Foxestalk Brexit Re-Referendum

[Guest Foxin_mad]

11 minutes 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.

There is no evidence it would be poorer people that I have seen. It could affect a broad spectrum, it really depends exactly what the impact is and how the government decide to minimise that impact.

 

It may lead to higher government spending in some areas, in fact I think a hard Brexit scenario probably makes this a necessity so in that case some people at the lower end may see an improvement.

 

Again I voted remain but I can see both sides have very valid points. I can not see why people would blindly  accept a deal that Corbyn is proposing that would potentially stop us signing a multi billion pound trade deal with Australia, China and India not to mention the US that could make us all a lot richer.

Edited 28 February 2018 by Foxin_mad

[Fox Ulike]

2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

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.

OK I get that.

 

For me it just seems that we're adding layer upon layer of complication just to avoid going down the simpliest option of staying within the CU.

 

Also, I believe that there is a huge gulf between a trade deal and actual trade. Your Pork Pie seller in Melton Mowbray who has sold his pork pies to his distributor in France for the last 20 years, is not suddenly going to start selling pork pies into India or the USA just because the tariffs change. Do you know how long profitable business relationships and pipelines take to set up? Do you know the cost that geographical distance adds to business? Do you understand the effect of different time zones and less opportunity for face-to-face contact time with your suppliers and customers?

 

We already have a trade deal with the whole world. In your 'hard Brexit' it's just going to be slightly easier if you sell to the rest of the World, but slightly more difficult if you sell into EU. But the fundamental trade patterns and relationships aren't going to shift significantly because there's more at play that just tarrifs.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

5 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

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?

 

 

 

If a chicken farmer or the UK as a whole wants to sell chickens to the EU and they want to buy them then I do not think that there is any problem making sure there is standardisation in place where it is necessary. To see products to any nation I expect you have to comply with their requirements to some extent.

 

How often do the EU standards change?

 

Everyone assumes that Britain is going to become some kind of desert with no standards after leaving the EU. I think this is an unsubstantiated myth, the UK has long had a reputation for high standards and fairness before the EU existed and I am quite sure after too. British Standards are often the foundation of many EU standards in certain areas, we have long had some of the highest electrical standards in the world. Some EU standards are daft, like fire extinguishers BSI used to be different colours so you could see what the feck was in them! Now there are all red so it is quite possible in an emergency situation when you cant be sat reading labels that you spray water on an electric fire! Of course there are exceptions in all cases nothing or no organisation is perfect.

[Strokes]

15 minutes ago, MattP said:

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.

Don’t forget VAT on energy, who feels that the most?

[Milo]

14 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

But the discussion was about exporting into the EU.

Ah. 

 

In which case I have very little interest. 

 

 

[Strokes]

16 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

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?

 

 

 

It’s not particularly relevant but it’s the importers that have to ensure standards and regulations not the exporters. As with tariffs.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

5 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

OK I get that.

 

For me it just seems that we're adding layer upon layer of complication just to avoid going down the simpliest option of staying within the CU.

 

Also, I believe that there is a huge gulf between a trade deal and actual trade. Your Pork Pie seller in Melton Mowbray who has sold his pork pies to his distributor in France for the last 20 years, is not suddenly going to start selling pork pies into India or the USA just because the tariffs change. Do you know how long profitable business relationships and pipelines take to set up? Do you know the cost that geographical distance adds to business? Do you understand the effect of different time zones and less opportunity for face-to-face contact time with your suppliers and customers?

 

We already have a trade deal with the whole world. In your 'hard Brexit' it's just going to be slightly easier if you sell to the rest of the World, but slightly more difficult if you sell into EU. But the fundamental trade patterns and relationships aren't going to shift significantly because there's more at play that just tarrifs.

But why stay in a or the customs union if we have no control over it? We are just doing that to say we have had Brexit even though nothing changes. What actually happens with a customs union is we are in a worse place than we were when we were in the EU. Brexit in name only is just a pointless waste of time.

 

Who says the distributor in France will stop buying pork pies? If his customer love Pork pies then they will probably continue to want them. If the government can subsidise business to ensure the impact of any tariff is minimal then I cant see a problem.

 

We can trade with other countries now on WTO rules but obviously what we are trying o do is strike better deals that may open up new opportunities and investment no available under WTO agreements. I think trade patterns and relationships can change for instance culturally we are more similar to New Zealand and Australia than we are to France, so perhaps there could be big opportunities there, similarly with South Africa, the US.

 

Again I would rather us be in a strong position to strike these deals with the whole of the EU but I would rather us go it alone than be tied to a customs union we have no say over.

[Beechey]

Voted to leave on the grounds that the EU was heading in a direction the UK couldn't, and wouldn't follow. I think since the vote that has only accelerated. I was in favour of an EEA/EFTA style arrangement, and still largely am (it's not going to happen though, not even under Labour's plans), but I certainly don't think the UK could follow the direction the EU is heading in with a defence union, banking union, and pushing for further integration of the Eurozone with no peep of what happens to those outside the EZ. UK was in a shrinking voting block on some of the major issues in the EU, and with the EZ seemingly going to integrate into almost a single entity (if Macron has his way), then I can't see how membership could have even been tenable under those circumstances (not to mention the humiliation that was only us and Hungary being against Junker's appointment as President of the Commission), and it doesn't help that Cameron went to the EU asking for some very minor changes, and got absolute scraps, like how the Pound will be equal to the Euro in EU texts, or how "ever closer union" will now be omitted from texts (both are effectively meaningless). That possibly lost him the referendum.

 

In terms of that way it's been handled, I can't describe it as anything other than shambolic, frankly from both sides. The UK took an age to trigger A50, and then an age to release it's plans. The EU (specifically some of the major players in the Commission and Parliament) has been combative for seemingly no reason, which causes some UK figures to be so in return. It's been a great example of how to not come to an amicable agreement thus far.

Edited 28 February 2018 by Beechey

[Footballwipe]

9 minutes ago, Beechey said:

Voted to leave on the grounds that the EU was heading in a direction the UK couldn't, and wouldn't follow. I think since the vote that has only accelerated. I was in favour of an EEA/EFTA style arrangement, and still largely am (it's not going to happen though, not even under Labour's plans), but I certainly don't think the UK could follow the direction the EU is heading in with a defence union, banking union, and pushing for further integration of the Eurozone with no peep of what happens to those outside the EZ. UK was in a shrinking voting block on some of the major issues in the EU, and with the EZ seemingly going to integrate into almost a single entity (if Macron has his way), then I can't see how membership could have even been tenable under those circumstances (not to mention the humiliation that was only us and Hungary being against Junker's appointment as President of the Commission), and it doesn't help that Cameron went to the EU asking for some very minor changes, and got absolute scraps, like how the Pound will be equal to the Euro in EU texts, or how "ever closer union" will now be omitted from texts (both are effectively meaningless). That possibly lost him the referendum.

 

In terms of that way it's been handled, I can't describe it as anything other than shambolic, frankly from both sides. The UK took an age to trigger A50, and then an age to release it's plans. The EU (specifically some of the major players in the Commission and Parliament) has been combative for seemingly no reason, which causes some UK figures to be so in return. It's been a great example of how to not come to an amicable agreement thus far.

NO REASON? HAHAHAHAH

[Beechey]

Just now, Footballwipe said:

NO REASON? HAHAHAHAH

Yes, what reason does it benefit them to be combative when we're negotiating a future relationship?

[Guest]

PwC: Weak pound hurt Maplin

PwC have confirmed that they’ve taken control of Maplin, and are looking for a buyer for some, or all, of the company.

They also say that Maplin was hurt by the fall in sterling – which slumped against rival currencies after the Brexit vote in June 2016.

Zelf Hussain, joint administrator and PwCpartner, says:

“The challenging conditions in the UK retail sector are well documented. Like many other retailers, Maplin has been hit hard by a slowdown in consumer spending and more expensive imports as the pound has weakened.

“Our initial focus as administrators will be to engage with parties who may be interested in acquiring all or part of the company. We will continue to trade the business as normal whilst a buyer is sought.

“Staff have been paid their February wages and will continue to be paid for future work while the company is in administration.”

[Fox Ulike]

35 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

But why stay in a or the customs union if we have no control over it? We are just doing that to say we have had Brexit even though nothing changes. What actually happens with a customs union is we are in a worse place than we were when we were in the EU. Brexit in name only is just a pointless waste of time.

 

Who says the distributor in France will stop buying pork pies? If his customer love Pork pies then they will probably continue to want them. If the government can subsidise business to ensure the impact of any tariff is minimal then I cant see a problem.

 

We can trade with other countries now on WTO rules but obviously what we are trying o do is strike better deals that may open up new opportunities and investment no available under WTO agreements. I think trade patterns and relationships can change for instance culturally we are more similar to New Zealand and Australia than we are to France, so perhaps there could be big opportunities there, similarly with South Africa, the US.

 

Again I would rather us be in a strong position to strike these deals with the whole of the EU but I would rather us go it alone than be tied to a customs union we have no say over.

Well maybe. It's certainly pointless and figuratively speaking it might be a waste of time - but it's not an actual waste of time.

 

The actual waste of time would be in renegotiating lots and lots of trade deals rather than accepting the one-size-fits-all approach of the CU.

 

For me, the more I talk to people about this, the thing that just keeps coming to the fore is the utter pointlessness of the whole thing - whichever flavour of Brexit you choose. There just is no point to any of this.

 

Maybe it's a Sociological thing that all advanced capitalist economies go through when they reach a certain level of maturity. Like the uprising in Catalonia. When a Society gets too comfortable they just look for ways to disrupt it to give themselves some sense of struggle. What is it that Laurence Fishbourne says in the Matrix? Something that about the original matrix was set in a human utopia but everybody rejected it because nobody could accept contentment and happiness! Getting a bit deep now I know!

[Fox92]

I did vote remain but if there was another referendum I'd vote leave on principal I don't think it's fair to vote for something, not get the result you want so re-vote.

[Colourmy]

2 hours 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?

Because Leicester is a very left/liberal leaning city and so it would be likely that the supporters of LCFC and users of this forum voted remain.

[Colourmy]

24 minutes ago, toddybad said:

PwC: Weak pound hurt Maplin

PwC have confirmed that they’ve taken control of Maplin, and are looking for a buyer for some, or all, of the company.

They also say that Maplin was hurt by the fall in sterling – which slumped against rival currencies after the Brexit vote in June 2016.

Zelf Hussain, joint administrator and PwCpartner, says:

“The challenging conditions in the UK retail sector are well documented. Like many other retailers, Maplin has been hit hard by a slowdown in consumer spending and more expensive imports as the pound has weakened.

“Our initial focus as administrators will be to engage with parties who may be interested in acquiring all or part of the company. We will continue to trade the business as normal whilst a buyer is sought.

“Staff have been paid their February wages and will continue to be paid for future work while the company is in administration.”

Or it could be that they were ridiculously expensive for tat that could be got for far less from virtually anywhere on the internet!

[Colourmy]

Trying to blame the closure of a not-relevant High street chain on Brexit is what is wrong with the majority of fervent remainiacs.

[Saxondale]

Remain / Remain.

 

It's an insane thing to try and do. Even if you think Brexit is a good idea ideologically or in principle (which it isn't), it just doesn't work in practice. It doesn't add up.

 

If you work for a foreign-owned company, be prepared to lose your job. If you work for a company that relies on trade with foreign-owned companies, be prepared to lose your job. If you work for a company that is sensitive to currency fluctuations, be prepared to lose your job.

 

And because all these people are going to lose their jobs, the entire economy will collapse: housing market, construction, etc. 

 

Welcome to the dark ages.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Colourmy said:

Trying to blame the closure of a not-relevant High street chain on Brexit is what is wrong with the majority of fervent remainiacs.

I just quoted the administrator.

Toys are us went under because of pricing.

Maplins was, in part, due to increased costs due to the drop in the pound. They've looked at the books, we haven't.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, BornBlue said:

Remain / Remain.

 

It's an insane thing to try and do. Even if you think Brexit is a good idea ideologically or in principle (which it isn't), it just doesn't work in practice. It doesn't add up.

 

If you work for a foreign-owned company, be prepared to lose your job. If you work for a company that relies on trade with foreign-owned companies, be prepared to lose your job. If you work for a company that is sensitive to currency fluctuations, be prepared to lose your job.

 

And because all these people are going to lose their jobs, the entire economy will collapse: housing market, construction, etc. 

 

Welcome to the dark ages.

Funnily enough I read something yesterday which seemed quite pertinent.

 

The Roman Empire had seen off numerous threats and appeared stable and unyielding. Yet beneath the prosperous exterior, issues that are not often covered in relation to poverty and the division of wealth formented problems. The Empire fell and the conditions created were the precursors to the dark ages. It all seems remarkably prescient.

Edited 28 February 2018 by Guest

[Colourmy]

8 minutes ago, toddybad said:

I just quoted the administrator.

Toys are us went under because of pricing.

Maplins was, in part, due to increased costs due to the drop in the pound. They've looked at the books, we haven't.

Toys are Us went under because they owed £15 million to HMRC in Vat payments and their credit line didn't fancy loaning them money to pay an aged Vat bill.

Maplins went bust because the internet didn't go away!

[yorkie1999]

Voted remain, but changed it to leave after seeing this. 

 

[Fox Ulike]

9 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Funnily enough I read something yesterday which seemed quite pertinent.

 

The Roman Empire had seen off numerous threats and appeared stable and unyielding. Yet beneath the prosperous exterior, issues that are not often covered in relation to poverty and the division of wealth formented problems. The Empire fell and the conditions created were the precursors to the dark ages. It all seems remarkably prescient.

Unfortunately it was probably more to do with the influx of foreign hoardes from the East. ie the Visigoths

 

Wealth inequality had been deeply entrenched in the Roman Empire for 100s of years before it fell - you can't get more unequal than master and slave.

 

The Dark ages seems a bit far-fetched. Can Brexit have a worse effect than the financial crash of 2008?

 

 

[Innovindil]

Someone has to ask surely. 

 

Wtf is a maplin? 

[Realist Guy In The Room]

Voted leave.

 

Would now vote remain.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

58 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

Well maybe. It's certainly pointless and figuratively speaking it might be a waste of time - but it's not an actual waste of time.

 

The actual waste of time would be in renegotiating lots and lots of trade deals rather than accepting the one-size-fits-all approach of the CU.

 

For me, the more I talk to people about this, the thing that just keeps coming to the fore is the utter pointlessness of the whole thing - whichever flavour of Brexit you choose. There just is no point to any of this.

 

Maybe it's a Sociological thing that all advanced capitalist economies go through when they reach a certain level of maturity. Like the uprising in Catalonia. When a Society gets too comfortable they just look for ways to disrupt it to give themselves some sense of struggle. What is it that Laurence Fishbourne says in the Matrix? Something that about the original matrix was set in a human utopia but everybody rejected it because nobody could accept contentment and happiness! Getting a bit deep now I know!

I don't know I think coming out of the EU where we have some control to go into 'a' customs union where we have no controls seems like an actual waste of time to me! Just so we can say to the Brexit voters they got Brexit even though they didn't actually get Brexit! We just got being in a common market. Surely it has to be better just to scrap the whole thing full stop. Of course politically Labour and Corbyn don't actually want to be in the EU as it would probably cause them a lot of trouble in state aid laws if they want to enact their policies which is why I think they are doing this bizarre 'a' customs union but not 'the' customs unions. To me it sounds very much like having cake and eating it and I am not sure how the EU will accept it.

 

Negotiating our own trade deals makes sense to some extent, currently we don't have a trade deal with Australia for example, we couldn't have one under the customs union, and the EU is unlikely to strike a deal with Australia. To that end we are missing out on opportunities and trade from there under current wto agreements and tariffs. We obviously need to be able to strike some form of deal with the EU on trade that is where the biggest difficulty lies for Brexit.