|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
If the lower middle class are to be wiped out, where are your NCOs to come from, to keep the squaddies in line? or your police, for that matter?
Surely these idiots can only be talking to each other, aren't they?
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
If the Right attempts to impose a free-market Brexit on the UK, the consequences could be social upheaval just as bad as if we were to reverse the Brexit process, as the OECD is recommending that we do.
It was largely the despised lower middle classes who voted for Brexit. One of the reasons they did so was because they believed that it would protect their jobs, services and communities. Once they find out that they've been conned - again - they will be in a poisonous mood. Ironically, these are largely the same people who will be taking to the streets if Brexit is cancelled(or if a Norway-type compromise is miraculously fudged through). But as someone remarked upthread, if we're going to have social unrest, let's have it with an economy that still functions. People who still have jobs will be a lot easier to buy off.
If I was a Brexit true believer (for it is a religion, not a political programme), I would be desperate to torpedo the negotiations and get hard brexit now, before the full horror of our self-inflicted predicament percolates into popular consciousness.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
That's a good point. The present impasse is like a kind of slow poisoning, and the whole body politic is suffering as well. Hence, we get the ghastly spectacle of Boris talking about the lion roaring, and so on. Politicians have rarely looked so foolish, and indeed, incapacitated. Maybe it's the worst mess since Suez.
So if this drags on and on, there will be more of a push back against Brexit. As Rocinante says, the headbangers may want to guillotine the whole thing, to avoid the push back.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
The beating will be happening, anyone saying otherwise is a liar or a fool.
The choice now is which stick will do the least damage. And, if the pols cannot playing silly buggers, it will be a large, knobby log with nails in it.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
It was largely the despised lower middle classes who voted for Brexit. One of the reasons they did so was because they believed that it would protect their jobs, services and communities. Once they find out that they've been conned - again - they will be in a poisonous mood.
But will they blame Brexit? I suspect not. I think they will more likely blame the EU for being "unreasonable".
"Stewing in own juice" is not an effective teaching tool.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Blaming the EU is being well primed right now. The trash press are gung ho for any sign of EU resistance to UK wishes. This is, well not treacherous exactly, but certainly unreasonable, but also what you would expect from Johnny Foreigner. Why can't they just admire British bullshit?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
There is a lot of anger around now, the JAMs, the Squeezed Middle, the young locked out of home ownership, it seems everyone's angry about something. The Brexit vote wasn't just about the EU, the problems people were kicking against were largely to do with Austerity, regressive taxation and poor working conditions. Unscrupulous politicians were able to persuade large numbers of the electorate that it was all the fault of the EU and immigrants. All this is now a matter of record, more or less.
It would certainly be a political masterstroke for the BarStewards to use the EU as a scapegoat one last time: The EU is to blame for The consequences of us leaving the EU!
I think that (1) a lot of people will not be fooled - not everyone is that stupid and (2) this powderkeg will blow sometime, whatever we do now, and the landing will be softer if the economy is still in reasonable shape.
Who knows, a future government (not a Tory one, obviously) might then be in a position to actually do something about these peoples' grievances, rather than blaming them on foreigners and the vulnerable.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
That's very funny. The EU is to blame for the consequences of leaving the EU. This is a bit like the husband who says, you made me feel lousy, so I hit you, and now, you've made me feel even worse.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
I think that (1) a lot of people will not be fooled - not everyone is that stupid and (2) this powderkeg will blow sometime, whatever we do now, and the landing will be softer if the economy is still in reasonable shape.
I don't necessarily agree with (1), or at least I think even if the majority of people are not fooled, the direction is still set by the vocal majority that is.
After all, the referendum was swung by promises on the side of a bus and screams of 'Breaking Point!'
The UK has a toxic media culture, which exists almost solely in order to feed outrage into public credulity and convert it into money. I don't see this changing. Whether or not the majority of people *actually* believe them is neither here nor there given that in practice politicians act as if they did and no one protests.
The permanently-pissed off aren't going to buy any narrative that blames their own decisions - they'll always ultimately deflect onto some weak group in society, blame the EU will easily transform into 'blame all foreigners'.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Da-DAH! Starting with London.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Sorry, that was in response to Eutychus.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
And even assuming this domestic upheaval was somehow contained, once again your aspiration seems to assume the EU will welcome back the prodigal with open arms. I just can't see this happening. Any agreement by the 27 to let the UK back in will be on far different terms, with joining the Euro probably topping the list.
If article 50 is revoked, we haven't left. There is no "readmission". Clearly the UK will be about as welcome and as relevant as a stale fart at the EU negotiating table in that scenario, but all the vetos that are still in place will remain. The "deal" that was offered to Cameron before the referendum is off the table, but that deal had no content anyway, so that makes no difference.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
If article 50 is revoked, we haven't left. There is no "readmission".
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
When will people wake up to the fact that the rest of the world, and the EU-27 in particular, has not ground to a halt while the UK dithers?
According to the European Council the letter from Theresa May triggering Article 50 quote:
starts the withdrawal process
The EU-27 cannot simply pretend the UK never began the withdrawal process; it has already had too many real-world consequences. And it cannot afford to pretend that for fear of other countries engaging in the same stupidity.
In the extremely unlikely event of the withdrawal process not being completed, the terms on which the UK remains in the EU will be very, very different to what it had before the referendum.
Not least because of its hugely damaged credibility.
--------------------
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
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
It's not the internet denizens I'm concerned about, more the people behind racially-motivated attacks.
Reneging on Brexit would be fuel to the far-right's fire.
Not doing the right thing because you don't want to deal with potential violence seems like cowardice. And, somewhat akin to giving in to terrorism.
--------------------
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
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
'Cause that's that, I can scream, I can shout
I can cry my eyes out but she's not coming back
That's that, I can hope, I can pray
But she's still gone away
And she's not coming back and that's that.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
It's not the internet denizens I'm concerned about, more the people behind racially-motivated attacks.
Reneging on Brexit would be fuel to the far-right's fire.
Not doing the right thing because you don't want to deal with potential violence seems like cowardice. And, somewhat akin to giving in to terrorism.
I was responding to the suggestion that Brexit could be undone without fuss because the only people who might object would be elderly keyboard warriors.
The fundamental reason I think Brexit should not be undone, especially by means of some secret legal artifice, as was suggested upthread, is because that would be a denial of the democratic and parliamentary process, and I think that would do more damage to the UK long term than accepting the consequences of Brexit.
If accusations of cowardice are to be made, they should be laid at the door of political leaders who seem incapable of doing just that.
--------------------
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
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I was responding to the suggestion that Brexit could be undone without fuss because the only people who might object would be elderly keyboard warriors.
The fundamental reason I think Brexit should not be undone, especially by means of some secret legal artifice, as was suggested upthread, is because that would be a denial of the democratic and parliamentary process, and I think that would do more damage to the UK long term than accepting the consequences of Brexit.
If accusations of cowardice are to be made, they should be laid at the door of political leaders who seem incapable of doing just that.
The problem with this, fundamentally, is that a majority of those who voted Leave did not vote for a substantial worsening of their lives. Because that was never on the voting slip during the referendum.
Hence we have the prospect of British MPs in the Westminster parliament refusing to accept a no-deal Brexit.*
The question is then what happens next.
A scenario whereby the EU refuses to budge forcing the UK to a no-deal exit seems fairly likely at this juncture. A vote in Westminster rejecting this state of affairs seems possible, if not likely.
Some legal experts say that the A50 notification can then be undone, which presumably would mean that the UK carries on as before.
It isn't desirable for the EU, but I don't see how this means that the UK would only be allowed back into the club on different terms. If the change is made before the end of the 2 year period of notification (and assuming that the legal opinions which suggest the A50 thing can be reversed are shown to be correct), then the UK never leaves and "allowing the UK back in" is not what is happening.
But then in the not-very-long term, I don't think it matters anyway: whether or not the UK eventually leaves, the EU is dead.
* not guaranteed, but surely possible - and a reflection of democracy such as we have it here.
[ 19. October 2017, 06:53: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Well let's have a second referendum now we know the mess we're in - no problem with democratic or parliamentary process then, is there?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
A scenario whereby the EU refuses to budge forcing the UK to a no-deal exit seems fairly likely at this juncture.
This sounds unfortunately like an echo of the "it's all the EU's fault" mantra people are said to be rehearsing. If the UK cocks up the exit process it's adopted, that's hardly the EU-27's fault. quote:
Some legal experts say that the A50 notification can then be undone, which presumably would mean that the UK carries on as before
It might not technically be "readmission", but the point I keep trying to make is that whatever happens, it will not be "carrying on as before".
To name but one issue I'm running across this morning in my day job, EU cross-border programmes and the related funding have all shifted away from the UK.
And as I said earlier, much of the trust in the UK as a committed partner to the EU will have been eroded. quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I don't think it matters anyway: whether or not the UK eventually leaves, the EU is dead.
If the EU is dead anyway then the Brexiteers are right and should be organising accordingly. At the moment, however, it just seems to be perpetual dithering for which the EU-27 will somehow be blamed. quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Well let's have a second referendum now we know the mess we're in - no problem with democratic or parliamentary process then, is there?
That would certainly be better than the legal smoke and mirrors you seemed to be referring to previously.
But who is the "we" that "know the mess we're in"? I'm really not convinced that if you went out and re-ran the referendum tomorrow you'd get the outcome "we" would like. This discussion is hardly representative of popular opinion.
--------------------
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
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
The problem with this, fundamentally, is that a majority of those who voted Leave did not vote for a substantial worsening of their lives.
I'm not even sure about that. I think there's a trend for "up yours and damn the consequences" votes.
I've spoken to more than one person who has expressed their intention to vote for an extreme party on the basis that "I know it will make things worse for everyone (me included), but that way all those other people get to suffer too" (yes, really).
My feeling is that this perverse sense of justice played a big part of the far-right and far-left votes in France's presidential election, as well as the Trump vote and the Brexit vote; it certainly seems to be the thinking in the blogpost Chris Stiles referred to.
[ 19. October 2017, 07:16: 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
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
My point was that the method by which it is done won't affect the degree of whining from the leavers - they believe in one person, one vote, once - so why not go with the method that focusses the fallout on as few people as possible. Polling suggests that there has been significant, though not decisive, movement against Brexit. I'd give it a few more months before another referendum just to drive home the sort of disaster we're looking at. I wouldn't want to leave it too long or we'll have lost a lot of jobs and investment just on the possibility of Brexit.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
This sounds unfortunately like an echo of the "it's all the EU's fault" mantra people are said to be rehearsing. If the UK cocks up the exit process it's adopted, that's hardly the EU-27's fault.
Agreed. But then it isn't particularly the UK's fault if it wants to continue as before and the EU laws let it. Them's the rules.
quote:
It might not technically be "readmission", but the point I keep trying to make is that whatever happens, it will not be "carrying on as before".
To name but one issue I'm running across this morning in my day job, EU cross-border programmes and the related funding have all shifted away from the UK.
And as I said earlier, much of the trust in the UK as a committed partner to the EU will have been eroded.
I'm sure there is some truth there, although if Horizon 2020 is anything to go by, then this can be quickly untangled if the UK decides not to leave. All that has happened with H2020 is that British partners are not being accepted in new projects. If the situation changes, then new projects will be able to include British partners as before.
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
If the EU is dead anyway then the Brexiteers are right and should be organising accordingly. At the moment, however, it just seems to be perpetual dithering for which the EU-27 will somehow be blamed.
Well there are some things that the Brexiteers are right about. The EU needs reform, the Euro isn't working out particularly well and a small number of countries are contributing a lot to help a good number of countries who only benefit.
I don't think those things are likely to change, and the fault-lines created by the Brexit vote are only going to make the EU less stable. It is a great shame.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
The problem with this, fundamentally, is that a majority of those who voted Leave did not vote for a substantial worsening of their lives.
I'm not even sure about that. I think there's a trend for "up yours and damn the consequences" votes.
I've spoken to more than one person who has expressed their intention to vote for an extreme party on the basis that "I know it will make things worse for everyone (me included), but that way all those other people get to suffer too" (yes, really).
My feeling is that this perverse sense of justice played a big part of the far-right and far-left votes in France's presidential election, as well as the Trump vote and the Brexit vote; it certainly seems to be the thinking in the blogpost Chris Stiles referred to.
This is not directly related to what you've written above, but I've noticed some splintering of pro-European lefty support because of the Catalonian vote. I've seen some vocal supporters of Remain who say that Catalonia has shown them how messed up the whole project is.
It is hard to parse how extensive the left's support is disintegrating, but if pressure comes from both the hard right and from the up-to-now supporters on the left, then it is hard to see who now thinks the EU should continue.
Losing a net contributor is going to make the EU weaker, if the election of the far-right into governance in some EU countries leads to increasing bad feelings about sending EU funds south and east (never mind the other issues, including the migrant crisis) it is hard in my opinion to see how the union can continue for long.
[ 19. October 2017, 07:30: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Hence my prediction upthread of the resurgence, in the long term, of the city-state.
--------------------
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
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Some legal experts say that the A50 notification can then be undone, which presumably would mean that the UK carries on as before.
The government has received legal advice on this question. But, along with a large number of other impact studies, are locked away and we don't know what that advice is. All these studies and advice were funded by tax revenue, but the government has refused to release them - either to MPs or in response to freedom of information requests - and there is a case pending in the High Court.
But, you are correct - there have been several legal experts who have expressed their view that A50 can be withdrawn. I've been told by an MSP who has had a role on the edges of the negotiations that the treaty doesn't specify that there is a way to withdraw an A50 declaration, so whether that's possible is a political question rather than strictly a legal one. Ultimately the question can only be resolved by trying ... will the EU27 let us back away from Brexit at this stage? and, on what conditions? I'm optimistic, if only because Brexit is a distraction from the more important issues facing the EU.
If (when) we back out of Brexit then we'll still be an EU member, but it won't be the same EU and the same relationship. Will the move of European agencies out of the UK stop, or continue? Will private companies who have started to move operations to elsewhere in the EU continue those moves? Other nations in the EU have started to move the EU in a new direction, the UK will have no political capital to influence those moves.
As for the mechanism for the UK to withdraw our A50 declaration, I don't think it can be just by government diktat (despite the penchant for our current government to do everything behind closed doors without bothering Parliament or the people with any input). It needs, at least, a debate and vote in both Houses of Parliament, maybe another referendum.
Of course, a further referendum cannot simply be a rerun of the 2016 referendum. It needs to be a referendum with a different question - be that "do you agree that the UK should withdraw A50 and remain in the EU?" or "do you want the UK to leave the EU on the terms defined by the government?" (with, naturally, access to the details of that form of Brexit and the associated studies that informed that).
--------------------
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
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
And as I said earlier, much of the trust in the UK as a committed partner to the EU will have been eroded.
I imagine that at this point the UK is considered to be a less reliable partner by *every* country considering making a trade agreement with it.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It will be interesting to see how political parties react, if we end up on the cliff-edge, that is, about to crash out of the EU, with no agreement on regulations and trade.
I suppose the Ultras will opine, this is the will of the British people, even if you can't drive a lorry to France, and planes can't take off. So be it. This of course, is a lie, but there you are, just one more.
But probably others will be more pragmatic and devise some emergency means of avoiding this.
I suppose some of the Ultras believe that by going up to the cliff-edge, the EU will be forced to concede more. I wouldn't count on it.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Another suggestion here that the Tories are attempting to use Game Theory to get the deal they want.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It will be interesting to see how political parties react, if we end up on the cliff-edge, that is, about to crash out of the EU, with no agreement on regulations and trade.
I suppose the Ultras will opine, this is the will of the British people, even if you can't drive a lorry to France, and planes can't take off. So be it. This of course, is a lie, but there you are, just one more.
But probably others will be more pragmatic and devise some emergency means of avoiding this.
I suppose some of the Ultras believe that by going up to the cliff-edge, the EU will be forced to concede more. I wouldn't count on it.
Either:
a) Any negative fallout is a price worth paying to be out of the EU. (But their desire to talk up no deal and walk away now suggest that some of them are savvy enough to realise that once the public realises they've been conned, they might change their minds).
b) Scare stories because they understand nothing.
Politico makes this very valid point:
"... any of the consequences of the Brexit cliff edge are likely to come into focus, and even take effect, well before that last stroke of the clock. While politicians tend to have an extraordinary high tolerance for down-to-the-wire negotiations, businesses and markets loathe uncertainty, and corporate actors are likely to act well in advance. As a result, the drop off the cliff may end up being more of a prolonged, slow-motion abseil than a dramatic leap in the middle of one night."
There's going to be a lot of anger whatever happens. It depends what they want people to be angry about ... Fudging the Referendum or breaking everything.
[ 19. October 2017, 12:25: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I've been refreshing my memory on the basics of game theory. If it is correct that the Tories are trying to manipulate game theory to get the result that they want, their strategy might make sense. They refuse to co-operate with the way that the other side wants to negotiate, they are generally unhelpful, they state that the no-deal wouldn't be a big deal.
The EU has to decide what to do about that in response. If they do nothing, refuse to consider making any substantial changes, etc then they watch the UK back off a cliff.
One can almost imagine this diagram on the back of an envelope in Downing Street:
code:
EU
No Compromise Compromise
NC very bad UK win, EU
for all lose
UK
C Politically Everyone wins
impossible
So one can imagine that it is possible that Downing Street is aware of the unimaginable difficulties of going it alone for a hard no-deal Brexit but is prepared to risk it because they believe that the problems created for the EU would be massive.
Perhaps they are even calculating that the EU states will realise how bad the situation will be if the EU negotiators don't compromise and that they'll come in at the last minute, ditch the prior negotiating position and be prepared to make concessions - on the basis that if the UK don't make concessions then the only outcomes are bad.
On the other hand, this perhaps downplays the importance to the EU of solidarity and how bad it would be (to the union) if the EU does actually compromise.
So perhaps it is all bluff and counter-bluff.
Bollocks, I really hope this isn't how their negotiation strategy looks.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
I had a really nice mango yesterday, juicy and sweet. I understand that you won't have mangoes after you leave the EU. Sad.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
I had a really nice mango yesterday, juicy and sweet. I understand that you won't have mangoes after you leave the EU. Sad.
Get a large glass house and grow my own?
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I've been refreshing my memory on the basics of game theory. If it is correct that the Tories are trying to manipulate game theory to get the result that they want, their strategy might make sense.
No, I don't think it is correct. Even if they have accidentally stumbled on the right strategy from a game theory point of view, their execution is off.
Going back to Greece, iff you assumed the same premises Varoufakis did (and he overestimated his internal and external hands) then what he tried to do was logical from a game theory perspective. The Tories have started off with an incorrect set of premises and don't have any idea how to execute on that. They have a number of misconceptions on what the EU is trying to do, and because they are fighting internally their only position is that of Violet Elizabeth Bott ("I shall thcream and thcream until I'm thick")
http://howshouldyouvote.co.uk/collapse/ is clear description of the current stage of the talks.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I've been refreshing my memory on the basics of game theory. If it is correct that the Tories are trying to manipulate game theory to get the result that they want, their strategy might make sense.
No, I don't think it is correct. Even if they have accidentally stumbled on the right strategy from a game theory point of view, their execution is off.
Going back to Greece, iff you assumed the same premises Varoufakis did (and he overestimated his internal and external hands) then what he tried to do was logical from a game theory perspective. The Tories have started off with an incorrect set of premises and don't have any idea how to execute on that. They have a number of misconceptions on what the EU is trying to do, and because they are fighting internally their only position is that of Violet Elizabeth Bott ("I shall thcream and thcream until I'm thick")
http://howshouldyouvote.co.uk/collapse/ is clear description of the current stage of the talks.
Very clear article. I can't remember if someone has told the old joke on this thread - during a negotiation, one man takes his gun out, puts it to his head, and says, 'if you don't agree to my terms, I'll shoot.'
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
mr cheesy: quote:
Bollocks, I really hope this isn't how their negotiation strategy looks.
I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that they really ARE that stupid. They say they're planning to make the UK more like Singapore, but really we're going to end up as Europe's answer to North Korea.
[ 19. October 2017, 14:41: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Not very long ago, I challenged a leave-voting colleagues to name one way in which our lives will be improved by leaving the EU. She thought long and hard, and eventually came up with "people from the EU won't be able to compete for our jobs". My response was to count the number of non-British citizens in our team, the total being the square root of FA. (It's a diverse team, but we are all born in the UK apart from a couple of people from the subcontinent who have acquired citizenship.) Beyond that she couldn't think of anything. And she still supports Brexit!
The real Brexit headbangers are those of us who are banging our heads against a wall trying to talk people down from this cult, which I increasingly consider it to be.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I've been refreshing my memory on the basics of game theory. If it is correct that the Tories are trying to manipulate game theory to get the result that they want, their strategy might make sense. They refuse to co-operate with the way that the other side wants to negotiate, they are generally unhelpful, they state that the no-deal wouldn't be a big deal.
The problem for the Tories is that it is a) perfectly transparent that this is what they're doing, and therefore only creates resentment on the other side; b) while the EU does not want a no oompromise situation, nevertheless the EU has less to lose than the UK does from a no compromise situation, and therefore they are in a position to adopt exactly the same strategy.
It's like playing chicken, only the UK is on a bicycle and the EU in a 4x4.
[ 19. October 2017, 15:36: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
--------------------
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
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I challenged a Brexit acquaintance, who goes around triumphantly saying, of course we should cut all ties with Europe, I suppose a kind of no-deal on steroids.
I asked him how planes could fly over European airspace, or how food could be exported or imported, and of course, he backtracked, and said, well, there will have to be some arrangement or other.
So this no deal turns out to be a big deal, in fact. Am I mad, or is he mad, or are we both mad?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
In the extremely unlikely event of the withdrawal process not being completed, the terms on which the UK remains in the EU will be very, very different to what it had before the referendum.
Not least because of its hugely damaged credibility.
On the latter, we agree. If the UK turns around and says "actually, wait, we're staying" then it will have no credibility in the EU for a generation.
On the former, we do not. Yes, invoking article 50 starts the withdrawal process - that's exactly what it says on the tin. If the UK revokes this declaration (and although much of the advice is secret, my understanding at the time was that there was some reasonable consensus that A50 was unilaterally revokable) then in legal terms, it is a nullity, and the UK remains an EU member on the same legal terms as before.
But I agree with you also that some of the reallocations of funding, relocations of EU bodies and so on will have long-term effects. It wouldn't just be waking up after a bad dream.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I've been refreshing my memory on the basics of game theory. If it is correct that the Tories are trying to manipulate game theory to get the result that they want, their strategy might make sense.
No, I don't think it is correct. Even if they have accidentally stumbled on the right strategy from a game theory point of view, their execution is off.
Going back to Greece, iff you assumed the same premises Varoufakis did (and he overestimated his internal and external hands) then what he tried to do was logical from a game theory perspective. The Tories have started off with an incorrect set of premises and don't have any idea how to execute on that. They have a number of misconceptions on what the EU is trying to do, and because they are fighting internally their only position is that of Violet Elizabeth Bott ("I shall thcream and thcream until I'm thick")
http://howshouldyouvote.co.uk/collapse/ is clear description of the current stage of the talks.
I notice that at the end of that article, he says, 'the mandate is gone', meaning that nobody voted for hard Brexit, and therefore we can revoke the referendum. It's a disputatious point, but I think it's a credible one.
I hear the joke a lot now - you won, get over it.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I can't remember if someone has told the old joke on this thread - during a negotiation, one man takes his gun out, puts it to his head, and says, 'if you don't agree to my terms, I'll shoot.'
Something like this?
--------------------
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
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
On the latter, we agree. If the UK turns around and says "actually, wait, we're staying" then it will have no credibility in the EU for a generation.
On the former, we do not. Yes, invoking article 50 starts the withdrawal process - that's exactly what it says on the tin. If the UK revokes this declaration (and although much of the advice is secret, my understanding at the time was that there was some reasonable consensus that A50 was unilaterally revokable) then in legal terms, it is a nullity, and the UK remains an EU member on the same legal terms as before.
But I agree with you also that some of the reallocations of funding, relocations of EU bodies and so on will have long-term effects. It wouldn't just be waking up after a bad dream.
Brexiteers love to talk about how Europe (or possibly the World and even the Universe) needs us more than we need them, which is, of course, bollocks. However, I do think whilst Britain would need to show a bit of humility and would need to work hard to restore trust, but I don't think if Britain did revoke A50 there would be major problems. Certainly compared to the cliff-edge scenario.
My reasoning here (and I may be wrong but...) is that from a self-image point of view, the EU will want to be seen to be magnanimous. More importantly is cash and geopolitics. The UK is a BIG contributor to the EU pot and the EU would be keen to keep that. Geopolitically the UK is the biggest European player in NATO and whilst our military is shrinking, it remains of notable size by European standards.
All of the above is based on reading European sources and talking to colleagues who are not British (i.e. ignoring the self-serving nonsense of the UK press).
As I said, I may be wrong but I do think that whilst being welcomed back with open arms is unlikely, being accepted back is a realistic possibility if the UK (especially with a change of PM) revoked A50.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
Geopolitically the UK is the biggest European player in NATO
Which is unrelated to its membership of otherwise of the EU, isn't it?
--------------------
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
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I'd think there will be less problem from the EU with accepting a withdrawal of the A50 notification than from the Tory Brexit headbangers.
This is the problem that May has; even if the plan is to try to push concessions by holding a hardline until minutes before a deadline, she now has an antagonised wing in her party who will accept nothing other than running full speed off the cliff.
I can't see any scenario where this is going to end well. If we (the UK) renounce A50 then there is going to be significant problems with Brexiteers, never mind the neo-Nazis who wander around in their wake. I've no idea what form that'd take, but I'd imagine at very least they'd cause a 2007-style fuel protest. I'd imagine a campaign of attrition would get very bitter very quickly.
If we accept some deal which doesn't include restrictions on movement, that's equally not going to be good enough.
If we hold out for some deal where only workers can come to the UK (which isn't so different to the deal which happens in some other EU countries), the EU isn't going to accept unless all the current EU citizens get regularised status. Which isn't going to be acceptable.
Indeed, it seems that the only deal which would be acceptable to the hardliners is the very one which seems most impossible and unlikely for the EU to agree: namely one where UK goods and people can move freely within the EU, where the UK is not restricted in trade agreements made with third countries and where the UK doesn't have to follow EU regulations.
Sigh. What a mess.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
Geopolitically the UK is the biggest European player in NATO
Which is unrelated to its membership of otherwise of the EU, isn't it?
Technically yes. But I cannot believe that Brexit, especially a bad-tempered process with resentment all round, will do other than weaken NATO.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
I'm probably being dense or ignorant but can anyone explain what either side are hoping to achieve with the Irish border?
Both sides agree that there should be no 'physical infrastructure' at the border. And the EU also seems to accept in principle that a trade deal is possible without the UK being part of the customs union.
There is no precedent for the border of a customs union not to have physical infrastructure. Without the physical infrastructure, you don't have a border. Mr Davis thinks some technological solution can be found (e.g. customs declarations made at the depot instead of at the border) but Mr Barnier says the solution must be political, not technological. But there are no political solutions other than putting the border down the Irish Sea instead, which is a good a way as any of pissing all over the Good Friday Agreement.
So it looks like both sides are in absolute agreement that what we really need is a square circle. Then, every few weeks, we're treated to a press conference where Mr Barnier says he's very disappointed at the lack of square circles in the British proposals, while Mr Davis says he's confident that a square circle can be plotted just as soon as a few technical details are overcome.
[ 20. October 2017, 09:43: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
My reasoning here (and I may be wrong but...) is that from a self-image point of view, the EU will want to be seen to be magnanimous. More importantly is cash and geopolitics. The UK is a BIG contributor to the EU pot and the EU would be keen to keep that. Geopolitically the UK is the biggest European player in NATO and whilst our military is shrinking, it remains of notable size by European standards.
Also, the EU is trying to negotiate (or has just negotiated) trade deals with other big nations. (From memory, I think one with Canada has just concluded and one with Japan is in the pipeline.) I don't understand why the EU (if it were acting rationally) would not want to conclude a good agreement with the world's fifth-largest economy while trying to conclude these other deals. It would send a terrible signal, wouldn't it?
[ 20. October 2017, 09:48: Message edited by: Anglican't ]
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I don't understand why the EU (if it were acting rationally) would not want to conclude a good agreement with the world's fifth-largest economy while trying to conclude these other deals. It would send a terrible signal, wouldn't it?
They may well wish to have a trading agreement with the UK - however there are limited numbers of trade negotiators, and they'll want to be seen as a stable partner by continuing progress on the trade deals they already have in flight in preference to putting these on pause to get a trade deal with the UK.
Besides which, trade agreements of that sort take a long time to negotiate - and time is not necessarily on the UKs side.
You are assuming again the position of 'they need us more than we need them'
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
You are assuming again the position of 'they need us more than we need them'
Well I think we need each other. We both gain by thrashing out a satisfactory deal and we both possibly lose without one.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
You are assuming again the position of 'they need us more than we need them'
Well I think we need each other. We both gain by thrashing out a satisfactory deal and we both possibly lose without one.
You are assuming all countries in the EU are in a state of stasis, where the only decision that have to make is whether or not to make a deal with the UK.
In the case where the UK crashes out without a deal, the EU has a choice of how to deploy it's resources to minimize economic impact and maximize future economic benefits. If the UK has - at that point - proved to be a completely intransigent negotiating party (as it has done to date) then the EU may well decide that their resources are better occupied elsewhere doing other things.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
