Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

cogito

phillw wrote: »

I think you misunderstand what negotiating means. You go in and give your red lines and what you're prepared to compromise over. We have red lines at odds with their red lines, we have no room to compromise because of Mogg & his EU hating friends. You have to think we're magically superior to suggest that the EU isn't negotiating, unfortunately of course most brexiters think we are magically superior.

I understand perfectly well what negotiating means. It takes two to tango and if you don't get what you want, you walk away.

When you say that we have no room to compromise, what you and your UK hating friends mean is that we must totally capitulate to the EU. Nothing less than a de facto remain will make you happy.

kabayiri

BobQ wrote: »

While I agree with this I think that if we were serious about making it happen we should have got on with it. Built the border crossings, had trade deals on the table ready to sign, arranged alternative sources of goods and services.


Instead the Government has fought amongst itself and failed to do anything to prepare for a no-deal.

I advocated for going in hard. This government talked tough and acted weakly. They surrendered the agenda almost straight away.

I wouldn't have guaranteed any EU citizen rights whatsoever; it would be all contingent on any deal. Call it a red line if you like. But instead we have weak politicians.

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

Well if you want an oppressive regime ruling the country with an iron fist while stripping away human rights, increasing polution etc then maybe you could follow their example.

People seem far more interested in buying cheap imported consumer goods than the quality of life for fellow humans. Sad reflection of modern society.

Thrugelmir

kabayiri wrote: »

I wouldn't have guaranteed any EU citizen rights whatsoever; it would be all contingent on any deal.

Possibly it is. We have no idea. Easier enough to take something off the table.

buglawton

kabayiri wrote: »

I advocated for going in hard. This government talked tough and acted weakly. They surrendered the agenda almost straight away.

I wouldn't have guaranteed any EU citizen rights whatsoever; it would be all contingent on any deal. Call it a red line if you like. But instead we have weak politicians.

Granting existing EU nationals residency upfront put the UK on the moral high ground. Then it was time to be tough... which ain't happening.

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

I understand perfectly well what negotiating means. It takes two to tango and if you don't get what you want, you walk away.

When you say that we have no room to compromise, what you and your UK hating friends mean is that we must totally capitulate to the EU. Nothing less than a de facto remain will make you happy.

And thus we must just both agree to walk away. Our red lines are incompatible with those of the EU and neither will change.

It seems common for leavers to think negotiate means "meet in the middle" which might be the case in pre-school but not in business. It's also not UK hating to point that out.

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

This is a serious question. Let's assume Brexit goes through.

Where would the EU want the UK to be in 5/10 years time?

If they didn't care, and the UK did suffer industrial and economic hardship, then political instability would not be far behind.

Europe has seen this before remember, when the Allies had a very aggressive stance against the Weimar republic. That too was accompanied by a rise in populism, a specific group to focus their hatred on, and we all know how that panned out.

A new Weimar republic, but also a nuclear power, would not be an attractive neighbour.

So...EU needs to be aggressive for the sake of their club rules, yet they are haunted by their past.

I think the EU want to make the leaving process a difficult one, but they will all probably do some longer term makeshift deal, and resolve very little.

Honestly? As long as the EU reduces dependence on the UK it doesn't really need to care about us unless we try to act aggressively towards them. They obviously want as close a relationship as possible but not on Mays frankly insulting terms.

Realistically it can only go 2 ways; 1. Somehow We become a super prosperous nation on their doorstep with a FTA in place and flowing money into the EU or 2. We do badly, turn back into the sick man of Europe and rejoin the EU as a new member without our veto, rebate or not outs and become a proper member rather than a reluctant one. Neither outcome is better than us staying in but they can't make us stay.

The EU has plenty of other problems to deal with than wasting all of its efforts on brexit. So do we.

The more I think about it, the more in favour I am of a hard Brexit. It's what we voted for after all.

LHW99

The more I think about it, the more in favour I am of a hard Brexit. It's what we voted for after all.

Can't disagree with that. It was also what the Government booklet handed out before the referendum seemed to imply would happen - and there was still a majority in favour of leave.

kabayiri

buglawton wrote: »

Granting existing EU nationals residency upfront put the UK on the moral high ground. Then it was time to be tough... which ain't happening.

It wasn't a very consistent morality play though was it?

I think the bickering masked any honourable early gestures.

My point about setting up a hard stance up front is that it would turn things around. The EU would be negotiating on behalf of member states to secure citizen rights. Then we would see what they really value : the core EU rules or jobs for the Eastern member states.

Somehow we needed to smoke out how fixed the EU position was much earlier on. Instead, we have May panic with some pivotal dinner being touted as make/break.

kabayiri

Thrugelmir wrote: »

People seem far more interested in buying cheap imported consumer goods than the quality of life for fellow humans. Sad reflection of modern society.

I know that some of us on here do value quality UK made goods like hifi Thrug. We had this discussion before.

That model, of product value through longevity and TCO, was never going to satisfy the globalists with their Amazon style visions of a never ending conveyor belt of tomorrow's landfill.