BREXIT - more good than bad or more bad than good?

[mheslep]

Wiki indicates the UK opted-out of the Schengen Area. So too Ireland. Norway is obliged to follow only part of EU law as referenced above, not all.

While paying for access to the EU market appears to be the standard, the UK would be foolish not at least try to negotiate fees down, as the UK has enormous leverage over German auto makers in particular. I don't know that all of them could withstand a loss of access to the UK.

 

[rootone]

Yes, they only have to implement EU law as regards trading and product standards.
I think for example laws relating relating to things like working conditions, wages, and environmental controls they don't.
However their governments' policies in those areas are not substantially different to EU policies.

 

[mheslep]

Right, as is the case with most international trade agreements

 

[Buckleymanor]

Wiki indicates the UK opted-out of the Schengen Area. So too Ireland. Norway is obliged to follow only part of EU law as referenced above, not all.

While paying for access to the EU market appears to be the standard, the UK would be foolish not at least try to negotiate fees down, as the UK has enormous leverage over German auto makers in particular. I don't know that all of them could withstand a loss of access to the UK.

What is the point to try and negotiate the fees down when the emerging facts point to a 122 billion pound black hole.
Fees paid and the amount lost by German carmakers pail into insignificance when you take a look at losses due to exiting.http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-bill-migrants-16bn-autumn-statement-2016-obr_uk_5835c11ce4b0207d191712c3?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk3&pLid=-460866671_uk
It is not a question of all of them suffering a loss to us it's evidently a question of us suffering a loss to them as there is considerably more of them than us.

 

[mheslep]

What is the point to try and negotiate the fees down when the emerging facts point to a 122 billion pound black hole.
Fees paid and the amount lost by German carmakers pail into insignificance when you take a look at losses due to exiting.http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-bill-migrants-16bn-autumn-statement-2016-obr_uk_5835c11ce4b0207d191712c3?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk3&pLid=-460866671_uk
It is not a question of all of them suffering a loss to us it's evidently a question of us suffering a loss to them as there is considerably more of them than us.

122B on a tally sheet over 13 years per HuffPo, some unkown share of which may be due to the current status of Brexit.

Trade leverage is not a head count, but a money count.

 

[Buckleymanor]

122B on a tally sheet over 13 years per HuffPo, some unkown share of which may be due to the current status of Brexit.

Trade leverage is not a head count, but a money count.

Well I trust the OBR rather than your assessment of some unknown share, 59 billion seems rather conservative.No doubt when the dust settles we will know where to lay the blame.

 

[Buckleymanor]

As mentioned before 59 billion seems rather an underestimate.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38245646http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38245646
Who knows what the final tally will be I hope that all the people who voted for it will understand the implications.

 

[nsaspook]

https://apnews.com/e48bf51838ced94e2d92adba189b4944

LONDON (AP) — Britons counted down the hours Friday to their country’s departure from the European Union — some joyous, some sad, many just hopeful the divorce would mark the end an anguished chapter in their country’s history.

The U.K. officially departs the EU at 11 p.m. local time, midnight in Brussels (2300 GMT, 6 p.m. EST). The departure comes 3½ years after the country voted by a margin of 52%-48% to walk away from the club that it had joined in 1973.

 

[phinds]

... I hope that all the people who voted for it will understand the implications.

My understanding is that it is very well documented that most of the people who voted "leave" did NOT even begin to understand the implications, having been straight-out lied to by their politicians who promised that it would all be very simple and advantageous.

They've been getting a better understanding of it lately but it's too late.

 

[epenguin]

https://apnews.com/e48bf51838ced94e2d92adba189b4944

" many just hopeful the divorce would mark the end an anguished chapter in their country’s history."

There are many illusions about this process. The above is one of them.

it is true that a lot of people of the UK are, after the Brexit issue has dominated U.K. politics for 4 years, bored with it, don't want to hear any more about it. But they are about to get more years of what they don't want.

For one thing nothing of substance on the ground will change between today and tomorrow. All laws and regulations remain as they are as we enter into a 'transitional period'. This will last until it is succeeded by a definitive agreement between the now separate UK and the EU. This can in theory happen by the end of 2020; Johnson says it will but practically nobody believes that it will by then; no one believes that Johnson believes it (nor anything else).

For another Britain is moored Geographically next to the European Union, almost as surrounded by the the EU as Switzerland is, nearly half its trade is with the EU, various things will be changing and the UK will no longer have input as of right into EU policies that affect it. So contrary to the above vain hopes relations with the EU will dominate British news and politics for the foreseeable future.

There is just one thing that changes tonight. Brexit is formally definitive and irreversible. This is psychologically important to a lot of Brexiteers. You see ever since these achieved their wafer-thin majority for Brexit they have been dead scared of their flukey victory then slipping from their hands.This fear explains a lot of the subsequent dynamics. For example the pressure to open negotiations prematurely (before the government even knew what its own position and aims were). The welling and stirring up of hatred for the whole political class including PM Theresa May, suspected of not having having their hearts into it. The need of politicians to outflank each other in extremism, which paid off in the last election.

So as for things slipping away from public attention – if only! There would be more of a chance of a sensible agreement if that happened.

 

[Orodruin]

All laws and regulations remain as they are as we enter into a 'transitional period'. this will last until it is succeeded by a definitive agreement between the now separate UK and the EU.

... or lack thereof. ”No deal” remains a possible option. With Johnson saying he will break alignment with EU standards and not extend the transition period it also seems like the only option that satisfies those two. The only way of getting a trade deal with the EU done and implemented in time is essentially to fall flat and accept EU regulations.

 

[WWGD]

FWIW, Britons have been more civil in dealing with their differences than people in the US dealing with Trump, yet there does seem to be a lot of day -dreaming by Brexiters: do you think a country of 66 million will be able to find better trading/general deals than a block of 400+ million? Good luck negotiating a good deal with Don " America First " Trump and other countries/blocks. Their strongest point are the financial and general services sector; if any thing helps them, I suspect it will be that.

 

[fresh_42]

Their strongest point are the financial and general services sector; if any thing helps them, I suspect it will be that.

A total of 40 banks and financial institutions have already moved their businesses from London to Frankfurt or are about to do so. (Report by New Financial - British think tank)

 

[phinds]

For another Britain is moored Geographically next to the European Union, almost as surrounded by the the EU as Switzerland is, nearly half its trade is with the EU, various things will be changing and the UK will no longer have input as of right into EU policies that affect it.

And add to this the fact that geographic proximity is by far the most important characteristic of trade deals. They've really screwed themselves on that front.

 

[fresh_42]

And add to this the fact that geographic proximity is by far the most important characteristic of trade deals. They've really screwed themselves on that front.

It's not only that. Many companies have representations or even factories in both. How beneficial is it for them to have two different law systems to obey? Not to mention prehistoric custom systems. If A produces a screw for a part in B which again is finally assembled in A, what are the custom fees? A nightmare.

 

[WWGD]

It's not only that. Many companies have representations or even factories in both. How beneficial is it for them to have two different law systems to obey? Not to mention prehistoric custom systems. If A produces a screw for a part in B which again is finally assembled in A, what are the custom fees? A nightmare.

On top of moving the products across hard borders. With Ireland, and Northern Ireland itself.

 

[Buckleymanor]

My understanding is that it is very well documented that most of the people who voted "leave" did NOT even begin to understand the implications, having been straight-out lied to by their politicians who promised that it would all be very simple and advantageous.

They've been getting a better understanding of it lately but it's too late.

I could not agree more the information being brought to light indicates that GB is in effect giving itself it's own sanctions without the help of any hostile influence.
This in effect could result in the eventual breakup of GB with Scotland and Ireland leaving the Union.
Good heavens what have we done!

 

[PeroK]

What I think will be interesting now is that - to some extent - the pro Brexiteers will have to move on from their victim mentality. At the moment, everything that is wrong with the UK is the fault of the EU and the remainers. It will be an interesting transition to the politics where everything is the fault of Brexit!

 

[Jonathan Scott]

There are some interesting statistical correlations with voting Leave or Remain. The most spectacular is with level of education (based on the proportion of graduates in the local electorate), in that areas with higher levels of graduates were far more likely to vote Remain. There is also an effect of age, with older people more likely to vote Leave, even after correction for education level. See the following articles for more detail:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/brexit-voting-and-education/
I was personally very shocked by the referendum result, because of the people I actually know (mostly in IBM or my amateur orchestras) hardly any would have considered voting Leave themselves, and most of us would have considered anyone who did to be extremely gullible, and/or extremely xenophobic. So if anyone can come up with a scientific measure of gullibility for UK voters, I think there would be an even stronger correlation with voting Leave.

It's also totally misleading for them to proclaim that Brexit has been "achieved". The only "deal" so far is just a vague bit of hand-waving which pushes all the apparently unsolvable problems down the road for a few months. The situation at the end of 2020 is nearly as terrifying as it was when imminent "no-deal" Brexit loomed back in October, and is in some ways worse, because Boris has made it as difficult as possible to extend the transition period.

 

[fresh_42]

That doesn't take me wonder. The educated understand global economy and that there is no way back, and they understand themselves as part of Europe. The elderly still dream of the empire. But there is no way back either.

We currently live in the longest period of peace in Europe ever. Nationalisms are the biggest threat to it. Too bad so many people seem to have forgotten what had happened when everybody followed only its own interests, which was basically during the entire European history. For this alone I would have voted Remain. And there are future conflicts on the horizon: oil, gas, fishing, fresh water, GW, migration! I do not trust people. The inertia of the EU is a benefit, not a disadvantage. Big problems don't allow quick solutions. Never did.

 

[PeroK]

It's also totally misleading for them to proclaim that Brexit has been "achieved". The only "deal" so far is just a vague bit of hand-waving which pushes all the apparently unsolvable problems down the road for a few months. The situation at the end of 2020 is nearly as terrifying as it was when imminent "no-deal" Brexit loomed back in October, and is in some ways worse, because Boris has made it as difficult as possible to extend the transition period.

First, whatever you think about it, Brexit has been a remarkable political coup. There was a slim majority in the UK to leave and they have achieved it. We're definitely as good as out now.

Second, it's clear that there is little mood in the UK to extend the fight. There is no political capital in trying to reverse it. We all have to accept it's going to happen.

Third, Boris was elected to do precisely what he is intent on doing. Whatever you feel personally, there is no viable political capital in the UK now other than to get us out as soon as practical. He stood on an unequivocal position to do this. This is what he was elected to do, like it or not.

 

[Orodruin]

the pro Brexiteers will have to move on from their victim mentality. At the moment, everything that is wrong with the UK is the fault of the EU and the remainers.

I am not convinced that this is true. There will be many things left to blame the EU for: Not giving a good trade deal, asking ”unreasonable” things in trade negotiations, not accepting a non-existing border that threatens the integrity of the single market, etc.

 

[PeroK]

I am not convinced that this is true. There will be many things left to blame the EU for: Not giving a good trade deal, asking ”unreasonable” things in trade negotiations, not accepting a non-existing border that threatens the integrity of the single market, etc.

That's why I qualified it with "to an extent". They are effectively the government now and it's not easy to hide in a modern democracy when you are actually the government.

PS I agree they will do all those things.

 

[Orodruin]

That's why I qualified it with "to an extent". They are effectively the government now and it's not easy to hide in a modern democracy when you are actually the government.

To a large extent this depends on the media and the way media puts an angle on things.

 

[PeroK]

To a large extent this depends on the media and the way media puts an angle on things.

The media, generally, are merciless!

 

[epenguin]

It's not only that. Many companies have representations or even factories in both. How beneficial is it for them to have two different law systems to obey? Not to mention prehistoric custom systems. If A produces a screw for a part in B which again is finally assembled in A, what are the custom fees? A nightmare.

Well yes, the manufacture of an individual car is now often cross-border - part of it is constructed in one country then transported to e.g. the UK where various other parts are added then it is transported elsewhere for further work - the transport is calculated down to the hour, maybe it goes back and forth more than once. Part of the advantage and justification of the EU is that it enables this sort of integration and scale, thereby maintaining a competitiveness with other parts of the world that individual national producers would not. It is obviously best if this takes place within a single fiscal, regulatory etc. regime and potential nightmare if customs procedures have To be inserted into these systems that depend on rapid exchange. "Regulatory divergence would mean cars (and car parts) being subject to compliance checks in both directions, increasing costs and delays." (Economist yesterday)

These things have been debated up hill and down dale in the UK; everybody learns just enough to maintain their end in polemics. Debate takes place against the background of change and uncertainty in the car market anyway - the collapse of demand for diesel is just one of the relevant destablisers. Don't imagine the debate is much concerned with the economics (employment etc) or even environment, the point rather is what political mileage can be obtained from anything? E.g. following a few deaths of cyclists in accidents in London Boris made claims that a wheeze of his about lorry (truck) cabin design (he has a lot like that) had been blocked by the EU. When this was looked into it turned out that it had been the UK Government that had been delaying and watering down new EU regulations to improve lorry safety. But no one cared, by the time the boring true story had been discovered the Boris show had moved on to kippers.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...nson-claims-about-kippers-fishy-brussels-says
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-kipper-rant-tory-hustings-isle-man-a9010591.html

 

[Orodruin]

The media, generally, are merciless!

The media played a large part in getting Brexit in the first place. I am not sure they are going to change their tune any more than people who vited for Brexit will.

 

[fresh_42]

The media, generally, are merciless!

Strange. That reminds me that I dreamt of grabbing The Sun last night. However, I forgot why.
Many British people who live here got a second citizenship lately...

 

[Jonathan Scott]

Third, Boris was elected to do precisely what he is intent on doing. Whatever you feel personally, there is no viable political capital in the UK now other than to get us out as soon as practical. He stood on an unequivocal position to do this. This is what he was elected to do, like it or not.

He didn't win the election so much as the opposition lost it. And before the election, he stated repeatedly that it wasn't only about Brexit, but afterwards he clearly labelled it a total mandate for Brexit.

Our first-past-the-post electoral system is seriously flawed; it only works locally when there are two main parties. When there are three or more, if you don't want one of the main two parties to get in, the only way to try to stop them is to vote for the other, even if you actually want to vote for another party. If you do vote for one of the other parties, the vote is essentially wasted, as it is not reflected in any way in the results.

 

[PeroK]

He didn't win the election so much as the opposition lost it. And before the election, he stated repeatedly that it wasn't only about Brexit, but afterwards he clearly labelled it a total mandate for Brexit.

Our first-past-the-post electoral system is seriously flawed; it only works locally when there are two main parties. When there are three or more, if you don't want one of the main two parties to get in, the only way to try to stop them is to vote for the other, even if you actually want to vote for another party. If you do vote for one of the other parties, the vote is essentially wasted, as it is not reflected in any way in the results.

Well, okay, but if BJ has no mandate to lead the country then who has? No government ever has a majority of the popular vote. Not in my lifetime. It's not the worst way to choose a government.

 

[Bandersnatch]

E.g. following a few deaths of cyclists in accidents in London Boris made claims that a wheeze of his about lorry (truck) cabin design (he has a lot like that) had been blocked by the EU. When this was looked into it turned out that it had been the UK Government that had been delaying and watering down new EU regulations to improve lorry safety. But no one cared, by the time the boring true story had been discovered the Boris show had moved on to kippers.

As far as I understand, this, uh, creative reporting has been his modus operandi ever since his time as a EU correspondent at The Daily Telegraph.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

An election based on who can tell the most attractive lies and get away with it is not a shining example of democracy in action, and the UK isn't alone in experiencing that.
With a more proportional system, the Lib Dems, Greens and so on could at least hold a balance of power to keep things from getting too ridiculously polarized. (The main party policies seem to be mainly to do exactly the opposite of the other, even though the sensible position lies somewhere in the middle).

 

[rootone]

I am UK born but have lived for a long time somewhere else.
That is probably a good thing as far as I can tell.
I won't be annoying at airports, honestly, I promise.

 

[fresh_42]

I am UK born but have lived for a long time somewhere else.
That is probably a good thing as far as I can tell.
I won't be annoying at airports, honestly, I promise.

Since the UK never signed Schengen, where is the difference?

 

[phinds]

I am UK born but have lived for a long time somewhere else.
That is probably a good thing as far as I can tell.
I won't be annoying at airports, honestly, I promise.

So, I take it it's a secret where you live now.