How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

[blueparrot]

Nobody voted to introduce more friction, that new friction exists as a result of a political construct that we were part of and now we're not. The same friction already exists with the rest of the world so how on earth does the rest of the world cope? The fact is they do cope and they cope much better than anybody in Europe does. Around 50% of our trade was already conducted on these terms anyway so it isn't anything new or controversial.

Again, what you're arguing for is to be part of a protectionist bloc, why when the growth is elsewhere? If we consider where the growth is going to be then those trading frictions are going to become more relevant to trade outside the EU than inside the EU. However, whilst in the EU we had zero control over outside trade policy but now we have 100% control.

If the EU decided to drive off a cliff to protect its internal market then we would drive over with them, that's what has happened to European countries on Brexit. Brexit hasn't greatly affected them but by every measure they've lost more than they've gained. The EU then sleeps soundly at night because it has protected itself but what about European citizens?

I know many on here will regurgitate the same olds that you can't leave a club and have all the benefits of it and yes I agree but it's a very illogical statement when the benefits of that club are eroding. The EU would for example benefit massively from loosening trade frictions with the rest of the world (incl. the UK) so why is it a good thing that it preaches the opposite? Or are we just arguing that it would be better to die on the bonfire with them?

Btw, I didn't vote to leave but the result was nearly 9 years ago... It's time to get over it.

Time to get over it is a meaningless cliche. It’s time to make what we have better than it is. Which is what will happen. By the end of this parliament I predict we will have some sort of trade deal, agreements on asylum and closer defence ties and in return we will have accepted free movement for under 30s and alignment on some trade rules.
It’s a start at least, if Labour win a second term or end up with a minority government, there will probably be further steps to align.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

You always ascribe ulterior motives to everything I post, it serves two purposes, one, it insults me, and two it gives you cover to never address anything I post.

It's obvious. Why? Because you stray far from the topic. Your post wasn't about Brexit it was about all problems in society. I'd think the same regardless of political leaning if it was someone else doing it.

The fact Reagan and Trump were saying in the sixties and seventies stuff that eventually found traction decades later says precisely nothing about anything.

A narrative that is not anchored in reason might get you elected but it won't solve any problems. Labour have already been elected, it now says it's in the problem solving business, and one of those is Brexit. It cannot fashion a narrative based on bullshit and lies, coz the mainstream media won't go along with it as it does with the Tories, so it has to build a consensus over and above the right wing press, and that consensus will only be built if it is anchored in honesty and facts, because the sustainability of such a consensus will be wholly contingent on positive results, and you won't get positive results if your narrative is based on lies. Go take a tour of Boris's forty new hospitals and tell me I'm wrong.

I don't know why I bother, you are the most dogmatic poster here, just go pester someone else for a while.

You quoted me first.

 

[inbetween]

Because trade follows geography, and a small increase in a small number is far less relevant than a large decrease in a large number.

This is not complicated.

Well we're perhaps a prisoner to our geography then unfortunately.

And also maybe rejoining the EU and throwing our towel in the ring of stagnation of the Eurozone is the best that we can hope for.

 

[The perfect fumble]

It's obvious. Why? Because you stray far from the topic. Your post wasn't about Brexit it was about all problems in society. I'd think the same regardless of political leaning if it was someone else doing it.




You quoted me first.

Fuck off.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Well we're perhaps a prisoner to our geography then unfortunately

One of the interesting things about this thread is the language used.

We are apparently "prisoners", or as one poster wrote yesterday, "subjugated".

 

[meltonblue]

I completely understand why it never happened. My point was pointing out to say 'we didn't want EFTA' is wrong because voters were never asked and at least a proportion of those that voted leave will have listened to Gove and Farage and others and believed them when they implied a version of EFTA was on the table,and possible.

By we, I was referring to our government, not voters.

 

[Vic]

and there in a nutshell was the "they need us more than we need them" attitude...

Actually, the next bit after the quote above said more or less that.

 

[Vic]

By we, I was referring to our government, not voters.

How many voters knew what EFTA was?

The Remain campaign wasn't offering it as a possibility as that might increase the Leave vote, and the Leave campaign never suggested it explicitly, but Farage's "we could be like Norway" and the Leave lie that "we'll still be in a free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border" could only really mean EFTA.

If Leave had said "we could end up with no deal with the EU" they'd have lost.

 

[meltonblue]

How many voters knew what EFTA was?

The Remain campaign wasn't offering it as a possibility as that might increase the Leave vote, and the Leave campaign never suggested it explicitly, but Farage's "we could be like Norway" and the Leave lie that "we'll still be in a free trass zone from Iceland to the Russian border" could only really mean EFTA.

If Leave had said "we could end up with no deal with the EU" they'd have lost.

I agree. It was talked about pre the referendum but given the red lines our government put in place it was never a viable option in the negotiations was my point.

Personally I argued for efta membership as I thought that reflected the split better than any of the other options.

 

[Vic]

I agree. It was talked about pre the referendum but given the red lines our government put in place it was never a viable option in the negotiations was my point.

Personally I argued for efta membership as I thought that reflected the split better than any of the other options.

Indeed. It was the "Brexit means Brexit" nonsense and stupid red lines that did the damage.