Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

52% of the UK are. The rest are pretty liberal.

Expats, Irish, Gibraltarn's and the SNP amongst them. Hardly liberal.

wunferall

phillw wrote: »

You're so wrong it must hurt.

Did you not get the memo that we're behind with our rent?

If I'm so wrong why the bile; explain how?
Especially when our own government suggest we do not.

phillw

wunferall wrote: »

The last sentence of your posts makes no sense, sorry.

Well I'm doing better than you where no part of your posts make sense.

Sorry.

wunferall wrote: »

If I'm so wrong why the bile; explain how?

That makes no sense as an argument.

wunferall wrote: »

Especially when our own government suggest we do not.

You used the word "Our", which means you're trying to manipulate the argument by creating an emotional response. Sorry that doesn't work with me.

If you mean the UK government, then I think you'll find it's perfectly possible for them to be wrong. In the current situation where they are all saying whatever will let them hold onto power for as long as possible, then anything they say is likely to be very wrong indeed.

Expect the opposite, when Davis said it won't be like Mad Max. It makes me more worried about the future of the UK.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Expats, Irish, Gibraltarn's and the SNP amongst them. Hardly liberal.

What do you mean by expats? Most of them were denied the vote. I don't know what accusations you're throwing at the other "foreigners" but you probably hate them right?

wunferall

phillw wrote: »

Well I'm doing better than you where no part of your posts make sense.

Sorry.



That makes no sense as an argument.



You used the word "Our", which means you're trying to manipulate the argument by creating an emotional response. Sorry that doesn't work with me.

If you mean the UK government, then I think you'll find it's perfectly possible for them to be wrong. In the current situation where they are all saying whatever will let them hold onto power for as long as possible, then anything they say is likely to be very wrong indeed.

Expect the opposite, when Davis said it won't be like Mad Max. It makes me more worried about the future of the UK.

You have been asked for evidence of who globally outside the EU views the UK as obstinate.
You have been asked for evidence of who globally outside the EU thinks the UK is stupid because of Brexit.
You haven't answered.

What you have done is, it seems, as much verbose distraction as you can in order to avoid answering.
You really can't back up your statements, can you?

tracey3596

wunferall wrote: »

You have been asked for evidence of who globally outside the EU views the UK as obstinate.
You have been asked for evidence of who globally outside the EU thinks the UK is stupid because of Brexit.
You haven't answered.

What you have done is, it seems, as much verbose distraction as you can in order to avoid answering.
You really can't back up your statements, can you?

I suspect you won't get an answer since the statement made in those posts were wrong.

wunferall

tracey3596 wrote: »

I suspect you won't get an answer since the statement made in those posts were wrong.

Yes and you just reminded me that I'm still waiting for a third answer; why am I wrong phillw?

phillw wrote: »

You're so wrong it must hurt.

Herzlos

Scaremongering or just scary?

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/02/20/aviation-cliff-edge-how-brexit-is-sabotaging-a-british-succe

The UK aviation industry is now the largest in Europe and the third largest in the world. In 2006, it transported 268 million passengers, sustaining a million jobs, and contributing £52 billion to the economy and £9 billion directly to the Treasury. The EU is its single biggest destination, accounting for just over half of passengers.

No sane British government would ever want to leave a system which has proved so demonstrably successful. Theresa May would almost certainly rather find a way of staying in. But aviation, like every other sector, is a hostage in the internal Tory psychodrama over Brexit.

The single aviation market is part of the EU's legal spider's web. It comes under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which hard Brexiters reject, and has rules established and monitored by EU agencies, which hard Brexiters want to leave.

The most important agency in aviation is the European Aviation Safety Agency (Easa). Everything you see on a plane in Europe has been vouched for by Easa - from the engine, to the landing gear, to the little trolley that goes up and down the aisle with the drinks. It's heavily influenced by the UK and France, who together provide two-thirds of all the rule-making input on European safety regulation.

If you leave it, bad things happen. All the things Easa used to take care of will suddenly have to be done by the UK's Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). You don't even want to think about how much work that entails, or how many members of staff would have to be hired to do it. The level of technical complexity is dizzying.

Ensuring that the plane itself is safe to fly requires certifying 5,000 different parts. And that is just one tiny part of the work that the regulator needs to do. It'll also have to monitor the training and work of any engineer carrying out work on any plane anywhere in the UK. It'll need to have day-to-day oversight of the work done at all 172 maintenance, repair and overhaul sites. Even military training simulators for combat aircraft pilots will come under its remit.


That new regulatory work would come as Britain cut itself off from its largest market. Leaving Easa means we'd be out the continental system and back to the days of old-school bilateral treaties, restricted to flights to and fro. It would be like going back to the early 90s, but not in a fun Netflix series sort of way. Just in a really drab, irritating way. Most analysts expect there to be significant price rises for passengers, of somewhere between 15% and 30%.

This sounds bleak enough as it is, but in reality it would represent victory. Because even getting to this point means we'd have avoided several more catastrophic short-term hazards.

The first is no-deal Brexit. If talks fall apart, UK aviation faces disaster. No deal on Brexit means no deal on aviation - and no WTO-style arrangement to fall back on. Flights from the UK to Europe would have no legal foundation. Even Britain's flights to the US, which are currently validated by an EU treaty, would be affected. It would be chaos.

If a Brexit deal is reached, the transition element means UK membership of Easa would be extended for another couple of years, buying a little more time to hammer out some kind of long-term arrangement. But the third-party problem remains. Britain's flight rights and safety recognition with several other countries - including the US and Canada - both come through EU membership.

This is why the UK recently slipped out a message to world governments requesting that they continue to treat it as an EU member during transition.

In the area of flying rights, this strategy is likely to succeed. No-one gains from chaos in the air and planes grounded in a key global transport hub. The problem is with safety agreements.

The US and Canada will require detailed technical information about Britain's safety regime before they allow flights. Previously this was vouched for by our membership of Easa. But now, no-one knows what the UK is doing.

British ministers will insist that there's nothing to worry about. Our safety standards on Brexit day will be identical to the ones we had the day before. But the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) isn't worried about today. It's worried about what we'll be like tomorrow. And it is not getting anyguarantees about what a future UK aviation regime will be like, because the government is lost in a civil war between those wanting to stay close to the EU and those wanting complete divergence.

Just one of hundreds of reasons we aren't going to leave without a deal.
Now I'm pretty sure we'll get a deal, but do we have the expertise to do this under the CAA? How many staff will we need to duplicate the functionality?

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

Just one of hundreds of reasons we aren't going to leave without a deal.

Who said that UK was going to?

gfplux

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Scraping the barrel these days.





:think:

No barrel, no scraping.

gfplux

tracey3596 wrote: »

You're making these up, aren't you?
If not, after the first line of your post show us any evidence (evidence please note, not hearsay) that any of those will be positively affected by Brexit?

Dont shoot the messenger.
This first attempt at a list is taken from posts made in these Brexit threads.