Brexit negotiations

[Cobby]

Inward investment in 2017, the year after the Referendum, was 6% more than 2016 and that's with investors fully aware that we're leaving the EU (and completely unsure about what deal we'd have). We were #1 for FDI among all EU countries. Strange that. Why are investors from around the world betting on the UK in such big numbers (despite the uncertainty around a Brexit deal)

http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/pub...flows-since-the-brexit-referendum/#strongbp23
Hmm. The data doesn't necessarily agree with your "I've-read-the-headline" optimism.

And why do Remainers have to be such miserable gits grasping at every bad news straw?

Partly because we want to deal with reality. With your lack of concern over the effects of Brexit you are not presenting a reflection of reality.
When entire industries and fields of experts agree on a thing - and they largely do in this case - there are a plethora of stories with which to grapple. Brexit, in any form, will be bad. No Deal/Cliff Edge Brexit will be extremely bad.

Leavers on the other hand are not only grasping at straws, they're grasping at other things and pretending they're straws to bolster their arguments. Plank after plank, the floor of their argument keeps falling out from under them but they are utterly undeterred.

 

[Cobby]

Also, this is a periodic reminder that the advisory referendum produced an unsafe result tainted by criminality, fraud, and foreign influence.

And if anyone thinks those campaigns didn't affect how they voted, please remember that the Brexit zealots in this thread still use the debunked myths and lies put out by the Leave campaigns in the referendum.

 

[Cobby]

Aviva, NatWest to join 'Brexodus' of business to EU
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/aviva-natwest

"The move, timed for 2259 GMT on March 29, is part of a wider withdrawal of business and money by financial companies seeking to keep contracts and policies within the European Union even after Britain departs. Brexit formally takes effect at 2300 GMT on March 29."

The current reposte of Leavers about this sort of thing is, "it's got nothing to do with Brexit!".
It's gone from "Project Fear", through, "it won't happen" and "nothing to do with Brexit"... I guess we're about to arrive at, "it's what we voted for!".

 

[Newchodge]

Aviva, NatWest to join 'Brexodus' of business to EU
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/aviva-natwest

"The move, timed for 2259 GMT on March 29, is part of a wider withdrawal of business and money by financial companies seeking to keep contracts and policies within the European Union even after Britain departs. Brexit formally takes effect at 2300 GMT on March 29."

The current reposte of Leavers about this sort of thing is, "it's got nothing to do with Brexit!".
It's gone from "Project Fear", through, "it won't happen" and "nothing to do with Brexit"... I guess we're about to arrive at, "it's what we voted for!".

This sentence from the report "But the quiet shift of money means less business will be processed in Britain and less tax will be raised by the country’s financial sector, currently the biggest source of corporate tax revenue." suggests that we will have a reduced tax income. Having even less money available to the government to provide decent public services, when they cannot afford to do so at the moment cannot affect anyone's lives, and in particular will not affect the most vulnerable in society. Yeah, right.

 

[Mr D]

This sentence from the report "But the quiet shift of money means less business will be processed in Britain and less tax will be raised by the country’s financial sector, currently the biggest source of corporate tax revenue." suggests that we will have a reduced tax income. Having even less money available to the government to provide decent public services, when they cannot afford to do so at the moment cannot affect anyone's lives, and in particular will not affect the most vulnerable in society. Yeah, right.

And aren't you glad one party wants to borrow more in order to buy up some businesses in order to have the state run them - the same state that cannot run the rail network or the NHS so well.

 

[Cobby]

And aren't you glad one party wants to borrow more in order to buy up some businesses in order to have the state run them - the same state that cannot run the rail network or the NHS so well.

Weak attempt to swing "Brexit is a disaster" to "here's some narrow and nonsensical rhetoric about the Labour Party".

Stay on topic kiddo, you can do it.

 

[Clinton]

Many remainers, including myself, have always strongly disagreed with the idea of such a sudden doomsday scenario.

You disagreed when? Before the Referendum or after the scares were proven wrong? If it was before, could I please have a link?

The fact remains that we haven't left yet. And by haven't left, I mean we have yet to experience the majority of tangible ramifications that will be caused by Brexit...

If some claims made by Remain turned out to be false, stupid, blatant scaremongering ... it's possible that their other claims and predictions are also wrong.

They may turn out to be right, but let's face it - their predictions about a post-Brexit economy are just extensions of their predictions on what a post-Leave-vote economy would look like.

So more likely to be wrong than right.

To be frank I find the idea of claiming that "project fear" has been disproven in its entirety at this point a bit absurd.

It's been proven a bunch of lies. When someone's lied to you about something you tend to not trust their other claims very much. The Brits particularly don't like being pushed around like that. That's my observation from living among them for 30 years after living in various other places like India and the US. A second referendum will see them rebel against the political elite (and their recommendations) in vast numbers. This is why even Farage is now open to the idea of a second ref!

I voted Remain because the EU has achieved some good things - notably on employee rights, environment, privacy, corporate excesses - and I would like to see those continue. But I stated right from the start that as far as the economy goes the UK will do really well whether in or out of the EU. In fact, I have zero doubt the economy will do better out of the EU (after an initial period of adjustment). And we'll be further away from the sh*tstorm when the brown stuff hits the fan with that whole misconceived common currency nonsense.

suggests that we will have a reduced tax income..

Till the UK cuts its tax rate and becomes a nice little offshore haven. The EU has always been terrified of this and which is why they included the wording in the withdrawal agreement about Britain not creating a "competitive advantage" for itself

Granted, we won't see this particular PM taking such a bold move. It'll require someone with a backbone. But it's entirely possible we'll get such a PM in the future. The less the EU cooperate on a decent trade deal, the more likely the UK is to go rogue.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

If some claims made by Remain turned out to be false, stupid, blatant scaremongering ... it's possible that their other claims and predictions are also wrong.

They may turn out to be right, but let's face it - their predictions about a post-Brexit economy are just extensions of their predictions on what a post-Leave-vote economy would look like.

"Remain" is not a person. If it were, you may have a point, as one person with very silly opinions would lose credibility when it comes to their other opinions.

It's a group of millions of people though, so you cannot tar everyone with the same brush. Much in the same way that it's impossible to tar all leave voters with the same brush either.

Even right now in domestic politics, we have the leaders of the Conservative and Labour parties at loggerheads with many of their own MPs and members. Same sides, but very different opinions.

It's been proven a bunch of lies. When someone's lied to you about something you tend to not trust their other claims very much. The Brits particularly don't like being pushed around like that. That's my observation from living among them for 30 years after living in various other places like India and the US. A second referendum will see them rebel against the political elite (and their recommendations) in vast numbers. This is why even Farage is now open to the idea of a second ref!

What's been proven a bunch of lies? Osborne's claims of Armageddon the on the day of the referendum result?

Don't trust his other claims then. But they have no bearing on the claims of mine or many others.

I voted Remain because the EU has achieved some good things - notably on employee rights, environment, privacy, corporate excesses - and I would like to see those continue. But I stated right from the start that as far as the economy goes the UK will do really well whether in or out of the EU. In fact, I have zero doubt the economy will do better out of the EU (after an initial period of adjustment). And we'll be further away from the sh*tstorm when the brown stuff hits the fan with that whole misconceived common currency nonsense.

Till the UK cuts its tax rate and becomes a nice little offshore haven. The EU has always been terrified of this and which is why they included the wording in the withdrawal agreement about Britain not creating a "competitive advantage" for itself

Granted, we won't see this particular PM taking such a bold move. It'll require someone with a backbone. But it's entirely possible we'll get such a PM in the future. The less the EU cooperate on a decent trade deal, the more likely the UK is to go rogue.

That's a big "if" Clinton. A very big one I don't think will materialise as easily as you think.

You speak of the resistance against the "political elite", but massive corporate tax cuts and deregulation are viewed as cornerstones of political and wealthy elitism in this country. Good luck trying to convince enough of the public that the answer to a prosperous Brexit is a radical shift towards more of what most don't like in the first place.

We are very much settled into a European brand of right-wing politics. Yes, we're more towards the right than many countries in Europe, but seem positively socialist compared to the likes of the US. Free healthcare? Paid maternity leave? Strict food standards? They are mortifying concepts over the pond, yet some of our favourite policies even amongst Conservative voters.

And the big hiccup in all this is that out of the 52% who voted leave, there's a large chunk of them who would find this "rogue" model a horrifying outcome in many ways. 35% of Labour supporters voted to leave, and such a strategy goes against almost every aspect of their political beliefs.

As I've said before numerous times now, a large percentage of the public may be united on leaving the EU, but they have very, very different ideas on what we should do after we've left.

Oh, and don't forget the distinct possibility of Brexit damage, pinned on the Tories, resulting in a win for Labour. We could leave the EU and put our taxes, standards and protections up compared to pre-Brexit levels. What then?

 

[KM-Tiger]

Oh, and don't forget the distinct possibility of Brexit damage, pinned on the Tories, resulting in a win for Labour. We could leave the EU and put our taxes, standards and protections up compared to pre-Brexit levels. What then?

I think the Labour win is highly unlikely. The defection of the TIGgers has crystallised how unelectable Labour have become. This could have a bearing on how MPs vote next time on May's surrender agreement. Tory MPs wavering for fear of a Corbyn govt may well change their minds. I'll be bold and predict an even bigger defeat than last time.

As regards post Brexit changes, a big disappointment has been the lack of vision from any politician as to where we might be heading after Brexit. Dare we hope for a low tax, high standards, high protections economy? It's possible.

 

[Clinton]

"Remain" is ...a group of millions of people though, so you cannot tar everyone with the same brush.

It's a bunch of politicians who are working to frustrate Brexit.

And the big hiccup in all this is that out of the 52% who voted leave, there's a large chunk of them who would find this "rogue" model a horrifying outcome in many ways. 35% of Labour supporters voted to leave, and such a strategy goes against almost every aspect of their political beliefs.

There's been a sea change in public opinion most of it against politicians who are 'just not getting on with it'. Some Remainers have moved to Leave, some Leavers would now vote Remain. But the majority for leaving would now be significantly more than the last time if the same question is put to the public again. The public will, rightly, see it as the EU and the UK political elite not respecting democracy and trying to force a different outcome.

The Independent Group is a brave move, but stupid. In the long run, it will be clear that the only thing that unites this disparate lot is a will to go against the public vote. And the public don't like that, irrespective of how they voted at the Referendum. I predict now that unless the Independent Group find a different common purpose they'll fall flat on their faces.

 

[Cobby]

They may turn out to be right, but let's face it - their predictions about a post-Brexit economy are just extensions of their predictions on what a post-Leave-vote economy would look like.

So more likely to be wrong than right.

You may not be aware since you are fixated on the never-actually-got-said claims about a Leave vote causing world war 3, but most of the predictions about the state of the economy after a Leave vote were, by and large, accurate.

It's been proven a bunch of lies. When someone's lied to you about something you tend to not trust their other claims very much.

Literally every Brexiteer argument came after this:

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

There's been a sea change in public opinion most of it against politicians who are 'just not getting on with it'. Some Remainers have moved to Leave, some Leavers would now vote Remain. But the majority for leaving would now be significantly more than the last time if the same question is put to the public again. The public will, rightly, see it as the EU and the UK political elite not respecting democracy and trying to force a different outcome.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/euref2-poll-of-polls/

The polls disagree, and I think, based on what we learned in terms of methodology during the referendum, they will be more accurate than they were before.

There will certainly be fixes in place to solve the issues of last time, but I think it's clutching at straws to suggest that these fixes have made accuracy even worse (based on the suggestion that the leave vote would be even higher this time). Each to their own though.

The Independent Group is a brave move, but stupid. In the long run, it will be clear that the only thing that unites this disparate lot is a will to go against the public vote. And the public don't like that, irrespective of how they voted at the Referendum. I predict now that unless the Independent Group find a different common purpose they'll fall flat on their faces.

I actually think they could thrive.

Labour is lurching more to the left under Corbyn, and the Conservatives are lurching more to the right under this strange obsession with the ERG. There's a prime opening for a party based in the centre ground of politics. And with the Lib Dems still hurting from their collaboration with the Tories, a fresh new party taking the centre could be a welcome attraction for many people to escape all this left/right bitterness.

I also think you're overstating how much the broader public care about this concept of "going against the public vote". Many leave supporters obviously won't like it, whereas many remainers will.

Technically speaking, it doesn't go against the public at all, as they're merely being asked again three years later when a range of new circumstances are known (including the deal on the table). If we still want to leave, we'll leave. If we don't, we'll have changed our minds and that should be respected also. The choice would be there for the people to make.

Even KM-Tiger has said that he'd be tempted to stay in the EU (at least for now) instead of leaving with May's deal, and I'm sure he's not the only one, so it isn't as black and white as many claim now.

 

[The Byre]

If some claims made by Remain turned out to be false, stupid, blatant scaremongering ... it's possible that their other claims and predictions are also wrong.

And the scaremongering continues! Politicians talk rubbish - they always did and they always will. They are as a breed wilfully stupid.

Instead of listening to them, listen to industry. At the moment everybody is holding their breath and sitting on their hands. One thing I hope you can understand as an intelligent man who deals with businesses of all types, is that if you have a factory geared to serving the EU market, there is absolutely no point having that factory outside of the EU. As half of the UK's exports are manufacturing, if there is a 'radical' separation, that would be a heavy blow to the UK economy.

A second referendum will see them rebel against the political elite (and their recommendations) in vast numbers. This is why even Farage is now open to the idea of a second ref!

That is wishful thinking and reminds me of the Scottish referendum on interdependence.

You are seeing and hearing more noises from Brexit, because they are the protest movement against the status quo. In the 2014 Indy-Ref, huge crowds gathered to support independence and the No! supporters were genuinely worried. Yes! crowds were huge and noisy, No! crowds were subdued and small. The Yes! campaign was convinced that it would win handsomely.

But the polls were right and No! won by a large margin

In the past 30 days, there have been 30 polls and the average result has remained a very, very steady 54/46% for remain. It's that old political beast - The Silent Majority!

I have zero doubt the economy will do better out of the EU (after an initial period of adjustment).

Economies HATE sudden change. It takes decades and even century or two to overcome sudden change and I'm including changes for the better there as well. Your initial period of adjustment could easily last 100 years and be overtaken by events anyway and the whole issue become irrelevant.

And we'll be further away from the sh*tstorm when the brown stuff hits the fan with that whole misconceived common currency nonsense.

That is a misreading of the European economy on an industrial scale.

The Euro is in reality just the D-Mark. That is why it was set to two-for-one.

Before the Euro you could pay for goods and services almost anywhere in D-Marks. I had a two-week holiday in Yugoslavia and paid for everything in D-Marks. West German D-Marks were especially welcome behind the Iron Curtain! It was Europe's currency. Shops in nations bordering onto Germany even ran dual tills. One for the local buttons and one for the all-powerful D-Mark.

The Euro is not going to fail because it backed by the Bundesbank. It is the D-Mark. The real difference is that basket-case economies can no longer print their Monopoly money, but have to face up to fiscal reality.

Granted, we won't see this particular PM taking such a bold move. It'll require someone with a backbone. But it's entirely possible we'll get such a PM in the future. The less the EU cooperate on a decent trade deal, the more likely the UK is to go rogue.

That person with backbone has yet to be elected to The House of Commons!

Great minds, visionaries and strong characters are no longer interested in entering politics, as the real power today lies elsewhere. Politicians can be bought and sold. You don't even need money. The promise of money is often enough - either that, or just a picture of them waving their todgers at a prostitute in a hotel room! It is those who do the buying and the selling that hold the reins to power.

Yes, the UK could find a future outside the EU, but to achieve that would require a great leader, backed by a terrific team, with the skill and drive to reshape a nation and its economy and overcome the lethargy and waste that is endemic within Whitehall.

The problem is, no competent person wants that gig!

There is no King Arthur, no William Wallace, no Robert the Bruce, no Winston Churchill and no other unicorns about to rise from their slumbers and rally the nation to greatness. What you have is a simpering collection of mediocre nonentities, spouting soundbites that others prepared for them, after consulting focus-groups.

There's been a sea change in public opinion

There obviously has been no 'sea-change' - the polls are remarkably stable and all that has changed is that some Brexit supporters have become noisier.

Change takes place when the Silent Majority allows it.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

The Euro is in reality just the D-Mark. That is why it was set to two-for-one.

Before the Euro you could pay for goods and services almost anywhere in D-Marks. I had a two-week holiday in Yugoslavia and paid for everything in D-Marks. West German D-Marks were especially welcome behind the Iron Curtain! It was Europe's currency. Shops in nations bordering onto Germany even ran dual tills. One for the local buttons and one for the all-powerful D-Mark.

And now the Euro is a world currency. One day after its introduction shops in Nairobi and Zanzibar were happily taking them. The UK is one of the few countries in the world where shopkeepers do not want them.

 

[Clinton]

"But the quiet shift of money means less business will be processed in Britain and less tax will be raised.

And today's news: UK's public finances record largest ever surplus.

Office for National Statistics (ONS) data also showed that borrowing in the current financial year to January was £21.2bn, £18.5bn less than the same period last year and the lowest year-to-date figure for 17 years.

The 'bad news' (for Remainers) just doesn't stop coming.

...if you have a factory geared to serving the EU market, there is absolutely no point having that factory outside of the EU.

And vice versa. If you're a car manufacturer in Germany it'll now make sense to move some of your operations to the UK

And bear in mind we import more products from the EU that we export to them.

Before the Euro you could pay for goods and services almost anywhere in D-Marks. ..The Euro is not going to fail because it backed by the Bundesbank.

I agree with you that the D-Mark was huge in its time. Not nearly as universally accepted as the USD or Sterling , but still pretty big. However, you're wrong about old BuBa. It still holds political clout but lost most of its powers, and setting of monetary policy, to the ECB.

Yeah, most politicians are simply focus-group driven, popularity pimps who come across as indentikit robots despite the different labels - Tory / Labour etc - fixed to them when they're leaving the factory. And the ones who seem to have some conviction / personality / something else that makes them look a bit different - Corbyn at one end and JRM at the other - haven't a snowball's chance in hell of becoming PM. Not that they'd be any good as PM anyway.

But we've had crap PMs for a large part of the decades since the war and the UK economy is still up there as one of the world's largest. I think it'll cope with another crap PM or two.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

And today's news: UK's public finances record largest ever surplus.

Which only shows that the Tories don't need to squeeze everyone with austerity so much/

The 'bad news' (for Remainers) just doesn't stop coming.

Twisted logic?

 

[Clinton]

Twisted logic?

It must be very frustrating for Remainers. Each time they think, "Aha, we've got something," it gets snatched from their hands. I do feel a bit sorry for them in a way.

@Newchodge wasn't impressed with the record numbers in employment when that news came out a few days ago. Her argument was that the stats are skewed by people who work one hour a week being counted as employed.

Today's figures show a whopping increase in income tax flows to the government (despite a rise in the personal allowance!)

These people working an hour a week must have some really lucrative gigs!

Or maybe, just maybe, employees on PAYE, across the UK, earned more. No? Not possible?

I'm all for more austerity if it can bring the public finances into order and reduce the huge national debt built up by Labour (and, to be fair, the Tories and Coalition contributed to it as well).

 

[Cobby]

It must be very frustrating for Remainers. Each time they think, "Aha, we've got something," it gets snatched from their hands. I do feel a bit sorry for them in a way.

@Newchodge wasn't impressed with the record numbers in employment when that news came out a few days ago. Her argument was that the stats are skewed by people who work one hour a week being counted as employed.

Today's figures show a whopping increase in income tax flows to the government (despite a rise in the personal allowance!)

These people working an hour a week must have some really lucrative gigs!

Or maybe, just maybe, employees on PAYE, across the UK, earned more. No? Not possible?

Maybe stop treating every argument against you as a polar opposite and high nemesis. The whole conversation is complex and nuanced. Not misrepresenting the arguments against you would also help your credibility.

Employment does appear to have gone up, some reasons are good, others are bad.
Wages appear to have risen, partly in real-terms due to inflation caused by rising prices, etc.
FDI thing not so much backing your position as you'd claimed.

None of these topics belong at the far end of the spectrum on either side, so stop trying to argue mono-causal outcomes; a thing doesn't happen because of only one other thing, nor does one thing only cause one effect.

I'm all for more austerity if it can bring the public finances into order

Of course you're for it. "People unaffected by austerity consider austerity acceptable." This is another great example of unacknowledged privilege.

 

[The Byre]

I'm all for more austerity if it can bring the public finances into order and reduce the huge national debt built up by Labour (and, to be fair, the Tories and Coalition contributed to it as well).

Unfortunately, austerity bites in all the wrong places - bureaucrats are remarkably good at protecting their jobs are their budgets, which is why we have as many civil servants at the MOD as uniformed service personnel. Welfare recipients on the other hand can do little to protect themselves.

The above is one of the many, many mechanisms that makes austerity work backwards and leads to the 'austerity-delusion' - the more you cut, the less you save.

It is all part of that family of economic fallacies and anomalies that come from the false assumption that what is true for one person must be true for an entire nation.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

"The Royal Navy has 15 times more commanding officers than active warships, it has been revealed.

Following crippling defence cuts, there are now 40 admirals and 260 captains but just 19 ships.

The statistics were exposed by Tory MP James Clappison during a defence debate in the Commons in 2013.

He highlighted the plight of the Navy by revealing there are now 13 captains for every destroyer and frigate, and about two admirals – who each earn more than £100,000 a year – per warship."

 

[MBE2017]

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/euref2-poll-of-polls/

Labour is lurching more to the left under Corbyn, and the Conservatives are lurching more to the right under this strange obsession with the ERG. There's a prime opening for a party based in the centre ground of politics. And with the Lib Dems still hurting from their collaboration with the Tories, a fresh new party taking the centre could be a welcome attraction for many people to escape all this left/right bitterness.

Granted Labour has moved to the left under Corbyn, the Conservatives are still where they were, it is only because so many people and the news talk about Brexit that people assume they have moved to the right. The ERG struggled for weeks to initiate a no confidence vote, their numbers are small.

This current Conservative Gov has a larger tax percentage take, benefit payments etc than almost any Gov in history, hardly moving to the right, just people making an assumption that they are.

 

[Clinton]

Following crippling defence cuts, there are now 40 admirals and 260 captains but just 19 ships.

That's normal!

Same thing happens in business. You scale back production resources - sell plant and equipment - but you still have the overheads and it takes longer to wind some of those liabilities down.

What did you expect would happen to the admirals and captains when the Navy was scaled back? You thought they'd all die overnight? In time the Navy will hopefully adjust staffing.

The bloody media, blowing things up in their desperation for eyeballs, is making everyone stupid.

I don't see Cobby's posts, thank goodness. I've got him on ignore. But he seems to be getting excited again and posting in this thread. In the unlikely event he says something sensible perhaps someone will repost that.

 

[Mr D]

"The Royal Navy has 15 times more commanding officers than active warships, it has been revealed.

Following crippling defence cuts, there are now 40 admirals and 260 captains but just 19 ships.

The statistics were exposed by Tory MP James Clappison during a defence debate in the Commons in 2013.

He highlighted the plight of the Navy by revealing there are now 13 captains for every destroyer and frigate, and about two admirals – who each earn more than £100,000 a year – per warship."

You are of course aware of what else happens in a navy besides the ships?
Training, procurement, supplies, logistics, repairs, management, personnel etc.
Need officers in charge of various things. Need admirals in charge of things too. Common to rotate officers through various parts of a service in order to gain familiarity with the way things are done, helpful when later planning things and widens experience.


Just like you can find the NHS has a hospital with more than one manager.
Just like you can find a company like say Tesco can have more than one manager.

The navy luckily for us operates a bit more efficiently than having just 19 captains and one admiral. I don't think any modern navy has dared to go to the idea of just enough captains for the active ships. Its a dangerous mix.

The US navy has 480 ships and 3,145 captains. 114 and 71 rear admirals. 38 vice admirals. And 9 admirals. That's what you would call 232 admirals.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/239345/total-military-personnel-of-the-us-navy-by-grade/

Now would you suggest the US navy is a badly oversubscribed service that's got way too many of the upper ranks of Captain and above?
Or is it simply that ships are just one aspect of a navy needing staff and management?

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Today: European regulator recognises London clearing houses

Ha ha.

But no concern for the rest of the economy then?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/22/city-free-port-brexit-deal-bankers

 

[Clinton]

You miss the point.

The Guardian, of all newspapers, was screaming about how clearing would move to Germany, how we'd lose billions, blah, blah.

And I maintained at the time that it was a load of bullsh*t, that clearing couldn't move from London, that the EU would cave. People like you laughed at me.

Who's laughing now?

According to that link you posted:

...as far as the City is concerned, if there is a no-deal Brexit, Brexit did not happen.... The regulators have duly issued licences to the clearing houses, allowing Europe’s banks to disregard EU rules and continue trading on London’s derivatives platforms. Financially speaking, London is to become a “free port”.

Duh! That was the only obvious outcome from the start. And I made the call back then (not with the benefit of hindsight). What did the EU get in return for making this massive concession? Nothing. Zilch.

So you can continue to let the alarmist Guardian guide your panic attacks, or you can get sensible about this. Just as" London will now be fine", the rest of the economy will be fine as well once Brexit starts to bite on Irish farmers, German car makers etc. (it will bite a lot, lot less on UK businesses).

As your article says about this clearing deal, "It is in the EU’s interest as much as in Britain’s". Er, that's not what anyone said a year ago! Especially not the anti-UK Guardian.

Similarly, a sensible trade arrangement is in the EU's interests as much as ours and we will get it.

Cut those last four words out, blow it up into a big poster and stick it on your wall.

This is something they our dumbass negotiators should have extracted from the start if it wasn't for the annoying Remain gits in government and in the civil service who were frustrating the UK's negotiating position.

Our position should have been simple: "Remove free movement, give us our sovereignty back but let trade continue as normal. Don't do that and we'll walk with a No Deal and become a tax haven. " (That's something else I stated at the start)

As unreasonable as that sounds that should have been our opening position. I've negotiated numerous deals in my 35 years in business. Most negotiations start from a position where the other side thinks you're completely bonkers!

The £39b, rights for EU citizens, everything else should have been negotiable subject to getting the main demand above.

If we had stated it clearly, not budged, and actually left with a No Deal, the EU would have caved. Just like they caved today (and which I predicted a long time ago).

The Guardian is seriously p*ssed off that the EU has agreed to let clearing continue in London. I don't understand the morons, they should be celebrating - it is, after all a major score for Britain.

 

[KM-Tiger]

if it wasn't for the annoying Remain gits in government and in the civil service who were frustrating the UK's negotiating position.

And sadly continue to do so.

Taking no deal off the table, as they are far too fond of saying, simply weakens our position.

 

[Mr D]

And sadly continue to do so.

Taking no deal off the table, as they are far too fond of saying, simply weakens our position.

Taking no deal off the table 2 years ago could have worked.

Taking no deal off the table when we have no other agreed deal and we are still leaving in 5 weeks is impossible. Unless the MPs agree a deal the other side is offering.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

The Guardian is seriously p*ssed off that the EU has agreed to let clearing continue in London. I don't understand the morons, they should be celebrating - it is, after all a major score for Britain.

Obviously you did not read the article. A score for London but not a score for the suckers who voted for Brexit in farming, aviation car making etc etc etc.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

You miss the point.

The Guardian, of all newspapers, was screaming about how clearing would move to Germany, how we'd lose billions, blah, blah.

And I maintained at the time that it was a load of bullsh*t, that clearing couldn't move from London, that the EU would cave. People like you laughed at me.

Who's laughing now?

Did you fully read the article? They will be recognising London's clearing houses for 12 months...

Will this be extended? Probably. But the EU certainly won't give up trying to bring European clearing inside the Eurozone. They now have no need to protect the UK's interests as we won't be a member, and anything they move into the Eurozone would be a big win that strengthens the EU as a whole.

Time will tell.

the rest of the economy will be fine as well once Brexit starts to bite on Irish farmers, German car makers etc. (it will bite a lot, lot less on UK businesses).

I'd love someone to finally explain the logic in this, as it still seems to be missing.

When we lose the single market and EU-associated FTAs, around 60% of our international trade is going to be disrupted. Meanwhile, around 5% to 15% of the trade of each individual member state is going to be disrupted by comparison.

More than half of hours. Less than a fifth of theirs. So how, exactly, does this mean it'll be very hard for EU markets but bite a "lot, lot" less on the UK?

If you claim that percentages don't matter, and it's all about the monetary surplus, then we have a trade surplus with the Republic of Ireland, so this must mean that Brexit will hurt us more than it will hurt the Irish.

You can't have it both ways, so which is it?

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Taking no deal off the table, as they are far too fond of saying, simply weakens our position.

Please explain how shooting ourselves in the foot helps our position.

A big problem throughout the referendum and ensuing negotiations is that politics is being treated like a TV programme like Big Brother or a football match.

We started off being friends with our EU neighbours and now seem intent on making enemies. If we had started by trying to keep the good bits of our humanity intact I'm sure we would not be trying to threaten the other side with "No Deal".

 

[Clinton]

A score for London but not a score for the suckers who voted for Brexit in farming, aviation car making etc etc etc.

You do realise that London is in the UK, right?

I don't get you people. Part of the UK benefits hugely from a big bonus (despite not having to trade anything in return for it) and all you can do is b*tch that only part of the UK benefited from this particular announcement.

I'd love someone to finally explain the logic in this...

Already done all of that, there's no point in doing more. People who want to whine and moan will just continue doing that no matter what logic is explained to them.

If we had started by trying to keep the good bits of our humanity intact I'm sure we would not be trying to threaten the other side with "No Deal".

Er, in negotiations you use every (legal) card you've got including painting for the other side a picture of the options available to you.

The problem with our EU negotiation was that there were not two sides negotiating- everybody was on the same bloody side!

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Already done all of that, there's no point in doing more. People who want to whine and moan will just continue doing that no matter what logic is explained to them.

You haven't. No one has. This is the third time I've asked it and it's skirted around every time.

If you don't mind sharing a few pearls of your wisdom, I'd appreciate if you could be the first person to give me a clear-cut answer on this:

When we lose the single market and EU-associated FTAs, around 60% of our international trade is going to be disrupted. Meanwhile, around 5% to 15% of the trade of each individual member state is going to be disrupted by comparison.

More than half of hours. Less than a fifth of theirs. So how, exactly, does this mean it'll be very hard for EU markets but bite a "lot, lot" less on the UK?

If you claim that percentages don't matter, and it's all about the monetary surplus, then we have a trade surplus with the Republic of Ireland, so this must mean that Brexit will hurt us more than it will hurt the Irish.

You can't have it both ways, so which is it?

 

[Clinton]

Sorry, Scott, over 250+ pages, and in other threads, I've explained it numerous times. I don't have the time or patience to go and dig out those posts.

 

[Jeff FV]

You miss the point.

The Guardian, of all newspapers, was screaming about how clearing would move to Germany, how we'd lose billions, blah, blah.

....

The Guardian is seriously p*ssed off that the EU has agreed to let clearing continue in London. I don't understand the morons, they should be celebrating - it is, after all a major score for Britain.

Obviously you did not read the article. A score for London but not a score for the suckers who voted for Brexit in farming, aviation car making etc etc etc.

Forgive me if I’ve misunderstood the nuances of this particular discussion, but is the “score for London/Britain” a retention of the status quo - I.e. clearing will continue as before?

If so, we seem to be in the same position that I posted about a few weeks/months ago, whereby we are now “celebrating” as wins elements that retain the status quo, I.e. things won’t get worse after Brexit than they are now. Which once again prompts me to ask the question: what will we gain from Brexit?

As I said before, I am open to be persuaded on the benefits of Brexit, if only to stop me worrying about it, but all the positive stories seem to be that things won’t get worse, rather than what will be better after March 29th

 

[The Byre]

So you can continue to let the alarmist Guardian guide your panic attacks, or you can get sensible about this. Just as" London will now be fine", the rest of the economy will be fine as well once Brexit starts to bite on Irish farmers, German car makers etc. (it will bite a lot, lot less on UK businesses).

The EU has taken steps to ensure that Irish farm produce gets EU support and can ship directly to France.

As for cars, the economics of making and selling cars at high volumes are very different from nearly all other products. The largest cost is development and not the marginal cost of building the actual car that you buy, which can be as low as one-eighth of RRP. For this reason, manufacturers can reduce costs enormously by reducing the range. When the Honda Accord was being sold in the US, it had an RRP of $25,000 in 2014. Honda pulled the plug on the Accord across Europe at £30,000 RRP, as it was losing money. It was losing money because of all the different versions that they had to develop. In the US there is one version - 4-cylinder petrol automatic, fully spec'ed, LHD.

The problem with our EU negotiation was that there were not two sides negotiating- everybody was on the same bloody side!

The problem with your argument is that I agree with it totally in many or even most respects - except that we are where we are!

It's like trying to explain to some business person that their latest prestige M&A has gone sour, they bought a turkey and it's time to close it down and admit that it was a bone-headed idea! "No, we can still make this work!" they cry. "We just have to revisit the deal and try to get some of our money back!"

You are where you are! You can't turn the clock back!

The UK has the government it has got - useless! There is no effective opposition! All parties wasted two-and-a-half years shouting at themselves in a series of circular arguments, much like these 250-plus pages of pointless debate.

There is a good argument to be made for never having joined in the first place, but to have struck one-off deals on labour, trade, etc. But that didn't happen. As I stated right from the get-go, preparation for a no-deal exit should have taken place from Day-One. But that didn't happen either!

Nothing happened!

When I attended business school all those years ago, our business strategy lecturer taught us that the worst decision is no decision. We still have 'No Decision'.

The (in)famous 'Silent Majority' is moving with glacial speed (about 2-3% p.a.) over to 'Remain'. This is mostly a result of churn. For the past year, the polls have averaged out at 5% in favour of 'Remain'. The latest round of six polls for week-ending 18th Feb. averaged out at 6%. In the month prior to that, they were at 8%.

No decision - no effective government - no competent team in place - no opposition - no preparation - no real support - no Brexit.

Simples!

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Sorry, Scott, over 250+ pages, and in other threads, I've explained it numerous times. I don't have the time or patience to go and dig out those posts.

Okay so you won't answer it either then. Fair enough.

Anyone else want to have a go?

When we lose the single market and EU-associated FTAs, around 60% of our international trade is going to be disrupted. Meanwhile, around 5% to 15% of the trade of each individual member state is going to be disrupted by comparison.

More than half of hours. Less than a fifth of theirs. So how, exactly, does this mean it'll be very hard for EU markets but bite a "lot, lot" less on the UK?

If you claim that percentages don't matter, and it's all about the monetary surplus, then we have a trade surplus with the Republic of Ireland, so this must mean that Brexit will hurt us more than it will hurt the Irish.

You can't have it both ways, so which is it?

I'd genuinely like to know the clear-cut answer to this which gives such confidence that individual EU member states are going to suffer way more than we will.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Forgive me if I’ve misunderstood the nuances of this particular discussion, but is the “score for London/Britain” a retention of the status quo - I.e. clearing will continue as before?

Its a retention of one aspect of the UK's trade in financial services for 12 months.

My view is that if just one thing is worse after Brexit it will be a bad thing. Ending Erasmus+ and the EU health card are 2 major bits of nastiness which we could have avoided.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I don't get you people. Part of the UK benefits hugely from a big bonus (despite not having to trade anything in return for it) and all you can do is b*tch that only part of the UK benefited from this particular announcement.

You are dealing with it like a game of football. We are about 12-0 and have just scored our first goal. It would have been fun but 80% of the fans didn't see it.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I'd genuinely like to know the clear-cut answer to this which gives such confidence that individual EU member states are going to suffer way more than we will.

Don't worry. We have a trade deal with the Faroe Islands;-)

 

[KM-Tiger]

Ending Erasmus+

What is the current status of Erasmus?

It has other non-EU members, so I've always presumed we would stay in it.