The battle may have been lost but, the war, it seems, is still ongoing.
He who laughs last and all that



Mind you, even though YOU knew what YOU were voting for, I'll be really surprised if you get it and it's that thought that is keeping me going for now.

I'm glad I'm in your thoughts so much.



We'll see. Ultimately the government can ignore the Lords, the Scots and all the bluster and get on with their negotiations, which are actually going pretty well. Any interference weakens the UK and I'll warn you here and now that if the opposition start playing politics with the 'meaningful vote', things could crash quickly and that's when we could face a cliff edge.

The cliff edge was there all along but, no issue with getting your excuses in early.
Even Brexitiers like your good self have said that we are likely to be worse off financially after Brexit and if this was, in any way, the optimistic outlook, who knows where we will end up.
The price of democracy always affects some more than others and many Brexitiers were convinced that we would all be better off

Unlike Jeremy Corbyn and his cronies, of course, whose stance on various issues (especially Brexit) swings and changes as part of their cynical vote-winning strategy.

A blatant example would be their u-turn on the customs union. Contrary to the previous party line, Corbyn suddenly decided the UK would stay in the customs union, but an all-singing, all-dancing bespoke customs union offering the absolutely perfect Brexit scenario in some weird dreamland.

He knows the EU would sooner invade Crimea that agree to his claims, yet Labour shout it from the rooftops knowing some people will be fooled. Even many Labour MPs and voters were up in arms. Cynical and dishonest.

It's THAT important to them.

Of course the possibility of a cliff edge was always there. What naive Remoaners didn't seem to understand is that the bluster and hard talk from both sides was simply tactical positioning prior to the negotiations. In reality discussions have been reasonable and aimed at achieving the best result for both sides. Not perfect, but progressive.

However, there's always the chance the opposition will decide to play political hardball and kibosh ANYTHING the government proposes, which would mean WTO terms at best and the hardest possible Brexit (although I hate the hard/soft terminology). I don't actually think they will - I think even Labour realise the backlash would be of biblical proportions and would ultimately backfire on them. But it probably won't stop the SNP and Liberals.

As I've said many times on here, yes, slightly worse off in the short term, better off in the long term. In more ways than just the economy.

Why are you quoting Corbyn to me? I thought I made my thoughts on Corbyn's antics crystal clear a post or two ago. If Corbyn wants to retain the young peoples' votes who flocked to Labour last year he should get his act together where Brexit is concerned. Again as I posted earlier, with Labour, the SNP, the Lib/Dems and dissident Tories there is an anti Brexit majority in the Commons. Mr Corbyn should wise up. It's not the 70's. The Soviet Union no longer exists, and the only resemblance Russia bears to it is in its suppression of its people. Come down off the fence and lead the opposition for once.

Of course you did

After Mark Carney's pretty damning report as to the financial effects of Brexit, suggesting that each household is already £900 / year worse off, mainly due to the weaker value of the £ following the referendum result and the expected additional squeeze on real income, once we are actually out.https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media ... 7298EA8163. Could some of our "experts" who are in the "leave" camp, please explain the negative effect of the past 40 years of membership of the Common Market and EU. Apart from the headline grabbing issues surrounding the European Courts and the rules regarding "straight bananas". Fundamentally, how has the UK been "damaged" by our continued membership ?

After Mark Carney's pretty damning report as to the financial effects of Brexit, suggesting that each household is already £900 / year worse off, mainly due to the weaker value of the £ following the referendum result and the expected additional squeeze on real income, once we are actually out.https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media ... 7298EA8163. Could some of our "experts" who are in the "leave" camp, please explain the negative effect of the past 40 years of membership of the Common Market and EU. Apart from the headline grabbing issues surrounding the European Courts and the rules regarding "straight bananas". Fundamentally, how has the UK been "damaged" by our continued membership ?

Who is to say the £ wouldn't have tanked even if we had stayed in?

The value of the £ is about speculation rather than reality and there are a number of factors that determine the demand for a currency.

In terms of what it has cost us to be members of the EU - let's start with the value of our net contributions to the EU - how many billions is that?

Come on Sal, that's not even funny.

The value of the pound fluctuates all the time.

However, the instant drop, which occurred at the very moment that "brexit" became likely, is down to the "no" vote and to attempt to slant it in any other direction just makes you look daft/desperate.

IF Carney is right, it may not quite be the "cliff edge" that some politicians have been talking about.
However, a couple of grand per household, every year, just so that we can pretend that we have "control" is a huge price to pay and will very quickly overtake our net contributions (we'll not count any benefits of membership at this stage as this would make our position look even more bleak).

We're still awaiting Mrs May's fantasy solution to "customs union" and a "frictionless" border between Ireland and N.Ireland.

The 12 cabinet ministers cannot agree the way forward, let alone "selling" their idea (assuming they can agree on one) to Parliament, The EU and the general public.

The instant drop was because those traders who deal in this area took a view on the currency it is as simple as that. The cost of raising bonds doesn't appear to be costing the government anymore which is a much better indicator of the real view of the economy from the outside world.

The remainers all said a no vote would be catastrophic for the economy - as yet that hasn't proved to be the case - inflation hasn't gone through the roof - interest rates haven't moved - unemployment has gone down and wages look like they are on the up.

A couple of grand per household suggests you don't have an alternative as to how you spend your money - why can you not buy British goods that will not be impacted by the leave vote - perhaps that is a positive externality of the vote? Carney is without doubt the worst forecaster he has yet to get a forecast correct - so I would take everything he says with a pinch of salt.


The biggest costs in a household are mortgage/rent - utilities - not impacted by EU, Food - possible to avoid much of the impact by selective buying, fuel - price fluctuation nothing to do with EU membership. Council tax - adversely impact by being a member so potentially a gain. Clothes again most are manufactured in the far east so limited impact.

I always thought we would end up with WTO tarrifs - let's face it plenty of countries trade with the EU that are not members so why can't we? It is not as if we are a huge manufacturing powerhouse anymore?

On Ireland the idea that if there is no border huge amounts of goods are going to flow across the border is quite simply a stupid notion. The north is a small place so there is so much it can consume and it is an island so it would all have to be smuggled off the island there are only so many BMW's you can get away with.


I ask again - what have been our net contributions to the EU in 40 years of members I bet in today's value close to £500bn

You are very flippant with a drop of "a couple of grand per household".
For many people, certainly those at the lower end of the wage scale, this would be absolutely huge, although, as the figure is an average, this monetary effect would affect those on higher household incomes by far more than those at the bottom of the scale.

Again, you seem to be in utter denial about the currency shift and the subsequent impact on trade in the UK.

As a huge net importer, particularly in "visible" trade, the effect is significant and although many companies have tried to absorb some of this increased cost and delayed increasing consumer prices, again, you are in denial.

Haven't you noticed the good that you buy, either increasing in price and/or shrinking in size ??

Regarding our trade with the EU, of course this is critical to The UK's future.

Although trade in both directions (EU - UK and UK - EU) could be said to be similar, the imported goods are spread between 26 countries, whereas our trade with the EU is from 1 (unless you say that the UK is 3 nations). Again, you are in denial.

As for our net contributions, some would say this has been money well spent and of course, they haven't always been at current levels and the cost of being on the outside looks to be significantly higher so, in actual fact, we would still be "winning".

I'm pleased that Mr Farage & Co have done such a good "selling" job on you and I just hope that he is somewhere near right but, sadly, I fear that he's a long way from being right and assuming that we wish to continue supplying the £250 billion to the EU, we will still have to comply with their rules and regulations, oh the irony

[I'm pleased that Mr Farage & Co have done such a good "selling" job on you and I just hope that he is somewhere near right but, sadly, I fear that he's a long way from being right and assuming that we wish to continue supplying the £250 billion to the EU, we will still have to comply with their rules and regulations, oh the irony



'"

This is perhaps the most simplistic of Brexiter's many simple views of the world. It's all black/white, our money/no benefit. The idea of the EU, proven over many years is mutual economic benefit. We get access to the markets of other countries, they get access to ours. We pay more into the central funds because we are rich. But then EU expenditures help areas become more prosperous so they can buy more of our goods and have better infrastructure so our goods can get to market more quickly.

The UK's economic performance before and after being in the EU are so divergent (and our economy post vote so divergent from other economies) that the factual benefits of membership are so obvious that it's increasingly rare to find a Brexiter dispute them. Instead they are retreating to their nationalistic "control" argument despite all plausible scenarios leaving us with less control and no say in the rules we will inevitably have to abide by.

The UK has a huge negative balance of payments with the EU - so we pump money in so some countries become more prosperous so they can charge us more for their goods - perhaps that really is too simplistic?

Yes they may be able to buy more of our goods but we will also buy much more of their goods - seems a lose lose to me.

Nobody is saying it will be easy - but impossible no, as I keep saying there are plenty of countries especially in the far east that don't seem to have any difficulties trading with the EU without the EU putting any real restructions on how they operate e.g. working practises - if a country has something the EU wants no trade barriers will stop it being bought.

Can you explain the "huge negative balance of payments" please. Do you mean in terms of trade or, contributions ?

I would also argue that Britain, without the influence of the EU, would go backwards, in terms of employment legislation, and on a topical note "green issues", something which can only change "collectively", an area where the EU is particularly strong.

And, you talk about lose/lose ??
Changing a trading relationship with your "biggest customer" is always fraught with danger.
Most businesses would prefer "not rocking the boat", however, The UK has decided to gamble on getting some better deals from being on the outside of the trading union.
This is not something that most business leaders would recommend, little wonder that the CBI were so against "leaving".

Our negative trade balance with the EU - hope that helps.

If labour get in power it will be impossible for firms to operate given the employment views of Corbyn/McDonald and their stooge McClusky. Every company will have to be full unionised - the board will be made up of shop floor workers that are members of a union etc. That is if Labour haven't nationalised it!!

Most businesses don't have to pay a huge sum for the opportunity to trade - perhaps they would take a different view. Most businessmen will tell you the "margin is in the risk". Steady is OK but its not a growth strategy. If you never take any risks you will standstill and those taking calculated risks will pass you by.

On green matters - unless you get the US and China to play ball its a waste of time - the EU is impotent when it comes to either of these two.

What? It's the definition of economic win/win!

Tories have been saying for years that trade deficits don't matter. Has there been a sudden change of heart on this as well to fit into a Brexit narrative?

An economic win/win - an ability to trade with whom you want at a price that generates sufficient profits to enable the firm to invest for the future i.e. a long term proposition.

Trade deficits, do they matter - only if you are funding part of the very reason for the deficit - would you not agree?

The deficit would be a whole lot less if our currency had greater value - please see previous posts on the weakening £ following the referendum ??

You seem like you want it both ways ??

Cake and eating it spring to mind

Still can't see the Irish border question being resolved without a customs union.

Everything I read suggest the technology for a border like Ireland's is years away.

WTO rules demand a border too so no deal means border. Can't see anything other than at the very least an extended customs union until such time as the tech is workable.

Perhaps you are correct as long as we are free to negotiate with other non-EU countries during this period all is good

Why should we be able to do this ?
It's not the EU that have failed to agree to a deal, it's our own governments utter inability to agree between themselves (never mind getting Parliament, House of Lords and the General Public to agree).
We should adhere to the EU rules until such time as we are out, if not, "we" will just keep going on and on and on.

"Our" lack of a Brexit strategy was obvious at the outset and the cabinet still cant agree the best way forward, which is absolutely scary, when you consider that certain elements have already been "agreed".

Worth remembering that this is all our (the UK's) own doing and again, The EU, with 26 nations to satisfy and yet we cant manage to have 21 people singing from the same song sheet, it's embarrassing.

Remember the Tory mantra "strong and stable" what a bloody joke

Agree about the strong and stable - May is an embarrassment.

I have always said WTO is the best way forward - it works for many other countries and there is no logical reason why it can't work here. Perhaps it will encourage us to become more self sufficient or reduce our dependence on Europe.