Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[Fade and Die]

News this AM carrying reports that young people ineligble to vote in EU ref of 2016 but eligible now to vote, of which there are more than 2 million, on consistent polling would vote to remain over leave by ratio of 7 to 1. Conversely expecting older remainers to move to leave is not expected, generational in that everyone younger than say 58 (taking into account childhood) has known nothing but being in Europe politically so don't yearn for days of yore with rose tinted specs on.

Some may say this is not relevant to what happended in 2016 but if that trend is correct then it's only going to be a matter of time before there is another referendum to rejoin the EU in whatever form that takes in future, is it not?
If Cameron could put it in his 2015 election manifesto then why can't any other party have a EU ref in/out pledge in theirs in the not so distant future too?

We know political parties are shallow enough to include anything they think will win votes so EU issue must keep coming up.
Fair chance the Conservative Party will have split on Europe by then too.

As soon as we leave, the rejoin movement will just grow legs and eventually will prevail, has to, hasn't it?

Brexit has actually strengthened and unified EU 27 if anything, not the opposite as leavers hoped.

No I think once the UK leaves and thrives the EU will start to come undone, more infighting mostly about finances will lead to discontent and a rise in Nationalism, Italy will probably be first, then the Greeks. One by one more countries will leave and eventually it will cease to exist..... Who knows maybe a Phoenix will arise from it’s ashes, just a few like minded countries who want a loose affiliation to trade together, they might call themselves the EEC!

 

[Foxholer]

Aren't points 7, 8 and 9 actually true......

7: The UK will NOT be able to make its own trade deals.
8: The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade tariffs.
9 The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade quotas.

We currently don't make our own trade deals, we don't set our own trade tariffs and we don't set our own trade quotas. As a member of the EU they negotiate these on our behalf - I'm assuming with some kind of input from each member state. So technically all three of those points are true and if we stay in the EU we still won't do any of those things.

As for the rest I'm not sure "twaddle" is a strong enough term for what it all is. I'm sure there would have been something in the papers or on the news if the London stock exchange was moving to Frankfurt in 2020 or if we had to adopt the Euro and enter the Schengen zone by 2022. Unless it's all just one big conspiracy and they're keeping it from us. I'm putting my tinfoil hat back on to stop them reading my mind and knowing that I know what they are doing.

Yep! They are/That's certainly one of the 'how it is' states as per my post for EU members on deals negotiated by the EU.
Of course, that also means 'there's no need to negotiate trade deals, because we've done it for you', but why present both sides of the coin!
And 8 and 9 are actually (pretty much) redundant as 'trade deals' (only) consist of 'tariffs' and 'quotas'! The only possible 'benefit' of a UK-specific 'deal' would be if the overall quota negotiated by the EU wasn't sufficient for UK 'needs', but that's not particularly likely imo.

As others have stated...Project Fear! I detest the instigators of such twaddle - on both sides of the argument!

 

[drdel]

News this AM carrying reports that young people ineligble to vote in EU ref of 2016 but eligible now to vote, of which there are more than 2 million, on consistent polling would vote to remain over leave by ratio of 7 to 1. Conversely expecting older remainers to move to leave is not expected, generational in that everyone younger than say 58 (taking into account childhood) has known nothing but being in Europe politically so don't yearn for days of yore with rose tinted specs on.

Some may say this is not relevant to what happended in 2016 but if that trend is correct then it's only going to be a matter of time before there is another referendum to rejoin the EU in whatever form that takes in future, is it not?
If Cameron could put it in his 2015 election manifesto then why can't any other party have a EU ref in/out pledge in theirs in the not so distant future too?

We know political parties are shallow enough to include anything they think will win votes so EU issue must keep coming up.
Fair chance the Conservative Party will have split on Europe by then too.

As soon as we leave, the rejoin movement will just grow legs and eventually will prevail, has to, hasn't it?

Brexit has actually strengthened and unified EU 27 if anything, not the opposite as leavers hoped.

It may have unified Brussels but if you look at the members voicing discontent I'd hardly call them unified in any way.

 

[Hacker Khan]

Yep! They are/That's certainly one of the 'how it is' states as per my post for EU members on deals negotiated by the EU.
Of course, that also means 'there's no need to negotiate trade deals, because we've done it for you', but why present both sides of the coin!
And 8 and 9 are actually (pretty much) redundant as 'trade deals' (only) consist of 'tariffs' and 'quotas'! The only possible 'benefit' of a UK-specific 'deal' would be if the overall quota negotiated by the EU wasn't sufficient for UK 'needs', but that's not particularly likely imo.

As others have stated...Project Fear! I detest the instigators of such twaddle - on both sides of the argument!

Some may argue people who distribute and believe such twaddle on both sides are a bigger threat to democracy than a second vote. I read a very good article in Wired the other day talking about bot based propaganda being a massive threat to democracy as over 50% of us get our news from social media nowadays. And the stuff then went on in the Trump election and potentially Brexit is very primitive compared to what could be done once your premier news source could be at best an echo chamber, and at worst completely made up.

 

[Foxholer]

No I think once the UK leaves and thrives the EU will start to come undone, more infighting mostly about finances will lead to discontent and a rise in Nationalism, Italy will probably be first, then the Greeks. One by one more countries will leave and eventually it will cease to exist..... Who knows maybe a Phoenix will arise from it’s ashes, just a few like minded countries who want a loose affiliation to trade together, they might call themselves the EEC!

I actually doubt this will happen.

I'm pretty sure there WILL be a certain amount of disruption within EU - mainly financial, but it won't break the EU up. It might make the EU stronger - to the detriment of the UK, at least in the Financial Area.

To me, the trigger for all of this was the significant increase in EU size a few years ago. The deferment of 'benefits' of, particularly, Freedom of Movement of People merely deferred the 'crisis' for the UK - already made sceptical of several aspects of EU membership by (perhaps misguided or perhaps truly patriotic) folk with influence. UK IS pretty 'crowded' in areas that contribute most to its economy and providing the appropriate level of services to its population, at an 'affordable' cost, is a considerable problem. So the seemingly 'uncontrollable' (I'm almost certain that's not actually the case) influx of significant numbers of immigrants from the recently joined member states has put additional burdens on those services, and provided more ammo for those that seek to have UK 'independent'. The Press has also had a considerable part to play, both with its overall anti-EU stance and, imo, the lack of appropriate quality/standards/regulation.

 

[bluewolf]

Hey Brian, sorry I didn't get back to this. I've been doing a (tiny) bit of digging around this. Can you provide actual proof that EU Grants (not loans) were used to fund these moves?

Sorry to drag this up again but I'm genuinely interested in the answer.

I have an overwhelming sense that most of it isn't true (happy to be proven wrong). And the logic doesn't work anyway.

The consensus seems to be that the EU I'd actively seeking to move manufacturing from the U.K. But this doesn't make sense when some on here are adamant that our EU payments are going to increase. If the EU need us as much as some say then they sure as sh*t can't justify hurting our economy.

Also, I'm constantly reading on here about the EU Federal Superstate. About how the only way to avoid it is to leave. But that assertion assumes that France, Germany, Spain, Italy etc are all happy to give up their national identity, and that we won't because ours is what? Too strong? Too good? Do we genuinely think we're better than everyone else?

We seem to have Schroedinger's Brexit happening. The EU want to destroy our employment base whilst upping our contributions. They want to subsume our national identity whilst everyone else is happy to give theirs up. They want to come here and take all our jobs whilst also taking all our benefits. It's bizarre.

 

[Hobbit]

Sorry to drag this up again but I'm genuinely interested in the answer.

I have an overwhelming sense that most of it isn't true (happy to be proven wrong). And the logic doesn't work anyway.

The consensus seems to be that the EU I'd actively seeking to move manufacturing from the U.K. But this doesn't make sense when some on here are adamant that our EU payments are going to increase. If the EU need us as much as some say then they sure as sh*t can't justify hurting our economy.

Also, I'm constantly reading on here about the EU Federal Superstate. About how the only way to avoid it is to leave. But that assertion assumes that France, Germany, Spain, Italy etc are all happy to give up their national identity, and that we won't because ours is what? Too strong? Too good? Do we genuinely think we're better than everyone else?

We seem to have Schroedinger's Brexit happening. The EU want to destroy our employment base whilst upping our contributions. They want to subsume our national identity whilst everyone else is happy to give theirs up. They want to come here and take all our jobs whilst also taking all our benefits. It's bizarre.

Just in from golf - T-shirt weather here. I'm sceptical about some of it, and will look at it later. However, as I said earlier in the thread, the company I used to work for did close production lines in the UK and Germany and move it to the Czech Republic.

 

[bluewolf]

Just in from golf - T-shirt weather here. I'm sceptical about some of it, and will look at it later. However, as I said earlier in the thread, the company I used to work for did close production lines in the UK and Germany and move it to the Czech Republic.

I have no doubt that production has moved, but it's being presented as the EU purposefully offering financial incentives for factories in the U.K. To close and move production to Eastern and Southern Europe. I just don't think it's true.

 

[Hobbit]

I have no doubt that production has moved, but it's being presented as the EU purposefully offering financial incentives for factories in the U.K. To close and move production to Eastern and Southern Europe. I just don't think it's true.

I don't think the EU has been purposefully providing incentives to move production out of the UK. If that were the case why has the company I worked for moved production out of Germany, as well as the UK, to the Czech Republic? Honestly, I think companies have been taking advantage of grants/tax breaks offered by the 'local' govts, funded by the EU. The companies have to maximise their dividends, or be answerable to shareholders. They show no loyalty to a country anyway, only to the ROI.

However, I do feel that its a flawed model for the EU. As you alluded to, it leads to loss of tax returns in one country, which impacts the money the EU can get out of that country, and sees lower tax returns in a country the business has been moved to. If was to attract extra business from outside the EU into the poorer countries, great, but it doesn't seem to achieve much of that.

As for the federal superstate; have a read of Juncker's 'state of the nation' address. You could also look at what Macron has said, and supported by Merkel. The proposal for an EU army. The proposal for an EU chancellor.

The changing of what is needed to pass laws from a qualified majority to a simple majority. TBH, with 28 member states it probably needs to change or nothing would go through. But, conversely, simple majorities are, as we currently know, cause no end of problems.

 

[bluewolf]

I don't think the EU has been purposefully providing incentives to move production out of the UK. If that were the case why has the company I worked for moved production out of Germany, as well as the UK, to the Czech Republic? Honestly, I think companies have been taking advantage of grants/tax breaks offered by the 'local' govts, funded by the EU. The companies have to maximise their dividends, or be answerable to shareholders. They show no loyalty to a country anyway, only to the ROI.

However, I do feel that its a flawed model for the EU. As you alluded to, it leads to loss of tax returns in one country, which impacts the money the EU can get out of that country, and sees lower tax returns in a country the business has been moved to. If was to attract extra business from outside the EU into the poorer countries, great, but it doesn't seem to achieve much of that.

As for the federal superstate; have a read of Juncker's 'state of the nation' address. You could also look at what Macron has said, and supported by Merkel. The proposal for an EU army. The proposal for an EU chancellor.

The changing of what is needed to pass laws from a qualified majority to a simple majority. TBH, with 28 member states it probably needs to change or nothing would go through. But, conversely, simple majorities are, as we currently know, cause no end of problems.

I agree with pretty much all of the first part of your post. The second part has one major flaw. The people don't want it. And as we're seeing now, if the people don't want it then it ain't happening. This is the truly ironic side of Brexit. The very people who are most afraid of the EU Suprrstate are the very ones who could stop it just by doing what they are currently doing. They just aren't giving themselves enough credit (strange as that may sound).

 

[Hacker Khan]

Just had a email form a German mate who lives in Berlin, he says

'We had a store near by 'Broken English' and they announced they are going to close it as due to Brexit it won't be worth it, too much hassle. So, no more marmalade, biscuits, Boddington's, Cadbury's...'

Who says there will be no victims of Brexit......

 

[Dando]

News this AM carrying reports that young people ineligble to vote in EU ref of 2016 but eligible now to vote, of which there are more than 2 million, on consistent polling would vote to remain over leave by ratio of 7 to 1. Conversely expecting older remainers to move to leave is not expected, generational in that everyone younger than say 58 (taking into account childhood) has known nothing but being in Europe politically so don't yearn for days of yore with rose tinted specs on.

Some may say this is not relevant to what happended in 2016 but if that trend is correct then it's only going to be a matter of time before there is another referendum to rejoin the EU in whatever form that takes in future, is it not?
If Cameron could put it in his 2015 election manifesto then why can't any other party have a EU ref in/out pledge in theirs in the not so distant future too?

We know political parties are shallow enough to include anything they think will win votes so EU issue must keep coming up.
Fair chance the Conservative Party will have split on Europe by then too.

As soon as we leave, the rejoin movement will just grow legs and eventually will prevail, has to, hasn't it?

Brexit has actually strengthened and unified EU 27 if anything, not the opposite as leavers hoped.

So what, more people are eligible to vote.
The same can be said after every vote but I guess that won’t help your cause!

 

[Hobbit]

I agree with pretty much all of the first part of your post. The second part has one major flaw. The people don't want it. And as we're seeing now, if the people don't want it then it ain't happening. This is the truly ironic side of Brexit. The very people who are most afraid of the EU Suprrstate are the very ones who could stop it just by doing what they are currently doing. They just aren't giving themselves enough credit (strange as that may sound).

For want of a better way of putting it, aren't you being a little naive? The EU's own satisfaction survey, published in the last few weeks shows that there's very few countries with more than a 50% satisfaction with the EU. Several countries have govts or significant standings of hard right politicians who have campaigned and won on an anti-EU mandate. Italy is still at loggerheads with the EU over its budget, even though it passes the EU's GDP % criteria, and the EU have recently threatened them with fines over it.

Juncker's appointment of his number 2 is suspect to say the least.

And with a backdrop of all that Juncker proposes, and gains support from France and Germany, for an EU army and an EU chancellor. The EU's use of the current Security and Defence policy is open to question and isn't popular yet he still proposed the EU army. Don't forget that Germany and France hold a huge block of votes in the EU parliament.

The people of several countries voted no for Maastricht and the Lisbon Treaty yet the EU pushed them through with virtually no change to those treaties.

 

[User62651]

So what, more people are eligible to vote.
The same can be said after every vote but I guess that won’t help your cause!

Not more people, same amount of people, think you missed the point entirely and I dont have a cause, sorry.

 

[User62651]

If my aunty had a willy she would be my uncle.

Quality posting again there SR, the effort must be exhausting.

 

[SocketRocket]

News this AM carrying reports that young people ineligble to vote in EU ref of 2016 but eligible now to vote, of which there are more than 2 million, on consistent polling would vote to remain over leave by ratio of 7 to 1. Conversely expecting older remainers to move to leave is not expected, generational in that everyone younger than say 58 (taking into account childhood) has known nothing but being in Europe politically so don't yearn for days of yore with rose tinted specs on.

Some may say this is not relevant to what happended in 2016 but if that trend is correct then it's only going to be a matter of time before there is another referendum to rejoin the EU in whatever form that takes in future, is it not?
If Cameron could put it in his 2015 election manifesto then why can't any other party have a EU ref in/out pledge in theirs in the not so distant future too?

We know political parties are shallow enough to include anything they think will win votes so EU issue must keep coming up.
Fair chance the Conservative Party will have split on Europe by then too.

As soon as we leave, the rejoin movement will just grow legs and eventually will prevail, has to, hasn't it?

Brexit has actually strengthened and unified EU 27 if anything, not the opposite as leavers hoped.

The logic is questionable. Just as more young
people become old enough to vote more middle aged people become old. I would disagree that its older people looking back with rose tinted glasses on a glorious time before we were members of the EU, I lived through those days and they were austere days where most of us were hard up related to people today, life was hard and pretty unforgiving. IMO the way older people tended to vote the way they did was due to a lifetime of experience and the wisdom that gives them. Many of them voted remain just as many young people voted leave, I am often surprised when seeing young people on Question Time promoting Brexit , also during debates and street interviews by tv presenters. I tend to be sceptic on reports saying how young and old people voted, I think it was more of a mixed bag.

 

[SocketRocket]

Quality posting again there SR, the effort must be exhausting.

The point being that its opinionated and subjective, not fact. You of course will go for it though as it supports your preferences although it changes nothing, the vote was at a moment in time, should we rerun general elections every two years because some old people had died.

 

[Hobbit]

News this AM carrying reports that young people ineligble to vote in EU ref of 2016 but eligible now to vote, of which there are more than 2 million, on consistent polling would vote to remain over leave by ratio of 7 to 1. Conversely expecting older remainers to move to leave is not expected, generational in that everyone younger than say 58 (taking into account childhood) has known nothing but being in Europe politically so don't yearn for days of yore with rose tinted specs on.

Some may say this is not relevant to what happended in 2016 but if that trend is correct then it's only going to be a matter of time before there is another referendum to rejoin the EU in whatever form that takes in future, is it not?
If Cameron could put it in his 2015 election manifesto then why can't any other party have a EU ref in/out pledge in theirs in the not so distant future too?

We know political parties are shallow enough to include anything they think will win votes so EU issue must keep coming up.
Fair chance the Conservative Party will have split on Europe by then too.

As soon as we leave, the rejoin movement will just grow legs and eventually will prevail, has to, hasn't it?

Brexit has actually strengthened and unified EU 27 if anything, not the opposite as leavers hoped.

There is part of one sentence in there that I think people shouldn't lose sight of. "...if that trend is correct..." It may be educated speculation but its still only speculation.

The number and percentages have been done to death in the last 2.5 years, along with those at GE's. There's a trend there that is worth noting too. When its close, it can't be predicted with any certainty.

 

[bluewolf]

For want of a better way of putting it, aren't you being a little naive? The EU's own satisfaction survey, published in the last few weeks shows that there's very few countries with more than a 50% satisfaction with the EU. Several countries have govts or significant standings of hard right politicians who have campaigned and won on an anti-EU mandate. Italy is still at loggerheads with the EU over its budget, even though it passes the EU's GDP % criteria, and the EU have recently threatened them with fines over it.

Juncker's appointment of his number 2 is suspect to say the least.

And with a backdrop of all that Juncker proposes, and gains support from France and Germany, for an EU army and an EU chancellor. The EU's use of the current Security and Defence policy is open to question and isn't popular yet he still proposed the EU army. Don't forget that Germany and France hold a huge block of votes in the EU parliament.

The people of several countries voted no for Maastricht and the Lisbon Treaty yet the EU pushed them through with virtually no change to those treaties.

So, we're in the middle of the biggest political crudstorm in decades, all because the people were unhappy with the political classes, and you're claiming that people being unhappy doesn't result in political crudstorms?

 

[User62651]

The point being that its opinionated and subjective, not fact. You of course will go for it though as it supports your preferences although it changes nothing, the vote was at a moment in time, should we rerun general elections every two years because some old people had died.

It was carried on the tv news this morning, the polling is factual.