Brexit negotiations

[Mr D]

3). This post-Brexit path relies heavily on decades of uninterrupted Conservative rule of the hard-right variety. This is extremely unlikely to happen, particularly as such policies tend to make things worse before they get better. That's a crucial difference between Singapore and the UK, as over there, one party has dominated politics since the 1950s. Back here at home, it wouldn't take much for Labour to get into power and completely derail the ideas of the hard-line Brexiteers.

This post-Brexit model is probably music to the ears of a lot of heavily right-wing supporters, but for those on the left, in the centre, and even moderately to the right, this shift would be unlike anything this country has seen before, and on a whole other level to anything Thatcher ever did.

I'm not entirely sure what the current Labour position on Brexit is. Seems to have altered a bit over the past couple of years depending who gets in front of the press.
Them getting in after we have left may well open the door for their own bonfire of regulations. Not the same ones, more the ones protecting businesses and keeping taxes understandable.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I'm not entirely sure what the current Labour position on Brexit is. Seems to have altered a bit over the past couple of years depending who gets in front of the press.
Them getting in after we have left may well open the door for their own bonfire of regulations. Not the same ones, more the ones protecting businesses and keeping taxes understandable.

Personally I think Brexit will backfire spectacularly in terms of domestic politics for those on the right. Leaving the EU is ideal for the right-wing agenda of Mogg and the like, but that depends on them actually being in power to deliver that agenda.

Labour are playing a cautious game. They'd rather moderately appeal to a wider base instead of greatly appealing to a smaller section of the electorate. At this stage, they are happy to let the Conservatives remain responsible for Brexit with all these promises, because it's impossible to create a Brexit outcome that's going to please everyone who would ever consider voting Tory.

It's working like a charm, too: https://news.sky.com/story/public-o...against-brexit-sky-data-poll-reveals-11453220. 78% of people think the government is doing a bad job on Brexit, and crucially, because opinions vary so much, many on the leave side are just as unhappy as those on the remain side.

When you add it all up, including the fact that the economy will inevitably gets worse before it gets better, I can see Labour being swept into power fairly soon, and possibly for a very long stint.

 

[Steven001]

If we leave the EU, and the hard-right Brexiteers get their way, we can wave goodbye to swathes of:
- Environmental regulations

Already destroyed our industry - closure of coal power stations devastated mining towns across the land, wind energy is highly inefficient and kills birds which are important to our ecosystem. British steel manufacturing down massively, almost non-existent now.

- Safety regulations

Many unnecessary regulations cost businesses a lot of money and makes it difficult for small and medium sized businesses to compete with larger firms.

- Quality regulations

If we can stop importing from China and start manufacturing over here, quality will go up.

- Workers rights

Really? You think all of a sudden when we leave the EU our workers will have no rights?

- Minimum/living wage rights

Minimum wage is a disastrous policy, inflation rises with the minimum wage, it's a cyclic event, an economic death spiral for small and medium sized businesses and even large companies and it needs to be stopped. We have to consolidate our spending and rake in the uncollected tax from large companies who have been allowed to get away with it. Pay off the national debt, stop borrowing money and reduce inflation.

- Employment support (maternity leave, sick pay etc)

Maternity leave has been guaranteed well since before the EU came into existence.

- Press freedom and free speech

Interesting you would mention this when clearly Britain doesn't have free speech. Instead we have ridiculously far-reaching hate-speech laws and a politically correct establishment who smashes down the hammer on anyone daring to challenge their pompous sanctimony.

- Welfare support

Welfare support is often given to those who don't deserve it, people who can work but wish not to. We need to be very strict and stop paying people to be lazy.

- The NHS

The NHS was created before the EU and it will still be there after the EU crumbles away.

- Government spending in general

Government spending is completely out of control. The UK government see fit to reduce Police presence on our streets when major cities are experiencing an unprecedented level of crime and at the same time they waste billions on ridiculous ideas like HS2. We need a better government, one who acts in the interest of our nation.

--------------------

It's like you regurgitated everything the anti-Brexit establishment has been churning out since the referendum result! and I don't agree with this modern reversal where "right-wing/hard-right" has become "left-wing/hard-left" Brexiteers like myself want freedom from the undemocratic control of the EU - I think you will find that this is a liberal, left wing concept.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Already destroyed our industry - closure of coal power stations devastated mining towns across the land, wind energy is highly inefficient and kills birds which are important to our ecosystem. British steel manufacturing down massively, almost non-existent now.

Many unnecessary regulations cost businesses a lot of money and makes it difficult for small and medium sized businesses to compete with larger firms.

If we can stop importing from China and start manufacturing over here, quality will go up.

Really? You think all of a sudden when we leave the EU our workers will have no rights?

Minimum wage is a disastrous policy, inflation rises with the minimum wage, it's a cyclic event, an economic death spiral for small and medium sized businesses and even large companies and it needs to be stopped. We have to consolidate our spending and rake in the uncollected tax from large companies who have been allowed to get away with it. Pay off the national debt, stop borrowing money and reduce inflation.

Maternity leave has been guaranteed well since before the EU came into existence.

Interesting you would mention this when clearly Britain doesn't have free speech. Instead we have ridiculously far-reaching hate-speech laws and a politically correct establishment who smashes down the hammer on anyone daring to challenge their pompous sanctimony.

Welfare support is often given to those who don't deserve it, people who can work but wish not to. We need to be very strict and stop paying people to be lazy.

The NHS was created before the EU and it will still be there after the EU crumbles away.

Government spending is completely out of control. The UK government see fit to reduce Police presence on our streets when major cities are experiencing an unprecedented level of crime and at the same time they waste billions on ridiculous ideas like HS2. We need a better government, one who acts in the interest of our nation.

--------------------

It's like you regurgitated everything the anti-Brexit establishment has been churning out since the referendum result! and I don't agree with this modern reversal where "right-wing/hard-right" has become "left-wing/hard-left" Brexiteers like myself want freedom from the undemocratic control of the EU - I think you will find that this is a liberal, left wing concept.

Well I can see why you voted leave then! You seem to love the path the hard-right Brexiteers would like to take the UK down if they have the opportunity. That's fair enough. It has pros and cons, much like any other path.

Whether they get that opportunity is, of course, a different story.

PS: I also wouldn't be so sure about factors such as the NHS, maternity leave and workers rights. The model claimed to provide the land of opportunity post-Brexit relies heavily on those being whittled away to encourage FDI. In fact, they are thorns in the side of the whole idea, so it depends how far the hardline Brexiteers think they can push it without alienating too much of the electorate.

 

[Mr D]

Already destroyed our industry - closure of coal power stations devastated mining towns across the land, wind energy is highly inefficient and kills birds which are important to our ecosystem. British steel manufacturing down massively, almost non-existent now.


Many unnecessary regulations cost businesses a lot of money and makes it difficult for small and medium sized businesses to compete with larger firms.


If we can stop importing from China and start manufacturing over here, quality will go up.


Really? You think all of a sudden when we leave the EU our workers will have no rights?


Minimum wage is a disastrous policy, inflation rises with the minimum wage, it's a cyclic event, an economic death spiral for small and medium sized businesses and even large companies and it needs to be stopped. We have to consolidate our spending and rake in the uncollected tax from large companies who have been allowed to get away with it. Pay off the national debt, stop borrowing money and reduce inflation.


Maternity leave has been guaranteed well since before the EU came into existence.


Interesting you would mention this when clearly Britain doesn't have free speech. Instead we have ridiculously far-reaching hate-speech laws and a politically correct establishment who smashes down the hammer on anyone daring to challenge their pompous sanctimony.


Welfare support is often given to those who don't deserve it, people who can work but wish not to. We need to be very strict and stop paying people to be lazy.


The NHS was created before the EU and it will still be there after the EU crumbles away.


Government spending is completely out of control. The UK government see fit to reduce Police presence on our streets when major cities are experiencing an unprecedented level of crime and at the same time they waste billions on ridiculous ideas like HS2. We need a better government, one who acts in the interest of our nation.

--------------------

It's like you regurgitated everything the anti-Brexit establishment has been churning out since the referendum result! and I don't agree with this modern reversal where "right-wing/hard-right" has become "left-wing/hard-left" Brexiteers like myself want freedom from the undemocratic control of the EU - I think you will find that this is a liberal, left wing concept.

Is there a reason we should have coal power stations? Are they so efficient and non polluting?

Wind energy highly inefficient, yes - but can it provide some power while having low running costs?
Steel? https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/steel-production
That's 750,000 tons. Per month. Which you call almost non existent. I'd hate to think what you would call 1980 then. Which was several times less.

Why would quality go up if we stopped importing from china and started making stuff here? We already have that facility in Britain, a major manufacturing country. If the people buying wanted production here. Perhaps the price isn't right? Perhaps there are other factors like the import of raw materials? Perhaps environmental or power concerns?
Just because something is made in Britain doesn't mean its quality will be any different than when its made to the same specs elsewhere. If I buy a steak knife is it any different when made in Cumbria than when made in China?

You are betting on some things staying the same after Brexit. Why should they? Britain will be going its own way and the very MPs you appear to have trouble with at the moment could well be the same people deciding what perks and policies should be kept or scrapped.
The exact same people.

Now you thinking government spending is out of control is surprising. Would not have pegged you as a fan of austerity.
People can indeed be surprising.

 

[KM-Tiger]

I also wouldn't be so sure about factors such as the NHS, maternity leave and workers rights.

Our maternity arrangements are better than EU minimums.

And I see no reason for fear on workers rights. Most of what matters is in UK primary legislation, and much pre-dates the EU anyway. I would doubt any appetite from either parliament or public opinion to strip any of that away.

Once we can legislate on our own, then I would hope parliament would take a look at the changing nature of work, mainly brought about by the internet. There may be a need for new legislation. On the one hand to deal with the gig economy, eg Uber drivers, and on the other to protect workers that work for the likes of Amazon or Sports Direct.

 

[Mr D]

Our maternity arrangements are better than EU minimums.

And I see no reason for fear on workers rights. Most of what matters is in UK primary legislation, and much pre-dates the EU anyway. I would doubt any appetite from either parliament or public opinion to strip any of that away.

Once we can legislate on our own, then I would hope parliament would take a look at the changing nature of work, mainly brought about by the internet. There may be a need for new legislation. On the one hand to deal with the gig economy, eg Uber drivers, and on the other to protect workers that work for the likes of Amazon or Sports Direct.

What particular protection do workers at amazon require?

They already have the same protection common to UK workers, what specifically do they require that isn't already covered?
A ban on cheap transport? A ban on recruitment outside 5 miles away? What?

 

[KM-Tiger]

What particular protection do workers at amazon require?

Perhaps none. But if you read accounts of what it is like to work at Amazon, then the word 'exploitation' springs to mind. Should, for instance, overtime be able to be compulsory as it is there?

And with the example Uber drivers, I believe a recent court case has given them employment rights for holiday and sick pay, as they were deemed to be employed rather than self-employed. So perhaps the existing legislation works, but should it need a courts case? Better, IMHO, a good legal framework for companies like Uber to operate within.

 

[Mr D]

Perhaps none. But if you read accounts of what it is like to work at Amazon, then the word 'exploitation' springs to mind. Should, for instance, overtime be able to be compulsory as it is there?

And with the example Uber drivers, I believe a recent court case has given them employment rights for holiday and sick pay, as they were deemed to be employed rather than self-employed. So perhaps the existing legislation works, but should it need a courts case? Better, IMHO, a good legal framework for companies like Uber to operate within.

I've worked in multiple jobs where overtime was compulsory. Including at a bank and in a hotel.

You want compulsory overtime to be banned? What happens to the customers? What happens to health & safety? What happens to other people working much longer hours to do the work? If not enough staff volunteer are the ones who do going to work 14 or 15 hours to do the work?

It appears the existing legislation does protect Uber drivers. The whole point of having a court case is to decide where the workers say one thing and the employer says another. Should we ban the courts from interfering? Or just class all people in any kind of work as employees and make things simple?

The government have announced a little while back that they are looking at working. Whether that will produce better terms and better conditions or merely more problems is open to question.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Our maternity arrangements are better than EU minimums.

And I see no reason for fear on workers rights. Most of what matters is in UK primary legislation, and much pre-dates the EU anyway. I would doubt any appetite from either parliament or public opinion to strip any of that away.

Once we can legislate on our own, then I would hope parliament would take a look at the changing nature of work, mainly brought about by the internet. There may be a need for new legislation. On the one hand to deal with the gig economy, eg Uber drivers, and on the other to protect workers that work for the likes of Amazon or Sports Direct.

You're missing my point slightly.

This isn't about what we'll be allowed to do once we've left the EU. This is about the hardline Brexiteer master plan for all this great post-Brexit prosperity they keep talking about.

If you've ever wondered why they seem to be such big outliers in terms of being so confident about how good things will be post-Brexit, this is why. It relies entirely on a plan of mass deregulation and reduced taxation unlike anything we've seen before in an attempt to emulate the likes of Singapore. Put everything hugely in favour of business, and FDI will rush in.

Take, for example, this think tank prediction of a boost in economic growth:

https://www.economistsforfreetrade....uk-economy-by-135-billion-say-top-economists/

This forecast depends entirely on the UK going down a route of mass deregulation and unilateral free trade. This is where we abolish all our trade tariffs and quotas without requesting any other country does the same. This is a radical fringe theory that would leave UK companies without any protection whatsoever.

This is particularly why the hardline Brexiteers aren't so fussed about no deal, either. Countries are reluctant to start a race to the bottom on taxation and regulation because they want to maintain good relationships with their partners. But if the relationship with the EU deteriorates to that degree, they'll have even greater freedom to push this agenda to the extreme.

So when you hear about this small group of Tory MPs pushing the hard Brexit agenda, such as Rees-Mogg et al, this is their plan. Their forecasts of post-Brexit prosperity depend on making this "survival of the fittest" plan a reality, and it's one that few countries in the world dare to touch.

 

[Steven001]

Well I can see why you voted leave then! You seem to love the path the hard-right Brexiteers would like to take the UK down if they have the opportunity. That's fair enough. It has pros and cons, much like any other path.

Whether they get that opportunity is, of course, a different story.

PS: I also wouldn't be so sure about factors such as the NHS, maternity leave and workers rights. The model claimed to provide the land of opportunity post-Brexit relies heavily on those being whittled away to encourage FDI. In fact, they are thorns in the side of the whole idea, so it depends how far the hardline Brexiteers think they can push it without alienating too much of the electorate.

There's no such thing as a "hardline Brexiteer" this is just a toxic label meant to degrade the opposition, such as "little Englander". There's a binary here as there was in the referendum - you either want Brexit or you don't, it's really that simple.
I can see you are vehemently opposed to Brexit, that's your choice of course but eventually you will have to accept it when Britain leaves the EU.

Project fear is on its last legs, the latest nonsense to emerge from HM Gov attempts to strike fear into the minds of the British public by suggesting that we will run out of food after we leave the EU and that we should stockpile supplies!! The absolute hysteria and propaganda coming from the mouths of the government is not just depraved, it's rather comical and sad!

No doom & gloom from me, I'm looking forward to a Great British future

 

[Steven001]

Is there a reason we should have coal power stations? Are they so efficient and non polluting?

Yes. It will create jobs and cheap energy. We have the technology now to clean the emissions from coal plants to such a degree that their effect on the environment would be negligible.

Steel? https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/steel-production
That's 750,000 tons. Per month. Which you call almost non existent. I'd hate to think what you would call 1980 then. Which was several times less.

A quick Google reveals article after article talking about the decline of British steel manufacturing. Remember Sheffield, the city of steel? I drove through the industrial zone the other day, a mile or so down a road with abandoned foundries and steel fabrication buildings either side of me, not one in operation. To say that we have recovered in less than 2 years is highly unlikely but it's not just steel, manufacturing in Britain has been in decline in all areas for at least 2 decades now.
https://www.google.com/search?clien...British+steel&oq=the+decline+of+British+steel

Why would quality go up if we stopped importing from china and started making stuff here?

Because China is renowned for making cheap quality goods which don't last.

If the people buying wanted production here. Perhaps the price isn't right? Perhaps there are other factors like the import of raw materials? Perhaps environmental or power concerns?

Good point. We don't have much if any manufacturing power, we need to step up our game and then when things are mass produced they will become cheaper. Environmental concerns is one of the reasons why our industrial power has been squashed, this whole green thing is ridiculous and needs to be completely reevaluated.

You are betting on some things staying the same after Brexit. Why should they? Britain will be going its own way and the very MPs you appear to have trouble with at the moment could well be the same people deciding what perks and policies should be kept or scrapped.
The exact same people.

Well yes. If the same people stay in power things will continue to get worse which is why we need to get rid of them. People need to wake up to the fact that if you vote for a mainstream party you are voting for the slow death of our nation.

Now you thinking government spending is out of control is surprising. Would not have pegged you as a fan of austerity.
People can indeed be surprising.

I'm not a fan of austerity so your intuition was correct. I feel that money should be spent wisely on the things we actually need and not wasted on ridiculous vanity projects like HS2.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

There's no such thing as a "hardline Brexiteer" this is just a toxic label meant to degrade the opposition, such as "little Englander". There's a binary here as there was in the referendum - you either want Brexit or you don't, it's really that simple.

Thinking this is a binary decision is one of the major problems with Brexit. It's an order of magnitude more complicated than that.

What about the Scottish independence referendum? If Scotland voted for independence, does that mean they had to cut all ties with the UK and put immigration controls along the Scottish border? Of course not. Nor did the vast majority of independence supporters want that.

Leaving the EU, and the future relationship with the EU, are two very different decisions. Every country has a relationship with every other. We have relationships with the United States, Australia, China, Japan and so on.

Now we must decide what relationship we want with the EU, but a vote to leave does not provide a mandate to have no relationship at all. Much in the same way that if Scotland had voted to go it alone, it would not have been a mandate to cut all ties and throw up a physical border either.

 

[Steven001]

Thinking this is a binary decision is one of the major problems with Brexit. It's an order of magnitude more complicated than that.

What about the Scottish independence referendum? If Scotland voted for independence, does that mean they had to cut all ties with the UK and put immigration controls along the Scottish border? Of course not. Nor did the vast majority of independence supporters want that.

Leaving the EU, and the future relationship with the EU, are two very different decisions. Every country has a relationship with every other. We have relationships with the United States, Australia, China, Japan and so on.

Now we must decide what relationship we want with the EU, but a vote to leave does not provide a mandate to have no relationship at all. Much in the same way that if Scotland had voted to go it alone, it would not have been a mandate to cut all ties and throw up a physical border either.

The problem is remainers attempting to complicate Brexit when it's not at all complicated. We leave the EU and all its institutions, then join the WTO. Meanwhile all EU law temporarily becomes UK law and we sift through the legislation and destroy that which doesn't do our nation any favors and modify that which in principal may be a good idea but which needs altering to suit British needs.

The Scottish independence referendum is an attempt by the SNP who are anti-Brexit to the extreme to scorn England and remain a member of the EU. The people of Scotland don't want to leave Britain because they know as I do, Scotland would be no more.

Yes we have relationships with other nations and those nations have relationships with other nations but never in the history of those relationships were countries ordered to attach themselves to a political union which overrides their national sovereignty and demands open borders immigration from some of the worst countries on Earth for human rights violations.

The vote to leave absolutely does provide a mandate to have no relationship at all between the UK and the EU, that's what leaving means, as opposed to staying.

 

[Newchodge]

The problem is remainers attempting to complicate Brexit when it's not at all complicated.

Are you completely mad?

Have you the faintest idea how many regulations need to be met in order, for example for a plane to fly through EU airspace? We cannot meet those regulations. Importing medical goods, for example, radioactive isotopes, we can't do that without the necessary regulatory body. Which we don't have.

What is your solution to the problem of the border between the EU and Northern Ireland?

What do you envisage happening at the border between the EU and Gibraltar?

Where on this earth do you get the idea that it is not at all complicated? Are you that ignorant pratt Boris Johnson in disguise?

 

[Mr D]

Yes. It will create jobs and cheap energy. We have the technology now to clean the emissions from coal plants to such a degree that their effect on the environment would be negligible.



A quick Google reveals article after article talking about the decline of British steel manufacturing. Remember Sheffield, the city of steel? I drove through the industrial zone the other day, a mile or so down a road with abandoned foundries and steel fabrication buildings either side of me, not one in operation. To say that we have recovered in less than 2 years is highly unlikely but it's not just steel, manufacturing in Britain has been in decline in all areas for at least 2 decades now.
https://www.google.com/search?clien...British+steel&oq=the+decline+of+British+steel


Because China is renowned for making cheap quality goods which don't last.


Good point. We don't have much if any manufacturing power, we need to step up our game and then when things are mass produced they will become cheaper. Environmental concerns is one of the reasons why our industrial power has been squashed, this whole green thing is ridiculous and needs to be completely reevaluated.


Well yes. If the same people stay in power things will continue to get worse which is why we need to get rid of them. People need to wake up to the fact that if you vote for a mainstream party you are voting for the slow death of our nation.


I'm not a fan of austerity so your intuition was correct. I feel that money should be spent wisely on the things we actually need and not wasted on ridiculous vanity projects like HS2.

You appear to have a poor idea of manufacturing. What position are we in the world? 128th? 140th? 7th?
We have pretty good manufacturing. What we do not have is the major manpower involved in manufacturing we had decades ago.

Creating jobs? Jobs are not a benefit to a business they are a cost. As shown by the fact the employees cost the company.
If creating jobs is your goal then say so and we can go back to digging with spades and farming with hoes and sickles. Expect it to be inefficient and costly, humans cost money.

Yes I remember Sheffield. Nice city, been there many times on the train and a few site visits in the area.
You remember the strikes? Made it so much easier for other places elsewhere to set up and provide goods on time and within budget.
Why buy from Sheffield and get it delivered 9 months late when the same quality can be delivered on time from another place?

How are those unions working out for the steelworkers now? I hear a lot less strikes are called these days.

 

[Mr D]

The problem is remainers attempting to complicate Brexit when it's not at all complicated. We leave the EU and all its institutions, then join the WTO. Meanwhile all EU law temporarily becomes UK law and we sift through the legislation and destroy that which doesn't do our nation any favors and modify that which in principal may be a good idea but which needs altering to suit British needs.

The Scottish independence referendum is an attempt by the SNP who are anti-Brexit to the extreme to scorn England and remain a member of the EU. The people of Scotland don't want to leave Britain because they know as I do, Scotland would be no more.

Yes we have relationships with other nations and those nations have relationships with other nations but never in the history of those relationships were countries ordered to attach themselves to a political union which overrides their national sovereignty and demands open borders immigration from some of the worst countries on Earth for human rights violations.

The vote to leave absolutely does provide a mandate to have no relationship at all between the UK and the EU, that's what leaving means, as opposed to staying.

You appear unaware of what Britain will have to do as part of a trade deal. Immigration involving say a hundred thousand people a year, by agreement? Are we going to turn down the deal because of that?
You might but you will not get the chance - trade deals are government business not public referendum business.

Your idea about mandate appears to be shared by you. I have not seen it elsewhere in the same format. Perhaps you need to create a political party to enforce it on others.

 

[Steven001]

Are you completely mad?
Have you the faintest idea how many regulations need to be met in order, for example for a plane to fly through EU airspace? We cannot meet those regulations. Importing medical goods, for example, radioactive isotopes, we can't do that without the necessary regulatory body. Which we don't have.

No, I'm not mad, thanks for asking but what is mad are the claims from the project fear camp;

• planes won't be able to fly over Europe any more...
• we will run out of medication and there will be a health crisis...
• we will run out of food...

What next? Will a lake of fire consume us all!!? You are repeating soundbite by soundbite the idiotic screeching of the UK establishment and its vain attempts to spread fear and panic through anti-Brexit propaganda. It really isn't working and it's beginning to sound religious - this unwavering commitment to a totalitarian, anti-democratic superstate with its irremovable, unelected commission. I guess if your into masochism, the EU is a great thing!

I already answered your question by the way, we leave, we got to WTO rules, we take all existing EU legislation into British law on a temporary basis and work out what we want to keep, throw away or modify.

What is your solution to the problem of the border between the EU and Northern Ireland?

Same as last paragraph above + we take back control of our borders.

What do you envisage happening at the border between the EU and Gibraltar?

Sightseeing, tourists going on holiday, the usual stuff.

Where on this earth do you get the idea that it is not at all complicated? Are you that ignorant pratt Boris Johnson in disguise?

You seem to be a little vexed. There's really no need for it

 

[Steven001]

You appear to have a poor idea of manufacturing. What position are we in the world? 128th? 140th? 7th?
We have pretty good manufacturing. What we do not have is the major manpower involved in manufacturing we had decades ago.

You are under the illusion that we have a large manufacturing base, we don't. Manufacturing as mentioned has been in decline for many years. The UK's biggest export is financial services which aren't even physical goods.

Creating jobs? Jobs are not a benefit to a business they are a cost. As shown by the fact the employees cost the company.

Did you seriously just say that?
What do you think happens when someone gets employed? They earn money, right? They spend that money with other businesses, yes? The tax money they get taken off their wage goes to the government and pays for public services and new ventures, right? Jobs are essential to the survival of an economy, can't believe you'd suggest otherwise.

If creating jobs is your goal then say so and we can go back to digging with spades and farming with hoes and sickles. Expect it to be inefficient and costly, humans cost money.

Now you're just being silly but while we're on the point of manual labor, why are we importing 100's f thousands of low skilled 'workers' into our country every year? We should be using our own people, driving home the idea of work ethic that we used to have and have a self-sustaining economy, not so reliant on other nations.

Yes I remember Sheffield. Nice city, been there many times on the train and a few site visits in the area.

It was a nice city. Now its a drug-fueled gang ridden ghetto. That's the effect poverty has on a former industrial city which has had its limbs ripped away by greedy internationalists.

 

[Steven001]

You appear unaware of what Britain will have to do as part of a trade deal. Immigration involving say a hundred thousand people a year, by agreement? Are we going to turn down the deal because of that?

Immigration is not an essential part of trade, nor has it ever been until the European Union became political and not just monetary. We don't need 100,000 a year, to be honest we don't need 1 a year, I'm sure you have noticed we have a housing shortage, we have a crisis in the NHS, the Police can't cope, there are too many cars on the road, public transport is overflowing at peak times, we don't have enough schools - all these problems are driven by the exact same route cause - OVERPOPULATION.
We don't need immigration, what we need is the opposite, deportation.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

The vote to leave absolutely does provide a mandate to have no relationship at all between the UK and the EU, that's what leaving means, as opposed to staying.

You know that we can leave the EU, and all its institutions, and still have a relationship, right?

You have laughed at the "project fear" claims, such as flights between the UK and EU being grounded, but that's the kind of thing that happens if you walk away without agreeing anything.

There must be an agreement and collaboration between the EASA and CAA, otherwise aircraft parts made under their respective jurisdictions would no longer have legal clearance in the other's jurisdiction. That's the law, and airlines are not going to break the law in some maverick attempt to keep things moving. WTO, or keeping EU law, doesn't change that.

As for empty supermarket shelves, this too is a real possibility. UK customs, and all the ports, are woefully underprepared to suddenly deal with a doubling of customs checks. There's nowhere near enough staff, systems or capacity, as the ports have been tailored to the single market and now have a couple of years to heavily re-design how they work. Again, WTO or retaining EU law temporarily makes no difference.

And as Newchodge has pointed out, because we've spent so long under the jurisdiction of EU regulatory bodies, we don't even HAVE most of the bodies we need to manage our domestic and international affairs, and they certainly won't be ready by March 2019.

I respect that you would like a bare bones relationship with the EU, but even that is a hugely complicated matter that is also at risk of not happening. And if it doesn't happen, the UK will be in a situation that no other developed nation on earth has ever been in before.

 

[menetworkjadaltd]

I look forward to many staycations over the next few years... C'mon Bognor!

 

[Mr D]

You are under the illusion that we have a large manufacturing base, we don't. Manufacturing as mentioned has been in decline for many years. The UK's biggest export is financial services which aren't even physical goods.


Did you seriously just say that?
What do you think happens when someone gets employed? They earn money, right? They spend that money with other businesses, yes? The tax money they get taken off their wage goes to the government and pays for public services and new ventures, right? Jobs are essential to the survival of an economy, can't believe you'd suggest otherwise.


Now you're just being silly but while we on the point of manual labor, why ar e we imprting 100's f thousands of low skilled 'workers' into our country every year? We should be using our own people, driving home the idea of work ethic that we used to have and have a self-sustaining economy, not so reliant on other nations.


It was a nice city. Now its a drug-fueled gang ridden ghetto. That's the effect poverty has on a former industrial city which has had its limbs ripped away by greedy internationalists.

For a small manufacturing base then we are 8th in the world. Don't know about you but I can think that is pretty good. Considering the countries higher than us includes much bigger population countries too.
http://www.madeherenow.com/news/pos...moves-up-the-world-manufacturing-league-table

Financial exports? Is there is a reason that only physical goods count with you? If other people want other stuff why not supply them?

Feel free as a business owner to employ however many people you want. You can think of the benefit your business gets while anyone looking at your accounts will see the cost.
Having too many staff for a project, too many staff in a business are a cost that can be rectified. In the meantime they are a drain on the business.
Would you have a thousand people digging foundations for houses or a half dozen men with machines digging?

We appear to be importing low skilled workers to do jobs the locals are unwilling or unable to do. Farming and hospitality have been mentioned a time or two when talking about importing workers. Working shifts say from 5am hard manual labour on a farm - lots of British unemployed applying for those jobs? From the few farmers I have met the answer would be no.

Think you need to look at history a little closer. Steel production in Sheffield didn't close because the workers were great at the jobs and the factories produced great product on time, cheaply and to spec. We still have a steel industry, multiple sites around. Places that kept going when another place closed.

Manufacturing isn't the be all and end all of a nation. Many nations have multiple income streams now including tourism and in some cases financial products.
Though the financial products could go elsewhere easily enough if driven from our shores.

 

[Mr D]

Immigration is not an essential part of trade, nor has it ever been until the European Union became political and not just monetary. We don't need 100,000 a year, to be honest we don't need 1 a year, I'm sure you have noticed we have a housing shortage, we have a crisis in the NHS, the Police can't cope, there are too many cars on the road, public transport is overflowing at peak times, we don't have enough schools - all these problems are driven by the exact same route cause - OVERPOPULATION.
We don't need immigration, what we need is the opposite, deportation.

So what birthrate do you want the country to have?
We have a declining population, the birthrate doesn't replace the deaths. When you get old which country are you planning to go to for care? Won't be enough younger, able bodied people in time to do everything if the population decline isn't reversed or dealt with.
So rather than immigration how are you planning on forcing women to have more kids?

Birth rate of 1.76 in 2017. That's under 2 kids born per woman. Break even point is a chunk above 2.0 as not all women can have children or choose to have children.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...letins/birthsummarytablesenglandandwales/2017

 

[Steven001]

So what birthrate do you want the country to have?
We have a declining population, the birthrate doesn't replace the deaths.

No we don't, we're massively overpopulated which is why our public infrastructure simply cannot cope. I mean how can you be so very far away from the truth that you end up stating the direct opposite of reality?! It really is mind-boggling.

Won't be enough younger, able bodied people in time to do everything if the population decline isn't reversed or dealt with.

There you go again. You have to be stark raving bonkers to say this kind of thing. How can you not see that we are overpopulated?

So rather than immigration how are you planning on forcing women to have more kids?

You mean indigenous people or immigrants and the descendants of immigrants? No one can force anything, it would be unnatural and we don't need to do it. Immigrants and the descendants of immigrants are having huge families in this country, we have more people than we could ever need.

Birth rate of 1.76 in 2017. That's under 2 kids born per woman. Break even point is a chunk above 2.0 as not all women can have children or choose to have children.

You mean indigenous people, yes the white British birth rate is horrendously low as is the indigenous European birthrate in general. When conditions improve, that will climb but we need the right government in power to facilitate a positive change. Lib/Lab/Con are not viable.

 

[Mr D]

No we don't, we're massively overpopulated which is why our public infrastructure simply cannot cope. I mean how can you be so very far away from the truth that you end up stating the direct opposite of reality?! It really is mind-boggling.


There you go again. You have to be stark raving bonkers to say this kind of thing. How can you not see that we are overpopulated?


You mean indigenous people or immigrants and the descendants of immigrants? No one can force anything, it would be unnatural and we don't need to do it. Immigrants and the descendants of immigrants are having huge families in this country, we have more people than we could ever need.


You mean indigenous people, yes the white British birth rate is horrendously low as is the indigenous European birthrate in general. When conditions improve, that will climb but we need the right government in power to facilitate a positive change. Lib/Lab/Con are not viable.

So you now say those birth rate figures are wrong. You'll be providing different data link?
Massive overpopulation - you claim - so what is the correct population for this country? And will you simply kill the excess or deport them to places like Croydon, Carlisle or Leeds?
Or will you take the high road and deport yourself to set an example? Just be careful of going some place where they don't like immigrants.

Even with the few having huge families that birth rate is quite low. Need to increase it by a considerable number of births to keep population stable at a point. And a major chunk of the population is never going to change that birthrate - we are too old, or don't want kids, or cannot have kids.

You also seem to have a novel idea about birthrate increasing when conditions improve. History would indicate otherwise. As conditions requiring large families to keep the parents in their old age are reduced and as the options for freely available contraception take hold then birth rate drops. You'd need world war 3 or other reversion to barbarism to increase the birth rate due to conditions. Birth rate does tend to increase during and immediately after wars - for obvious reasons!

 

[Steven001]

Massive overpopulation - you claim - so what is the correct population for this country?

No claim, it's the truth as once again our public services are unable to cope with overpopulation. You are unwilling to see this as it seems you a proponent of uncontrolled mass immigration a.k.a national suicide.

And will you simply kill the excess or deport them to places like Croydon, Carlisle or Leeds?

You'll be calling me Hitler next! No, I don't want to kill anyone. Deportation involves moving someone out of the country completely, if they went to the places you suggested which are still inside our country it would be a pointless endeavor.

Or will you take the high road and deport yourself to set an example?

Why would I leave my own country? I contribute here, many others do not. Will you leave Britain when we leave the EU?
How about we deport human traffickers, dangerous foreign criminals and child sex gangs? Are you against that too as they are humans with human rights?

Even with the few having huge families that birth rate is quite low. Need to increase it by a considerable number of births to keep population stable at a point. And a major chunk of the population is never going to change that birthrate - we are too old, or don't want kids, or cannot have kids.

Indigenous Brits are having small families or no children at all. I see time after time the reason stated that they don't see a future. It's because of unscrupulous treasonous governments like the one we have at the moment making life very hard and miserable for the masses. The middle class are feeling the pinch and the working class have become softened by state benefit payments. The country is a mess and it has nothing to do with Brexit.

I can't wait till all us Brexiteers are completely and utterly betrayed by Theresa May, then we can discard the establishment parties and get a nationalistic government in power.

 

[Mr D]

Steven, you claiming something is the truth does not make it true.

Your opinion regarding us having too many people? Sadly world population is increasing and the U.K. does not have the power - even after leaving the EU - to avoid immigration. Asylum seekers flee from persecution in France never mind Syria or Afghanistan.

 

[Steven001]

Steven, you claiming something is the truth does not make it true.

Your opinion regarding us having too many people? Sadly world population is increasing and the U.K. does not have the power - even after leaving the EU - to avoid immigration. Asylum seekers flee from persecution in France never mind Syria or Afghanistan.

Presenting facts to remainers is about as much use as beating my head against a wall, maybe that's your modus-operandi, to exhaust my patience with baseless rebuttals?
Please try to provide actual evidence that the current UK population is within acceptable levels. Any evidence whatsoever, not your feelings, just facts.

 

[Mr D]

Presenting facts to remainers is about as much use as beating my head against a wall, maybe that's your modus-operandi, to exhaust my patience with baseless rebuttals?
Please try to provide actual evidence that the current UK population is within acceptable levels. Any evidence whatsoever, not your feelings, just facts.

You have been presenting ideology not facts. Telling more about your beliefs than you may want.

What basis are you using for definition of acceptable? Your claim of too many presumes you have a number you are using where too many no longer applies.

And who came up with this number?

You have come up multiple times with claims that the evidence does not support, is this another example?

 

[Steven001]

You have been presenting ideology not facts. Telling more about your beliefs than you may want.

What basis are you using for definition of acceptable? Your claim of too many presumes you have a number you are using where too many no longer applies.

And who came up with this number?

You have come up multiple times with claims that the evidence does not support, is this another example?

I knew you couldn't provide any evidence whatsoever that the current UK population is within manageable levels and while you might say that this doesn't prove we are overpopulated, you simply cannot explain why our public services are straining to function.

It's been fun, think I'll leave it here.

 

[Mr D]

I knew you couldn't provide any evidence whatsoever that the current UK population is within manageable levels and while you might say that this doesn't prove we are overpopulated, you simply cannot explain why our public services are straining to function.

It's been fun, think I'll leave it here.

I'm asking you for figures you are using for your claim regarding massive overpopulation. You made the claim so you obviously know why its overpopulated.

So what is the figure you want the population to be? And where are you getting the extra population from to maintain it at that level?

 

[KM-Tiger]

I just came across this via Twitter:

http://www.brugesgroup.com/blog/import-excess-tax-a-brexit-game-changer

It's not an easy read and the concept is complex, but it does seem to me to present a viable solution to a lot of issues.

 

[NickGrogan]

Monaco is 68 times more densely populated than the UK, anyone from the EU can move there - just like the UK and they have an immigration rate more than double the UK.

So it must be a really horrible place to live, right?

https://www.visitmonaco.com/en

 

[Newchodge]

I am impressed with the 4 lines devoted to Regulatory Compliance. To me this is far more important than the tariff issue. and it says nothing about it.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I just came across this via Twitter:

http://www.brugesgroup.com/blog/import-excess-tax-a-brexit-game-changer

It's not an easy read and the concept is complex, but it does seem to me to present a viable solution to a lot of issues.

As Newchodge has pointed out, it's often regulations that are some of the most complex issues when it comes to trade agreements. And it's the alignment of regulations which has some of the largest impact on facilitating trade.

May's position on this is fairly logical. If we align with the EU on regulations (which we largely agree on anyway), we automatically align with 27 of our regional trade partners in one go. This would also include the majority of our top 20 largest trading partners, and any countries where the EU has already signed FTAs and will do in the future.

In my view, what this plan has done, and what a lot of pro-Brexit plans seem to do, is massively oversimplify the issue of trade deficits. There's this idea that if we export more than we import, then we win, and in the reverse situation, we lose.

What this fails to take into account is that imports can be integral parts of British business, particularly in our own manufacturing sector. And often, it's not a matter of choice. The UK cannot source everything internally. We don't even have the natural resources in a lot of cases, or even suitable weather in the case of perishable foodstuffs.

There's a lot of successful British businesses that require imports as part of their supply chain. Many resulting products are then exported back out or sold to consumers in the UK. Any forced attempt to penalise imports would therefore impact these two sectors massively.

This idea seems to take the extreme approach of:

1). Give the EU tariff-free access to the UK (which already exists)
2). Charge British businesses a tax if they import from the EU more than they export
3). Pay these tax revenues to British exporters to offset EU tariffs

Combine that with a fall in the Pound in the event of no-deal, and what do you think will happen to the many British businesses that rely on imports, and all the consumer prices for a huge selection of items in our shops and supermarkets?

And what about the exporters that rely on imports as part of their supply chain, of which there are many? The lower pound, and this suggested tax, could negatively offset any export savings or reimbursements from this plan, and then some.

This is, once again, an idea of inducing suffering on both sides, and then hoping that the EU blinks first.

Let me ask you this:

This proposal involves giving the EU tariff-free access and creating a tax in an attempt to force the EU to reciprocate with tariff-free terms. If this idea is so great, and if it works so well in our favour, why not just keep it? Why try to use it as a tool to give us tariff-free access to the EU when we can trundle along with this as a long-term solution instead?

The solution is proposed as an "FTA in all but name", but one that gives us "powerful leverage" in talks. If it's fantastic for the UK, but bad for the EU, why even have the talks? Just to be nice?

 

[The Byre]

I just came across this via Twitter:

http://www.brugesgroup.com/blog/import-excess-tax-a-brexit-game-changer

It's not an easy read and the concept is complex, but it does seem to me to present a viable solution to a lot of issues.

It is a typical 'solution' that is put out there by the economically illiterate and those unfamiliar with the mechanics of import and export.

1. It adds bureaucracy in a needless and pointless manner.
2. It fails to stop or prevent or even check and control imports or exports.
3. It fails to take invisible imports into account.

If I buy something from Germany, I pay for it via our German bank account and the goods are sent to the UK, but billed against our German company and we adjust our books internally. Goods going the other way are the same. UK pays, goods go to Germany and we credit and balance internally - thereby making instant payment possible and without exorbitant bank fees. If the goods go from Germany to Germany, we initiate the deal in the UK, but pay from Germany and the German arm can do the same in the UK.

We seldom move money in and out of the UK, so there would be no trigger to 'tell' some bureaucracy that goods have moved anywhere.

Also, where in all that Bruges Group nonsense, is the mechanism for keeping tabs on the activities of a UK insurance company selling in Germany, backed by contingency from, say Munich-Re in Bavaria?

Exactly how will their scheme know if we down-load a massive piece of software from a Berlin Company with accounts in Luxembourg and we pay them via our Luxembourg accounts? It's not that long ago that I bought a piece of equipment from an Edinburgh company and it was delivered to us in the UK, but we paid from our German account to their German account.

The Bruges Group scheme is childish nonsense, oblivious to the realities of existing and deeply embedded inner-EU trading arrangements.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...-trade-deal-beijing-put-risk-south-china-sea/

This is the kind of thing that sums up one of my concerns about our post-Brexit future.

Right now, we're in a position of strength within the EU. We are (or at least were) one of the leaders and most influential members of the 2nd largest economy in the world.

We also know (or knew) that whatever happens in the world, we'd have the backing of our union allies in a political and economic sense who share similar goals and values.

Now though, we're choosing to leave that behind to become an "independent" nation. That puts us, at least temporarily, in a position of weakness, as we'll lose the foundation of the EU before we have the chance to build foundations elsewhere. That's inevitable.

There's obviously a finite number of major economies to trade with, so in our moment of weakness (or what some might call desperation) to replace the avenues that are being lost, how much are we going to pander to other countries just to win the trade deals we urgently need?

Before we've even left, we already see China casting doubts over a comprehensive trade agreement if we do anything they don't like. And their theory, which is a fair one, is that we're only conducting these exercises to pander to the United States, as we want a trade agreement with them too.

And what's more alarming is that while we generally agree on most issues with our European neighbours, we have firm disagreements with major economies across the world on a range of more sensitive issues. Are we just going to keep our mouths shut to curry favour? Can we afford not to?

People talk about Brexit making the UK a proud, independent nation once again. But if this is a sign of things to come, it's going to be a moment of shame if our country is reduced to this. Not pride.

 

[MBE2017]

We also know (or knew) that whatever happens in the world, we'd have the backing of our union allies in a political and economic sense who share similar goals and values.

Are we just going to keep our mouths shut to curry favour? Can we afford not to?

People talk about Brexit making the UK a proud, independent nation once again. But if this is a sign of things to come, it's going to be a moment of shame if our country is reduced to this. Not pride.

You don’t think has always happened? As for always having our European allies backing, please don’t make me laugh.

Spain supported Argentina in the Falklands war, and has offered support in helping them get the islands from the UK only a few years ago, to help in their bid to regain Gibraltar. That is is just one that comes to mind, ALL countries vie for their own interests ALL the time, and so they should.

All we need is belief in ourselves to achieve what we want, there are too many snowflakes around these days. How we ever managed to win anything in the past few thousand years is beyond me, maybe the British character has changed beyond all recognition.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

You don’t think has always happened? As for always having our European allies backing, please don’t make me laugh.

Spain supported Argentina in the Falklands war, and has offered support in helping them get the islands from the UK only a few years ago, to help in their bid to regain Gibraltar. That is is just one that comes to mind, ALL countries vie for their own interests ALL the time, and so they should.

Of course. Every country has their own interests and disagreements, much like groups of family and friends do. But crucially within the EU, more careful consideration must be given to fellow members than would usually be the case. If you damage a fellow EU member, you damage the EU, and therefore damage yourself too.

There's no question that in the event of turmoil anywhere in the world, the members of the EU will stick together more than most. It's logical to do so, as when acting as a combined force, the EU-28 can stand toe-to-toe with giants such as China and the US. And as an EU member, we're one of the leaders of that group.

I think the difference in scale is often underappreciated. Yes, we have one of the largest economies in the world, but the US spends almost as much on their military alone as we do on our entire country. The state of California has a larger GDP than the UK.

If people think the EU needs us more than we need them, that role is very much reversed if we head out on our own. Many of the emerging markets are going through a difficult period, and if we want to distance ourselves from the EU, the only choice to replace what we've lost is to pander to the US, China and some other countries to get some kind of deal. And we aren't in a position to be picky.

All we need is belief in ourselves to achieve what we want, there are too many snowflakes around these days. How we ever managed to win anything in the past few thousand years is beyond me, maybe the British character has changed beyond all recognition.

Sorry but this isn't a movie. "Belief" does not get around the realities of the situation. We built up our strength and power with the British Empire, but that's gone and has been for a while.

To be clear, I'm not saying that the UK desperately needs the EU. I'm saying we were a leader of the EU in a position of great strength and leverage. We're throwing that away now, so I hope it's worth it, I really do.