The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[apelike]

 

Also, do you know what inflation is?

 

Yes, I think its caused by hot air..

[cgksheff]

This is probably a source of the 17% figure:

 

https://iea.org.uk/blog/abolish-the-cap-let-food-prices-tumble

[L00b]

The EU needs an orderly, predictable, equitable brexit, for minimum disruption and disquiet. This relies on fair-minded and reasonably amicable negotiations on trade, commerce, education, infrastructure, security etc, and collaboration on vital future projects like ITER and ESA.

A fundamental problem -one of the very many- with the above, is that there is a cost to the UK for achieving that (there is one to the EU27 too, of course, but it is negligible in proportion - because borne by 27, amongst which are national economies as big and bigger than the UK itself).

 

A cost to the UK, the principle of which Leavers are dimly aware (they expect Britain to be worse off for a while, but consider that a cost worth bearing if the benefits estimated from Brexit eventually materialise), but the likely scale of which they have no real idea, engaging as they do in acute denial and other assorted hand-waving whenever aspects of that cost are pointed out to them.

 

Put simply, they have no idea just how much Brexit is going to cost them (collectively, 'the UK'), because no trusted source (i.e. Leave-aligned politicians) has told them (nor is any such source to do so within the next year-and-a-half), and because any source which is not Brexit-aligned is not to be trusted to begin with. There is still just as much lack of objectivity in the debate, as there ever was in the campaign before the referendum, and this isn't going to change anytime soon.

 

The Government has a few ideas of course (senior civil servants, certainly), but they are keeping those secret, because when Leavers find out, they are going to be very unhappy.

 

So instead, Brits keep getting the sort of cretinous PR arm-flapping last seen this morning, wherein May proclaims that she wants to make "23:00 (NB: 00:00 EU time) on 29 March 2019" the "official Brexit date and time in law"

 

(a legislative idea which is unicorn-grade powder thrown in the electorate's eyes, since-

<i> that date and time for <actual> Brexit is already guaranteed in (EU) law -and automatic- in view of the fixed 2-year term set in Article 50 TEU and its triggering by the UK on 29 March 2017;

<ii> the UK cannot legislate about that date for effect in any case, since the deadline arises solely from, and expires solely under, EU law (the TEU) which supersedes UK law (insofar as Article 50 and its effects are concerned) right until that date; and

<iii> even if May wasted MPs' time and taxpayer's money getting this imbecilic "Brexit date" Act through, the sovereignty of Parliament (as requalified by the Supreme Court ruling in the Miller case) guarantees that Parliament could repeal that Act at any time it chooses, including before the date if an anti-Brexit majority of MPs developed by then.

 

Still, I'm confident many Leavers will lap this latest guff just the same, as the good little mushrooms that they are.

Edited November 10, 2017 by L00b

[tzijlstra]

This is probably a source of the 17% figure:

 

https://iea.org.uk/blog/abolish-the-cap-let-food-prices-tumble

 

Where it states - Author’s calculation based on data from the OECD and the World Bank

 

 

But it’s OK, he’s got a PhD which makes it fine not to publish his methodology

[Magilla]

So instead, Brits keep getting the sort of cretinous PR arm-flapping last seen this morning, wherein May proclaims that she wants to make "23:00 (NB: 00:00 EU time) on 29 March 2019" the "official Brexit date and time in law"

 

Michael Heseltine had some interesting comments on this this morning. A panic measure that reflects the growing public feeling that Brexit is a bad idea

 

It's going so bad, she's using the Trump approach, deflect and distract.

 

<iii> even if May wasted MPs' time and taxpayer's money getting this imbecilic "Brexit date" Act through, the sovereignty of Parliament (as requalified by the Supreme Court ruling in the Miller case) guarantees that Parliament could repeal that Act at any time it chooses, including before the date if an anti-Brexit majority of MPs developed by then.

 

Looks like the guy who wrote Article 50 agrees:-

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/10/brexit-date-is-not-irreversible-says-man-who-wrote-article-50-lord-kerr

 

Also:-

 

The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator has challenged Theresa May’s beleaguered government to address the fundamental question of whether Britain wants to deregulate and follow the US social and economic model or stay within the European mainstream.

Speaking in Rome, Barnier voiced his concern over recent comments by the US commerce secretary on a visit to London, with whom the trade secretary, Liam Fox, is in discussions over a future trade deal.

 

I'm guessing not, but any leavers got any ideas on this?

Edited November 10, 2017 by Magilla

[ez8004]

Yes, I think its caused by hot air..

 

Since you have not commented on my other points with regards to workers’ rights, I am assuming that you are confirming that you really have no idea in the issue.

[Car Boot]

Except when they introduced legislation on the maximum number of hours in a working week and the protection for people on zero hour contracts.

 

And how does this so- called EU 'protection' for people on zero hour contracts help people in Ireland, Finland, Sweden, Cyprus, Malta and the United Kingdom?

 

All are EU member states. All have zero hour contract work for the lowest paid.

 

And in countries such as Spain, Denmark and Poland zero hour contract work is not prohibited or even particularly regulated.

 

So how does so-called EU 'protection' benefit an agency worker on a zero hour contract in Barnsley?

[SnailyBoy]

And how does this so- called EU 'protection' for people on zero hour contracts help people in Ireland, Finland, Sweden, Cyprus, Malta and the United Kingdom?

 

All are EU member states. All have zero hour contract work for the lowest paid.

 

And in countries such as Spain, Denmark and Poland zero hour contract work is not prohibited or even particularly regulated.

 

So how does so-called EU 'protection' benefit an agency worker on a zero hour contract in Barnsley?

 

Are you suggesting that the UK government could already disregard EU legislation if it chose to?

[Car Boot]

True cost of EU membership is £980 million per week

 

A new study on the true costs of EU membership, by leading City analyst Bob Lyddon, has been published and makes for extremely worrying reading.

 

The analysis takes into account the money paid directly to the EU budget, £267 million per week. Also included is:

 

The annual net cost of EU migrants (the majority employed in unskilled or semi-skilled low paid work) to the state once the tax they pay is deducted from the benefits they receive, which is £30 billion a year.

 

£12 billion a year is denied to the Exchequer through legal tax avoidance schemes which directly result from Britain being a member of the EU.

 

Extra payments include £2 billion a year given to the EU foreign aid budget (which are not officially designated as payments to Brussels).

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/877708/brexit-news-uk-eu-latest-bill-membership-money-cost-billion-study-research

[SnailyBoy]

True cost of EU membership is £980 million per week

 

A new study on the true costs of EU membership, by leading City analyst Bob Lyddon, has been published and makes for extremely worrying reading.

 

The analysis takes into account the money paid directly to the EU budget, £267 million per week. Also included is:

 

The annual net cost of EU migrants (the majority employed in unskilled or semi-skilled low paid work) to the state once the tax they pay is deducted from the benefits they receive, which is £30 billion a year.

 

£12 billion a year is denied to the Exchequer through legal tax avoidance schemes which directly result from Britain being a member of the EU.

 

Extra payments include £2 billion a year given to the EU foreign aid budget (which are not officially designated as payments to Brussels).

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/877708/brexit-news-uk-eu-latest-bill-membership-money-cost-billion-study-research

 

Shucks, I though it was £350m a week. I've heard that number before somewhere.