[Politics] Brexit

[Machiavelli]

By 1980 a big majority regretted their referendum choice in 1975 ... 65% to 26% wanted to leave

I'm sure you're going to post a link to that purported fact, while also posting a link to opinion polls on EU membership between 1975 and 2016.

 

[rogersix]

By 1980 a big majority regretted their referendum choice in 1975 ... 65% to 26% wanted to leave

did you have time to take on a couple of new employees, or did it all implode so rapidly, you didn't have the chance?

 

[WATFORD zero]

If you hadn't been in a rush, you'd have read my answer in the post you were replying to. You might not like the answer, but it's an answer.

Can you tell me the derogatory terms I used and shouldn't have? I'd hate to post inappropriate language like that, but unless you tell me what the derogatory terms were, how can I expect to avoid them in future?

My rush was because I support a Football team who's match I was going to, which shouldn't really be a huge surprise on an Albion message board, and It's me trying not to use derogatory terms in the face of extreme provocation

I assume this is the post you are referring to

I apologise for the use of a derogatory term, whatever it was. Though honestly I can't see where it was, so please could you tell me what the derogatory term(s) was/were?

Part of the reason Johnson made such a pig's ear of it is because May had made a massive pig's ear of her own. She should never have let Northern Ireland be the divisive issue it was allowed to become; no-one in the referendum campaign thought it was a big issue. She should have said firmly that it is a UK issue, that the UK can handle our side of the border without putting up border posts and the like, and the Republic must do what it feels it must do.

I have no idea whether Johnson could have done better without May's mess as his starting point; maybe he couldn't. Later performance suggest that his ability to achieve anything is unproven, to say the least.

I am afraid that just because you have never apparently understood the Irish issue, didn't mean it didn't exist and wasn't highlighted as a major problem since day 1 of the referendum campaign

And your solution is it is a UK issue that can be resolved by doing nothing

Absolute genius. I can't imagine why May got booted out for coming up with the Northern Ireland backstop, Johnson spent all his time negotiating the unimplementable Northern Ireland Protocol and Truss is prepared to trigger article 16 and start a trade war over it, when all they had to do was do nothing.

I am sorry but this is the level of understanding which has ultimately resulted in Truss as PM and 4 chancellors in 4 months

I've actually edited the post to take out the derogatory term and replace it with 'understanding' but don't believe any judge would have convicted given the provocation

 

[A1X]

 

[dsr-burnley]

I can't tell if she's a pro-Brexiter who thinks the border controls have been mishandled, or an anti-Brexiter who think that if we didn't have controls the smuggling wouldn't happen.

 

[dsr-burnley]

My rush was because I support a Football team who's match I was going to, which shouldn't really be a huge surprise on an Albion message board, and It's me trying not to use derogatory terms in the face of extreme provocation

I assume this is the post you are referring to


I am afraid that just because you have never apparently understood the Irish issue, didn't mean it didn't exist and wasn't highlighted as a major problem since day 1 of the referendum campaign

And your solution is it is a UK issue that can be resolved by doing nothing

Absolute genius. I can't imagine why May got booted out for coming up with the Northern Ireland backstop, Johnson spent all his time negotiating the unimplementable Northern Ireland Protocol and Truss is prepared to trigger article 16 and start a trade war over it, when all they had to do was do nothing.

I am sorry but this is the level of understanding which has ultimately resulted in Truss as PM and 4 chancellors in 4 months

I've actually edited the post to take out the derogatory term and replace it with 'understanding' but don't believe any judge would have convicted given the provocation

No need to be sensitive about being in a rush. I wasn't being critical about you rushing, just making a point with no hidden meaning.

I didn't say that they need do nothing about the Irish border. What they needed to do was work out a protocol whereby exports in either direction could be reported in the same way as they already were for VAT purposes, and use that as the basis for necessary checks in the same sort of way as the already did if someone was fiddling the cross-border VAT. The systems needed would already be partially in place.

 

[southstandandy]

"Tough on Brexit. Tough on the consequences of Brexit" was a phrase I heard yesterday.

I think that's right. The country now needs tough policies to mitigate the Brexit damage.

In fairness, the zenophobic views of some (not all) Brexiteers (ie 'British jobs for British people'), is now being somewhat undone by the UK now looking at opening up avenues to get employees from Europe back to those jobs we don't want to do here, such as hospitality, farming, and care services. Hopefully we can fill some of these posts which are hugely important especially in healthcare. The care company we use to assist my disabled father pay £20 per hour now but still can't get UK staff wanting the work so hopefully we can find some from abroad to fill the gaps.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I can't tell if she's a pro-Brexiter who thinks the border controls have been mishandled, or an anti-Brexiter who think that if we didn't have controls the smuggling wouldn't happen.

You're fairly obviously struggling, so I'll try and help you out

You do understand that we haven't put any of the Brexit border controls in place for Britain that we were going to because JRM believes that doing so would constitute an 'act of self harm' even though the EU seem to have implemented all theirs ? We just keep putting them off for the last 2 years and beyond hence this sort of thing happening. Of 22 random vehicles checked illegal meat imports were found in 21 of them because we haven't implemented any of the controls which we were meant to in order to stop this from happening and 'Take Back Control'

The details were revealed by Natalie Elphicke, the Conservative MP for Dover, in a debate in Westminster Hall yesterday.
She said: “We need to remember that it is not 22 vehicles a day that enter the UK at Dover, but up to 10,000 vehicle movements across the Channel a day.

 

[Motogull]

I have no idea whether Johnson could have done better without May's mess as his starting point; maybe he couldn't. Later performance suggest that his ability to achieve anything is unproven, to say the least.

I'm pretty sure he'd have f***ed it up whatever state he inherited.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I thought Project Fear was meant to take 2 years, we've only been out for 22 months. Johnson, Truss and co really need to slow down a bit FFS

 

[The Clamp]

Brexit caused Johnson to be PM
Johnson caused Truss to be PM
Truss caused Britain to collapse
Brexit caused it to be un-fixable.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

You're fairly obviously struggling, so I'll try and help you out

You do understand that we haven't put any of the Brexit border controls in place for Britain that we were going to because JRM believes that doing so would constitute an 'act of self harm' even though the EU seem to have implemented all theirs ? We just keep putting them off for the last 2 years and beyond hence this sort of thing happening. Of 22 random vehicles checked illegal meat imports were found in 21 of them because we haven't implemented any of the controls which we were meant to in order to stop this from happening and 'Take Back Control'

The details were revealed by Natalie Elphicke, the Conservative MP for Dover, in a debate in Westminster Hall yesterday.
She said: “We need to remember that it is not 22 vehicles a day that enter the UK at Dover, but up to 10,000 vehicle movements across the Channel a day.

drs-bumley is in denial.

The greater good is always the thing. Staying in the EU was always the greater good. The price to pay to convince people we should leave, to enact the leaving, and to survive the leaving, was NEVER worth the leaving. It was always a bad idea. History has proven this.

It needed charlatans (Farrage) nut jobs (ERG) and opportunists (Johnson) to Get Brexit Done. And it still isn't done.

And the cost, the degradation of UK politics, the charisma cult (Johnson) and the total lack of any plan, finally serving up Chaos under the Conservatives, has now f***ed us all in the arse.

The gobshites on NSC promoting all this cracktoss have now all f***ed off into oblivion, I now see, too. Good riddance. And look what you've done

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

In fairness, the zenophobic views of some (not all) Brexiteers (ie 'British jobs for British people'), is now being somewhat undone by the UK now looking at opening up avenues to get employees from Europe back to those jobs we don't want to do here, such as hospitality, farming, and care services. Hopefully we can fill some of these posts which are hugely important especially in healthcare. The care company we use to assist my disabled father pay £20 per hour now but still can't get UK staff wanting the work so hopefully we can find some from abroad to fill the gaps.

Indeed. Which will mean throwing all the newly won Brexit 'freedoms' out of the window. Ironically PPF, if he has any grandchildren, will see them being taught by refugees on minimum wage owing to the teacher shortage, and treated by Pakistani and African GPs (locums) when they manage to get their name on the six-month waiting list. Strong and stable. More free. Sunny uplands. What a load of old lying xenophobic piss-taking bollocks.

 

[dsr-burnley]

You're fairly obviously struggling, so I'll try and help you out

You do understand that we haven't put any of the Brexit border controls in place for Britain that we were going to because JRM believes that doing so would constitute an 'act of self harm' even though the EU seem to have implemented all theirs ? We just keep putting them off for the last 2 years and beyond hence this sort of thing happening. Of 22 random vehicles checked illegal meat imports were found in 21 of them because we haven't implemented any of the controls which we were meant to in order to stop this from happening and 'Take Back Control'

The details were revealed by Natalie Elphicke, the Conservative MP for Dover, in a debate in Westminster Hall yesterday.
She said: “We need to remember that it is not 22 vehicles a day that enter the UK at Dover, but up to 10,000 vehicle movements across the Channel a day.

In a sense I am struggling. Because if border controls are necessary to keep dodgy meat out, then surely that's an argument in favour of leaving the EU not an argument against it. I thought the argument about staying in the EU was that we wouldn't need border controls?

I don't believe these were 22 random vehicles. The chances of randomly finding 21 vehicles out of 22 that were carrying meat, legal or otherwise, are too small to take seriously. For that matter, the chances of finding 21 randomly selected vehicles from Eastern Europe out of 22 arrivals are too small to consider. These were targeted checks.

 

[beorhthelm]

In a sense I am struggling. Because if border controls are necessary to keep dodgy meat out, then surely that's an argument in favour of leaving the EU not an argument against it. I thought the argument about staying in the EU was that we wouldn't need border controls?

I don't believe these were 22 random vehicles. The chances of randomly finding 21 vehicles out of 22 that were carrying meat, legal or otherwise, are too small to take seriously. For that matter, the chances of finding 21 randomly selected vehicles from Eastern Europe out of 22 arrivals are too small to consider. These were targeted checks.

thats a fair point. how much is bubbling around elsewhere in europe and who is the customer for such goods? story as stinky as the meat.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Economic and Social Research Institute finds overall trade is down by almost a fifth due to Brexit

 

[Motogull]

thats a fair point. how much is bubbling around elsewhere in europe and who is the customer for such goods? story as stinky as the meat.

Its not a fair point. Its someone wanting it to be not so because it suits them. Those doing checks possibly undergo a little bit of training beforehand so are better equipped possibly to spot a dodgy one. Or possibly not, given who is in charge and funding it.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Economic and Social Research Institute finds overall trade is down by almost a fifth due to Brexit

"Research released today (19 October 2022) by the ESRI shows reductions in UK to EU goods trade by 16% and trade from the EU to UK by 20% relative to the scenario in which Brexit had not occurred. The comparison scenario is that trade with the UK should have been expected to grow at a similar pace to that of the same products being traded with other EU partner countries around the world."

The problem with this is that it isn't logical. The say that the proportion of trade between UK and the EU has fallen, and the by definition the proportion of trade between the EU and the Rest of the World (RoW) has risen.

Then they assume that Brexit had not happened. They expect that if Brexit hadn't happened, both trade scenarios would have risen equally. Therefore the relative loss of trade to the EU must be because of Brexit.

They can't do this. They can't make an assumption that Brexit made more difference and then conclude that the difference was because of Brexit - they're going round in a circle.

Surely it's more likely that traders found that the price of trade with the EU has risen (we never stop hearing that it has!) which makes RoW more competetive and that's why the relative share of trade has changed.

 

[Bold Seagull]

"Research released today (19 October 2022) by the ESRI shows reductions in UK to EU goods trade by 16% and trade from the EU to UK by 20% relative to the scenario in which Brexit had not occurred. The comparison scenario is that trade with the UK should have been expected to grow at a similar pace to that of the same products being traded with other EU partner countries around the world."

The problem with this is that it isn't logical. The say that the proportion of trade between UK and the EU has fallen, and the by definition the proportion of trade between the EU and the Rest of the World (RoW) has risen.

Then they assume that Brexit had not happened. They expect that if Brexit hadn't happened, both trade scenarios would have risen equally. Therefore the relative loss of trade to the EU must be because of Brexit.

They can't do this. They can't make an assumption that Brexit made more difference and then conclude that the difference was because of Brexit - they're going round in a circle.

Surely it's more likely that traders found that the price of trade with the EU has risen (we never stop hearing that it has!) which makes RoW more competetive and that's why the relative share of trade has changed.

If you read it in full, you will note they echo your concerns about how you measure and compare, and illustrate how there is great difficulty in doing that.

You have to try and measure it somehow though don't you? Or would you prefer no one looks at or acknowledges the consequence and therefore we learn nothing going forwards?

 

[dsr-burnley]

If you read it in full, you will note they echo your concerns about how you measure and compare, and illustrate how there is great difficulty in doing that.

You have to try and measure it somehow though don't you? Or would you prefer no one looks at or acknowledges the consequence and therefore we learn nothing going forwards?

Thanks. I suppose a summary is always likely to miss out essential details.

With the variables of covid and the war on top of Brexit, it's no easy task plucking out figures for what might have been.