Has Brexit now been priced-in

peachyprice

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Council tax bills have been arriving recently. Be a few people in for a shock. We were surprised by the % increase on our modest abode. A Brown moment. No increase in income tax or national insurance. Knowing full well there's other ways of skinning a persons pocket.

3.9% increase here, ALL of it going to policing.

HornetSaver

peachyprice wrote: »

3.9% increase here, ALL of it going to policing.

Policing is the absolute classic:

https://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Letter-from-Sir-Andrew-Dilnot-to-Andy-Burnham-MP-090316.pdf

The police grant from central Government is being cut every year, and the only way for a force to secure a real-terms freeze in the overall amount of money available is to raise the police element of council tax by the maximum permitted.

Or, as George Osborne put it in November 2015 (same source):

“...there will be no cuts in the police budgets at all. There will be real-terms protection for police funding”

An example of what this means on an individual force level:

http://www.durham-pcc.gov.uk/Finance/Council-Tax/Council-Tax.aspx

padington

Conrad wrote: »

WTO has been priced in since the vote.


One day even the most ardent Remainers will look back see this merely as a slight change in the way we traded.

Tell that to Gibraltar

Thrugelmir

padington wrote: »

Tell that to Gibraltar

Interesting contradiction. Self interest rules these days.

padington

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Interesting contradiction. Self interest rules these days.

Spain rules our Brexit negotiations, what muppets these Brexsh!tears are for not seeing that one coming.

HornetSaver

Even if you take the view that whatever happens from here on out is better than staying in the EU, the ramping up of Gibraltar as a priority, and the leverage that Spain potentially hold over the entire deal/no deal question, demonstrates just how uncertain these discussions still are.

One minute there was extremely good reason to believe that both sides were very keen on a comprehensive deal tying up lots of loose ends and including transitional arrangements towards whatever eventual outcome is decided upon (said good reason being that the mood music from both sides was not all that far apart). The next, we're wondering how on earth this circle could possibly squared within any deal.

Again, I acknowledge that many take the view that either a comprehensive deal or a hard Brexit and WTO terms are better than EU membership. But surely even the most hardline pro-Leave supporter on this forum (who I know has read this thread) acknowledges that the two are very different things from one another? It could even be argued that there's more difference between those two than between a comprehensive deal and remaining in the EU.

Thrugelmir

padington wrote: »

Spain rules our Brexit negotiations, what muppets these Brexsh!tears are for not seeing that one coming.

Then the Spanish are two faced. As recently it wasn't going to be an issue. In a wider context shows how difficult it is to align the interests of 27 member states. When ultimately self interest is the root of every decision.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

I find it most interesting to see the continued bleatings of a few who seem to determinedly grasp each and every (often obscure) piece of negativity they can regarding Brexit.

Look, personally I have said that I for one realise that Brexit cannot possibly progress as smooth as clockwork.
I accept that there will be problems and undoubtedly some will be quite major.
However this must be tempered with the probability that - at the end of the day - life will most likely in large part carry on pretty much as before.
That there will be positive aspects as well as negative.
When throughout history has it not been thus?

As far as recent events are concerned we should all surely realise that much of what we read is initial posturing; sabre-rattling if you will.
Which will have little bearing on any eventual outcome, be that relating to Gibraltar or to the UK's contribution to EU security.

What none on here seem yet to have acknowledged is that the case put forward by Tusk et al as a response to the invoking of Article 50 must now be agreed-to by a majority of representatives from the remaining 27 EU member states.

Regardless of whatever differences there may be between "hard Brexit" and WTO terms, until talks in the future begin to indicate at least the likeliest direction eventual agreement will take such theorising is just that; guesswork basically.

So instead of bleating and grasping at negativity whilst denying positivity to date, is it not possible to wait for these next few months when discussion should reveal the true direction of talks before the proverbial "cry wolf" calls begin in earnest?

Thrugelmir

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Which will have little bearing on any eventual outcome, be that relating to Gibraltar or to the UK's contribution to EU security.

Security is an interesting issue. As only 4 EU states contribute the agreed 2% of GDP to fund NATO. The Germans are reluctant to meet the requirement. Trump's posturing adds weight to the UK position. As Europe as a whole funds little of protecting it's Eastern border. Poland and Estonia may well turn out to be the UK's allies during Brexit negotiations.

padington

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Then the Spanish are two faced. As recently it wasn't going to be an issue. In a wider context shows how difficult it is to align the interests of 27 member states. When ultimately self interest is the root of every decision.

... and what achievement aligning them in the first place and what vandalism this Brexit is proving to be.