Brexit - the negative thread

[tim2]

12 minutes ago, shrek said:

I'm still amazed its so low!

 

I think it can take a while to kick in - many things purchased at cheaper cost are working their way through the system but soon the new higher prices will have to be passed on.

[tim2]

23 minutes ago, Saint 1 said:

 

"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market" - Daniel Hannan MEP

"Only a madman would actually leave the [single] market" - Owen Paterson MP, Vote Leave backer

"Wouldn't it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They're rich. They're happy. They're self-governing." - Nigel Farage, UKIP Leader

"Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK" - Arron Banks, Leave.EU founder

 

They never said those things. Ever. #PostTruth #HistoryRewrite

[GeordieSaint]

10 minutes ago, tim2 said:

They never said those things. Ever. #PostTruth #HistoryRewrite

#fakenews #burnhim

[ckn]

Here's a first for me... Maggie Thatcher's speech in 1988 on the single market:
 

Quote

 

The task of government is two-fold: —to negotiate in Brussels so as to get the possible results for Britain; —and then to make you the business community aware of the opportunities, so that you can make the most of them.

It's your job, the job of business, to gear yourselves up to take the opportunities which a single market of nearly 320 million people will offer.

Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers—visible or invisible—giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the world's wealthiest and most prosperous people.

Bigger than Japan. Bigger than the United States. On your doorstep. And with the Channel Tunnel to give you direct access to it.

It's not a dream. It's not a vision. It's not some bureaucrat's plan. It's for real. And it's only five years away.

 

Yep, May makes Thatcher look fairly normal in comparison.  The arch-Thatcherites should be looking at what their deity really thought about the EU rather than what 30-ish years of listening to swivel-eyed nutjobs has told them.

[Just Browny]

1 hour ago, Saint 1 said:

Very flattering to be labelled delusional by yourself in particular. If the referendum was on the single market, these Leavers seem awfully confused - why didn't someone inform them that a Leave vote was a vote to leave the single market?:

"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market" - Daniel Hannan MEP

"Only a madman would actually leave the [single] market" - Owen Paterson MP, Vote Leave backer

"Wouldn't it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They're rich. They're happy. They're self-governing." - Nigel Farage, UKIP Leader

"Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK" - Arron Banks, Leave.EU founder

They all seem to be under the impression here that a Leave vote is completely independent to voting whether or not to leave the single market. So either I have made the same silly mistake as some of the most prominent Leave campaigners out there, or you're re-writing history after the fact in order to suit what you personally want out of Brexit. 

Interest rates probably won't go up for a couple years still. The target for inflation is 2% anyway, though clearly you would want this to be demand-pull inflation rather than cost-push. However, the Monetary Policy Committee have a bit of flexibility and don't have to justify their actions (or lack of) to the Chancellor until it hits 3%.

Even here, since 2013 the MPC has had a bit more scope to make trade-offs considering wider economic context i.e. growth and employment. As a result, they'll probably act differently to if this inflation was demand-pull inflation, given the predicted impact of Brexit on growth and employment and also the need to counteract any further contractionary fiscal policy, i.e. cuts to spending in order to plug the budget shortfall.

I've reported you to the mods for mercilessly destroying a fellow forum member.

[ckn]

It'd be better if May were doing a handstand while giving this speech...  talking out your bum is much easier that way.

[Saint Toppy]

16 minutes ago, ckn said:

Here's a first for me... Maggie Thatcher's speech in 1988 on the single market:
 

Yep, May makes Thatcher look fairly normal in comparison.  The arch-Thatcherites should be looking at what their deity really thought about the EU rather than what 30-ish years of listening to swivel-eyed nutjobs has told them.

In 1988 the EU was a very different place to what it is now. For a start it didn't contain all the poor countries like Malta, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria & Romania which massively shifted the EU from a body containing countries with broadly similar economies & wealth to one with huge disparities.

It was also long before the EU gave itself swathes of new powers to dictate to individual countries, impose directives regardless of their effect on those countries and long before the introduction of the Euro. Thatcher was very much for a free market economy but against a federal Europe. The EU landscape now bears little resemblance to the one Thatcher was talking about in 1988.

[ckn]

Just now, Saint Toppy said:

In 1988 the EU was a very different place to what it is now. For a start it didn't contain all the poor countries like Malta, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria & Romania which massively shifted the EU from a body containing countries with broadly similar economies & wealth to one with huge disparities.

It was also long before the EU gave itself swathes of new powers to dictate to individual countries, impose directives regardless of their effect on those countries and long before the introduction of the Euro. Thatcher was very much for a free market economy but against a federal Europe. The EU landscape now bears little resemblance to the one Thatcher was talking about in 1988.

We're not talking about the federalised political EU, we're talking about taking us out of the Single Market.

[Saint Toppy]

3 minutes ago, ckn said:

We're not talking about the federalised political EU, we're talking about taking us out of the Single Market.

You can't separate the two when looking at any historical arguments. In 1988 trade of goods & services within the EU was between countries with broadly similar economies. With the enlargement to include a large number of poorer countries trade changed dramatically. Yes the market size grew but the richer countries were then flooded with cheap goods, services and labour and changing forever a trading bloc where countries traded on broadly equal terms.

The single market in 1988 compared to now is massively different in its makeup

[Just Browny]

9 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

It was also long before the EU gave itself swathes of new powers to dictate to individual countries, impose directives regardless of their effect on those countries

Could you unpack this a little bit? Because what you've written there is complete ######.

[Saint Toppy]

1 minute ago, Just Browny said:

Could you unpack this a little bit? Because what you've written there is complete ######.

The Maastricht treaty (which we stupidly signed up to) and other subsequent treaties gave the EU swathes of new powers. Areas that we used to be able to veto or opt out of were now decided by qualified majority voting meaning directives could be imposed on the UK even if every single British MEP voted against it. It also gave the EU new powers for the setting of EU budgets and the contributions of individual countries. It gave them the powers to create a single currency (though thankfully not the power to impose it on countries), and the powers to harmonise almost every sector.

[Just Browny]

7 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

The Maastricht treaty (which we stupidly signed up to) and other subsequent treaties gave the EU swathes of new powers. Areas that we used to be able to veto or opt out of were now decided by qualified majority voting meaning directives could be imposed on the UK even if every single British MEP voted against it. It also gave the EU new powers for the setting of EU budgets and the contributions of individual countries. It gave them the powers to create a single currency (though thankfully not the power to impose it on countries), and the powers to harmonise almost every sector.

Thanks. The veto was removed in the early 1980s, and Qualified Majority Voting was extended to almost all legislation in 1986 through the Single European Act. Thatcher would have been well-versed in the Single European Act, since she ordered Arthur Cockfield to author it.

So two years before the speech ckn referred to, Thatcher not only agreed to but led the creation of the legislation which gave the EU the swathes of new powers you refer to.

You go on to say that, post-Maastricht, we were no longer able to opt out of major areas. The example you give is of the Economic and Monetary Union, which (as you say yourself) we opted out of.

[JohnM]

30 minutes ago, ckn said:

We're not talking about the federalised political EU, we're talking about taking us out of the Single Market.

As you know-and I posted a link to the official EU statement on this- the EU is a political and economic union.  Not "or" , not even "and/or" but "and"  that means you can't have one without the other.

If this is any help, I voted to remain on the basis that our civil servants working in the EU would work in our interests. Instead, they have gone native. In addition, the constant whine from the Eurolibdemsocialistfederalistintegrationists  on here have convinced me I was wrong. I just listened to May's speech in full  live on TV, and am now fully convinced I was wrong. I should have voted leave.

[Griff9of13]

6 minutes ago, JohnM said:

As you know-and I posted a link to the official EU statement on this- the EU is a political and economic union.  Not "or" , not even "and/or" but "and"  that means you can't have one without the other.

If this is any help, I voted to remain on the basis that our civil servants working in the EU would work in our interests. Instead, they have gone native. In addition, the constant whine from the Eurolibdemsocialistfederalistintegrationists  on here have convinced me I was wrong. I just listened to May's speech in full  live on TV, and am now fully convinced I was wrong. I should have voted leave.

And we all know if it was Jeremy Corbyn (or any other leader of the Labour party) giving exactly the same speech you would be dead set against it. You're fooling no one. Less than 12 months ago you were wanting the Tory party to purge themselves of the right wing nutters (to join UKIP or whatever), now you are happy they are steering Tory policy. 

[Saint Toppy]

31 minutes ago, Saint 1 said:

Yes it is. But the whole point of the single market (and indeed general free trade) is that a reduction in barriers means that each country can produce that which it is most efficient at producing, the idea of Comparative Advantage. The expansion of the single market actually brings further benefits, because the poorer countries can produce that which they're most efficient at, generally labour-intensive products, and the wealthier countries can produce that which they're most efficient at, for example capital-intensive or skill-intensive products. This means real prices are driven down and therefore standard of living is increased.

Additionally, because the market is larger, the most efficient companies have a larger market to sell to. and there is greater potential for Economies of Scale. This means that there are greater incentives to innovate in comparison to a smaller market (more benefit for doing so) and greater incentives to invest, improving the long-run aggregate demand in the economy (i.e. GDP). 

What the addition of more countries to the single market meant in practical terms was increased liberalisation of trade through a reduction in both tariff and non-tariff barriers. While this is specific to the Single Market members here, the World Trade Organisations main purpose is driving trade liberalisation through the reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers. If this actually resulted in less beneficial outcomes than otherwise, why would the World Trade Organisation be pushing for trade liberalisation?

Your forgetting one important fact about the single market in the EU, unlike most other tariff free trade deals this also includes the free movement of people as well as goods & services.

So to some extent what your saying about product costs is true, but the huge disparity in wages & living standards between the older EU member countries and those of the newer countries is causing massive problems that weren't there before. There hasn't been an equalling of living standards hence why large numbers travel from the poorer countries to the wealthier ones

[Bedford Roughyed]

Heather StewartVerified account‏@GuardianHeather

Downing Street sources confirm May's speech constitutes the "plan" promised to MPs - there will be no white paper.

[Griff9of13]

8 minutes ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

Heather StewartVerified account‏@GuardianHeather

Downing Street sources confirm May's speech constitutes the "plan" promised to MPs - there will be no white paper.

So much for the much heralded "greater democracy".

[GeordieSaint]

1 hour ago, Saint 1 said:

"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market" - Daniel Hannan MEP

"Only a madman would actually leave the [single] market" - Owen Paterson MP, Vote Leave backer

"Wouldn't it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They're rich. They're happy. They're self-governing." - Nigel Farage, UKIP Leader

"Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK" - Arron Banks, Leave.EU founder

Are you saying the above are all 1) completely misinformed 2) willfully lying? 

Possibly both according to the PM:

"It would, to all intents and purposes mean not leaving the EU at all. That is why both sides in the referendum campaign made it clear that a vote to leave the EU would be a vote to leave the single market."

[John Drake]

Can't cope with three Brexit threads on the go, so can everyone er, migrate, to the latest thread linked below from now on, ta.