If we vote for Brexit what happens

Tromking

padington wrote: »

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

That'll be the economically and politically independent Canada you're 'bugging out' to if Brexit is not to your liking Padders?
If you're an advocate of supranational entities like the EU why are you not moving to mainland Europe when it all goes t*ts up?
Strange.

setmefree2

Andy_L wrote: »

Well there's all those Tata steel plants.....

Tata motors (owners of Jaguar and Landrover), Tata Global Beverages (owns best-selling Tetley Tea), Indian IT firms Infosys and Wipro, pharmaceutical firms Piramal and Cipla, Vistaar Group (Media City Manchester)

.....more required anyone?

padington

Tromking wrote: »

That'll be the economically and politically independent Canada you're 'bugging out' to if Brexit is not to your liking Padders?
If you're an advocate of supranational entities like the EU why are you not moving to mainland Europe when it all goes t*ts up?
Strange.

Believe me, Europe thinks we are an ar£e now as well.

Canada because half the family live there. We have been considering France for an interim.

davomcdave

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

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

I've not insulted anyone except to call you out for being a keyboard warrior and I'm not the first one to say it.

Thank you for the rest of your response. I don't believe that what I proposed as a possible interim agreement isn't as unlikely as you think as something put up for discussion. I still think that the most likely outcome is train wreck Brexit but I am interested to understand what people that think Brexit is a bright idea feel would be a good outcome.

We'll see what transpires.

Masomnia

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)?

Yes, is the short answer.

I think a deal will be tricky to do, because the of competing interests of 27 member states. That said, if the smaller members kick up a fuss then a bit of back-room bartering usually sorts it like when the Belgians kicked up a fuss about CETA.

We currently have equivalence of rules and regulations and tariff free trade. If the EU wants to put up barriers to trade and shoot themselves in the foot in the process then it is kind of up to them, but I would hope that both sides recognise that putting up barriers is a bad thing. The tricky bit in doing trade deals is working out where to bring down barriers, as people generally like things to stay as they are and not have their industries disrupted.

My money is on a UK-EU partnership along the lines of CETA, minimal trade barriers, with more control over immigration in return for us paying in.

padington

It's telling that the least educated part of he electorate voted to leave. Every living prime minister has expressed serious misgivings as well as the current and last chancellor. The CBI. The banks. Never has the message been so clear.

padington

Masomnia wrote: »

Yes, is the short answer.

I think a deal will be tricky to do, because the of competing interests of 27 member states. That said, if the smaller members kick up a fuss then a bit of back-room bartering usually sorts it like when the Belgians kicked up a fuss about CETA.

We currently have equivalence of rules and regulations and tariff free trade. If the EU wants to put up barriers to trade and shoot themselves in the foot in the process then it is kind of up to them, but I would hope that both sides recognise that putting up barriers is a bad thing. The tricky bit in doing trade deals is working out where to bring down barriers, as people generally like things to stay as they are and not have their industries disrupted.

My money is on a UK-EU partnership along the lines of CETA, minimal trade barriers, with more control over immigration in return for us paying in.

Putting in place a good deal for leaving members would be counter productive, when will that simple idea sink in to you lot. Europe is desperately hoping our experiment fails. They are also excited about the prospect of winning over our financial services business. Big interests, huge interests are set to oppose us at every turn.

Also there is nothing rational about people. We just chose Brexit, that was like chosing to hit ourselves in the face every year for ten years. Europe may just decide to join the stupid party.

davomcdave

padington wrote: »

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

Aussies and Kiwis think that Brexit is a complete muck-up.

Putin thinks it's a good idea though.

tracey3596

davomcdave wrote: »

I've not insulted anyone except ...........

Except around half the UK population you mean?

davomcdave wrote: »

Brexwhingers ....

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=72333656&postcount=18062

Or besides describing posters as being "naive" or "fantasists" - which it appears you have difficulty spelling BTW.
All this and more in this single thread.


As for lies, well.

davomcdave wrote: »

The UK is already the 6th biggest economy in the world ...

from yesterday.
No it is not.
It is the 5th largest.
https://knoema.com/nwnfkne/world-gdp-ranking-2016-data-and-charts-forecast
You have to hunt really quite hard to find a recent scoring system which says other than 5th and yet you seem to have.
Why?

This too from only yesterday.

davomcdave wrote: »

The point is that Indian companies are quite small in total. You post this figure of tens of billions but actually that's muck all in the grand scheme of things.

Repeatedly proven incorrect with both figures AND with companies - who would have known that Jaguar Landrover were "small" and insignificant?
We should tell their 37,000 workers that.
Just one example.

davomcdave wrote: »

Aussies and Kiwis think that Brexit is a complete muck-up.

Putin thinks it's a good idea though.

Evidence?
If it is not true as shown in these examples over the last few days, tell us what it is?

Look, we know you don't like the idea of Brexit.
Your posts clearly demonstrate that admirably albeit in a too often derogatory and/or condescending manner.
But really, you're doing your credibility no favours at all by posting mostly what basically amounts to cr4p.
You're making whole reams of the thread almost unreadable and that's why I don't post much.
Because it's full of bullsh..........

A_Pict_In_A_Past_Life

davomcdave wrote: »

Aussies and Kiwis think that Brexit is a complete muck-up.

Putin thinks it's a good idea though.

Really?
Most of our two families are either in Oz or NZ.
That's certainly not what they say or what they see.
In fact the usual response is pretty much along the lines of "bl@@dy good on ya" or "we told ya so before ya joined" from what we see on our weekly video calls.

Putin?
Just wants an end to the EU doesn't he?
And the way things are going he might just get it.