Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

Conrad

A 50 not revocable according to EU rules;


http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-17-2001_en.htm


Once triggered, can Article 50 be revoked?
It was the decision of the United Kingdom to trigger Article 50. But once triggered, it cannot be unilaterally reversed. Article 50 does not provide for the unilateral withdrawal of the notification.

Conrad

Arklight wrote: »

The EU gives the thumb screws another turn:


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-eu-uk-divorce-bill-pay-european-union-right-to-stay-five-days-michel-barnier-a7836911.html

Yikes, heyalp, I will run to the hills in panic.....

A_Medium_Size_Jock

"Every way you turn, Britain’s post-Brexit future looks bright" from CityA.M.:

Meanwhile, back in the real world, there has been news to celebrate.
Yet again Britain attracted the most Foreign Direct Investment, despite the Brexit vote, and there were big investment announcements from Jaguar and Superdrug that further demonstrate business confidence in our country’s economic prospects.
Then the Hungarians declared that the EU had far more to lose from not completing a trade deal than the UK had. And no wonder – UK exports to EU compared to those to the rest of the world are now 38 per cent versus 62 per cent. Exports to EU have been steadily dropping. It is exports to markets other than EU that are our future.
Finally, the EU-Japanese agreement demonstrated what is possible if we hold our nerve. Japan will pay nothing, not a single yen, to have free trade access to the Single Market.
All Japanese manufacturers will have to do is meet the regulatory requirements, as would be expected. Nor will Japan have to take free movement of people, or endure the jurisdiction of the ECJ, or have its taxes dictated by the EU as a price for the agreement.
The one stumbling block is that it is only an agreement in principle, and that its adoption could take four or more years. Still, it shows what kind of deal is possible for the UK, and we have the advantage of already being completely up to speed in EU laws and regulations.

http://www.cityam.com/268266/every-way-you-turn-britains-post-brexit-future-looks-bright

A_Medium_Size_Jock

mayonnaise wrote: »

Opinion piece written by some bloke from 'Global Britain'.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Britain

Nothing to see here.

Feel free to point out what in that article is not factual - providing you have now learned the difference between fact and prediction.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

ilovehouses wrote: »

Are we not talking about different standards and the effect they have on cost and complexity any more?

That was a few pages ago now, the rest of the thread has moved on.
Only you persist.

Here is more which I'm sure you will pontificate upon :

Simon Hart, RSM’s Brexit lead partner said: “Decision makers appear generally confident that the UK and their businesses will adapt and emerge stronger post Brexit.
“Whether this optimism will continue during the negotiations remains to be seen, but early sentiment is positive.”
Manufacturing was the most consistently upbeat sector, with 57 per cent of companies operating in the sector positive about the economy’s prospects over the next five years, while 78 per cent felt prepared for an EU exit.

http://www.cityam.com/268262/londons-middle-sized-firms-most-prepared-uk-brexit-new-data

mayonnaise

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Feel free to point out what in that article is not factual - providing you have now learned the difference between fact and prediction.

Jock, you're losing it, matey. You have linked to an article by a Brexiteer saying Brexit will be great.
You might as well link to posts by Conrad from MSE to support your point.

kabayiri

andrewf75 wrote: »

I have to say while I'm generally critical of the UK's approach to Brexit, I can't quite see why an exit fee is justified. I get that we have made commitments for things, but equally we have paid for things that we will no longer have access to so it should balance itself out.
But I think its something that is hard to have a balanced opinion on without understanding it more than most of us ever could.

It's a daft discussion because it is antagonistic by definition.

Part of A50 should be a transition cost discussion, which focuses on how much an exiting state will have to pay/receive to enter into a new agreed relationship with the EU.

It's rather like TCO, you need to understand the Total Cost of Change.

But...hey, nowt I can do, except wait until the details have been signed off.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

mayonnaise wrote: »

Jock, you're losing it, matey. You have linked to an article by a Brexiteer saying Brexit will be great.
You might as well link to posts by Conrad from MSE to support your point.

So that'll be a no, will it?
To remind you:

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Feel free to point out what in that article is not factual .............

:rotfl:

andrewf75

kabayiri wrote: »

Part of A50 should be a transition cost discussion, which focuses on how much an exiting state will have to pay/receive to enter into a new agreed relationship with the EU.

Yes I think it has only really come about because the UK seems hellbent on having no relationship at all with the EU afterwards. If a more measured approach had been taken, I don't think there would be any talk of an exit fee because it would be assumed that we would still want to play a part in many of the EU's agencies.

Tromking

andrewf75 wrote: »

Yes I think it has only really come about because the UK seems hellbent on having no relationship at all with the EU afterwards. If a more measured approach had been taken, I don't think there would be any talk of an exit fee because it would be assumed that we would still want to play a part in many of the EU's agencies.

I don't think so.
This is more about the EU losing 10% of its total budget and rightly or wrongly wanting to fill the gap the UK will leave for as long as possible. This isn't just about the funding of EU agencies, it covers all aspects of the EU's operations.