Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#431

Post by hardlianotion »

philwelch wrote: post #338
yholio wrote: post #41

The Brexit promise is something nobody can deliver on. It was a lie, you cannot force the EU to accept an unfavorable trade deal. If only for the reason that it would set an exceptionally bad precedent and everybody would want their own deal, to pick and choose the parts of EU membership that are favorable to them, leading the EU to implode. Somebody needs to own up to that lie and accept that a "no deal" outcome, wh…

> If only for the reason that it would set an exceptionally bad precedent and everybody would want their own deal, to pick and choose the parts of EU membership that are favorable to them, leading the EU to implode. The UK already picked and chose the parts of EU membership they wanted. They opted out of the Euro, they opted out of Schengen, they opted out of the Charter of Fundamental Rights--all of this, and more,…

Those negotiations were not made on the basis of threatening to leave the EU.

(edited for clarity)

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#432

Post by tasubotadas »

sparkie wrote: post #343
paganel wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Juncker tweeted about an hour ago that “time is almost up” for the UK. That means that the EU won’t sweeten the proposed deal.

They will make concessions. I'll put money on it. The UK leaving with no deal would be the beginning of the end of the EU. There is already growing anti-EU sentiment in Italy (4th largest economy in the block), Hungary, Austria, Poland. The UK leaving could set off a chain reaction which would either end the EU project or drastically reduce its size. The EU simply can't afford to have the UK leave completely, because…

So put your money. Make some short positions on Euro.

And I would argue the opposite - the departure of the UK will leave the EU stronger. People will see what kind of clusterfuck it creates and they will learn that capital investors do not like such a mess.

While countries in the EU (especially Ireland - THE English speaking country successor in the EU) will enjoy the diverted cashflows into their economies.

If there is going to be any domino effect at all, it is going to be the resurrection of the Independence of Scotland which will most likely want to join EU at some point after that.

I would even argue that the EU will find happiness at least in a sense that they got rid of a member that enjoyed exclusive rights (no Euro, no Schendgen) which will make the path easier for the "United States of Europe" model.

Regarding the "afford" bit, the only party that can't afford that is the UK - the UK imports 55% of "stuff" from the EU, and exports 50% to the EU. The EU27 exports to the UK are 16% which puts it behind the US.

Finally, most of those anti-EU movements are a joke as they are tied with outsider parties partly funded by Russian money and some fake-news campaigns. Also, having Poland in that list is a mistake, Poland is one of the biggest benefitors from the membership, and there are no such movements at all. The only thing they are upset is the two-speed EU which is another topic altogether.

- http://time.com/4955503/germany-elections-2017-far-right-rus... - https://www.thelocal.de/20180522/russian-payment-for-afd-lea... - https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/marine-le-pen-s-brush-wi...

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#433

Post by growlist »

rtkwe wrote: post #270

The issue with the referendum since the beginning was leave was such a nebulous cloud for the entire range of Brexit from barely-there-Brexit to Britian-stands-alone(-get-those-people-out)-Brexit while remain had a very definite meaning. Because of that everyone could pour all their displeasure at anything wrong into leave and think the deal would take care of it. That's why I'm always annoyed at the 'another referen…

Edit: I got a bit carried away.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#434

Post by k9s9 »

altairiumblue wrote: post #197

The best position on Brexit that I've heard coming out of a British politician. Well worth the listen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XEj64IFzQ8

Given our current, "engagement maximizing" news media/social media architecture it doesn't matter who stands up and speaks the truth and how well they do it and how many clicks they get. They will fail.

In the arms race for the public's attention that has been setup, by this clicks/views/likes/retweets/upvote based architecture, the incentive for thousand other voices to drown out the truth, to pander, to distract, to mislead has never been higher. And its not hard work. It attracts and props up the most hard working yet unqualified people on the planet.

Until the architecture changes and incentives for these people change, just expect more and more Brexit and Trump like events wasting everyone's time and energy.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#435

Post by blibble »

roywiggins wrote: post #352
blibble wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement. > ... > It's a package deal. how do you explain the existence of the EU-Canada deal where Canada has essentially complete tariff free access to the EU's Single Market without freedom of movement? here's the commission's factsheet on it: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/images/infographics/ceta-explained...

CETA is not a customs union- there are still customs controls between Canada and the EU. If you don't have EU regulations enforced in Canada, those controls do it at the border with the EU. That works. But if you want into the customs union (and therefore being allowed to just walk things across the border to the EU, no checks) you have to sign up to pretty much all the EU regulations. And that's the point that the f…

> CETA is not a customs union

this is correct, but not at all relevant to your original point:

> If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement.

this statement is objectively not true, as is proven by the existence of CETA

> But if you want into the customs union (and therefore being allowed to just walk things across the border to the EU, no checks) you have to sign up to pretty much all the EU regulations. And that's the point that the four freedoms kick in, and you have to take freedom of movement.

this statement is also not true: Turkey forms a customs union with the EU: goods travel freely between the EU and Turkey without customs checks, and the EU does not have freedom of movement with Turkey

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#436

Post by stordoff »

BossingAround wrote: post #70

All I can think of is, why? I don't know what were the main points against the deal, but the only reason I can think of that the deal is rejected is that Corbin, or whoever else would come out of this kerfuffle victorious, wants to re-issue vote on leaving the EU in order to stay..? This is insanely puzzling to me, and very much unexpected. Can someone ELI5..? Or maybe ELI15 would be enough.

> the only reason I can think of that the deal is rejected is that Corbin, or whoever else would come out of this kerfuffle victorious

For it to be defeated by such a margin, it had to receive cross-party rejection. 118 Conservatives voted against it (with 196 voting for), it was proposed by a Conservative Government.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#437

Post by pjc50 »

jandrese wrote: post #357
ivraatiems wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read your post as quite confident, but a lot of people were equally confident that the original referendum would be a strong Remain victory. What are you basing these predictions on?

It seems like the second referendum will also fail if it still includes the "allow brown people into your country" part of being an EU member.

There is of course no rule in the EU obliging countries to accept non-EU immigrants. It's the "allow Poles into your country" that some Brits are unwilling to accept.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#438

Post by amelius »

rtkwe wrote: post #270

The issue with the referendum since the beginning was leave was such a nebulous cloud for the entire range of Brexit from barely-there-Brexit to Britian-stands-alone(-get-those-people-out)-Brexit while remain had a very definite meaning. Because of that everyone could pour all their displeasure at anything wrong into leave and think the deal would take care of it. That's why I'm always annoyed at the 'another referen…

> That's why I'm always annoyed at the 'another referendum would tarnish democracy' line

I'm annoyed for another reason: first, in 1975, [1], there was a referendum that asked the British people if they would want to join the EEC. Then, in 2016, there was a referendum that asked them if they would want to leave the EU. So if there can be a second, then why can't there be a third?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_European_Union%E2%8...

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#439

Post by megaremote »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #402
mattlondon wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

16 year olds can get married, join the military, work fulltime and pay income tax. Why shouldn't they also be allowed to vote?

You know what, you're right. We should extend all 18-21 privileges to 16 years of age across all developed nations and call 16+ aged individuals adults. Because after all, they're fully developed persons capable of the same level of rational thought and emotional separation as those at 18 through 21 years of age and beyond. So, age of adulthood: 16. Age of consent: 16. Age of military draft eligibility: 16. Subsequen…

You know that when you have to go to the extreme that you have lost the argument.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#440

Post by [deleted] »

dv_dt wrote: post #394

At this point a no deal Brexit looks substantially different from the possible-Brexit that was voted upon. Shouldn't there be a new referendum of basically a new question of a no deal Brexit vs Remain? I know very little of British politics, is there some other dynamic at work that pushes to what seems like a strongly economically destructive no deal Brexit?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN