Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper? • Hacker News Board

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#131

Post by JohnStrange » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

djsumdog wrote: post #43

forinti wrote: post #9

I 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?

I thnk Brexit is a good thing .. for the EU. The UK has refused to adopt the Euro. The GBP is totally overvalued. The UK/Ireland have no plans to join the Shengen zone (which is a good thing for American backpackers I'll admit, as when you're 90 days in the EU run out, you can stay in the UK for 120, until the reset period). Politically, the UK is more closely aligned to US foreign policy (that of war mongering) than…

I believe Brexit is a loose-loose deal. It's bad for the UK because it causes a lot of complications without producing real benefits. Basically, the UK will loose lot of political influence and control while having to abide to the EU's trade rules anyway. It's bad for the EU, because the union may loose cohesion, as it may turn out that the UK is doing not so bad after all and local anti-European socialist and nationalist movements will capitalize on that a bit, because the EU looses influence on the US without the UK, and because the UK provided a counter-balance to the axis France-Germany and now smaller countries fear that the EU will move forward faster than they wish for.

My prediction is that the net result will make everyone a little worse off in 10-20 years from now than if the UK had stayed in the EU, but the effect will not be very noticeable and overall hard to quantify.

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#132

Post by chrisoverzero » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

xienze wrote: post #82

moomin wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right about the polarisation. The same forces in play in America are in play in Britain right now. It's no accident that Trump described himself as "Mr Brexit". Authoritarian voters support Brexit, liberal ones don't. The major parties split right/left not authoritarian/liberal and are terrified of losing their voting base. I know a die hard leaver, she's one of the few people I'd trust my children with. She's…

> It's no accident that Trump described himself as "Mr Brexit". No he didn’t. That’s how he introduced Nigel Farage at a rally.

> They will soon be calling me MR. BREXIT!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/76624621307949875...

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#133

Post by rusk » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #83

rusk wrote: post #53

I kind of feel the whimper came before Christmas, in the talks discussing Northern Ireland and the status of the border there between the UK and Europe. I can't remember the details exactly but the Good Friday Agreement [0] provided a constitutional footing whereby the UK effectively gave an undertaking to abide by the rules of the EU trade area, while not being a member of the EU trade area . This to prevent the ere…

> and the EU of course must consult her in setting these. What? No. The Eu didn't commit to a single thing in that agreement, beyond graciously accepting for the UK to pay its bills and letting it trade as long as they follow EU rules. The UK will end up like Norway: paying the price for selling into the EU, without any say in EU rules. Which is exactly what was predicted at the start, and makes the Uk a de-facto vas…

The Eu didn't commit to a single thing

The EU agreed that given this agreement there would be no requirement for a customs border.

The term "Vassal state" is incorrect as it describes a nation that has been subjugated to the will of another nation e.g. Ireland's relationship with the UK before the 20th century.

The EU is not a state, it is a "collection of states" and is the realisation of the need for greater alignment of policy between neighbouring countries.

The portrayal of the EU as some kind of evil controlling super-state is a lie, plain and simple.

That's not to say there isn't plenty of things wrong with the EU but the correct response is, as one of the major nations of Europe for the UK to get in there and make it work.

Instead the UK has repeatedly sent Farage.

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#134

Post by adventured » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

moomin wrote: post #58

StanAngeloff wrote: post #5

As 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 pl…

You're right about the polarisation. The same forces in play in America are in play in Britain right now. It's no accident that Trump described himself as "Mr Brexit". Authoritarian voters support Brexit, liberal ones don't. The major parties split right/left not authoritarian/liberal and are terrified of losing their voting base. I know a die hard leaver, she's one of the few people I'd trust my children with. She's…

In your opinion, what do you think the consequences with regards to Scotland will be given some time? Might they seek another independence vote to then rejoin the EU?

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#135

Post by sornars » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

marrs wrote: post #102

nkkollaw wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad. If anything because they'll have to rewrite thousands of laws and procedures that came from the EU times, and deal with the caos that that will cause. That only will cost so much money (and pain) that it would justify staying in the EU. Then, of course there are companies that have left and that will leave, highly-skilled workflow for London that will be harder to get, etc. They have to negotiate with the EU so…

If anything because they'll have to rewrite thousands of laws and procedures that came from the EU times, and deal with the caos that that will cause. I've never understood this argument. Surely all you have to do is write a law that says: in the absence of British law, default to EU legislation. That's the essence of the great repeal bill, is it not? They have to negotiate with the EU so that they're not completely…

   I've never understood this argument. Surely all you have to do is write a law that says: in the absence of British law, default to EU legislation. That's the essence of the great repeal bill, is it not?

My understanding of one of the big issues with defaulting to EU law is that disputes under EU law are settled by the ECJ and EU regulatory bodies (which are governed by ECJ rulings). This is not suitable for post-Brexit Britain's red lines. Accommodating this requires revisiting and rewriting the law to use British equivalents and I suspect this is a more time consuming process than a simple find-replace job.

This is also why Theresa May plans to use the 'Henry VIII clauses'[1] which allows the Government to amend laws (in this case, the Great Repeal Bill) without further scrutiny from parliament. This is potentially problematic as those amendments can include pretty much anything.

[1] https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/henry-vi...

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#136

Post by matthewmacleod » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:36 PM UTC

Angostura wrote: post #63

0942v8653 wrote: post #37

Will the UK still participate in the GDPR after Brexit? Are there plans to write up something similar?

The simple answer is 'yes' - the government and opposition parties are committed to implementing GDPR in full.

Until the second we leave, and then you can _guarantee_ it will be watered down.

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#137

Post by the_mitsuhiko » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:36 PM UTC

blibble wrote: post #125

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is incorrect: Article 50 states that the withdrawal agreement only requires a Qualified Majority, not unanimity But a trade deal with the UK does not. We just went through this with CETA.

trade deals under the Common Commercial Policy also are under QMV: this is the entire point of the EU being delegated responsibility for trade CETA is a mixed agreement: 99% of it is covered under the CCP and went into effect before it had even been voted on by most national parliaments you can confirm for yourself from the EU's own website on CETA ( http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/index_en.htm ): On 2…

You are correct that basic trade agreements do not require parliamentary approval. The assumption however here would be that the UK wants more than that the EU can just hand out itself.

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#138

Post by ljf » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:36 PM UTC

blibble wrote: post #103

pjc50 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which propaganda outfit did you get that from, Zerohedge?

ah yes, the old "fake news" argument the data is from the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Publications/Files/Key_Findings_...

Note that is from 2015 - long before brexit. 'if' the UK stops immigration then that number will no doubt be smaller.

Quote: Between 2015 and 2050, the top net receivers of international migrants (more than 100,000 annually) are projected to be the United States of America, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, the Russian Federation and Italy.

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#139

Post by matthewmacleod » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:37 PM UTC

collyw wrote: post #15

Nursie wrote: post #2

This 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…

As a Brit working in Europe, one year and a half after the announcement I have absolutely no idea what is going to happen. It makes sense to at least know what the worst possible scenario is. We have a Prime Minister who was against Brexit pushing for a hard Brexit. An opposition leader who is for Brexit. An uninformed public who were blatantly lied to (350 million a week to the NHS). The whole thing is an absolute s…

Even worse than that, 18 months later and we have absolutely no idea what anybody wants to happen!

Re: Does Brexit end not with a bang but a whimper?

#140

Post by pbhjpbhj » Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 1:37 PM UTC

627467 wrote: post #104

Nursie wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trade with one of the world's larger economies. There is clear mutual interest in continuing trade on an open basis. I'm not saying the EU is not in a stronger position, nor am I trying to make any claims that Brexit is good or bad, nor that it is being pursued competently by the current government (far from it). But the assessment of the process as being entirely one sided seems to me to be simplistic.

The EU is more than an economic union. In fact, economic integration was/is only one of the strategies to foster lasting European stability, peace and path towards harmony among warring neighbours. To face these negotiations only on the basis of economic gains/lost is ignoring the political and less tangible goals of the union.

But lack of war in Europe is costing us so much in lost revenue for UK arms manufacturers!