Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[WackyWengerWorld]

Tariffs will hurt the EU countries more than us, as they are trying to be as competitive as they can for our custom. Why would they want to restrict business with one of its major customers?

No they won't, they're a bigger trading block and as such we're less significant as a customer. Our EU market simply is

It would be easier for us to strike up free trade deals with other countries, as the the regulations do not need to be as strict.

No it won't. For one it can take a decade to put together a trade agreement together and no they won't be 'need to be less strict'. Countries won't prioritise us that highly because we are smaller trading block than the EU. So the US is prioritising an EU trade agreement over a UK one.

The UK are looking at a Brexit with no trading agreeements in place anywhere and aren't close to any.

No. They can trade under WTO rules.

Right, which means the highest tarriffs possible, increasing business costs to anyone who trades in the EU, or anywhere because there are no trade agreements.

 

[Dan]

 

[Rams]

You might be but the rest of us aren't. Granted we haven't forgotten Germany's wish to rule Europe, mainly because they are still at it, as numerous posters on here know when they keep reminding us that Merkel is in charge (well supposedly).
No, it's just the way they think. Most domineering political systems (and domineering people) work in just the same way.

What do you call people who believe that Germany wants to rule Europe? Xenephobic!

 

[devilish]

I think we're better off if the UK and EU are allowed to give their goodbyes. There might be a deal regarding immigrants stuck in each other territory but that would be it. The UK will not pay any outstanding bills and the EU would not be obliged to offer the UK any trade deal at all. Its time for both to party to seal a new stable and bold Good riddance....

 

[Abizzz]

Does May actually expect what will be discussed in the negotiations to remain secret and if so who is it that she doesn't want them to find out, the British public?

No, May fully expects the Telegraph to be the only media to cover Brexit in complete sentences. Pictures will be duly supplied by the Sun and Mail. (The nerve of Brexiteers to cry foul play... They do realize nobody outside of their own camp takes them seriously anymore, don't they?) Oh and Donald of course, if it suits his interest.

It should be quite simple, shouldn't it ?
All the UK needs to do is say to the EU -
' OK...Show us where it says in the rules that anyone leaving the EU has to pay to leave, and would it be the case that if, say, Poland or Bulgaria decided to leave, they'd still get their € 40 billion each year ( or wharever amount it is ) of subsidies for the next few years after they've left ? '
Then the UK should politely ask for a breakdown of the bill that the EU wants the UK to settle.
Nothing wrong with that approach....Well, not as far as I can see

This seems the only sensible thing to do, really. That should settle the past relationship and open doors for a new one.

 

[Red Defence]

And when that fails to cause mass panic and the UK begging to stay in the EU they'll no doubt increase it to €150bn.

Their techniques are embarrassingly predictable. Their behaviour intended to cause animosity between countries. Kids in the playground mentality.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

And when that fails to cause mass panic and the UK begging to stay in the EU they'll no doubt increase it to €150bn.

Their techniques are embarrassingly predictable. Their behaviour intended to cause animosity between countries. Kids in the playground mentality.

As with anything in life, if you agree to pay for something, sadly you gotta pay. Like those shitty gym memberships we all lock ourselves into every few years.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

The only divide and conquer tactics I have seen is the Tory Brexiters splitting the Uk into two groups and having a free hand in the UK by destroying the opposition.

 

[Rams]

The Clearing House in London will have to move to a EU member state, probably Paris or Frankfurt I guess. Cost of jobs? 80,000... yes you read it right, 80,000 jobs!!!!! That's what Brexit will mean in reality. Hope the Brexiteers are pleased.

 

[Rams]

And when that fails to cause mass panic and the UK begging to stay in the EU they'll no doubt increase it to €150bn.

Their techniques are embarrassingly predictable. Their behaviour intended to cause animosity between countries. Kids in the playground mentality.

I don't agree. But I do think that, for example, threatening a war with Spain is very juvenile indeed.

 

[Red Defence]

The Clearing House in London will have to move to a EU member state, probably Paris or Frankfurt I guess. Cost of jobs? 80,000... yes you read it right, 80,000 jobs!!!!! That's what Brexit will mean in reality. Hope the Brexiteers are pleased.

One senior executive in the clearing market, who asked not to be named, said that proposals to force Britain to give up its right to clear trades denominated in euros was political "huffing and puffing" that would see Europe score an "enormous own goal".

That echoes the comments made by City veteran Michael Spencer last week, when he told an audience in London that such a move would be a “deeply, deeply bad event” that could cripple European firms.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/05/02/lse-fires-back-eu-plot-seize-euro-clearing/

Opinions seem to differ on this.

 

[devilish]

Brexit was won on the idea of total independence for the UK in terms of setting laws, commercial disputes, setting border controls and signing new trade deals. That means that the UK couldn’t stay in the EU, EEA, the customs union or accept the ECJ ruling. It’s that simple. The Tory party can’t make a U-Turn on those promises without making themselves look silly. Meanwhile the EU cannot and will not appease them. If they did, then they will have to appease others who are far bigger and more important than the UK (China, US etc).

Some might say the EU need the UK and some might say it doesn’t. In my opinion, that argument isn’t even relevant. For years the UK had halted any attempt of a stronger European union and had opted out and protested about everything and everyone. The UK had squandered its legal right to send a meaningful voice to Brussels by appointing UKIP MEPs who either they don’t bother turning in to meetings or else they spend the time insulting others. That had resulted into Brexit which is nothing more than a Tory catfight that went out of control.

Now the pertinent question should be, why on earth would the EU help the Tory party get out from the hole they dig themselves into? Why should they even care? They got more pressing issues than getting involved into the UK’s squabbles. Syria is imploding, Turkey is heading to a dictatorship, Libya is a new Somalia and the two superpowers are lead by idiots.That is far more important than sealing a trade deal witht the UK.

 

[devilish]

Opinions seem to differ on this.

If that's the case then why on earth is the UK so obsessed with a trade deal? They should show the middle finger to Europe and leave. And yet here we are, with British papers obsessing about Brexit and with TM constantly rambling about a bold and new relationships with the EU. I assure you that Brexit barely make any headlines in European papers anymore.

 

[onemanarmy]

If that's the case then why on earth is the UK so obsessed with a trade deal? They should show the middle finger to Europe and leave. And yet here we are, with British papers obsessing about Brexit and with TM constantly rambling about a bold and new relationships with the EU. I assure you that Brexit barely make any headlines in European papers anymore.

This I can confirm. It's non-news in Europe at the moment...

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Just wait until Sterling clearance is done in the Eurozone

 

[Red Defence]

If that's the case then why on earth is the UK so obsessed with a trade deal? They should show the middle finger to Europe and leave. And yet here we are, with British papers obsessing about Brexit and with TM constantly rambling about a bold and new relationships with the EU. I assure you that Brexit barely make any headlines in European papers anymore.

You know what, none of us give a toss whether Brexit make headlines in Europe or not. It shouldn't still be making headlines because it's our decision not theirs. If say Malta decided to leave then fine, it's up to them. If they decide to stay in then that's fine too, it's up to them. The sooner people accept that our decision is exactly that, ours to choose and make not theirs, then the better the relationships will be between everyone. Accept our decision gracefully and deal with in in the same manner is the way to go.

 

[Red Defence]

This I can confirm. It's non-news in Europe at the moment...

Brilliant, time for them to get on with their own lives now.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Brexit was won on the idea of total independence for the UK in terms of setting laws, commercial disputes, setting border controls and signing new trade deals. That means that the UK couldn’t stay in the EU, EEA, the customs union or accept the ECJ ruling. It’s that simple. The Tory party can’t make a U-Turn on those promises without making themselves look silly. Meanwhile the EU cannot and will not appease them. If they did, then they will have to appease others who are far bigger and more important than the UK (China, US etc).

Some might say the EU need the UK and some might say it doesn’t. In my opinion, that argument isn’t even relevant. For years the UK had halted any attempt of a stronger European union and had opted out and protested about everything and everyone. The UK had squandered its legal right to send a meaningful voice to Brussels by appointing UKIP MEPs who either they don’t bother turning in to meetings or else they spend the time insulting others. That had resulted into Brexit which is nothing more than a Tory catfight that went out of control.

Now the pertinent question should be, why on earth would the EU help the Tory party get out from the hole they dig themselves into? Why should they even care? They got more pressing issues than getting involved into the UK’s squabbles. Syria is imploding, Turkey is heading to a dictatorship, Libya is a new Somalia and the two superpowers are lead by idiots.That is far more important than sealing a trade deal witht the UK.

The EU propose a Ukraine style associate membership kind of arrangement. This would give the UK favourable terms on single market access, border controls etc and the ability to sign bilateral deals with other countries. In return the UK would have to agree to maintaining various EU standards and pay a not unsubstantial yearly membership fee, about half of what it pays currently. I think this kind of arrangement could be politically possible in the UK.

I think you are wrong on the trade deal issue. The UK leaving the EU harms both the EU and the UK, a continued trading relationship is in the best interests of both parties. That the UK crashing out of the EU harms the UK more than the EU doesn't mean that Brussels punish the UK out of spite and to satisfy the big egos in Brussels, it is a ridiculous notion really. They will be economically pragmatic and seek to arrange a deal. If a mutually acceptable deal can be reached is another question altogether.

 

[devilish]

You know what, none of us give a toss whether Brexit make headlines in Europe or not. It shouldn't still be making headlines because it's our decision not theirs. If say Malta decided to leave then fine, it's up to them. If they decide to stay in then that's fine too, it's up to them. The sooner people accept that our decision is exactly that, ours to choose and make not theirs, then the better the relationships will be between everyone. Accept our decision gracefully and deal with in in the same manner is the way to go.

I assure you that most Europeans cant care less about the UK, Brexit or any trade deals. Its us who are caught in this shitfest that are concerned.

Regarding EU politicians, all they care about is for the UK to settle the bills. In matter of fact they resisted the UK's attempt to have parallel talks going on (trade deal and divorce). The former is not high priority for them. You can't really blame them. Trump's administration thinks that a trade deal with the UK is low priority and we all know that Trump has a soft spot towards Blighty.

 

[devilish]

The EU propose a Ukraine style associate membership kind of arrangement. This would give the UK favourable terms on single market access, border controls etc and the ability to sign bilateral deals. In return the UK would have to agree to maintaining various EU standards and pay a not unsubstantial yearly membership fee, about half of what it pays currently. I think this kind of arrangement could be politically possible in the UK.

I think you are wrong on the trade deal issue. The UK leaving the EU harms both the EU and the UK, a continued trading relationship is in the best interests of both parties. That the UK crashing out of the EU harms the UK more than the EU doesn't mean that Brussels punish the UK out of spite and to satisfy the big egos in Brussels, it is a ridiculous notion really. They will be economically pragmatic and seek to arrange a deal. If a mutually acceptable deal can be reached is another question altogether.

I am afraid that's something the EU had to decide. Don't forget that in two years time the UK is not part of the EU anymore and therefore it has no say if and what type of deal they are given. First priority is to settle the bills. The rest will be discussed later at the EU own leisure and once the UK is out.

Also note that its not fair to put the UK ahead of other countries who are more important (ex US or China) for the Union and had been waiting for a longer time. Don't take that as punishment. It takes time for 27 countries to agree on something. It won't be democratic if the EU signs anything so big against 1-2 country members will. Surely the UK can sympathise to that can they?

Two things is for sure.

a- there are countries whose hoping that Brexit will be a big big shitfest. One of whom happens to be my own country who saw a sharp increase in companies going there thanks to Brexit and will want more of it. These countries are all armed with a VETO and will sink any trade deal that is not good for them (not the Union or Germany but THEM)

b- The farther the UK goes from the EU standards the more difficult it will be for them to get a trade deal.

And please don't mix what Maltese/EU politicians thinks to what I feel. I am in the UK because I love the people and the lifestyle. In matter of fact all my qualifications are British (despite Malta give free tertiary education to everyone). I can assure you that I am in the UK for pure lifestyle. In matter of fact from a purely financially purposes I am better off in my country.

 

[Rams]

Opinions seem to differ on this.

If the transactions are done in Euro's then the European commission is going to force the clearing houses to do so from a EU member state or country on the continent. This is not an opinion or wishful thinking, this really is going to happen and the London stock exchange know fully well it's going to happen.

 

[Rams]

Brilliant, time for them to get on with their own lives now.

The penny still hasn't dropped has it? It's the UK that's going to suffer, my country. And that's why I do care about it far more then any of my Dutch colleagues, who don't really care and just feel sorry for the Brits for their stupidity.

 

[devilish]

If the transactions are done in Euro's then the European commission is going to force the clearing houses to do so from a EU member state or country on the continent. This is not an opinion or wishful thinking, this really is going to happen and the London stock exchange know fully well it's going to happen.

I happening to have a friend who owns a construction company in my country. Office space is in ridiculous high demand at the moment thanks to Brexit. They are literally knocking new buildings down to rebuild them to suit office space. Meanwhile rent had gone up by 300% in the past year or so. I know, because I got some properties in Malta on rent and I cant believe my luck.

 

[WackyWengerWorld]

Regarding EU politicians, all they care about is for the UK to settle the bills. In matter of fact they resisted the UK's attempt to have parallel talks going on (trade deal and divorce). The former is not high priority for them. You can't really blame them. Trump's administration thinks that a trade deal with the UK is low priority and we all know that Trump has a soft spot towards Blighty.

Where as Britain it is the complete opposite. Given it's the only card we hold it'd be pragmatic to demand parallel talks or state no divorce payments will be forthcoming until a trade deal is arranged. Paying a large divorce bill and hoping they would offer a trade deal down the line would be a poor strategy and simply giving up Britain's trump card.

 

[devilish]

Where as Britain it is the complete opposite. Given it's the only card we hold it'd be pragmatic to demand parallel talks or state no divorce payments will be forthcoming until a trade deal is arranged. Paying a large divorce bill and hoping they would offer a trade deal down the line would be a poor strategy and simply giving up Britain's trump card.

Well, you’ve got a point of course. ‘Brussels’ (ie the remaining 27) will be handed a big financial hole in their budget to fill. However, I am pretty sure that the EU will find a way to work things around that. Once the big General elections are out of the way, Germany/France will probably concede that they will have to pay slightly more and the remaining countries will have to live with less. The EU will also be handled a big scapegoat to blame (ie the UK) and will take this opportunity to make necessary reforms that are needed (i wonder what they will be and if they will be enough, but that's an argument for another day)

The populist spring took a rocking the day all 27 EU nations unified against Brexit. If Macron and Merkel win then I can see it die out completely. In matter of fact, even Trump seemed to have lost hope of seeing the EU destroyed any time soon. He wouldn't have placed the EU ahead of the trade deal queue if it wasn't the case. If the US (and the most anti European president of all people) cant remain hostile with Europe forever then imagine how important it is for the UK to seal a deal with its own continent.

In my opinion, the only leverage the UK had was article 50. No one could force the UK to activate it and no one could kick the UK out of the EU even if they wanted to do so. The UK could simply dig its heels and not activate article 50 unless an alternative trade deal is given first. Under such circumstances the European markets would start trembling long before the UK markets did and the UK would get its way. Unfortunately, May lacked the support to do so and had to surrender to the pressure of the Brexiters who wanted to leave the EU ASAP.

Another course of action that really needs to be explored is for the UK to become part of NAFTA. Unfortunately, NAFTA Is pretty dependent on Trump’s whims and we all know how unstable that man is. I can see him selling you out if that means getting a better deal with the EU.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

im not a May supporter in fact im developing a strong dislike for her, even above my usual distain for conservative MP's, (i'm going to vote Labour in the General Election) but im struggling to see why she is getting so much criticism for saying 'no deal is better then a bad deal', what do we want her to say? we will take what ever deal the EU offers and pay as much as they like?

what am i missing?

 

[Zarlak]

im not a May supporter in fact im developing a strong dislike for her, even above my usual distain for conservative MP's, (i'm going to vote Labour in the General Election) but im struggling to see why she is getting so much criticism for saying 'no deal is better then a bad deal', what do we want her to say? we will take what ever deal the EU offers and pay as much as they like?

what am i missing?

Probably the fact that during the campaign they promised we'd get whatever we wanted and the EU would fall to their knees begging us for amazing terms because we're such a massive empire that the world fear and respect in equal measure and that negotiating a much better deal will be so incredibly easy that Boris could even do it. Of course, anyone with more than 1 brain cell knew that wasn't going to be the case and that we'd be offered poor terms, but some people on here honestly believed we'd get whatever we wanted because the EU need us.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

Probably the fact that during the campaign they promised we'd get whatever we wanted and the EU would fall to their knees begging us for amazing terms because we're such a massive empire that the world fear and respect in equal measure and that negotiating a much better deal will be so incredibly easy that Boris could even do it. Of course, anyone with more than 1 brain cell knew that wasn't going to be the case and that we'd be offered poor terms, but some people on here honestly believed we'd get whatever we wanted because the EU need us.

i get what your saying, but that still doesn't really add up the way people are attacking her, the way people are acting as if it is wrong for her to say no she won't just agree whatever deal offered.

 

[Kentonio]

i get what your saying, but that still doesn't really add up the way people are attacking her, the way people are acting as if it is wrong for her to say no she won't just agree whatever deal offered.

Because it was a truly stupid thing to say. She's basically putting forward the idea of leaving with no deal as a serious alternative option that we're considering. The problem with that, is that leaving with no deal would be outrageously destructive. First of all it would leave around 1.5m Brits currently in the EU, and 3.5m Europeans living in the UK completely fecked. We'd have no legal justification for our residence, employment etc etc. This isn't some fantasy, once we leave the EU anyone who doesn't already have permanant residency (and that takes 5 years generally) would basically have to go home unless a deal is made. Funnily enough the idea of millions of people being driven out of their jobs and homes is not particularly attractive, especially for those of us who would be directly effected.

Secondly there's the small matter of trade. Without a deal, suddenly there are not only tariffs on everything, but also customs inspections. We don't have anything like the infrastucture to deal with customs inspections on the volume of trade we do with Europe, not even close. So you'd be looking at months of endless queue's in and out of the country, with businesses across the UK crawling to a standstill because the endless list of parts and supplies they buy from the continent aren't arriving on time.

Oh and its not just one way, all the things we sell to Europe are subject to EU regulation. Which suddenly we're not going to be a part of anymore. So instead of our goods and services just being waved through because we're part of the same regulatory frameworks, suddenly we're going to have to prove that our goods and services comply with EU standards.

It's an almost unimaginable horror show scenario, that would drive the UK to its knees. The idea that the ridiculous robot in Downing Street and her merry band of clowns and feckwits are actually considering it as an option is beyond insane.

Technically though she's right. A bad deal (for instance insisting every British citizen go and kill themselves) would indeed be better than no deal. The idea that anything she would potentially negotiate will be worse though, is farcical.

 

[devilish]

Because it was a truly stupid thing to say. She's basically putting forward the idea of leaving with no deal as a serious alternative option that we're considering. The problem with that, is that leaving with no deal would be outrageously destructive. First of all it would leave around 1.5m Brits currently in the EU, and 3.5m Europeans living in the UK completely fecked. We'd have no legal justification for our residence, employment etc etc. This isn't some fantasy, once we leave the EU anyone who doesn't already have permanant residency (and that takes 5 years generally) would basically have to go home unless a deal is made. Funnily enough the idea of millions of people being driven out of their jobs and homes is not particularly attractive, especially for those of us who would be directly effected.

Secondly there's the small matter of trade. Without a deal, suddenly there are not only tariffs on everything, but also customs inspections. We don't have anything like the infrastucture to deal with customs inspections on the volume of trade we do with Europe, not even close. So you'd be looking at months of endless queue's in and out of the country, with businesses across the UK crawling to a standstill because the endless list of parts and supplies they buy from the continent aren't arriving on time.

Oh and its not just one way, all the things we sell to Europe are subject to EU regulation. Which suddenly we're not going to be a part of anymore. So instead of our goods and services just being waved through because we're part of the same regulatory frameworks, suddenly we're going to have to prove that our goods and services comply with EU standards.

It's an almost unimaginable horror show scenario, that would drive the UK to its knees. The idea that the ridiculous robot in Downing Street and her merry band of clowns and feckwits are actually considering it as an option is beyond insane.

Technically though she's right. A bad deal (for instance insisting every British citizen go and kill themselves) would indeed be better than no deal. The idea that anything she would potentially negotiate will be worse though, is farcical.

I disagree to that. Irrespective of the size of one country you can't sound desperate when negotiating else you'll risked being runned down. And tbf the UK is not an insignificant country either.

The big mistake was

a- Not having any plan whatsoever
b- aiming way higher then the country can actually achieve and taking decisions before you actually speak with the negotiators (ie the UK is leaving the single market, its leaving the ECJ, its will control freedom of movement etc)
c- ignoring what the EU negotiators are saying and in some ways (ex Farage) openly insulting them

After the Brexit result, the UK should have got their shit together and they should have come out with a solid and realistic plan of action. There should be no more posturing, no more threats and definately no more populist cut and paste quotes that may sound popular in the UK but are meant to irk the very people you'll soon be negotiating with.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Because it was a truly stupid thing to say. She's basically putting forward the idea of leaving with no deal as a serious alternative option that we're considering. The problem with that, is that leaving with no deal would be outrageously destructive. First of all it would leave around 1.5m Brits currently in the EU, and 3.5m Europeans living in the UK completely fecked. We'd have no legal justification for our residence, employment etc etc. This isn't some fantasy, once we leave the EU anyone who doesn't already have permanant residency (and that takes 5 years generally) would basically have to go home unless a deal is made. Funnily enough the idea of millions of people being driven out of their jobs and homes is not particularly attractive, especially for those of us who would be directly effected.

Secondly there's the small matter of trade. Without a deal, suddenly there are not only tariffs on everything, but also customs inspections. We don't have anything like the infrastucture to deal with customs inspections on the volume of trade we do with Europe, not even close. So you'd be looking at months of endless queue's in and out of the country, with businesses across the UK crawling to a standstill because the endless list of parts and supplies they buy from the continent aren't arriving on time.

Oh and its not just one way, all the things we sell to Europe are subject to EU regulation. Which suddenly we're not going to be a part of anymore. So instead of our goods and services just being waved through because we're part of the same regulatory frameworks, suddenly we're going to have to prove that our goods and services comply with EU standards.

It's an almost unimaginable horror show scenario, that would drive the UK to its knees. The idea that the ridiculous robot in Downing Street and her merry band of clowns and feckwits are actually considering it as an option is beyond insane.

Technically though she's right. A bad deal (for instance insisting every British citizen go and kill themselves) would indeed be better than no deal. The idea that anything she would potentially negotiate will be worse though, is farcical.

Ken you are going into meltdown here.

The EU have proposed a three year transition deal specifically to smooth the transition in customs practices. Any chaos is bad news for the EU too.

I would bet my house that we don't see the chaos you foretell.

 

[Kentonio]

I disagree to that. Irrespective of the size of one country you can't sound desperate when negotiating else you'll risked being runned down. And tbf the UK is not an insignificant country either.

The big mistake was

a- Not having any plan whatsoever
b- aiming way higher then the country can actually achieve and taking decisions before you actually speak with the negotiators (ie the UK is leaving the single market, its leaving the ECJ, its will control freedom of movement etc)
c- ignoring what the EU negotiators are saying and in some ways (ex Farage) openly insulting them

After the Brexit result, the UK should have got their shit together and they should have come out with a solid and realistic plan of action. There should be no more posturing, no more threats and definately no more populist cut and paste quotes that may sound popular in the UK but are meant to irk the very people you'll soon be negotiating with.

Look, there's a big difference between sounding desperate and sounding insane. The right thing to say was what absolutely everyone expected her to say: "We'll ensure that our friendships and close ties with Europe continue in the future from outside the EU, but we'll ensure that we put the interests of Britain first in the forthcoming negotiations. Never the less, we firmly believe we can find a deal that is beneficial to all parties".

Bear in mind that most politicians were Remain, and the EU was very attracted to the idea that this was a populist temper tantrum that over time could be undone. The wisest negotiating strategy would have been to use that wish to get a decent deal that didn't drive the UK public completely away from the EU ideals, but at the same time left them worse off than they are now (which an inevitable outcome of Brexit anyway). Instead she's put out there the idea that we could follow the most suicidal, nonsensical path possible, while insulting our European partners and convincing half the country that 'no deal' is a perfectly reasonable option.

 

[Kentonio]

Ken you are going into meltdown here.

The EU have proposed a three year transition deal specifically to smooth the transition in customs practices. Any chaos is bad news for the EU too.

I would bet my house that we don't see the chaos you foretell.

So what you're saying is that a deal is actually better than no deal? Because if you read my post again, I was talking about the outcome of no deal.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

I disagree to that. Irrespective of the size of one country you can't sound desperate when negotiating else you'll risked being runned down. And tbf the UK is not an insignificant country either.

The big mistake was

a- Not having any plan whatsoever
b- aiming way higher then the country can actually achieve and taking decisions before you actually speak with the negotiators (ie the UK is leaving the single market, its leaving the ECJ, its will control freedom of movement etc)
c- ignoring what the EU negotiators are saying and in some ways (ex Farage) openly insulting them

After the Brexit result, the UK should have got their shit together and they should have come out with a solid and realistic plan of action. There should be no more posturing, no more threats and definately no more populist cut and paste quotes that may sound popular in the UK but are meant to irk the very people you'll soon be negotiating with.

Do you think that the EU negotiators are that nieve that they would not know she has no choice short of crushing her own country but to make a deal with them? They know all the angles especially the bleeding obvious. They have the upper hand and can call her bluff that is a fact.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

So what you're saying is that a deal is actually better than no deal? Because if you read my post again, I was talking about the outcome of no deal.

You seem to take political and negotiating rhetoric as truth when it is simply posturing from both sides.

I'm certain a transition deal similar to the one outlined below will happen.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexi...ainer-theresa-may-article-50-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

 

[Kentonio]

You seem to take political and negotiating rhetoric as truth when it is simply posturing from both sides.

You don't go into negotiations saying you'll burn your own house down if you don't get a good deal. Not if you want to enter negotiations with even a shred of credibility. This idea that 'looking tough' is how negotiations should work is a complete fantasy. The smoothest and most profitable negotiations start with goodwill, include compromise and mutual understanding and involve parties who will protect their interests but also look for ways to help the interests of both parties. The stuff we're seeing out of Downing Street and from David Davis sound like a teenager has watched Wolf of Wall St, put on their dad's suit and gone in to 'make some business happen'.

It's fecking embarrasing quite frankly.

 

[devilish]

Look, there's a big difference between sounding desperate and sounding insane. The right thing to say was what absolutely everyone expected her to say: "We'll ensure that our friendships and close ties with Europe continue in the future from outside the EU, but we'll ensure that we put the interests of Britain first in the forthcoming negotiations. Never the less, we firmly believe we can find a deal that is beneficial to all parties".

Bear in mind that most politicians were Remain, and the EU was very attracted to the idea that this was a populist temper tantrum that over time could be undone. The wisest negotiating strategy would have been to use that wish to get a decent deal that didn't drive the UK public completely away from the EU ideals, but at the same time left them worse off than they are now (which an inevitable outcome of Brexit anyway). Instead she's put out there the idea that we could follow the most suicidal, nonsensical path possible, while insulting our European partners and convincing half the country that 'no deal' is a perfectly reasonable option.

That's something no one really believed or cared about in the first place. The UK had never really cultivated any interest in building allies within the EU. Quite the contrary, they spent their time within the EU insulting MEPs or/and accusing the EU of everything.

Those who were traditionally pro UK (Malta, Holland etc) were shocked with the UK calling for a referendum on Brexit. They considered it as a catfight between the Tory party that got out of hand and a betrayal towards them and their combined interest. Once Brexit was won, these countries (now a minority) were quick to build alliances with others knowing that the UK won't be there for long.

In my opinion, the UK should have had the decency to start negotiations with a plan in mind and sufficient backup at home to implement it. The EU might not be the most flexible thing around but it does offer alot of different deals (EU Membership, EEA membership, Customs unions, Swiss like bilaterial agreements, a CETA like trade deal etc) which were tried and tested and were relatively easy for both parties to implement. Instead the UK went for a bold and new relationship (the EU calls it cherry picking), no one can really comprehend and which is heavily stacked towards the junior partner. That's a bit of a problem since it gave space for individual countries to come out with their own list that they want implemented. Its very difficult to come out with a deal which make 28 countries happy.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

Because it was a truly stupid thing to say. She's basically putting forward the idea of leaving with no deal as a serious alternative option that we're considering. The problem with that, is that leaving with no deal would be outrageously destructive. First of all it would leave around 1.5m Brits currently in the EU, and 3.5m Europeans living in the UK completely fecked. We'd have no legal justification for our residence, employment etc etc. This isn't some fantasy, once we leave the EU anyone who doesn't already have permanant residency (and that takes 5 years generally) would basically have to go home unless a deal is made. Funnily enough the idea of millions of people being driven out of their jobs and homes is not particularly attractive, especially for those of us who would be directly effected.

Secondly there's the small matter of trade. Without a deal, suddenly there are not only tariffs on everything, but also customs inspections. We don't have anything like the infrastucture to deal with customs inspections on the volume of trade we do with Europe, not even close. So you'd be looking at months of endless queue's in and out of the country, with businesses across the UK crawling to a standstill because the endless list of parts and supplies they buy from the continent aren't arriving on time.

Oh and its not just one way, all the things we sell to Europe are subject to EU regulation. Which suddenly we're not going to be a part of anymore. So instead of our goods and services just being waved through because we're part of the same regulatory frameworks, suddenly we're going to have to prove that our goods and services comply with EU standards.

It's an almost unimaginable horror show scenario, that would drive the UK to its knees. The idea that the ridiculous robot in Downing Street and her merry band of clowns and feckwits are actually considering it as an option is beyond insane.

Technically though she's right. A bad deal (for instance insisting every British citizen go and kill themselves) would indeed be better than no deal. The idea that anything she would potentially negotiate will be worse though, is farcical.

i don't really dis-agree to much with your points, but i still think having ago at her for saying we won't just accpet any deal, when saying that her would make her look even weaker then we are..... i dunno just seems weird, their are so many things to attack May and our policy over Brexit for, having a go at her for saying im not gonna just take any deal seems odd to me and i like i say im not a may supporter at all.

 

[devilish]

Do you think that the EU negotiators are that nieve that they would not know she has no choice short of crushing her own country but to make a deal with them? They know all the angles especially the bleeding obvious. They have the upper hand and can call her bluff that is a fact.

No one in Europe knows exactly what the UK is brewing up. Maybe the UK was planning to join NAFTA or it could build an economy which was similar to Singapore. Europe might think that its a crazy thing to do. There again, the UK is known to venture into new territories, sometimes of which it turned quite well for them (ie colonialism for example)

My point is that the UK should have never activated article 50 without a plan and without any solid assurances that that their plan can and will work + it will be supported by both the majority of stakeholders within and outside the UK. Article 50 is stacked heavily against the leaver. There's no space for trial and error.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

i don't really ***-agree to much with your points, but i still think having ago at her for saying we won't just accpet any deal, when saying that her would make her look even weaker then we are..... i dunno just seems weird, their are so many things to attack May and our policy over Brexit for, having a go at her for saying im not gonna just take any deal seems odd to me and i like i say im not a may supporter at all.

Let her explain to the electorate what leaving with no deal actually means , actually tell the truth. She can't and she won't because the reality is too scary for the UK