How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 7)

[steve_k]

Mrr T said:

Unless you have spoken to all leave voters you have no idea of what they thought. As it is the Leave campaign was clear this would be the easiest deal ever, it would be done in an afternoon over tea (and maybe cake), they need us more than we need them. Based on this I would suggest most leave voters expected leaving to have no negative economic effect. If leave had campaigned on a clear platform that the likeliest brexit exit was without an withdrawal agreement and every one should expect to be worst off and won. Then you would have a point. Then again I do not think leave would have won with that strategy.

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-40667879/eu-trade...

Edited by steve_k on Thursday 24th January 13:42

[Vanden Saab]

toppstuff said:

You assert that powerful people have historically achieved things by using the dissatisfaction of the population. I think I can also add that another component of this has been to create something for people to be rallied against - a bogeyman or group of people; something to focus the anger of the dissatisfied.

You do realise that as a brexiter, you a participant in exactly the same process ?

You don’t see it now but it’s pretty clear to the rest of the world that there is a nexus that links populism with brexit with trump with MAGA with trade wars and with increased anger. I refuse to be a part of that nexus. How about you ?

You are a remainer therefore you are by your own definition part of that nexus.... Hilarious idea though 5/10

[SpeckledJim]

chrispmartha said:

SpeckledJim said:

chrispmartha said:

SpeckledJim said:

ATG said:

Digga said:

ATG said:

EU membership doesn't hinder you from trading internationally.

They aren't stopped, but they are hindered to the extend that the UK can only deal with anywhere in the RoW under trade deals negotiated by the EU.

And the extent of that hindrance is ... ? I know, why don't we ask UK manufacturers? Oh, they've already answered that one over and over and over again.

The absence of an EU - Australia trade deal DOES hinder our trade. Anything over about £500 gets clobbered for import duties and reduces the amount the Aussies spend with us.

Outside the EU, if we can do a deal with Australia, then that will certainly be a help to our international trade. Just an example from my experience.

Big if in your last sentence, however I agree with your sentiment, so does the EU it seems, would be kind of Ironic if they secure a good trade deal and we don't

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/eu-austr...

It would, but I can't think why they might want a deal with the UK via the EU, but not want one directly between us?

So I think your IF is bigger than mine?

Maybe, but I didn't say they wouldn't want to deal with us I said if we didn't get as good deal as the EU, and if (that's an none existent if) we were staying in the EU the negations for a trade deal would be already underway for us.

I think this ongoing perception that because the EU is big, it gets good deals is a complete fallacy.

The EU's deals are stuffed with the fudges, compromises and exclusions that are the result of 28 (27) competing national egos and interests on a single side of the table.

A deal between the UK and AUS should be better, for both parties, than anything that has to cover the legitimate concerns of the Hungarian basket weavers lobby or the Bavarian coffee roaster's union.

[plasticpig]

dasigty said:

The usual misconception of Adolf being of the right, he was of the left, thats why you will find little if any difference between the Nazi & communist parties.

Where do you get this crap revisionist history from? Is there a website with an address along the lines of hitlerwasreallyalefty.com ? Hitler privatized railways, banks and steelworks. Thatcher did the same; ergo Thatcher was a commie. See here for further elucidation

[Piha]

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

[don'tbesilly]

Piha said:

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

Which of course is a clear fabrication of what history/facts tells us.

[SeeFive]

Piha said:

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

I don’t think remain will ever allow anyone to forget anything about that, and I personally find it hard to see how a leave voter could argue it. Cameron certainly led by example on that one.

When it comes to inaccuracies stated in the campaign, similarly remain campaigners will not ever let anyone forget about that too. Well, except for the inaccuracies from the remain campaign and expert predictions of course...

Reading on this forum, there seems to be more acceptance that there was bks spouted by leave campaign from leave voters than there is acceptance that the remain campaign spouted bks from the remain campaigners today.

All IMHO of course, other opinions are available.

[deadslow]

don'tbesilly said:

Piha said:

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

Which of course is a clear fabrication of what history/facts tells us.

not really, chum. The Leave side do a lot of shouting, but always run a mile when asked to take responsibility. Do you even remotely imaging any Remainers want to be in charge of doing this deal?

[citizensm1th]

Ford are saying that a no deal brexit would cost them he more than 600 million this year alone.

[andymadmak]

Piha said:

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

You also seem to forget that despite appointing 2 Brexit supporting Brexit Secretaries she then proceeded to fundamentally undermine them by cooking up her own deal with Olly Robbins and negotiating behind their backs.
Now, the standard Remainer retort for this is that May had to step in because Davis was doing a bad job, usually followed by some rather personal disparaging remarks about DD. The problem with that proposition is that the only real facts we have on who was actually doing what point very clearly to the fact that May was engaged in her own process pretty much from the get-go.
Chequers appeared out of no-where, presented to a stunned cabinet (AFTER she had already been to Berlin to get the nod on it from Merkel)
and pretty much everything that has happened since it broke cover has been based around finding ever more desperate ways to ram it through Parliament.

[bitchstewie]

don'tbesilly said:

Piha said:

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

Which of course is a clear fabrication of what history/facts tells us.

It really isn't.

You may think it was Gove and maybe it was Gove, but even then it's just another example of the sort of backstabbing incompetence you're dealing with.

Ken Clarke said it best, couldn't run a whelk stall.

[chrispmartha]

citizensm1th said:

Ford are saying that a no deal brexit would cost them he more than 600 million this year alone.

Pah, what would they know about it all...

https://news.sky.com/story/hard-brexit-will-cost-f...

[citizensm1th]

chrispmartha said:

citizensm1th said:

Ford are saying that a no deal brexit would cost them he more than 600 million this year alone.

Pah, what would they know about it all...

https://news.sky.com/story/hard-brexit-will-cost-f...

It's all starting to add up to quite a bit now

[Piha]

andymadmak said:

Piha said:

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

You also seem to forget that despite appointing 2 Brexit supporting Brexit Secretaries she then proceeded to fundamentally undermine them by cooking up her own deal with Olly Robbins and negotiating behind their backs.
Now, the standard Remainer retort for this is that May had to step in because Davis was doing a bad job, usually followed by some rather personal disparaging remarks about DD. The problem with that proposition is that the only real facts we have on who was actually doing what point very clearly to the fact that May was engaged in her own process pretty much from the get-go.
Chequers appeared out of no-where, presented to a stunned cabinet (AFTER she had already been to Berlin to get the nod on it from Merkel)
and pretty much everything that has happened since it broke cover has been based around finding ever more desperate ways to ram it through Parliament.

You also seem to (conveniently) forget that the tory faithful clearly voted in the PM into No10 in a democratic GE. Was it her fault her Brexit ministers were inept?

[SpeckledJim]

citizensm1th said:

Ford are saying that a no deal brexit would cost them he more than 600 million this year alone.

Drop in the ocean compared to what PartsPlus is going to cost them.

[don'tbesilly]

deadslow said:

don'tbesilly said:

Piha said:

steve_k said:

At least get the quote right it was it should be the easiest deal ever, but this was said before the remoainers took over the negotiations.

You seem to forget that most Leave politicians fled when given the opportunity to become tory leader. or when given a Brexit related job they clearly showed they weren't up to the job.

Which of course is a clear fabrication of what history/facts tells us.

not really, chum. The Leave side do a lot of shouting, but always run a mile when asked to take responsibility. Do you even remotely imaging any Remainers want to be in charge of doing this deal?

In terms of who stood as a candidate for the position as PM after Cameron did a runner can you tell me how I'm wrong?

Apart from resigning from their positions in Brexit related positions, who wasn't up to their job.

It seems Corbyn wants to be in charge of doing a deal, or did you miss his no confidence motion in the Govt, and repeated calls for a GE?

[Piha]

SpeckledJim said:

citizensm1th said:

Ford are saying that a no deal brexit would cost them he more than 600 million this year alone.

Drop in the ocean compared to what PartsPlus is going to cost them.

Phew!

That makes things much betterer.

[citizensm1th]

SpeckledJim said:

Drop in the ocean compared to what PartsPlus is going to cost them.

Even more of an unnecessary added cost then

[SpeckledJim]

Piha said:

SpeckledJim said:

citizensm1th said:

Ford are saying that a no deal brexit would cost them he more than 600 million this year alone.

Drop in the ocean compared to what PartsPlus is going to cost them.

Phew!

That makes things much betterer.

Just puts it in some context. Ford's in a right state. I don't think this is above the fold on the list of their problems.

[SeeFive]

citizensm1th said:

Ford are saying that a no deal brexit would cost them he more than 600 million this year alone.

From the briefest research on the internet, Ford’s performance has fluctuated during the restructuring of its business, seemingly today being propped up by a US domestic market of folks moving to small trucks, where Ford are dominant. They have issues in the Far East and many other geographies, Europe being just one of them. They are struggling to maintain a 5 year dividend for shareholders, so could have good reason to blame poor performance on anything other than Ford.

Have they provided a breakdown of how that will materialise overlaid upon performance within any other Brexit outcome? I would be really interested to see that. Until then for me it is potentially business burying known future bad news / shifting blame to areas out of their control etc...