Fintan O'Toole's provocative piece in the New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/...1419773522000&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&_r=1
looking at the news today the EU side are taking the lead in the neg's setting out what will be discussed first - and the money is at the forefront - before any talk of trade.
The one thing that I fairly clear here is across the whole of parliament they haven't a fucking clue how or what they are going to get a deal. They're basically going into the negotiations trying to wing it and see what happens. Brexit is now the elephant in the room in every aspect of British life and it's already cost £130m in an election that wasn't necessary. By the time Britain has left and paid the divorce bill etc the UK is going to have to make up billions and billions of lot money.
To get a good deal, something is going to have to give, it's as simple as that and at some point the Govt is going to have to stick two fingers up to the 52% and say for the good of the country it's impossible to just leave with the situation we're in. The only way to a reasonable deal that I can see would be a Norway/Switzerland type deal but that would include giving up certain rights such as immigration. I would like to see something like that for a ten year period whilst Britain trains its nurses and doctors etc in preparation for another referendum in ten years where one of the options should be to either remain like that or leave.
Sticking two fingers up at the 52% isn't the answer. They're just not going to take that lying down. We do need to buy time, its ridiculous to believe that 40 years of econmic integration can be overturned in 2 years. A lengthy transitional arrangement is essential, but it does need to be on the basis of a phased separation, starting with legal separation, eventually ending up with a preferred long term trading arrangement.
Can I ask, cos I don't get it, why it's okay for the EU to pump €80BN a month into the Euro, for quantative easing and it's okay, but we're not allowed and we have to live with austerity measures?
I never quite understand why it's alright for one, but not another, considering the strength of the pound is not calamitous as one would expect at this stage.
I'm not an expert, by any means, in economics so no need to be a Dick about a question.
I asked why is it okay for Europe to prop up the Euro with quantative easing?
Don't bother answering me, actually.
Cheers.