Another new Brexit thread

[Vic]

I see Liam Fox is now giving interviews saying we need to stop focussing on doing trade deals and do more to be positive about our exports once we leave. Oh and its all the fault of civil servants.

Nowt like getting your explanations for failure in before it becomes obvious you have eh? Always handy to be able to blame someone who cannot answer back too.

Also wants to abolish the Department for International Development so we can take money to end poverty in the developing world and divert it to propping up exporters.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Also wants to abolish the Department for International Development so we can take money to end poverty in the developing world and divert it to propping up exporters.

Charity begins at home....

 

[Blue Hefner]

Charity begins at home....

Maybe so but this is different. Build a road somewhere that didn’t previously have a road and you can stick petrol stations at either end - the community can get around easier and safer, the construction of the road creates jobs and access to other parts of the country as well as jobs in the petrol station and shop. Never mind the money that will be spent on fuelling new and existing cars and lorries

Win, win all round

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Maybe so but this is different. Build a road somewhere that didn’t previously have a road and you can stick petrol stations at either end - the community can get around easier and safer, the construction of the road creates jobs and access to other parts of the country as well as jobs in the petrol station and shop. Never mind the money that will be spent on fuelling new and existing cars and lorries

Win, win all round

Absolutely, but we can only spend what we can afford. If brexit is going to hit the country in the pocket asgard as the doom mongers are saying, then surely it's only prudent to tighten up on the money we give away in the short term at least?

 

[Vic]

@Mëtal Bikër

I know that you have given thought to the adoption of a model for the UK that reflects (or actually is) EFTA membership.

I was expecting the EU to be much more strategic thinking in their handling of Brexit and have worked on 2 approaches.

1. To get Brexit cancelled - this is the way that they went - understandably given all the signals they were receiving from the machinations at Westminster, but they do appear to have put their eggs in one basket so to speak.

2. Design a model as described in the article linked below. Although it would have to have been called something other than zone 2 of the EU - something like 'FTA for strategic partners' - and establish this with the UK. Following set up with the UK they could in parallel have designed their Target Model and planned their 2 or 3 speed Europe. They could then accelerate integration with a willing core and transition countries less committed to integration and counties such as Norway and Switzerland - or all EFTA - onto the same arrangements as the UK. This would have given them the opportunity to purge any quirks that have historically developed during the setting up of EFTA and the EEA.

Taking the 2nd approach would have resolved so many problems and have allowed countries to progress through what are essentially different levels of membership without being vulnerable to the emotive challenge of processes seen as joining / membership etc.

Really quite surprised that they have allowed the process to become so black and white for the UK - such was their confidence that Brexit would get binned I guess.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020...r-an-opportunity-for-the-european-federation/

I'm not sure why you'd expect MB to take time off his "no one's stopping you leaving" nonsense to read that. But are you really endorsing unicorn ideas that entail leaving the EU and then rejoining as a member of a new category of EU membership?

I know you'll say I've misunderstood but that's the gist of this odd piece by Tony Czarnecki (who seems to think the EU is the body best placed to form the World Government needed to stave off disaster).
"People want more freedom but we need to sacrifice some freedom and sovereignty for Humanity to survive."

 

[aguerrrroooooooooooo]

Absolutely, but we can only spend what we can afford. If brexit is going to hit the country in the pocket asgard as the doom mongers are saying, then surely it's only prudent to tighten up on the money we give away in the short term at least?

Austerity hasn't really worked that well over the last decade though. More tightening of the purse strings isn't a great idea, we need to start investing into the infrastructure of the country unless we want to see the place turn into a complete hell hole

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Austerity hasn't really worked that well over the last decade though. More tightening of the purse strings isn't a great idea, we need to start investing into the infrastructure of the country unless we want to see the place turn into a complete hell hole

I did say short term

 

[aguerrrroooooooooooo]

I did say short term

Sometimes it's more prudent to invest rather than make cuts.

I don't know if the government can afford to make more cuts if brexit is to be viewed even as semi successful

 

[Vic]

Sometimes it's more prudent to invest rather than make cuts.

I don't know if the government can afford to make more cuts if brexit is to be viewed even as semi successful

Well there's lots more council cuts to come this year so if anyone expected austerity to be over, think again.

 

[grunge]

Absolutely, but we can only spend what we can afford. If brexit is going to hit the country in the pocket asgard as the doom mongers are saying, then surely it's only prudent to tighten up on the money we give away in the short term at least?

Borrowing?

the only way I can see making a success of Brexit is by splashing the cash in unprecedented amounts. Building newer and better infrastructure, cutting edge manufacturing and scientific facilities, investing in education/training to fill the manufacturing shortfalls we will have when closing up the immigration routes, linking areas of the country better and by offering major tax benefits for companies to stay / come into the country.

it is in a roundabout way what they have said they want with suggesting the UK can become Europe’s Singapore.

none of this is viable overnight tho. Well other than tax benefits.

 

[Vic]

Absolutely, but we can only spend what we can afford. If brexit is going to hit the country in the pocket asgard as the doom mongers are saying, then surely it's only prudent to tighten up on the money we give away in the short term at least?

As Remainers are keener on overseas aid than Leavers, are you saying Remainers should now accept cuts in overseas aid because Brexit is going to be as economically bad as they said?

 

[Chippy_boy]

Borrowing?

the only way I can see making a success of Brexit is by splashing the cash in unprecedented amounts. Building newer and better infrastructure, cutting edge manufacturing and scientific facilities, investing in education/training to fill the manufacturing shortfalls we will have when closing up the immigration routes, linking areas of the country better and by offering major tax benefits for companies to stay / come into the country.

it is in a roundabout way what they have said they want with suggesting the UK can become Europe’s Singapore.

none of this is viable overnight tho. Well other than tax benefits.

Singapore is not built on public sector spending, it's all driven by low taxes (highest rate is 22%) and thriving private enterprise.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

As Remainers are keener on overseas aid than Leavers, are you saying Remainers should now accept cuts in overseas aid because Brexit is going to be as economically bad as they said?

you will accept whatever the government does until you win an election. That’s how it works

 

[grunge]

Singapore is not built on public sector spending, it's all driven by low taxes (highest rate is 22%) and thriving private enterprise.

and an absolutely fantastic infrastructure and education system all built in from the planing phases.

however even the people who came up with the idea of Singapore say we couldn’t replicate the model as it’s built on being a 1st world country in a 3rd world area and being built from the ground up pretty much, a luxury we don’t have, So a direct attempt to emulate it wouldn’t work. Our infrastructure is mostly government controlled so it will be them spending ( or selling? )

but we certainly need to improve infrastructure If we want to make a go of it.

Even down to the likes of broadband. They hit about 180mb average. Uk is about 40mb.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

As Remainers are keener on overseas aid than Leavers, are you saying Remainers should now accept cuts in overseas aid because Brexit is going to be as economically bad as they said?

Point taken, but I think the debate here is probably moving from leave/remain to a left/right economic one.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Singapore is not built on public sector spending, it's all driven by low taxes (highest rate is 22%) and thriving private enterprise.

I’d be all for replicating the Singapore model as it’s a socialist market economy, a bit like Norway. The state owns most of the means of production and most of the land and most of the housing. They provide over 80% of the housing for its population and they will ‘sell’ you a house but that’s in the form of a 99 year lease. You can sell it on but, as the 99 years countdown it becomes worth less, as it will revert back to being owned by the state after the 99 years are up. Like Norway, the Singapore sovereign wealth funds own a large share of the biggest Singapore companies and, collectively, these companies make up about 40% of their Stock Exchange values. So, if you’re espousing a capitalist system, based on the state owning the means of production, I’m with you.
I suspect, however, that’s not the blueprint you Conservative chaps mean when you talk about Singapore on Thames, is it?

 

[Chippy_boy]

I’d be all for replicating the Singapore model as it’s a socialist market economy, a bit like Norway. The state owns most of the means of production and most of the land and most of the housing. They provide over 80% of the housing for its population and they will ‘sell’ you a house but that’s in the form of a 99 year lease. You can sell it on but, as the 99 years countdown it becomes worth less, as it will revert back to being owned by the state after the 99 years are up. Like Norway, the Singapore sovereign wealth funds own a large share of the biggest Singapore companies and, collectively, these companies make up about 40% of their Stock Exchange values. So, if you’re espousing a capitalist system, based on the state owning the means of production, I’m with you.
I suspect, however, that’s not the blueprint you Conservative chaps mean when you talk about Singapore on Thames, is it?

Singapore is essentially a socialist state? Well that's a new one.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Singapore is essentially a socialist state? Well that's a new one.

You should read up about it. I know their population is 8% of ours and their GDP is about 12% of ours but it just shows what you can do, if you’ve a mind to, and you don’t get stuck in pointless ideologies.

 

[BlueHammer85]

This just again shows the truth of the oft repeated (and decried by those either incredibly hard of understanding or in such a level of denial that they prefer to deceive themselves) statement that:

"We will not see movement from the EU unless and until faced with a viable walk-away option and the political will to use it"

That this was always true now becomes increasingly obvious - and it will be often evidenced in the coming months

Fuck me. There it is again.

 

[west didsblue]

Fuck me. There it is again.

Don’t tell me you’re still reading his posts!