[B0ycey]

@ingliz
@B0ycey
@foxdemon
@Decky

The damage has been done already to the EU and Britain. The only way Brexit will be cancelled is by Britain agreeing to not impede further integration. Under those conditions of course we will forgive and forget. Even if Britain will want to stop Brexit at some point, there are new realities that will need to be addressed. As it is, nobody really wants Britain as part of the EU because they have been the problem child of EU for quite some time. We have bended the rules so much for Britain, yet they started Brexit anyways.

Technically Britain can cancel Brexit by itself but i doubt it will be that simple.
Almost everybody understand that cancelling Brexit will mean that Britain will again try to bend the rules and impede developments in the EU. Majority of the EU politicians do not want this.

Decky and foxdemon didn't address this point and ingliz is an EU citizen. I addressed the point and if I had my way we would indeed federalism the entire continent. It would create Europe as the leading superpower and save costs that could go into reform and promote growth. But you are naive to think the UK are the anchor to prevent this from occuring (but they certainty are an obstacle). With or without Brexit, this kind of policy is many many years from occuring from changing all the minds in heartland Europe to national governments giving up many powers to Brussels. Also I doubt the majority of Europe do want the UK to leave either. What politicians might say to the media and what they say behind closed doors are two seperate things. It's a great disadvantage in mindgames to give your opponent an inch, so no, if the UK did change their mind they would be given an embrace and used as a warning for other nationalist thoughout Europe that being outside of the EU is not without cost.

As for your point about greater intergration, the EU has for years given the UK opt outs to get this far in their dream for a United Europe. It makes more sense to continue to do while the rest of Europe do indeed progress into intergration further (if the UK did indeed change their mind). Perhaps the UK might be less inclined to veto actually and be part of Europe more if they changed their mind, who knows. I suppose my point being is I doubt the UK being part of the EU will slow intergration down. The thing that is stopping it at the moment is individual states thinking of their own self interests and not the continents interest as a whole.

[Beren]

And if the Brits want as close a relation as they say they want, they'll have to accept EU regulations and become a passive member like Norway or Switzerland or Turkey, all of which are associated with the single market without having any say in its decision-making processes. That would be a perfect arrangement.

Which would never be acceptable to the British voters according to Theresa May, so I wonder if they leave without a deal or the whole thing gets reversed somehow. It seems like a hard Brexit or no Brexit situation actually.

[Atlantis]

Which would never be acceptable to the British voters ...

I think the wish of the voters is about the last thing British politicians are concerned about right now. It's all a question of whether May's government can package a deal so the loss of control actually looks like "taking back control." Something like, "after long and arduous talks we have reached the best deal for the UK, which gives us greatest access to the single market while at the same time being fully sovereign (nobody is going to read the small print anyways).

if I had my way we would indeed federalism the entire continent.

I see European integration like an organic process. There is no master plan, which has to be adhered to even under changing conditions. We develop according to necessity, eg. the financial crisis prompted the idea of a banking union and now, perhaps, a fiscal union. A federation cannot be imposed. It will happen when there is overwhelming support.

There is always going to be dissension, like in any group, and national interest tends to slow integration. But often circumstances force us to act, like in the issue of a border force. And despite all the criticism of the EU, most understand perfectly well that it is beneficial to them, even if they pretend otherwise to get some national advantage. That's the same for Britain. The UK used the referendum as a leverage to get more national advantages. Nobody, not even Brexit leaders, expected the leave campaign to win. It was an accident. British leaders gambled just a bit too recklessly.

But the drivers of European integration, especially Germany and France, understand that our national interest is best served by European integration and not by narrowly focusing on national advantages at the expense of our neighbors.

[Beren]

I think the wish of the voters is about the last thing British politicians are concerned about right now. It's all a question of whether May's government can package a deal so the loss of control actually looks like "taking back control." Something like, "after long and arduous talks we have reached the best deal for the UK, which gives us greatest access to the single market while at the same time being fully sovereign (nobody is going to read the small print anyways).

I'm not sure if the British elite and the political class want that. I also wonder if the Tories really want to manage the process through because it divides them and can hurt them badly whatever they do. On the other hand Labour and Corbyn seem confused too while a YouGov survey finds 42% of respondents think it is right to leave the EU and 47% think it is wrong.

Labour’s official policy is that it accepts the referendum result, but its leader has sent mixed signals about whether he would support staying in the single market. This week Corbyn said he would vote to remain if there was a second referendum, but at last month’s Labour conference he said he was wary of committing to staying in the single market because it would restrict the powers of a future Labour government.

► Show Spoiler

Or maybe he's not confused at all?

[Atlantis]

Looks like May is starting to see reason after all by accepting virtually every condition set by the EU.

Theresa May kickstarts trade talks by accepting £53bn bill

European Union negotiators have started drawing up the outlines of a future trade deal with Britain after receiving signals from the government that it would agree to pay more than €60bn (£53bn) for the “Brexit bill”.

Boris told the EU to "go whistling." In the end, all that posturing by British politicians and the ravings of the media will be in vain.

[Nonsense]

By Potemkin -  04 Nov 2017, 00:50

"Since when has the UK been ruled by plebiscite or referendum? You're basically just complaining about the fact that the UK is a representative parliamentary democracy rather than a direct democracy. If you don't like that fact, then you'd better start stockpiling the molotov cocktails and building the barricades right now".

The UK is a 'parliamentary democracy', if that is what you call it, I do NOT.
What goes on in parliament by way of voting or actual policies, is NOT representative of voting outside of Westminster.

"But that's exactly what does happen. I believe the treaty according to which the UK declared war on Nazi Germany when it invaded Poland dated back to the early 19th century and had been long forgotten by most European statesmen. But the UK wanted to declare war on Hitler to stop that lunatic in his tracks, and that dusty old treaty was the perfect pretext".


Great Britain declared war on Germany in September 1939 as a result of failed negotiations between Hitler & Chamberlain which effectively gave Hitler the green light to invade Poland.

No 'Treaty' was needed to declare war on Germany, in fact the second world war began because the Versaille Treaty effectively lapsed through non-enforcement when Hitler breached the terms of it.
That Treaty came into being after WW1, it blamed Germany for that war & France in particular enforced the reparations that Germany was made to pay.


The EU itself recognises there are problems with migration\asylum that require change & simply digging into the status quo in order to counter the 'Right' popularity throughout Europe is counter-productive.

"So what do you propose? The EU isn't going to dissolve itself any time soon, and the status quo is, almost by definition, here to stay for the foreseeable future. mainly because legal contracts and treaties cannot simply be torn up whenever you feel it's convenient to do so".


The other 27 countries could revoke Article 50 TEU, the Vienna Convention(a 'convention' is not a legal term)on the law of Treaties provides that a notification to withdraw from a Treaty , 'may be revoked at any time before it takes effect'.

However, the special arrangements of the TEU take precedence over the Convention.

The 'problem' is, the referendum & the government's stated notice that it will enforce the 'will-of-the-people' according to the result of that referendum.

ONLY an early General Election with a very specific policy of revoking that intention to withdraw would carry the force of law in the UK & thus satisfy both the democratic will of the people with eliminating the current wish to leave the EU provided the other 27 countries agree?

[Nonsense]

Looks like May is starting to see reason after all by accepting virtually every condition set by the EU.

Theresa May kickstarts trade talks by accepting £53bn bill



Boris told the EU to "go whistling." In the end, all that posturing by British politicians and the ravings of the media will be in vain.

This act of treachery by Theresa MAY is a collective act of political suicide by the TORY Party 'elite', an arrogant, ignorant bunch of vermin.
Waving £40 BILLION at the EU, in order to move on the stage 2 of the negotiations is madness.

Does the government think that is the 'ceiling', NO!, it is NOT, they will bite the hand that feeds it & this TORY government is paying the EU more, ONLY because the business lobby that they, the TORIES represent, can continue milking the British people by ACCEPTING MORE 'FREE MOVEMENT' OF CHEAP LABOUR INTO THIS COUNTRY.

IT IS NOT THE 'BUSINESS' COMMUNITY WHO WILL END UP PAYING THIS EXTRA £20 BILLION +, IT IS THE POOR & PUBLIC SERVICES THAT WILL END UP PAYING FOR IT.

[redcarpet]

Brexit Is Already Costing You Hundreds More Every Year, Experts Say

huffingtonpost.co.uk


Brexit is already costing families hundreds more every year, according to experts.

A Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) report has analysed how the referendum vote has impacted inflation, wages and living standards ahead of the autumn budget on Wednesday.

It shows UK households are already paying a high economic price and that Brexit is costing the average household £7.74 per week through higher prices – equivalent to £404 a year.

Higher inflation has also reduced the growth of real wages - and the impact of price increases is equivalent to a £448 cut in annual pay for the average worker.

Report co-author Dr Holger Breinlich, of the University of Nottingham, said: “Our findings show that the Leave vote has led to a sharp increase in inflation. At a time of growing disenchantment with austerity, this is clearly unwelcome news for living standards across the UK.”

It's already costing money per-head, etc. Not that that should surprise anyone. Nor is the NHS getting that 350 million either.....

[JohnRawls]

This act of treachery by Theresa MAY is a collective act of political suicide by the TORY Party 'elite', an arrogant, ignorant bunch of vermin.
Waving £40 BILLION at the EU, in order to move on the stage 2 of the negotiations is madness.

Does the government think that is the 'ceiling', NO!, it is NOT, they will bite the hand that feeds it & this TORY government is paying the EU more, ONLY because the business lobby that they, the TORIES represent, can continue milking the British people by ACCEPTING MORE 'FREE MOVEMENT' OF CHEAP LABOUR INTO THIS COUNTRY.

IT IS NOT THE 'BUSINESS' COMMUNITY WHO WILL END UP PAYING THIS EXTRA £20 BILLION +, IT IS THE POOR & PUBLIC SERVICES THAT WILL END UP PAYING FOR IT.

@redcarpet
@Beren
@ingliz

What are you talking about even? You are going to pay us 60 Billion when it is all and done. I do not understand who gave the British people the impression that you are in the driving seat in these negotiations.

If you do not want to have a no deal Brexit, you will need to:

a) Pay us up for what you signed for. (Roughly 50-60 billion)
b) Provide a solution to Northern Ireland issue.
c) Give a position on European Union citizens right. (If we don't like it then No deal)

When the bare minimum of this is done then we can start negotiating a trade agreement. Europe is fine with both no deal or a deal of some sort. We are not gonna loose much percentage wise from it but this is something we would PREFER to avoid. Britain on the other hand, will suffer significant damage if a no deal Brexit happens. We basically have 4 Aces in our hand while Britain has a pair of 10s. There is no way you can do anything about it.

Just to put it in percentages for you guys.
Britain is around 7-8% of EU trade.
EU is around 40-50% of British trade.

Even if we take a bar of 20% as a loss than we will loose around 1.4 to 1.6 % of our trade while you will loose around 8 to 10% of your trade. The numbers are incomparable percentage wise. Also we are booming right now, so we will likely have just lower growth while you guys will have a full blown 2008 level recession.

Numbers above are speculative. (from me)

Before you start shouting "Evil Empire of EU", consider that we did not interfere in your referendum nor did we force you to leave or join us. So your point about the evil empire is irrelevant here. It is your own idea to leave so man up to it and provide solutions. If you can't than suffer the consequences.

[redcarpet]

I don't disagree on A or C. I can't think of a solution for NI though.

[Seeker8]

On Ireland there has to be a hard border, there is no other solution.

I do not understand who gave the British people the impression that you are in the driving seat in these negotiations.

Because the media in Britain is on a massive campaign to convince people of it. The most popular newspapers are owned by billionaire tax-avoiders who are desperate to get the UK out. They will turn every event into a positive for Britain. Like today they are saying the problems in Germany with them trying to form a government is great news for brexit. But is it really? i doubt it.

[Rugoz]

Just to put it in percentages for you guys.
Britain is around 7-8% of EU trade.
EU is around 40-50% of British trade.

Eh...at least get your numbers right.
EU exports to the UK were ~17% of total EU exports (EU exports minus UK exports to the rest of the world plus EU exports to UK).
UK exports to the EU were 43% of total.

[JohnRawls]

Eh...at least get your numbers right.
EU exports to the UK were ~17% of total EU exports (EU exports minus UK exports to the rest of the world plus EU exports to UK).
UK exports to the EU were 43% of total.

I have seen many figures for this. I am not sure what are the currently acceptable ones are but if it makes you feel easier then let it be 17 to 43. Does it change anything in your perspective? Also the 43 and 17 numbers are vague, cause we can't really gauge the impact of both export/import on domestic supply chains and other sectors of economy that are connected to each other.

(As mentioned before the numbers were speculative)

[Seeker8]

[Rugoz]

I have seen many figures for this. I am not sure what are the currently acceptable ones are but if it makes you feel easier then let it be 17 to 43.

There aren't "many figures" and it doesn't make feel "easier". It's basic accounting with 2016 data.

[JohnRawls]

There aren't "many figures" and it doesn't make feel "easier". It's basic accounting with 2016 data.

Due to the unpredictability of all of these factors growth predictions vary greatly. According to the most optimistic scenarios, where the UK maintains a high level of access to the Single Market, the effects range from a loss of 2.2% of GDP7 and the absolute best case scenario, which foresees that the UK would benefit from leaving Europe with a 1.6% higher GDP in 2030. The assumptions and the plausibility of this very positive best case scenario will be evaluated further down in the paper. The most pessimistic predictions, where the UK would have a simple WTO managed relationship with the EU, show that the UK could face an income loss of between 3.1% (50 billion pounds) and 9.5% of GDP.9 As a baseline for comparison: following the 2007/2008 global financial crisis UK GDP fell by around 7%.

Source: http://europeanmovement.eu/wp-content/u ... _FINAL.pdf

As mentioned before. There are many reports from private enteties and from EU institutions along with some minor reports from the UK institutions that I have seen. The predictions are varied depending on methedology , the presumption of what Brexit etc. So there are "many" figures in this sense but if you only read 1 place then it is understandable that you get only same figured all the time.

[JohnRawls]

On Ireland there has to be a hard border, there is no other solution.


Because the media in Britain is on a massive campaign to convince people of it. The most popular newspapers are owned by billionaire tax-avoiders who are desperate to get the UK out. They will turn every event into a positive for Britain. Like today they are saying the problems in Germany with them trying to form a government is great news for brexit. But is it really? i doubt it.

If there is no solution for Ireland or UK is not fine making concessions for Ireland then it is going to be No deal Brexit.

Some would say that it is counter productive but UK has no choice but cave in on this. (UK stands to loose more from no deal). On the other hand UK has very few wiggle room regarding this. I am also not sure how can it get sorted out. We shall see.

[Rugoz]

Source: http://europeanmovement.eu/wp-content/u ... _FINAL.pdf

As mentioned before. There are many reports from private enteties and from EU institutions along with some minor reports from the UK institutions that I have seen. The predictions are varied depending on methedology , the presumption of what Brexit etc. So there are "many" figures in this sense but if you only read 1 place then it is understandable that you get only same figured all the time.

We were talking about export shares, not growth figures. Wtf is your problem?

Anyway, when it comes to growth projections I presume GDP per capita is more relevant to the British than GDP. And yeah, obviously impossible to predict at this point.

[Beren]

Because the media in Britain is on a massive campaign to convince people of it.

In many cases the media just tells what people want to hear anyways, I'm sure movies or series about the Tudor period, the Napoleonic era, or WW2 are/would be popular too. The British still suffer from delusions of grandeur spontaneously and they don't really need the media to feel like that.

It's a bit surprising Hungary has so much to lose, only 4% of our exports goes to the UK and 2% of imports comes from there, as well as only 4% of FDI is comprised of British investments, Belgium should have more to lose than we do. Would they kick out our emigrants or what?

[JohnRawls]

We were talking about export shares, not growth figures. Wtf is your problem?

Anyway, when it comes to growth projections I presume GDP per capita is more relevant to the British than GDP. And yeah, obviously impossible to predict at this point.

Export and Import amounts are irrelevant without analysing impact on the economy via some metric (GDP in our case) As I stated in the first post that you quoted, there is amount of trade and the amount of loss that added up to some number of losses.

Purely export and import is irrelevant if it does not explain the growth or loss that will happen. As a simple example: If our exports and imports are 100% between each other but the loss after Brexit would be 0 for our economies then it wouldn't be much of a weakness or strength in the negotiations.