Even those on here I don't see changing their mind, no-one seems to have suddenly "seen the light" as it were. The Caf is generally youngish and leftish but some of them were pro-Leave but even some of us older and rightish were pro-Remain.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Even those on here I don't see changing their mind, no-one seems to have suddenly "seen the light" as it were. The Caf is generally youngish and leftish but some of them were pro-Leave but even some of us older and rightish were pro-Remain.
You only ever hear the hardliners comment and ramble. I can guarantee you those in the middle, the ones who were genuinely duped into seeing "the benefits" of Brexit like the £350m for the NHS as an example, have changed their minds. In fact I would go as far as to say the vast majority of those who didn't see immigration as the reason for their vote have probably changed their minds.
I was/am a Remainer / Remoaner.
But all this talk about being half in-half out worries me. I think this is one of those instances where a compromise wont be able to deliver the best of both worlds. It will only deliver the worst. So if the choice is between cancel the whole thing, pretend it never happened and remain as a full EU member, I would vote for that. But if its between a "hard" and a "soft" Brexit, I am coming round to the view that maybe hard, while being potentially damaging, would be preferable to the alternative.
The things that upset people (not me, but Leave voters) about the EU would be 100x worse if we were a "vassal state" as JRM put it. We did used to have significant influence on the EU, despite what people may have thought. Yes we had to implement legislation developed elsewhere, but we had a lot of influence over it. We wouldnt if we were forced to live by EU rules without being a member. Then we really would have a democratic deficit. Being part of the customs union would mean limited opportunity to make these fabled trade deals. I dont really believe in these trade deals anyway, unless what is being offered is a regulatory race to the bottom - chemically washed meat etc. But at the end of the day, if we "leave" but are then unable to even pursue the deals, that is going to stir up a lot of resentment among the slim majority of people who want out.
Im not sure. I do feel a hard Brexit could be really, really bad, economically. So maybe anything is better than that. But part of me thinks maybe the best thing is to give Brexiters what they want, see if they can make it work. If not, and they have no excuses, maybe we can reapply - even if we get no more special entitlements, as we had before. At least then there will be no sniping and no "what ifs" about the opportunities that the Remainer establishment denied them.
The bottom line is I dont think there is any way forward that doesnt leave the country worse off than it was. Even if we Remain as full members, which I think would be best economically, I think the political damage from that would be incalculable. As I said, the half way option suits nobody and would end up being the worst of both worlds. So maybe the best thing is to just cut ties and see what happens. Endure the damage and pick up the pieces when the dust settles, make the best of whatever the situation ends up being.
But all this talk about being half in-half out worries me. I think this is one of those instances where a compromise wont be able to deliver the best of both worlds. It will only deliver the worst. So if the choice is between cancel the whole thing, pretend it never happened and remain as a full EU member, I would vote for that. But if its between a "hard" and a "soft" Brexit, I am coming round to the view that maybe hard, while being potentially damaging, would be preferable to the alternative.
The things that upset people (not me, but Leave voters) about the EU would be 100x worse if we were a "vassal state" as JRM put it. We did used to have significant influence on the EU, despite what people may have thought. Yes we had to implement legislation developed elsewhere, but we had a lot of influence over it. We wouldnt if we were forced to live by EU rules without being a member. Then we really would have a democratic deficit. Being part of the customs union would mean limited opportunity to make these fabled trade deals. I dont really believe in these trade deals anyway, unless what is being offered is a regulatory race to the bottom - chemically washed meat etc. But at the end of the day, if we "leave" but are then unable to even pursue the deals, that is going to stir up a lot of resentment among the slim majority of people who want out.
Im not sure. I do feel a hard Brexit could be really, really bad, economically. So maybe anything is better than that. But part of me thinks maybe the best thing is to give Brexiters what they want, see if they can make it work. If not, and they have no excuses, maybe we can reapply - even if we get no more special entitlements, as we had before. At least then there will be no sniping and no "what ifs" about the opportunities that the Remainer establishment denied them.
The bottom line is I dont think there is any way forward that doesnt leave the country worse off than it was. Even if we Remain as full members, which I think would be best economically, I think the political damage from that would be incalculable. As I said, the half way option suits nobody and would end up being the worst of both worlds. So maybe the best thing is to just cut ties and see what happens. Endure the damage and pick up the pieces when the dust settles, make the best of whatever the situation ends up being.
I dont get the impression this is the case, but it would be interesting if there was another referendum and Remain won it convincingly. Contrary to what I said above, that would be the one relatively pain-free way out. I suspect it would still be close, which would solve nothing. And I think Leave might well win by even more than last time. I think Brexiters would paint the EU side as obstructionist, trying to thwart the will of the UK people, not negotiating in good faith etc. I think a lot of people who were on the fence would feel the UK has been treated badly - that is how the media in this country would present it.
We would probably be in the same situation either way, just a slim chance EU exporters might have some influence. Slim being better than none.
I think comparing South American agents to May, Boris & Co is a bit harsh on the agents by the way.
Listen love I want leave you but I want to keep having sex with you because I think it benefits us both. Why won't you accept that? You're being totally unreasonable.
Brexiteers and their demands of the EU in a nutshell.
We would probably be in the same situation either way, just a slim chance EU exporters might have some influence. Slim being better than none.
I think comparing South American agents to May, Boris & Co is a bit harsh on the agents by the way.
Well I can't really debate about that since no one has any idea of what the government wants. They keep forwarding the 'have the cake and eat it' strategy in a different wrapping only to be explained to them that can't be possible, then there's a discussion about that, a sort of strategy comes up out of that discussion, the EU start evaluating that plan only to be shot down by the government once who would then forward the original 'have the cake and eat it' again.
But those who didn't like foreigners two years ago still don't like them now, those that were dumb enough to believe the NHS claim, the wonderful new trade deals etc are still the same dumb people now, those that hate the EU haven't suddenly fallen in love with it and those that had the false hope that their life would miraculously change for the better for no other reason than hope, still will do so.
Yes there'll be a small number of people in the middle which could sway it one way or another but until something really painful affects them,they'll still be swayed by what they want to believe influenced by the media.
People also still have hope that if it does all go wrong they can change their minds later and rejoin, I don't see this either, at least not for many years and in the meantime all the damage will have been done.
True.
I said the below, meaning those who didn't vote because of immigration.
I don't think any of those voting leave even knows what the EU is so I doubt there is anyone that hates it.
Those that voted because were lied to will have seen that now and won't fall for it again. They're not stupid, a lot o people were desperate.
ALSO a very big factor I think was the protest vote of people who didn't really think leave would win.
Maybe I'm biased, maybe I refuse to accept that the majority of this country is racist, xenophobic and downright stupid. All i can say is it is unlikely Brexit will occur, at least in the form that the hardliners wish it would. It might be a Brexit in name or there might not be one at all.
Is it possible to have voted to leave the EU without being a stupid racist xenophobe?
I think it will be a Brexit in name only as I doubt the government really has much choice, no matter how much bluster and cake and eat it rubbish they spout and the people won't be given a chance to change their mind.
Glad you still have faith in the British, any hope I had has died.
Yes there's millions likely. That's why I believe a second referendum will separate the wheat from the chaff. Am I deluded? Maybe.
Of course it is. Looking from the outside just seems the British public in the last decades has been subjected to a lot of confusion between the benefits and disadvantages you have staying there, normally a certain type of press who lets get real, belong to a certain group of people who doesn't want to follow the rules.
Of course you have the reverse situation where the Pro Eu side tried to put the argument between the financial apocalipse and racism and the final result was this.
At least is what I see from the outside, so, no, I don't believe it is solely based on anti foreigner votes, and I suspect there are currently a lot of eastern european countries who have much less democratic and racist tendencies there.
You can walk across it without being checked though
That's because technically EEA is a Custom Union between the EU and EFTA members, the Chapter 3 and protocols 10-11 are about customs.
Not a customs union like we normally would talk about though, if it would ever be talked about as one.
http://www.efta.int/media/documents...t/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf
http://www.efta.int/media/documents...ent/Protocols to the Agreement/protocol10.pdf
http://www.efta.int/sites/default/f...ent/Protocols to the Agreement/protocol11.pdf
It is a custom union without the name but that's just semantic for political reasons. In the end, it serves the exact same purpose and one of them is literally to facilitate cross border trades which you can read in the article you posted.
This is exactly the compromise the Tory party are after though; Norway style without the single market.
They can strike their free trade deals with the rest of the world, whilst still being aligned with Europe
Obviously the major sticking point is still Northern Ireland. Is this border hard or soft?
Does it make it easier that all the Northern Irish have automatic Irish and therefore EU Citizenship? For the average Irish and Northern Irish Citizen, surely the single market never ceases as they are free to work in both countries?
That's interesting, how does one qualify as Northern Irish? Is it by residence or birth or whatever?
No but no but no but the Germans will want to sell us their cars.
I think if they take the BINO option a movement that is bigger and uglier than UKIP is going to sweep across the country in a few years.
I'm not 100% sure. How and why the Home Office keeps track of these things is confusing but it's definitely related to place of Birth;
(wiki)
Independent
Guardian
The DUP go on about Northern Ireland not having different rules to the rest of the UK... but they already do.
The Customs Border should have been in the Irish Sea
They'll still be free to work in both countries but even a hard border in itself will be problematic - a pain in the arse at best and likely to lead to political strife if things go south.
UKIP is pretty much dead in the water at this point though. We'll maybe see an alternative movement rise in prominence, or perhaps we'll see a very hard-right Tory assume power.
Agree, UKIP is dead. But I think what came next would have an uglier complexion because there would be a bigger anti-establishment, resentful, "we were sold out" element. I think it reach UKIP's high water mark, in terms of popularity and support, quite quickly.
Thanks @rcoobc
This is exactly the compromise the Tory party are after though; Norway style without the single market.
They can strike their free trade deals with the rest of the world, whilst still being aligned with Europe
Obviously the major sticking point is still Northern Ireland. Is this border hard or soft?
Does it make it easier that all the Northern Irish have automatic Irish and therefore EU Citizenship? For the average Irish and Northern Irish Citizen, surely the single market never ceases as they are free to work in both countries?
It's not really an alignment, the directives are written in the EEA agreement, it's not really different to what happens in the EU. Also we don't really know the UK's position on the 4 freedoms, we have heard everything and its opposite.
Unless the Conservatives somehow lose power, the single market is dead. So the 4 freedoms are largely irrelevant.
That's where the EFTA model doesn't work, they are part of the single market and Schengen. That's also why people need to understand that we are talking about something that doesn't exist, so the UK should stop with the lame comparison and start to act seriously.
Conservative days are numbered. I seriously cannot see how they can continue to stay in power after the absolute mess they have turned this country into. That's without taking into consideration the austerity factor. If they somehow retain power, well I don't know what to say, I might retire from service and leave the country or something. I cannot live in a country full of idiots
The 4 freedoms are dead, but the comparison still works in most other areas:
There will almost certainly be freedom to travel between the EU and the UK, without freedom to look for work or buy property. Heck, we know this *has* to happen between the UK and Ireland (along with freedom to look for work and buy property), and the whole point is to get visa free travel between the UK and EU26.
- This does not require any sort of customs union, or any sort of single market union.
Norway have the freedom to create their own free trade deals as part of the EFTA. How much they really benefit from this is hugely debatable (the list of countries isn't exactly huge), but they also have the freedom to their own fishing policy and their own agricultural policy.
- This requires *not* being in the customs union with the EU.
On both these points, there are a lot of similarities between the UK and Norway. The big difference is that Norway are part of the Single Market, and the UK will not be. Indeed, the UK have already felt repercussions of that, with the European Medicine Agency and the European Banking Authority leaving the UK, the UK banks to lose passporting rights, the UK financial sector to lose Euroclearing and so on. Indeed, given that the services sector is the largest economic sector of the UK, and the financial sector is the largest services sector, and services are the largest UK export... it's going to hurt
So I'm not saying that "Norway without the Single Market" is going to be good for the UK, I'm just saying that that's where we are going to end up.
In the same way that Norway can make their own free trade deals, the UK will be able to, too. In the same way that Norway are tethered to EU rules, the UK will be too (with some political nonsense to obfuscate it).
The Irish Border problem is pretty much unsolvable though. Many people are going to be happy. Ireland / Northern Ireland needed special status the DUP wrecked that
The December text:
Physical infrastructure and related checks and controls on the Norway/Sweden border:
@rcoobc First that's only semantic but it's not the custom union but a custom union, the nuance is important here because you can have a custom agreement with the EU without being a member of the EU custom union. Now, the problem here is that what you wrote makes little sense because I don't see the goal, maybe you mentioned it but I fail to see it.
What do you want from a custom agreement, what is it supposed to achieve? I read your post and you make a comparison with a custom agreement but then get rid of all its substance and basically end up with the ability to strike your own deals. If that's your goal what is the point of a custom agreement in your case?
What do you want from a custom agreement, what is it supposed to achieve? I read your post and you make a comparison with a custom agreement but then get rid of all its substance and basically end up with the ability to strike your own deals. If that's your goal what is the point of a custom agreement in your case?
With regards to a goal, you are asking the wrong person. I didn't ask for this, and in fact no one asked for this. We've got this crazy catch-22 Brexit, not because anyone wanted it, but because it was the only one possible.
Basically; the UK public has been fed the follow two statements about the European Union:
- Being part of the European Union allows untold millions of migrants to live here, work here, and claim benefits.
- Being part of the European Union prevents the UK from striking trade deals with the rest of the world.
A third statement that "The European Union over regulate and have stupid regulations that hard British businesses" also resonates with many (straight Bananas), but most people don't care about this compared to the first two.
So the Conservative Government is trying to marry the Brexit promise (regaining the ability to strike our own free trade deals and an end to freedom of movement), with the political reality (the UK economy depends heavily on the EU, the UK economy wants to stay aligned with the EU, the EU+EFTA is our biggest trade partner, Ireland cannot have a hard border, etc).
Why do we want to be in a customs union with the EU, but not the customs union with the EU, so we can strike our own trade deals, but have regulatory alignment? Not because anyone has done some analysis that says it will grow the economy by x %, not for environmental or moral reasons... simply because that's political reality the Tories find themselves in.
Yeah I have to say that doesn't sound particularly good for *any* border in Ireland, but it seems like there is going to be one, and I would imagine it's going to look a lot like Norway-Sweden
@rcoobc I realize that it's going to be tedious but the idea of a custom agreement is still lost here. When I talk about goals, I'm not talking about politics but laws and economy, what is it that the new custom agreement is supposed to achieve?
That's the missing piece, I understand what you are saying but you are just repeating the nonsense that some media and politicians spout.
If we pretend that Brexit doesn't exist and the UK are just entertaining the idea of a custom agreement with the EU+EFTA, what would be the goals and the limits? From what we know, the Norway example is not the model and that's not a debate because when you are against Schengen, regulated borders and the single market, you have basically gutted EFTA.
So like I asked earlier fundamentally what are the goals of the custom agreement, that's the first question to answer and it will allow everyone to see what is possible and what isn't because you can't have everything.
That's the missing piece, I understand what you are saying but you are just repeating the nonsense that some media and politicians spout.
If we pretend that Brexit doesn't exist and the UK are just entertaining the idea of a custom agreement with the EU+EFTA, what would be the goals and the limits? From what we know, the Norway example is not the model and that's not a debate because when you are against Schengen, regulated borders and the single market, you have basically gutted EFTA.
So like I asked earlier fundamentally what are the goals of the custom agreement, that's the first question to answer and it will allow everyone to see what is possible and what isn't because you can't have everything.
Barnier's today confirmed the City's losing its passport once we leave the single market. In before, glad we're finally rid of those bankers (and their taxes...).
Again I see in this thread that nonsense about migrants claiming benefits. Are you aware and can you quote a number of how many of the people like me come to this country and do that? And then compare to the overall amount of people here that actually support the economy.
Do you think people up sticks and come to the UK, so they can sit on their arse and watch the rain fall outside (almost year-round)? I really have to laugh at some of the 'opinions' I see spouted as facts and I am not even going to get into the fact the UK can control all these things already.
Brexit is literally getting into disasterland and the lunatics which seem to have May by the horns are seriously dangerous people. If anyone ever doubted that Brexit is NOT good for this country, they'd just look and read up on the people that support it. JRM, for example, was a failure as a fund manager, yet he's now giving economic forecasting lessons to the whole of the EU.
Also, who in their right mind thinks 60m people can get a better deal in any area than 500m The Brexiteers have pulled the wool so far over people's eyes that the remainers had to answer the question of whether the UK was getting a good deal out of the EU when it was the fastest growing big developed economy in the world. Imagine where this country could be with a proper government and inside the EU. What a waste, seriously.
So many lies are spouted about the Brexit process on a daily basis that if I didn't know any better, I'd believe some of them.
Again I see in this thread that nonsense about migrants claiming benefits. Are you aware and can you quote a number of how many of the people like me come to this country and do that? And then compare to the overall amount of people here that actually support the economy.
Do you think people up sticks and come to the UK, so they can sit on their arse and watch the rain fall outside (almost year-round)? I really have to laugh at some of the 'opinions' I see spouted as facts and I am not even going to get into the fact the UK can control all these things already.
Brexit is literally getting into disasterland and the lunatics which seem to have May by the horns are seriously dangerous people. If anyone ever doubted that Brexit is NOT good for this country, they'd just look and read up on the people that support it. JRM, for example, was a failure as a fund manager, yet he's now giving economic forecasting lessons to the whole of the EU.
Also, who in their right mind thinks 60m people can get a better deal in any area than 500m The Brexiteers have pulled the wool so far over people's eyes that the remainers had to answer the question of whether the UK was getting a good deal out of the EU when it was the fastest growing big developed economy in the world. Imagine where this country could be with a proper government and inside the EU. What a waste, seriously.
So many lies are spouted about the Brexit process on a daily basis that if I didn't know any better, I'd believe some of them.
Last edited:
Honestly, I don't understand your question.