[Nonsense]

I still have some faith that neither BoJo nor Rees-Mogg will be PM.

How about 'citizen' CORBYN?

[Potemkin]

How about 'citizen' CORBYN?

We all knew it would happen one day, Nonsense....

[Beren]

It's amazing with how much pleasure people can indulge in their leaders' petty vices, whereas screwing up their country big time can be perfectly okay with them, or even desirable.

[ingliz]

screwing up their country big time can be perfectly okay with them

Always forgetting that, "Every society is three meals away from chaos"

and

Brexit means botulism

and

If the UK were to suspend food safety controls, others might block exports from a country taking such a cavalier approach to public health.

― T. Lang et al. Feeding Britain: Food Security after Brexit

[One Degree]

Hmmm, maybe countries should not have more people than they can feed? They certainly should not encourage immigration.
The ‘sky is falling’ arguments of the anti brexiteers is as meaningless as the ‘sky is falling’ anti Trump crowd. Both show a complete lack of faith in their own people.

[JohnRawls]

Hmmm, maybe countries should not have more people than they can feed? They certainly should not encourage immigration.
The ‘sky is falling’ arguments of the anti brexiteers is as meaningless as the ‘sky is falling’ anti Trump crowd. Both show a complete lack of faith in their own people.

Comparing Trump to Brexit. Let us see here:

1) Who are the economic powerhouses on this list: USA, EU(without UK) or UK?

2) Who is in a better negotiating position? The country that wants to renegotiate basically 90% of its trade deals or an entity that is renegotiating around 10% of its trade deals/volume?

3) Who will have a terrible economic outcome if no deal is reached? EU or UK? What are the prospects for growth for both enteties after no deal Brexit happens?

4) How will the UK get better deals with other countries if its economy is 1/8th? or 1/10th of the Eu? if the EU couldn't get them. (I can't be bothered to look up the exact numbers)

[One Degree]

Comparing Trump to Brexit. Let us see here:

1) Who are the economic powerhouses on this list: USA, EU(without UK) or UK?

2) Who is in a better negotiating position? The country that wants to renegotiate basically 90% of its trade deals or an entity that is renegotiating around 10% of its trade deals/volume?

3) Who will have a terrible economic outcome if no deal is reached? EU or UK? What are the prospects for growth for both enteties after no deal Brexit happens?

4) How will the UK get better deals with other countries if its economy is 1/8th? or 1/10th of the Eu? if the EU couldn't get them. (I can't be bothered to look up the exact numbers)

Just globalist propaganda. The countries with the highest average incomes are all small countries. Their success puts the lie to ‘big is better’. Big is only better for global capitalists, not individuals.

[JohnRawls]

Just globalist propaganda. The countries with the highest average incomes are all small countries. Their success puts the lie to ‘big is better’. Big is only better for global capitalists, not individuals.

You know, the small countries are rich because they are stable for centuries. Because they have steady economic relations and do not fight/threaten anyone. Also because it is possible for them to be tax heavens.

Do you honestly believe that any of those qualities can be attributed to future or present UK?

[One Degree]

You know, the small countries are rich because they are stable for centuries. Because they have steady economic relations and do not fight/threaten anyone. Also because it is possible for them to be tax heavens.

Do you honestly believe that any of those qualities can be attributed to future or present UK?

Yes, since the U.K. was pretty big in crooked online gambling last I heard.
I agree much of the success of small countries can be attributed to illegal activities for the larger countries, but this is just more reason to break up the larger countries.
The world is not dependent upon the EU or the US, it is dependent upon the communities that make them up. The larger ‘ownership’ does not accomplish anything that can not be accomplished through the cooperation of small autonomous countries. The U.K. is totally capable of negotiating their own welfare with other countries. The only hindrance is the existence of the EU and it deliberately acting against them. There is no reason for them to do so other than a desire for dominance. Why else should the EU punish them? Why should the EU not allow individual countries to negotiate in their best interest?
Who is unwilling to trade with an autonomous UK, other than the EU?

[JohnRawls]

Yes, since the U.K. was pretty big in crooked online gambling last I heard.
I agree much of the success of small countries can be attributed to illegal activities for the larger countries, but this is just more reason to break up the larger countries.
The world is not dependent upon the EU or the US, it is dependent upon the communities that make them up. The larger ‘ownership’ does not accomplish anything that can not be accomplished through the cooperation of small autonomous countries. The U.K. is totally capable of negotiating their own welfare with other countries. The only hindrance is the existence of the EU and it deliberately acting against them. There is no reason for them to do so other than a desire for dominance. Why else should the EU punish them? Why should the EU not allow individual countries to negotiate in their best interest?
Who is unwilling to trade with an autonomous UK, other than the EU?

Yes, it is the EU fault shtik. Never heard this before

Do not blame yourself for the bad choice, it is not your badly thought out decision, it is of course the evil EU who is preventing UK from doing all of the above. It is not because it is almost impossible for the UK to do it by itself. EU must provide a solution to the decision the UK took. How dare it, not provide a solution. It is always not your fault as a country, as a government, as a person......

[One Degree]

Yes, it is the EU fault shtik. Never heard this before

Do not blame yourself for the bad choice, it is not your badly thought out decision, it is of course the evil EU who is preventing UK from doing all of the above. It is not because it is almost impossible for the UK to do it by itself. EU must provide a solution to the decision the UK took. How dare it, not provide a solution. It is always not your fault as a country, as a government, as a person......

You lost me. Hard Brexit. The U.K. makes their own deals. They did it for centuries. The only difference is they now must deal with the existence of the EU. There is no problem without the EU’s existence. To argue the creation of a misguided union should dictate the future is disingenuous. It was a mistake that needs corrected. It is not the UK’s fault the EU decided to demand uniformity that was unacceptable.
The U.K. should be proud to be the first to resist the path the EU was taking. The EU made the decisions leading to their own destruction, not the U.K. Many others will soon follow suit because it is obvious the EU’s intentions are dominance, not cooperation.
I believe a hard Brexit will result in the rapid deterioration of the EU and the UK’s suffering from the EU will be offset by countries recognizing the UK’s brave stance. It is only the ‘negotiations’ that is preventing the U.K. from enjoying the benefits of the people’s decision. Trump and others would be more than willing to be helpful to a U.K. doing a hard Brexit.
The EU only has their own totalitarian ambitions to blame for their failure.

[Varilion]

This negotiation is one of the typical cases in which, if there is a deal, it will be a last minute deal. Till then, both parties need to show that they are ready for a no-deal to be credible. And here the big question is how much the UK is credible in this.

If you look at the underlying interests, the main one of the EU is to preserve its integrity. This means not to offer to a leaving member better conditions than to the remaining ones (aka no cherry picking). So if Brexit will be a success ( ), for sure it will not be thanks to an agreement with the EU better than the membership of the club.

What is more difficult to understand is what are the interests of the UK; besides avoiding an electoral doom for the government...

[Beren]

New British Foreign Minister Jeremy Hunt travels to Berlin and threatens the Germans with throwing themselves under the bus if the EU is not flexible enough with them!

Brexit Bulletin: No Deal by Accident

[Rugoz]

I'm surprised the customs union is still an unresolved issue.

The Swiss border is being crossed by 2.2m people and 23k lorries with 1bn of goods every day, yet Switzerland is outside the customs union. It's easily doable with the right technical infrastructure. The Northern Irish border is peanuts in comparison.

[Beren]

Maybe they've already decided it will be the Swiss model, bilateral agreement by bilateral agreement.

[Varilion]

Another thing about this negotiation to remember: "Nothing is agreed till everything is agreed"
Concerning a Swiss-style agreement, if i am not wrong both parties have concerns or elements they do not want.

The north-Ireland bolder issue is more philosophical.
A guy named Aristotle said "It is impossible that the same thing belong and not belong to the same thing at the same time and in the same respect". And now we have that the UK wants a border with the EU, but has an agreement with Ireland which says that there shall be no border with Ireland...

[Beren]

It would be simpler to give up Northern Ireland perhaps, I wonder whether they would like to be thrown under the bus with the rest anyway, which is the same with Scotland. Next thing could be riots in London, which is hardly a British city anymore.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

Brexiteers have said all along they don't want to be anything like as closely tied to the EU as Switzerland.

Brexiteers fear ‘Swiss Trap’ trade deal

LONDON — In their search for a model for trade relations with the EU after Brexit, British Euroskeptics have a new watchword: Beware the “Swiss Trap.”
...For some in the British government, the Swiss model — and the high level of access to the European single market it offers — looks attractive, were it not for a catch which troubles even the mildest of Euroskeptics: If the Swiss break a single clause in any of the numerous bilateral agreements that make up their trade deal with Brussels, their whole economic relationship comes tumbling down.

This all-or-nothing “guillotine clause” forces the Swiss into accepting a large and evolving share of EU law, including free movement of people, with little practical power to break away without risking enormous economic damage.

British negotiators and leading Cabinet Euroskeptics are now striving to find a way to avoid this so-called trap while simultaneously maintaining the same level of access to the European single market enjoyed by the Swiss, said senior Cabinet ministers and U.K. government officials who asked not to be identified by name.
...
To Brussels’ ears, this may sound like the king of the much-mocked have-cake-and-eat-it solutions, a scenario they are desperate to avoid, in which Britain picks and chooses which parts of EU membership it wants to preserve.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexite ... r-britain/

[Rugoz]

Brexiteers have said all along they don't want to be anything like as closely tied to the EU as Switzerland.

The article is full of hyperbole, like anything related to Brexit. Only the Bilaterals I are subject to a "guillotine clause" (the FTA and Bilaterals 2 are not), abandoning them would not result in "enormous economic damage". Though it's true that accepting the clause is generally considered to be a mistake in retrospective.

[Beren]

Brexiteers have said all along they don't want to be anything like as closely tied to the EU as Switzerland.

Sure, they don't, but bilateral agreements could pass one by one perhaps, whereas a big Brexit deal seems less and less likely to ever pass.