Foxestalk Brexit Re-Referendum

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

Guarantee every leaver has put remain to leave and every remainer has put leave to remain

Don't worry, even if they have it will all be levelled out when Moosebreath, Bunk Moreland, Chandler, Frank To Be, Rog and Omar finish their shifts in Bahrain, Qatar, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and the UAE and do it the other way around.

[Horibbly Wrong]

Leave - the harder the better

[David Guiza]

1 minute ago, Horibbly Wrong said:

Leave - the harder the better

I assume your username is apt? 

[Strokes]

24 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

Guarantee every leaver has put remain to leave and every remainer has put leave to remain

Well I was only the third voter last night and it was obvious nobody had shifted at that point. I’ve been honest, have you?

[Donut]

6 minutes ago, Horibbly Wrong said:

Leave - the harder the better

Why though?

 

 

[Voll Blau]

Remain/Remain

 

Genuinely entered the initial campaign with an open mind, but having read a fair amount on both sides of the argument I couldn't see any benefit at all to backing Leave. Feel much more strongly pro-Remain now than I was on the day of the referendum and I've got absolutely no confidence in those conducting the negotiations.

 

If it does go through I reckon we'll be back in within 20 years on much less favourable terms than we have now and this will all have been a huge waste of time, money and resources which could have been dedicated to actually improving things in this country.

[bovril]

I'm closer to leave now than I was in June 2016, which seems to be different from a lot of people. Would still vote remain though.

[Rogstanley]

30 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Well I was only the third voter last night and it was obvious nobody had shifted at that point. I’ve been honest, have you?

It's not possible as the appropriate option isn't available 

[Fox Ulike]

10 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Remain/Remain

 

Genuinely entered the initial campaign with an open mind, but having read a fair amount on both sides of the argument I couldn't see any benefit at all to backing Leave. Feel much more strongly pro-Remain now than I was on the day of the referendum and I've got absolutely no confidence in those conducting the negotiations.

 

If it does go through I reckon we'll be back in within 20 years on much less favourable terms than we have now and this will all have been a huge waste of time, money and resources which could have been dedicated to actually improving things in this country.

 

Yup. That's pretty much it in a nutshell for me too. If we weren't already in it, there would be no point now joining it. It would be a huge waste of time to give up all our trade arrangements simply to adopt the EU's trade arrangements. Similarly, since we are in it, there's no point in leaving it to give up all our trade arrangements to sort them all out ourselves. Also a huge waste of time.

 

For me, the EU is just a big out-sourcing option. We pay into it so that all the boring stuff like food safety regulations and fishing quotas etc etc get done centrally rather than 28 different countries having to put time and money into setting up 28 separate institutions every time they want to do something.

 

The EU is like a Dry Cleaners where you take your shirts to get ironed rather than do them yourself. It costs a bit more but saves a lot of time and a shit job that i'd rather not do myself. I could "take back control" of my shirt situation and open my own Dry Cleaners. But  there's one on my way to work. So for fvcks sake who cares??

 

I voted Remain simply because the Leave campaign provided absolutely no vision as to what post-Brexit Britain would look like.  Apart from chlorinated chicken, they still haven't, so there's really no reason why anyone would shift their position. The results of Toddy's survey bear that out.

 

 

[Guest]

On overall numbers not much has changed but the 4% swing to remain is more than enough for a majority. Admittedly a sample of 78 is hardly enough to draw any real conclusions. What it probably does show is people more or less holding to their original vote although remain appears to be the more likely side to see increased support. It did occur to me I should probably have waited for TM's speech on Friday.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

I think basically we need to go one of 2 ways.

 

I think we wither need to call the whole thing off and remain which obviously is my personal preference.

 

The other option is a hard Brexit, personally looking at the options of customs unions, etc. that are being proposed I can not see how a so called 'soft Brexit' will everwork, if it does we are in a much diminished position anyway so quite frankly what is the point? If we have to have Brexit at all then I am probably more inclined to go down the Hard Brexit route as I feel in the long term this will probably be more beneficial to the nation than a halfway house Brexit.

[Fox Ulike]

5 minutes ago, toddybad said:

On overall numbers not much has changed but the 4% swing to remain is more than enough for a majority. Admittedly a sample of 78 is hardly enough to draw any real conclusions. What it probably does show is people more or less holding to their original vote although remain appears to be the more likely side to see increased support. It did occur to me I should probably have waited for TM's speech on Friday.

What is interesting (and statistically significant) though is how different the FT stats differ from the actual referendum result.

 

52% voted leave but they are significantly underrepresented on this Politics threads on a footy website. Only 30%.

 

I wonder why that might be?

[Strokes]

8 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

What is interesting (and statistically significant) though is how different the FT stats differ from the actual referendum result.

 

52% voted leave but they are significantly underrepresented on this Politics threads on a footy website. Only 30%.

 

I wonder why that might be?

I don’t know but it was the same before the referendum iirc, which why I expected Leicester to be a big remain area.

[Fox Ulike]

11 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I think basically we need to go one of 2 ways.

 

I think we wither need to call the whole thing off and remain which obviously is my personal preference.

 

The other option is a hard Brexit, personally looking at the options of customs unions, etc. that are being proposed I can not see how a so called 'soft Brexit' will everwork, if it does we are in a much diminished position anyway so quite frankly what is the point? If we have to have Brexit at all then I am probably more inclined to go down the Hard Brexit route as I feel in the long term this will probably be more beneficial to the nation than a halfway house Brexit.

But is there actually a “hard Brexit” option?

 

We will still want to trade with the EU.  To do so, we’ll have to adopt the EU standards and regulations etc that we currently wish to discard.

 

There will still be fishing quotas and they'll still be a need for immigrants and cheap foreign labour.

 

What exactly is a ‘hard Brexit’?

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

But is there actually a “hard Brexit” option?

 

We will still want to trade with the EU.  To do so, we’ll have to adopt the EU standards and regulations etc that we currently wish to discard.

 

There will still be fishing quotas and they'll still be a need for immigrants and cheap foreign labour.

 

What exactly is a ‘hard Brexit’?

That's just an outright lie, virtually every country in the World trades with the EU and they don't have to adopt regulations set by the commission. If you want tariff free access to it you have to, but even countries like North Korea are able to trade within the EU.

 

Hard Brexit appears now to have a different definition depending on your viewpoint, some see it as a complete no deal break, someone more moderate would see it as being outside the single market.

Edited 28 February 2018 by MattP

[Guest Foxin_mad]

13 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

But is there actually a “hard Brexit” option?

 

We will still want to trade with the EU.  To do so, we’ll have to adopt the EU standards and regulations etc that we currently wish to discard.

 

There will still be fishing quotas and they'll still be a need for immigrants and cheap foreign labour.

 

What exactly is a ‘hard Brexit’?

Hard Brexit is in my eyes is:

 

Come out now, pay no so called 'divorce bill'

Call EUs Bluff, use money saved to subsidise businesses hit with tariffs

Offer incentives for British people to buy non EU products, subsidise products (British of those of our closet trade partners e.g chlorinated chicken)to encourage purchase

Offer Tax incentives to Business to stay

 

If they don't want to trade with us then we don't trade with them. At least we have the ability to make our own trade agreements with other nations. Initially this would have a huge impact but over time it will be much better I feel than being in a customs union we have absolutely no say over.

 

Why would we have fishing quotas and cheap foreign labour with a so called hard Brexit? Supposedly no one will want to live here anyway if you believe the hyperbolic rhetoric! so what few jobs there are should be equally shared amongst the far right tory racists and old people

 

Edited 28 February 2018 by Foxin_mad

[Fox Ulike]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

That's just an outright lie, virtually every country in the World trades with the EU and they don't have to adopt regulations set by the commission. If you want tariff free access to it you have to, but even countries like North Korea are able to trade within the EU.

 

Hard Brexit appears now to have a different definition depending on your viewpoint, some see it as a complete no deal break, someone more moderate would see it as even being outside the single market.

Is it? So if a North Korean chicken farmer wants to sell chickens to the EU, what standards and regulations does he have to adopt in order to ensure his chickens can be imported into the EU and sold alongside EU products in EU supermarkets?

[ithuriel]

I get the feeling the politicians are fudging everything to remain without remaining, unless they can get another vote, that or they are quite inept, the entire lot of them.

[Milo]

3 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

That's just an outright lie, virtually every country in the World trades with the EU and they don't have to adopt regulations set by the commission. If you want tariff free access to it you have to, but even countries like North Korea are able to trade within the EU.

 

Hard Brexit appears now to have a different definition depending on your viewpoint, some see it as a complete no deal break, someone more moderate would see it as even being outside the single market.

Is it? So if a North Korean chicken farmer wants to sell chickens to the EU, what standards and regulations does he have to adopt in order to ensure his chickens can be imported into the EU and sold alongside EU products in EU supermarkets?

This is a non-issue. 

 

If a North Korean chicken farmer wants to sell chickens to the UK, they will have to satisfy UK Food Safety Regs and Standards. 

 

EU Safety laws were pretty good, and have been absorbed into UK food law over the past few years. So we now have our own various Safety and Standards regs, independent of EU jurisdiction. 

 

Its a good place to be, and I can't really see too much of a problem in migrating across more sector specific laws, tbh. 

 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

2 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

Is it? So if a North Korean chicken farmer wants to sell chickens to the EU, what standards and regulations does he have to adopt in order to ensure his chickens can be imported into the EU and sold alongside EU products in EU supermarkets?

For certain products I am sure this is the case. If a North Korean (assuming the sanctions removed) car company want to sell cars in the EU, as long as the car has a reasonably standard set up this would be possible, maybe with punitive tarrifs.

 

Obviously we would struggle to export products to the EU that don't meet their standards, the irony is that most of the EU do not bother to adhere to most of the standards anyway. Go to a remote farm in France and you wont find any of the health and safety practices in place, and I also imagine a few other thins are being ignored too. People talk of 'standards' but really I would like to see how well these are enforced and monitored within the EU, obviously we have been fed horse burger and potentially fiprinol that we know about, what else is there?

[Fox Ulike]

3 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Hard Brexit is in my eyes is:

 

Come out now, pay no so called 'divorce bill'

Call EUs Bluff, use money saved to subsidise businesses hit with tariffs

Offer incentives for British people to buy no EU products, subsidise products to encourage purchase

Offer Tax incentives to Business to stay

 

If they don't want to trade with us then we don't trade with them. At least we have the ability to make our own trade agreements with other nations. Initially this would have a huge impact but over time it will be much better I feel than being in a customs union we have absolutely no say over.

 

Why would we have fishing quotas and cheap foreign labour with a so called hard Brexit? Supposedly no one will want to live here anyway if you believe the hyperbolic rhetoric! so what few jobs there are should be equally shared amongst the far right tory racists and old people

 

 

I'm not sure I can see any advantage for Britain in your hard Brexit scenario.

 

Subsidising businesses would be a fairly radical  approach that would be a huge administrative headache to set up and regulate. A "Buy British" campaign might work but i'm not sure  people would be prepared to pay more for products just cos they're British. Also, would USA etc sign a free-trade deal with us if we were running a "Buy British" chicken campaign, for example? Tax incentives might work but would reduce Government revenue. So there's no real advantage there.

 

Surely just remaining part of the CU is preferable to all that?

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said:

Hard Brexit is in my eyes is:

 

Come out now, pay no so called 'divorce bill'

Call EUs Bluff, use money saved to subsidise businesses hit with tariffs

Offer incentives for British people to buy non EU products, subsidise products (British of those of our closet trade partners e.g chlorinated chicken)to encourage purchase

Offer Tax incentives to Business to stay

 

If they don't want to trade with us then we don't trade with them. At least we have the ability to make our own trade agreements with other nations. Initially this would have a huge impact but over time it will be much better I feel than being in a customs union we have absolutely no say over.

 

Why would we have fishing quotas and cheap foreign labour with a so called hard Brexit? Supposedly no one will want to live here anyway if you believe the hyperbolic rhetoric! so what few jobs there are should be equally shared amongst the far right tory racists and old people

 

And who's going to feel that huge impact I wonder? People in this country. Most likely poorer people.

 

It just doesn't make sense to commit such drastic acts of self-harm with no guarantee of a better life for everyone here in the long term. I've yet to meet a Leaver who's not admitted to me they think things will get worse for this country initially, and it fvcking baffles me as to why people would willfully vote for that.

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Voll Blau said:

And who's going to feel that huge impact I wonder? People in this country. Most likely poorer people.

 

It just doesn't make sense to commit such drastic acts of self-harm with no guarantee of a better life for everyone here in the long term. I've yet to meet a Leaver who's not admitted to me they think things will get worse for this country initially, and it fvcking baffles me as to why people would willfully vote for that.

Most tariffs imposed by the EU go onto things like shoes, clothes and food, the things that the poorest spend a higher proportion of their income on than the richer.

 

Many people take decisions that could cause short term harm for potential long term gain, that's not unusual at all.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

1 minute ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

I'm not sure I can see any advantage for Britain in your hard Brexit scenario.

 

Subsidising businesses would be a fairly radical  approach that would be a huge administrative headache to set up and regulate. A "Buy British" campaign might work but i'm not sure  people would be prepared to pay more for products just cos they're British. Also, would USA etc sign a free-trade deal with us if we were running a "Buy British" chicken campaign, for example? Tax incentives might work but would reduce Government revenue. So there's no real advantage there.

 

Surely just remaining part of the CU is preferable to all that?

The advantage is we can negotiate our own trade deals outside the or a 'customs union'

 

If we are in the customs unions we can only deal with the people the EU say we can deal with, but we have absolutely no control over who the EU decides to strike trade deals with as we are no longer part of the EU. Corbyn claims he can get a bespoke deal which sounds awfully like having cake and eating it, in practice it wont happen.

 

The US may sign a trade deal if we promote American cars, or offer incentives to use then over German ones for example. If we subsidise British products the hope would be that they are cheaper. Obviously initially we have to work very hard to make it work and we may have to look at ways to encourage more investment here as obviously the change will make a huge difference.

 

I personally feel a hard Brexit would be better than staying in a customs union we have no say over. Of course I would rather remain a full decision make in a reformed EU.

[Fox Ulike]

7 minutes ago, Milo said:

This is a non-issue. 

 

If a North Korean chicken farmer wants to sell chickens to the UK, they will have to satisfy UK Food Safety Regs and Standards. 

 

EU Safety laws were pretty good, and have been absorbed into UK food law over the past few years. So we now have our own various Safety and Standards regs, independent of EU jurisdiction. 

 

Its a good place to be, and I can't really see too much of a problem in migrating across more sector specific laws, tbh. 

 

But the discussion was about exporting into the EU.

 

So whether its a North Korea or UK farmer, there will need to be standardisation with EU Safety Laws surely?

 

And, every time these change, will UK and NK farmers have to adapt their practices to fit - if they want to get their chickens onto EU supermarket shelves?