Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

phillw

Herzlos wrote: »

I thought that was the key point of Brexit? To not have to follow EU rules and courts? Thus we could change standards.

Right, anything we produce to export into the EU will have to follow their standards but anything for consumption in this country can have the standards reduced so we die earlier of cancer.

I'm serious, we voted against clearer labels for carcinogenic ingredients. This is only going one way.

The 48% of EU referendum voters, who like living, will have to try to avoid all the terrible ideas the 52% inflicted upon us.

melanzana wrote: »

But he does mention that a new PM will be great thing.

He certainly likes our kipper waving future PM, it's because they are both white supremacists..

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Only that which the eu have trade deals with, and only under the eu's terms and conditions.

The EU have and will always do better trade deals with every single country than we can, so that's all good. Doing trade deals comes down to pure numbers and our numbers are much smaller, I can't think of any other reason apart from xenophobia why you think we could do better deals. This whole nationalistic flag waving is a complete dead end, you're loving it now but it's going to be painful real soon.

buglawton

phillw wrote: »

...The EU have and will always do better trade deals with every single country than we can, so that's all good...

Could you post a link to the brand of crystal ball you're using?

SouthLondonUser

How about some common sense?

On what planet does a country get better deals than a trading block about 6 times bigger? Do you know of such cases?

In fact, what the Americans have said so far is far from encouraging : they basically want us to swallow stuff (eg chlorinated chicken) which the EU as a whole has managed to avoid.

lisyloo

melanzana wrote: »

Johnson will be saved. His Falklands moment has conveniently arrived.

Don’t know which channel your watching but I’ve seen Jeremy Hunt dealing with it on BBC.

Enterprise_1701C

A lot of the eu trade deals have not included services, we are a service based economy, we will be able to negotiate trade deals that include what we need.

Arklight

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

A lot of the eu trade deals have not included services, we are a service based economy, we will be able to negotiate trade deals that include what we need.

Yeah, sure. There's no evidence whatsoever of there being one shred of truth to that statement. But keep repeating the Brexit mantra anyway.

Tromking

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

LOL.

What's Boris going to do about it?

There's no amount of bluff, bluster, jingoism and 'positive thinking' that can make up for the fact that Britain is now a third rate military power with ever diminishing status and influence around the World.

Even countries like Iran can now seize British shipping with impunity.

It would appear that your take on this is way off.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-ranked-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world-in-audit-of-major-powers/

I’m personally quite proud that even at the fag-end of our membership of the EU, our military is still enforcing the EU sanctions against Iran. France is maybe going to be busy in the next few years.

Arklight

Tromking wrote: »

It would appear that your take on this is way off.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-ranked-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world-in-audit-of-major-powers/

I’m personally quite proud that even at the fag-end of our membership of the EU, our military is still enforcing the EU sanctions against Iran. France is maybe going to be busy in the next few years.

That's interesting, but I'm not sure this subjective aggregation of capabilities is especially reliable. According to this, the UK is almost a superpower like the US, whereas Russia languishes behind India and Australia as a military also ran.



Common sense alone might tell us this is nonsense. The US spends more on defence than every other military power combined in order to achieve something called full spectrum dominance, the ability to defeat every other rival simultaneously in any theatre of war.

They have over a million uniformed personnel. A ranking that suggests they'd struggle to defeat Britain's 70,000 odd squaddies, of whom maybe about 40,000 might be capable of active deployment, handful of ships and smattering of ageing air craft, is not sensible.

This isn't to denigrate the important role of the British personnel who are still left. They do a dangerous and valuable job with far too little. But there aren't many of them, and Britain's military has next to no ability to project itself globally without American support.

Tromking

@Arklight
Merely challenging Hamish’s, rather miserablist and self-loathing contention that the U.K. is a “third rate military power”.

adindas

Tromking wrote: »

@Arklight
Merely challenging Hamish’s, rather miserablist and self-loathing contention that the U.K. is a “third rate military power”.

Indeed, That is another evidence how an arch remonear is grossly informed that led him to reach the wrong conclusion including brexit. How come UK is rated as “third rate military power” if UK is the only few countries with nuclear deterrance. It is only a very naive person will ever reach to that conclusion.

Not to mention apart from a Nato member Uk is only nation in the EU under Commonwelath Five Power Defence Arrangements which include nation with strong Navy presence e.g Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Singapore.

It is like when "Diane Abbott" estimate about the cost of adding the policy on the interview with LBC.

It depends on the year and the method beeing used, UK has always be ranked in the Top five in term of military power.

In addition to the link above This report is 5th January 2019.

Another Link:
https://www.forces.net/news/britain-worlds-second-biggest-power-says-report

Well UK will become “third rate military power” if labour under Corbyn take control this country with a person like Diane Abbott become Home Secretary.