i agree with everything you just said, but you didnt really answer my question?
so you think May when pressed what she will do if the EU doesn't offer a fair deal should just say we will take whatever they offer as we need to?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
so you think May when pressed what she will do if the EU doesn't offer a fair deal should just say we will take whatever they offer as we need to?
None of this fallout is too surprising and some of it is even recycled. When May was running for leader last summer, she responded in front of the 1922 committee to criticism that she was a "bloody difficult woman" by saying "Yes, I am a bloody difficult woman, and the next person to find out will be Jean-Claude Juncker". Juncker meanwhile comes across like like a parody of everything the British instintively dislike about the EU, with extra points for coming from some Ruritania that largely exists for tax avoidance.
In my opinion, the UK should have gone for an EEA form of deal which would have allowed the UK unrestricted access to the single market while being able to seal its own trade deals. It would serve as a golden opportunity for the Tory party to actually bother reading the rules attentively and implement every rule in that book that are meant to limit anyone abusing of his rights as an EU citizen.
By doing so the government will still respect the will of the people without shooting at its own feet. Once outside the EU the UK would be in a position to seal trade deals with third countries at its own leasure and from a stronger position (ie they can still rely on an unrestricted access to the single market)
Meanwhile the EU would be happy that this problem is sorted once and for all and that they can now focus on things that truly matter (ie like a potential Russian invasion)
Last edited:
Well, I do tend to do a when I persuade people to listen to my bright ideas and the brown smelly stuff hits the fan.
The problem is that she's answering a question she doesn't need to (and shouldn't) answer. It's the same as with the Gibraltar issue. Obviously if anyone threatened militarily the sovereignty of a Britain possession we would respond in kind, but no serious person would raise that over Spain because it's idiotic. All May needed to do was insist that she'll fight hard for a good deal, because everyone already knows no deal is totally unacceptable to both sides. She's basically in a posh restaurant and after walking in announcing that if the food isn't good she'll just walk out after without paying. There are situations where that would perhaps happen, but it's a last case scenario and bringing it up sounds completely uncultured and infantile.
exactly where is the incentive to stay
"Join our club and if you leave you will get a better deal and still get to use our facilities"
What the actual feck were people expecting lol
Both sides will have to make some compromises. It depends what she considers a bad deal, if she wants the single market, passport rights and so on, then the EU have already said what needs to happen regarding the freedoms, contributions and EU law covering transactions between the two. But accepting those kind of things will not appease the hard brexiters.
I don't see how she can keep everyone happy.
If both sides can't agree then it will end up as a hard break. In the end no-one will win.
May's actually gone totally nuts. What a mess this is going to be.
Who in God's fecking name told her that speech was a good idea? Form "Brussels gossip" to full blown conspiracy in less than 24 hours. What the feck has this country come to when this weapon is going to ripped to win a landslide victory?
Saw this comment on the guardian. Thought it was a joke at first.
I just can't see the logic in her calling out the EU today. Sure it might gain her a few votes but the election is all but wrapped up and we badly need these trade talks to go well.
Think this is worth remembering.
I hope the UK still have faith in May, Davis, Johnson and Fox to obtain any kind of decent deal for the UK.
I think that is a bad take. It completely ignores the context of May's remark - which is a culmination of her "being in another galaxy". Plus EU politicians don't fight elections on the basis of negotiating to leave the EU.
There's five weeks of campaigning left before the election, with an increasing amount of flak falling on British soil from across the channel.
I suspect recent events have caused May and her advisors to revise their political calculations. No doubt they hoped to get through the campaign without saying any very hard things about Europe, which might have created a bad atmosphere when real negotiations begin.
But given all the shit that's coming their way from Europe, they've changed their minds. Lying down while every Euro pol or bureaucrat who feels like it has a kick at them, all the while telling the British people: " It's all right, they don't really mean it, they're just pretending, they're very nice people really" is not a spectacle which is likely to endear them to the electorate. It makes May and her government look weak, and might raise serious concerns among voters about whether they had the guts to stand up for British interests in the face of intimidation.
Well this has been clarified today, hasn't it?
Almost every major leader in Europe is facing a challenge from the far right populists. They'll all have felt that drag to the right, regardless of how they each dealt with it.
This is more like Cameron's veto, self defeating perhaps and a notable moment, but not the historic declaration of war that most of twitter is making out.
I see it a lot in the last pages but no one actually explain what they consider to be a fair deal. Also why people have this misconceived idea that the EU want to offer an unfair deal?
I'm not sure what you mean by "trade war". If we traded with the EU paying the WTO most favoured rates, this would hurt the EU more than us, see as we import from EU countries more than we export, and therefore the fee we pay the EU could be potentially be used to offset our export tariffs with money to spare.
On the finance side, the big corporates will wait and see how things pan out. What you're assuming is an absolute worst case scenario which is unlikely.
It would not take long to arrange new deals with other nations, but it would depend on how eager these other nations are to get it done.
This will hurt the EU nation state economies more than us, as I've already stated that they sell more to us than we sell to them, leaving them paying more tariffs than us.
The report leaked few days ago makes this scenario unlikely. They don't trust her.
The thing is the UK doesn't produce things that aren't already on the continent, which means that tarrifs will make UK goods and services less competitive from within the EU and will make EU goods and services more attractive from within the EU. But the opposite isn't true since the UK do not produce all the goods and services produced within the EU, so they will still have to purchase them but with tarrifs whether it is to the EU or to someone else..
Tariffs are placed on what you sell. Therefore the EU countries can still buy from us at the same rate. However, they rely on our custom. 8% of German cars are bought by us, and that's a huge market that BMW &VW etc will not want disturbed.
What people in this thread do not understand is that the UK's bargaining position with the EU is VERY VERY strong, and European nations can either mutually benefit with us from sensible negotiations, or the EU can hurt both us and our European partners for the sake of the EU's agenda to gain more influence for it's own purpose.
Its really not the case
Continued silence or a submissive air is hardly to our benefit, so i have no problem with May putting down such a marker. The two sides are poles apart on this divorce bill in any event, and i'd far rather the focus were on citizen rights.
How could they talk about trust after the leak and ensuing remarks? The negotiations are in their very infancy, and even the editor of the pro-EU Financial Times has said that the damage to personal relations could be irrevocable.
How could they talk about trust after the leak and ensuing remarks? The negotiations are in their very infancy, and even the editor of the pro-EU Financial Times has said that the damage to personal relations could be irrevocable.
Fair deal:
- A deal which maximizes the economic and other interests of both parties.
- A deal which recognizes Europe's legitimate desire to maintain the exclusive nature of EU membership and the privileges associated with it.
- A deal which is not influenced by any consideration of 'punishing' the UK for leaving the Union.
It is just the people who live here you can't stand or it must be a Fifty Shades of Grey type of love.
Which is what is going to happen, I don't see why people think otherwise.
Not really. Why would say that?
The second biggest contributor, one of the biggest customers, one of the biggest European militaries, one of the world's best and most respected intelligence service.
We are not irrelevant to the EU. Believe it and be proud of Britain!
B and c are a bit contrasting
The problem is a lot of Brexiters see the EU in seeking to keep the benefits of being a member for the remaining nations as punishing the UK for leaving
Can we just simply rename this thread the Labour Party anti Brexit Thread. Tories are shit, We will all die after Brexit, it's the Tories fault, we will all die... rinse and repeat... 
Not really, it basically means that the deal given to the UK will not be comparable to a membership but it won't be a sanction either.
Britain is going to threaten the EU with its big military? With hold information that could stop terrorism? A lot to be proud of right there
When the EU says that the UK can't be allowed to make a success of Brexit for example. I can understand that if it means getting various advantages without out paying very much into the EU but the success or otherwise of the decision to leave isn't in the EU's gift.
The UK will interpret anything that is not unrestricted access to the single market as a punishment. Case in point the heavy criticism Malta's PM got because he dared saying that the UK will get an inferior deal as opposed to full membership
No. It's about recognising us as a friend and ally. You are just an idiot.
This is going terrific. We're going to get shafted.
She's like Queen Canute trying to hold back a tide of misery but her Tory chums will probably be OK.
She's like Queen Canute trying to hold back a tide of misery but her Tory chums will probably be OK.
Oh dear
The second biggest contributor- that is something that the UK made absolutely clear it doesn't want to remain for long
one of the biggest customers- it subjective. The EU is not the UK. Its a union of countries each armed with a veto rather then simply England with other minor regions tagging around. That's quite significant. For example Malta has a trade deficit with the UK and doesn't give a feck about how much prosecco the UK customers buy from Italy. What they do care about is that Brexit is good for them because businesses are leaving the UK and moving to Malta. On the other hand 47% of the UK business is linked to Europe. What happens if that 47% is heavily impeded because of tariffs?
Each 27 nations has different agendas and the UK will have to satisfy all (or most) of them.
one of the biggest European militaries- the only real treat is Europe is Russia. If Russia attack then the EU will be wiped out irrespective of the UK involvement or not. We will probably do what we always did in the past century or so. ie we wait for the US to bail us out. There a military pact for that and its called NATO
one of the world's best and most respected intelligence service.- that's true. However would really want to dick around with that? What happens if it comes out that a terrorist attack on UK turf could be avoided but wasnt simply because TM refused cooperation with the EU intelligence?
Irrelevant is not the right word. Not top priority is more appropriate. The UK is at the end of the US trade deal queue and will probably be at the EU queue too. A continent can live without the co-operation of 1 country but can a country live without the cooperation of the very continent it is part off. Trump toyed with the idea (ie destroying NAFTA) and he made a massive U-TURN. We're talking of the US here not the UK