The economic consequences of Brexit

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

May has been clear, the goal is to get the best deal for the UK and the EU to enable free trade in goods and services whilst retaining control over our boarders and whilst not having the ECJ have jurisdiction over UK law.

That by definition means we cant continue to be members of the single market, because to be a member you have to allow the ECJ be the top court. That is why when May discusses this she talks about access to the single market.

That is not hard Brexit, that is not soft Brexit, both are stupid terms with a multitude of possible meanings.

So government policy it to have a UK/EU treaty which gives the UK every thing it wants but nothing it does not want.

I can see a small snag.

Why is this so hard for you to understand.

The government position is to get the best deal they can for the UK and the EU, using the legal framework they have to work under.

They will have red lines in the negotiation process, they will also have areas where more flexibility will be allowed.

If the EU and the UK agree to the red lines, we will have a deal, if they don't, we wont.

[anonymous-user]

alfie2244 said:

Trophy Husband said:

We will not leave Europe.

Ah.....hankering after the good old days eh?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12244964

Good post Trophy Husband, very well put.

As regards hankering after the good old days. I suspect that a fair chunk of brexit voters hanker after a long lost England that only exists in Pathe news reels. Sorry guys that good old England (if it ever was that fantastic in reality) will not return.

[B'stard Child]

Mrr T said:

So government policy it to have a UK/EU treaty which gives the UK every thing it wants but nothing it does not want.

I can see a small snag.

It'll be a crack team of negotiators that pull it off but nowt wrong with starting it with the best possible outcome as the result to aim at - surely?

Negotiations will be to keep as much whilst giving away as little

The EU's position will be the same.

I'd expect there to be compromise on all sides - if there isn't then it's not a negotiation at all. It will end badly for everyone.

[sidicks]

Jimboka said:

Good post Trophy Husband, very well put.

As regards hankering after the good old days. I suspect that a fair chunk of brexit voters hanker after a long lost England that only exists in Pathe news reels. Sorry guys that good old England (if it ever was that fantastic in reality) will not return.

As with most things, I suspect you are wrong.

[Trophy Husband]

andymadmak said:

Yes, we will leave the EU. There will be adjustments over the next few years, (it won't take a generation) By the time your children leave school they will be entering a workplace that will be trading more fervently around the world. The EU (if it still exists by then) will still be a trading partner for the UK, just a slightly less important one as in the coming years the UK will focus on the truly enormous opportunities elsewhere on the planet. The UK has voted to get out there and make new friends. The EU just wants to stay in and work out new ways of picking its own nose. The old world is stagnant, the new world is vibrant and I for one am proud that this old nation of ours has voted to be a part of it.

Yes, yes I know I am talking in simplistic terms, but honestly TH, I fear that facts and stats are not what you will receive well right now. Change is coming and it is clear that you fear it. That fear dominates you and blinds you. Don't let it.

Next question. On what basis or with what knowledge are you certain that what you say will be? I just don't feel it myself. Hey, I'd love for my business to boom and to be wrong about this. But I fear I am not.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Trophy Husband said:

Basically, TM may have acted 'unlawfully'. We'll see shall we?

Well, she hasn't yet.

But I do think her repeated statements that MP's will not get to vote on invoking A50 is somewhat cavalier pending the judgment of the Supreme Court on the matter.

[Hosenbugler]

Trophy Husband said:

Hosenbugler said:

Trophy Husband said:

We will not leave Europe. I still believe that Parliament will not vote for it. It is not in the best interests of the population. Who would sanction a decision so stupid as to damage the economy for at least a generation? I don't give a flying toss if 51.8% of the people who voted want it. I'd love to see the demographic of those who voted out. I'm sure it would make great a great socioeconomic study in years to come. Please excuse my generalisation for those of you who voted out who don't fall into the category but I suggest that the majority of those that voted us out have contributed the least to the prosperity of this great nation.
How can TM broker the best deal for UK when the vote to leave is the biggest slap in the chops for the remainder of the union? Get real people. Yes, of course she can broker the best deal but that only means one thing. A shiite deal but the best that can be achieved. Like going to a cheap restaurant and asking for their finest wine.
Talk about UK manufacturing? Are we talking Honda? Ford? GM? Toyota? JLR? Tata? That is manufacturing in the UK not UK manufacturing.
I'm in my late 40's and my sons are 6 and 4. I worry for their future and I'm right to. I'm sure it has been said here many times but I for one am ashamed of the people I know who voted to leave and remain so. My difficulty is that I am not responsible for the decision but may have to suffer the consequences for years and years to come. I'd rather not be looking at saying 'I told you so' ad infinitum for the rest of my days. Here's hoping this has all been a dreadful nightmare.

We will not leave Europe, we will, however leave the EU.

Parliament have no need to vote on anything, they asked the electorate to make a decision for them on a specific subject, they did.

You are just another who likes democracy when it agrees with you views.

Thanks for the pedantry. There are many ways that this can play out constitutionally. The UK must invoke Article 50 based on the UK's constitutional requirements. Read up on them (below). Parliament cannot sanction an action that will have a negative effect on the population. On the balance of probabilities Brexit will.

The argument rests on the fact that without Parliament's backing any prime minister would be exercising what are known as prerogative powers.
These are a collection of executive powers held by the Crown since medieval times and now placed in the hands of ministers.
They are often used in foreign affairs Parliament has largely left to the government.
However, case law establishes these executive powers cannot trump an act of Parliament.
Legislation can only be altered by legislation.
And so, by extension, if a prime minister triggered Article 50 and so put the UK on a one-way road out of the EU without Parliament's backing, he or she would be overriding the 1972 European Communities Act, which provides for the UK's membership of the EU and for the EU treaties to have effect in domestic law.
The Article 50 process would cut across and emasculate the 1972 act, and so, the argument goes, the prime minister needs the backing of a new act of Parliament to give him or her the constitutional authority to push the Leave button.


Writing in the Times newspaper, the crossbench peer Lord Pannick QC, an eminent specialist in public law, said: "Whether Parliament would enact legislation to allow for an Article 50 withdrawal is a matter for it.
"However, without such legislation, the prime minister cannot lawfully give a notification."
Similar views have been expressed by Lord Lester QC and Sir Malcolm Jack, a former clerk to the House of Commons.
There is also an attempt to crowd-fund legal advice on the issue: "Should Parliament decide?"
The Crowd Justice website says a legal challenge could be "the most important public law case in living memory".
If it was decided that a prime minister acting alone under prerogative powers lacked the constitutional authority to trigger Article 50, an act of Parliament would need to be passed giving him or her that authority.
The passage of that act would of course provide the opportunity for MPs (a majority of whom favour Remain) to express their views on Brexit and in theory vote according to their consciences.

Basically, TM may have acted 'unlawfully'. We'll see shall we?

Yet another anti democrat , we are going out. Parliament needs to decide nothing., the decision has been made on their behalf. They cannot ignore the vote. There was a Labour MP (talking sense, astonishingly) on Neil the other day, she related, that she was for staying in the EU, yet her electorate voted , overwhelmingly , to leave, adding that 7 out of 10 of MP's of her party had a similar suituation. Added to that , she added that although the Lords are virtually all for stay, they would not dare to meddle with the democratic vote.

The horse has bolted. A small vocal minority , (because thats what it is) will not reverse things.

[ou sont les biscuits]

Hosenbugler said:

Yet another anti democrat , we are going out. Parliament needs to decide nothing., the decision has been made on their behalf. They cannot ignore the vote. There was a Labour MP (talking sense, astonishingly) on Neil the other day, she related, that she was for staying in the EU, yet her electorate voted , overwhelmingly , to leave, adding that 7 out of 10 of MP's of her party had a similar suituation. Added to that , she added that although the Lords are virtually all for stay, they would not dare to meddle with the democratic vote.

The horse has bolted. A small vocal minority , (because thats what it is) will not reverse things.

A small vocal minority? Would that be the just about half that voted to stay?

[Trophy Husband]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Trophy Husband said:

Basically, TM may have acted 'unlawfully'. We'll see shall we?

Well, she hasn't yet.

But I do think her repeated statements that MP's will not get to vote on invoking A50 is somewhat cavalier pending the judgment of the Supreme Court on the matter.

Well yes. Not quite unlawfully yet. I understood it to be expressing the intention to activate Article 50 as possibly unlawful without the legislation in place.

If and when it goes to the Supreme Court and all of the evidence stacks up against leaving the EU, what then? Surely, the most senior judges in the land have a duty to protect the subjects of this nation from themselves.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Trophy Husband said:

If and when it goes to the Supreme Court and all of the evidence stacks up against leaving the EU, what then? Surely, the most senior judges in the land have a duty to protect the subjects of this nation from themselves.

It's been, judgement expected by the end of the month.

Judges don't protect the people, they just interpret the law as it stands.

[freshkid]

John145 said:

Strocky said:

freshkid said:

I voted remain, it was mainly a solidarity thing...I feel I am part of Europe and that the EU is a necessary evil.

However, most of my earnings come from abroad (paid in Euros/Dollars). Since we left I am receiving more £s than ever in my bank account once the currency conversion is done. It's like getting a 20-30% pay rise. Yes going on holiday has just got more expensive, but anything priced for the UK market prior to Brexit is now looking cheap.

I get the root cause of this, but it taught me a lesson in economics. What looks bad to some is rarely bad for everyone. Which makes me think we need to focus not on the consequences of Brexit, but on the opportunities.

Simple example - UK retailers have an opportunity because we are home to the cheapest goods in Europe right now. Should be boom times while it lasts. Some wholesalers have not even upped prices yet. Ok, it won't last but lets make some money while the sun shines right?

How many UK workers are paid in the manner you are?

And in one short sentence the whole purpose of freshkid's post is missed. Quite spectacular.

I don't think everyone has time to read and digest what others are getting at. When people post opposing views it's all too easy to resort to seeking to reconfirm your own.

Not many UK workers are paid as I am, but maybe the employers of those workers have an opportunity to seek new business from Europe. European money is worth 'more' to us than UK money, so you could say it's having the opposite effect from that which many of the Brexit opposition feared. Rather than closing our borders, it will drive us to do more business with the EU and the rest of the world.

I fear I will still be misunderstood here

[Einion Yrth]

Trophy Husband said:

If and when it goes to the Supreme Court and all of the evidence stacks up against leaving the EU, what then? Surely, the most senior judges in the land have a duty to protect the subjects of this nation from themselves.

I don't want to be protected from myself, I want to be protected from undemocratic nay antidemocratic people like you.

[andymadmak]

Trophy Husband said:

andymadmak said:

Yes, we will leave the EU. There will be adjustments over the next few years, (it won't take a generation) By the time your children leave school they will be entering a workplace that will be trading more fervently around the world. The EU (if it still exists by then) will still be a trading partner for the UK, just a slightly less important one as in the coming years the UK will focus on the truly enormous opportunities elsewhere on the planet. The UK has voted to get out there and make new friends. The EU just wants to stay in and work out new ways of picking its own nose. The old world is stagnant, the new world is vibrant and I for one am proud that this old nation of ours has voted to be a part of it.

Yes, yes I know I am talking in simplistic terms, but honestly TH, I fear that facts and stats are not what you will receive well right now. Change is coming and it is clear that you fear it. That fear dominates you and blinds you. Don't let it.

Next question. On what basis or with what knowledge are you certain that what you say will be? I just don't feel it myself. Hey, I'd love for my business to boom and to be wrong about this. But I fear I am not.

I cannot be certain of anything. if I could I would buy a lottery ticket! Seriously though, one of the problems I see with your line of thinking is the belief that if the vote had been to Remain then things would have carried on as they are today. That is simply not the case. The EU is evolving, and at its heart are a set of objectives and goals that the UK simply does not share. People point to our opt outs and such like, but they fail to recognise that opt outs can be lost, surrendered or bargained away by unscrupulous politicians hell bent on their own agendas.
Staying in was not a vote for the status quo, but even if it HAD been, just what sort of organisation were you voting to remain in? - The EU is corrupt, undemocratic, sclerotic and seemingly incapable of taking care of its own people. Have you seen what is happening in southern Europe? Do you understand what 50% youth unemployment in Greece, Spain and such like means for those communities? And yet the EU does NOTHING to help. Why? because the main benefactor (Germany) is living high on the hog as a result of having the benefits of what is for it a massively undervalued currency (For Greece et al the same currency is massively over valued, hurting those countries even more)

You have to recognise Europe for what it is - a political experiment designed to make you dependant on it. Like the proverbial frog in the pan of water, by the time you realise what it's doing to you it's too late to get out.

Now, what lies in the future is a UK that is not tied to the fate of the EU (at least not so tightly as now) but which is able to get out into the wider, rapidly growing rest of the world (roughly 6 billion people ) and begin forging the links that will ensure our FUTURE prosperity.
I have travelled a LOT since the referendum, and without exception our exit vote is greeted warmly where ever I have been. People WANT to do business with us and, contrary to the views of some on here, most see us as good people and a good place to do business. We are still admired and respected in many places, of that you can be sure. ( I see it and hear it every day in my business)
There really can be a great future for UK after EU, and that even includes our relationship with the EU itself. In it we were the reluctant difficult child, out of it we are the 5th biggest trading nation on the planet and a great place for the EU to want to do business with. Idiots like Junker will pass, and the REAL sense will prevail...maybe not tomorrow or next week, but in the end money talks and politicians walk.

Sorry for the long diatribe, but it's genuinely hard to write the big picture up in a short note. The future really can be whatever this great nation of ours makes of it. I genuinely and sincerely hope that all those locked into some sort of "frustrate exit at all costs" dream come to their senses. - so much energy being directed in entirely the wrong direction is an exercise in futility and waste.

Edited by andymadmak on Tuesday 25th October 15:18

[freshkid]

^^ Andy saying what I wanted to but in proper grown up language! Out of EU does not mean Britain is pulling up the drawbridge on the wider world. Business opportunities abound.

[Trophy Husband]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Trophy Husband said:

If and when it goes to the Supreme Court and all of the evidence stacks up against leaving the EU, what then? Surely, the most senior judges in the land have a duty to protect the subjects of this nation from themselves.

It's been, judgement expected by the end of the month.

Judges don't protect the people, they just interpret the law as it stands.

OK. What laws are being/have been interpreted?

[PurpleMoonlight]

Trophy Husband said:

OK. What laws are being/have been interpreted?

The constitutional ones I think, and whether or not the PM can invoke A50 without the MP vote.

[don4l]

Trophy Husband said:

We will not leave Europe. I still believe that Parliament will not vote for it. It is not in the best interests of the population. Who would sanction a decision so stupid as to damage the economy for at least a generation? I don't give a flying toss if 51.8% of the people who voted want it. I'd love to see the demographic of those who voted out. I'm sure it would make great a great socioeconomic study in years to come. Please excuse my generalisation for those of you who voted out who don't fall into the category but I suggest that the majority of those that voted us out have contributed the least to the prosperity of this great nation.

How can TM broker the best deal for UK when the vote to leave is the biggest slap in the chops for the remainder of the union? Get real people. Yes, of course she can broker the best deal but that only means one thing. A shiite deal but the best that can be achieved. Like going to a cheap restaurant and asking for their finest wine.

Talk about UK manufacturing? Are we talking Honda? Ford? GM? Toyota? JLR? Tata? That is manufacturing in the UK not UK manufacturing.

I'm in my late 40's and my sons are 6 and 4. I worry for their future and I'm right to. I'm sure it has been said here many times but I for one am ashamed of the people I know who voted to leave and remain so. My difficulty is that I am not responsible for the decision but may have to suffer the consequences for years and years to come. I'd rather not be looking at saying 'I told you so' ad infinitum for the rest of my days. Here's hoping this has all been a dreadful nightmare.

A classic case of "Post Traumatis Minority Syndrome".

Where is FiF's chart when you need it?

[s2art]

Trophy Husband said:

If and when it goes to the Supreme Court and all of the evidence stacks up against leaving the EU, what then? Surely, the most senior judges in the land have a duty to protect the subjects of this nation from themselves.

Naahh. Obvious troll is obvious. The judge makes judgement on the law. Nothing else.

[Hosenbugler]

ou sont les biscuits said:

Hosenbugler said:

Yet another anti democrat , we are going out. Parliament needs to decide nothing., the decision has been made on their behalf. They cannot ignore the vote. There was a Labour MP (talking sense, astonishingly) on Neil the other day, she related, that she was for staying in the EU, yet her electorate voted , overwhelmingly , to leave, adding that 7 out of 10 of MP's of her party had a similar suituation. Added to that , she added that although the Lords are virtually all for stay, they would not dare to meddle with the democratic vote.

The horse has bolted. A small vocal minority , (because thats what it is) will not reverse things.

A small vocal minority? Would that be the just about half that voted to stay?

The vast majority of those who voted to stay, have accepted the result and moved on. Its only on social media and politics leaning sites , plus of course some politicians themselves, you find remoaning. The vast majority of the great British public have accepted matters and carried on regardless.

[anonymous-user]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Trophy Husband said:

If and when it goes to the Supreme Court and all of the evidence stacks up against leaving the EU, what then? Surely, the most senior judges in the land have a duty to protect the subjects of this nation from themselves.

It's been, judgement expected by the end of the month.

Judges don't protect the people, they just interpret the law as it stands.

Not quite. There has been a first instance with judgment expected very soon. Whoever loses is likely to appeal to the SC who apparently are lined up to hear the appeal before Christmas.

But the courts aren't deciding on whether the UK should activate A50. They are deciding on whether the PM can activate it "solo" or whether it needs the mandate of Parliament first. It's a question of "how", not "whether".