Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 4)

[Ridgemont]

Mortarboard said:

If all you wanted was to Chuck out underperform8ng MPs, you've been able to do that for quite a while!

M.

I’m interested in chucking out under performing governments on *all* matters of policy. Democracy eh? I look forward to the day Brussels embraces the concept.

[Ridgemont]

And yes to be clear I would rather the EU got on with the process of reducing the various chambers of national government to what Ken Clarke amusingly described as ‘local councils’ and apply some coherence to EU policy. It might well save the bloc.
But we’re out. So more power to their elbow. Just without us is just fine.

[blueg33]

Murph7355 said:

blueg33 said:

It’s very weird acknowledging that a decision was poor but saying you would make the same one again. People fail job interviews for saying that.

It was always going to be damaging.

The implementation and the choice are two very separate things.

They were unavoidably connected. All you had to do was look at the politicians pressing for leave. Voting leave was always going to get you those people in power.

[911hope]

732NM said:

Makes you wonder why they didn't bother with sorting their own routes previously. Sure could have saved a lot of wear and tear on the UK road network and saved the lungs of the many towns residents built next to the A14.

Road improvement may have a contribution.

[crankedup5]

Ridgemont said:

Mortarboard said:

crankedup5 said:

Brexit is an ongoing process, it’s not a static moment in time with no further opportunities.

Any sign of a plan yet? (He asked, knowing that the answer is "like ste there is")

So we can expect "shooting from the hip", more or less.
Hope labour get lucky

M.

Odd one the ‘plan’ argument.

There was an EU plan. We saw various iterations distilling the base ‘ever closer Union’. The next step was the outcome of the Five Presidents report (Banking Union blah blah https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/lds...

That got blown up by Brexit it appears. So I’m not sure if the EU has much of a plan currently apart from dealing the crap on their doorstep whether it be migration, Ukraine or dealing with an insurgent right.

The thing is that there is no need for a UK Brexit plan. There will be governments elected who will be elected proposing a change of emphasis (alignment for example with the EU re x y and z, or a trade deal with a, b or c). It doesn’t really matter. It’s not in need of a ‘plan’: that is what a sovereign country does (oooh for example the US) year after year.

Some enterprising government (no doubt labour) will hang their hook on an ‘industrial policy’ or another (possibly Tory but you never know nowadays) might emphasise deregulation and free markets. Who knows? But the one thing you can be sure on is that the government making that decision will have been elected to do that by the people, and will not have to deal with the commitment say 30 years earlier to handover entire swathes of policy making to a body does not answer directly to the British people. That’s the plan.

Good post - ongoing process bringing forward the best of opportunities available to U.K.

[911hope]

crankedup5 said:

Good post - ongoing process bringing forward the best of opportunities available to U.K.

Such as.....?

[Murph7355]

blueg33 said:

They were unavoidably connected. All you had to do was look at the politicians pressing for leave. Voting leave was always going to get you those people in power.

The politicians backing Leave weren't the ones in power as noted. Nor the ones that came into power for 3.5yrs, after the first stupid chess moves had been played. Tinfoil hat time perhaps, but I will never be convinced people like Robbins and May weren't being heavily duplicitous.

F1GTR's comment was more logical - nobody in the then current house had any ability, as demonstrated during the stalemate, so expecting any of those available to follow a sensible plan was....optimistic.

But that wasn't the point. The time to vote was 23rd June 2016. It was a calculated move by that prize dick Cameron as he thought he would win and could put the issue to bed forever. So if you wanted change (tick), it was then or never.

It was the start of a journey IMO.

As I think Ridgemont just noted, the Tory implosion at this GE is potential proof that the fig leaf has gone. Nowhere to hide.

My guess is that Labour are going to end up in the same predicament within one, possibly two terms.

If that happens, then I can readily see a party/parties winning the following GE on a full blown electoral reform ticket.

Then we can start the real rebuild, from the inside out.

The EU wasn't the cause of the biggest maladies in the UK. But it definitively gave something to hide behind. That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

[turbobloke]

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

[CivicDuties]

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

[crankedup5]

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

[crankedup5]

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

[CivicDuties]

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

[turbobloke]

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

Yes, untold remainer hype is obvious.

It took 7 years from the vote, 2 from leaving the EU, for goods trade to normalise (OBR) compared to 13 years after EEC accession (paper cited earlier in this thread).

Even arch-remainer CMD acknowledged the nonsense of anti-brexit hype as revealed by his Davos confession - Brexit "turned out less badly than we first thought" and Britain leaving the EU is "not a disaster". Far from it, but at least he's getting there. No more tears, Dave.

The only remaining strategy for the trade myopics is to stick to falsely pessimistic economic modelling (errors) even when they've been corrected and apologised for.

[CivicDuties]

turbobloke said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

Yes, untold remainer hype is obvious.

It took 7 years from the vote, 2 from leaving the EU, for goods trade to normalise (OBR) compared to 13 years after EEC accession (paper cited earlier in this thread).

Even arch-remainer CMD acknowledged the nonsense of anti-brexit hype as revealed by his Davos confession - Brexit "turned out less badly than we first thought" and Britain leaving the EU is "not a disaster". Far from it, but at least he's getting there. No more tears, Dave.

We're relying on the word of David Cameron, who is currently engaged in the Conservative Party election campaign, and is desperate to absolve himself of responsibility for the catastrophes of Brexit and Conservative Party governance over the last 8 years? And still the "remainer tears" meme? Add some tears to this

"Turned out less bad than we thought", that's the best you've got? Have another

[Mrr T]

crankedup5 said:

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

Let me repost my reply to turbo.

Mrr T said:

I note again turbo makes claims but provides no links.

Let's help him.

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/comment/brita...

Does not seem to support the claims.

I am sure we welcome all these news trade agreement.
Japan - The EU already had an agreement. I believe Truss boasted the new agreement included extra cheese.
Australia and NZ - Are new agreement but the benefits are tiny and may be negative for UK agriculture.
Norway, Ireland and Liechtenstein - I assume turbo forgot they where part of the SM.
CPTPP - Where we already have country agreements with most. The largest we do not have an agreement is Peru.
US states - You mean the ones that cannot sign trade agreements because that a federal matter.
India - There might be some benefit but it seems they want a lot more work visa.
Switzerland - Again SM.
Israel - EU already had an agreement.
GCC - The EU has agreements with all the member.

If this is the best brexiters can offer the sunny uplands are a long way off.

As I already said if this is the best of brexit we can see why a large majority view it as a bad decision.

[don'tbesilly]

Brexit really starting to hit hard now 7 yrs after the UK left the EU (according to Mortarboard )



https://www.euronews.com/business/2024/06/21/euroz...

[don'tbesilly]

Mrr T said:

crankedup5 said:

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

Let me repost my reply to turbo.

Mrr T said:

I note again turbo makes claims but provides no links.

Let's help him.

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/comment/brita...

Does not seem to support the claims.

I am sure we welcome all these news trade agreement.
Japan - The EU already had an agreement. I believe Truss boasted the new agreement included extra cheese.
Australia and NZ - Are new agreement but the benefits are tiny and may be negative for UK agriculture.
Norway, Ireland and Liechtenstein - I assume turbo forgot they where part of the SM.
CPTPP - Where we already have country agreements with most. The largest we do not have an agreement is Peru.
US states - You mean the ones that cannot sign trade agreements because that a federal matter.
India - There might be some benefit but it seems they want a lot more work visa.
Switzerland - Again SM.
Israel - EU already had an agreement.
GCC - The EU has agreements with all the member.

If this is the best brexiters can offer the sunny uplands are a long way off.

As I already said if this is the best of brexit we can see why a large majority view it as a bad decision.

It was nonsense the first time you posted it, doubling down doesn’t make it any less of a nonsense.

[Mrr T]

don'tbesilly said:

Mrr T said:

crankedup5 said:

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

Let me repost my reply to turbo.

Mrr T said:

I note again turbo makes claims but provides no links.

Let's help him.

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/comment/brita...

Does not seem to support the claims.

I am sure we welcome all these news trade agreement.
Japan - The EU already had an agreement. I believe Truss boasted the new agreement included extra cheese.
Australia and NZ - Are new agreement but the benefits are tiny and may be negative for UK agriculture.
Norway, Ireland and Liechtenstein - I assume turbo forgot they where part of the SM.
CPTPP - Where we already have country agreements with most. The largest we do not have an agreement is Peru.
US states - You mean the ones that cannot sign trade agreements because that a federal matter.
India - There might be some benefit but it seems they want a lot more work visa.
Switzerland - Again SM.
Israel - EU already had an agreement.
GCC - The EU has agreements with all the member.

If this is the best brexiters can offer the sunny uplands are a long way off.

As I already said if this is the best of brexit we can see why a large majority view it as a bad decision.

It was nonsense the first time you posted it, doubling down doesn’t make it any less of a nonsense.

If it's nonsense I am sure you can point out the bits that are wrong.

[simon_harris]

CivicDuties said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

Said entirely without irony...

[Mortarboard]

turbobloke said:

Yes, untold remainer hype is obvious.

It took 7 years from the vote, 2 from leaving the EU, for goods trade to normalise (OBR) compared to 13 years after EEC accession (paper cited earlier in this thread).

Even arch-remainer CMD acknowledged the nonsense of anti-brexit hype as revealed by his Davos confession - Brexit "turned out less badly than we first thought" and Britain leaving the EU is "not a disaster". Far from it, but at least he's getting there. No more tears, Dave.

The only remaining strategy for the trade myopics is to stick to falsely pessimistic economic modelling (errors) even when they've been corrected and apologised for.

Customers and border controls still aren't updated. That's how well it's going.....

M.