no-deal volatility. Crispin Odey is the hedge fund manager who helped bankroll the Leave campaign and made hundreds of millions on referendum night by shorting sterling. He is now one of many hedge fund bosses betting billions against the pound because, in Odey’s words, “it is going to be difficult to do a deal . . . I didn’t expect negotiations with Brussels to go well and I was a Brexiteer.”

The moneyed establishment — the rich and super-rich — may be touched by Brexit, but wealth will insulate them against real pain. As the billionaire Peter Hargreaves, who reportedly gave millions to the Leave campaign, puts it: “You say my wealth is $4.6 billion? If it wiped $4 billion off and left me $600 million it would not change my lifestyle one iota.” Indeed, according to a survey last year by UBS, most UK millionaires believe Brexit will make them even richer. If not they can always escape, like the Brexiteer and Britain’s richest man Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who recently left the promised land of Brexit for the sunnier climes of Monaco.

 

Times

[ml1dch]

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/10/10/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-final-weeks-of-brexit

Quote

Everything you need to know about the final weeks of Brexit in five minutes

This is excellent. Thorough, easy to digest and solid on accuracy on where things are and where they might realistically go.

Well worth 5 / 10 minutes of your time.

Edited October 10, 2018 by ml1dch

[snowychap]

 

 

Edited October 10, 2018 by snowychap