RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: There are potential positives, but on the marginal side of being of use. And certainly not paying back after years and years of uncertainty and transition costs. As the mighty JRM said, it might take 50 years....

What are the potential positives? And I'm after positives on balance, so huge growth in rest of the world trade that isn't offset by damage to domestic and European trade doesn’t count.

Ah ok, nice caveat on original comment. As I said maybe marginal, and only potential and after many years. Both would be guessing in any case- and yes its obviously trade, with optimal tariffs and lower NTB's.

But how can it be a benefit when the US will bend us over backwards with de-regulation in order to agree to a trade deal...

Stom wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
What are the potential positives? And I'm after positives on balance, so huge growth in rest of the world trade that isn't offset by damage to domestic and European trade doesn’t count.

Ah ok, nice caveat on original comment. As I said maybe marginal, and only potential and after many years. Both would be guessing in any case- and yes its obviously trade, with optimal tariffs and lower NTB's.

But how can it be a benefit when the US will bend us over backwards with de-regulation in order to agree to a trade deal...

Maybe maybe not. Potential being the key and ignored word. The benefits would depend on the skill of the negotiators (oops) and net benefits of what happens to the EU over the next 'n' years.

Banquo wrote:

Stom wrote:

Banquo wrote: Ah ok, nice caveat on original comment. As I said maybe marginal, and only potential and after many years. Both would be guessing in any case- and yes its obviously trade, with optimal tariffs and lower NTB's.

But how can it be a benefit when the US will bend us over backwards with de-regulation in order to agree to a trade deal...

Maybe maybe not. Potential being the key and ignored word. The benefits would depend on the skill of the negotiators (oops) and net benefits of what happens to the EU over the next 'n' years.

As Banquo said. We don't necessarily have to sign a deal with the US if it's not in our interests (in fact, one might even say that no deal would be better than a bad deal) and sucking up to China, India, Brazil, etc might serve us better. Plus, it depends what happens to the EU and if the wave of populism enveloping the continent brings it down.

Puja

The US is under jury rig at the moment and hasn't exactly dazzled on the negotiation front of late.

I heard Donald was on top form in trade negotiations having taken to driving a child's toy car along his desk to illustrate the risk of being hit by 25% tariffs in one's automotive industry

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: There are potential positives, but on the marginal side of being of use. And certainly not paying back after years and years of uncertainty and transition costs. As the mighty JRM said, it might take 50 years....

What are the potential positives? And I'm after positives on balance, so huge growth in rest of the world trade that isn't offset by damage to domestic and European trade doesn’t count.

Ah ok, nice caveat on original comment. As I said maybe marginal, and only potential and after many years. Both would be guessing in any case- and yes its obviously trade, with optimal tariffs and lower NTB's.

It wasn’t meant as a caveat, I like free movement in Europe on a personal level but I've any number of issues with the EU, for me it has to be about how it impacts the wider economy (and not just me or my firm)

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
What are the potential positives? And I'm after positives on balance, so huge growth in rest of the world trade that isn't offset by damage to domestic and European trade doesn’t count.

Ah ok, nice caveat on original comment. As I said maybe marginal, and only potential and after many years. Both would be guessing in any case- and yes its obviously trade, with optimal tariffs and lower NTB's.

It wasn’t meant as a caveat, I like free movement in Europe on a personal level but I've any number of issues with the EU, for me it has to be about how it impacts the wider economy (and not just me or my firm)

well yes, but I framed it as potential, not as nailed on, and whether its 'net' positive also depends on the 'deals done' and their impact and what has happened to what was the status quo since. So in other words, won't really see if 'positive' for a long while in all likelihood, and in all likelihood hardly much more than marginal if that....we could live in hope

morepork wrote:The US is under jury rig at the moment and hasn't exactly dazzled on the negotiation front of late.

I stand by my comment that they could probably crush us on the negotiation front. Two bald men fighting over a comb, but I think we're clearly the better incompetents.

Read this today and thought it a well-written article from a Leave-voter's perspective: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... ink-again/

Puja

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:The US is under jury rig at the moment and hasn't exactly dazzled on the negotiation front of late.

I stand by my comment that they could probably crush us on the negotiation front. Two bald men fighting over a comb, but I think we're clearly the better incompetents.

Read this today and thought it a well-written article from a Leave-voter's perspective: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... ink-again/

Puja

Departments of State, Agriculture, Labour, etc etc etc are all acutely understaffed. The current US ambassador to GB is a man named Woody that owns a football team and is perpetually involved in tax fraud. What are they going to do? Send Ivanka to seal the deal?You appeal to Cheeto and he will do as you want.

The only scenario I see where the UK benefits from Brexit, regarding trade, is if the EU goes south hard no later than 3, maybe 4 years from now.

How likely is it? So far I would say very unlikely.

Hoping that Trump turns into Santa and deliver a positive trade deal? Even less likely.

morepork wrote:

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:The US is under jury rig at the moment and hasn't exactly dazzled on the negotiation front of late.

I stand by my comment that they could probably crush us on the negotiation front. Two bald men fighting over a comb, but I think we're clearly the better incompetents.

Read this today and thought it a well-written article from a Leave-voter's perspective: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... ink-again/

Puja

Departments of State, Agriculture, Labour, etc etc etc are all acutely understaffed. The current US ambassador to GB is a man named Woody that owns a football team and is perpetually involved in tax fraud. What are they going to do? Send Ivanka to seal the deal?You appeal to Cheeto and he will do as you want.

We have recently thought it was a good idea to put Boris Johnson as our main liaison with other nations.

And now it's Jeremy Hunt.

I'm still confident in our IncompetenceBowl chances.

Puja

gransoporro wrote:The only scenario I see where the UK benefits from Brexit, regarding trade, is if the EU goes south hard no later than 3, maybe 4 years from now.

How likely is it? So far I would say very unlikely.

Hoping that Trump turns into Santa and deliver a positive trade deal? Even less likely.

Ironically, us leaving and being such colossal dicks about it has probably made the EU stronger to deal with the wave of populist nationalism, simply through tarring the separatist movement with our fuckwittery.

Puja

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:The US is under jury rig at the moment and hasn't exactly dazzled on the negotiation front of late.

I stand by my comment that they could probably crush us on the negotiation front. Two bald men fighting over a comb, but I think we're clearly the better incompetents.

Read this today and thought it a well-written article from a Leave-voter's perspective: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... ink-again/

Puja

I came across that yesterday. Have their been any similar articles by remain voters that have changed their mind?

Lizard wrote:

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:The US is under jury rig at the moment and hasn't exactly dazzled on the negotiation front of late.

I stand by my comment that they could probably crush us on the negotiation front. Two bald men fighting over a comb, but I think we're clearly the better incompetents.

Read this today and thought it a well-written article from a Leave-voter's perspective: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... ink-again/

Puja

I came across that yesterday. Have their been any similar articles by remain voters that have changed their mind?

I'd be surprised. Leave aren't exactly running a tremendous advertisement for their side right now.

Mind, the polls are still running 52:48 (but in the opposite direction) so it's not like there's been an earth-shattering shift the other way. I think it's become an identity thing now - people are defining themselves by their vote, which makes changing their mind much more unlikely. You're not just changing a vote, but changing an identity, joining a different camp, becoming one of "them". And that means contradictory facts are much more likely to get bounced away with confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance - it's easier to decide the facts are wrong than to decide you are.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Lizard wrote:

Puja wrote:
I stand by my comment that they could probably crush us on the negotiation front. Two bald men fighting over a comb, but I think we're clearly the better incompetents.

Read this today and thought it a well-written article from a Leave-voter's perspective: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... ink-again/

Puja

I came across that yesterday. Have their been any similar articles by remain voters that have changed their mind?

I'd be surprised. Leave aren't exactly running a tremendous advertisement for their side right now.

Mind, the polls are still running 52:48 (but in the opposite direction) so it's not like there's been an earth-shattering shift the other way. I think it's become an identity thing now - people are defining themselves by their vote, which makes changing their mind much more unlikely. You're not just changing a vote, but changing an identity, joining a different camp, becoming one of "them". And that means contradictory facts are much more likely to get bounced away with confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance - it's easier to decide the facts are wrong than to decide you are.

Puja

There's the public comments of Liz Truss to trawl through, allegedly she voted remain but as the economy didn’t detonate after the leave vote she's now a leaver. In fairness lots of remain voters probably wanted to leave but voted remain over concerns around the process and outcome of leave

How one works for the treasury and makes comments along the lines of it's going okay look at all these new sources of foreign investment whilst watching actual investment take a nosedive I don't know, you'd have to be biblically stupid. Jeremy Hunt of course thinks very similarly to Liz Truss on this

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Lizard wrote: I came across that yesterday. Have their been any similar articles by remain voters that have changed their mind?

I'd be surprised. Leave aren't exactly running a tremendous advertisement for their side right now.

Mind, the polls are still running 52:48 (but in the opposite direction) so it's not like there's been an earth-shattering shift the other way. I think it's become an identity thing now - people are defining themselves by their vote, which makes changing their mind much more unlikely. You're not just changing a vote, but changing an identity, joining a different camp, becoming one of "them". And that means contradictory facts are much more likely to get bounced away with confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance - it's easier to decide the facts are wrong than to decide you are.

Puja

There's the public comments of Liz Truss to trawl through, allegedly she voted remain but as the economy didn’t detonate after the leave vote she's now a leaver. In fairness lots of remain voters probably wanted to leave but voted remain over concerns around the process and outcome of leave

How one works for the treasury and makes comments along the lines of it's going okay look at all these new sources of foreign investment whilst watching actual investment take a nosedive I don't know, you'd have to be biblically stupid. Jeremy Hunt of course thinks very similarly to Liz Truss on this

Biblically stupid or utterly politically amoral, swapping from side to side depending on who appears to be winning. I wouldn't count the public pronouncements of politicians for much.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
I'd be surprised. Leave aren't exactly running a tremendous advertisement for their side right now.

Mind, the polls are still running 52:48 (but in the opposite direction) so it's not like there's been an earth-shattering shift the other way. I think it's become an identity thing now - people are defining themselves by their vote, which makes changing their mind much more unlikely. You're not just changing a vote, but changing an identity, joining a different camp, becoming one of "them". And that means contradictory facts are much more likely to get bounced away with confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance - it's easier to decide the facts are wrong than to decide you are.

Puja

There's the public comments of Liz Truss to trawl through, allegedly she voted remain but as the economy didn’t detonate after the leave vote she's now a leaver. In fairness lots of remain voters probably wanted to leave but voted remain over concerns around the process and outcome of leave

How one works for the treasury and makes comments along the lines of it's going okay look at all these new sources of foreign investment whilst watching actual investment take a nosedive I don't know, you'd have to be biblically stupid. Jeremy Hunt of course thinks very similarly to Liz Truss on this

Biblically stupid or utterly politically amoral, swapping from side to side depending on who appears to be winning. I wouldn't count the public pronouncements of politicians for much.

Puja

Yet here we are. Wholly reliant on them. It’s where we went so wrong. We should’ve left the negotiations in the hands of the pros and away from politicians as much as possible. AFAIK, this is how most FTA’s etc are undertaken, unless you’re Trump. Send in the experts (yes, I know what Gove said) and then bring it back to parliament at a sensible stage(s). As I keep saying, the WA is so close to Lab’s, belatedly arrived at, position the only reason they can’t agree with the it is because it’s seen as May’s deal. If it was seen as Robbins’ I think we’d be out by now.

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
There's the public comments of Liz Truss to trawl through, allegedly she voted remain but as the economy didn’t detonate after the leave vote she's now a leaver. In fairness lots of remain voters probably wanted to leave but voted remain over concerns around the process and outcome of leave

How one works for the treasury and makes comments along the lines of it's going okay look at all these new sources of foreign investment whilst watching actual investment take a nosedive I don't know, you'd have to be biblically stupid. Jeremy Hunt of course thinks very similarly to Liz Truss on this

Biblically stupid or utterly politically amoral, swapping from side to side depending on who appears to be winning. I wouldn't count the public pronouncements of politicians for much.

Puja

Yet here we are. Wholly reliant on them. It’s where we went so wrong. We should’ve left the negotiations in the hands of the pros and away from politicians as much as possible. AFAIK, this is how most FTA’s etc are undertaken, unless you’re Trump. Send in the experts (yes, I know what Gove said) and then bring it back to parliament at a sensible stage(s). As I keep saying, the WA is so close to Lab’s, belatedly arrived at, position the only reason they can’t agree with the it is because it’s seen as May’s deal. If it was seen as Robbins’ I think we’d be out by now.

Not sure about that- its a Tory deal either way, and my take is that Labour's party political strategy is spot on (obviously diverging from what's good for the country); let the Tories cop every piece of blame for Brexit whilst pretending to be reluctant leavers (rather than hard Brexit best for Corbyn/McDonnell, Remain best rest of PLP (bar between 30-50 of them) and membership), and ideally force a GE at the right point where lasting blame drops on the Tories.

Course we’ll all be laughin’ at ourselves in 10 years as the Five Eyes 1st Expeditionary Force readies itself at Dover to invade Europe to free its people from civil war between the Brussels Dictariats EU Army and a coalition of various extreme ethno-nationalist guerilla groups.

Lizard wrote:Course we’ll all be laughin’ at ourselves in 10 years as the Five Eyes 1st Expeditionary Force readies itself at Dover to invade Europe to free its people from civil war between the Brussels Dictariats EU Army and a coalition of various extreme ethno-nationalist guerilla groups.

Sheeeit man. Don't even joke. You could probably kick off conflict with an ill considered internet meme at the moment.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
I'd be surprised. Leave aren't exactly running a tremendous advertisement for their side right now.

Mind, the polls are still running 52:48 (but in the opposite direction) so it's not like there's been an earth-shattering shift the other way. I think it's become an identity thing now - people are defining themselves by their vote, which makes changing their mind much more unlikely. You're not just changing a vote, but changing an identity, joining a different camp, becoming one of "them". And that means contradictory facts are much more likely to get bounced away with confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance - it's easier to decide the facts are wrong than to decide you are.

Puja

There's the public comments of Liz Truss to trawl through, allegedly she voted remain but as the economy didn’t detonate after the leave vote she's now a leaver. In fairness lots of remain voters probably wanted to leave but voted remain over concerns around the process and outcome of leave

How one works for the treasury and makes comments along the lines of it's going okay look at all these new sources of foreign investment whilst watching actual investment take a nosedive I don't know, you'd have to be biblically stupid. Jeremy Hunt of course thinks very similarly to Liz Truss on this

Biblically stupid or utterly politically amoral, swapping from side to side depending on who appears to be winning. I wouldn't count the public pronouncements of politicians for much.

Puja

Is political morality a barometer of intelligence? I think most of us would allow intelligence and morality needn't be linked. And I'd hope most of us would be worried about the fall in investment whichever way they voted or would vote if presented with a second referendum. I suspect I should also allow Truss made comments on the back of some daft comments from the remain campaign around just how damaging a vote to leave would be

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:
Biblically stupid or utterly politically amoral, swapping from side to side depending on who appears to be winning. I wouldn't count the public pronouncements of politicians for much.

Puja

Yet here we are. Wholly reliant on them. It’s where we went so wrong. We should’ve left the negotiations in the hands of the pros and away from politicians as much as possible. AFAIK, this is how most FTA’s etc are undertaken, unless you’re Trump. Send in the experts (yes, I know what Gove said) and then bring it back to parliament at a sensible stage(s). As I keep saying, the WA is so close to Lab’s, belatedly arrived at, position the only reason they can’t agree with the it is because it’s seen as May’s deal. If it was seen as Robbins’ I think we’d be out by now.

Not sure about that- its a Tory deal either way, and my take is that Labour's party political strategy is spot on (obviously diverging from what's good for the country); let the Tories cop every piece of blame for Brexit whilst pretending to be reluctant leavers (rather than hard Brexit best for Corbyn/McDonnell, Remain best rest of PLP (bar between 30-50 of them) and membership), and ideally force a GE at the right point where lasting blame drops on the Tories.

Yeh. You’re probably right.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Yet here we are. Wholly reliant on them. It’s where we went so wrong. We should’ve left the negotiations in the hands of the pros and away from politicians as much as possible. AFAIK, this is how most FTA’s etc are undertaken, unless you’re Trump. Send in the experts (yes, I know what Gove said) and then bring it back to parliament at a sensible stage(s). As I keep saying, the WA is so close to Lab’s, belatedly arrived at, position the only reason they can’t agree with the it is because it’s seen as May’s deal. If it was seen as Robbins’ I think we’d be out by now.

Not sure about that- its a Tory deal either way, and my take is that Labour's party political strategy is spot on (obviously diverging from what's good for the country); let the Tories cop every piece of blame for Brexit whilst pretending to be reluctant leavers (rather than hard Brexit best for Corbyn/McDonnell, Remain best rest of PLP (bar between 30-50 of them) and membership), and ideally force a GE at the right point where lasting blame drops on the Tories.

Yeh. You’re probably right.

Cripes. Did you not get the memo about agreeing in this forum

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: Not sure about that- its a Tory deal either way, and my take is that Labour's party political strategy is spot on (obviously diverging from what's good for the country); let the Tories cop every piece of blame for Brexit whilst pretending to be reluctant leavers (rather than hard Brexit best for Corbyn/McDonnell, Remain best rest of PLP (bar between 30-50 of them) and membership), and ideally force a GE at the right point where lasting blame drops on the Tories.

Yeh. You’re probably right.

Cripes. Did you not get the memo about agreeing in this forum

It wasn’t a memo, it was a missive.

With everything that is going on in the world at the moment I am starting to think that the meek will not inherit the world after all.