Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
Total red herring this mate, although you are correct that the loss of the EU subsidy could be a disaster for some farmers. Farming is shafted by supermarkets in our own country. Assuming brexit to some extent chokes the import of EU milk there may be benefit to the UK industry. We pay more for a leg of lamb than farmers get paid for a whole one - that's Tesco and co, not the EU to blame. Farmers only need propped up by subsidy because they get screwed over. We should be able to pay no more or less than we do now and the farmers get a fair deal, but this would mean a reduction supermarket profit margins. For me that’s the fight our govt need to have on behalf of farmers.
Click to expand...
We've just elected the market forces party ....
 
mcfc1632 said:
Or......

You could quit with the childish pedantry and stop embarrassing yourself by recognising that a quote was mildly adapted to provide context and appropriate tense

You could prevent further embarrassment by reading the trail of posts because if you relate the quote to that trail the relevance would be obvious - I am not inclined to spoon-feed you.

Or perhaps you do not actually understand the meaning of the quote but only know the specific wording - in that case my advice would be that embarrassment could be avoided by not always looking to score cheap points
Click to expand...
Sorry folks for the distraction but....

Well done for not writing 500 words ... but I always assume your reluctance to explain your arguments means you can't, and if you think "hoist" is present tense and needed adapting to "hoisted" then the embarrassment is all yours. In fact you've been hoist with your own petard.

Beware the pedantry bomb. People who complain about pedantry are usually wrong and just don't like being corrected.
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
What's the harm in pointing out when it becomes tiresome?
Click to expand...
Because the thread would be even longer if everyone posted how tiresome it was when someone repeated themselves. Now just stop doing it.

And you did make it a thing yourself...

Mëtal Bikër said:
...as i've said over and over, I support leaving the EU and rejoining the EFTA....
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Mëtal Bikër said:
What's the harm in pointing out when it becomes tiresome?
Click to expand...

Well to be totally pedantic there is no actual harm in pointing out that the same thing repeated ad nauseum is tiresome but it is itself tedious to do so and just adds more not particularly constructive posts to the thread. Much like this one. Brexit is done but the debate will linger on, both sides of the argument could probably be summed up in a few posts but those few posts will get rehashed time and again with a few stock phrases thrown in. I’m even boring myself now with this ultimately unnecessary post but no more unnecessary than most of what now passes for debate.

Think I’ll give it a miss for a while and come back when the mud begins to clear and we know what Brexit is really about.
 
journolud said:
Well to be totally pedantic there is no actual harm in pointing out that the same thing repeated ad nauseum is tiresome but it is itself tedious to do so and just adds more not particularly constructive posts to the thread. Much like this one. Brexit is done but the debate will linger on, both sides of the argument could probably be summed up in a few posts but those few posts will get rehashed time and again with a few stock phrases thrown in. I’m even boring myself now with this ultimately unnecessary post but no more unnecessary than most of what now passes for debate.

Think I’ll give it a miss for a while and come back when the mud begins to clear and we know what Brexit is really about.
Click to expand...
Then you're your own worst enemy, aren't you.
 
Vic said:
Sorry folks for the distraction but....

Well done for not writing 500 words ... but I always assume your reluctance to explain your arguments means you can't, and if you think "hoist" is present tense and needed adapting to "hoisted" then the embarrassment is all yours. In fact you've been hoist with your own petard.

Beware the pedantry bomb. People who complain about pedantry are usually wrong and just don't like being corrected.
Click to expand...
You are just making an even bigger idiot of yourself

I suggest try making a NY resolution to control your impulses

My post and adapted quote were perfectly relevant to the post I was replying to and perfectly understandable to anyone who is not desperately seeking ever more convoluted ways to make themselves look ridiculous

Recently you have been like some idiot on a mission wearing a conceptual 'reputation vest' reckless of the damage you do to your own reputation in a pathetic attempt to take someone/others with you.

As I say - I hope you are better able to exercise sime ability to discern between looking clever and coming across as a right knob

Only time will tell and that is entirely on you with - sorry to be blunt- no hiding place available to blame someone else

And on that basis - as a couple of local pubs beckon and then a gathering at a neighbours

I wish all on here a good evening and a great 2020
 
Again - to save those that do not want to read my response to you and ensure that it is clear that anyone making snide comments must in fact be two-faced enough to make that effort, I have annotated responses to your points within your post
Saddleworth2 said:
In the private sector, a full business case would be done prior to meaningful negotiations. It would normally be done on the basis of an ITT response from one or a number of service providers. My point was, in most cases there is a fall back of status quo if the business case is destroyed for whatever reason. That doesn’t apply with Brexit. There is no status quo safety net to turn to.

This is generally just a statement of fact with regard to the status quo not being a fallback with regard to Brexit.

For me this is welcomed and evidence that a genuine Brexit might now be the outcome. Under Theresa May the evidence now clearly demonstrates that she was engineering a BRINO outcome - you know my thoughts on her WA - I would have certainly voted for Remain over that deal which speaks volumes. But that fact does show that from 2016 - 2018, the fallback actually was a 'version' of the status quo.

It is only when there is commitment to a genuine Brexit have we seen a version of status quo removed as a fallback - a matter of weeks and a few months only.

I would challenge that everyone - be they Leave or Remain should be clear on the fact stated above. How can it be contested that the implementation of a vote to Leave the EU must reflect actually Leaving the EU and having the ability to determine our own regulations etc. - therefore leaving the SM and CU.

Re your comment on how FBCs are developed in the Private Sector - I fully recognise that. I spent the first half of my career working for a major SI managing delivery departments before moving into managing bids and government accounts. FWIW I would say that the main difference that I have found in the Public Sector over the past 20 years is that for the major programmes/procurement - say with a TCV >£250m - FBCs were/are not always (even very often) 'true' in their analysis and are often an artefact to ensure that there is cover on the audit trail for decisions taken. In the early noughties I had direct experience of FBCs for major outsourcing/PFI procurements where the FBC 'struggled' to come up with the correct answer. Brown got the Treasury - specifically the Treasury Task Force on PFI to provide 'support' to get the correct answer - generally just a pretty crude method of changing the treatment/assessment of risk allocated to the Public Sector Comparator.

Brown's preoccupation at the time was the use of PFI and therefore getting the Treasury to treat the costs of these contracts as 'off-balance sheet'. This 'support' was often essential as there were often better value for money economic methods of raising funding than via PFI

Turning to one of your key points. That Johnson has the means and political will to go for no deal if his realistic and ideal scenarios are rejected or simply if he runs out of time. Yes. I agree he has. And I agree that it is a bargaining lever as the EU will not wish it. How strong a leaver is open to discussion. Do I think that the EU would break one of their fundamental red lines, no I really don’t and that for me is critical as the most advantageous outcomes with the EU will come wrapped with consequences that are unacceptable and we will be back to the same impasse. That’s why I think a no deal conclusion is a very real and likely possibility at the end of 2020. Some would argue that is his ideal scenario anyway.

Your view that: "Do I think that the EU would break one of their fundamental red lines, no I really don’t...." is just an opinion - and I do not mean that negatively. My view that the EU would 'come to arrangements' that 'blur' some red-lines but which they can 'explain away' is also only an opinion - but this is why I say that there needs to be private discussions away from the glare of public and media scrutiny.

But irrespective of where on that spectrum the EU really sit, the situation is clearly one in which the EU are supported in their management of negotiations by seeing the UK not have an option of a No-Deal on the table.

I know that some people get wound-up by me pointing out that we will not see proper movement from the EU unless and until there is a genuine Walk-away option - and that means an option that is both genuinely viable and is backed by the political will to go that route if necessary. It is a simple fact - and it has been a simple fact since 2016 and no amount of denial changes that. People that have no experience of major negotiations not understanding this I have no problem with - it is those that do understand the truth of the point but seek to deny it just because of their subjective hatred of Brexit that I have a problem with. I do not include you in that group obviously.

I think that the EU will do a lot to accommodate UK requests if it avoids a No-Deal outcome - and the secret here is going to be the extent to which Johnson and his key advisors are willing to, in their turn, 'sell' certain agreements as not in fact staying tied to the EU regulations/controls.

For me the next steps are really simple and obvious - that does not mean 'easy'.

We need to genuinely establish where on the 'red-line' spectrum the EU are and where they will move to accommodate 'explainable compromises' as the price of avoiding a No-Deal outcome. That needs urgent work on planning how/what a No-Deal outcome means for the UK and establishing our own 'genuine red-lines'. A lot of the high-level descriptions of red-lines have been posted in the past that are just simplistic soundbites.

The bottom line is that we need to do the work to fully determine the scope, definition and implementation planning for a 'viable' No-Deal outcome. Without that detail then the EU just know - as they always did with May and Robbins - that the UK are just blathering. This work should have been commenced straight after the referendum, but I happen to know that it was not started in any form of 'earnest endeavour' until the Cabinet Office's IPA/GMPP function were asked to take a lead in the early summer of 2018.

Once that is established - the political will to use it depends on Johnson's own appetite - the pressure he faces and the extent to which the EU move - without it we may as well just agree to Remain.

I talked about the competence of the U.K. negotiation team and I recognise the framework you describe which would work if implemented by really competent people. Not just a core team + support, but every single one of their sponsors which would cover the entire cabinet and would require full support from media (that would be the easy bit). Not a word out of place, not a single wrong term, every step choreographed to achieve the best outcome. Rebuilding the relationship with the EU would have to be part of that so no more macho dick waving from Gove or Robb. I just cant imagine it. To go from the utterly inept to the frankly world class is a step too far for me to think credible. Surely a more likely outcome is more of the same inept shouting by Johnson and co whilst working hard to mitigate the worst impacts of a no deal scenario at the end of 2020.

I agree with all you say here - apart from your conclusion that you "....just can't imagine it....". When you accept the point above about red-lines and No-Deal then there is actually no option and we need to make the best fist we can. The old adage of - "....I wouldn't start from here' fits well - thanks to the inept May/Robbins and the machinations of the Remain cadre at Westminster we have lost over 3 years - but that is past and cannot be changed. These things actually do only take a few high-quality people, in the right positions of authority, to determine direction and then instruct a wide-ranging change programme. The work commenced under the GMPP will have brought forward a lot of departmental level detail which will save a lot of time.

There just needs to be an inner circle that is positioned to brook no challenge and ensure sharp focus on these outcomes - it is amazing how momentum can be established if you have these conditions - we have had only self-serving 'dither and delay' to date.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
bluethrunthru said:
We are to blame for demanding ever cheaper food. Tesco et al shaft the farmer for their own profit - do you know why Lidl and Aldi came here? Because the margins UK supermarkets work on are much higher than they do in their home market. Its called capitalism and it fucks over all but a fortunate few. The UK was always known as " Treasure Island" to companies from abroad because we couldn't just nip over a border to get a better price. Except on the Eire/Ulster border of course. The Govt won't be fighting anyone on behalf of farmers because they are non-interventionist ( when it suits them ) and the people that run Tesco and Sainsburys are their big donors.
Click to expand...
No that's not capitalism, it's called monopolistic trading. It's what happens when cartels establish themselves in markets. And the supermarket arena is now a virtual cartel with less than 6 major players.
In such situations, rules should be set so they are forced to share a good percentage of their profits with their suppliers.
 
Last edited:
The far right - in the USA too - equates capitalism, and free market economy with absolute non-intervention - even when monopoly, oligopoly markets emerge.
 
MCBlueFan said:
The far right - in the USA too - equates capitalism, and free market economy with absolute non-intervention - even when monopoly, oligopoly markets emerge.
Click to expand...
Many of the old right may think that way with their roots in big business but it is simply not true of the libiterian right that makes up a large proportion of the populist right.
 
BlueAnorak said:
Many of the old right may think that way with their roots in big business but it is simply not true of the libiterian right that makes up a large proportion of the populist right.
Click to expand...
Across the pond - in the States?

Seems to me that the Trump camp completely dominates Republican thinking and that Libertarian ideas are a small minority. Trump is all about non-intervention, no regulation, whatsoever... because this resonates with his base, overwhelmingly so it would seem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top