Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Pauciloquent_1_2

Instead of Katya Adler's opinions on Brexit* here is some relevant Brexit news.

Brexit: Government insists UK will leave customs union

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43860453

*
Well, everybody has opinions but why should Katya Adler's be any more relevant than anybody else's? Maybe then (just for example) our PM's opinion is just as relevant.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/the-future-is-bright-vows-may-on-tour-of-brexit-divided-country-idUKKBN1H439F

Herzlos

To be fair, May has climbed down on almost everything so far. Can she be regarded as a reliable source of information?
I have no doubt that she fully intends to "leave the customs union", right up until she doesn't. That'll either be a case of "leaving in name only" or quietly conceding that staying in the customs union is the best option, and blaming the EU for being intransigent again.

Lornapink wrote: »

When a solution is found, which, of course it will be, you will be posting that the EU was played by the UK I take it?

Why would the EU have been played by agreeing to something and it happening?

What you missed, which is understandable, that the "play" here, if it is such, is in getting the UK to agree to do the impossible with regulatory alignment as a backstop. In essence, we've agreed to regulatory alignment, because it's the only option.

Herzlos

Time and again Project Fear claims have been shown to be wrong, time and again Remainers refuse to acknowledge this. Cognitive dissonance is a very powerful antidote to facts.

I guess it's impossible for one to tell if one suffers from cognative dissonance. I mean, you presumably aren't aware of how hard your bending the facts to fit your view?

Maybe I'm suffering from cognative dissonance as well, in that when I follow the logic in simple steps I get told I'm wrong and the conversation goes dead when I ask someone to correct me. Or the subject gets changed as we end of arguing about petty semantics to avoid the issue.

I mean, I hope I am wrong, and that we're not going to get totally screwed.

Lornapink wrote: »

Ah, the usual drivel about the UK always being the one to back down.
Mm, let's see, what have we here;


EU diplomats have removed a so-called "punishment clause" from a draft text of the arrangement for the Brexit transition period, the BBC understands.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43062112

I'll ask again, just for the hell of it. Did you read the article when it came out, or when you mentioned it here?
Because it's pretty clear that their stance hasn't changed, they've just re-worded a document to refer to conditions elsewhere.
There was no change of mind or concession from the EU.

How does that "climbdown" compare to any of Mays?

mayonnaise

Pauciloquent_1 wrote: »

Well, everybody has opinions but why should Katya Adler's be any more relevant than anybody else's? Maybe then (just for example) our PM's opinion is just as relevant.

Remember when your PM said freedom of movement would end on 29 March 2019?
Remember when your PM said there would definitely be no role for the ECJ after 29 March 2019?

Trust me, the next U-turn on a/the customs union is just around the corner.

Pauciloquent_1_2

mayonnaise wrote: »

Remember when your PM said freedom of movement would end on 29 March 2019?
Remember when your PM said there would definitely be no role for the ECJ after 29 March 2019?

Trust me, the next U-turn on a/the customs union is just around the corner.

Trust you?
Based on your posts, no thank you very much.
Besides misrepresenting what was said neither of your examples here have been finally agreed and signed because there is no final Brexit agreement yet, or did you forget?

Here's an EU turnaround for you, by the sounds of it.

"The EU have now recognised that there will be some form of market access in financial services, having previously dismissed the idea," Mr Glen said.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2018/0423/956557-city-of-london-brexit/

Lornapink

Herzlos wrote: »

I guess it's impossible for one to tell if one suffers from cognative dissonance. I mean, you presumably aren't aware of how hard your bending the facts to fit your view?

Remainers urged us to take heed of threats coming out of the mouth of Hollande and others, that indeed the UK would 'of course' be made an example of. We were told the punishment clause was another 'obvious' consequence of Brexit. Remainers were even minded to believe Spain & other economies just recovering from a decade of hell, would go along with massive self-harm by stopping 40 million UK visits pa.

Remainer's then fall silent when these fairy tale punishment beatings fail to become reality. That's cognitive dissonance. When the much portended closing down of UK flights fails to materialise I will guarantee you guys wont mention it.
In the end the EU is very interested in a wide ranging new trade deal otherwise they wouldn't be putting all this energy and time into it.

Project Fear will be shown by history to have been utter nonsense.

Lornapink

Recall Clegg & friends saying 'in what possible world would the EU offer us tariff free trade in goods?'.


In the U.K., Brexit campaigners are likely to be happy with the EU’s offer of tariff-free trade in all goods and no quota limits. They have long claimed that the bloc would have no economic interest in putting up tariffs, especially as it has a substantial goods trade surplus with the U.K. -- but they will welcome seeing it in print.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-07/eu-trade-plan-falls-short-of-what-u-k-is-seeking-brexit-update

Lornapink

Herzlos wrote: »

There was no change of mind or concession from the EU.

How does that "climbdown" compare to any of Mays?

You endlessly imply the EU always get's it's way whereas we climb down, this is nonsense.
Here's another example of the EU softening a previously rigid position applauded by Remainers;

MEMBER STATE RATIFATION ON KEY AREAS SUCH AS FINANCIAL SERVICES NOT NEEDED;
UK-EU FTA EU boosted as ECJ said EU would not need trade deal ratification by member states on key areas.

http://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/singapore-may-renegotiate-eu-trade-deal-after-brexit-removes-british-markets-36052157.html

Herzlos

You are right, of course. The back-downs haven't been purely one sided; the EU has softened towards us slightly.

But you have to admit the concessions haven't been particularly balanced, have they?
Of course, that's to be expected when the UK starts with the ridiculous and then backs down to the obvious, like the so called "divorce bill".

I don't recall Clegg saying that at all; I don't remember anyone denying that we'll likely get a tariff free deal for goods (I stand to be corrected if you have a reference). What has been the narrative is that while we'll get tariff free goods, we won't get services, which is bad because we're a service economy. It seems there may be some movement too on services which is good.

I think you're confusing a "punishment clause", related to what happens if we violate our part of the agreement, with the EU "punishing us" by giving us a bad deal. Re-wording of the "punishment clause" doesn't mean anyone who used the word "punishment" is suddenly wrong.

iro

For some reason I have always treated Cleggy as a contrary indicator, that is if he is in favour of it I am against it.

Even if there was no other evidence the fact that Cleggy is against Brexit means that I am wildly in favour of it.

Here are some other examples:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1090926/Nick-Clegg-Lib-Dems-birthday-wishes-Cyril-Smith.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/nick-clegg-we-should-consider-joining-the-euro-1515755.html