If we vote for Brexit what happens

WengerIn

Conrad wrote: »

Do you think we are more likely to create good jobs through a consumer lead imports based economy fuelled by debt or by us earning hard currency through exports and also our consumers home sourcing?


Which is more sustainable long term?

What is more sustainable is exporting to pay for imports with the numbers being broadly similar. That would mean a pretty big reduction in living standards for the British, maybe reducing imports per capita by something like a grand a year. I don't recall that being sold as a benefit by the Leave campaign.

Fella

setmefree2 wrote: »

I'm quite disgusted with the EU tbh....can't be the only Remainer to feel like that. 100 billion Euros - just !!!!!!?

Juncker & Barnier have not thought their strategy through to it's logical ending IMO.

Back when Cameron was pleading for crumbs of concession, the EU were at least pretending there was a semblence of warmth in the relationship. Although they didn't give an inch there was at least the paper-thin pretence that the UK was a friend they didn't want to lose. The talk was all about what a lovely friendly democratic place the EU was.

By acting the way they have this week, the EU have demostrated this is not the case. That sends a very strong message to the 27 member states but it's not the message they intend. Effectively the relationship between the EU & it's member states is being shown to be that of captor & hostage. That is likely to go down extremely poorly with the electorate of other countries who might also want a referendum. Juncker clearly believes the only way to negotiate is bullying with fear tactics. He tried it pre-referendum & it failed spectacularly. He's doing it again now. I suspect not only will it fail, but also it will have the very opposite effect to what he's hoping in other member states. Next time a country is considering leaving, the EU will not have the option of portraying itself as a friendly democracy. It'll have proven itself to be a vengeful dictatorship. I can't think of anything more likely to whip up the leave sentiment everywhere.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Herzlos wrote: »

Great, now you've just got to get the other 26 countries on board.

As I keep saying, I don't disagree with you that a bad deal with hurt a lot of small parts of the EU, but I don't think that's enough to cause the EU to cave. The Brexit deal is pretty much dependent on the UK - the EU has already given them all of the options available.

Not quite true.
We only need enough to either:
Change the direction that the EU puppetmasters currently insist the Brexit negotiations take; or
Enough for a qualified majority in a vote.
Are you ignoring Denmark?
Ireland?
Poland?
Even large swathes of Germany itself?
Plus (as Conrad suggests) how about the Spanish once they find that the UK will no longer buy their fruit, veg & vino?
The French once their cheese and wine is unwanted due to the EU imposing tariffs?

No, I'm not suggesting that the EU will "cave".
And the suggestion that the deal is dependent upon the UK is laughable - who after all decides the direction these talks will take?
(A big hint: meeting. Friday. Eu.)
The EU has given the UK the options it would really prefer.
It doesn't mean that they are realistic - or that we must accept them.

Much will change in the first few months following the election in June, IMHO.

kabayiri

WengerIn wrote: »

What is more sustainable is exporting to pay for imports with the numbers being broadly similar. That would mean a pretty big reduction in living standards for the British, maybe reducing imports per capita by something like a grand a year. I don't recall that being sold as a benefit by the Leave campaign.

Don't you think living standards will fall anyway as technology puts more power in to the hands of increasingly fewer people?

I don't think either the EU or Brexit will help with some pretty big challenges we have in store. I kind of understand the mentality Conrad puts forward that we need to rise to the challenge. That might not be enough, of course.

WengerIn

kabayiri wrote: »

Don't you think living standards will fall anyway as technology puts more power in to the hands of increasingly fewer people?

I don't think either the EU or Brexit will help with some pretty big challenges we have in store. I kind of understand the mentality Conrad puts forward that we need to rise to the challenge. That might not be enough, of course.

No I don't.

Better technology for the last 350 years in agriculture and 250 years in industry has increased income, living standards and wealth for the vast majority of people. I can see absolutely no evidence at all to make me think that will change.

Yes, changes in technology have negative impacts on some people; I doubt that there are remotely as many thatchers, blacksmiths and coopers as there were back in the day but then again I strongly expect that there are a lot more change managers, social media marketers and solar panel installers than there used to be.

Tech is not going to destroy the economy of the world. Why? The point of an economy is consumption. Machines don't consume so if machines displace labour to a great extent the economy is damaged. Which companies go bust? Those with large CAPEX. Which companies have large CAPEX? Companies that have just bought a bunch of expensive, high-tech robots.

Shaka_Zulu

Arklight wrote: »

Actually Conrad, you've been predicting the imminent demise of the EU for months now.

It doesn't seem any closer to happening.

Aye well they said the same in Herculaneum in AD79.

gfplux

mrginge wrote: »

I think it's just a little nervousness. The game is supposed to play out the way the EU want (and are used to). When it doesn't then the volume gets raised and we get told how difficult things are and how it's their way or the highway.

Guess we'll see who's got the biggest balls in a few months.

10 months on from the referendum and you imagine it is not going as expected on the EU side!
No one and I mean no one on either side would have imagined at the end of June 2016 how "it would be going" In May 2017.
Nervous, yes and so we all should be. The tectonic plates that are moving with Britain leaving the EU should frighten everyone whatever side you are on.
This is not a game, this is real life and millions of people's lives will be changed for ever in the next few years. There will be collateral damage and I for one am frightened of that.

chucknorris

Fella wrote: »

Juncker & Barnier have not thought their strategy through to it's logical ending IMO.

Back when Cameron was pleading for crumbs of concession, the EU were at least pretending there was a semblence of warmth in the relationship. Although they didn't give an inch there was at least the paper-thin pretence that the UK was a friend they didn't want to lose. The talk was all about what a lovely friendly democratic place the EU was.

By acting the way they have this week, the EU have demostrated this is not the case. That sends a very strong message to the 27 member states but it's not the message they intend. Effectively the relationship between the EU & it's member states is being shown to be that of captor & hostage. That is likely to go down extremely poorly with the electorate of other countries who might also want a referendum. Juncker clearly believes the only way to negotiate is bullying with fear tactics. He tried it pre-referendum & it failed spectacularly. He's doing it again now. I suspect not only will it fail, but also it will have the very opposite effect to what he's hoping in other member states. Next time a country is considering leaving, the EU will not have the option of portraying itself as a friendly democracy. It'll have proven itself to be a vengeful dictatorship. I can't think of anything more likely to whip up the leave sentiment everywhere.

Dead right, I voted remain, but if Europe wants to take us on, bring it on! Let's see who blinks first.

gfplux

Asghar wrote: »

It's quite obvious that the EU leaders will leak details, use scare tactics and spread lies and propaganda to stop the UK from leaving.

I think, we are still the second biggest economy in the EU and they need us and our budget contributions. They do not want us to leave.

Then we have media, like the BBC, who seem more than willing to be a mouthpiece for these EU tactics.

I only wish that were true. "They do not want us to leave"
My understanding is that "Brussels" and Britain in general would loose too much face if the process was halted. Further as I have mentioned before many voters within the EU were amazed at the result of the referendum believing rightly or wrongly that Britain had a sweetheart deal. That has now moved to wanting Britain gone, gone, gone.
So both sides can not turn back. Sadly.

Except we are dealing with politicians and they will always surprise you.

IveSeenTheLight

Fella wrote: »

Juncker & Barnier have not thought their strategy through to it's logical ending IMO.

Back when Cameron was pleading for crumbs of concession, the EU were at least pretending there was a semblence of warmth in the relationship. Although they didn't give an inch there was at least the paper-thin pretence that the UK was a friend they didn't want to lose. The talk was all about what a lovely friendly democratic place the EU was.

By acting the way they have this week, the EU have demostrated this is not the case. That sends a very strong message to the 27 member states but it's not the message they intend. Effectively the relationship between the EU & it's member states is being shown to be that of captor & hostage. That is likely to go down extremely poorly with the electorate of other countries who might also want a referendum. Juncker clearly believes the only way to negotiate is bullying with fear tactics. He tried it pre-referendum & it failed spectacularly. He's doing it again now. I suspect not only will it fail, but also it will have the very opposite effect to what he's hoping in other member states. Next time a country is considering leaving, the EU will not have the option of portraying itself as a friendly democracy. It'll have proven itself to be a vengeful dictatorship. I can't think of anything more likely to whip up the leave sentiment everywhere.

Who changed stance first?
Juncker & Barnier or when Cameron stepped down and May took over?