In the event that he had become PM in 2017 where would the UK be now in the negotiations considering that his current plan couldn't work for the UK any more than the Tories' plan could.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
In the event that he had become PM in 2017 where would the UK be now in the negotiations considering that his current plan couldn't work for the UK any more than the Tories' plan could.
Where would the UK should there be any other leader PM Brexit? Idk, invent a parallel universe machine and find out.
Good post.As long as we operate under neoliberalism, the wins for nominally left-wing parties aren't wins - they're ways to stop the bleeding temporarily even as the monster on the other side grows.
Your next post, about the privilege of sitting out:
So that entire rant about Harambe and Stein and privilege - how d'you square that view of history with basic facts about voters?
What about looking at the policies of the Obama presidency, in handling the financial crisis: https://jacobinmag.com/2017/12/obama-foreclosure-crisis-wealth-inequality
Win!
Even with the Brexit Leave campaign which was of course a racist and xenophobic there was a surprising level of anti EU vote in the British Asian vote.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/02/20/the-british-asian-vote-for-brexit-contains-a-few-surprises/
It's far more complicated than Seth and anarchist friends not taking part.
I image it's the same universe where Paul vote for Cameron in 2015 doesn't lead to a referendum that brings the UK out the EU.
Have a leader, from whichever party, who is sensible and rational and understands how the EU works and who stops wasting time posturing trying to boost his /her own career instead of the country's future, and makes a definitive decision.
But I didn't vote for Cameron , that's in Stanley's universe.
Ah the multi universe of redcafe is a confusing one.
Not really. It's just that all you've got is trying to make out that who people voted for previously has any relation to anything whatsoever, clearly angling to suggest Paul had no right to criticise Brexit because of how you thought he voted, same as the "didn't you vote Lib Dem?" aimed at me which apparently means I'm not allowed an opinion on the matter either.
It's not confusing, it's just shit and all you have.
It's not confusing, it's just shit and all you have.
Stans universe is the most legit so far
I've never said you can't have a opinion(Although if any mods are listening if I could have that type of power it would be great, thanks). Just that your always moaning about how Labour are unelectable yet at the same time your actively voting against them getting into power. I would take the moaning more seriously if you were like one of the progress lot who for some reason still vote Labour.
But as I said yesterday, it didn't happen and if I had voted Tory and were still living in one the safest Tory seats in the country, it would have made no difference.
I would have made a considered decision , probably I would have because I would have known what Corbyn was like but Labour had never ever won the seat where I lived. If I'd have thought about it and considered that there was a risk maybe I wouldn't. Who knows?
I didn't vote for him in 2010 either, I wasn't living in the UK for either of the elections.
You know something is wrong when you are on Stan's side.
Because Britain is already a signatory and legislatively bound by the EEA.
www.efta.int/eea/eea-agreement/eea-basic-features
www.ft.com/content/16b50be8-161c-38d3-83b8-14b04faa9580
The only problem with the EEA is its essentially committing to movement of goods, persons, services and capital. All of which are a "softer" brexit. I wonder how Switzerland controls migration? Surely theres something in that.
It also makes Britain free to seek trade agreements on its own.
Theres also a cost to Britain, but it might work for a few years until theres a GE and a government gets time to undo 50 years of legislation and agreements.
Switzerland abides to FOM.
Also this might help you understand that what you're suggesting is not as easy as you think
http://lawyersforbritain.org/brexit...rt-6-can-we-stay-in-the-eea-without-agreement
Last edited:
But dont you have to apply to Switzerland if you want to move there?
Thanks will have a read.
Edit: so the work that needs to be done is around defining the "personality" of the UK post exit so that the "machinery" of the EEA still applies? (if thats what Britain wants for the near future)
As far as requiring the approval of the member states, thats still a requirement for any agreement on exit, and will still require writing legislation defining the relationship post exit. Approval (not sure if ratification is the right way to describe it) is still required from all EU states.
So it cant be any harder than whats happening now.
The purpose of getting into / onto the EEA is just buying time to work out a way to handle Brexit properly without just crashing out with no deal whatsoever.
I assumed that the EEA was an option regardless, obviously not.
Last edited:
I would have voted for brexit man most probably. Then cleansed myself from within.
Nope. Switzerland tried to force the hand by changing the rules but they had to backtrack
I am no lawyer but from what I can gather, when the UK entered the EU it somehow modified its membership with the EEA. Hence, returning to the EEA will require the go ahead of the EU and the other EEA members.
If you ask me, the EU is getting a bit fed up of the UK constantly trying to weasel its way to the good old cherry picking strategy. It really risk pissing off its partners enough to be shown the door in few months time with no transitional period and a classic good riddance reply. That would be disastrous for the UK.
It's even simpler than that, EEA is part of the EU package(It's a single entity) for EU members, if you leave the EU you leave everything.
I am no lawyer so I can't really be 100% sure about that. However, what I do feel comfortable about is the irritation, this constant cherry picking strategies must be sounding among EU politicians. Countries enter into relationships together because they trust one another and its mutual beneficial in equal ways. The moment one of those get broken then you can kiss this relationship goodbye. The UK keeps with this colonial master attitude of imposing a deal then it really risking ending up with nothing
For EU members, EEA is part of the first pillar out of three. Type "EU pillars" on google and you will see charts that makes it easier to understand.
The 'Didn't you vote Lib Dem' was in response to you complaining about politicians abstaining on crucial votes and/or voting with the government. You know, like they spent years doing but apparently not enough to lose your vote. Now, back to you complaining that people don't have principles when it comes to politics...
Oscie is genuinely worried about austerity and the NHS post-Brexit. The only good austerity and damage done to the NHS is the Lib Dem enabled variety.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44671507
Brexit: Third customs model devised ahead of cabinet talks
Brexit: Third customs model devised ahead of cabinet talks
Two years on, government is still negotiating with itself.
Oh good, a third one.
this is just a repeating cycle now of them coming up with customs models, going to the EU, the EU telling them "no, that's not in line with what we do", them going back saying "feck the EU, they won't negotiate at all, it's their fault". I wonder how many the UK will get through before they crash out in March?
But hey, at least they can blame the EU.
this is just a repeating cycle now of them coming up with customs models, going to the EU, the EU telling them "no, that's not in line with what we do", them going back saying "feck the EU, they won't negotiate at all, it's their fault". I wonder how many the UK will get through before they crash out in March?
But hey, at least they can blame the EU.
So are you a lifelong Labour supporter would vote Tory? That's exactly what I've said all along. But Corbyn has since revealed he's for Brexit as well but just doesn't have the courage to spell it out.
It makes Britain free to negotiate their own trade agreements. Two significant problems with this.
1. The real big problem - much bigger than tariffs , much bigger than having to apply the 4 freedoms - you have to have a hard border. This is the killer.
2. Why will the expert UK negotiating teams, note the irony, be able to negotiate better deals than they already have. And you won't need one team, you'll need dozens of them.
The EU have already seen a draft and it's already been rejected out of hand. More cake, vicar.
Has the Irish border been sorted out yet? No? Ok....
There can't be a hard border.
I know.
So what actually happens when the UK goes for the hard Brexit and violates the Good Friday agreement?
They can't violate the GFA - it's written into Law. The only way they could would be to change the law which is impossible as the House of Lords would veto it immediately (if it even got to the HOL which it wouldn't)
Ok but what happens when they violate the law?
A return to the Troubles? Bombs going off in London and Belfast? Probably united Ireland longer term. Also you are ignoring the FACT that they can't violate the GFA like that. They simply cannot do it.
There are two hard border problems - the Irish border and the border with the rest of the EU - the UK will never, or at least for the foreseeable future, be equipped to cope with a hard border.
By "they can't" do you mean literally or morally? Because from a practical standpoint, they can violate it and no one can do anything about it.
From a practical standpoint they absolutely cannot do it - the border would be impossible to maintain in a 'hard' way - there essentially is no border between NI and ROI as anybody who has been here will know so to try and set-up checkpoints, etc. would be virtually impossible to do - and no I do not believe there is a technical solution to it. If they ripped up the Good Friday Agreement it would be political suicide and would cause civil unrest - not only that it would be illegal as I've already said.
Believe me - a hard border is an impossiblity even if that is what the UK government wanted to do (which I do not think they do). They will fudge it and continue with some sort of customs union.
There seems to be a coordinated twitter attack from conservative ministers against Mogg/the European Research Group (the hard Brexit faction of the conservative party).
The fact that BREXIT has given the likes of Mogg a platform is another reason to think it was a terrible idea.
The GFA was done in the context of both the UK and Ireland being part of the EU.
Can the UK legally actually do a Brexit?
Whether morally or legally countries could object to the UK becoming a member of the WTO for a start.