|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
|
Alex Cockell
Ship’s penguin
# 7487
|
Posted
Is there any chance that May could get Liam fox to shut the hell up - and they go EEA? Just to keep the lights on?
Posts: 2146 | From: Reading, Berkshire UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
If she succeeds in getting the idiots in her party (Fox, BoJo, Davies, Gove ...) to shut up all that would do would be to let Farage come back to media attention. I'm not sure that's an improvement.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
"...ok, time to make it work."
That's my attitude as well.
Britain leaving the EU is going to happen, so we can either all pull together to make it work as well as possible for Britain or we can keep bitching about the fact that it's happening, undermining it at every opportunity and basically hoping it fails so we can say "I told you so". For me, there's only one rational choice there, and it's not the one that essentially copies the Republican Party's response to Barack Obama being President.
If Brexit goes badly... when Brexit goes badly it won't be because I was bitching about it in Ship of Fools. I'm not sure that invoking the Republicans in this context is particularly relevant. I think you will find that the angry nativists and white nationalists are on your particular side of the aisle. A better comparison would be with the Republican Party in 2003 where anyone who dared point out that the invasion of Iraq wasn't going to work was told to shut up and get behind our boys. Some people did, but it didn't stop it being a clusterfuck.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I had to laugh at the Times front page this morning, their paraphrase of May's speech was: 'Give us fair deal or you'll be crushed'.
I don't think she actually said that, although some journalists are interpreting the threat to emulate Singapore as something like that.
I wonder if this is a leak from an ultra-Brexit politician, just to show the iron fist in an iron glove?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The sooner Scotland gets independence so I'm not living in the UK the better
However passionately you obviously feel about this, it remains true that, from an economic perspective, Scottish independence remains a no brainer. Given the huge difference between Scotland's
trade with the rest of the UK compared to the rest of the world, the UK internal market is many times more important to Scotland than the EU market. I don't think this is lost on Scottish voters. Opinion polls, though notoriously inaccurate, suggest that support for independence has gone down since 2014.
A politician as wily as Nikki the Fish knows that another lost referendum will bury the issue for 50 years, so despite her rhetoric, I think she'll hold fire on that one for a while. No EU country is taking her seriously. It's more than likely that Scotland would have to apply anew for EU membership. If sufficient Scottish voters are so ideologically wedded to independence that they are willing to be an isolated small country with a basket case economy, they must be allowed to have it, but I rather doubt it.
This question of access to the Single Market is exaggerated in any event. All countries have access, and the UK economy is strong and resilient enough to cope with the worst case scenario, which is WTO rules on a most favoured nation basis. Despite all the sabre rattling which has gone on since June last, today even Jean Claude Junker has made conciliatory noises that, however difficult, the negotiations must find a fair deal for all. Today the Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said that there must be a fair deal for Britain, but that it must be inferior to membership.
That is to be expected. They don't want to make it easy for other countries to follow the UK out. But pragmatism will out once the dust settles. The Germans won't want a 10% tariff applied to their huge UK car sales. Perhaps sector by sector deals are achievable. In any event, the UK would make more out of reciprocal tariffs than it loses, money which could be targeted a easing any pain caused by this. And there IS a big world out there in which deals can be struck.
The history of Europe over the last few hundred years shows the UK as a country which always looked outward to the world rather than towards Europe. We have always been a half hearted and obstructive member of the EU, because we, and I'm generalising, never had the same vision of European integration that many other countries had. The UK can now renew its ties with old friends and allies, forge new ties in the growing Asian markets, and remain a helpful fiend and ally to our European neighbours. I don't see any of this as bad.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
threat to emulate Singapore
By that, do you mean Singapore's prosperity and the longevity of its citizens. No bad thing!
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I know typos are normally hors do combat, but I do like PaulTH's comment on the UK being a helpful fiend. Yay, Dr Freud, I presume.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Yeah apologies for the typo. I hope we become friends rather than fiends!
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
threat to emulate Singapore
By that, do you mean Singapore's prosperity and the longevity of its citizens. No bad thing!
Well, 'you'll be crushed' (from the Times front page), must have some economic basis to it. Hammond had already indicated that outside the single market, 'a new economic model' would be sought. As to why it would crush the EU, presumably, because a very low tax regime would suck trade away. Or is there another interpretation of being crushed?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
I think there would be serious downsides to adopting a radical free trade economy such as Singapore, because certain sectors, like agriculture, could never compete with tariff free imports from around the world, but I'm not sure Hammond had that in mind. Reducing corporation tax is how Ireland has attracted large multinationals to set up there. But it's hardly the "race to the bottom" as Jeremy Corbyn describes it. He would be innately hostile to anything which generates prosperity.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Prosperity for who? I think that the Singapore model is also being talked about in terms of intense deregulation of labour and other areas, and Labour, quite rightly, are worried about that. Whether you can trust a right-wing Tory govt to uphold workers' rights, well, let me see, maybe I need to blow on a dandelion, to find out. Damn, there are none, as it's winter.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I'm not sure that invoking the Republicans in this context is particularly relevant. I think you will find that the angry nativists and white nationalists are on your particular side of the aisle.
I was thinking of the way they spent eight years bitching, sabotaging and blocking anything Obama did purely because they didn't like Obama. I can see parallels in those who seem to be seeking to bitch, sabotage and block anything to do with Brexit purely because they don't like Brexit.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Today the Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said that there must be a fair deal for Britain, but that it must be inferior to membership.
Well exactly. "Pour encourager les autres"* will be a red line in these negotiations. Expert negotiating might, just might, be able to get a deal that looked like that but actually wasn't. But failing that unlikely outcome, the UK will pay a price designed to discourage others from following suit.
* To encourage the others.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I'm not sure that invoking the Republicans in this context is particularly relevant. I think you will find that the angry nativists and white nationalists are on your particular side of the aisle.
I was thinking of the way they spent eight years bitching, sabotaging and blocking anything Obama did purely because they didn't like Obama. I can see parallels in those who seem to be seeking to bitch, sabotage and block anything to do with Brexit purely because they don't like Brexit.
As a result they now control The White House, The Senate, Congress and the majority of State Governments. I wish that I thought the opposition to Brexit would be as effective.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
the UK will pay a price designed to discourage others from following suit.
If the EU was confident that it was the best option for its members, it wouldn't see any need to "encourage the others" to stay. The very fact that it is so worried about other countries following suit suggests that it is well aware that those countries could be better off if they weren't members. And yet it seeks to keep them in the fold.
Which leads me to wonder: if the EU isn't about making its member countries better off than they would be alone, what is it about?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by PaulTH:
quote:
However passionately you obviously feel about this, it remains true that, from an economic perspective, Scottish independence remains a no brainer. Given the huge difference between Scotland's
trade with the rest of the UK compared to the rest of the world, the UK internal market is many times more important to Scotland than the EU market. I don't think this is lost on Scottish voters. Opinion polls, though notoriously inaccurate, suggest that support for independence has gone down since 2014.
IF. ECONOMICS. WAS. THE. ONLY. THING. THAT. MOTIVATED. PEOPLE. WE. WOULDN'T. BE. IN. THIS. MESS.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
the UK will pay a price designed to discourage others from following suit.
If the EU was confident that it was the best option for its members, it wouldn't see any need to "encourage the others" to stay. The very fact that it is so worried about other countries following suit suggests that it is well aware that those countries could be better off if they weren't members. And yet it seeks to keep them in the fold.
Which leads me to wonder: if the EU isn't about making its member countries better off than they would be alone, what is it about?
But, it's not just about economics (or even about economics at all). The data is clear, everyone is economically better off in the EU than outside.
But, campaigns to leave the EU, in whatever nation they are, relate to concepts such as "national identity", "sovereignty", etc. Economics only comes into it when you examine the question - is the economic cost of leaving the EU worth the gains in the less tangible concepts such as national identity?
The EU, and the nations within the EU, will be taking an economic hit from Brexit. Moreover, there is damage to the larger aims of European integration. They will take further hits if other nations try to follow the UK. And, the ways to counter that are to argue on the grounds that others want to exit the EU on (nationalism etc), and to inflate the costs of exiting the EU. By making the costs high for the UK the signal is that the costs would be high for other nations, with the implicit question "is it worth it?".
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Which leads me to wonder: if the EU isn't about making its member countries better off than they would be alone, what is it about?
At its origin it was largely about trying to achieve different relationships between neighbouring countries other than invading each other and killing their respective inhabitants.
The UK, whose collective memory of WW2 does not include any humiliation or the pain of occupation but boils down to Spitfires doing victory rolls over cornfields, has in my view constantly and utterly failed to grasp this aspect of collective memory that underpins continental European federalism.
[ 18. January 2017, 13:53: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
the UK will pay a price designed to discourage others from following suit.
If the EU was confident that it was the best option for its members, it wouldn't see any need to "encourage the others" to stay. The very fact that it is so worried about other countries following suit suggests that it is well aware that those countries could be better off if they weren't members. And yet it seeks to keep them in the fold.
Which leads me to wonder: if the EU isn't about making its member countries better off than they would be alone, what is it about?
Perhaps the EU is the long-term best option for all member states, and their people, as a body, rather than the short term best option for any individual state or person?
But individuals - both people and states - are notorious for putting their own short-term good ahead of the common long-term good. I think the EU are right to seek to negate short-term good for an individual state in the interests of long-term good for all.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
For Singapore read London ONLY. A city state. How do Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle benefit?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
the UK will pay a price designed to discourage others from following suit.
If the EU was confident that it was the best option for its members, it wouldn't see any need to "encourage the others" to stay.
It's almost as if you've never heard of the free rider problem. The UK is essentially asking for all of the benefits of EU membership (free movement of capital and goods) with none of what it regards as the associated drawbacks (free movement of labor, product safety regulations, etc.). Most voluntary organizations similarly "encourage others to stay" through the mechanism of not allowing non-members to enjoy the benefits extended to members.
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The very fact that it is so worried about other countries following suit suggests that it is well aware that those countries could be better off if they weren't members. And yet it seeks to keep them in the fold.
Again, classic free-riderism. Yes, a lot of people/organizations will jump at an offer to enjoy all the benefits of an arrangement while avoiding any of the costs. That's why getting the good stuff is usually linked to sharing in the disadvantages.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
They will take further hits if other nations try to follow the UK. And, the ways to counter that are to argue on the grounds that others want to exit the EU on (nationalism etc), and to inflate the costs of exiting the EU. By making the costs high for the UK the signal is that the costs would be high for other nations, with the implicit question "is it worth it?".
So it's modelled on an abusive relationship where if a partner wants to leave they are kept in by threats?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
At its origin it was largely about trying to achieve different relationships between neighbouring countries other than invading each other and killing their respective inhabitants.
I can agree with that aim without agreeing with the method used to achieve it.
quote:
The UK, whose collective memory of WW2 does not include any humiliation or the pain of occupation but boils down to Spitfires doing victory rolls over cornfields, has in my view constantly and utterly failed to grasp this aspect of collective memory that underpins continental European federalism.
Quite so. We're different. The only problem I have with that observation is if you imply that we're somehow deficient or wrong for being different, or for having different priorities because of that difference.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110
|
Posted
Marvin
It doesn't matter whether you think it is unfair, or symptomatic of abuse, or whatever. It is about what the 27 can collectively agree re severance terms. And if severance terms cannot be agreed before the negotiating deadline is passed, we lose all current trading and social benefits without anything to put in their place.
The planned negotiations are to ameliorate that effect. Which might be described as the hardest of hard Brexits. You can safely take it that the results of that would be very unfavourable to the UK in the short to medium term.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The only problem I have with that observation is if you imply that we're somehow deficient or wrong for being different, or for having different priorities because of that difference.
I think the UK has always been caught in a cleft stick between Atlanticism and European federalism and that is just a fact of history, as are the attitudes in the wake of WW2.
In the referendum it might be argued to be a case of deciding between the lesser of the two evils.
I think the problem is that Leave is the worst of the two and that the vote for Leave was based largely on a nostalgic premise rather than anything forward-looking, either utopian ("never again" to war in Europe) or economic (I think the UK has delusions of grandeur about other countries, and more especially the EU-27, queueing up to strike quick trade agreements with it).
If events prove me wrong then I'll be very happy for you, but I'm not optimistic.
[ 18. January 2017, 15:11: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
threat to emulate Singapore
By that, do you mean Singapore's prosperity and the longevity of its citizens. No bad thing!
The problem with comparisons like this is that in reality most things are over-determined. I suspect the collection of idiots on the Tory right who make such comparisons are simply thinking in terms of - allegedly - low employment protections.
The other reality is that Singapore runs a highly dirigiste industrial and education policy, and the government controls 82% of the housing stock (which provides them with a means of controlling one of the largest sources of asset misallocations in modern economy)
[ 18. January 2017, 15:15: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
Meanwhile our Foreign Secretary is pursuing his distinctive brand of diplomacy (winning friends and influencing people) by likening the idea of the EU seeking to impose tough terms on the UK for Brexit to administering a punishment beating on an escaped British POW in an old war film.
Is there no way of getting that man to shut up?
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Perhaps Boris Johnson serves the same purpose as Trump: a distraction while the actual forward movement of politics and policy goes on elsewhere.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
I wish I could be as optimistic about Trump (and BoJo).
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It's also possible, that coupled with the Times headline about 'crushing' the EU, such language (punishment beatings), may reflect a genuine, if often suppressed, current of opinion among some politicians. We are at last free from the loathsome Gauleiters!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
For Singapore read London ONLY. A city state. How do Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle benefit?
No worries, Martin, once we have crushed the EU, the words 'Crecy' and 'Agincourt' will ring again in the village squares, the yeomen of England will once again dance their merry dances, the village looms will be heard a-clacking and a-fracking, we will ploth our jolly plight, or something. Make it so!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
I wish I could be as optimistic about Trump (and BoJo).
I never said anything about the actual politics being any better.
I'm pretty sure both of them are just playing to the gallery, though. I doubt Boris will be anywhere near any actual Brexit negotiations.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
For Singapore read London ONLY. A city state. How do Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle benefit?
No worries, Martin, once we have crushed the EU, the words 'Crecy' and 'Agincourt' will ring again in the village squares, the yeomen of England will once again dance their merry dances, the village looms will be heard a-clacking and a-fracking, we will ploth our jolly plight, or something. Make it so!
You are Boris Johnson's ghost-writer and I claim my five pounds.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
This is as naff as hell, but dammit, so is everything these days, ever since we left India.
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/download/file.php?id=14810
Well a friend of mine sent me this.......( don't think it's suitable if you're reading this at work...)
We're so sorry, Scotland
--------------------
Best Wishes
Stephen
'Be still,then, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the nations and I will be exalted in the earth' Ps46 v10
Posts: 3954 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
Funny gig! In fact, in terms of its perceived mandate, the Scottish government has been quite constructive in its Brexit discussions with the Westminster government, but has been pretty much entirely ignored by May beyond the occasional rhetorical flourish. Sturgeon is now almost compelled to move towards a second independence vote on a matter of principle, regardless of whether the polls are favourable or not. If Brexit starts to turn the UK economy decidedly sour, then the likelihood of Scottish independence will grow significantly. If a referendum is called, of course; May is far less likely to agree to one than Cameron, because she will feel less sure of winning it.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alex Cockell
Ship’s penguin
# 7487
|
Posted
Being on the autism spectrum - a LOT of stuff was siphoned in through EU.. and i feel more scard now...
I miss the more liberal feel..
Posts: 2146 | From: Reading, Berkshire UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Quite so. We're different. The only problem I have with that observation is if you imply that we're somehow deficient or wrong for being different, or for having different priorities because of that difference.
It can be if it is based on a deficient or wrong view of history. Certainly the statements from the current and former front bench suggest a rather skewed reading if anything.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
If Brexit starts to turn the UK economy decidedly sour, then the likelihood of Scottish independence will grow significantly.
Which if that's true just proves the madness of all this separatism (although as said I'm now determined to do what I can to make this thing work). As mentioned by someone upthread, Scotland's economy is far more dependent on the rUK than the UK's is on the EU. Two thirds of Scotland's trade is cross "border" to rUK.
If Brexit starts to turn the UK's economy "decidedly sour" then voting to leave the UK is just about the only way the people of Scotland could prove themselves to be more stupid than the Brexiteers. If the UK's on WTO 10% export tariffs then Scotland would be volunteering to go and stand on the wrong side of the wall to most of its trade - especially if there was a hard border between Scotland and rUK. If Scotland stays in the EU and the UK doesn't then ditto. Meanwhile Scotland starts a desperate dash to reorientate the bulk of its economy, and the rUK govt closes down all the public sector jobs in Scotland which serve the rUK.
I note however that they have the inalienable right so to be and also that the record of votes over the last 12 months should indicate that just because something is jaw droppingly imbecilic doesn't mean people won't vote for it.
[ 19. January 2017, 08:44: Message edited by: betjemaniac ]
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
The main reason to favour leaving the UK if you're in Scotland isn't so much that it will stop the economy going sour. The economy is going to go sour anyway. It's that you don't want to be run by a political establishment that thinks souring the economy is a price worth paying to pander to xenophobia and has no interest in maintaining things like the NHS (crisis? what crisis?).
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The main reason to favour leaving the UK if you're in Scotland isn't so much that it will stop the economy going sour. The economy is going to go sour anyway. It's that you don't want to be run by a political establishment that thinks souring the economy is a price worth paying to pander to xenophobia and has no interest in maintaining things like the NHS (crisis? what crisis?).
I agree, except that "rationally" you're still voting to make things worse - and that the Scottish NHS is the Scottish administration's bailiwick.
The difference with any Indyref2 is that this time the No Thanks bunch will have a worked example of how far project fear was actually project fact to point to, which could help. That and the fact that 38% of Scots did actually vote for Brexit, which means that there is a bedrock who are presumably happy (especially if they all vote Unionist again).
Worst case scenario is that Scotland votes either way 52/48 and becomes just as bitter and divided about that as the UK is on the EU. Scexiteers should really be careful what they wish for.
Putting my Mystic Meg had on, I think that (rightly or wrongly, and probably for all the wrong reasons), it might turn out to be the Brexit vote that has killed off Scottish independence for a generation. Counter intuitive, but it's my gut feeling.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Well, thing is that in most Brexit scenarios England may/may not come out OK but Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland do a lot worse.
So I think it isn't impossible to imagine a future for Wales where there is very low inwards investment, no Westminster funds to replace the EU structral funds and so many parts of Wales begin to rapidly sink.
We then wonder how long the Westminster set will allow this situation without suggesting some kind of devaluation, the reduction of the Welsh social security system or some kind of enforce Wexit from the UK.
Similar but different things in Scotland and NI.
The Tories only care about England, I can see them selling out the other nations to ensure England "makes a success" of Brexit.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
The difference with any Indyref2 is that this time the No Thanks bunch will have a worked example of how far project fear was actually project fact to point to, which could help.
Which side of the argument are you putting "the No Thanks bunch"? No thanks to independence or no thanks to the union? Because, at present, the predictions of "project fear" have (by definition) not happened since there isn't independence - no test of whether an independent Scotland could retain the pound, for example. The best is that economic predictions assuming a significant income from oil revenue were not as solid as stated with the collapse in oil prices way below anything that could have been predicted at the time of the independence campaign. But, of course, to counter that we have the statements from Project Fear that an independent Scotland couldn't assume continued membership of the EU, and the only way to ensure continued EU membership for Scotland was to remain within the UK - which has been shown to be complete bollocks (and Camerons "commitment" to maintaining the Union was shown to be what it was almost immediately as he put his pledge for an EU membership referendum in the Tory manifesto).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
UK to EU: How dare you say you'll ruin us if we leave you!
UK to Scotland: We'll ruin you if you leave us.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
The difference with any Indyref2 is that this time the No Thanks bunch will have a worked example of how far project fear was actually project fact to point to, which could help.
Which side of the argument are you putting "the No Thanks bunch"? No thanks to independence or no thanks to the union? Because, at present, the predictions of "project fear" have (by definition) not happened since there isn't independence - no test of whether an independent Scotland could retain the pound, for example. The best is that economic predictions assuming a significant income from oil revenue were not as solid as stated with the collapse in oil prices way below anything that could have been predicted at the time of the independence campaign. But, of course, to counter that we have the statements from Project Fear that an independent Scotland couldn't assume continued membership of the EU, and the only way to ensure continued EU membership for Scotland was to remain within the UK - which has been shown to be complete bollocks (and Camerons "commitment" to maintaining the Union was shown to be what it was almost immediately as he put his pledge for an EU membership referendum in the Tory manifesto).
no thanks to independence. I meant Brexit as the worked example. So, yes, vote No to stay in the EU was one claim. But then there's all the others - you can't keep the pound, there's too much cross border trade, customs at Berwick, etc.
If Brexit proves that project fear/Remain were right then, apart from vote No to stay in the EU, people might think that all the non EU based parts of project fear/No were also right....
Essentially, if the best the UK can get is Hard Brexit, then Yes campaigners in Scotland should be honest and say if it has to be hard Scexit - no EU, no pound, 10% tariffs on trade with rUK - then it's still worth it.
Because they can't guarantee, much vaunted White Paper or no, that a vote for Yes isn't a vote for hard Scexit.
It's just unbelievable that people should be looking at the unfolding chaos of Brexit and thinking, "you know what? The answer to this is more division! Scotland's better off walking away from two thirds of their trade to get back into the EU!"
I completely agree that Scotland's been backed into a dreadful position against its will. But unfortunately a) that's just a fact, and b) I don't think independence is going to help.
A vote for Scottish independence at this point would IMO have to be every bit as deluded and romantic a one as a vote for Brexit. "The rUK's cut our nose off, so our response is to cut our head off."
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
UK to EU: How dare you say you'll ruin us if we leave you!
UK to Scotland: We'll ruin you if you leave us.
That's sort of my point.
In the same way that the UK cannot possibly expect to be partial members of a union and enjoy the economic benefits if it leaves, neither can Scotland if it leaves the UK.
The people pointing out that the EU are being consistent and stating fact rather than being threatening, should presumably extend the same courtesy to the UK government when it does the same to Scotland. If it does.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
UK to EU: How dare you say you'll ruin us if we leave you!
UK to Scotland: We'll ruin you if you leave us.
For the record, I agree with you in the lunacy of your characterisation, and I'm against Scottish independence for exactly the same reasons as I was against Brexit (whilst recognising the inalienable right to self determination for both the British polity and the Scottish polity within that British one).
Essentially, if people want to unload their economic shotgun into the national feet then that's their right. Scary, but their right.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
I meant Brexit as the worked example. So, yes, vote No to stay in the EU was one claim. But then there's all the others - you can't keep the pound, there's too much cross border trade, customs at Berwick, etc.
If Brexit proves that project fear/Remain were right then, apart from vote No to stay in the EU, people might think that all the non EU based parts of project fear/No were also right....
I'm still failing to follow your argument. The "predictions" of Project Fear where what would happen if Scotland voted to leave the UK - that didn't happen, so there is no basis for saying any of them were shown to be right. The predictions for the Remain campaign in the EU referendum are still in the "wait and see" camp IMO - since we haven't left the EU yet the consequences to trade etc have yet to materialise. Now, I agree that if there's another independence referendum in Scotland in 5-10 years there may be data to show the extent to which the Remain campaign was right, but that's not available now (nor would it be available if there was a referendum within the next 2 years).
And, even then where is the relevance to the Scottish independence case? You have two sets of predictions - one by a group campaigning against Scottish independence, another by a group campaigning for the UK to remain in the EU. Different groups, different scenarios.
quote:
A vote for Scottish independence at this point would IMO have to be every bit as deluded and romantic a one as a vote for Brexit.
But, what's wrong with romance? Much of the Brexit campaign was, as you seem to note, romantic. And, in many cases the attitude to the EU and to Scotland are inconsistent.
Brexit campaigned for the 'romantic' ideals of sovereignty of our Parliament, maintaining national identity against being dragged into a "United States of Europe", independence from government by a foreign power etc.
But, many of those same people campaigned against Scotland seeking exactly those same things. The difference being that the Scottish Parliament has a lot less sovereignty than Westminster, the EU doesn't govern the UK in any realistic sense whereas Westminster does govern Scotland, political union in Europe is an aspiration that won't be realised for generations (and, will involve several further steps, each of which will give the people of the UK, and the rest of the EU, a chance to say "that's too far") whereas political union in the UK is an established fact.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I'm still failing to follow your argument.
OK:
Scotland 2014:
Project Fear - don't do this because xyz.
Scotland votes No - Scottish Yes campaign continues to characterise it as Project Fear because there's no evidence that xyz would happen.
UK 2016:
Project Fear - don't do this because xyz.
UK votes Leave.
*If* over the next 2 years Project Fear is proved to have been right about the EU, and the whole thing is a disaster - and I suspect that there will be evidence either way to draw that sort of line of argument very quickly (ie within the 2 years between now and 2019) - then when it comes down to it voters might be even more minded to give credence to predictions of disaster.
Yes it's 2 different arguments on 2 different subjects*, but I do reckon that people might point to "they said the sky would fall in and it has" and side with the camp that says that more of the sky will fall in if they vote yes.
Which is what No to independence will be saying. The only way round this would be for Yes to say more of the sky will fall in if there's a No vote. In which case both sides will be prophesying Armageddon and we'll all be in for the deep joy of the most negative campaign in history.
That's all. I'm not saying I'm right, or that it's in any way fair. But I can see why it might work out that way.
*although given that both votes are about a small thing detaching itself from a larger political and economic union they're not exactly miles apart either.
Put it this way, I have put (a small amount of) money on a No vote in IndyRef2 within 5 years.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
betjemaniac: quote:
*If* over the next 2 years Project Fear is proved to have been right about the EU
Am I the only person in the world who has noted the irony of the Remain campaign being dubbed 'Project Fear', when the Brexiteers campaigned mainly by playing on fears of immigration and nostalgia for a mythical Golden Age when Britain's destiny was entirely within our control?
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
