Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

phillw

ukcarper wrote: »

That may be true but it fairly obvious what leave voters concerns were and a Norway style leave satisfies none of them.

It's only obvious what the xenophobic ones concerns were, which I'm led to believe was a very small percentage.

If the referendum question was "do you want a xenophobic exit from the EU" then I'd concede your point.

ukcarper

phillw wrote: »

It's only obvious what the xenophobic ones concerns were, which I'm led to believe was a very small percentage.

If the referendum question was "do you want a xenophobic exit from the EU" then I'd concede your point.

It's not worth discussing things with you are all you end up doing is insulting anybody who doesn't agree with you.

I voted remain but realise that just because people have concerns about FOM it doesn't make them xenophobic.

Rinoa

phillw wrote: »

All the brexit supporting politicians want to increase their relative wealth compared to the rest of is.

How will they increase their wealth with Brexit as opposed to staying in the EU.

ben501

movilogo wrote: »

Don't assume Farage's definition of Leave is same as everyone else's

CU may or may not include FOM but as the name is "custom" it means it entirely depends on what deal UK agrees with EU.

Is that another misquote or a misunderstanding?


Sure it still depends on getting a deal, but it's customs, not custom. The relevant word here would be 'union', in that we'd share the same arrangement.
That's assuming we are talking about Customs (the collection of import taxes), not custom (a tailor made arrangement)

movilogo

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664

CU does not require 4 freedoms. In fact, CU is only about goods not service, money or people.

So, technically CU is a good compromise for Brexit. The only negative with CU is that UK can't have its own trade deals (as some Leavers say).

Moby

AG47 wrote: »

Meanwhile taking off rose tinted specs, back in the world of reality, the more favourable outcomes seem les likely by the day.

Sorry perma prob bulls, but property is looking to continue to fall and you will continue to be wrong if you dogmatically stick to your perma prob bull fanatics

As Hamish says parliament won't allow a 'no deal' outcome. Also the EU has no interest in throwing Ireland under a bus.

phillw

ukcarper wrote: »

It's not worth discussing things with you are all you end up doing is insulting anybody who doesn't agree with you.

I voted remain but realise that just because people have concerns about FOM it doesn't make them xenophobic.

It's not worth discussing things if you won't accept that a lot of the leave voters are xenophobic and the only way forward is to deal with it rather than appease it.

We know you claim to have voted remain.

People who have concerns about FoM above all else are obviously scared of foreigners coming here and therefore xenophobic. If you are able to balance the cons with the pros then you probably voted remain and you're not xenophobic.

Fear of the laws made in the European Parliament and decisions made in the ECJ is also xenophobic.

In all cases it's fear of foreigners. People might not like the label but then they should stop acting out of fear of foreigners, not try to abuse political correctness to dodge the label.

People coming from the EU have made a positive contribution to our economy, EU parliament has made a positive contribution to our laws, ECJ has made a positive contribution to peoples lives in the UK. So other than just not like the idea of foreigners coming here and telling us what to do then I await some non xenophobic reason for leaving

Because it sure isn't obvious there are any.

movilogo wrote: »

So, technically CU is a good compromise for Brexit. The only negative with CU is that UK can't have its own trade deals (as some Leavers say).

I don't think CU solves the backstop though, we need Single Market for that which does require the four freedoms and was part of the Labour party Manifesto in the last GE. So it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect Labour to keep pushing for it.

The Conservative votes (13,636,684) compared to Labour votes (12,878,460) in the last election are even closer than the Leave and Remain votes in the referendum.

When you throw in the SNP votes (977,569) & Lib Dem votes (2,371,910) then their appears to be a majority for no/soft brexit.

movilogo

this parliament won't allow a 'no deal' outcome

Changed the quote to make it right.

If Brexit is delayed/denied, next GE will be fight between Leave and Remain parties.

I don't think CU solves the backstop though, we need Single Market for that

Since when WTO rules dictate immigration?

Malthusian

Moby wrote: »

As Hamish says parliament won't allow a 'no deal' outcome.

They have no other option other than the nuclear option, which is to simply ignore the referendum and cancel Brexit.

Nuclear option is the right term here because it would be catastrophic for both the Tories and Labour. Brexitexit is mutually assured political destruction. Both parties would lose the votes of over half the country and be politically extinct. Even if parties called Conservative and Labour remained, they would be unrecognisable as the parties we have now.

No deal exit on the other hand would not be catastrophic for either party. Even if we do have a crippling recession, inflation and mass unemployment, that won't affect MPs or senior civil servants. A depression might cause a Tory defeat in the next election but that's no disaster as the Tories are probably going to lose the next election regardless, as they've won the last three and it's Labour's turn; a return to the normal economic and electoral cycle would not be classified as a disaster.

Parliament will therefore act in their own interests and trigger no deal Brexit. Either it will be a disaster and after a couple of years they can bring the UK crawling back into the EU, or it will be a smashing success in which case MPs will be heroes and say they knew all along that they had to get Brexit over the line. Win-win.

phillw

Malthusian wrote: »

Parliament will therefore act in their own interests and trigger no deal Brexit. Either it will be a disaster and after a couple of years they can bring the UK crawling back into the EU, or it will be a smashing success in which case MPs will be heroes and say they knew all along that they had to get Brexit over the line. Win-win.

It's also pretty tempting for remain voters to accept no deal. Either we're wrong but we have the consolation that things go well, or we're right and we go hard join in a scramble back to safety. The danger would be constantly being worse off but just not bad enough that the leavers accept they were wrong.

So in a no deal situation it would be beneficial to make sure the country really bombs but we maintain our own interests. Game theory ftw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHiT9VPkgUY

I wonder if they'll suggest secret voting at some point.