Brexit means Brexit

Conrad

Brexit is about a recognition we will prosper better under our own steam. We will very soon have settled on a plan and reap the rewards. The gloomy Remainers are going to look silly as the new prosperity era unfolds.

Reality is a funny beast, I realise this now more than ever. The gloomy remains are stuck in some kind of reality wormhole simply unable to see the true picture.

A year from now let's revisit all the gloomy nonsense predictions

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

May is hardly a remainiac and there are plenty of Brexiteers. She sits next to the leader of the leave campaign at cabinet.

The lack of a plan is because it's far far more complicated than the leave campaign led us to believe. I did think a decade of uncertainty was probably over-egging it but that view is gaining credence.

Brilliant for foreigners looking for yield as Sterling continues its journey downwards. They must be thinking it's sale of the century.

What is the 'right' level for sterling given we have a massive current a/c deficit?
How much do you think we should continue to borrow from abroad to pay the deficit?
What percent of UK businesses, land, property etc do you think we should sell to support your chosen level of sterling?

Why do you call selling off UK assets before brexit 'inward investment' and a 'fire sale' afterwards?

Herzlos

Conrad wrote: »

Brexit is about a recognition we will prosper better under our own steam. We will very soon have settled on a plan and reap the rewards. The gloomy Remainers are going to look silly as the new prosperity era unfolds.

Reality is a funny beast, I realise this now more than ever. The gloomy remains are stuck in some kind of reality wormhole simply unable to see the true picture.

A year from now let's revisit all the gloomy nonsense predictions

I really hope so. Unfortunately, I haven't seen any evidence supporting it yet.

Zelazny

I'd consider a second referendum fair if they established a proper constitution that dictated what the EU could and could not do and put proper limits on their power.

Limits on immigration etc are obviously important to a lot of people but without a proper constitution they could just change their mind tomorrow and we'd be stuffed

Masomnia

Zelazny wrote: »

I'd consider a second referendum fair if they established a proper constitution that dictated what the EU could and could not do and put proper limits on their power.

Limits on immigration etc are obviously important to a lot of people but without a proper constitution they could just change their mind tomorrow and we'd be stuffed

To be fair they did try to implement a constitution but it was rejected in referendums and therefore rebranded as the Lisbon Treaty.

BobQ

Masomnia wrote: »

To be fair they did try to implement a constitution but it was rejected in referendums and therefore rebranded as the Lisbon Treaty.

The Treaty does spell out these "competencies" in terms of what the EU can do and what Nations retain responsibilities for. However, it could be more explicit I agree.

CKhalvashi

Zelazny wrote: »

Limits on immigration etc are obviously important to a lot of people but without a proper constitution they could just change their mind tomorrow and we'd be stuffed

What people complaining about immigration don't understand, is that we have an aging population and a number of jobs each year just to keep the economy moving at the level it's at.

I seriously against an income/points-based immigration system for UK, because it means a number of immigrants will get the chance to better themselves every year at the expense of British workers, who'll remain at the bottom of the pile.

Maybe, however, that's because I'm realistic rather than taking the Brexiteers rose-tinted view that we can halt all immigration overnight and everything will keep moving.

CLAPTON

CKhalvashi wrote: »

What people complaining about immigration don't understand, is that we have an aging population and a number of jobs each year just to keep the economy moving at the level it's at.

I seriously against an income/points-based immigration system for UK, because it means a number of immigrants will get the chance to better themselves every year at the expense of British workers, who'll remain at the bottom of the pile.

Maybe, however, that's because I'm realistic rather than taking the Brexiteers rose-tinted view that we can halt all immigration overnight and everything will keep moving.

No, its you that doesn't understand that the ratio of working to non working has been falling for 100 years: just the period we have been continuously becoming richer: why not actually look up the facts and figures.

don't be rose tinted : just look at the actual facts over the last 100 years
and you can can consider whether you think that major productivty gains have finished and robots, driverless cars etc are an impossible dream.

cells

CLAPTON wrote: »

No, its you that doesn't understand that the ratio of working to non working has been falling for 100 years: just the period we have been continuously becoming richer: why not actually look up the facts and figures.

don't be rose tinted : just look at the actual facts over the last 100 years
and you can can consider whether you think that major productivty gains have finished and robots, driverless cars etc are an impossible dream.

how useful will all that technology be when the British 'race' dies out due to a low total fertility rate. UK women haven't been having enough babies to replace the population since the early 1970s

The most recent figures I could find says. In 2014, the total fertility rate (TFR) decreased to 1.83 children per woman. Over a quarter (27.0%) of live births in 2014 were to mothers born outside the UK

So the 'native' birth rate is even poorer than the 1.83 children per women. Probably closer to 1.4-1.5

But hey why does the country need children when we can look forward to self driving cars!

CKhalvashi

CLAPTON wrote: »

No, its you that doesn't understand that the ratio of working to non working has been falling for 100 years: just the period we have been continuously becoming richer: why not actually look up the facts and figures.

don't be rose tinted : just look at the actual facts over the last 100 years
and you can can consider whether you think that major productivty gains have finished and robots, driverless cars etc are an impossible dream.

I wouldn't trust a self-driving car, and can't see them being on the roads in my lifetime in any big numbers (and there's a good chance I'm a lot younger than you are).

The risk is that there will be a shortage of workers, which will push up wages demanded, which will make companies less competitive meaning there are no foreign buyers.

I won't buy something for £2 because it's made in Britain, when I can get an imported product for £1. At the moment, a majority of what I buy was probably at least part-manufactured in the UK, as there is a competitive supply chain there.

Noone has also given a fesable answer to what they want the trading relationship with the EU to be. Many businesses, including mine, depend on freedom of movement. It's in the governments long-term interests for me to remain in the UK, however if it looks like it's not going to be in mine, then I'm sure that many EU countries will be happy to take the interests instead.