EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January • Hacker News Board

Re: EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

#51

Post by mcv » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 7:45 PM UTC

no1youknowz wrote: post #48

mcv wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The conservatives under May decided to interpret the will of the people and decided on a close relationship with the EU and she negotiated very badly." Distant relationship, surely. She was negotiating a hard Brexit rather than the soft one that would have been more in line with some of the promises that had been made to the British public. Her mistake was pushing for an unreasonably hard Brexit which lead to all…

I'm going to get downvoted more. But honestly, I feel we are living in parallel worlds here. > Distant relationship, surely. She was negotiating a hard Brexit rather than the soft one No, Junker asked her if she wanted a FTA. She declined and wanted a closer relationship with frictionless trade. So she got the deal she wanted. The UK in the customs union. > Her mistake was pushing for an unreasonably hard Brexit whic…

> "We have to set our taxes the same as theirs."

And what is "theirs" here? The EU does not have a singular tax policy. I hope there's some coordination, but every country sets their own tax policy. Your post makes it sound like you're giving that up by leaving the EU.

Many of the things you want, you already had as a member of the EU. You had your own tax policy, foreign policy, full control of your army (if not, then that's on NATO; the EU has nothing to do with armies).

Stuff like fishing, manufacturing regulations, trade, etc are indeed subject to many EU (not to mention international) treaties. You make it sound like the UK does not want any treaties with anyone anymore. Even the WTO is an international treaty. Do you want to leave that too? Do you realise you're asking for economic isolation here? Self-imposed economic sanctions?

And yes, what May wants is a hard Brexit. Anything that takes the UK out of the EU common market is a hard Brexit. Anything that leaves the UK with access to the common market (the Norway or Switzerland model that Brexiteers used to argue for) is a soft Brexit. Breaking off all treaties like you're proposing is the No-Deal Brexit that Johnson seems to prefer if only Parliament would let him.

Re: EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

#52

Post by anotherevan » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:11 PM UTC

RT @julianpopov: The year is 2192. The British Prime Minister visits Brussels to ask for an extension of the Brexit deadline. No one remembers where this tradition originated, but every year it attracts many tourists from all over the world.

Re: EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

#53

Post by afandian » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:13 PM UTC

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #12

At some point they should give the UK an indefinite extension so the UK can just remain in the process of leaving for the next several decades. There's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution...

The rebate and lack of euro currency already made the UK a special case.

Re: EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

#54

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:19 PM UTC

Gerthak wrote: post #27

yostrovs wrote: post #3

It's a crisis of democracy when the people voted so clearly and they're not given what they voted for. They're being slowly ignored by the political class.

They didn't actually vote for anything in particular. It was a move to solve intra-Conservastives issue. It did solve it.

> They didn't actually vote for anything in particular. It was a move to solve intra-Conservastives issue. It did solve it.

The degree of intra-party struggle and defections, including from the cabinet, experienced by the Tories over Brexit divisions since the referendum suggest that the referendum did not, in fact, solve the intra-Conservative-Party issue.

Re: EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

#55

Post by philwelch » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 2:26 AM UTC

Zenst wrote: post #35

ceejayoz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_United_Kingdom_European_C... Yes: 67.23%

The EU and the ECM (what was voted for back in 1975) are two different beasts. Maastricht and Lisbon treaty would of been key changes in that transition that many countries had votes (and also revotes) upon. The UK, did not alas and it is pretty obvious that it should of. Ironically, the children of 1975 era had no say in their future until 2016 and you can see how they voted. Also those that who in 1975 voted to joi…

To make matters more complicated, the primary reason the UK isn't part of the Euro is because Britain crashed out of the pan-European exchange rate controls in 1992; if it wasn't for the "Black Wednesday" crisis, the pound sterling may have been abolished, again without popular referendum.

Both predicting and contributing to this crisis was George Soros, who shorted the pound sterling and profited immensely from it. This is one of many reasons he is a controversial figure in some circles.

Re: EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

#56

Post by me_me_me » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:24 PM UTC

lousken wrote: post #49

EU shouldn't have agreed to this, either leave now or never

No. It would hurt not only Uk's economy but also most of EU's economy.

How, say french PM, is going to justify to his ppl that they will suffer... say loss of 1% of gdp, just because politicians decided to teach British a lesson?

No politician would be willing to do this, that would be career suicide brought up every elections.

Plus bonus UK then gets a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card.

'Oh, the evil EU kicked us out without us having say, and now we are suffering. See how bad EU is' - Borris or another brexiter PM.

Re: EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January

#57

Post by Zenst » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:41 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #55

Zenst wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU and the ECM (what was voted for back in 1975) are two different beasts. Maastricht and Lisbon treaty would of been key changes in that transition that many countries had votes (and also revotes) upon. The UK, did not alas and it is pretty obvious that it should of. Ironically, the children of 1975 era had no say in their future until 2016 and you can see how they voted. Also those that who in 1975 voted to joi…

To make matters more complicated, the primary reason the UK isn't part of the Euro is because Britain crashed out of the pan-European exchange rate controls in 1992; if it wasn't for the "Black Wednesday" crisis, the pound sterling may have been abolished, again without popular referendum. Both predicting and contributing to this crisis was George Soros, who shorted the pound sterling and profited immensely from it.…

ERM and the Euro, whilst somewhat entwined are not mutually inclusive. The reason the UK never took on the Euro, was many fold and nothing to do with Mr Soros and the great EMF gamification for printing money.

If they did a referendum upon the Pound and the Euro in the UK, the result would be much clearer and conclusive than any membership referendum. Heck, even Scotland if it leaves the UK, wants to keep the Pound.

AS for the Euro, it worries me, so much QE has been actioned by the ECB, that it just feels like, once that eventually stops https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eurozone-ecb-qe/the-life-... though they have instigated new QE measures this year.

One aspect the UK has impacted the Euro has been in blocking (as a members vote) many initiatives to control the financial markets and with that, been instrumental in curtailing the controls needed for a large encompassing currency.

But I totally disagree that the UK's primary reason for adopting the Euro was due to the ERM shenanigans. https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/215/uncategorized/why-uk-... covers some reasons. But to say it is complicated is part and parcel of any currency control.

Remember, the UK's key income area's are Financial and Services, two area's in which the EU has been stymied to take control of, mostly due to it not being in the UK's main interest. Heck, even opening up services has been a backfoot EU initiative with members still not opening up those markets. But that is another matter, equally complicated and hard to summarize in a few sentences.