Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Herzlos

But I don't see the EU going out of it's way to cause the UK to suffer. It's letting the UK get exactly what it's asked for, and now no longer has to concern itself with what's best for the UK - the UK government should be doing that.

We're not getting any special treatment because we don't need special treatment. We're not getting punished because we don't need to be punished.

You're essentially complaining that the EU isn't stopping is punching ourselves in the face.

gfplux

The talk talk is ramping up ahead of phase 2 negotiations.
This article from Bloomberg discusses Germany’s hard line over money for access and also there are other details about what could happen.
https://luxtimes.lu/european-union/32421-germany-said-to-insist-uk-pay-for-post-brexit-bank-access

——
“Bloomberg) Germany will demand the UK pay for the privilege of its financial firms having access to European Union markets after Brexit as Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government maintains a hard-line stance against a bespoke trade deal.

The UK cannot hope for a trade agreement that includes financial services unless Britain agrees to make substantial contributions to the EU budget and adheres to European law, according to German officials from two key government departments in Berlin. Both asked not to be named discussing internal government strategy.
Non-EU countries Norway and Switzerland do have limited access to Europe’s single market, but they pay for the privilege.

Canada, whose free-trade pact the EU says Britain’s will most closely resemble, doesn’t pay into the EU budget – and financial services barely feature. According to the German officials, the UK must therefore choose between the Swiss or Norwegian models if financial services are to be included.

EU Budget Commissioner Guenther Oettinger told reporters in Brussels on Wednesday that UK payments after Britain’s planned post-Brexit transition phase ends in 2021 were a matter for the negotiations but that “the UK could reflect upon” how Switzerland pays to participate in some European projects.
On Tuesday, Barnier reinforced his hard-line stance on banking, after previously warning it will form no part of the trade agreement and saying “passports” for the U.K. finance industry will end.“
—-

Tromking

Herzlos wrote: »

But I don't see the EU going out of it's way to cause the UK to suffer. It's letting the UK get exactly what it's asked for, and now no longer has to concern itself with what's best for the UK - the UK government should be doing that.

We're not getting any special treatment because we don't need special treatment. We're not getting punished because we don't need to be punished.

You're essentially complaining that the EU isn't stopping is punching ourselves in the face.

I can’t disagree with a lot of what you’ve written, i was just writing from a UK citizens perspective. The EU is now in direct conflict with my country and it’s only natural that I use terms like suffer and punish and believe it or not I do get that the UK put itself in this position.

Herzlos

I don't think it's fair to say it's the perspective of all UK citizens. Most of the Remainers saw exactly this happening (and that's why I voted the way I did); this is the obvious consequence of leaving a trading/political union.

That people still seem up in arms that the big bad EU is being unfair to us seem to have completely missed that this is the only way it was ever going to unfold, and seem to think that it's because the EU is trying to punish us to set an example, when in reality we've changed it's priorities and considerations, and we're now an afterthought at best.
It also ties into this "they need us more than we need them" garbage. If you somehow feel that we've got the EU over a barrel, then sure they'd be trying to do what they can to give us what we want, but again the reality is that in this game of chicken we'll come off far worse, so there's no incentive for the EU to give us our cake and eat it, either.

When a small entity leaves the protection of a larger entity, it can't really be surprised that said larger entity stops looking out for it's interests. That's not punishment any more than not giving a bonus to an employee that resigned before the bonus period.

Enterprise_1701C

Herzlos wrote: »

But I don't see the EU going out of it's way to cause the UK to suffer. It's letting the UK get exactly what it's asked for, and now no longer has to concern itself with what's best for the UK - the UK government should be doing that.

We're not getting any special treatment because we don't need special treatment. We're not getting punished because we don't need to be punished.

You're essentially complaining that the EU isn't stopping is punching ourselves in the face.

Of course it is going to go out of its way to make the UK suffer. The eu has spent years stacking the cards to make it difficult for anyone to leave, without letting any country actually let their people decide. The last thing they want is for people to realise that it is feasible to leave without damage. When we turn round and prosper after leaving they will then try to block us from trading with their protectionist bloc.

I do not trust a word that comes out of their mouths, this USofE has been the intention for a long time, why else would they have a flag, a parliament, and now they are working on an army. Why else would they be working on a single currency (apart from the obvious idea of bankrupting every country bar Germany to ensure that they are beholden to the eu) And yet they spent ages denying that it was their intention. They even ignore the fact that their accounts have not been signed off in ages, and just keep throwing cash in any direction they want to.

They could have avoided Brexit but they would not change, they have now decided that they will try to break us for the sheer cheek of leaving, they did not believe that someone would leave their precious little bloc.

They did not count on us though, we have stood up against being taken over before, and we will again.

I voted to stay, but the dreadful attitude of the eu has made sure that if I were given the choice again I would vote to leave.

Herzlos

Has everyone seen this: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-hamper_uk_5a564c02e4b03bc4d03d4d12?s5s

Wind up or not?

“The gifts will help Mr Barnier to fully grasp the powerful commercial position Britain occupies globally”

Despite some of them having distinctly European origin or ownership.

Herzlos

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Of course it is going to go out of its way to make the UK suffer. The eu has spent years stacking the cards to make it difficult for anyone to leave

How so?

without letting any country actually let their people decide.

Didn't we decide to leave?

The last thing they want is for people to realise that it is feasible to leave without damage.

Because it's not. Basic economics shows there will be damage. Will the damage be worth it? Who knows.

When we turn round and prosper after leaving they will then try to block us from trading with their protectionist bloc.

Urm, okay. I bet you'll wheel this out when we don't get the cake and eat it deal - they've got no incentive to let us trade on our terms, and every incentive to let us trade on their terms. As you said, it's a protectionist bloc.

I do not trust a word that comes out of their mouths, this USofE has been the intention for a long time

Do you trust the words coming out of our governments mouths? Like Theresa "spinning submarine" May?

why else would they have a flag

Lots of things have flags, it makes them easy to identify.

a parliament

How else do you expect a large union with a parliamentary basis operate? Would you rather it was called an HQ?

and now they are working on an army.

Which is a closer integration of the current set up. We're not talking about "EU units", just units from EU countries that are more closely integrated with a coherent command structure.

Why else would they be working on a single currency (apart from the obvious idea of bankrupting every country bar Germany to ensure that they are beholden to the eu)

Because everything is so much easier in a trading union with a consistent currency.

And yet they spent ages denying that it was their intention.

No they haven't. It's been in many speaches and proposals from EU presidents.

They even ignore the fact that their accounts have not been signed off in ages, and just keep throwing cash in any direction they want to.

Yet it's been audited and confirmed to have no major discrepancies.

They could have avoided Brexit but they would not change, they have now decided that they will try to break us for the sheer cheek of leaving, they did not believe that someone would leave their precious little bloc.

Why would they change when we don't know what we want them to change? We had the ability to change the EU from the inside but many of our representatives don't turn up.
About half of the UK still doesn't think someone would be stupid enough to leave the bloc, either.

They did not count on us though, we have stood up against being taken over before, and we will again.

We've done the opposite; we've given up a leading say in a large entity under the pretense of sovereignty but we'll still need to do what we're told.

I voted to stay, but the dreadful attitude of the eu has made sure that if I were given the choice again I would vote to leave.

What attitude? What were you actually expecting the EU to do, here? I'm genuinely curious.

Tromking

Again, you seem intent on telling me something I already knew not least because it’s been part of the the Remain narrative from the beginning.
To my recollection I’ve personally never said ‘they need us more then we need them’ line, but there are consequences for the EU and its constituent nations if it does decide to follow its new “priorities and considerations” to the detriment of the UK, and before you say it I do get that worrying about the UK’s detriment is now not a EU priority per se.
Most of your post is the usual bitter leave voter conjecture, although I’m happy to see both our points of view being tested in the next 10 months.
We’ll know soon enough.

Herzlos

I think it's more frustration than bitterness. We're leaving, and will likely be worse off, I get that. There's nothing I can do to make it any more of a success, beyond making sure I'm financially stable enough to weather the storm. Hopefully it works, but if not hopefully we can fix most of it.

What really bugs me is that we're still, nearly 2 years later, getting the same rants about how we're somehow being punished for having to cheek to leave the US of E and made to be an example. If we ever finally get past this persecution nonsense maybe we can start to talk about the future and what we actually want/expect to happen. Who should we be trying to boost trade with? What trade? Where's the massive changes we need to make that the EU wasn't letting us? How do we drive forward into the 22nd century and the 4th industrial revolution? What can we do now we're "free" of the EU "shackles"?

All I see is people bragging that the sky hasn't fallen yet, and complaining that we aren't getting to use all the advantages of being in the EU whilst not being in the EU.

I'm not accusing you of any of this stuff, by the way, as we seem to largely agree.

cogito

gfplux wrote: »

The talk talk is ramping up ahead of phase 2 negotiations.
This article from Bloomberg discusses Germany’s hard line over money for access and also there are other details about what could happen.
https://luxtimes.lu/european-union/32421-germany-said-to-insist-uk-pay-for-post-brexit-bank-access

——
“Bloomberg) Germany will demand the UK pay for the privilege of its financial firms having access to European Union markets after Brexit as Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government maintains a hard-line stance against a bespoke trade deal.

The UK cannot hope for a trade agreement that includes financial services unless Britain agrees to make substantial contributions to the EU budget and adheres to European law, according to German officials from two key government departments in Berlin. Both asked not to be named discussing internal government strategy.
Non-EU countries Norway and Switzerland do have limited access to Europe’s single market, but they pay for the privilege.

Canada, whose free-trade pact the EU says Britain’s will most closely resemble, doesn’t pay into the EU budget – and financial services barely feature. According to the German officials, the UK must therefore choose between the Swiss or Norwegian models if financial services are to be included.

EU Budget Commissioner Guenther Oettinger told reporters in Brussels on Wednesday that UK payments after Britain’s planned post-Brexit transition phase ends in 2021 were a matter for the negotiations but that “the UK could reflect upon” how Switzerland pays to participate in some European projects.
On Tuesday, Barnier reinforced his hard-line stance on banking, after previously warning it will form no part of the trade agreement and saying “passports” for the U.K. finance industry will end.“
—-

How about we ask the EU to pay for access to the UK single market? Maybe they should pay us for the privilege of selling a lot more of their stuff than they buy from us.

Did you miss that the Swiss are very hacked off with the EU because of the limits they have imposed on Swiss access to EU financial markets? Seen in Switzerland as an attempt to impose their laws on the Swiss. The Swiss are one of the most amenable countries in the world when it comes to accommodating other countries and it's no small achievement on the part of the EU to upset them so much.