Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Zero_Gravitas

.string. wrote: »

Yes, the last para of Article 50 states:

So we join the Euro, submerge our military, have EU wide taxes and so o add nausea. It would not be back where we were.

People arguing for remaining in the EU should wise up and bury their hobby horse.

Not this again again... here!!!8217;s article 49 in full:

!!!8220;Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union. The European Parliament and national Parliaments shall be notified of this application. The applicant State shall address its application to the Council, which shall act unanimously after consulting the Commission and after receiving the assent of the European Parliament, which shall act by an absolute majority of its component members. The conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the Union is founded, which such admission entails, shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State. This agreement shall be submitted for ratification by all the contracting States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. The conditions of eligibility agreed upon by the European Council shall be taken into account.!!!8221;

No mention of having to adopt the Euro, join a European army or anything else that the brexiteer version of project fear would have us believe - only that joining terms should be negotiated.

Mind you, given how competent our government appears to be at negotiating, then perhaps that would be a bad thing...

All in all, the only logical and sensible plan of action would be to cancel article 50 and continue on our current terms; which, as has already been pointed out, the person who actually drafted article 50 says is perfectly possible to do. And the best vehicle for doing that and making sure that democracy is served would be a second referendum.

fewgroats

It all has a POETS feel about it. I can't see them negotiating throughout the weekend.

.string.

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

Not this again again... here’s article 49 in full:

“Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union. The European Parliament and national Parliaments shall be notified of this application. The applicant State shall address its application to the Council, which shall act unanimously after consulting the Commission and after receiving the assent of the European Parliament, which shall act by an absolute majority of its component members. The conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the Union is founded, which such admission entails, shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State. This agreement shall be submitted for ratification by all the contracting States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. The conditions of eligibility agreed upon by the European Council shall be taken into account.”

No mention of having to adopt the Euro, join a European army or anything else that the brexiteer version of project fear would have us believe - only that joining terms should be negotiated.

Mind you, given how competent our government appears to be at negotiating, then perhaps that would be a bad thing...

All in all, the only sensible plan of action is to cancel article 50 and continue on our current terms; which, as has already been pointed out, the person who actually drafted article 50 is perfectly possible to do.

Naivety personified.



Nice little rebate we had, what now

Spain would not get us until they got Gibraltar and more fish

How now for a United Ireland; Corbyn might like that but I wouldn't.

We would get back our opt-outs ? Of course not.

We would not be forced to contribute to the EU army.

As what is now a condition of membership we would have to join the Euro; Greece and Italy await with the rest.

And so on.

And then the domestic democracy stuff.

What was that Referendum all about? Do the people still believe in democracy?

Would we get another one to agree or disagree return to the EU?

Would therefore conditions be settled before that referendum?

What would the return costs be?

I doubt I would vote "return" in any new referendum.


Don't be naive

buglawton

Lornapink wrote: »

I argued since before the referendum that Brexit wan an opportunity to innovate and that the City would benefit by us leaving.

Now we learn the City wants no part in a trade deal with the EU, just as we predicted. This was covered in Sunday Politics, London today. Lol, so much for Banks all leaving !

Also we argued many times in the past that EU regulations are harming the City, that we'd be better off out as a global financial services player with more autonomy.

New EU Mifid2 regulations killing City business

https://semperfidem2004.wordpress.com/2016/08/16/brexits-non-impact-on-the-city-of-london-follow-the-money/

Not sure who the writer semperfidem2004 of those opinion pieces are. But a convincing argument is put that Brexit, even a hard one, will not make one jot of difference to the City and possibly even benefit it.

So basically, retail business in UK unaffected and B2B business already typically involves European players working from outside of the EU to circumvent various restrictions/be more efficient.

Zero_Gravitas

.string. wrote: »

Naivety personified.

Nice little rebate we had, what now

Spain would not get us until they got Gibraltar and more fish

How now for a United Ireland; Corbyn might like that but I wouldn't.

We would get back our opt-outs ? Of course not.

We would not be forced to contribute to the EU army.

As what is now a condition of membership we would have to join the Euro; Greece and Italy await with the rest.

And so on.

And then the domestic democracy stuff.

What was that Referendum all about? Do the people still believe in democracy?

Would we get another one to agree or disagree return to the EU?

Would therefore conditions be settled before that referendum?

What would the return costs be?

I doubt I would vote "return" in any new referendum.

Don't be naive

I’m not being naive, I’m being realistic in my assessment of what is best for this country. And as far as democracy is concerned, brexiteers conveniently forget this was actually the second referendum on European membership, and that they pushed for a second referendum because they believed that people had changed their minds...

And so what’s the shelf life on democracy? I don’t recall that when TM called the general election in 2017 many people saying “hang on, we had an election two years ago - surely that result should still stand?”.

So, people change their minds and democracy needs needs to reflect that, or it is no longer democracy. Add into this the significant number of young people who have become eligible to vote since the last referendum and have had no say; and the polling data showing that remain is consistently now ahead, and the case for a further referendum becomes increasingly compelling.

You may, of course, choose to vote leave in that next referendum - that’s democracy.

cogito

I hear that Druncker will be receiving the World Cup trophy on behalf of the EU next week as only EU members remain in it. In 2022, there will be just one EU team representing the 27 members (or it may be 28) or even 34 if they can fast track the Balkan candidates in time.

Enterprise_1701C

Herzlos wrote: »

Exactly. We know a lot more about what Remain will look like than Leave. So it's a tired and pointless argument.

We know exactly what remain would look like, and it is nothing like 3 years ago.

If we backed out of leaving we would

Lose our rebate - after all several net takers are hoping to come on board shortly, and they would almost certainly increase our membership fee too, they will be needing more money whether we are there or not, you can not have more net takers and not use more money if it is run on the same basis.

Be committed to joining the euro - all eu countries are supposed to be part of the euro by 2025.

That would mean we would have to assist in bailing out all the countries that have their economy wrecked by the euro - Italy and Portugal are in line for that.

We would be committed to a common tax and would no longer control our currency.

We would have to join the Schengen area, and be committed to taking any economic migrants that Merkel decided to invite in.

There is no way they would let us back out of Brexit without at least the above, we will be far better off out. The simple fact is they do not want us to leave and prosper, the best outcome for them would be if we backed out of Brexit and were cowed by them

The best thing for us is to continue and get out before the eu implodes, which it seems to be heading for unless it wakes up and realises that one size does not fit all. They have to learn to be flexible. Oh look, I see a pig flying over there !!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;..

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

We know exactly what remain would look like,

True.

We have been spectacularly successful as part of the EU.

and it is nothing like 3 years ago.

False.

If we backed out of leaving we would

Lose our rebate

False.

Be committed to joining the euro -

False.

That would mean we would have to assist in bailing out all the countries that have their economy wrecked by the euro

False.

We would be committed to a common tax and would no longer control our currency.

False.

We would have to join the Schengen area, and be committed to taking any economic migrants that Merkel decided to invite in.

False.

There is no way they would let us back out of Brexit without at least the above,

False.

We can unilaterally revoke article 50 at any time and our membership of the EU continues on the terms it is today.

we will be far better off out.

False.

Under every government analysis and under every possible trade deal arrangement we end up dramatically worse off by leaving than by staying.

Zero_Gravitas

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

We know exactly what remain would look like, and it is nothing like 3 years ago.

If we backed out of leaving we would

Lose our rebate - after all several net takers are hoping to come on board shortly, and they would almost certainly increase our membership fee too, they will be needing more money whether we are there or not, you can not have more net takers and not use more money if it is run on the same basis.

Be committed to joining the euro - all eu countries are supposed to be part of the euro by 2025.

That would mean we would have to assist in bailing out all the countries that have their economy wrecked by the euro - Italy and Portugal are in line for that.

We would be committed to a common tax and would no longer control our currency.

We would have to join the Schengen area, and be committed to taking any economic migrants that Merkel decided to invite in.

There is no way they would let us back out of Brexit without at least the above, we will be far better off out. The simple fact is they do not want us to leave and prosper, the best outcome for them would be if we backed out of Brexit and were cowed by them

The best thing for us is to continue and get out before the eu implodes, which it seems to be heading for unless it wakes up and realises that one size does not fit all. They have to learn to be flexible. Oh look, I see a pig flying over there !!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;..

But this is just pretty much like everything else the brexiteers have been saying - when talking about the advantages of leaving it’s just vague aspiration; and when talking about the disadvantages of staying it’s just unfounded scaremongering...

I suspect the only thing on which we can agree is the spectacular incompetence of the U.K. government in whatever they are trying to negotiate...

System

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

True.

We have been spectacularly successful as part of the EU.



False.



False.



False.



False.



False.



False.



False.

We can unilaterally revoke article 50 at any time and our membership of the EU continues on the terms it is today.



False.

Under every government analysis and under every possible trade deal arrangement we end up dramatically worse off by leaving than by staying.

2 years after the referendum and people still have no idea what they are talking about or voted on. Classic.