If we vote for Brexit what happens

TrickyTree83

padington wrote: »

No we're in a catch 22. Brexit has to happen because of the referendum but it will ensure we lose a heap jobs, cause big problems in Ireland and maybe the rock , raise the cost of living, sap all our top level energy, lose the good international feel
good factor for U.K. plc, possibly cause a legal nightmare, lose a ton of tax take, and to top it all we will most probably re-join sooner rather than later anyway.

That's the catch 22.

Where's the evidence [STRIKE]for all[/STRIKE] any of that?

If there's a sound reasoned logical argument for it rather than feelings I'd be more than happy to hear it.

padington

Oops did i forget to mention increased risk of loosing Scotland as
well ?

padington

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Where's the evidence [STRIKE]for all[/STRIKE] any of that?

What planet are you on? Banks are already moving jobs, it's not an 'if'. Scotland is already needing more powers to be kept. Merkel already increases her ratings in Germany every time she tells us 'no' and will be hard pushed to say 'yes'. This goes for Spain and France. Euro cleaing house jobs will certainly have to go. House prices are already down. The Cool Britannia zeitgeist has gone. The world is already laughing at us.

It's not an 'if' and the Brexit train wreck has only just began, this will go on for years.



https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/mar/31/uk-house-prices-slide-for-first-time-in-almost-two-years-says-nationwide?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.cityam.com/259545/bolshy-french-presidential-candidate-emmanuel-macron-tells/amp

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1792VC

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2016-09-21/global-banks-said-to-plan-for-loss-of-euro-clearing-after-brexit

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39266723

kabayiri

padington wrote: »

Oops did i forget to mention increased risk of loosing Scotland as
well ?

The risk of losing Scotland came in 2014 when the UK government allowed a referendum on Scottish independence.

This was nothing to do with Brexit.

Ultimately, if the majority in Scotland or Wales or NI want to leave, then they should be allowed to leave. The only issue comes down to timing.

That's democracy for you.

TrickyTree83

padington wrote: »

What planet are you on? Banks are already moving jobs, it's not an 'if'. Scotland is already needing more powers to be kept. Merkel already increases her ratings in Germany every time she tells us 'no' and will be hard pushed to say 'yes'. This goes for Spain and France. Euro cleaing house jobs will certainly have to go. House prices are already down. The Cool Britannia zeitgeist has gone. The world is already laughing at us.

It's not an 'if' and the Brexit train wreck has only just began, this will go on for years.



https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/mar/31/uk-house-prices-slide-for-first-time-in-almost-two-years-says-nationwide?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.cityam.com/259545/bolshy-french-presidential-candidate-emmanuel-macron-tells/amp

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1792VC

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2016-09-21/global-banks-said-to-plan-for-loss-of-euro-clearing-after-brexit

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39266723

It feels like you're a few months out of date. I don't have time to explain to you right now why that is, hopefully someone else can. If not I'll reply tonight and explain why what you just said is - generally - incorrect.

Thrugelmir

padington wrote: »

What planet are you on? Banks are already moving jobs, it's not an 'if'. Scotland is already needing more powers to be kept. Merkel already increases her ratings in Germany every time she tells us 'no' and will be hard pushed to say 'yes'. This goes for Spain and France. Euro cleaing house jobs will certainly have to go. House prices are already down. The Cool Britannia zeitgeist has gone. The world is already laughing at us.

That's the island mentality for you. The rest of the world is simply getting on with it's own business. No one else actually cares.

davomcdave

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

You can't predict the future no less the terms of the deal. All I've been referring to are the pressures affecting the negotiations that lead me to believe a mutually beneficial deal is a must.

You've simply referred to a couple of speeches where Junker (who has u-turned since), Verhofstadt (who has also u-turned) and Hollande (who is on his way out 100% certain) said we should be punished. Where is the smart money based on the available evidence, not feelings, evidence.

The application of game theory tells us that it is highly unlikely that there will be a deal. Certainly not in two years and probably not in a decade.

A genuine question for pro-Brexit people: would you accept a transitional deal in two years time, assuming a Brexit deal can't be achieved, which keeps the 'four pillars' in place while a trade agreement is hammered out (freedom of movement of goods, freedom of movement of capital, freedom of movement of labour, freedom to provide services), ensures the UK pays for what it has already agreed to pay for but no more, a recognition at least that the UK is entitled to a share of assets and no 'rule from Brussels' (no MEPs sent up, no requirement to enter in to British law what comes out of Brussels except what is required to keep the single market functioning)? Or would you rather just have what I call a 'train wreck' Brexit (no agreement of any sort, just walk away and be done with it)?

davomcdave

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Look at it another way - the revenues of all the Indian companies in the UK would ensure that Scotland's (a whole country mind) deficit was non-existent for two whole years.

Oh plus I note you STILL ignore Government statistics stating that Indian companies are the third largest investors into the UK.
Some "reluctant" that is.


Now (as has been said earlier) let's not get (again) too hung up on India.
Move on.
And without deception and downright lies please.

The US is the largest source of FDI into the UK with £253bn:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/articles/internationalperspectiveonukforeigndirectinvestmentfdi/2014

Looking at both inward and outward FDI positions by destination helps indicate the UK’s investment relationships with the rest of the world, while the performance of the underlying economies in which these investments come from or are held can explain changes in performance in those assets. In terms of foreign direct investment stocks in the UK, the largest sources of investment in 2014 were the USA (£253.0 billion), Netherlands (£176.0 billion), Luxembourg (£78.9 billion), France (£76.0 billion) and Germany (£50.1 billion). Treating the EU as a single region makes it the largest source of UK investment, with a value of £495.8 billion, or 47.9% of total UK inward investment.

You seem to be confusing the number of investments with the value of investments. India invested in the third number of projects but that's a completely different thing to it being the third largest investor. As you can see from here:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/bulletins/foreigndirectinvestmentinvolvingukcompanies/2015#net-fdi-flows-by-geography-component-and-industry

Asia is a relatively small investor in the UK. Flows are dwarfed by those from the Americas and Europe.

As to throwing around terms like 'liar', it's good to see that the art of the keyboard ninja isn't dead. Your highly aggressive attitude, which has been repeatedly called out, is unnecessary and reflects far more on you than the targets for your abuse. Maybe you should take a break for a few days and reflect on your attitude to your fellow posters.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

davomcdave wrote: »

The application of game theory tells us that it is highly unlikely that there will be a deal. Certainly not in two years and probably not in a decade.

A genuine question for pro-Brexit people: would you accept a transitional deal in two years time, assuming a Brexit deal can't be achieved, which keeps the 'four pillars' in place while a trade agreement is hammered out (freedom of movement of goods, freedom of movement of capital, freedom of movement of labour, freedom to provide services), ensures the UK pays for what it has already agreed to pay for but no more, a recognition at least that the UK is entitled to a share of assets and no 'rule from Brussels' (no MEPs sent up, no requirement to enter in to British law what comes out of Brussels except what is required to keep the single market functioning)? Or would you rather just have what I call a 'train wreck' Brexit (no agreement of any sort, just walk away and be done with it)?

Crikey Dave, that took some reading even if it isn't such a long spiel.

However:

Firstly what you propose is extremely unlikely.
If agreement is reached on who owes whom what before any trading relations are at least "in the pipeline" I personally would be quite surprised.
Because (as I have said before) IMHO it is a bit like making a payment (perhaps significant) on eBay with my Paypal funds without knowing just what it is that I am buying, all because I have been with eBay/Paypal for a while.
A transitional deal is then not as likely as you (and some others) would hope.
See below.

Secondly if (and remember it is just "if") any transitional deal becomes necessary, I really think that the majority of the British public would quite rightly demand that this transition be as short as possible.
Certainly not for longer than say a year - which would mean three years in total for a complete "divorce".

Why do I say this?
Because we know how long-winded (and devious) the EU are.

This is one more reason for the vote to Brexit.
Seven years for CETA for example and there are many examples of how long it takes the EU to reach agreement.
The UK public will not stand for that regarding Brexit.
More so when they see other trade deals being reached/promised extremely quickly.

For example the USA who promise a quick deal (under six months), and where trade deals negotiations are on average completed in a year and a half and again on average implemented inside four years (*1).
Countries mooted so far for "quick" trade deals include (but are not limited to) Australia; Canada; Mexico; India; Brazil; Japan; Switzerland; Korea; New Zealand; China; ..........

If anyone honestly believes that the UK public will accept trade deals being arranged with alternative (and especially if major) countries whilst the EU squeals for time they are mistaken.
More-so given that we all know frameworks are already in place for EU trade.

So if you want a short answer - I think the UK would probably stand for a short interim period.
But if it asked-for beyond a year I think (quite honestly) that the public will demand a "Hard Brexit".

As for your "train wreck" Brexit - plain silly IMHO.
This from the one who has just said " As to throwing around terms like 'liar', it's good to see that the art of the keyboard ninja isn't dead. Your highly aggressive attitude, which has been repeatedly called out, is unnecessary and reflects far more on you than the targets for your abuse. Maybe you should take a break for a few days and reflect on your attitude to your fellow posters."
and carries on without digesting what has been posted before.
Right.
Oh and we were talking 2015 BTW, not 2014 as your links. So you have the wrong year; 2015/2016 is what's needed. I hope that was not deliberate because that would be what?
And your comments are ?????

Perhaps then it is yourself that should cease the vitriolic rhetoric and instead employ the tactic of debate to a greater degree than the insult which so commonly appears in your posts.

Again though, "Now (as has been said earlier) let's not get (again) too hung up on India. Move on."

*1 https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/how-long-does-it-take-conclude-trade-agreement-us

padington

Thrugelmir wrote: »

That's the island mentality for you. The rest of the world is simply getting on with it's own business. No one else actually cares.

Wrong, again we've been the talk of the world, the Canadians can't believe how stupid we've been.