Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

gfplux

Bloomberg Brexit bulletin has this to say

Surely just not true!

QUOTE
Moving Out | Nearly one in seven EU companies with U.K. suppliers have already moved some of their business out of Britain and almost a quarter of U.K. businesses are planning to reduce their workforce to offset Brexit-related costs, according to a report from the Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply.
END QUOTE

Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply.
Who ever heard of them. They sound a very dodgy group

Herzlos

mrginge wrote: »

Oh my god not a parliamentary petition. What will we do???????

It'll result in a debate in parliament and a lot of pressure on MPs to look into it.

Or did you expect the remainers to just shut up once we were out?

Herzlos

mrginge wrote: »

I thought transition was about maintaining the status quo?
How do you capitulate on keeping things the same?

You’re not very good at this ‘getting the things you actually want’ lark are you?

It is about keeping the status who, which is exactly what we got (and not what we asked for).

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

It'll result in a debate in parliament and a lot of pressure on MPs to look into it.

Or did you expect the remainers to just shut up once we were out?

No I fully expect them to keep droning on and on and on for years.

With no effect.

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

It is about keeping the status who, which is exactly what we got (and not what we asked for).

Well it seems to me like we got the status quo alongside a big cherry of permissible third party trade negotiations on top.
Seems like a marginal win to me, given that cherry is probably the most important thing we wanted.
But let’s call it a capitulation if it keeps you happy.

Herzlos

mrginge wrote: »

Well it seems to me like we got the status quo alongside a big cherry of permissible third party trade negotiations on top.
Seems like a marginal win to me, given that cherry is probably the most important thing we wanted.
But let’s call it a capitulation if it keeps you happy.

You don't care about all the things May said she'd never agree to that she agreed to?

I agree the trade deals thing is a good outcome but we still lost on everything else .
Though few countries will want to sign a deal with us until they know what deal we have with the eu anyway.

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

You don't care about all the things May said she'd never agree to that she agreed to?

Not really no. That’s what a negotiation is.
I mean in the grand scheme of things, giving up on restricting rights for eu migrants during the next 21 months is small potatoes.
21 months of ECJ and other such trivialities is really not worth getting in a flap about.
After all, nobody wants to come any more (apparently).

I agree the trade deals thing is a good outcome but we still lost on everything else .

So what did we actually lose?

Though few countries will want to sign a deal with us until they know what deal we have with the eu anyway.

You’re failing to see the bigger picture.

Maybe other countries will be more keen to sign a deal with us so they can get some first mover advantage while the eu argue with us about fishing quotas.

That’s what you’ve not twigged. In your haste to think about we’ve ‘lost’, you’ve missed the important point that the eu have given up their period of exclusivity.

Herzlos

May and the Brexiteers we're making a huge deal of this stuff until we caved, at which point it was no big deal. They were even red line items.

All we've lost at this stage is influence.

I don't think there's any real first deal advantage; it's a big gamble, particularly for those that use us as a gateway to Europe or have a European supply chain. Ditto for those that want us to lower standards; will the eu deal allow us?

There will be lots of countries keen to improving trade terms from their pov vs the eu deal they have.

But at least we should avoid this wto limbo with most of them.

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

May and the Brexiteers we're making a huge deal of this stuff until we caved, at which point it was no big deal. They were even red line items.

I was under the impression that you wanted
A. Agreement to be reached
B. May to soften her approach and relax her red lines

Now it appears you actually wanted May to stick rigidly to her red lines, not giving an inch.
At least try and have some consistency.

All we've lost at this stage is influence.

You said we lost on everything else. Is that it?
And where have we lost this influence?
Sounds a bit like you’ve just made something up.

I don't think there's any real first deal advantage.

There is a massive advantage in that it gives us more scope and information about the areas we need and don’t need to prioritise

Enterprise_1701C

Herzlos wrote: »

We could always leave the eu if any of that ever actually happened.

That is NOT how it works. It would depend on who was in the driving seat. If Khorbyn ever got in and if he was in the driving seat he would set course for the biggest rocks he could find. His ambition seems to be to wreck this country, probably so it could be handed to his mates in Russia on a plate, his biggest ambition seems to be an economy similar to that of Venezuela.

The idea of the euro should have been shelved long ago, it is clear that the only people it really works for is the Germans. It damages every other economy it even breathes near, even the French are less than keen on it.

Is it not strange that the people that say the eu has stopped any wars within the eu are the people that started the two world wars in the first place? They are basically saying hand over your country and we will not fight you for it.

The eu wants to take over the world. Why else would a trading bloc need an army? To this end it is my belief that they will soon make it very hard to leave the eu, how they will go about that I do not know, but once we prove that there is life after the eu then the doors will be altered to one way only.