News6 mins ago
Brexit
35 Answers
Sorry to bring it up again, but does anyone get the impression we have won the referendum but lost our way ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by whiskeryron. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Can I propose an alternative explanation: Brexit is something that could clearly have worked -- depending, perhaps, on your definition of "work" -- but only with proper planning *before* putting the question to the people, rather than afterwards?
As it is, it should be obvious to even the most hardline Brexit conspiracy/incompetency theorist that a government that doesn't really know what it is trying to achieve, has only a year to decide now, will anyway have to make compromises as part of the negotiation process, and it trying to do all this with a minority government that is vulnerable to even the tiniest dissent from either wing of the party -- maybe *that's* making things difficult enough on its own?
As it is, it should be obvious to even the most hardline Brexit conspiracy/incompetency theorist that a government that doesn't really know what it is trying to achieve, has only a year to decide now, will anyway have to make compromises as part of the negotiation process, and it trying to do all this with a minority government that is vulnerable to even the tiniest dissent from either wing of the party -- maybe *that's* making things difficult enough on its own?
//Switzerland (not a member of the Customs Union) manages to trade with its EU neighbours with minimal friction. //
Yes, but Switzerland is a member of the single market.
--
As a recent report in the FT pointed out, the UK has not even taken the basic preparatory steps of setting up new regulatory agencies which would be necessary in the event of a no-deal Brexit - suggesting that there are zero plans for such a scenario. Moreoever it is getting to very close to "too late" to achieve those steps in time. The EU have not, as far as I'm aware, actually agreed to the UK's requests for a transition period.
A cynical person might say that this all looks like "the plan" - if there is one - is to simply stall until a sufficient number of Leave voters have died in order to eliminate their majority. Like Jim says, though, it looks far more likely that the government is gripped with indecision due to its own poor choices.
Yes, but Switzerland is a member of the single market.
--
As a recent report in the FT pointed out, the UK has not even taken the basic preparatory steps of setting up new regulatory agencies which would be necessary in the event of a no-deal Brexit - suggesting that there are zero plans for such a scenario. Moreoever it is getting to very close to "too late" to achieve those steps in time. The EU have not, as far as I'm aware, actually agreed to the UK's requests for a transition period.
A cynical person might say that this all looks like "the plan" - if there is one - is to simply stall until a sufficient number of Leave voters have died in order to eliminate their majority. Like Jim says, though, it looks far more likely that the government is gripped with indecision due to its own poor choices.
//A cynical person might say that this all looks like "the plan" - if there is one - is to simply stall until a sufficient number of Leave voters have died in order to eliminate their majority.//
The "plan" - we won't call it "Plan B" on account of we've already agreed that there's no prior plan of the "A" sort - rests on the assumption that the younger you are the more likely you are to be for EU membership.
Is that a fair observation, Kromovaricun? And, if so, how do explain the correlation?
The "plan" - we won't call it "Plan B" on account of we've already agreed that there's no prior plan of the "A" sort - rests on the assumption that the younger you are the more likely you are to be for EU membership.
Is that a fair observation, Kromovaricun? And, if so, how do explain the correlation?
//I agree with vetuste I believe there is a plot afoot//
Not suggesting a plot, Whiskery Ron.
Just don't see why being a younger person in itself should make you more likely to oppose, say, Scottish or Catalan independence, or Brexit, than Scottish, Catalan or British wrinklies.
If forced I could offer an explanation for such a bias in particular cases, although not necessarily flattering to the young or the education system.
Not suggesting a plot, Whiskery Ron.
Just don't see why being a younger person in itself should make you more likely to oppose, say, Scottish or Catalan independence, or Brexit, than Scottish, Catalan or British wrinklies.
If forced I could offer an explanation for such a bias in particular cases, although not necessarily flattering to the young or the education system.
//If forced I could offer an explanation for such a bias in particular cases, although not necessarily flattering to the young or the education system. //
I don't doubt it. This is usually the case whenever anyone tries to explain anything about young people...
The suggestion that there is a generation gap should not (imo) surprise you. Young people have very different prospects now than their parents did at their own age, have subtly (but substantially) different values to their parents or grandparents, and have grown up interacting with each other in profoundly different ways with profoundly different sources of information. Which of those precisely accounts for the difference is difficult to say - I'm not aware of any research that has gone into it yet, and it's probably too early for anything conclusive anyway. But I'd be very hesitant to jump on the perennial bandwagon which is used to explain everything about the younger generation - i.e. brainwashing/being spoiled/being inexperienced/being lazy/ etc. etc. etc.
I don't doubt it. This is usually the case whenever anyone tries to explain anything about young people...
The suggestion that there is a generation gap should not (imo) surprise you. Young people have very different prospects now than their parents did at their own age, have subtly (but substantially) different values to their parents or grandparents, and have grown up interacting with each other in profoundly different ways with profoundly different sources of information. Which of those precisely accounts for the difference is difficult to say - I'm not aware of any research that has gone into it yet, and it's probably too early for anything conclusive anyway. But I'd be very hesitant to jump on the perennial bandwagon which is used to explain everything about the younger generation - i.e. brainwashing/being spoiled/being inexperienced/being lazy/ etc. etc. etc.
I doubt one could dot all i's and cross all t's beforehand. Situations are dynamic anyway. One had to know the general aim and get on with the necessary negotiations knowing there will be issues that crop up, and will need dealing with, on route.
Young folk grew up with different experiences and thus less experience of what was before; and so are more sceptical of changing the familiar, more fearful of the period of disruption, less understanding that things settle down, and more inclined to believe the fear stories as they have nothing in their past to compare them to and thus reject them. As a group many seem prepared to reject their own nation and it's right for self govenance, but prefer the familiarity of being told what to do by a foreign unelected self serving elite controlling a major part of the continent.
Young folk grew up with different experiences and thus less experience of what was before; and so are more sceptical of changing the familiar, more fearful of the period of disruption, less understanding that things settle down, and more inclined to believe the fear stories as they have nothing in their past to compare them to and thus reject them. As a group many seem prepared to reject their own nation and it's right for self govenance, but prefer the familiarity of being told what to do by a foreign unelected self serving elite controlling a major part of the continent.
/The suggestion that there is a generation gap should not (imo) surprise you//
No, and why should it? Isn't the "gap" you're describing, Kromo, actually a natural process commonly called "growing up"? Or, more grandly, "rites of passage"?
An electorate restricted to eighteen year old VE's (I wouldn't wish this on the British people, by the way; it might count as cruel and unusual punishment) would produce governance likely to be extremely uncongenial everybody else, including VE clones who were four years older.
Cultural and educational factors apart, today's youth will be as bright and decent and independently minded as their parents.
No, and why should it? Isn't the "gap" you're describing, Kromo, actually a natural process commonly called "growing up"? Or, more grandly, "rites of passage"?
An electorate restricted to eighteen year old VE's (I wouldn't wish this on the British people, by the way; it might count as cruel and unusual punishment) would produce governance likely to be extremely uncongenial everybody else, including VE clones who were four years older.
Cultural and educational factors apart, today's youth will be as bright and decent and independently minded as their parents.
// Isn't the "gap" you're describing, Kromo, actually a natural process commonly called "growing up"? Or, more grandly, "rites of passage"? //
If you assume that older people are necessarily wiser than younger ones, yes. I'm not sure that's necessarily the case, though. It's an image that plays quite well for obvious reasons with the demographic that tends to use Answerbank.
If you assume that older people are necessarily wiser than younger ones, yes. I'm not sure that's necessarily the case, though. It's an image that plays quite well for obvious reasons with the demographic that tends to use Answerbank.
"Yes, but Switzerland is a member of the single market."
Very true. But the “problem” (in inverted commas because it is actually no problem at all) that the Irish border presents would not be solved by the UK remaining in the Single Market whilst quitting the Customs Union.
The problem that the EU would like us to believe would exist is that, post-Brexit, the UK could import vast quantities of goods free of EU tariffs, ship them over the border to Ireland where they could find their way to the rest of the EU. This would deny the Euromaniacs the opportunity to restrict and/or control trade in these goods which they do by the imposition of tariffs (the principle aim of the Customs Union). They say this problem can only be addressed either by the UK remaining in their Customs Union (or constructing a duplicate) or by the imposition of a hard border on the island of Ireland so that goods can be checked when arriving into the EU from the north.
Their argument is false. Vast quantities of goods arrive in the EU daily from across the world being delivered by air, sea and land. Few if any of them are held pending the arrival of a Customs official with a crowbar and a clipboard. Almost all of them resume their journey almost as quickly as they can be handled. In essence there are very few “hard” external borders to the EU where bulk goods are involved and there is certainly no need to construct one in Ireland. The idea that the trifling amount (in EU terms) of goods that could be moved across the Irish border might present a threat to the integrity of the EU’s Customs Union is preposterous. It is being used as an excuse to retain control over a recalcitrant UK which had the temerity to reject the European Project. And the UK’s spineless politicians are acquiescing to every demand that the EU makes.
Very true. But the “problem” (in inverted commas because it is actually no problem at all) that the Irish border presents would not be solved by the UK remaining in the Single Market whilst quitting the Customs Union.
The problem that the EU would like us to believe would exist is that, post-Brexit, the UK could import vast quantities of goods free of EU tariffs, ship them over the border to Ireland where they could find their way to the rest of the EU. This would deny the Euromaniacs the opportunity to restrict and/or control trade in these goods which they do by the imposition of tariffs (the principle aim of the Customs Union). They say this problem can only be addressed either by the UK remaining in their Customs Union (or constructing a duplicate) or by the imposition of a hard border on the island of Ireland so that goods can be checked when arriving into the EU from the north.
Their argument is false. Vast quantities of goods arrive in the EU daily from across the world being delivered by air, sea and land. Few if any of them are held pending the arrival of a Customs official with a crowbar and a clipboard. Almost all of them resume their journey almost as quickly as they can be handled. In essence there are very few “hard” external borders to the EU where bulk goods are involved and there is certainly no need to construct one in Ireland. The idea that the trifling amount (in EU terms) of goods that could be moved across the Irish border might present a threat to the integrity of the EU’s Customs Union is preposterous. It is being used as an excuse to retain control over a recalcitrant UK which had the temerity to reject the European Project. And the UK’s spineless politicians are acquiescing to every demand that the EU makes.
//Vast quantities of goods arrive in the EU daily from across the world being delivered by air, sea and land. Few if any of them are held pending the arrival of a Customs official with a crowbar and a clipboard. Almost all of them resume their journey almost as quickly as they can be handled. //
Pardon my ignorance, but is this not because the EU has a number of bespoke trading agreements with various parts of the world which allow this to happen? Or, perhaps, that goods are monitored in a way that doesn't require clipboard and crowbar? If the UK fell out of the EU without a deal I don't see how it could expect to have either of those things from the outset without first arranging them, which is what we're supposed to be doing now.
Pardon my ignorance, but is this not because the EU has a number of bespoke trading agreements with various parts of the world which allow this to happen? Or, perhaps, that goods are monitored in a way that doesn't require clipboard and crowbar? If the UK fell out of the EU without a deal I don't see how it could expect to have either of those things from the outset without first arranging them, which is what we're supposed to be doing now.
It's not because they have bespoke free trading agreements with non-EU nations. In fact they have comparatively few and it is difficult to find a major trading player amongst those with whom agreements are in force. Among the most notable absentees being the USA and China - the EU's two biggest trading partners. There are a number of agreements "under negotiation" and a number where negotiations have been concluded but an agreement not signed - probably the biggest player amongst these being Japan with whom negotiations concluded at the end of last year. The EU seems particularly slow in negotiating and concluding agreements, probably because of the sclerotic set up that necessitates every change of text having to be put before 28 nations for agreement.
You are correct in that goods now cross borders without the need for a crowbar and clipboard and there is absolutely no reason why a simple agreement cannot be readily concluded to cover the relatively small amount of traffic that crosses the Irish border. But of course that would remove a stumbling block and the EU likes too keep those in hand.
You are correct in that goods now cross borders without the need for a crowbar and clipboard and there is absolutely no reason why a simple agreement cannot be readily concluded to cover the relatively small amount of traffic that crosses the Irish border. But of course that would remove a stumbling block and the EU likes too keep those in hand.
Latest Posts
News7 mins ago
Festive Drinks Quiz - 5 January
Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago
News25 mins ago
