Brexit

Yes, many leavers seem blissfully unconcerned about the disastrous consequences of a no deal brexit.
But just as it is a Remainer fallacy to believe that all Brexit voters are stupid turkeys voting for Christmas, it is a Brexiteer fallacy to believe that everyone who voted Leave voted for a hard Brexit.
Millions of people were undecided until quite close to the vote itself. Millions were persuaded to vote Leave by promises of ' the easiest deal we'll ever make ', £350m per week for the NHS ' and 'we can have our cake and eat it '.
How many of those waverers would have voted leave if the vote had been a straight choice between Remain and a clear No Deal hard Brexit. Very few, I suggest.
It's a fallacy to believe that there is a majority in the country favouring No Deal. There isn't now and there never was.

 

I can see both sides of the argument but I find it more of a travesty that remainers believe that this country will fall into a complete melt down and not be able to stand on it's own two feet. How Great Britain has fallen!

 

And was lorry gridlock, drug and food shortages and emergency military standby part of what most people voted Brexit for?
The problem is that most ardent Remainers discuss this stuff with other ardent Remainers and most hard Brexiteers discuss Brexit with others who feel like them.
But there are millions of others in the middle who, just like swing voters and 'shy Tory voters' don't really talk about this stuff and who were strongly influenced by the Remain campaign without being as ideologically opposed to the EU as you and other hard Brexiteers are. They may have wanted some of the things that you want, but they didn't vote to make themselves poorer

 

Top post Damo, reality for me is that it made not a huge difference to me which way the vote went because I believe in Great Britain, I don't fear independence and I don't believe anyone should. Europe is a Union which shares some values I agree with and others I don't, there's no reason we can't take what we've learnt from the Union and apply the principle here in the UK but try improve it and adjust to what our country needs the most.

Absolute fact for me that immigration is a problem, I don't care about the numbers but I see the reality of it and it's an issue. I'm not saying close the borders, us against the world but they're must be a better system than what we have now but we're powerless to change that. I want us to be able to change that.

As I said in my first post, I trade with countries all over the world and the UK. If we have issues with products etc it may just encourage people to look closer to the home. We have some absolutely fantastic manufacturers here in the UK that maybe don't get a fair crack of the whip because of cheap labour in both Europe and the far east.

Why would workers rights lessen? One thing I will admit to is that workers rights have improved while we've been part of the union, as I said above there's no reason why we can't learn from that? There are fine countries outside of the EU which operate with employee laws, these aren't exclusive to the EU.

Even if the people at the top don't have the best interests at heart, there's no reason that everyday working people/business owners/service providers can't make it a great success.

 

The world has changed immeasurably since the days when we could use our global power to dominate others militarily and economically. Of course we have fallen, that's blindingly obvious, but we are where we are. Pretending that we're still in the first half of the 20th century won't help us deal with today's realities.
Standing on our own, outside the EU means that we will be picked off by other major economies, who will see us coming a mile away and exact a high price (and very low standards) for a trade deal.
I cannot understand how anyone thinks we can negotiate better trade deals with the wider world on our own than we already get by being part of the most powerful trade bloc on the planet. It seems laughable to me to think that anyone would believe this to be possible.

 

It doesn't mean that at all for me and I've tried to post my thoughts above.

 

It probably will but mainly because of thems who are in charge mate!

 

I agree the people in charge are doing a pretty pathetic job but I've more faith in the likes of you and me to make it work.

 

As were many who were frightened by comments from Cameron & Osborne who were spouting their project fear, there were lies on both sides it politics very few follow up their manifesto pledges,
I thought it was a straight choice remain in the EU and Customs Union or leave and get out of the EU and Customs Union.
With regards No Deal that was always the last throw of the dice, and IMO the ace card May should play if there is no movement on the back stop, as many have commented we have a deal or we default to No Deal, there is no middle ground.
As I posted above we should have had a leaver in charge of brexit we had the likes of David Davies and other pro brexit MPs involved but they all resigned rather than put their signature to the agreement May brought back to be voted on in the commons.
Once the original vote was counted we should have told the EU were leaving on the 29th of March and the ball is then in their court.
Allowing Theresa May to Captain HMS UK was always going to be difficult as she was a remainer trying to please all which was impossible and could never work, the EU saw this and realised the situation and played hard ball, which we both agree they have every right to.

 

You thought thatt but not everoeve who voted Leave thought like you.

The reason you think that we should play hardball is because you are happy to walk away with No Deal. It's easy to say ''walk away' if you don't care about getting a deal.
But all of our MPs (except the extreme loony fringe of the Tory Party) are terrified by No Deal, as are nearly all major British businesses and over 50% of the population. That's because all of those people believe it would be an economic and social disaster. You don't think it will, so you're happy to take the gamble on No Deal. Those of us who are convinced that it is the worst possible outcome are not so keen on using the threat of No Deal as a bargaining ploy, in case it ends up happening.

 

No deal is a very scary prospect but I feel that option has to be there when negotiating. I think where Bronco is coming from, is if we had set that out as our agenda straight from the start then I think we will have ended up with something far better as a deal than what we have at the moment. Now we are calling their bluff at the end of negotiations but we have our cards showing on the table. EU know No deal won't get through so why should they move from their position. Its who blinks first and we have dust in our eyes. The current deal is like getting divorced and moving out of the house, except you move into the shed, still have to pop in and do the washing up, pay the mortgage and bills. All those beautiful women (or men) you think you can now date, turn out to be a bit frumpy and not like the stunners you used to date in the past (even though they had to date you as they were your harem). Its being a mess from start to finish. Cameron like Blair should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves

 

Ps. We have opposing views on here's but its not turned into tribal battlefield. that's the most disappointing thiong about this Brexit thing, is the deep divisions which shouldn't be there but are now and will be for a long while. that's what i hate most. The press like Daily Mail has created these divisions.

 

The whole brexit thing has turned into a complete shambles, no surprises when it involves the feckwits in the houses of parliament. At the beginning there was good debate to be had regarding the pros and cons of leaving and staying. Unfortunately this was dumped by the wayside a long time ago as both sides of the debate have turned it into a slanging match of who can bullshit the furthest. I washed my hands of it a long time ago, the people of this country deserve to be represented far better regardless of the outcome.

 

We keep getting told the EU dislike the back stop far more than we do and would like it to finish asap , surely if that is the case they would change the wording of that particular sticking point.
I believe its now only 50 days to the dealine and as you say the EU have us over a barrel, some as yourself Steve say thats the way it would always be as they don't have to give us a good deal which us leavers understand.
If they continue to try and force a bad deal onto the UK(which the present deal is) then the only card left for May to play is walk away, this won't help anyone but they can't be seen to be giving into the UKs demands, as it will send a messsge out to other EU countries who might be thinking of leaving.
The negotiated 40 billions is a lot of money to lose that should be very much our hand to play, no deal no 40 billion.

 

That's one viewpoint, but it's not one I share. The EU were crystal clear from well before the referendum that, if we chose to leave, we would be expected to honour our existing commitments and that they would not bend their rules or make any exceptions for us.
If we had used No Deal as a bargaining chip they'd still have called our bluff. There's no way they would have (as they would see it) given in to us threatening them. If anything they'd have been even more hard nosed than they already have been.

 

But that £40 is a one-off payment. It's a lot of money, but it's chicken feed compared to what they believe we will lose by being out of the EU and it's a tiny proportion of the EU's budget. There's no way that they will compromise their single market or their sacrosanct principles for £40 billion.

Threatening to walk away won't help us - that's just cutting off our nose to spite our face. A No Deal Brexit would hurt us immeasurably more than it will hurt them. However much they don't want it, they want even less to compromise their rules for fear of creating a precedent that others might seek to follow.

 

Rubbish...

 

The point about a backstop, from their point of view, is that it has to be open ended. The point of it is to ensure that we/they don't end up with a hard border with Ireland being necessary if we can't get a mutually agreeable trade deal in the transition period. If the backstop is fixed term then it means that they would be left with a gaping hole in the EU border if the talks aren't concluded before the backstop ends. They won't allow that. As they said, a fixed term backstop isn't a backstop.

 

fair point. What I don’t think has helped matters is the unrealistic deal people expected or were led to believe existed. Freedom of movement was a big thing which was set out right at the start by the EU. What should have been illustrated to voters is virtually a matrix. If you want that in any deal you can start shopping in the budget aisle for the other bits of the deal as they will never stop that ideal. May knows any deal without being able to control immigration will never get past the electorate. Whatever happens out of this we must ensure that nationalism and hate doesn’t gain any seats.

 

What’s rubbish. That we are being polite on here and cordial or that there are now deep divisions in society which will take a long time to heal?