Let's Get Political!

[Flashheart]

He was referring to the withdrawal agreement not a trade deal this was perfectly clear.

If you had any credibility remaining - you just lost it.

I don't know why the others waste their time on you. You're just too far gone.

[RobertT]

Laws and Borders:

On these two, and I am not debating the right or wrongs of holding the view you have, a couple of points.  Just to make sure I am clear.

You do know the Commission is like a sort of Admin team - they create the legislative proposal, that much is correct, but the laws are passed by representatives of the Elected Governments and directly elected officials from each Country - Council & Parliament.  Just checking, because the process may be different to the UK, but you do have a say in the process as it exists today.  It is certainly diluted, but plenty of people don;t much care for the House of Lords and Monarch being unelected.

On Borders - this is the real reason, isn't it?  And again, so what if it is - plenty agree with you.  If it is, then, is the benefit that we can cut benefits (which we always had control over anyway) or that we will be able to give more jobs to the local, or simply determining that population growth is bad?  I am honestly intrigued by the reasoning because I hold a diametrically opposed view on immigration so have always struggled with why people think this way (I am not saying I am right - I know I hold a minority view).

[suttonred]

Yep and John Lennon is watching from the ashtray. Oh hang on that's a different poor taste joke

[Arriba]

He was referring to the withdrawal agreement not a trade deal this was perfectly clear.

The EU have made an acceptable deal impossible

Was he bollocks

[BambooToTheFuture]

I am honestly intrigued by the reasoning because I hold a diametrically opposed view on immigration so have always struggled with why people think this way (I am not saying I am right - I know I hold a minority view).

All those in favour say "aye" - Aye!

I am also one who does not believe there is really an immigration problem. It is something the UK and other nations can afford to pay and accommodate. Can't remember how many times I've mentioned, how insignificant the cost is. Think it works out at something like less than 20p per week to the UK taxpayer.

Taking the largest number (not all of these will have been granted asylum) of c135k Refugees and pending asylum cases (I've rounded this up, it's more like 133k).

A weekly payment of £40 pw (it's less for most, about £37pw and quite a lot don't receive anything if they turn down "housing").

135k
x
£40
=
£5.4m pw

x
52
=
£280.8m pa

There are c30m UK taxpayers.

£280.8m
/
30m
=
£9.36 pa.pp
/
52
=
£0.18p pw.pp
/
7
=
£0.0257p pd.pp

So we'll round it up and call it 3p per day as the cost to the UK taxpayer. I bet a good bunch of that 30m throw away at least 5p a day in change after buying a Coffee every morning. The UK does not have an immigration problem and even if we supposedly did, we can duly afford and accommodate it. It is not the huge "tax burden" that gets falsely banded around.

I think it probably has more to do with people not liking someone who might speak differently to them or (shock horror) have a different tone of pigmentation to them? In the UK, well I never  

[horlock07]

I think it probably has more to do with people not liking someone who might speak differently to them or (shock horror) have a different tone of pigmentation to them? In the UK, well I never 

Not putting words in anyone's mouth on here, but from those who I know who voted leave due to the immigration issue, which rather missed the points that a) it makes sod all difference to immigration from the Asian subcontinent and will actually likely lead to an increase and b) on the whole they all tend to have eastern European friends who would be most seriously affected seemed to pass them by!

[BambooToTheFuture]

Not putting words in anyone's mouth on here, but from those who I know who voted leave due to the immigration issue, which rather missed the points that a) it makes sod all difference to immigration from the Asian subcontinent and will actually likely lead to an increase and b) on the whole they all tend to have eastern European friends who would be most seriously affected seemed to pass them by!

Indeed, odd that isn't it? No doubt I'll get shouted down for using UNHCR figures (and subsequently have an immigration case lawyer friend, who has to turn down quite a lot of applications every year (you won't read that in the Mail/Express)) as not being 'real figures'. I had that from some Johnny Farageface on AssBook several years ago. Fucking idiots.

[Ardiles]

The EU have given Canda and other countries the access to their single market that we are after, we are not looking for anything more than they have given other third countries.

We've covered this already.  It's precisely because the UK is not small & insignificant - and also right next door - that the EU cannot afford to give us free access to their market without getting level playing field commitments from us.  In short, if Canada went rogue & started under-cutting EU producers, the EU would grumble a bit, but they would get by.  But if the UK did the same thing and started under-cutting - and let's be honest, the days of 'my word is my bond' are well & truly over with these fuckers in charge - that's an existential threat to the free market.  We're too big a deal for the EU to be able to be light touch.  They have to insist on a robust level playing commitment - and much more so than if we were smaller & further away.

[Batch]

they have also got to make it unpalatable to dissuade other member states that may be stupud enough to think of leaving

[Ardiles]

It all comes down to a choice.  You sacrifice a bit of sovereignty every time you make an agreement with another party.  Every time.  So we can be as sovereign as we like.  But the more ideologically pure we insist on being about it - and, for some reason, the current government is being *really* idealogical/dogmatic on this - the thinner the deals will be that you can make.  It's a choice.

Switzerland and Norway have both made meaningful agreements with the EU in exchange for market access.  The UK govt, at least for now, does not appear to want this.  Time will tell how long their resolve is going to last.

[RedRag]

they have also got to make it unpalatable to dissuade other member states that may be stupud enough to think of leaving

Correct.

Not you, but some leavers like to pretend that making leaving "unpalatable" is some kind of punishment.

Many of the benefits of the EU (esp the SM) stem from a common regulatory framework spreading far and wide.

Members are of course free to leave and make their own choices outside the EU/SM but so far as the SM is concerned they will find that it is for EU members to grant access as they decide best for them on a case by case basis.

If leaving members could enjoy most of the benefits for only a gentle price, then there would be a temptation for other members to leave and retain the benefits cheaply.  The SM would gradually evaporate.  To the loss of its members - and indeed the rest of the world and especially Europe.

If all the member states of Europe wanted to do everything their own way without shared laws, there would end up being 100s of bilateral treaties meaning that trade with France, Germany, Greece, Spain, Poland, Romania etc would be governed by different agreements and laws and systems of enforcement.

The UK believes it can do better by not being a team player, at least for the continent of Europe.  Then fine.  If we were a remaining member, do you think if France or Germany chose to leave, we'd be encouraging this or making sure access to our shared SM was not bestowed on them as some gimmee?

I believe Russia and China and the ERG and even eventually the Trumpists would be pleased to see the disintegration of the EU.  I am hopeful a less divided West with a strong EU may emerge.  The UK needs to articulate a proper and more detailed vision.  It is a bit of a maverick at present.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

I think we need to distinguish between member states and the populations of member states.

There’s no indication that, given a vote, other country’s citizens would also vote to leave.

[Ardiles]

I think there's plenty of indication that they wouldn't.  Columnists in the right wing press have been predicting the disintegration of the EU for years.  Once the UK voted out, it was meant to signal the beginning of several other exits.  And it just hasn't happened.  Instead, the rest of Europe is looking on, fascinated & bemused, with the popcorn out.  Not quite able to get their heads around what's going on here.

[pauld]

I think there's plenty of indication that they wouldn't.  Columnists in the right wing press have been predicting the disintegration of the EU for years.  Once the UK voted out, it was meant to signal the beginning of several other exits.  And it just hasn't happened.  Instead, the rest of Europe is looking on, fascinated & bemused, with the popcorn out.  Not quite able to get their heads around what's going on here.

Even Le Pen's neo-fascist Front National (or whatever they're called these days) don't want to leave any more. They've looked at the shit show we've become and backed off.

[horlock07]

I think we need to distinguish between member states and the populations of member states.

There’s no indication that, given a vote, other country’s citizens would also vote to leave.

Others have noted that the biggest boost to the EU in the EU has been the shit show of us trying to leave, led to quite the swing in support in many of the previously wavering members.

Also polling shows in the majority of EU27 countries the support for the EU not bending to our mid life crisis is pretty strong as well.