Brexit Begins

[RandBlade]

Are those two things really comparible?

Did the Greek/Eurozone crisis have legally defined deadlines?

And wasn't the issue with the WA our parliament rather than the EU?

And that's not the only alternative. Another alternative is for both sides to work to the originally agreed deadlines to allow enough time for elected officials to properly digest and scrutinise the proposition.

Yes the Greek/EZ crises did have legally defined deadlines because without an agreement by a particular date then the Greeks would have ran out of liquidity, a bit like Democrat/Republican talks doing the same and leading to a government shutdown when they fail - but it would have been a default instead of a shutdown. The talks frequently went to the wire.

May's WA was rejected by our Parliament yes, but then the EU refused to reopen the WA for new negotiations and called the matter closed. May tried to get it amended and failed. In the Tory leadership election Boris pledged it would either need to be reopened or no deal - and everyone insisted that it wouldn't be reopened . . . only for it to be reopened and changed as the clock was running out. Same principle. The EU could have reopened it sooner, they refused until the clock was nearly out.

Neither side were willing or able to work to any particular deadline as each party was waiting for the other to move - and refusing to do so. If the UK had moved then the EU would have banked that and told us to move further. How were we supposed to get the EU to move other than waiting until the clock forced it to do so?

[RandBlade]

Happy New Era

We still have one hour left of 2020 but are out of the Single Market and out of the Customs Union.

We're over the cliff edge, out, done, finito. We made it.

[Hazir]

Yes the Greek/EZ crises did have legally defined deadlines because without an agreement by a particular date then the Greeks would have ran out of liquidity, a bit like Democrat/Republican talks doing the same and leading to a government shutdown when they fail - but it would have been a default instead of a shutdown. The talks frequently went to the wire.

May's WA was rejected by our Parliament yes, but then the EU refused to reopen the WA for new negotiations and called the matter closed. May tried to get it amended and failed. In the Tory leadership election Boris pledged it would either need to be reopened or no deal - and everyone insisted that it wouldn't be reopened . . . only for it to be reopened and changed as the clock was running out. Same principle. The EU could have reopened it sooner, they refused until the clock was nearly out.

Neither side were willing or able to work to any particular deadline as each party was waiting for the other to move - and refusing to do so. If the UK had moved then the EU would have banked that and told us to move further. How were we supposed to get the EU to move other than waiting until the clock forced it to do so?

Rubbish. The only reason we reopened the WA was that all of a sudden De Pfeffel made an offer too good to refuse. An offer he himself didn't quite understand it turned out later.

[RandBlade]

A much better offer, a win/win.

Shame you couldn't come up with it but well done Boris for doing so.

[Hazir]

Actually, it was our original offer. Which was vehemently rejected by your government. Because no British Prime Minister could consent to a border in the Irish sea. And then suddenly it was what you wanted. Until you understood what you had signed. And grudgingly accepted because you couldn't wriggle out of it.

Which also explains why the DUP voted against the Terms of Surrender.

[RandBlade]

No it wasn't your original offer, it was substantially different in that it negotiated a unilateral exit from the arrangements to be controlled by Stormont unilaterally. If Stormont wants to end the arrangements they can do so without the consent of either Brussels or London.

Taking it out of the hands of Brussels and London was better than extending the rules to England too.

If the DUP want to end the arrangements they should get a majority to do so.

[Hazir]

Lol, the exit clause is drafted in a way that the unionists will never be able to end the application of the WA.

[RandBlade]

They can if they win a majority. If they don't then que sera sera.

I don't care, I care what happens with England/GB. Which I think you will find is the primary Tory concern too if they're honest.

The DUP screwed up. Good riddance to listening to them.

[Khendraja'aro]

I care what happens with England/GB.

No you don't. You only care about your own little corner, you care neither about NI, Scotland nor Wales.

You said so yourself.

[Hazir]

I am planning to wean myself of this Brexit talk, but this one was too funny, Some Brexiteer twat made a video with a British entrepreneur who had a company selling glass eels. A solid business with 8 employees. The owner of the company turned out to be a Brexiteer twat as well, complaining how the EU was holding him back expanding into other markets and how leaving the EU would enable him to sell his eels to (especially Eastern Europe). Long story short; Mr Eel voted out, and is in the works of closing down shop. Because Brexit puts up so much red tape on his trade that it doesn't make sense for his EU customers (100% of his customer base) to buy from him any longer.

[RandBlade]

No you don't. You only care about your own little corner, you care neither about NI, Scotland nor Wales.

You said so yourself.

Ni isn't in either England or GB.

I do care what happens with Scotland and Wales. Hopefully they will go independent, it will be the best for everyone. Scotland were too frit to do the right thing in 2014 but hopefully Brexit helps lead to a second vote and they do the right thing this time.

[RandBlade]

On the first day of Brexit already the first bit of divergence has been implemented - the tampon tax has been abolished.

[Hazir]

You must be thrilled that your tampons are potentially becoming 5% cheaper.

[Khendraja'aro]

I'm not sure why you're caring about Great Britain when you just said that you want Little Britain, i.e. England Stands Alone.

[gogobongopop]

Twitter Link

[Aimless]

Twitter Link

[insert "didn't you get the memo" meme]

[RandBlade]

Or Guardian trolling looking for a story.

[Aimless]

Or Guardian trolling looking for a story.

Not really. The reports of businesses' consternation, their disappointment and their struggles to adapt on such short notice have been quite widespread.

[RandBlade]

Not really. The reports of businesses' consternation, their disappointment and their struggles to adapt on such short notice have been quite widespread.

And yet simultaneously not that big of a deal.

There were always going to be teething issues, and half of social media politics extremists are looking to blow any alleged problem up out of all proportion and yet . . . crickets mostly. Teething problems, no major collapses.

[Hazir]

Actually in a lot of the situations the result of Brexit is that some business transactions is not viable any more because of new regulations. That's not a teething problem, that's business dying. Because of changes you chose for.

[RandBlade]

So companies will need to adjust or die then. Sink or swim.

Change happens.

[gogobongopop]

Self inflicted business change should be positive and yield tangible benefits. It should make operations easier, more efficient and ultimately more profitable.

That's one if the benefits of Brexit. Less red tape bureaucracy. Businesses complaining or having trouble with the new arrangements don't deserve to keep operating because they're unable to realise the tangible benefits of our new relationship.

[Hazir]

But Brexit doesn't mean less red tape. It means more red tape for more of your trade.

[gogobongopop]

I think you're mistaken. One of the main arguments made by both leave campaigns is that we would take back control of our laws and reduce red tape imposed by unelected bureaucrats; enabling businesses to streamline operations, expand markets and become more profitable.

The businesses complaining at present were probably failing long before Brexit anyway. Better they go under now and be replaced with people who know what they are doing. As RB said, they've had years to prepare. There's no excuse, and to be honest complaining isn't really very helpful.

[Aimless]

I think you're mistaken. One of the main arguments made by both leave campaigns is that we would take back control of our laws and reduce red tape imposed by unelected bureaucrats; enabling businesses to streamline operations, expand markets and become more profitable.

The businesses complaining at present were probably failing long before Brexit anyway. Better they go under now and be replaced with people who know what they are doing. As RB said, they've had years to prepare. There's no excuse, and to be honest complaining isn't really very helpful.

Pretending for a moment that you're not being sarcastic, I'd like to point out that it's difficult to prepare for new laws when you don't know what they'll be.

[gogobongopop]

Look, I'm not being sarcastic. I didn't want Brexit but it's done. I can either moan about it or embrace it and I'm going to do my damn hardest to do the later with all the gusto that any patriotic Englishman should. Democracy and all that.

So that's me now.

Any business that can't cope with a few new forms can get fucked. Stop bitching, realise the benefits and get on with it.

[Aimless]

I believe the previously thriving eel merchant disproves your claim re. failing businesses!!

[gogobongopop]

Well if it's a thriving business it's clearly we'll run and there's even less of an excuse for not adapting to the changes!

[Aimless]

Well if it's a thriving business it's clearly we'll run and there's even less of an excuse for not adapting to the changes!

It's true, I don't think he even considered shipping eels to the Mars colony no desire to adapt at all.

[Being]

Don't know how many brits are 3d printing enthusiasts but Prusa is not accepting orders to the UK. Happy I can still get my filament.