Brexit - The continuing mission to explore strange new forms of silliness

[peter12]

I'm not sure there have been any decent points made on either side in this discussion.

[bob-loblaw]

To me this would be like my wife and I deciding to sell our house. We decide to, then talk to realtors and find out what the market value is. If we realize we could get effed financially, we can decide not to put it up for sale.

I can't recall the specifics of the initial vote. But if they had a deal in place, vote on the deal. If there isn't a deal, share the consequences and also have a vote. You'd think that on something as important as this a sober second thought is the intelligent thing to do.

Politics is just so tribal these days and the desire to compromise or be pragmatic is just... gone.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by peter12

I'm not sure there have been any decent points made on either side in this discussion.

Anything you would like to add since just suggesting that Brexit has to move forward because .... it has to?

[Dogbert]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Che Guaverra? Is that you? It didn’t go so well for you last time.

Laugh all you want - the people will only take so much from a system that’s rigged against them at all levels, where their only value is the amount of money they can generate for the ultra-rich, and where they can be sold up the river to immeasurable suffering as soon as that’s more profitable.

To the vast majority of Brits, a no-deal Brexit will be disastrous for quality of life. Every economist worth his or her salt has said so. It’s being pushed through so that the UK’s social programs can be gutted and its public services sold off for pennies on the dollar - to make the ultra-rich even more rich at everyone else’s expense. It’s also becoming more obvious by the day that the system is set up to allow this to happen, and that the people cannot stop it by playing within the rules. What are they supposed to do?

[stampsx2]

A u.s. uk trade deal looks very promising:

From bloomberg:

Bolton’s offer to “carve out” areas where Britain and America could negotiate trade deals “very quickly” is designed to boost Johnson’s argument that Britain could see benefits from a no-deal Brexit. Bolton rejected the idea that trade talks would take years.

In a direct rebuke to former President Barack Obama, who in 2016 warned that Britain outside the EU would find itself at the “back of the queue” for a U.S. trade deal, Bolton said: “To be clear, in the Trump administration, Britain is at the front of the trade queue -- or ‘line,’ as we say.”

Asked which sectors he had in mind for fast deals, Bolton cited manufacturing, including car-makers. He said there was a potential “enormous benefit” from a financial services deal, but that this was “complex,” and so might not be the first on the list.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bloo...it-trade-deals

[KootenayFlamesFan]

The problem is that you can’t believe a single thing anyone in the current U.S. administration has to say.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

A u.s. uk trade deal looks very promising:

From bloomberg:

Bolton’s offer to “carve out” areas where Britain and America could negotiate trade deals “very quickly” is designed to boost Johnson’s argument that Britain could see benefits from a no-deal Brexit. Bolton rejected the idea that trade talks would take years.

In a direct rebuke to former President Barack Obama, who in 2016 warned that Britain outside the EU would find itself at the “back of the queue” for a U.S. trade deal, Bolton said: “To be clear, in the Trump administration, Britain is at the front of the trade queue -- or ‘line,’ as we say.”

Asked which sectors he had in mind for fast deals, Bolton cited manufacturing, including car-makers. He said there was a potential “enormous benefit” from a financial services deal, but that this was “complex,” and so might not be the first on the list.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bloo...it-trade-deals

There is huge benefit to the US, their plans for financial services basically cut London's nuts off and have almost all of the work move to Wall Street via regulatory allignment

There is really nothing the UK has it can sell to the US beyond what is sells now, mostly the US wants is to kill the City and open up the UK to US agricultural imports

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

A u.s. uk trade deal looks very promising:

From bloomberg:

Bolton’s offer to “carve out” areas where Britain and America could negotiate trade deals “very quickly” is designed to boost Johnson’s argument that Britain could see benefits from a no-deal Brexit. Bolton rejected the idea that trade talks would take years.

In a direct rebuke to former President Barack Obama, who in 2016 warned that Britain outside the EU would find itself at the “back of the queue” for a U.S. trade deal, Bolton said: “To be clear, in the Trump administration, Britain is at the front of the trade queue -- or ‘line,’ as we say.”

Asked which sectors he had in mind for fast deals, Bolton cited manufacturing, including car-makers. He said there was a potential “enormous benefit” from a financial services deal, but that this was “complex,” and so might not be the first on the list.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bloo...it-trade-deals

Do you seriously believe the Trump administration is just going negotiate a deal that greatly benefits Britain out of the goodness of their hearts?

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

There is huge benefit to the US, their plans for financial services basically cut London's nuts off and have almost all of the work move to Wall Street via regulatory allignment

There is really nothing the UK has it can sell to the US beyond what is sells now, mostly the US wants is to kill the City and open up the UK to US agricultural imports

So there is zero benefit to a trade deal with the u.s.? It’s a one way street with the u.s. but lots of benefit to trade deals with the eu? I mean by that logic Canada should probably back out of usmca and try getting in the eu.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

So there is zero benefit to a trade deal with the u.s.? It’s a one way street with the u.s. but lots of benefit to trade deals with the eu? I mean by that logic Canada should probably back out of usmca and try getting in the eu.

Which is pretty much what CETA is trying to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compre...rade_Agreement

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by peter12

I'm not sure there have been any decent points made on either side in this discussion.

You want to expand on that thought? Comment on any concerns you have with Barnet's posts?

[VladtheImpaler]

If not for Corbyn, there would probably be sufficient numbers of Tory MP's that would cross the floor. The problem for the sane wing of the Tory party is that they are caught between 2 nightmare scenarios - the unmitigated disaster of Brexit on one hand, and the fact that breaking party lines might hand the keys to the country to a complete moron that will seek to take the country back to the 1950's. At least that is my read from afar. I am sure it is far more nuanced than that, but this seems to be the crux of the dilemma for the "sane" MP's caucus, which would otherwise be able to muster a majority.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

If not for Corbyn, there would probably be sufficient numbers of Tory MP's that would cross the floor. The problem for the sane wing of the Tory party is that they are caught between 2 nightmare scenarios - the unmitigated disaster of Brexit on one hand, and the fact that breaking party lines might hand the keys to the country to a complete moron that will seek to take the country back to the 1950's. At least that is my read from afar. I am sure it is far more nuanced than that, but this seems to be the crux of the dilemma for the "sane" MP's caucus, which would otherwise be able to muster a majority.

Except that overhanging all of this are two swords: 1) that Parliament had MANY opportunities to negotiate Brexit and ... refused, and 2) hanging over all of this is a referendum result that everybody agreed was legitimate.

Brexit is a political crisis - no doubt about it. Just not one that anyone seems particularly interested in avoiding or fixing or mitigating.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

A u.s. uk trade deal looks very promising

No it doesn't. Not in the slightest.

As things stand with Bojo undermining the GFA there is zero chance of any getting passed by Congress.

And that's even if you were to take Bolton at his word in the first place.

[Bagor]

Politicians.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1166676234211905536

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

If not for Corbyn, there would probably be sufficient numbers of Tory MP's that would cross the floor. The problem for the sane wing of the Tory party is that they are caught between 2 nightmare scenarios - the unmitigated disaster of Brexit on one hand, and the fact that breaking party lines might hand the keys to the country to a complete moron that will seek to take the country back to the 1950's. At least that is my read from afar. I am sure it is far more nuanced than that, but this seems to be the crux of the dilemma for the "sane" MP's caucus, which would otherwise be able to muster a majority.

That really is accurate analysis. The leadership of the two largest parties as swung to the opposite extremes.

Both parties do however, have a lot of talent on their benches, but their voices aren’t heard within their own parties. Those in the centre are being increasingly marginalised, and it just seems to get worse all the time.

Too many people follow politics as if they are following their favourite sports teams. A prime example is where I live. My MP is one of the most extreme Brexiteers there is. She makes no effort to represent or act as the voice of her constituents which voted 62.2% in favour of remaining in the UK Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/...esults/local/b

Despite this, she’ll likely get re-elected, because she plays on the right team despite not giving a damn for her constituents.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Locke

Well....I just found a new source of amazing news stories!!

https://newsthump.com/2019/08/25/you...n-fire-engine/

my god that was funny!

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

That really is accurate analysis. The leadership of the two largest parties as swung to the opposite extremes.

Both parties do however, have a lot of talent on their benches, but their voices aren’t heard within their own parties. Those in the centre are being increasingly marginalised, and it just seems to get worse all the time.

Too many people follow politics as if they are following their favourite sports teams. A prime example is where I live. My MP is one of the most extreme Brexiteers there is. She makes no effort to represent or act as the voice of her constituents which voted 62.2% in favour of remaining in the UK Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/...esults/local/b

Despite this, she’ll likely get re-elected, because she plays on the right team despite not giving a damn for her constituents.

You live in Vauxhall?

[BowRiverBruinsRule]

I appreciate your knowledge. I am not as in the know as you but what say sounds reasonable.

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by Izzle

Which is pretty much what CETA is trying to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compre...rade_Agreement

Canada should stay as far away from the eu as possible barring a few trade deals.

Let’s put ourselves in Britains shoes for a moment:

If Canada was hypothetically part of the eu starting tomorrow, Canadians would be ok with whatever policies the eu wishes to impose upon us? I sure wouldn’t. Why would anybody want some dimwit in Brussels who we never elected making decisions on what policies are best for my country? While they are making policies that we here in Canada have to live by, we send them billions of dollars because we are a “have” country. Who in their right mind would ever go for that?

Canada has never needed the eu and i don’t believe Britains do either. If they came together as a nation during ww2 and succeeded they can deal with Brexit.

Then again maybe the eu making decisions for Canada wouldn’t be too bad. Brussels wouldn’t do a worse job than the current liberals.