Is Boris sh*tting himself?
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
Don't know about Johnson s
tting himself but as things are panning out, with lots of unintended consequences raising their heads, I am.
We are living through a period that will be written about extensively in the future. The exit reminds me of the histories of the civil wars, not to mention WWI, when at any time those with authority could have stepped in to stop the steady progress to disaster but they chose not to. The question that always crosses my mind is why they didn't act. Students in the future will ask why the voters decided to give so much power to Sturgeon. They must have known, they will say, that she would use it for her own ends.
And why, they might wonder, did the government think that the EU would do anything other than what is best for them. They have the authority.
In history lessons in this country the students will be bemused. In European universities, they'll have a laugh.
The EU will ensure that our exit costs us. They will punish us because it will want to discourage others from doing the same. The import/export argument is inconsequential. What would really cost the EU is for the UK to get a good deal. So we won't. We will be told what to do.
There is a suggestion that there will be no talks before we invoke Article 50. That is wrong. The heads of the European states are talking now, and they are deciding what scraps to let us have.
It's OK... "We've got our country back"......tting himself but as things are panning out, with lots of unintended consequences raising their heads, I am.We are living through a period that will be written about extensively in the future. The exit reminds me of the histories of the civil wars, not to mention WWI, when at any time those with authority could have stepped in to stop the steady progress to disaster but they chose not to. The question that always crosses my mind is why they didn't act. Students in the future will ask why the voters decided to give so much power to Sturgeon. They must have known, they will say, that she would use it for her own ends.
And why, they might wonder, did the government think that the EU would do anything other than what is best for them. They have the authority.
In history lessons in this country the students will be bemused. In European universities, they'll have a laugh.
The EU will ensure that our exit costs us. They will punish us because it will want to discourage others from doing the same. The import/export argument is inconsequential. What would really cost the EU is for the UK to get a good deal. So we won't. We will be told what to do.
There is a suggestion that there will be no talks before we invoke Article 50. That is wrong. The heads of the European states are talking now, and they are deciding what scraps to let us have.
grumbledoak said:
Derek Smith said:
There is a suggestion that there will be no talks before we invoke Article 50. That is wrong. The heads of the European states are talking now, and they are deciding what scraps to let us have.
There is a whole world outside the EU, Derek. The Eurocrats don't control that or our access to it.Kermit power said:
"Yes, Mr President, of course China could sign that nice trade deal with the UK on those terms, but wouldn't you prefer it if we got rid of those last few objections and signed a deal with you as the whole of the rest of the EU instead"?
As if. The Eurozone's future isn't looking all that rosy, and China's rulers are not stupid.don4l said:
But everyone won't lose 10%.
We will still buy the same number of cars.
German cars will go up by 10%.
Jaguars won't. So people will buy more Jags.
Minis that are made in this country won't go up.
Skodas made in Eastern Europe will go up.
For these reasons I don't think that there is any chance that the EU will try to exclude us from a free trade area.
As I pointed out earlier, shares in BMW and Mercedes have fallen much further than anything in London. The Spanish market has fallen even further.
Europe's markets are down by about 10%, while the UK's markets are down about 3%.
A rather pleasant dream. We will still buy the same number of cars.
German cars will go up by 10%.
Jaguars won't. So people will buy more Jags.
Minis that are made in this country won't go up.
Skodas made in Eastern Europe will go up.
For these reasons I don't think that there is any chance that the EU will try to exclude us from a free trade area.
As I pointed out earlier, shares in BMW and Mercedes have fallen much further than anything in London. The Spanish market has fallen even further.
Europe's markets are down by about 10%, while the UK's markets are down about 3%.
The UK will suffer a minor recession at best and the one thing that goes on the back burner is a new car.
The political uncertainty will hit all sales of luxury items.
As for the price of cars, or other manufactured goods, not going up . . . as I say, a dream. I have some savings. We were going to go on a cruise this year. All rather expensive. We decided against it because of the referendum. You never know, I thought. So we're off to Amalfie. The cruise will not be next year as savings will be, I think, important.
That the EU will be hit by a UK exit is a given. That is one reason their markets have been hit a bit. There is also the problem of the Spanish election results. That's got to hurt them. But short term problems, such as the £ plummeting against the $, are not the problem. It is medium/long that will hit us.
All that has happened so far was predicted by posters on here but they were rubbished.
Derek Smith said:
Don't know about Johnson stting himself but as things are panning out, with lots of unintended consequences raising their heads, I am.
We are living through a period that will be written about extensively in the future. The exit reminds me of the histories of the civil wars, not to mention WWI, when at any time those with authority could have stepped in to stop the steady progress to disaster but they chose not to. The question that always crosses my mind is why they didn't act. Students in the future will ask why the voters decided to give so much power to Sturgeon. They must have known, they will say, that she would use it for her own ends.
And why, they might wonder, did the government think that the EU would do anything other than what is best for them. They have the authority.
In history lessons in this country the students will be bemused. In European universities, they'll have a laugh.
The EU will ensure that our exit costs us. They will punish us because it will want to discourage others from doing the same. The import/export argument is inconsequential. What would really cost the EU is for the UK to get a good deal. So we won't. We will be told what to do.
There is a suggestion that there will be no talks before we invoke Article 50. That is wrong. The heads of the European states are talking now, and they are deciding what scraps to let us have.
Once over I would have agreed with you but the world is a different place now, if the UK is made to suffer by the EU, they will suffer, if we have less money that is less money to spend on imported goods so harming their economy, is the EU in a strong financial situation to implement such a plan ? I think not, but I would not put it past the idiots in charge of the EU, they don't appear to care. tting himself but as things are panning out, with lots of unintended consequences raising their heads, I am.We are living through a period that will be written about extensively in the future. The exit reminds me of the histories of the civil wars, not to mention WWI, when at any time those with authority could have stepped in to stop the steady progress to disaster but they chose not to. The question that always crosses my mind is why they didn't act. Students in the future will ask why the voters decided to give so much power to Sturgeon. They must have known, they will say, that she would use it for her own ends.
And why, they might wonder, did the government think that the EU would do anything other than what is best for them. They have the authority.
In history lessons in this country the students will be bemused. In European universities, they'll have a laugh.
The EU will ensure that our exit costs us. They will punish us because it will want to discourage others from doing the same. The import/export argument is inconsequential. What would really cost the EU is for the UK to get a good deal. So we won't. We will be told what to do.
There is a suggestion that there will be no talks before we invoke Article 50. That is wrong. The heads of the European states are talking now, and they are deciding what scraps to let us have.
Derek Smith said:
And why, they might wonder, did the government think that the EU would do anything other than what is best for them. They have the authority.
I think you'll find that the brexiters knew all along that the EU would always do what was best for them irrespective of the consequences, it's the remainers that regarded it as some benign entity with our best interests at heart. Dr Jekyll said:
Derek Smith said:
And why, they might wonder, did the government think that the EU would do anything other than what is best for them. They have the authority.
I think you'll find that the brexiters knew all along that the EU would always do what was best for them irrespective of the consequences, it's the remainers that regarded it as some benign entity with our best interests at heart. Dr Jekyll said:
I think you'll find that the brexiters knew all along that the EU would always do what was best for them irrespective of the consequences, it's the remainers that regarded it as some benign entity with our best interests at heart.
And yet, now that we've voted to leave, the Leave proleteariat are desperately trying to tell themselves and everyone else that the EU will act fairly and rationally, whilst the silence from the Leave patricians has been deafening!Getting back to the OP, yes, I think Boris (and Gove, and all the others except Farage) is s
tting himself, because he has enough first hand political experience to realise what has happened.Dr Jekyll said:
I think you'll find that the brexiters knew all along that the EU would always do what was best for them irrespective of the consequences, it's the remainers that regarded it as some benign entity with our best interests at heart.
ThisI also always expected some sort of downturn, whether that be a minor recession or just slow down in growth. This is bound to create disruption.
The question was always whether we were willing to accept a European Federal state as a price to avoid some short term disruption and 52% of us weren't.
The EU is only headed one way in terms of its share of the world economy and soon I think we will be thankful we are no longer shackled to it.
Lucas CAV said:
It's OK... "We've got our country back"......
Indeed. I wish this were true, but we have not got ANYTHING back. We are still a full member of the EU, with no timetable and absolutely no plan for exit.
It seems that it did not occur to any of the politicians arguing for Brexit to take basic legal advice about the process of leaving the EU. It is clear now that they do not have a plan.
Boris has posted a blue sky idea, which would basically see us still in the EU in all but name. No £350m per week (or any cost savings for that matter), but with less exposure to the crazier EU laws. Not a bad idea, but not what he campaigned for either.
Chris Grayling was interviewed on newsnight last night and he tried to argue that 'membership of the common market' was just a phrase and that their focus was trade with Europe.
Meanwhile, our economy is taking a hit, we have rocked the worlds markets and our credit rating, which we preserved throughout the 2008 recession, has dropped for the first time since the 1970's.
Interestingly Chris Grayling also dropped in the words that 'parliament is sovereign' without explaining why. Nothing is going to happen now without an act of parliament. The best case is that we achieve a Norway model with some legal concessions (what Boris is now proposing). Norway pay 32 euros less per person than we do, so don't expect a new hospital every week.
The markets would be much worse if the BOE had not committed £250bn for stability. The worst case sees us spending this, which is equivalent to 50 years of net EU contributions in the coming year, whilst achieving no concessions at all.
I entirely understand why many people voted leave, but unfortunately the leave campaign were winging it, with no ideas and no plan. I don't think they seriously expected to win and it is now apparent that they are desperately finding a way to deal with the fact that they had no plan.
PRTVR said:
Once over I would have agreed with you but the world is a different place now, if the UK is made to suffer by the EU, they will suffer, if we have less money that is less money to spend on imported goods so harming their economy, is the EU in a strong financial situation to implement such a plan ? I think not, but I would not put it past the idiots in charge of the EU, they don't appear to care.
I think you miss the point I was making. The EU will want to put off other states from leaving. That is their one essential. They will change rules and laws so that they can have Scotland and Gibraltar in the EU, not for financial reasons but to show the likes of, for instance, Greece, Spain and Italy, that no quarter will be given. Sure it might well hurt them, but it will hurt us more and it will keep others in line: Pour encourager les autres.
Elysium said:
I entirely understand why many people voted leave, but unfortunately the leave campaign were winging it, with no ideas and no plan. I don't think they seriously expected to win and it is now apparent that they are desperately finding a way to deal with the fact that they had no plan.
Yes, it's a bit like voting for the Liberals in the 1970s - then waking up to the horror of having this chap for PM:
Elysium said:
Indeed. I wish this were true, but we have not got ANYTHING back.
We are still a full member of the EU, with no timetable and absolutely no plan for exit.
It seems that it did not occur to any of the politicians arguing for Brexit to take basic legal advice about the process of leaving the EU. It is clear now that they do not have a plan.
Boris has posted a blue sky idea, which would basically see us still in the EU in all but name. No £350m per week (or any cost savings for that matter), but with less exposure to the crazier EU laws. Not a bad idea, but not what he campaigned for either.
Chris Grayling was interviewed on newsnight last night and he tried to argue that 'membership of the common market' was just a phrase and that their focus was trade with Europe.
Meanwhile, our economy is taking a hit, we have rocked the worlds markets and our credit rating, which we preserved throughout the 2008 recession, has dropped for the first time since the 1970's.
Interestingly Chris Grayling also dropped in the words that 'parliament is sovereign' without explaining why. Nothing is going to happen now without an act of parliament. The best case is that we achieve a Norway model with some legal concessions (what Boris is now proposing). Norway pay 32 euros less per person than we do, so don't expect a new hospital every week.
The markets would be much worse if the BOE had not committed £250bn for stability. The worst case sees us spending this, which is equivalent to 50 years of net EU contributions in the coming year, whilst achieving no concessions at all.
I entirely understand why many people voted leave, but unfortunately the leave campaign were winging it, with no ideas and no plan. I don't think they seriously expected to win and it is now apparent that they are desperately finding a way to deal with the fact that they had no plan.
Our credit rating went down in 2013...We are still a full member of the EU, with no timetable and absolutely no plan for exit.
It seems that it did not occur to any of the politicians arguing for Brexit to take basic legal advice about the process of leaving the EU. It is clear now that they do not have a plan.
Boris has posted a blue sky idea, which would basically see us still in the EU in all but name. No £350m per week (or any cost savings for that matter), but with less exposure to the crazier EU laws. Not a bad idea, but not what he campaigned for either.
Chris Grayling was interviewed on newsnight last night and he tried to argue that 'membership of the common market' was just a phrase and that their focus was trade with Europe.
Meanwhile, our economy is taking a hit, we have rocked the worlds markets and our credit rating, which we preserved throughout the 2008 recession, has dropped for the first time since the 1970's.
Interestingly Chris Grayling also dropped in the words that 'parliament is sovereign' without explaining why. Nothing is going to happen now without an act of parliament. The best case is that we achieve a Norway model with some legal concessions (what Boris is now proposing). Norway pay 32 euros less per person than we do, so don't expect a new hospital every week.
The markets would be much worse if the BOE had not committed £250bn for stability. The worst case sees us spending this, which is equivalent to 50 years of net EU contributions in the coming year, whilst achieving no concessions at all.
I entirely understand why many people voted leave, but unfortunately the leave campaign were winging it, with no ideas and no plan. I don't think they seriously expected to win and it is now apparent that they are desperately finding a way to deal with the fact that they had no plan.
Derek Smith said:
PRTVR said:
Once over I would have agreed with you but the world is a different place now, if the UK is made to suffer by the EU, they will suffer, if we have less money that is less money to spend on imported goods so harming their economy, is the EU in a strong financial situation to implement such a plan ? I think not, but I would not put it past the idiots in charge of the EU, they don't appear to care.
I think you miss the point I was making. The EU will want to put off other states from leaving. That is their one essential. They will change rules and laws so that they can have Scotland and Gibraltar in the EU, not for financial reasons but to show the likes of, for instance, Greece, Spain and Italy, that no quarter will be given. Sure it might well hurt them, but it will hurt us more and it will keep others in line: Pour encourager les autres.
Exactly, the EU are more interested in saving the EU rather than any worries about loss of trade. They have to discourage others from leaving.
JagLover said:
This
I also always expected some sort of downturn, whether that be a minor recession or just slow down in growth. This is bound to create disruption.
The question was always whether we were willing to accept a European Federal state as a price to avoid some short term disruption and 52% of us weren't.
The EU is only headed one way in terms of its share of the world economy and soon I think we will be thankful we are no longer shackled to it.
So you think that most of those who voted to leave had balanced the pros and cons of the financial outcome and then made up their minds? Well, it's a point of view I suppose, but not one I've got much support for.I also always expected some sort of downturn, whether that be a minor recession or just slow down in growth. This is bound to create disruption.
The question was always whether we were willing to accept a European Federal state as a price to avoid some short term disruption and 52% of us weren't.
The EU is only headed one way in terms of its share of the world economy and soon I think we will be thankful we are no longer shackled to it.
If you read the commentators who were pro exit, you will discover that many suggest that the vote was on immigration, this especially since Johnson came out in mild support of the Norwegian option. I think it is true but the vote was to leave the EU. It said nothing at all about immigration control and the free borders with the Norwegian option will not go against the referendum.
We are, as you put it, shackled to the EU still. Its success will be to our benefit. If there is a break up of the EU then we will suffer, and maybe more than most. We need a successful EU. Of course we do.
Derek Smith said:
So you think that most of those who voted to leave had balanced the pros and cons of the financial outcome and then made up their minds? Well, it's a point of view I suppose, but not one I've got much support for.
If you read the commentators who were pro exit, you will discover that many suggest that the vote was on immigration, this especially since Johnson came out in mild support of the Norwegian option. I think it is true but the vote was to leave the EU. It said nothing at all about immigration control and the free borders with the Norwegian option will not go against the referendum.
We are, as you put it, shackled to the EU still. Its success will be to our benefit. If there is a break up of the EU then we will suffer, and maybe more than most. We need a successful EU. Of course we do.
Success of European countries including EU members will be to our benefit. Success of the EU itself, no. If you read the commentators who were pro exit, you will discover that many suggest that the vote was on immigration, this especially since Johnson came out in mild support of the Norwegian option. I think it is true but the vote was to leave the EU. It said nothing at all about immigration control and the free borders with the Norwegian option will not go against the referendum.
We are, as you put it, shackled to the EU still. Its success will be to our benefit. If there is a break up of the EU then we will suffer, and maybe more than most. We need a successful EU. Of course we do.
The EU as an institution is quite willing to sacrifice prosperity for the sake of integration. The history of the Euro is an example. it was never going to work without political integration, the idea was that the inevitable failure would lead to integration as the solution.
Derek Smith said:
I think you miss the point I was making. The EU will want to put off other states from leaving. That is their one essential. They will change rules and laws so that they can have Scotland and Gibraltar in the EU, not for financial reasons but to show the likes of, for instance, Greece, Spain and Italy, that no quarter will be given.
Sure it might well hurt them, but it will hurt us more and it will keep others in line: Pour encourager les autres.
and that is entirely why we want to give up our self governance and be ruled by these people....Sure it might well hurt them, but it will hurt us more and it will keep others in line: Pour encourager les autres.
Building a federal state through threats and intimidation only works for so long.
don4l said:
But everyone won't lose 10%.
We will still buy the same number of cars.
German cars will go up by 10%.
Jaguars won't. So people will buy more Jags.
Minis that are made in this country won't go up.
Skodas made in Eastern Europe will go up.
For these reasons I don't think that there is any chance that the EU will try to exclude us from a free trade area.
As I pointed out earlier, shares in BMW and Mercedes have fallen much further than anything in London. The Spanish market has fallen even further.
Europe's markets are down by about 10%, while the UK's markets are down about 3%.
How many components or raw materials required to make those Jag's and Minis come from outside the UK? We've got pretty much no mining industry, no aluminium smelting and it looks like the remains of our steel industry is about to fall over, so I'm guessing they import a fair bit. I'm already paying 14% more for stuff in Europe than I was at Christmas, so I find it hard to believe Jaguar and Mini's will still cost the same to produce.We will still buy the same number of cars.
German cars will go up by 10%.
Jaguars won't. So people will buy more Jags.
Minis that are made in this country won't go up.
Skodas made in Eastern Europe will go up.
For these reasons I don't think that there is any chance that the EU will try to exclude us from a free trade area.
As I pointed out earlier, shares in BMW and Mercedes have fallen much further than anything in London. The Spanish market has fallen even further.
Europe's markets are down by about 10%, while the UK's markets are down about 3%.
RizzoTheRat said:
How many components or raw materials required to make those Jag's and Minis come from outside the UK? We've got pretty much no mining industry, no aluminium smelting and it looks like the remains of our steel industry is about to fall over, so I'm guessing they import a fair bit. I'm already paying 14% more for stuff in Europe than I was at Christmas, so I find it hard to believe Jaguar and Mini's will still cost the same to produce.
But the labour cost is a big component, in the most worthwhile industries very big, and that will stay much the same. So the cost will go up but not by the amount the currency will drop. The pound dropping is, in the short term, A Good Thing. This is why Greece would really like some way of devaluing their currency to get themselves out of trouble.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff