Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
mainlymacro.blogspot.com
Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
1–10 of 235 posts
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#2This seems speculative and it effectively posits a worst-of-all-worlds situation resulting - one if which the UK is half inside the single market.
Half inside such that it allows the flow of goods (the UK is a net importer) but not services (which we net export). This would be untenable, worse than a no-deal situation. And the basis of this speculation is that the EU is holding all the cards. I'm really not convinced this is true.
The article reads a little bit like a remain fantasy - Brexit will be a disaster and then people must come around to my way of thinking! The problem with that analysis is that in your way of thinking it was likely unimaginable that the Brexit vote would go through in the first place. And then we heard that no PM would ever actually action it, and then that no Parliament would allow it. None of which has really panned out.
--edit-- I'd love to reply to more of the comments below, but I appear to be rate-limited. Never mind then...
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#3Amazing how small errors in a text start to degrade your confidence in the content. At the outset the sentences are clear and mostly correct. As it goes on small errors start to appear and occasionally the entire meaning of a sentence becomes unclear. By the end, reading his slightly dramatic flourish, you get the feeling that he wrote with some emotion and wasn't tending to the language very carefully.
On the one hand you can say these are merely typos. On the other you could say they reflect a lack of clarity, a lack of care. I know I find it hard to ignore.
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#4This seems speculative and it effectively posits a worst-of-all-worlds situation resulting - one if which the UK is half inside the single market. Half inside such that it allows the flow of goods (the UK is a net importer) but not services (which we net export). This would be untenable, worse than a no-deal situation. And the basis of this speculation is that the EU is holding all the cards. I'm really not convinced…
Isn't a Canada-like solution exactly what current negotiations appear to work towards? Barnier presented a slide with options for the UK and a free trade agreement like with Canada was the only one that doesn't violate red lines set by the UK government.
Such a free-trade agreement would allow most goods to flow relatively freely but doesn't have any provisions for services.
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#5As a EU resident who is a partner in several UK based businesses, the uncertainty over what's coming next is frightening. When I approached different colleagues, friends & family in the UK, they all had different views on what should happen. To an outsider, it looks like opinions have been polarised.
If you are managing a business that has ties to the UK there are very many unknowns right now. It's a lot easier to plan for the worst than it is to take risks IMHO. Brexit must ultimately hurt the UK economy in some way – jobs lost, money flowing out of the country, talented people leaving?
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#6Amazing how small errors in a text start to degrade your confidence in the content. At the outset the sentences are clear and mostly correct. As it goes on small errors start to appear and occasionally the entire meaning of a sentence becomes unclear. By the end, reading his slightly dramatic flourish, you get the feeling that he wrote with some emotion and wasn't tending to the language very carefully. On the one ha…
Meh.
It's full of articles with "it's" instead of "its". It's the internet.
You're (oh, yes--and "your" instead of "you're") not going to have a good time if you stop at typos or grammatical errors instead of just trying to see if what you read is interesting or not.
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#7This seems speculative and it effectively posits a worst-of-all-worlds situation resulting - one if which the UK is half inside the single market. Half inside such that it allows the flow of goods (the UK is a net importer) but not services (which we net export). This would be untenable, worse than a no-deal situation. And the basis of this speculation is that the EU is holding all the cards. I'm really not convinced…
Isn't a Canada-like solution exactly what current negotiations appear to work towards? Barnier presented a slide with options for the UK and a free trade agreement like with Canada was the only one that doesn't violate red lines set by the UK government. Such a free-trade agreement would allow most goods to flow relatively freely but doesn't have any provisions for services.
> Isn't a Canada-like solution exactly what current negotiations appear to work towards?
Quite possibly, but I'm not familiar enough with CETA to know the answer to this question - does CETA restrict Canada's ability to enter other trade agreements with third-party nations?
The partial Single Market membership mentioned in the article does come with that proviso - that the UK cannot make trade deals with other nations, which is why I think it's an untenable position.
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#8A real shame that Oxford decided to name their department after an oligarch who expropriated huge wealth out of Russia [1]. Sad to admit I consider any position associated with the Blavatnik name tainted.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/03/oxford-uni...
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#9I can't decide if Brexit is good or bad for the UK. On the one hand, there's the common market and freedom of movement. On the other there's Germany's dominance and lots of fragile banks.
What would be worse, losing access to the free market or being around if the banks fail? Or would being outside the market make a difference if Deutsche Bank failed?
Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?
#10This seems speculative and it effectively posits a worst-of-all-worlds situation resulting - one if which the UK is half inside the single market. Half inside such that it allows the flow of goods (the UK is a net importer) but not services (which we net export). This would be untenable, worse than a no-deal situation. And the basis of this speculation is that the EU is holding all the cards. I'm really not convinced…
So far negotiations have shown the EU holds most of the important cards. The UK caved in on any negotiation demand.
It’s a fascinating view from Germany:
The UK threatens “No Deal”, the EU informs companies that “No Deal” is a possible outcome and plans contingencies, informs companies that they should too, UK now complains that EU threatens companies.
UK says “Out means out”, EU prepares to move EU institutions abroad, UK complains about EU moving institutions abroad.
I’m also puzzled what’s supposed to happen with such important stuff as rules and agreements for importing nuclear materials for powerplants (currently regulated via Euratom), regulations regarding medicine/medical treatment (currently also handled on a european level) and all of that stuff.
Which other option does the UK realistically have for those things other than just accept the EU rules? Any producer for anything that wants to export to the EU will have to abide by EU rules anyways. Will there be a UK and a EU edition of things?
All of this could be solved with sufficient time, but triggering article 50 was akin to holding a loaded gun to your head and saying “if you don’t do what I want at the end of the next two years, I’ll pull the trigger.”