Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Herzlos

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Don't recall it being a current topic of conversation so no.

Current topic? It's been underlying the entirety of the Brexit negotiations.

tracey3596

Herzlos wrote: »

This thread seems to largely reflect the conclusions I'm coming to on why Leave & Remain just can't understand each other. I genuinely don't think there's any solution either as both approaches are completely incompatible. I've spent nearly 2 years asking questions like "why?" and "what's the problem your trying to solve?" and getting pretty much nowhere.

https://twitter.com/garrethhayes/status/965318168028819456

What do people think? Will either side ever be able to understand the concerns of the other?

(any bets on who'll quote a Brexiteer half way down that somehow invalidates the whole argument).

Who on earth is this Gareth Hayes; why should his opinions be more worthy than anybody elses; and why resort to Tweets? Are you running out of things to post?

tracey3596

Moby wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/20/uk-will-have-to-have-a-customs-union-post-brexit-says-corbyn

Labour seems to be inching towards a softer Brexit!

But Labour are not the government, are they?

tracey3596

gfplux wrote: »

It was not paywalled although copy and paste from the article does not work on my device.

To your further points.
I am not attempting to give weight to the news. Just illustrating Brexit by a thousand cuts.

Judging by the volume of posts from remainers (soon to be returners) it seems more like Brexit via a thousand quibbles.
I'm still waiting for the evidence I asked you for; you posted your opinion but you cannot provide any evidence to support it?
That is called conjecture or speculation.
In other words, it is not true.

tracey3596

Theophile wrote: »

Lots of angry posts from our brexiteers today.
Maybe linked to this?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/20/the-guardian-view-on-the-shrinking-vision-for-brexit-unloveable-to-all
Yes, it's an opinion piece, before anyone feels the need to point that out.

On the contrary, lots of angry posts from remainers - or will you soon be called returners?

Maybe it's because of this?
"Economists "debunk" Whitehall Brexit analysis - and claim the economy will grow"

The Economists for Free Trade believe Brexit on the basis of Theresa May’s Lancaster House speech will boost the UK’s economy by two-to-four per cent.

http://www.cityam.com/280953/economists-debunk-whitehall-brexit-analysis-and-claim


And that's NOT from an opinion piece.

tracey3596

Moby wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/20/tory-mps-sign-letter-to-theresa-may-outlining-hard-brexit-goals
The loons are stamping their feet.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/david-davis-brexit-speech-david-brent-eu-talks-vienna-a8219721.html

:rotfl:

So in your eyes the voting majority are "loons"?
:wall:
These "loons" as you facetiously call these MP's should not be putting forward the case for the voting majority that voted for Brexit?
I suppose you would rather send Theresa May a letter stating what you would like to see happen - and expect her to pay attention to your suggestions in preference to a democratic majority?
:rotfl:

Theresa May's own words:

"People in the UK feel very strongly that if we take a decision, then governments should turn not round and say no you got that wrong"

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-vote/britains-pm-may-says-no-question-of-a-second-brexit-referendum-idUSKCN1G10BY

tracey3596

ilovehouses wrote: »

Rees-Mogg continues his Tory leadership bid using brexit as a Trojan horse..



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43131446

In your imagination maybe - or is that in your worst nightmares?
FYI he has said he does not want to be leader, only a few weeks ago too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/02/05/tory-mp-jacob-rees-mogg-says-could-not-prime-minister-family/
Never mind though, you can carry on shaking in your boots if you are so inclined.

tracey3596

ilovehouses wrote: »

I like irony too.

From that it appears that you're uncertain of the definition.
Instead maybe try this:
"David Davis And Boris Johnson Are The 'Ronaldo and Messi' Of Brexit, Says Michael Gove"

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/michael-gove-davis-boris-brexit_uk_5a8c2a17e4b0a1d0e12d3b3a?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage

It includes this:

the UK’s fishing waters and other agricultural crown jewels are not offered up to Brussels as a trade-off for the City of London to get special access to the EU.

vivatifosi

Herzlos wrote: »

This thread seems to largely reflect the conclusions I'm coming to on why Leave & Remain just can't understand each other. I genuinely don't think there's any solution either as both approaches are completely incompatible. I've spent nearly 2 years asking questions like "why?" and "what's the problem your trying to solve?" and getting pretty much nowhere.

https://twitter.com/garrethhayes/status/965318168028819456

What do people think? Will either side ever be able to understand the concerns of the other?

(any bets on who'll quote a Brexiteer half way down that somehow invalidates the whole argument).

I have no idea who Gareth Hughes is.

I do think Brexit is a divisive issue. However negotiation always seeks middle ground and compromise. So whatever we end up with won't be staying in the EU, nor ought it be a no deal floundering off, as that will not help anyone.

FWIW I always thought we'd end up more at the EFTA level as the compromise, I'm now increasingly of the view that it will be more like Canada, but with services included.

We have to try to see each other's views or the country faces years of schism which isn't good for building our mutual future, wherever we end up.

Perhaps a starting point is asking where our personal red lines are. So mine would be:

1. We should not endanger the Good Friday agreement.

2. I want to be able to continue to travel to Europe for long periods of time, even if I don't have a right to live there.

3. Participation in joint anti terror work should not be compromised.

4. We can not have a scenario whereby we end up with food shortages as a result of failure to agree an adequate exit.

5. The pound should not be put in a scenario where it experiences further major falls against the world's currencies.

6. Fair and equitable treatment of both Britsh people living in Europe at time of leaving and fair and equitable treatment of EU citizens living in the UK.

Additionally, there are some points that I would like to see negotiated in to any agreement:
1. Continued joint European mobile calls and data roaming
2. Continued access to EHIC
3. Continued access to ERASMUS
4. Continued access to EURATOM
5. Continued access to pet passports

There are probably other things that I haven't thought of, but that's a start.

Arklight

Herzlos wrote: »

This thread seems to largely reflect the conclusions I'm coming to on why Leave & Remain just can't understand each other. I genuinely don't think there's any solution either as both approaches are completely incompatible. I've spent nearly 2 years asking questions like "why?" and "what's the problem your trying to solve?" and getting pretty much nowhere.

https://twitter.com/garrethhayes/status/965318168028819456

What do people think? Will either side ever be able to understand the concerns of the other?

(any bets on who'll quote a Brexiteer half way down that somehow invalidates the whole argument).

That’s a very insightful summary. To paraphrase the Twitter thread, it’s saying that the main thing that Brexiteers are angry about is complicated rules and restrictions they don’t understand but that they feel are confining them.

The world, both on a personal and international level is governed by myriad regulations and Brexit voters think by getting rid of the EU they are somehow going to be free of rules. Which is why Brexit politicians are doing such a bad job or arranging a break, because it requires sitting down and figuring out a whole load of new rules.

This would also explain why better educated people are anti-Brexit and less nationalistic. You hear a lot from the Right about 'Freedom' but it is Ill defined at best.

For a poorly educated Right winger, angry that he or she hasn’t got what they feel was their right, all these rules are to blame for them missing out. For a better educated person, the treaties and agreements are what supports their way of life.

It largely depends whether you want to drive a car, read the Guardian, and have central heating and clothes and vote Remain and Labour or Lib Dem, or vote Tory and UKIP, live in a hollowed out tree in the forest, and wear hats made out of decomposing squirrels you managed to catch yourself and not share with anyone.