Has Brexit now been priced-in

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Thrugelmir wrote: »

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.

Indeed so.
Sigmar Gabriel is calling the 2% target "completely unrealistic" - this despite his being a strong supporter of the planned EU Defence Force.
It does very strongly appear that at least some in Germany would rather fund this EU Defence Force than fund Nato.
Do so few really wonder why that might be?
Or what the effects of this will be particularly upon the Eastern European members of the EU?

https://www.thelocal.de/20170331/germany-on-collision-course-with-us-ahead-of-nato-summit

A_Medium_Size_Jock

padington wrote: »

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

"Vandalism"?
:rotfl:

Oh please.
I have seen much naivety in these forums but to suggest that the EU are "aligned" is delusional.
Read any of the threads in these forums regarding Brexit to see examples of just how differing opinions are in the Eurozone, in matters as diverse as migration and banking to funding and a desire for reform within the EU.
No, "aligned" my wotsit; a major reason that all but the major, original members are now part of the EU is to be funded by them.

HornetSaver

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.

I have seen much naivety in these forums but to suggest that the EU are "aligned" is delusional.

The extent to which people's memory of the facts will shift depending on which opinion they are trying to support never ceases to amaze me.

Either the EU is coherent and capable of coming to a rational decision in a reasonable period of time, or it is dysfunctional and totally incapable of doing so. Though of course, it could very well be that the former is the case but that no agreement is reached - such is the nature of multi-party politics at any level.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

HornetSaver wrote: »

The extent to which people's memory of the facts will shift depending on which opinion they are trying to support never ceases to amaze me.

Either the EU is coherent and capable of coming to a rational decision in a reasonable period of time, or it is dysfunctional and totally incapable of doing so. Though of course, it could very well be that the former is the case but that no agreement is reached - such is the nature of multi-party politics at any level.

The facts however remain facts.

Recent evidence suggests an inability to reach (certainly timely) agreement within EU members is highly likely.
TTIP or CETA anyone?

Also as I have posted before elsewhere:

For a chief negotiator, Michel Barnier has little room to maneuver.
Barnier, the dapper Frenchman tasked with brokering the U.K.’s departure from the EU, has at least 30 masters — the 27 EU leaders and the three European institutions — unlike his British counterpart, David Davis, who answers to just one.

http://www.politico.eu/article/michael-barnier-europe-brexit-not-so-supremo-uk-negotiation-deal/

HornetSaver

Well, Davis answers to the Commons, to the Lords, to the three devolved administrations, to the Government and to the British electorate.

But feel free to count that as one and brand it a fact if you wish.

padington

Mark my words, this Brexit madness will cost us a pretty penny which will take decades of work to regain. It won't cost benefit us in our lifetime and will further the decline of the western liberal democratic influence in the world.

Or we'll keep all the laws and almost all freedom of movement and immigration and just lose all our influence in Europe and global good will.

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.

It's a nightmare aligning 27 countries but the hard work was already done, now the vandalism begins and we have to begin to realign ourselves with the 27 all over again, outside their members club.

Good luck.

This will cost us a fortune, we'll have less money to invest in education and supporting exciting start up companies and be even less productive.

Great move.

Filo25

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Indeed so.
Sigmar Gabriel is calling the 2% target "completely unrealistic" - this despite his being a strong supporter of the planned EU Defence Force.
It does very strongly appear that at least some in Germany would rather fund this EU Defence Force than fund Nato.
Do so few really wonder why that might be?
Or what the effects of this will be particularly upon the Eastern European members of the EU?

https://www.thelocal.de/20170331/germany-on-collision-course-with-us-ahead-of-nato-summit

If the Trump foreign policy approach is the new normal for the US then its hard to see a long term future for NATO in its current form in any case

prosaver

peachyprice wrote: »

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

Thought it was going for the care of old people seems logical. .
Its not going to be a thread blaming everything on brexit is it.

Theres mices in my house..
BREXIT. ..!

prosaver

padington wrote: »

It's a nightmare aligning 27 countries but the hard work was already done, now the vandalism begins and we have to begin to realign ourselves with the 27 all over again, outside their members club.

Good luck.

This will cost us a fortune, we'll have less money to invest in education and supporting exciting start up companies and be even less productive.

Great move.

In your dreams ...