How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)
Discussion
PurpleMoonlight said:
otis criblecoblis said:
See, I don't buy that. I'd say of the leave vote they were mostly always leave people, perhaps way back and long before the immigration wave took place that is so often rolled out as the sole reason too.
Gut feeling, but just from the campaigning where Remain had no positive case and avoided actually sounding really pro EU, and focused on selling doom as a way to win votes, far more Remain voters simply didn't fancy a risk of leaving despite having no love for the EU.
I didn't think for a second that you would.Gut feeling, but just from the campaigning where Remain had no positive case and avoided actually sounding really pro EU, and focused on selling doom as a way to win votes, far more Remain voters simply didn't fancy a risk of leaving despite having no love for the EU.
otis criblecoblis said:
Helicopter123 said:
I'm in favour of Freedom of Movement.
The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
How do you control EU immigration to help bring it down to Remainer May's 100k target for all immigration ? Leave aside if the target is sensible or not, but focus on what controls they have that would cut the numbers down to say 50k net a year. The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
No Deal Brexit
Damage Economy
Unemployment increases.
UK less desirable.
Why are the politicians so afraid of "no deal"? All these phrases "cliff edge","crash out" et al are just scaremongering surely?
Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
Nickgnome said:
otis criblecoblis said:
Helicopter123 said:
I'm in favour of Freedom of Movement.
The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
How do you control EU immigration to help bring it down to Remainer May's 100k target for all immigration ? Leave aside if the target is sensible or not, but focus on what controls they have that would cut the numbers down to say 50k net a year. The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
No Deal Brexit
Damage Economy
Unemployment increases.
UK less desirable.
otis criblecoblis said:
See, I don't buy that. I'd say of the leave vote they were mostly always leave people, perhaps way back and long before the immigration wave took place that is so often rolled out as the sole reason too.
Gut feeling, but just from the campaigning where Remain had no positive case and avoided actually sounding really pro EU, and focused on selling doom as a way to win votes, far more Remain voters simply didn't fancy a risk of leaving despite having no love for the EU.
I think you're mostly on the money there.Gut feeling, but just from the campaigning where Remain had no positive case and avoided actually sounding really pro EU, and focused on selling doom as a way to win votes, far more Remain voters simply didn't fancy a risk of leaving despite having no love for the EU.
Negative remain campaign v years of "it's all the EU's fault".
My gut feel also is that many people who voted remain didn't do so out of a deep desire for more Junckers and Barnier etc. they just looked at the steady pay cheque and their standard of living and didn't want to risk it.
digimeistter said:
Why are the politicians so afraid of "no deal"? All these phrases "cliff edge","crash out" et al are just scaremongering surely?
Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
You are right - leaving without a deal stops the backstop being an issue because the EU would be forced to adopt a light touch regime themselves to avoid breaching the GFA. However, it's not without its problems, not least because of the lack of time to get the "no deal deal" arranged.Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
If you are of a remain mindset the reasoning for objecting is obvious, but for the Brexiteers it's a little more nuanced.
And by more nuanced, I believe it's nakedly political. Being in favour of "no deal" marks your card with the remainers, and that's a problem for a potential candidate who wants to bring the Tory party back together again.
There's also the issue that while the economic shock is more or less guaranteed, there's no consensus how big it will be, or how long it will last. Had the government started full preparations for it two years ago however, the shock would have been much smaller than it will be.
If the shock is deeper or longer lasting than most economists expect then the acute effects will bump up against the next election campaign, which will be a problem for the Tories.
For Labour it's even more complicated. I think most of Corbyn's old pals in the cabinet are probably in favour of no deal (so they can nationalise everything) but they sit atop of a party that by and large thinks the complete opposite. That's why we see no clear position adopted by Labour on anything.
Helicopter123 said:
gooner1 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Fittster said:
ash73 said:
sunbeam alpine said:
What am I missing?
It's not just about money.Why am I not suprised.
The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
Controlled immigration that was an issue for some.
davepoth said:
You are right - leaving without a deal stops the backstop being an issue because the EU would be forced to adopt a light touch regime themselves to avoid breaching the GFA. However, it's not without its problems, not least because of the lack of time to get the "no deal deal" arranged.
If you are of a remain mindset the reasoning for objecting is obvious, but for the Brexiteers it's a little more nuanced.
And by more nuanced, I believe it's nakedly political. Being in favour of "no deal" marks your card with the remainers, and that's a problem for a potential candidate who wants to bring the Tory party back together again.
There's also the issue that while the economic shock is more or less guaranteed, there's no consensus how big it will be, or how long it will last. Had the government started full preparations for it two years ago however, the shock would have been much smaller than it will be.
In that sense, I think the Remainers are doing No Deal a favour - they've been shouting about how catastrophic it's going to be, so unless we have 12 months of rioting on the streets, I suspect a lot of people would go "Oh, that wasn't so bad, it was all an exaggeration".If you are of a remain mindset the reasoning for objecting is obvious, but for the Brexiteers it's a little more nuanced.
And by more nuanced, I believe it's nakedly political. Being in favour of "no deal" marks your card with the remainers, and that's a problem for a potential candidate who wants to bring the Tory party back together again.
There's also the issue that while the economic shock is more or less guaranteed, there's no consensus how big it will be, or how long it will last. Had the government started full preparations for it two years ago however, the shock would have been much smaller than it will be.
The biggest issues would be if the recovery period lasted into the next GE and we didn't get the "Dunkirk Spirit" of people making the best of a difficult situation. So long as there's a feeling of "it was bad, but we're getting there", I don't think it's as toxic as some would have it.
digimeistter said:
Why are the politicians so afraid of "no deal"? All these phrases "cliff edge","crash out" et al are just scaremongering surely?
Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
Yes.Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
Helicopter123 said:
gooner1 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Fittster said:
ash73 said:
sunbeam alpine said:
What am I missing?
It's not just about money.Why am I not suprised.
The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
Tuna said:
The biggest issues would be if the recovery period lasted into the next GE and we didn't get the "Dunkirk Spirit" of people making the best of a difficult situation. So long as there's a feeling of "it was bad, but we're getting there", I don't think it's as toxic as some would have it.
Ask most people on here how much poorer they expect to be in a hard Brexit and they'll simply say "I don't believe it will happen".I've known one person honest enough to put a number of in and it was 20% over 5 years.
Oh and jsf who would "lose everything" to protect the future generations.
How many people do you know who would volunteer to lose 20% of their income over 5 years?
I think it will be very toxic once most people feel any personal direct impact.
"Dunkirk Spirit" due to a self-inflicted wound is very different to fighting Nazi's.
Mrr T said:
digimeistter said:
Why are the politicians so afraid of "no deal"? All these phrases "cliff edge","crash out" et al are just scaremongering surely?
Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
Yes.Personally I think no deal is the best option now, revert to WTO rules and invoke Article 24, solves all the so called "problems"
Or am I being too simplistic?
Does it require the EU's agreement to use it?
otis criblecoblis said:
Nickgnome said:
otis criblecoblis said:
Helicopter123 said:
I'm in favour of Freedom of Movement.
The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
How do you control EU immigration to help bring it down to Remainer May's 100k target for all immigration ? Leave aside if the target is sensible or not, but focus on what controls they have that would cut the numbers down to say 50k net a year. The ability to work, travel and study within the EU is a great thing.
We have the tools already to control immigration into the UK but choose not to use them, that's hardly the fault of the EU.
No Deal Brexit
Damage Economy
Unemployment increases.
UK less desirable.
Some here say that people who voted remain are inward looking. I refute that. Why, as a business person who operated globally would I have ever tried to stifle growth in the UK. Most business people tend to want their business to thrive and grow.
Other leavers here say it’s not about the money and are relaxed about a lower growth or no growth at all for a while. Therefore by those leavers own wishes there will be less employment and thus my post above in accurate.
Dr Jekyll said:
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: "Dunkirk Spirit" due to a self-inflicted wound is very different to fighting Nazi's.
Having to pay 7 Euros to visit the EU is very different from fighting off Panzer divisions trying to visit you.Helicopter123 said:
Fittster said:
ash73 said:
sunbeam alpine said:
What am I missing?
It's not just about money.If you were honest you'd acknowledge this, but I suspect the word you bandy about is not a word you either understand or are yourself.
I've asked you before and will do again, what problem do you have with a countries desire to control immigration?
Can you point out what exactly you see as a problem that the administrations of the USA/Canada/Australia/New Zealand and other countries don't have?
Have you contacted each countries administrators as above to register your displeasure at the controls they have, and let them know it's not something you agree with or do was it in your power to do so?
Edited by don'tbesilly on Sunday 16th December 14:26
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff