Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
What worries me is that there are only two reasons for today's fiasco about impact assessments

1) There are none which would mean pure incompetence and we have a government who are leading us down a line with absolutely no idea what the outcome would be. If this was a business in major negotiations any talks would be paused immediately, everybody involved sacked and the entire position reviewed.
2) There are full and detailed impact assessments but the outcome of them is so bad economically for the country that it is actually better to look like incompetent fools with no idea of what is going on. That's scary.
 
Balljy said:
What worries me is that there are only two reasons for today's fiasco about impact assessments

1) There are none which would mean pure incompetence and we have a government who are leading us down a line with absolutely no idea what the outcome would be. If this was a business in major negotiations any talks would be paused immediately, everybody involved sacked and the entire position reviewed.
2) There are full and detailed impact assessments but the outcome of them is so bad economically for the country that it is actually better to look like incompetent fools with no idea of what is going on. That's scary.
Click to expand...
I think the only reason that they are willing to accept all the things that the EU are asking of them is because the outcome of the Impact assessments are very bad.

Now would the government go into this with out doing a white paper into the impact of it? Yeah I'm pretty sure they would.

Would the Civil Service do an Impact study whether they were asked for it or not? Of course they would.
 
Fully Fledged said:
I think the only reason that they are willing to accept all the things that the EU are asking of them is because the outcome of the Impact assessments are very bad.
Click to expand...

This is so ridiculously incompetent that part of me thinks this has to be some deliberate attempt at looking so bad we can back out of the entire thing. Possibly because of what you're saying. There's no way that parliament can just continue like nothing has happened when a government is claiming that there is no assessment of what we are doing will do to our economy.

The arguments used today that he doesn't believe in financial predictions or that the potential impact is so big that predictions are worthless is actually even worse as it is a total admittance that we have no idea of what will happen. If a business wouldn't do that for very obvious reasons it makes the governments position an absolute shambles.
 
So the Brexit committee voted that Davis was not in contempt of Parliament for saying he'll deliver the reports because they never existed in the first place. An absolute joke and disgrace for Parliament if I've ever seen one but I won't hold my breath for Brexiters to point out this blatant perversion of democracy.

You all will be surprised to hear that it was 11 votes to 8. 10 Cons and 1 DUP supported Davis...
 
Balljy said:
What worries me is that there are only two reasons for today's fiasco about impact assessments

1) There are none which would mean pure incompetence and we have a government who are leading us down a line with absolutely no idea what the outcome would be. If this was a business in major negotiations any talks would be paused immediately, everybody involved sacked and the entire position reviewed.
2) There are full and detailed impact assessments but the outcome of them is so bad economically for the country that it is actually better to look like incompetent fools with no idea of what is going on. That's scary.
Click to expand...
To be fair to the Government they think they have carte blanche to do whatever they want. So why bother with impact assesments? 52% of the electorate have already shown they arent interested in "experts" anyway!
 
Rightnr said:
So the Brexit committee voted that Davis was not in contempt of Parliament for saying he'll deliver the reports because they never existed in the first place. An absolute joke and disgrace for Parliament if I've ever seen one but I won't hold my breath for Brexiters to point out this blatant perversion of democracy.

You all will be surprised to hear that it was 11 votes to 8. 10 Cons and 1 DUP supported Davis...
Click to expand...
Absolutely outrageous.
 
Barca84 said:
Hey pal shelve the unwarranted hostility. My point is clear. Brexit will not completely destroy peoples chances of living abroad.
Click to expand...

Erm... that's the thing, for some it absolutely WILL do so. Why aren't you understanding that? A lot of people would love to move to Australia for example, or America, or Cananda and simply cannot. Brexit means the 30 countries you could move to without any issue at all are off the table.

So your point is crap. He was OTT as I said, but don't make the mistake that emigrating anywhere is easy... unless it's in the EU of course, then it's a piece of piss. Brexit will detroy many peoples chances of living abroad, that's an undeniable fact.
 
Davis says, "I am not a fan of economic models because they have all proven wrong". So on what is the predicted positive outcome of the future after Brexit based ?
 
Barca84 said:
Thanks for this Wibble. I'm sorry to hear about the possible negative impact of Brexit on your son's water polo options but this really doesn't address Jippy's wild assertions. My point is that the term abroad obviously extends to beyond Europe. There's a tendency in this thread to forget about the world beyond European confines.



More than a "tad OTT". I agree movement outside of the EU may well be a struggle but that has nothing to do with Brexit. It may well prove the case even that movement outside of the EU might be made easier as part of any negotiations with new trading partners? As for the rubble and rats prediction it's hysterical nonsense as he's acknowledged.
Click to expand...
My point was OTT- I'd been on that nasty EU-produced poison called Stella.
While overboard, the gist of my point has been proven today. Despite how grave the economic perils are, Brexiters are so ideologically driven that they'd rather we go through with it, even if it sets living standards back 20 or 30 years. 'Pile of rubble' was a metaphor. Sort of.

And yes, it will be a damn sight harder for me or my nieces to work in the EU post-Brexit. Hardly a controversial statement, more plain fact.
 
jackofalltrades said:
Davis says, "I am not a fan of economic models because they have all proven wrong". So on what is the predicted positive outcome of the future after Brexit based ?
Click to expand...

Jippy said:
And yes, it will be a damn sight harder for me or my nieces to work in the EU post-Brexit. Hardly a controversial statement, more plain fact.
Click to expand...
You wont be needing these things in Brexit land, people are tired of them.
 
Barca84 said:
Thanks for this Wibble. I'm sorry to hear about the possible negative impact of Brexit on your son's water polo options but this really doesn't address Jippy's wild assertions. My point is that the term abroad obviously extends to beyond Europe. There's a tendency in this thread to forget about the world beyond European confines.



More than a "tad OTT". I agree movement outside of the EU may well be a struggle but that has nothing to do with Brexit. It may well prove the case even that movement outside of the EU might be made easier as part of any negotiations with new trading partners? As for the rubble and rats prediction it's hysterical nonsense as he's acknowledged.
Click to expand...
Your second point is valid, up until the point where the very same countries you want to have as trading partners are asking for... "freedom of movement". And they're not talking about tourists, they want reciprocity in the ability to go, live and work in the country. Exactly what seems to be the "problem" for many Brexiters because apparently, all those immigrants from Europe drain the NHS, take the jobs, etc... so it sounds a bit contradictory. However, on the principle, you are right.
 
Saw someone put it succinctly - we're essentially revoking every single trade agreement we've got to do something we hope might go well, and the guy in charge of the transition hasn't actually even bothered his arse to assess the risks of doing so. Mental.
 
How the feck did we end up with these people running the country? :lol:
 
Cheesy said:
Saw someone put it succinctly - we're essentially revoking every single trade agreement we've got to do something we hope might go well, and the guy in charge of the transition hasn't actually even bothered his arse to assess the risks of doing so. Mental.
Click to expand...

Or benefits.
 
The DUP are overplaying their hand here.
They've already had a shocking election, if it turns out they are the reason for a hard Brexit and a total collapse of the Northern Irish economy then surely to God it kills the party or their turnout at least?
How could they spin any sort of narrative about working for their constituents?
They tried all that sectarian rabble rousing nonsense in March and received apathy in response.
Gerry Adams must be laughing his ass off.
 
cyberman said:
The DUP are overplaying their hand here.
They've already had a shocking election, if it turns out they are the reason for a hard Brexit and a total collapse of the Northern Irish economy then surely to God it kills the party or their turnout at least?
How could they spin any sort of narrative about working for their constituents?
They tried all that sectarian rabble rousing nonsense in March and received apathy in response.
Gerry Adams must be laughing his ass off.
Click to expand...


You’re being far too sensible and rational in your analysis. The same people that voted for the DUP will still vote for the DUP. It’s one of the quirks of....well of that part of the world.
 
Jippy said:
My point was OTT- I'd been on that nasty EU-produced poison called Stella.
While overboard, the gist of my point has been proven today. Despite how grave the economic perils are, Brexiters are so ideologically driven that they'd rather we go through with it, even if it sets living standards back 20 or 30 years. 'Pile of rubble' was a metaphor. Sort of.

And yes, it will be a damn sight harder for me or my nieces to work in the EU post-Brexit. Hardly a controversial statement, more plain fact.
Click to expand...

"A damn sight harder" I'd agree with and that's a really poor and hyperbolic metaphor. That's Stella for you though :D

Looking at the issue with some sympathy for both sides of the Brexit/Remain argument I see sweeping generalisations such as" Brexiters are this" and "remainers are that" as unhelpful. We are talking about the views of several million people and, tempting as it is, reducing this to such statements loses all sense of nuance and insight into why different people believe in, and vote for, different things. I doubt there are many who are pro Brexit who genuinely believe that living standards will be affected as you claim. They may be mistaken re the long term effects but to think otherwise is again, for me, pure hyperbole.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:
So your point is crap. .
Click to expand...

Wonderful contribution thanks.
 
Gasolin said:
Your second point is valid, up until the point where the very same countries you want to have as trading partners are asking for... "freedom of movement". And they're not talking about tourists, they want reciprocity in the ability to go, live and work in the country. Exactly what seems to be the "problem" for many Brexiters because apparently, all those immigrants from Europe drain the NHS, take the jobs, etc... so it sounds a bit contradictory. However, on the principle, you are right.
Click to expand...

Yep that's exactly the point I was making. I've no doubt that for some who voted Brexit this will also be a problem
 
At a conservative initial cost of £50 Billion, and with potential spiralling onward costs I think it is time for some radical thinking.

A cheaper option would surely be to recreate the homes of all the most ardent brexiteers and the DUP in the Falkland islands. Hire a fleet of airplanes and medical staff to administer a mild dis-associative such as Ketamine and some tranquilisers.

Take them from their homes one night and fly them out there - put them in their re-located homes and let them get on with it.

They could choose to reset the clock back to the 1950's or whatever decade they prefer and will only have to "take back control" from some overly curious penguins, rather than face the modern reality of a global world where borders are becoming meaningless.

They can enjoy the freedom of WTO trade or arrange whatever trade deals they want with friendly local governments such as Argentina or any passing southern right whales.

I'm sure that Arlene Foster can take on the role of Prime minister of "New Brittania" and in no time at all they can choose to ban homosexuals, promote creationism and burn a visiting police offer in a large whicker structure as is their want.
 
Have the DUP not yet cottoned on to the fact that the British Government were fully prepared to sell them out? Clearly Theresa was ready to do so and only put the brakes on to safeguard the Tory government.

It`s one of the clearest signs yet that a United Ireland is inevitable.
 
You just know the Conservatives will survive this. If Labour did this it would take them 2 decades to get back into power.
 
horsechoker said:
You just know the Conservatives will survive this. If Labour did this it would take them 2 decades to get back into power.
Click to expand...

Whilst the focus is on getting brexit through and preventing the remainers from stopping it then yeah they'll be seen as victors.
 
Abizzz said:
Where do you draw the line of what the vote meant? Every brexiteer who talked at depth about it wants the UK to remain part of some things (concerning security at the very least, but also in education, science etc.). Who decides what the vote meant and what it didn't mean, if leaving the EU without leaving the customs union is a betrayal of the vote?
Click to expand...

Yeah but every brexiteer that talked about it at depth was given a platform. There would be plenty who didn't want to remain regarding anything these psychos want to involve us in and they would not be given a platform of any real meaning. Maybe a thread on an internet forum that will one day be removed. We talk about security yet Europe is being flooded either by insidious means or complete stupidity. Cause these freaks that talk of security, try to convince anyone who will listen that war can bring peace. When it can't and it won't. So for me, I know it will offend many and it will because we're a 'multicultural' society, but this is yet another divisive tactic. The people are not ready mentally, and they're not mature enough and so this would be another method of being dictated too - through an illusion of negotiations. They wanted out. Out means out. But then what is created is...well, what does out mean?....No, it means out. It means out when people voted. And it still means out. The elongated negotiations are nothing more then tactics used to stretch out something that should be very simple. You will get a vote on whether we should go do something in Syria (and they will in time ignore it) but they won't really give you a say on closing borders. People went to war to protect their lands and their lands have been stolen using a thing called empathy. So what we have is complete bs and people in a nation who have been conned into giving it up. So there will be plenty who wanted to remove this nonsense because if we want to talk about security? You close borders. You can bring in but numbers that don't threaten to overrun the country. You also do multiple background checks etc. I wouldn't trust clowns in suits at the EU to give a damn about the average person or our security. It might seem empathetic to reach out but it's not wise.
 
Last edited:
Barca84 said:
Wonderful contribution thanks.
Click to expand...

There was a lot more in my posts than that but I guess the best thing to do when someone rips your point to pieces is to focus on the one part you can make a little quip to.

My point was simple, the original poster was OTT but emigrating abroad becomes a damn site harder if the UK is outside of the EU. Can't really understand why you wanted to keep debating it as it's pure fact.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
There was a lot more in my posts than that but I guess the best thing to do when someone rips your point to pieces is to focus on the one part you can make a little quip to.

My point was simple, the original poster was OTT but emigrating abroad becomes a damn site harder if the UK is outside of the EU. Can't really understand why you wanted to keep debating it as it's pure fact.
Click to expand...

The reason I rarely enter this thread is largely due to the toxic nature of the debate propelled by posters who's opening gambit to polite and reasoned argument is to be abusive. It's juvenile as is your response above. So off you go angry little man...
 
We know that already, he is the most pro EU guy on earth.
 
GloryHunter07 said:
To be fair to the Government they think they have carte blanche to do whatever they want. So why bother with impact assesments? 52% of the electorate have already shown they arent interested in "experts" anyway!
Click to expand...
That's the crucial point I think. People's opinions on Brexit are determined more with their hearts than their heads. Maybe some would be swayed by impact assessments but quite honestly at this point I would expect most to dismiss it if it didnt confirm their predispositions, and embrace it if it did. And that goes for both sides, I dont think the Brexiters have a monopoly on confirmation bias.

I am deeply pessimistic about this whole thing and this is at the crux of it. People are visceral on this subject and all the predictions about a bad outcome only lead to people becoming more entrenched in their views. That is why, while I can see why people say we will end up with a Norway type arrangement from a logical perspective (despite there being absolutely nothing logical about leaving the EU to take up that arrangement) I dont think it will happen that way myself. I feel like we are engaged in a game of chicken at the moment and I cant see either side backing down.

I dont think anyone on the UK side actually has the authority to back down. The "will of the people" logic has taken on a life of its own and it would be a brave politician that turned around and said "sorry guys, this is undeliverable." Going back to the original point, people see this in quite black and white terms, I dont think the 52% will accept "we couldnt get a good deal" as an excuse, they have been primed with the idea that walking away without a deal is a viable option and there will be significant political pressure to do that. Especially as the perception at that point would be that the EU have strongarmed us, made it impossible for us to leave on good terms. I dont think the public mood would be for staying in the EU on that basis. It would be, "screw you guys, do you know who you are messing with? We are Britain, we saved you lot from the Nazis and we will get through this, feck you."

I dont think we'll have come close to sorting anything out by the two year deadline. I think there is a real possibility we could crash out with no deal at that point, almost by accident, due to sheer ineptitude (we may have another general election before the deadline which will eat up half the time we have left.) Think its slightly more likely that the EU will grant an extension, more for their own benefit than ours (Ireland and other friendly countries or those invested in a favourable outcome will convince the others to agree) but even with that time I dont think an arrangement everyone is happy with will be reached, and it will merely be time to organise a slightly more orderly no deal / bare bones deal hard Brexit.
 
Adebesi said:
Think its slightly more likely that the EU will grant an extension, more for their own benefit than ours (Ireland and other friendly countries or those invested in a favourable outcome will convince the others to agree) but even with that time I dont think an arrangement everyone is happy with will be reached, and it will merely be time to organise a slightly more orderly no deal / bare bones deal hard Brexit.
Click to expand...

Why would more time be to their benefit if the outcome is likely to be a hard Brexit anyway? Uncertainty damages the 27 as well as Britain.
 
So it looks like we're going to miss the EU deadline on moving onto trade talks. That would set it back until March, leaving only about 9 months to conclude one of the most complex trade deals ever. Outstanding..
 
Kentonio said:
Why would more time be to their benefit if the outcome is likely to be a hard Brexit anyway? Uncertainty damages the 27 as well as Britain.
Click to expand...

I can just see an extension being agreed because we literally ran out of time due to politics in the UK, Germany and elsewhere making an agreement possible in the time. And while at that point it will probably be obvious a deal isnt going to be comprehensive and advantageous to everyone, something limited to mitigate the worst impact - on Ireland for example - might be possible with more time. I dont think it will create too much more uncertainty, by then it will probably be pretty clear where things are going. Businesses that are going to relocate to the EU will already be moving or moved already and I doubt there will be any more haggling over market access by that point.

I just dont think the EU will feel it has much to lose offering an extension. Let me put it differently: if both sides are looking at this far more from a political perspective than an economic one, by the time we got to the deadline, politically the process will be basically over. The EU will feel it has "won" by that point, and the UK will claim its own victory by not giving in. The extension would allow both sides to bank the political spoils, while salvaging the situation as best they could from an economic perspective.

I dont know if that makes a lot of sense, but that is how I see it going. Brinksmanship till the end, running out of time because of all the stuff going on here and in Germany / elsewhere, everyone accepting that basically it is a hard Brexit but a very limited agreement being reached right at the end - after the deadline - not to "soften" the Brexit but to make it a bit more orderly, at least. I guess the EU's interest in that would be to appear magnanimous. It is in the EU's interest that the UK is worse off outside the EU than inside, but that doesnt mean it wants to see us go into complete economic meltdown. Not least because people in the UK would blame the EU and it could lead to major tensions between the two sides.

In short the extension would be about damage limitation.
 
Adebesi said:
I can just see an extension being agreed because we literally ran out of time due to politics in the UK, Germany and elsewhere making an agreement possible in the time. And while at that point it will probably be obvious a deal isnt going to be comprehensive and advantageous to everyone, something limited to mitigate the worst impact - on Ireland for example - might be possible with more time. I dont think it will create too much more uncertainty, by then it will probably be pretty clear where things are going. Businesses that are going to relocate to the EU will already be moving or moved already and I doubt there will be any more haggling over market access by that point.

I just dont think the EU will feel it has much to lose offering an extension. Let me put it differently: if both sides are looking at this far more from a political perspective than an economic one, by the time we got to the deadline, politically the process will be basically over. The EU will feel it has "won" by that point, and the UK will claim its own victory by not giving in. The extension would allow both sides to bank the political spoils, while salvaging the situation as best they could from an economic perspective.

I dont know if that makes a lot of sense, but that is how I see it going. Brinksmanship till the end, running out of time because of all the stuff going on here and in Germany / elsewhere, everyone accepting that basically it is a hard Brexit but a very limited agreement being reached right at the end - after the deadline - not to "soften" the Brexit but to make it a bit more orderly, at least. I guess the EU's interest in that would be to appear magnanimous. It is in the EU's interest that the UK is worse off outside the EU than inside, but that doesnt mean it wants to see us go into complete economic meltdown. Not least because people in the UK would blame the EU and it could lead to major tensions between the two sides.

In short the extension would be about damage limitation.
Click to expand...

You may well be right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.