[Politics] Brexit

[WATFORD zero]

On the brexit thing...as corbyn wants a customs union / single market and the EU will not change the scope of what that entails, I do not believe there will ever be an agreement between the parties in parliament, we will never leave the EU whoever is in power.
Personally for my job, pension etc, I am not that unhappy with that, but I understand why that is totally unacceptable to a lot of people.

I have to disagree. I think that if we asked the EU for Customs Union/Single Market they would be all over it like a tramp on chips.

We continue paying in, stay in the single market and get no say in the way the EU develops (and they don't have Farage stinking out the EU parliament). I think the EU would absolutely love that (and possibly, have been waiting for us to get ourselves into that entirely predictable position).

The reason we won't get to that immediately is because TM backtracking on any of her red lines will cause the split in the Tory party that Cameron thought he would resolve once and for all with a referendum

But given that the alternative is a hard border ? Agree with you that it's a bit of a pickle.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

What would Sir Ivan Rogers know anyway? He's an expert.

Experts are yesterday's problem...


https://twitter.com/BrendanLarvor/status/1114212617000816642?s=19


It's exports now that Putin has in his *no deal* crosshairs.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

It's mutually assured damage, but Republic of Ireland aside, it wouldn't hurt The EU as much as it will us. We're also the ones choosing to inflict the damage by leaving The EU in the manner we are, not the other way round.

I think your post is correct but it brings another argument up that is one that has bothered me for years about the EU. I was never in favour of such a close relationship where our economies and institutions were so tightly bound. It is a major flaw that a country should find such difficulty in leaving the EU, it's design is at fault, we are largely to blame for not opposing greater integration more.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I feel exactly the same....I voted for Kyle and more importantly will vote for peter Atkinson who is a brilliant local labour councillor for portslade and mile oak and is approachable and gets things done. I always was a Tory voter, but Peter Kyle took the time to speak to us and listened to local problems that affects us all. Of the things we were concerned about, he fixed a few of them BUT always gave us a reason if they couldn't be fixed.

The issue, and Atkinson had the same problem is that certain hard left people tried and are trying to get them deselected as they don't see them as " socialist enough" ...luckily Atkinson saw them off, but I fear for Kyle.

On the brexit thing...as corbyn wants a customs union / single market and the EU will not change the scope of what that entails, I do not believe there will ever be an agreement between the parties in parliament, we will never leave the EU whoever is in power.
Personally for my job, pension etc, I am not that unhappy with that, but I understand why that is totally unacceptable to a lot of people.

Wow.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I don't think you know what you are talking about. I don't agree that the EU had ever wanted a no deal. I pointed out that many posts from remainers stated that a no deal would hurt the UK more and wouldn't have much effect on the EU as it was a larger body. I am not rowing back in the least, you are being extremely picky, you seem to like argument just for the sake of it. If you don't think there are posts on here saying a no deal wouldn't effect the EU much it at all or whatever then that's your choice.

Okey Doke

You've got me interested now Trig. Who thought the EU wanted a 'no deal' ? (facepalm emoji removed in case someone thought it insulting)

Lots of posts from remainers earlier in the thread stressing that a no deal wouldn't matter to the EU etc etc.

I've seen lots of posts saying that a 'no deal' would be far worse for Britain, which of course it would. If Britain decides to blow it's own brains out economically, then of course it will have a significant effect on the rest of the EU.

However, I can't recall any post saying that the EU wanted a 'no deal'.

Maybe you could correct me and show me one ?

I am referring to the sentiment. I agree that the opinion has been expressed at length that a no deal would be worse for Britain. It doesn't mean there haven't been loads of posts that have expressed that a no deal would not hurt the EU much.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Okey Doke









[emoji106]

You are one of the most entrenched people I have read on here. One part from Trig for a justification. My point is so simple, there were many remain posters who stated a no deal would not hurt the EU much.

For the record i did not say that the EU had ever wanted a no deal.

 

[ManOfSussex]

I think your post is correct but it brings another argument up that is one that has bothered me for years about the EU. I was never in favour of such a close relationship where our economies and institutions were so tightly bound. It is a major flaw that a country should find such difficulty in leaving the EU, it's design is at fault, we are largely to blame for not opposing greater integration more.

Ultimately Brexit itself is the problem though and after 45 years of integration and cooperation there are many other issues aside from economics - For example Denmark wouldn't find such difficulty in leaving The EU as we would as there isn't an international peace treaty relating to the Schleswig-Holstein/Region Syddanmark land border with The EU as we have with our one.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Wow.

Maybe I've missed something, but what is 'Wow' about anything in PO's post ? Seems a perfectly balanced and reasonable post to me ?

 

[WATFORD zero]

You are one of the most entrenched people I have read on here. One part from Trig for a justification. My point is so simple, there were many remain posters who stated a no deal would not hurt the EU much.

For the record i did not say that the EU had ever wanted a no deal.

But look at the first post of mine (which was in answer to another poster entirely) that you decided to leap in, quote and responded to

You've got me interested now Trig. Who thought the EU wanted a 'no deal' ? (facepalm emoji removed in case someone thought it insulting)

Lots of posts from remainers earlier in the thread stressing that a no deal wouldn't matter to the EU etc etc.

I'm simply showing you what you said which you now admit is bollocks - I really can't be arsed

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Ultimately Brexit itself is the problem though and after 45 years of integration and cooperation there are many other issues aside from economics - For example Denmark wouldn't find such difficulty in leaving The EU as we would as there isn't an international peace treaty relating to the Schleswig-Holstein/Region Syddanmark land border with The EU as we have with our one.

Ultimately Brexit is a problem? Well i would say that at this moment Brexit is a problem. Empires have a habit in history of breaking up. I would suggest that the more closely the EU tries to hold onto countries, the more these kind of problems will exist. Other countries will undoubtedly have a Brexit moment at some point, that is a given, it's just a question of when.

 

[Rodney Thomas]

Yes, I agree, maybe i used a poor choice of wording, but I find it hard to imagine any Brexiteer however frothing at the mouth, would say a no deal would ruin the EU?

I'll give you that. I had a quick search of this thread on google and couldn't find anything to suggest Brexiteers have said the EU would collapse with no deal (I did find lots of people stating the EU will collapse anytime from imminently to 10 to 50 years from now - but that wasn't the point I was making)

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

But look at the first post of mine (which was in answer to another poster entirely) that you decided to quote and responded to



With



Which you now admit is bollocks - I really can't be arsed

I admit nothing of the sort. Trig said something that i also disagree with, like you. I simply stated that there was a more watered down version of his point existing in posts in this thread.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

All remainers want Article 50 revoked don't they? Certainly I do. But what you're proposing doesn't seem realistic or even much of a compromise to me.

Which is why there is a 'but', in my sentence, with the compromise.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Ultimately Brexit is a problem? Well i would say that at this moment Brexit is a problem. Empires have a habit in history of breaking up. I would suggest that the more closely the EU tries to hold onto countries, the more these kind of problems will exist. Other countries will undoubtedly have a Brexit moment at some point, that is a given, it's just a question of when.

The EU isn't trying to hold onto any country. We asked for the extension and could have gone out tomorrow.
The EU is a cooperation with politicians and leaders all having a say. It is not an empire.

 

[Ernest]

2nd referendum

What are the TINGERS policies on the NHS, schools, police, railways, public services or don't you care

 

[ManOfSussex]

Ultimately Brexit is a problem? Well i would say that at this moment Brexit is a problem. Empires have a habit in history of breaking up. I would suggest that the more closely the EU tries to hold onto countries, the more these kind of problems will exist. Other countries will undoubtedly have a Brexit moment at some point, that is a given, it's just a question of when.

I said Brexit itself is 'the' problem - it's an ill thought through, stupid idea that's turned this country into an international embarrassment - and it's all of our own making.

(To suggest that The EU is an empire that tries to hold onto countries against their will and suggesting other member states will have their own Brexit 'independence' moments - perhaps visit or live somewhere genuinely previously subjugated and ruled by an empire that's now independent and then come back to that.)

 

[golddene]

These are admirable sentiments and for what it's worth, I totally agree. However, the problem is that no matter what your opinion is on who will eventually move in to no 10 in the event of winning a GE, you should always consider how your localised vote affects the outcome. To clarify, I've really gone off Corbyn and would LIKE to vote TIG, but that plays right into the Tories hands as the constituency where I'm still registered is East Worthing, where that evil snide Loughton currently resides. Given that my #1 priority in a GE would be to oust that fat prick out of his comfy Tory seat (never gonna happen but I can dream), I have to vote for the person who I think is most likely to challenge him for the seat. Which will probably be the Labour candidate.

I guess my point is that it matters not a jot what you think of the leader or the party as a whole. You have to vote based on who's likely to win the seat because the seat is all that matters. So if you're in a constituency which is a Tory stronghold and you want to see a change of seat, you have to vote for Labour if they are the main challengers.

So despite the fact that I really don't like him at all, I will still vote Labour.

Have respect for anyone who tries to vote tactically as it's the only way to oust MPs who otherwise would win by default as the opposition split will always favour them. I did this in 2017 to elect the Liberal Lloyd to oust the Tory, this worked well until he (Lloyd) decided to resign the Liberal whip so he could justify voting for May's WA, this after campaigning on the Lib remain ticket?? (T*at)

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Leavers and remainders would have to be Blind Freddy not to see that Germany has now taken control of the Brexit debacle.A sad day as our Parliament flounders in its ineptitude.

Parliament has been inept but it faces an intractable problem. It has narrowly been given a remit to facilitate either a very soft Brexit or an extremely hard one. They're chalk and cheese and inevitably there are profound differences of opinion about what is in the national interest. This isn't helped by the fact that the public apparently now feels that neither is.

Neo dictatorships come to decisions more easily of course, and you can blame Gina Miller for us not having one of those.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

The EU isn't trying to hold onto any country. We asked for the extension and could have gone out tomorrow.
The EU is a cooperation with politicians and leaders all having a say. It is not an empire.

When history is written about this, if our species survive, a couple of hundred years from now, the EU will be regarded as an empire. Many people in the EU have advocated making Brexit difficult for Britain as a deterrent to other countries which may also be tempted to follow the same route. This makes sense in the short term as ostensibly it keeps things together, but long-term, it will result in a negative effect.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

I said Brexit itself is 'the' problem - it's an ill thought through, stupid idea that's turned this country into an international embarrassment - and it's all of our own making.

(To suggest that The EU is an empire that tries to hold onto countries against their will and suggesting other member states will have their own Brexit 'independence' moments - perhaps visit or live somewhere genuinely previously subjugated and ruled by an empire that's now independent and then come back to that.)

Empires are all quite different at different moments in their history, as empires go, I regard the EU as an extremely benign example.