My main issue is the clear and deliberate disconnect between the EU organisations and the people, tbh.

In almost all cases, when idealism is disconnected from reality and idealism has a way to trump reality, the results are tragic.

I'm not at all sure that's true but if it was then it applies to UK exports to the EU as well doesn't it?

It feels like there is a determination by some to believe it's catastrophic for exports from the UK to the EU but no big deal when it's exports from the EU to the UK.

As it stands the UK will face tariffs and non-tariff barriers on all its goods when it leaves the single market as it has no trade agreements with anyone. The French wine maker will face new tariffs on a fraction of its production. That is the difference.

Ok but even allowing that difference for arguments sake, it's no solace to the EU to UK exporters that any pain is magnified for the UK to EU exporters. It doesn't reduce any need for the EU to reach a trade deal or the political pressure it's going to find itself under.

If the attitude of the EU is 'it hurts our members exporters but not enough for us to care' or 'it's too complicated to get agreement among ourselves to do anything' then I come back to pointing out that that's a very strong economic argument for the Leave camp.

The UK will be forced to accept free movement, nicely so. Damning would be to let some morons restrict it.

The UK will not be allowed to set a bad example, we in the EU would have our hands full with populists (like you had/have) after that, a major pain in the ass for years to come.

You did wrong, time to pay for it. You let those stupid populists with bad haircuts flourish.

You keep ignoring the whole ethos of the single market. It is about breaking down barriers and improving standards in applicant countries. Despite getting all sorts of opt-outs the UK's thickeratti have decided that they can't cut it and have voted to leave. If the UK is allowed to pick and choose, the project fails. So they simply won't be allowed into the single market.

They will leave or be ejected two years after art. 50 is triggered and immediately face tariffs - there is no possibility of a non-single market trade deal being concluded and ratified in time to stop this.

What happens after this in terms of trade is that some sort of deal for goods is probably agreed, but not services eg banking.

Lotta butthurt about freedoms itt.

Just a politucal tool to undermine the nation state and create ze glorious superstate.


Makes me happier and more certain voting leave was the only reasonable choice for a nation that wants to stay a nation.

The last mohican.

Trying To Read The Brexit Tea Leaves

Over here in the U.S., Bloomberg Television (and other media) have been commenting on the days events in Britain - especially the change of government and the UK's new Prime Minister, Theresa May. (It has been noted that Mrs. May will be the 13th Prime Minister to assume office since Queen Elizabeth was coronated back in 1952. Right off the top of my head, I can name about seven of the PMs who have served under Her Majesty.)

One of the points noted by the commentators is that Prime Minister May has publicly stated Article 50 will not be invoked (be her) until at least some unspecified time in [early?] 2017. The rationale for this delay is that the new PM needs time to organize her Government and get her negotiating team in place. I could be wrong about this, (I'm not sure), but, prior to the referendum vote, wasn't Mrs. May solidly in the "Remain" camp - 100 percent backing her party's leader Mr. Cameron?

Prime Minister Cameron resigned because he said he could not carry out a policy (i.e. exiting) with which he personally disagreed. Now Mrs. May is the PM and she is expected to carry out a policy with which she also (presumably) disagreed? If you're a politician, it's hard for me to figure how you can suddenly reverse course and carry out a policy, in good faith, of which you were previously opposed. (Correction: This observation obviously does not apply if your name is Boris Johnson.)

Does the cynic in me sense that Prime Minister May is playing for time by delaying the invocation of Article 50 in the hope that ways of "watering down" (or even negating) the negative impacts of Brexit can be discovered? Better yet, is the PM thinking along the lines of ... "OK, we'll give the country 6-9 months to really think about getting out. After the citizenry has had ample time to reflect, public opinion may change. I might be able to declare I will not invoke Article 50 as long as I'm PM, call a General Election on that basis, and roll the dice." Is this a plausible line of thinking?

I suppose my more general question is: Just how committed is Prime Minister May to going forward with Brexit?

I have a perfect and simple solution for the UK’s Brexit problem that you are all so wrapped up in, in so much gory detail. It takes care of your silliness of trying to have a new marrige to the EU and also brings you back into the fold of respectability and good sense, not to mention financial gain and security. The UK should be become the 51st state in the marvelous and glorious Untied States of America. The UK is going to disintegrate and resembles a pack of mongrel dogs that turn on each other so this will eliminate that problem also. So the wise option to bolster the UK and give it new life and sustenance, is for May to buddy up to Obama and the US congress and get admitted as a US State.

To placate the foolish numbers people, Puerto Rico can be added at the same time (Puerto Rico has serious problems of its own) and the good old USA will have 52 states and 52 stars. With the UK under our wing there is nothing but smooth sailing ahead for you sea-going, trade-crazy limeys. Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash indeed.

It will be like coming home, sort of. You limeys mucked it up long ago and now you can finally admit all your errors and become one of US - The land of the free and the home of the brave.

When that is set in motion, May can tell Merkel and rest of the EU oligarchy to kiss her ass. The EU can then stagger and sway about on its own.

*Welcome home Chez, Plaayde, and Diebitter!

@Alan

May's position as Remain supporter is awkward for her but less so than for her predecessor. To say she was solidly in the Remain camp is going a bit too far - she did very little campaigning and although she declared for Remain she appeared to most people to be somewhat on the fence regarding the issue (or perhaps hedging her bets).

Zeno:

If we could have weekly "President's Questions" over here - and be treated to the spectacle of watching our Chief Executive sweating tough questions from the opposition party - I might go for your brilliant idea! (Ha! Ha!)

Your posts itt are almost without exception unfunny and predictable but instead of your "solution" how about we send you all the Out voters who would like to join your ex-colony?

It's win/win because the average intelligence of both the USA and the UK would rise.

When asked about what she thought about leaving if it happened, I think her response was a shrug and she said 'its not the end of the world.'

We're talking about the, for us you and me worst case scenario, where we are leaving the single market. Being out doesn't mean not agreeing a mutually beneficial trade deal.

It's purely a matter of political will. Even if a complete trade deal isn't agreed then an interim agreements on some key areas can be reached. Various political agreements will be reached too, for example on the rights of people already in each others countries.

Maybe but again, the EU will be damned if a deal cannot be reached and it has to be mutually beneficial.

I suppose so ... I'm glad to see that Larry the Cat, the Chief Mouser, is not losing his job.

It will be like an old relative moving back in with a now grown up child that left home many years ago.

I don't think the USA is mature enough yet. Better we take our chances living sad and alone in a draughty old house waiting to be eaten by the pets.

usa is obv a shambles in many respects and will drag us down in the short term, but perhaps we can reform more effectively it from within

What do you gain by that? I really want to understand. Are you so proud to be a UK citizen that you would sacrifice everything to be one? At the end we all live on the same planet and you can't influence where you are born. Unfortunatly for a lot of people it's already an achievement to be born as a German, British or French citizen although they have done nothing for this.

Excellent point. And we have better food and wine and beer.

Most of the following essays, which were written at various times during the last fifteen years, are concerned to combat, in one way or another, the growth of dogmatism, whether of the Right of the Left, which has hitherto characterized out tragic century. This serious purpose inspires them even if, at times, they seem flippant, for those who are solemn and pontifical are not to be successfully fought by being even more solemn and pontifical.

– Bertrand Russell (April, 1950) from the introduction to his book, Unpopular Essays.



The last sentence speaks volumes.

I note Chez’s response was not just enjoyable but entertaining. He deserves a pint or two.

Friend 1: The problem when I'm pissed is that I can't decide whether I'm James Brown or Bertrand Russell.

Friend 2: Yeah, you think like James Brown and dance like Bertrand Russell.

The leavers won't accept free movement of people from the EU.

I could see the government trying to fudge something in regards to free movement of workers to try and get access to the single market.

But I don't think the EU would go for it.

I don't think any deal with the EU is possible within 2 years. So tariffs are inevitable.

This sums up the whole problem with democracy by referendum.

How do we know how most people who voted Out feel about free movement without having another referendum? Some people will have voted Out for other reasons eg thinking the NHS was going to get an extra £350M/week spent on it, or for matters of "sovereignty" as people I work with cite.

They can sell 10% cheaper for an advantage today.

Your poor grasp of how companies set prices to absorb budgeted costs let alone how car manufacturers rely heavily on part imports is making it impossible to discuss this with you on any serious level.