Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

phillw

Fella wrote: »

You shouldn't fret so much over the economy, it'll be fine.

So brexit was purely caused by positive thinking in the face of evidence to the contrary?

cogito wrote: »

Why would they? They ignored government recommendations to vote remain.

Sure, but there were rich people with vested interests that managed to persuade them that the government were lying. The question is what they will do when they find out that the government weren't lying.

Don't forget that most people voted to leave when Boris was saying we would definitely stay in the single market and that £350 million a week would go to the NHS. A lot of brexiters already have the realisation that they were conned into voting to leave and are just pinning their hopes that maybe it won't be as bad as it looks like it will be. More and more of them will wake up to that as time goes by.

But the racists are happy if that gives you any consolation.

Conrad wrote: »

It's pure biased nonsense providing only an oblique angle into politics. For example it would never seek to understand the damage done to impoverished citizens of very poor EU nations from their losing Doctors to the already highly privileged UK, and not consider why we don't train enough of our own Nurses from the vast ranks of youth that would dearly love such an opportunity.

I can't work out whether you're joking or not. Are you saying that people voted for brexit because they wanted to lose money but distribute it more equally to the poorer countries? That would not be my understanding of the situation at all.

I spoke to a friends brother who is training to be a doctor, he said that he doesn't know anyone planning on staying in the UK once they have qualified.

The Guardian also don't highlight the problems caused by importing quinoa. Both of these aren't covered because people don't like to be reminded that everything they do has an impact. This is what sunk the remain campaign.

But don't worry, we'll soon be in the league table of impoverished countries and we'll have first hand experience.

Tromking

cogito wrote: »

Why would they? They ignored government recommendations to vote remain. Not just once, but twice. First by voting to leave and second by voting for parties whose manifestos committed them to leave.

If they changed their minds about leaving, they could have voted for the LibDems.

It pains me to say it, but the most likely scenario re. Brexit is it now on the UK side at least, collapses in enertia because of Tory in-fighting.
Terms like 'soft-Brexit' and a 'jobs based Brexit' as espoused by the majority of our new parliament are just a proxy to delay and ultimately stop the UK from leaving the EU.
The onus was on the Tories to get enough seats to push through the Brexiteers version of Brexit, they patently failed in that task.
Sorry my fellow leave voters, the mandate and more importantly the political will in our new parliament for leaving the EU is not there.

phillw

Tromking wrote: »

Terms like 'soft-Brexit' and a 'jobs based Brexit' as espoused by the majority of our new parliament are just a proxy to delay and ultimately stop the UK from leaving the EU.

It's difficult to predict what Maybot will do when she gets stuck in a loop, but I don't believe we will be that lucky.

I think they'll carry on and deliver the type of brexit that nobody really wanted and the tax payers will be stumped with the bill, we'll lose out on 27 other countries fighting for our rights & people will be forced to do unpleasant jobs that immigrants were willing to do. It's a lose lose situation.

And the Winston Churchill quote is not cool, please remove it as it's use as propaganda is misleading at best.

https://www.facebook.com/JonDanzigWrites/posts/779086008890568:0

“If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.”
This was not said by Churchill after the war, but during the war, on the eve of the ‘D Day’ landings in Normandy that would eventually lead to victory over Nazi Germany.

And in 1963, just two years before he died, Churchill wrote, “The future of Europe if Britain were to be excluded is black indeed.”

Tromking

phillw wrote: »

I think they'll carry on and deliver the type of brexit that nobody really wanted and the tax payers will be stumped with the bill, we'll lose out on 27 other countries fighting for our rights & people will be forced to do unpleasant jobs that immigrants were willing to do. It's a lose lose situation.

In that scenario, then I think BobQ's prediction comes into play.
Despite the poll suggesting 60% plus of the population are now in favour of the UK getting on with it as regards Brexit, if the deal is patently pants then expect a wholesale shift in public opinion on Brexit. Remember also that a bad deal will not get past the Commons or the unelected Lords.

phillw

Tromking wrote: »

Despite the poll suggesting 60% plus of the population are now in favour of the UK getting on with it as regards Brexit,

That isn't far off the 51% of people who voted to leave. Another 9% of people just want to get the pain over and done with, because they hope that maybe it won't be so bad for them.

Tromking wrote: »

if the deal is patently pants then expect a wholesale shift in public opinion on Brexit.

When the deal is revealed then we'll be told it's too late to do anything about it. Which is the real reason Theresa May wants to keep any details about the deal under wraps.

Tromking wrote: »

Remember also that a bad deal will not get past the Commons or the unelected Lords.

We'll have brexit with no deal & then come up against the stone wall of 158 WTO countries. I wonder how Argentina will vote.....

"Be Nice to People on Your Way Up. You’ll Meet Them On Your Way Down"

We're in for a rough ride. Our brief dominance of the world has come to a self destructive end.

kabayiri

The EUrocrats have probably long since realized that they actually need the UK to leave the EU construct.

The voices of those keen on further integration within the EU will only grow stronger now.

It's not a case of whether UK would remain in the EU; it's what kind of EU we would remain in.

We could have easily become a fringe player in the direction of the EU anyway.

Look how casually Dave Cameron was sent away with a flea in his ear, for what may turn out to be fairly modest reforms.

Tromking

phillw wrote: »

That isn't far off the 51% of people who voted to leave. Another 9% of people just want to get the pain over and done with, because they hope that maybe it won't be so bad for them.

I agree, hence my point that the mandate is wafer thin and will be compounded by a shift in public opinion if the deal is bad.

phillw wrote: »

When the deal is revealed then we'll be told it's too late to do anything about it. Which is the real reason Theresa May wants to keep any details about the deal under wraps.

Wrong, even a no deal needs to get past both houses of Parliament.

phillw wrote: »

We'll have brexit with no deal & then come up against the stone wall of 158 WTO countries. I wonder how Argentina will vote.....

Previous reply applies.

Re. The Churchill quote, go **** yerself!

A_Medium_Size_Jock

I will be most interested to see how the EU and member states square this statement from Merkel with any plans to restrict UK/EU trade as a result of Brexit:

Germany wants to make progress in its presidency of the Group of 20 leading economies on improving free and fair trade and will try to get broad agreement on open markets at next month's leaders' summit, Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-germany-merkel-idUKKBN19B170

gfplux

Tromking wrote: »

In that scenario, then I think BobQ's prediction comes into play.
Despite the poll suggesting 60% plus of the population are now in favour of the UK getting on with it as regards Brexit, if the deal is patently pants then expect a wholesale shift in public opinion on Brexit. Remember also that a bad deal will not get past the Commons or the unelected Lords.

If the "bad deal" doesn't get by the Commons or the unelected Lords Britain will JUST DROP OUT OF THE EU at the end of March 2019.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

ilovehouses wrote: »

If Merkel is looking to make third country trade easier it still won't be as easy as the current arrangement the UK enjoys with the EU.

By leaving the single market UK/ EU trade will be restricted. It's an entirely predictable by-product of Brexit.

There's nothing to be squared.

Why not, when all the necessary apparatus regarding requirements to trade is already there?
There is no reason for trade to be restricted other than EU belligerence.

Any reduction in trade harms the EU too you know.
See:

Food exports to the UK saw a 6.8 percent drop compared to the same period last year, while wine exports fell by seven percent, the Italian farmers' association Coldiretti said.
"The Brexit effect is being felt on symbolic Made in Italy products in Great Britain, where there was an overall sudden drop of eight percent in exports of Italian products," the organization said.

https://www.thelocal.it/20170619/the-brexit-effect-italys-food-and-wine-exports-see-eight-percent-drop

It has been said many times before that certainly the UK may suffer - but so too would large swathes of the EU.
So what Merkel suggests regarding free trade is entirely relevant and must indeed be considered with regard to Brexit.