How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 2)

[Funkycoldribena]

mx5nut said:

"Annoying liberals" is seen as a valid political view by some of the angrier posters here.

I'm far from angry but annoying liberals is great because they're such a bunch of stomping five year olds.Ive been on the planet quite a few years and never known it this bad.
Grown men and women virtually in melt down...

[ORD]

andymadmak said:

Um, isn't it a 5 year chart (the top one)?

That one is, yes, and it shows a collapse in mid-2016, strangely enough.

[don'tbesilly]

Ghibli said:

alfie2244 said:

So not manning up then?

I think you will find it was don'tbesilly that said Days/weeks

You still struggling to get your head around the meaning of 'immediate', or did you not ask your parents to explain what 'immediate' means, or perhaps like you they didn't/don't know.

Here you go, you can even practice how to pronounce it

immediate
ɪˈmiːdɪət
adjective
1.
occurring or done at once; instant.
"the authorities took no immediate action"
synonyms: instant, instantaneous, on-the-spot, prompt, swift, speedy, rapid, quick, expeditious; More

[anonymous-user]

ORD said:

andymadmak said:

Um, isn't it a 5 year chart (the top one)?

That one is, yes, and it shows a collapse in mid-2016, strangely enough.

5 year and 1 year was posted.

here is the £ to $ rate since we joined the EEC in 1973, lowest was 1.04 in 1986, joining the EEC saw the £ collapse far more than we saw because of Brexit vote. 2008 GFC saw the £ fall far more than the Brexit vote. Late 70's to early 80's saw a huge collapse in the £ as the countries economy fell apart.

[Zod]

jsf said:

ORD said:

andymadmak said:

Um, isn't it a 5 year chart (the top one)?

That one is, yes, and it shows a collapse in mid-2016, strangely enough.

5 year and 1 year was posted.

here is the £ to $ rate since we joined the EEC in 1973, lowest was 1.04 in 1986, joining the EEC saw the £ collapse far more than we saw because of Brexit vote. 2008 GFC saw the £ fall far more than the Brexit vote. Late 70's to early 80's saw a huge collapse in the £ as the countries economy fell apart.

Which neatly illustrates my point about the long-term 1.4 floor rate.

[anonymous-user]

Zod said:

Which neatly illustrates my point about the long-term 1.4 floor rate.

30 year average is about 1.55

It shows how the £ has been much higher and has seen a long term fall since joining the EEC, the biggest shocks we have seen are much much bigger than the Brexit vote, we are currently back at the 2008 rate after the crash.

[ORD]

No idea what Jsf is on about now.

Is the point that Brexit took a massive chunk out of the value of Sterling but not the biggest chunk ever? If so, not terribly enlightening.

[anonymous-user]

ORD said:

No idea what Jsf is on about now.

Is the point that Brexit took a massive chunk out of the value of Sterling but not the biggest chunk ever? If so, not terribly enlightening.

It's pretty clear you don't know what the charts show. The Brexit vote was not a massive chunk, it was a minor fall compared to historical events. The long term value of the £ against the $ has been on a downward trend for over a century, which is as expected when you look at the relative sizes of the economies over that period.

What i am trying to illustrate to you ORD, is the value of the £ is nothing scary, it's following normal patterns when you have a change as significant as we are making. I expect we are likely to see the £ back to 1.5 level by the end of the year, so long as the negotiations don't collapse. If things fall apart then the £ and Euro will both fall against the $ and the £ may be in the 1.30's, that has advantages in export trading and will help drive down the deficit, but will add inflation, but even with that inflation will be tiny by historical standards.

[mike9009]

How do leavers feel the negotiations are going, especially with respect to the four main points for leaving the EU?.

1. Taking back control of our borders.
2. Spending more money on the NHS (maybe other services or reducing taxes??).
3. Leaving centralised (EU) regulation and their 'undemocratic' governance.
4. Opening more trade with ROW

(Sorry, I may have missed some other reasons to leave)

Is it going how you hoped?

[confused_buyer]

ORD said:

N

Is the point that Brexit took a massive chunk out of the value of Sterling

It certain took a big chunk, can't see how anyone can deny that. However, in the months prior to the referendum the £ was at about 1.40-1.45 to the $. I've seen people use the incorrect "spike" figure of $1.50+ but that was a 10 minute spike on vote night with speculators profit taking.

Today it is at $1.385 to the £ (and has peaked at $1.394) so it is also true to say it is very, very nearly back to the rate it was prior to the vote to leave.

(Lowest it ever got after the vote was $1.20 btw).

[Troubleatmill]

mike9009 said:

How do leavers feel the negotiations are going, especially with respect to the four main points for leaving the EU?.

1. Taking back control of our borders.
2. Spending more money on the NHS (maybe other services or reducing taxes??).
3. Leaving centralised (EU) regulation and their 'undemocratic' governance.
4. Opening more trade with ROW

(Sorry, I may have missed some other reasons to leave)

Is it going how you hoped?

Negotiations are still ongoing... and will be for a long time.
Why don't you ask when negotiations finish?

The minute by minute press updates on negotiations is rather tiresome.

[PurpleMoonlight]

mike9009 said:

How do leavers feel the negotiations are going, especially with respect to the four main points for leaving the EU?.

1. Taking back control of our borders.
2. Spending more money on the NHS (maybe other services or reducing taxes??).
3. Leaving centralised (EU) regulation and their 'undemocratic' governance.
4. Opening more trade with ROW

(Sorry, I may have missed some other reasons to leave)

Is it going how you hoped?

We haven't left yet, and even when we do nothing new will happen until 2021.

I think the Government hope to control the borders during the transition but the EU seem to want all freedoms to continue during it.

[anonymous-user]

mike9009 said:

How do leavers feel the negotiations are going, especially with respect to the four main points for leaving the EU?.

1. Taking back control of our borders.
2. Spending more money on the NHS (maybe other services or reducing taxes??).
3. Leaving centralised (EU) regulation and their 'undemocratic' governance.
4. Opening more trade with ROW

(Sorry, I may have missed some other reasons to leave)

Is it going how you hoped?

Its going as broadly expected after May screwed up the election and lost the majority required to sideline the remoaner conservatives. We would have been in a better position if Cameron hadn't run away and instead did the right thing for the country. st bag of a man.

This is going to lead to a more aligned to the EU market than i would have preferred, as that will mean we don't get as large a benefit from world trade as otherwise was possible.

Control of borders still looks on track, its too political an issue to back down.
Spending on NHS cant happen until we leave, it would be political suicide for funding not to increase post leaving, so that will happen
Leaving EU regulation is 50/50 based on what backbone May has, its still possible but will depend on the trade terms and how disputes are to be handled.
Opening more trade depends on the terms of the leave agreement, not as good as i would have expected had May not screwed up. We wont see any of that until after the transition period, assuming we do get a deal.

[Crackie]

jjlynn27 said:

Crackie said:

Wow, I Agree with you 100% Eddie .........but you are a hypocrtite

Don't you just hate it when bad things happen to good lines?

Must have been a subconscious slip JJ, Sigmund was a wise old bird.

[mike9009]

jsf said:

mike9009 said:

How do leavers feel the negotiations are going, especially with respect to the four main points for leaving the EU?.

1. Taking back control of our borders.
2. Spending more money on the NHS (maybe other services or reducing taxes??).
3. Leaving centralised (EU) regulation and their 'undemocratic' governance.
4. Opening more trade with ROW

(Sorry, I may have missed some other reasons to leave)

Is it going how you hoped?

Its going as broadly expected after May screwed up the election and lost the majority required to sideline the remoaner conservatives. We would have been in a better position if Cameron hadn't run away and instead did the right thing for the country. st bag of a man.

This is going to lead to a more aligned to the EU market than i would have preferred, as that will mean we don't get as large a benefit from world trade as otherwise was possible.

Control of borders still looks on track, its too political an issue to back down.
Spending on NHS cant happen until we leave, it would be political suicide for funding not to increase post leaving, so that will happen
Leaving EU regulation is 50/50 based on what backbone May has, its still possible but will depend on the trade terms and how disputes are to be handled.
Opening more trade depends on the terms of the leave agreement, not as good as i would have expected had May not screwed up. We wont see any of that until after the transition period, assuming we do get a deal.

Hi jsf,

Thanks for your honest appraisal. I 'think' I would not be particularly happy at this juncture either.

I do realise we have not left yet but we are almost one year through negotiations. I accept any real appraisal of the success of the negotiations probably cannot happen for a couple of decades. <not sure where this thread will be by then > but probably still rabbiting on about different graphs from various biased sources and hypothesising various root causes.

Mike

[andymadmak]

I will give it just one more go (third time lucky!) Would any of our Remain contingent be willing to have a go at answering these questions?

andymadmak said:

1 Leaving aside for a moment the real issues with the Brexit campaign, what in your opinion were the unacceptable elements of the Remain campaign?

2. Assuming that the first Referendum had never happened, but armed with the knowledge of how badly Remains tactics worked first time out (yes, I am asking you to be a Time Lord! ) how do you think the Remain campaign should have been /be organised
(I'm couching the question like that because I don't want your responses to be based on attacking what Brexit did in Ref1, rather I want to gauge how Remain could have gone about things differently in your opinion.)

If anyone on the Remain side could answer those two in a constructive way, I promise that I will also answer them, doing my best to take the position of a Remain voter. (which ironically, I could easily have been right up to the last week of the campaign)

[olimain]

jjlynn27 said:

Correct.

Very good article by DC;

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/dominic-cumm...

(if you exclude Gove adulation)

+1 on the thanks for this. It's taken about 3 hours of dipping in and out of but a very worthwhile read.

[ORD]

Andy,

(1) Not much. The skinhead poster was unacceptable (but nowhere near as bad as some people make it out to have been).

(2) The Remain campaign should have gone slightly less nuclear on the risks of leaving. Not much, but a little. More importantly by a mile, it should have been competent. It was a st show.

[mike9009]

andymadmak said:

I will give it just one more go (third time lucky!) Would any of our Remain contingent be willing to have a go at answering these questions?

andymadmak said:

1 Leaving aside for a moment the real issues with the Brexit campaign, what in your opinion were the unacceptable elements of the Remain campaign?

2. Assuming that the first Referendum had never happened, but armed with the knowledge of how badly Remains tactics worked first time out (yes, I am asking you to be a Time Lord! ) how do you think the Remain campaign should have been /be organised
(I'm couching the question like that because I don't want your responses to be based on attacking what Brexit did in Ref1, rather I want to gauge how Remain could have gone about things differently in your opinion.)

If anyone on the Remain side could answer those two in a constructive way, I promise that I will also answer them, doing my best to take the position of a Remain voter. (which ironically, I could easily have been right up to the last week of the campaign)

I think the biggest error made was trying to out 'headline' the Leave campaign, making more and more incredulous claims. The whole campaign revolved around soundbites and outlandish statements (from both sides). As such, the remain campaign lost credibility. They tried to appeal to the lowest common denominator. As the 'story' of Brexit unfolds the complexity of leaving, the compromises of leaving are, in my opinion, becoming apparent. The headline grabbing immediate recession, war in Europe etc were cringeworthy.

How should it been run?

Difficult one, but more reasons to remain in the EU with firm, factual debate rather than incredulous claims wrapped up for newspaper headlines/ sales. Robustly, debunking the 'Leave Campaigns' claims more thoroughly may help. Unfortunately the Remain campaign also did not have a 'pin-up' campaigner (like Boris, for example). The remain campaigners were seen as staid autocrats - I suspect some celeb with an ounce of credibility and eloquence (they seemed mostly pro-EU) would have been better than a politician or the governor of the BoE.

By the way, I am biased - and I may be underplaying the strong arguments to leave, but the campaign from both sides was an embarrassment to our political leaders. Now, the negotiations are also turning into another embarrassment....

Just my initial thoughts......

[don'tbesilly]

mike9009 said:

andymadmak said:

I will give it just one more go (third time lucky!) Would any of our Remain contingent be willing to have a go at answering these questions?

andymadmak said:

1 Leaving aside for a moment the real issues with the Brexit campaign, what in your opinion were the unacceptable elements of the Remain campaign?

2. Assuming that the first Referendum had never happened, but armed with the knowledge of how badly Remains tactics worked first time out (yes, I am asking you to be a Time Lord! ) how do you think the Remain campaign should have been /be organised
(I'm couching the question like that because I don't want your responses to be based on attacking what Brexit did in Ref1, rather I want to gauge how Remain could have gone about things differently in your opinion.)

If anyone on the Remain side could answer those two in a constructive way, I promise that I will also answer them, doing my best to take the position of a Remain voter. (which ironically, I could easily have been right up to the last week of the campaign)

I think the biggest error made was trying to out 'headline' the Leave campaign, making more and more incredulous claims. The whole campaign revolved around soundbites and outlandish statements (from both sides). As such, the remain campaign lost credibility. They tried to appeal to the lowest common denominator. As the 'story' of Brexit unfolds the complexity of leaving, the compromises of leaving are, in my opinion, becoming apparent. The headline grabbing immediate recession, war in Europe etc were cringeworthy.

How should it been run?

Difficult one, but more reasons to remain in the EU with firm, factual debate rather than incredulous claims wrapped up for newspaper headlines/ sales. Robustly, debunking the 'Leave Campaigns' claims more thoroughly may help. Unfortunately the Remain campaign also did not have a 'pin-up' campaigner (like Boris, for example). The remain campaigners were seen as staid autocrats - I suspect some celeb with an ounce of credibility and eloquence (they seemed mostly pro-EU) would have been better than a politician or the governor of the BoE.

By the way, I am biased - and I may be underplaying the strong arguments to leave, but the campaign from both sides was an embarrassment to our political leaders. Now, the negotiations are also turning into another embarrassment....

Just my initial thoughts......

Remain did have both David Beckham and Eddie Izzard as firm supporters of staying in the EU, did neither have an ounce of credibility or eloquence?

Beckham always comes across very well when interviewed, articulate and seemingly well educated, and Izzard's performance on QT was such a memorable event for the remain campaign that I'm surprised neither seemed to have much of an impact on those voters who were undecided on which way to vote.

I thought the Remain campaign were on to a winner having both David and Eddie onside, would you not agree?