Geopolitical impact of Brexit

[Khendraja'aro]

Funny because I keep being the one able to say I told you so while all your projections have fallen flat on their face.

That's kind of interesting. Would you please point out the projections we made which would happen before an actual Brexit? Because Brexit did not happen yet - this fine distinction may have eluded you once again.

Comical Ali strikes again. Or to use a more contemporary example: Alternative Facts with RandWay.

[Hazir]

I can't see how any court could have jurisdiction over this matter after Brexit. More likely to be settled by agreement for a sum lower than the widely reported 60 bn. Of course the world may be at war but that time in which case I guess RB would score a stunning victory by getting out of paying his bill

The Court in The Hague in principle has jurisdiction. Provided both parties grant it that. It would be a departure from the idea of international rule of law if the UK wouldn't.

[Hazir]

Funny I say that and then afterwards come across this article.

We see your €60bn in liabilities and raise you €150bn in assets. How much do you want to pay us to leave?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...orth-european/

That is pretty much dead in the water, given that the UK was only party to the EU after most of the assets were accrued.

[RandBlade]

1: First response to my "Why I'm voting Leave" thread:

And you expect Boris Johnson or whichever nationalist comes to power as a result of Brexit to pursue a globalist agenda?

Prediction wrong. Yes a globalist agenda became immediate policy of the British government as soon as we voted Leave. One of the very first actions of the new PM was to set up the Department for International Trade to look for new trade deals.

2: After I complained about the EU's inability to agree TTIP which is why we needed to be able to sign our own deals came this suggestion that of course TTIP will happen and we'll be losing that being outside as the EU's TTIP will be agreed before a deal between Britain and USA.

Regardless of who's most to blame for the slow/stalled negotiations, the TTIP or something like it is likely to benefit both the US and the EU greatly. Does anyone believe such a treaty will not come about in the foreseeable future?

Perhaps the UK and the US would eventually establish some form of bilateral free trade agreement as well but even if the US were to change its mind about the matter and put some effort into making such a deal with a single country, said deal would likely not be concluded before the current negotiations with the EU are. Brexit may even help the TTIP negotiations move forward, I dunno.

Anyway, while Bloris may be right to criticise reactionary elements in the EU for stalling the negotiations, his implicit claim that the UK can get a better deal with the US sooner may not be accurate.

Prediction wrong. TTIP is dead in the water now. Britain and USA are already working on forging a new deal.

3: Currency, following a discussion that a moderate fall in exchange rates is a good thing came the projection of a calamitous fall instead.

A 30% drop (as droves of economists think is very possible) is not a good thing for any country. It effectively knocks the controls wrt price stability out of the hands of your central bankers.

Projection wrong. Sterling was trading at £1.25 to £1.30 to the Euro pre-vote so a 30% drop would take us well past parity to between £0.875 and £0.91 to the Euro. It's really £1.175 at the moment, a drop of 6% not 30%

4: Migration - I said that with a potential easing of pressure from unskilled Eastern Europeans we could treat people equitably and make it easier to treat students and skilled workers from outside the EU better.

The idea that the Little Englanders who are dominating the Leave campaign are going to turn around and push for more third world immigration is laughable.

Since the campaign the Faragist bastards have vanished from the political scene and there has already been action to make it easier for Indians to get a visa along with talks for more on that in the future. Also talks of removing student numbers from the migration figures to eliminate pressure on that.

5: Speaking of Farage it was "wishful thinking" to believe that Brexit would be the death of UKIP.

If leaving the EU destroys UKIP, where do you think UKIP voters will turn? Seems odd to assume that this party won't change some policy positions to please these people. Again, lots of wishful thinking based on virtually zero evidence, while ignoring a ton of theoretical and empirical evidence.

Farage is history and in the United States now as his own nation has made him redundant. He can f**k off and stay there, good riddance. His replacement is a joke, the party is floundering in the polls and will soon lose all its MEPs.

6: Though Loki wasn't the only one to assume it was "wishful thinking", not only that a post-Brexit Tory party would "tear itself apart"

It's already wishful thinking that the UKIP will go away after achieving the independence they were one of the driving forces behind. It's more likely that the Conservative Party will tear itself apart in the aftermath of this referendum.

Oh the Tory party had a very civil leadership campaign and is now united in a way it hasn't been for decades, while the Labour Party tore itself apart and has a leader three quarters of its MPs publicly said they have no confidence in.

7: Bit early to call this categorically wrong still but you've not had a mention yet so

Frankfurt am Main will definitely welcome a Brexit. They're already making plans on how to house all the fleeing bankers.

Tell me how many bankers have so far fled to honour those plans?

8: These so-called experts lost a lot of money very quickly. Whoops.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36612776

More dumb experts, right Rand?

9: But not as much as these so-called experts who got the direction of travel completely wrong, FTSE ultimately rose rather than fall.

https://twitter.com/graemewearden/st...49534879866880

2-3% was optimistic. Close to 6%.

[Steely Glint]

Tony Blair still under the impression that anyone gives a toss what he thinks.

[Loki]

Hilarious for Rand to claim the UK is going in a globalist direction as each week brings forth a new anti-immigration policy/proposal. And UKIP has clearly disappeared from the scene. That's why it's polling at 12%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinio..._election#2017

[RandBlade]

Hilarious for Rand to claim the UK is going in a globalist direction as each week brings worth a new anti-immigration policy/proposal.

I'm talking about trade and you know it, funny that you seem to only be able to rant and rave about immigration because if you spoke about trade you'd have to concede I was right and you were wrong. There is no more of an anti-immigration vibe now than there was from Theresa May under David Cameron, at least we've not had "go home" vans driving around this year.

And UKIP has clearly disappeared from the scene. That's why it's polling at 12%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinio..._election#2017

Down on what it got at the General Election, down on what it was polling pre-referendum, down on what it was polling virtually the entire period since 2012.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinio...neral_election

[Hazir]

Tony Blair still under the impression that anyone gives a toss what he thinks.

Given the coverage, obviously someone does.

[Loki]

I'm talking about trade and you know it, funny that you seem to only be able to rant and rave about immigration because if you spoke about trade you'd have to concede I was right and you were wrong. There is no more of an anti-immigration vibe now than there was from Theresa May under David Cameron, at least we've not had "go home" vans driving around this year.

Remind me all the trade deals the UK has negotiated since Brexit.

And you're simply wrong on the immigration front.

Down on what it got at the General Election, down on what it was polling pre-referendum, down on what it was polling virtually the entire period since 2012.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinio...neral_election

We must have different definitions of obsolete.

[RandBlade]

Remind me all the trade deals the UK has negotiated since Brexit.

You can't seriously be that thick, we haven't even invoked Article 50 yet. Work is happening on that front but it will take time.

And you're simply wrong on the immigration front.

No you simply are. See two can play at that game.

We must have different definitions of obsolete.

We must. They're down on what they scored to achieve 1 out of 650 seats. Or excluding defectors with a personal vote they're down on what they scored to achieve 0 seats. They've never achieved a single Parliamentary seat ever not from a defector. Not one.

Other than the soon to be abolished MEPs.

[Khendraja'aro]

I'm really not seeing projections in all that stuff you posted. Plus, again, you're doing it wrong. You yourself just said:

You can't seriously be that thick, we haven't even invoked Article 50 yet. Work is happening on that front but it will take time.

And then you quoted me:

Frankfurt am Main will definitely welcome a Brexit. They're already making plans on how to house all the fleeing bankers.

This does not wash, Rand. You just said yourself: Brexit did not happen yet. Which means that, as of yet, there's no reason to flee. This will change immediately when Brexit actually happens.

You are one stupid fucker. Again, Rand, we're talking about the actual Brexit which may be happening in two years. Not your stupid-as-fuck referendum which is not binding and yet it is. Geeze.

[Steely Glint]

Given the coverage, obviously someone does.

Bet you €10 that the movement he talked about to challenge Brexit never materializes.

[Hazir]

Hard to tell which part of the 48% feel passionate enough about Brexit.

[Steely Glint]

If they haven't felt passionate enough until now, they're hardly going to do so because Tony Blair urges them too.

[RandBlade]

I'm really not seeing projections in all that stuff you posted. Plus, again, you're doing it wrong. You yourself just said:



And then you quoted me:

I take it you missed the words "Bit early to call this categorically wrong still but you've not had a mention yet so"

You don't show me up by saying it is too early when I already said that myself!

This does not wash, Rand. You just said yourself: Brexit did not happen yet. Which means that, as of yet, there's no reason to flee. This will change immediately when Brexit actually happens.

It takes time to more organisations and people over. It won't happen the day after we Brexit if it happens at all.

You are one stupid fucker. Again, Rand, we're talking about the actual Brexit which may be happening in two years. Not your stupid-as-fuck referendum which is not binding and yet it is. Geeze.

Except many of the failed projections warned of immediate crashes following the referendum caused by its uncertainty.

[Hazir]

And now it's official; first the talk about the exit-bill, then in December dependent on the outcome of that, trade talks.

Also Brexitanian: your PM was fibbing when he said he'd invoke article 50 immediately after the referendum. Guess that teaches us that you can't believe a word a British PM says. It also means that you can't blame predictions for the goalposts being moved.

[Loki]

You can't seriously be that thick, we haven't even invoked Article 50 yet. Work is happening on that front but it will take time.

You just said you were right about trade. Where is your evidence?

We must. They're down on what they scored to achieve 1 out of 650 seats. Or excluding defectors with a personal vote they're down on what they scored to achieve 0 seats. They've never achieved a single Parliamentary seat ever not from a defector. Not one.

Their power was never based on their ability to win seats in the Commons. Using your logic, they never had any power, thus never had any to lose.

[Hazir]

According to the FT the €60bn figure isn't just a Brussels idea, it's becoming the common position.

Can someone tell IDS that ministers in other EU countries aren't EU bureaucrats? It's bad enough that idiot and his ilk got the UK out on a diet of false information, but I really don't want to see this all end in a trade war beause Brexitanians high on whatever they use keep flapping their jaws.

[RandBlade]

Why don't you provide links to articles? Be interesting to read the FT article you refer to but no link.

[Hazir]

https://www.ft.com/content/732ba330-...e-68d53499ed71

but it's behind a pay wall

[Aimless]

Perhaps some people are keeping their fingers crossed for AfD and FN

[RandBlade]

https://www.ft.com/content/732ba330-...e-68d53499ed71

but it's behind a pay wall

Thanks. Google has an arrangement that pays the FT to by-pass the paywall. If you Google an FT headline and click the link via Google News then the paywall comes down (Google pays the FT for the click). In this instance the headline being "Germany and Italy back European Commission on Brexit".

European nations backing the European Commission's starting point in negotiations is not the same as that being the outcome at the end of negotiations.

As for IDS he's a backbencher. He has as much say in the outcome of negotiations as Ken Clarke.

[Hazir]

It says nothing about the outcome, except that right now it seems like that amount is the official starting figure of the EU. And you'd need a QMV to overturn that. So you better stop thinking about this as 'merely an opening bid'.

[Hazir]

Perhaps some people are keeping their fingers crossed for AfD and FN

AfD is not only too small to get power and declining already; also it's not anti-EU as such. The FN is making a lot of noise at the moment, but I do not lose a single minute of sleep over the chances of a Le Pen presidency. And even if I were wrong on that count; M. Le Pen would have to live with a legislative in which she - at present - has zero seats.

[RandBlade]

It says nothing about the outcome, except that right now it seems like that amount is the official starting figure of the EU. And you'd need a QMV to overturn that. So you better stop thinking about this as 'merely an opening bid'.

No we need to agree with a QMV or there's no deal. There's nothing to overturn as if we don't agree we just walk away. That's the outcome of how Article 50 is written.

[RandBlade]

AfD is not only too small to get power and declining already; also it's not anti-EU as such. The FN is making a lot of noise at the moment, but I do not lose a single minute of sleep over the chances of a Le Pen presidency. And even if I were wrong on that count; M. Le Pen would have to live with a legislative in which she - at present - has zero seats.

There is more chance of Trump snogging the CNN press correspondent at his next press conference than there is a Le Pen Presidency.

[Aimless]

No we need to agree with a QMV or there's no deal. There's nothing to overturn as if we don't agree we just walk away. That's the outcome of how Article 50 is written.

Unless the EU successfully shows that you're treaty bound to honor your commitments.

[RandBlade]

Which it won't. Especially not the way it's been inflated.

[Hazir]

No we need to agree with a QMV or there's no deal. There's nothing to overturn as if we don't agree we just walk away. That's the outcome of how Article 50 is written.

As usual you do not understand; if the mandate says €60bn, the outcome of the 'negotiations' must add up to €60bn or there is no deal. And no deal means a trade war.

[RandBlade]

Bullshit.