OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Trickytreesreds]

So, in effect to the last few posts-

We didn't vote into a superstate, we joined a hand full of economically similar countries. This has now swelled, by stealth and guile to include numerous sub countries, which we pay for.

Because we have been in as long as we have, we're trapped and should stay to help that plan grow even more?
Regardless of the misery loads of us feel with the policies it enforces?

Oh well, I'm, convinced now after all. Perhaps I'm Italian or French after all. Shall I switch sides, or just surrender?

PS, love the Malta comparison. A country covering 316 sq km now slaughters us and wants us "punished". 50 years ago, under our umbrella, yet now has a new gravy train it doesn't want stopped. Well It's one place off my holiday list and every UK citizen should do the same. Lets see if Brussels makes up that shortfall.

[swaledale]

So, in effect to the last few posts-

We didn't vote into a superstate, we joined a hand full of economically similar countries. This has now swelled, by stealth and guile to include numerous sub countries, which we pay for.

Because we have been in as long as we have, we're trapped and should stay to help that plan grow even more?
Regardless of the misery loads of us feel with the policies it enforces?

Oh well, I'm, convinced now after all. Perhaps I'm Italian or French after all. Shall I switch sides, or just surrender?

PS, love the Malta comparison. A country covering 316 sq km now slaughters us and wants us "punished". 50 years ago, under our umbrella, yet now has a new gravy train it doesn't want stopped. Well It's one place off my holiday list and every UK citizen should do the same. Lets see if Brussels makes up that shortfall.

Could you be anymore xenophobic? I suppose you think every action and word spoken by the UK over the last century has been fair, reasonable and with the best interests of all other countries in mind?

Ye gods not only do you not base your views on unsubstantiated rumours but your views are so narrow minded!

[Trickytreesreds]

Could you be anymore xenophobic? I suppose you think every action and word spoken by the UK over the last century has been fair, reasonable and with the best interests of all other countries in mind?

Ye gods not only do you not base your views on unsubstantiated rumours but your views are so narrow minded!

What because I won't go on holiday to Malta, after an attempt at bullying? lmao.
You are so funny Swale, pleased keep going. It's comedy gold.

[swaledale]

Nice to see swale being civilised again, I agree. But he's wrong on so many counts.

I don't any rational brexiteer blames all our ills on the eu, but there a few down to the eu and I, like many, feel we will do better without the eu.

The eu hasn't drained our finances, but it is a drain on them. We pay 350m a week but receive back about half in grants and subsidies. That costs money and is undisputed.

We are not hogtied by by eu rules and regulations, but we are certainly restricted by them. I have suffered then in business, my small farmer friend has to work with the same rules as a much larger French farmer, whereas the rules are fine for the large farm, they are stupid for the small farmer renting individual fields of other people. Then there's a local road development which had some eu finding, resulting in a bus lane on a busy dual carriageway, for 4 buses an hour at peak time, and over a half mile detour for cars!

What a ridiculous statement to say we are no less secure. We are now relying on EVERY eu country to have enough controls when granting asylum. 1 weak country can allow anyone to become an eu citizen and therefore free movement to the UK.

To say the eu compliments our objectives, is only true if we agree with the rest of the eu.

Military wise, I can't remember seeing many eu operations, but I do recall frequent NATO exercises.

The eu has many problems and I think they'll increase with further expansion. As I've said before, to stay in the eu is as big, probably bigger gamble than leaving, who knows where the eu will end up? Incidently, were you in favour of joining the Euro?

And on the subject of farming Ram59, this is what your small farmer friend is fighting against not the EU, the bloody NFU!

I don’t feel represented by the NFU. In fact, I find myself increasingly alienated by their self-righteous lobbying for the short-term interests of a small number of large-scale farmers. This especially applies to their resistance ... to even the tamest environmental regulation; to public access to land; and to any redirection of farming subsidies to encourage younger, smaller-scale entrants to the industry."

[swaledale]

What because I won't go on holiday to Malta, after an attempt at bullying? lmao.
You are so funny Swale, pleased keep going. It's comedy gold.

Even your not thick enough to think my labelling you as a xenophobe is down to that!

By the way your not even funny, sad, deluded and so eager to grasp at anything that seems to support your twsted agenda.

[roger_ramjet]

So after 1750 posts we seem to have narrowed down the argument to its basics.

ECONOMICS : As Swale rightly observes, there will be a mass of costs which will arise with brexit both in putting it into affect and in the post brexit universe. It may well be that the net annual cost (after rebate and inwards receipts from CAP etc) no longer payable to Brussels will be absorbed by the incremental costs of the post brexit management of the functions previously carried out by the EU - but at least they will be carried out by British labour - if there is enough qualified to do it, which is a huge IF - and so our social security costs will fall.

Lets call that a breakeven.

TRADE : Unpredicitible outcome, but most likely to be initially negative connotations which should improve longer term as the new trade relationships bed in.

SOVEREIGNTY : perhaps the key determining factor for a number of reasons - not least of which is the fact that noone did, nor now does, clearly understand the economic issues outlined above. The fact remains that the EU is NOT what the Great British public originally voted for. It has evolved from being a trade area, like EFTA, ANZFTA or SICA, into a quasi-federal state, with, it must be said, the complicity of successive British governments. People do not want this degree of integration and so voted by a voting majority against continuing to be part of it.

Those people are prepared to pay the price in potential economic retardation and cash flow to preserve the independence and sovereignty of the UK. Whether they quite rationalised it this way is a moot point, but in effect we have (or have commenced the process to) "bought ourselves out of the system" by sacrificing the economic benefits of membership at the high altar of sovereignty.

Time will tell if this decision was long term advantageous, but can you put a price on "Freedom". Are today's idealistic brexiteers following in the footsteps of William Wallace regardless of the price: or are they simply a petty bunch of disenfranchised racists seeking to find a cause to blame their personal ills on, rather than examining their own limitations?

The truth may well lie somewhere in between those two polarised views, but all the arguments about whether we are better off in or out from a financial perspective is sort of irrelevant. We have traded finance off against freedom. Arguments can be promoted on both sides of the trade off but the simple truth is we dont know and wont maybe ever know if it is the right decision.

So by all means Tricky and Swale argue about angels on a pinhead until the cows come home. You will doubtless both go to your graves (as will I) without knowing whether the decision was right. It is very much a pragmatism v principles argument; head v heart and will always remain that.

[swaledale]

Well summed up, I'd take issue on the financially neutral, because we are already at 3.8% unemployemtn and anything under 4% is considered full employment, so can't see the savings in social security, plus those damned immigrants actually contribute a significant tax yield.

I guess the argument has moved on from if we leave (we are, though i did read an interesting view the other day that the EU may collectively come to its senses and realise that it would be worth changing its approach and offering an improved deal to the Uk IF it voted to remain in, unlikely though, one sure thing about a collection of humans is that it takes time and usually history before they begin to recognise what could have been achieved and even then some remain in denial) to what the deal and relationship will be when we leave.

Its this debate (hard soft or slightly floppy Brexit which is crucial and it will i think end in a result which the Brexit side will think they have not got what they wanted other than the fact the Uk left the EU, I say that because the economic interdependence - in all areas of the economy is so interlinked and interdependent that some sort of compromise is essential or a substantial part of the Uk and european economy will be ****ed!

As fr freedom and control, mmm it will be in name only, for me the big plus of the Eu was that it could and did regulate companies and global corporations (yes I hear you say not as well as it could ahve done but more than those organisations liked) such is the nature of the world today that a single government is actually quite powerless against the big corporations - be punitive and they will simply move jobs etc elsewhere, plus of course they have such financial power that they can lobby (or buy influence).

The notion of sovereignty and freedom is one which only those who yearn for the days of yore actually hold dear and the reality is that a single nation is not strong enough to operate on its own - one reason why the SNP will never in my view achieve independence, yes an independent scotland sounds sey, but the reality is they would be a lot worse off and most Scots know this.

So welcome to Brexit

We will obey the same laws have largely the same regulations, adopt many that eminate from the EU, especially those which we have to in order to sell goods there, replicate subsidy that the Eu provided, find we need foreign labour to keep our economy and services going and more than likely suffer a drop in the standard of living but we will be "in control"!

[ramAnag]

Not sure you, Tricky or Swale will go to your graves without knowing Rog. Not unless you're all thinking of going quite imminently. Seems likely to me that there will be a lot of regrets before mid summer.
Interesting that you bring it down to Trade, Sovereignty and Economics with no direct mention of Immigration which was probably the main motivation behind a great many of those who voted 'Leave'. At the risk of repeating the argument I'd also challenge your suggestion that 'people' do not want this degree of integration because, by definition, 'people' only refers to the 37% who voted against it so by no means...'the people'.
The point I still have great difficulty with is...you have written very intelligently about the situation, as have others - Swale, AF and Ram59 amongst them - but I don't actually believe that the majority of people are capable of following your reasoning - some Sun readers probably won't even be able to read it - so is there not a real danger that we are now being led into possible recession by the knee jerk reaction of a minority who simply used the referendum as a populist protest vote against perceived immigration levels and over bureaucratic government.

[roger_ramjet]

Not sure you, Tricky or Swale will go to your graves without knowing Rog. Not unless you're all thinking of going quite imminently. Seems likely to me that there will be a lot of regrets before mid summer.
Interesting that you bring it down to Trade, Sovereignty and Economics with no direct mention of Immigration which was probably the main motivation behind a great many of those who voted 'Leave'. At the risk of repeating the argument I'd also challenge your suggestion that 'people' do not want this degree of integration because, by definition, 'people' only refers to the 37% who voted against it so by no means...'the people'.
The point I still have great difficulty with is...you have written very intelligently about the situation, as have others - Swale, AF and Ram59 amongst them - but I don't actually believe that the majority of people are capable of following your reasoning - some Sun readers probably won't even be able to read it - so is there not a real danger that we are now being led into possible recession by the knee jerk reaction of a minority who simply used the referendum as a populist protest vote against perceived immigration levels and over bureaucratic government.

I am perhaps ascribing a greater degree of reasoning to voting patterns than the voters actually applied in their decision making, and perhaps making the case ex post facto for the decision, but ..... Undoubtedly immigration was a major factor in voting choice, but since the Brexit decision is unlikely to reduce immigration and reliance of external labour, the issue folds into that of "freedom" and "being in control" and "sovereignty" - ie we retain the inalienable right to control our borders even if we end up controlling them in the same way as the EU did! Form over substance

[roger_ramjet]

Not sure you, Tricky or Swale will go to your graves without knowing Rog. Not unless you're all thinking of going quite imminently. Seems likely to me that there will be a lot of regrets before mid summer.
Interesting that you bring it down to Trade, Sovereignty and Economics with no direct mention of Immigration which was probably the main motivation behind a great many of those who voted 'Leave'. At the risk of repeating the argument I'd also challenge your suggestion that 'people' do not want this degree of integration because, by definition, 'people' only refers to the 37% who voted against it so by no means...'the people'.
The point I still have great difficulty with is...you have written very intelligently about the situation, as have others - Swale, AF and Ram59 amongst them - but I don't actually believe that the majority of people are capable of following your reasoning - some Sun readers probably won't even be able to read it - so is there not a real danger that we are now being led into possible recession by the knee jerk reaction of a minority who simply used the referendum as a populist protest vote against perceived immigration levels and over bureaucratic government.

I think we will go to our graves not knowing, but we may have an inkling. The virtues of this decision are far more long term than this summer. The first implications and impacts may start to play out by then, but the merits of Brexit can only really be evaluated after no less than 10 years out - after all we had 40 odd years in to see how it did, before many decided that they didnt like it. I fully expect that the impact in the next three to five years will be potentially difficult to deal with and financially expensive, but once all the revamped trade deals fall into place we may return to the neutral position trade wise, but with our sovereignty (for what its worth) in our own hands. This may be illusory but that illusion may keep the proles happy.

Yes, as Swale says, global corporations will have their way over small markets/countries - but even a reduced stature EU may struggle to stand up to those mega corporations. As Ben Brockman might ask "who would win in a battle between a robot and a T Rex?" Answer probably neither. besides when all the dust is settled we will probably still be in the EEA (perhaps modified a bit re movement of labour / Schengen) via EFTA and so be subject to most EU legislation except the chaotic EU CAP and Fisheries Policies. That may be a reasonable soft compromise in my view.

[ramAnag]

By which time I fear the futures of those who will, by then, be approaching thirty may have been seriously scuppered.
Not being disrespectful but there is something seriously wrong when those with dementia or possibly only months to live have a bigger say on a decision which may take decades to play out than those aged sixteen or seventeen.

[roger_ramjet]

Cannot disagree

Wibble

Wibble

[Akwesasne]

By which time I fear the futures of those who will, by then, be approaching thirty may have been seriously scuppered.
Not being disrespectful but there is something seriously wrong when those with dementia or possibly only months to live have a bigger say on a decision which may take decades to play out than those aged sixteen or seventeen.

What has happened to the concept of the village elder, the person who has taken and survived the worst and enjoyed the best that life can throw at them and recommend to the younger generation what works best. Teenagers are so gullible that they are prepared to put their necks on the block just because politicians tell them to go, subdue and possibly kill people they don't know, never met and probably would like if they did meet.

[swaledale]

I think the young people have realised (probabely back in the 60's that the village or indeed town elder was telling them a lot of tripe!

Now I get that age and experience counts for something but not when it holds back innovation, experimenting and generally carries on myths and falsehoods!

[Ram59]

My lads thought I knew nothing when they were teenagers. Surprisingly now they're in their late twenties, they come to me for advice on a regular basis.