Brexit, the economy and house prices (Part 3)

Herzlos

If the UK is so clearly keen to hurt itself for some pointless political reasons, why are brexiteers so adamant the EU won't be willing to do the same for a genuine reason?

Maintaining the EU is more important to EU27 than the money from a difficult member. It's so obvious I'm surprised people seem to deny or ignore it.

cogito

I'm a UK citizen so it won't. But if I were a French citizen living in the UK it would the ECJ gave me greater rights than UK citizens. You think this is acceptable?

Try it another way. The EU did not demand ECJ jurisdiction over EU citizens living in Canada when it completed its trade deal. If it is important to the EU to have judicial overarch, why did it not do so with Canada?

This has been explained to you many times. I would have thought you might understand by now.

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

If the UK is so clearly keen to hurt itself for some pointless political reasons, why are brexiteers so adamant the EU won't be willing to do the same for a genuine reason?

Maintaining the EU is more important to EU27 than the money from a difficult member. It's so obvious I'm surprised people seem to deny or ignore it.

Absolutely. The EU wishes to hand out punishment beatings to a leaving member to discourager les autres.

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

If the UK is so clearly keen to hurt itself for some pointless political reasons, why are brexiteers so adamant the EU won't be willing to do the same for a genuine reason?

Maintaining the EU is more important to EU27 than the money from a difficult member. It's so obvious I'm surprised people seem to deny or ignore it.

Obviously they want to maintain the EU but that is for political reason. The facts are it will be beneficial to both sides if we have a reasonable deal and in the long term it will not benefit anyone if political dogma wins out.

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

Absolutely. The EU wishes to hand out punishment beatings to a leaving member to discourager les autres.

The EU is doing nothing of the sort; it's just giving us exactly what we asked for: to be outside the sphere of what the EU has to care about. The EU cannot do something that hurts the EU27 to favour us.

It's not the EU's fault that we're asking for the impossible cake and eat it.

Herzlos

ukcarper wrote: »

Obviously they want to maintain the EU but that is for political reason. The facts are it will be beneficial to both sides if we have a reasonable deal and in the long term it will not benefit anyone if political dogma wins out.

Agreed. The EU will happily accept a deal that is good for it. If that happens to be good for us that'll be a bonus but it's not something they'll lose sleep over.

We already know what the best is, but 51.9% of us decided we want a bad deal.

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

The EU is doing nothing of the sort; it's just giving us exactly what we asked for: to be outside the sphere of what the EU has to care about. The EU cannot do something that hurts the EU27 to favour us.

It's not the EU's fault that we're asking for the impossible cake and eat it.

What is the impossible cake that the UK is asking for? To use your own words - be specific.

Herzlos

Not my words but ok. We want to have full access to 3 of 4 inseparable freedoms, with no contributions, deference to their arbitration, or their human rights requirements.

We don't want free movement except for some magical borders around Eire and Gibraltar.

So we want all the benefits of being in a EU but without any of the responsibilities that come with being a grown up member of a cooperative organisation.

Am I wrong? Does anyone genuinely expect the EU to agree to that because we buy some cars and tulips?

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

Agreed. The EU will happily accept a deal that is good for it. If that happens to be good for us that'll be a bonus but it's not something they'll lose sleep over.

We already know what the best is, but 51.9% of us decided we want a bad deal.

We are a big part of the EU economy the majority of countries exporting more to us than we do to them. It makes no sense to write that off, I accept that there are lines they can't cross but a compromise will have to be reached.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Herzlos wrote: »

Why would they if the UK haven't offered them anything worthwhile?

It's a total fallacy to assume both sides must meet in the middle, especially with such imbalanced parties.

This has to be one of the biggest misconceptions posted in this thread so far, because:

* It is not up to the UK to "offer" the EU anything. That is a gross misunderstanding of the EU's rules around withdrawal of a member state, which makes it very clear that it is the EU "in the driving seat" throughout the withdrawal process.

* The UK as the member wishing to leave may choose to agree or disagree with whatever is proposed by the EU 's Brexit negotiation team. Anyone failing to understand this concept really needs to read further into Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and beyond, for example Articles 207, 217, 218, 238 etc.

* "the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal" - this from Article 50 itself. Hence it is a duty of the EU to negotiate and to reach agreement, or at least attempt to.

* There is no such requirement upon the UK as the member wishing to leave to reach agreement. Any supposed "bill" for example would become null and void should agreement not be reached within the two year deadline given once Article 50 was invoked. That is not to be taken as an implication that such an eventuality would be necessarily beneficial for either part BTW, it is purely a statement of fact.

So you see, it might be in both the UK's and the EU's best interests to reach agreement; to negotiate and to compromise in order to reach a mutually-agreeable outcome.
But it is not a necessity.

We can (and do in this and other threads) debate ad nauseam the possible consequences for a range of eventualities surrounding Brexit, but the evidence so far is generally of such a conflicting nature that accurate forecasting is impossible.
The likelihood is however that the result of Brexit will be somewhere between the "cliff edge" of extreme remainers and the "boom of new opportunities" suggested by extreme Brexiteers.
In other words, little will change.