Quantcast
Brexit
Scoobes said:
I have to ask (I'm probably going to regret this), what do some of you guys think "no deal" actually means?

"no deal" means that Britain will leave the EU without a plan how the future relationship between the EU and Britain will look like and without knowing what will happen to the 1000s of laws and institutions in GB who are based/dependen on EU law and EU institutions.



Around the Network
Scoobes said:
phinch1 said:

Like I said, if you can read? We were told by just "voting to leave" the £ would collapse and we'd be in a recession (before we even leave)

 

It hasn't

 

We have 63 thousand EU NHS workers we also have 3.8 million EU Nationals living in the UK

So EU workers living here definitely put more stress on the NHS than help

Those statistics, interesting they're the same people who predicted the recession, and the instant job losses, (which again they were wrong on) why should anyone believe they're predictions now? It's fear mongering at its finest

The £ did collapse.

The BoE staved off recession by reducing the interest rates to 0.25% and pumping an additional £70 billion into the economy (quantitative easing is generally not a good sign). We were also fortunate that the global economy improved.

EU migrants pay in more than they take out, are far more likely to be of working age and therefore will rarely use the NHS. On the other hand we have a shortage of staff and a government that isn't training enough UK doctors and nurses. EU workers do not put more stress on the NHS than they contribute to it either directly via working for the NHS or indirectly through taxes.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/economics/about-department/fiscal-effects-immigration-uk

At the moment you're arguing how it's not as bad as people made it out... but how is leaving with no deal going to improve your life?

Non-EU migrants even have to pay twice into the NHS, as they have to pay 200 pounds a year unless they're on a student visa on top of their part of their paycheck. And the visa prices of the UK will keep many people out even if their expertise would be needed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvzTOmEPYyE

 

For anybody who wants to know about Brexit in detail, I suggest TLDR News on Youtube, as they have a very detailed and impartial series on Brexit:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLa9zPc4IBEBfE1YnVyKd9rjYVZgRaIGJh



Bofferbrauer2 said:
Scoobes said:

The £ did collapse.

The BoE staved off recession by reducing the interest rates to 0.25% and pumping an additional £70 billion into the economy (quantitative easing is generally not a good sign). We were also fortunate that the global economy improved.

EU migrants pay in more than they take out, are far more likely to be of working age and therefore will rarely use the NHS. On the other hand we have a shortage of staff and a government that isn't training enough UK doctors and nurses. EU workers do not put more stress on the NHS than they contribute to it either directly via working for the NHS or indirectly through taxes.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/economics/about-department/fiscal-effects-immigration-uk

At the moment you're arguing how it's not as bad as people made it out... but how is leaving with no deal going to improve your life?


For anybody who wants to know about Brexit in detail, I suggest TLDR News on Youtube, as they have a very detailed and impartial series on Brexit:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLa9zPc4IBEBfE1YnVyKd9rjYVZgRaIGJh

Yeah their videos are really informative.



One of two things are going to happen. Either there will be a no deal Brexit, or there will be a second referendum. There are no other possibilities with the timescales involved here. The referendum is already getting close to impossible due to time constraints, but the EU has said they would extend the deadline if a second referendum was being held, so I think it's still possible. Anyone who thinks there's another possibility at this point is fooling themselves. So there's no point in asking what the "best way" to leave the EU is.

That said, while I'm an American and thus not directly affected by it, I do care about the UK on some level so for their sake I hope there's a second referendum. Specifically, I hope there is a second referendum that has ranked choice voting, allowing people to choose "No Deal", "May's deal", or "Remain" and I hope "Remain" wins. Now that people understand much better what leaving would entail (either no deal or May's deal, the latter of which would only be possible under a referendum like this anyway since it was already voted down in parliament), the people will be better informed, and the result this time will be indisputable. Every citizen that votes will have as full an understanding as could be reasonably asked for exactly what each choice means. I don't think there'd even be need for time to campaign, just enough to organize the vote and advertise that it was happening.

With ranked choice voting, if Remain loses again, Remainers can choose whether they'd like No Deal or May's Deal as their second choice, so they'd feel like they had at least some say in their future even if they didn't get to remain. I've seen opinions from Remainers on both sides of this debate, some saying May's deal is so bad that no deal would be better, and some still maintaining that any deal is better than nothing. So that would be at least a little more fair than simply leaving however the UK's incompetent parliament manages to. While I'd personally love to see Remain win, I'd still be happy for the people of the UK if they voted for No Deal under these circumstances as it would be a fully informed vote, as democratic as I can imagine it being.

Even the No Dealers and May's Dealers would benefit here, as there are some who would rather leave in some way, shape, or form even if it isn't their preferred way, and there are some who would rather remain than have a Brexit they don't want. I've seen all of these opinions expressed at least once since the first referendum, and a second referendum where all three are a possibility and people get to rank their preferences is much more fair than a simple yes or no vote. A ranked choice referendum would be the fairest way to do things, in my opinion, because not only is it more democratic, it's just a better, more legitimate referendum, that more accurately takes the people's opinion. So the people saying that a second referendum isn't fair because they're afraid their first referendum would be invalidated, the truth is that it wouldn't. In fact, the most likely outcomes would be a very similar number of leavers and remainers voting for a leave option or the remain option respectively for their first choice, likely not changing the outcome there, but with some possibility of the second choice coming into play and deciding what kind of Leave the UK really wants, or if the UK as a whole feels torn on leaving and only wants to do so if it can leave a certain way. I suppose there's also a chance that Remain would get over 50% on the first round and thus make the ranking unecessary, but I doubt it, honestly. If it did, it would be really close, but hopefully the second round would still be counted anyway so that the UK would get to see exactly how much consensus is formed by the second round. For all you know, maybe once the second choice is selected, one choice will have a supermajority, and the UK will feel a bit better about their choice since it wouldn't feel as much like one half the country dragged the other half into something they hated. I'd imagine that such a supermajority would be possible for any of the three choices.

As I said before, I'd be cheering for Remain, but like I also said, I'm from the US so it's not something I directly have a stake in. But I hate seeing you guys so torn up over it, so if anything, I'd prefer any outcome of a second, ranked-choice referendum to simply crashing out with no deal when you run out of time, or parliament miraculously deciding on a deal that the EU also accepts before the deadline (or an extended deadline, since the EU also said they'd accept an extension until the European elections so long as the UK had a direction they wanted to go in during the extra time that could arrive at a new deal). The latter would happen too fast and leave too many unhappy, and splinter the UK further, and no deal would make Remainers and anyone that wanted some kind of deal unhappy and generally make everyone feel hopeless, like they can't count on their government at all, and even the hard Brexiteers would be mad that all that time was wasted arguing over a deal when trade deals could have been worked on and prepared in time to be ready so that when Brexit happened the UK had a system of trade deals already in place. The second referendum, if it is ranked choice, just seems like it would have the most potential to make the most people happy, while the current course is by all accounts a disaster and making as many people as possible unhappy.



HylianSwordsman said:
One of two things are going to happen. Either there will be a no deal Brexit, or there will be a second referendum. There are no other possibilities with the timescales involved here. The referendum is already getting close to impossible due to time constraints, but the EU has said they would extend the deadline if a second referendum was being held, so I think it's still possible. Anyone who thinks there's another possibility at this point is fooling themselves. So there's no point in asking what the "best way" to leave the EU is. 

That's not true. For one the house of commons could either decide a vote of no confidence again, the second being a general election, and the other option being revoking article 50 ...

HylianSwordsman said:

That said, while I'm an American and thus not directly affected by it, I do care about the UK on some level so for their sake I hope there's a second referendum. Specifically, I hope there is a second referendum that has ranked choice voting, allowing people to choose "No Deal", "May's deal", or "Remain" and I hope "Remain" wins. Now that people understand much better what leaving would entail (either no deal or May's deal, the latter of which would only be possible under a referendum like this anyway since it was already voted down in parliament), the people will be better informed, and the result this time will be indisputable. Every citizen that votes will have as full an understanding as could be reasonably asked for exactly what each choice means. I don't think there'd even be need for time to campaign, just enough to organize the vote and advertise that it was happening. 

There is no consensus for what the format of a second referendum would be and campaigning is absolutely mandatory since it is THE LAW ... (a minimum of at least 10 weeks and even then that length would be heavily criticized by the Electoral Commission)

HylianSwordsman said: 

Even the No Dealers and May's Dealers would benefit here, as there are some who would rather leave in some way, shape, or form even if it isn't their preferred way, and there are some who would rather remain than have a Brexit they don't want. I've seen all of these opinions expressed at least once since the first referendum, and a second referendum where all three are a possibility and people get to rank their preferences is much more fair than a simple yes or no vote. A ranked choice referendum would be the fairest way to do things, in my opinion, because not only is it more democratic, it's just a better, more legitimate referendum, that more accurately takes the people's opinion. So the people saying that a second referendum isn't fair because they're afraid their first referendum would be invalidated, the truth is that it wouldn't. In fact, the most likely outcomes would be a very similar number of leavers and remainers voting for a leave option or the remain option respectively for their first choice, likely not changing the outcome there, but with some possibility of the second choice coming into play and deciding what kind of Leave the UK really wants, or if the UK as a whole feels torn on leaving and only wants to do so if it can leave a certain way. I suppose there's also a chance that Remain would get over 50% on the first round and thus make the ranking unecessary, but I doubt it, honestly. If it did, it would be really close, but hopefully the second round would still be counted anyway so that the UK would get to see exactly how much consensus is formed by the second round. For all you know, maybe once the second choice is selected, one choice will have a supermajority, and the UK will feel a bit better about their choice since it wouldn't feel as much like one half the country dragged the other half into something they hated. I'd imagine that such a supermajority would be possible for any of the three choices.

@Bold Actually, the critics would be correct that it isn't fair in principle if a supposed second referendum included a remain option which led to a remain vote in contrast to a leave vote with the first referendum since the result of the first referendum wouldn't be respected when it has yet to be enacted ...

If you actually cared about respecting the result of the first referendum then a remain option shouldn't even be included in a potential second referendum and should be just either May's deal, no deal or another possible way to leave. Democracy is not all about holding votes but it's also about coming to terms with the consequences that comes with it ... 

"It wouldn't feel as much like one half the country dragged the other half into something they hated"

This view is incompatible with the consequences of democracy. If it were that simple then we wouldn't need a democracy and would instead opt for unity. A democracy exists solely to separate the mandate from the opposition ... 

HylianSwordsman said: 

As I said before, I'd be cheering for Remain, but like I also said, I'm from the US so it's not something I directly have a stake in. But I hate seeing you guys so torn up over it, so if anything, I'd prefer any outcome of a second, ranked-choice referendum to simply crashing out with no deal when you run out of time, or parliament miraculously deciding on a deal that the EU also accepts before the deadline (or an extended deadline, since the EU also said they'd accept an extension until the European elections so long as the UK had a direction they wanted to go in during the extra time that could arrive at a new deal). The latter would happen too fast and leave too many unhappy, and splinter the UK further, and no deal would make Remainers and anyone that wanted some kind of deal unhappy and generally make everyone feel hopeless, like they can't count on their government at all, and even the hard Brexiteers would be mad that all that time was wasted arguing over a deal when trade deals could have been worked on and prepared in time to be ready so that when Brexit happened the UK had a system of trade deals already in place. The second referendum, if it is ranked choice, just seems like it would have the most potential to make the most people happy, while the current course is by all accounts a disaster and making as many people as possible unhappy.

The hard brexiteers were already negotiating trade deals across the world. The only party that weren't willing to negotiate before the exit was the EU and solely the EU because they wanted a withdrawal agreement ... 

Just as America came to terms with Trump it is now time for Britain's turn to come to terms with Brexit ... 



Around the Network
fatslob-:O said:

The hard brexiteers were already negotiating trade deals across the world. The only party that weren't willing to negotiate before the exit was the EU and solely the EU because they wanted a withdrawal agreement ... 

Just as America came to terms with Trump it is now time for Britain's turn to come to terms with Brexit ... 

*Looks at record-long Shutdown*

Yeah, right



fatslob-:O said:

"It wouldn't feel as much like one half the country dragged the other half into something they hated"

This view is incompatible with the consequences of democracy. If it were that simple then we wouldn't need a democracy and would instead opt for unity. A democracy exists solely to separate the mandate from the opposition ... 

In theory, yes. In practice, trying to pretend that the opposition doesn't exist after the vote - or worse, openly treating them with contempt and hostility while dismissing their views as being irrelevant - almost never ends well in the longer run.



Scoobes said:
I have to ask (I'm probably going to regret this), what do some of you guys think "no deal" actually means?

It means they have absolutely no withdrawal agreements in place, at the time the leave is finalised.

It means that the UK does NOT get 21months + more to slowly adjust to the new ways of doing things.
There will be a day where suddenly, when no trade can happend again until, you have deals in place again and worked out the bussiness side of things.

UK bussiness will have to follow the law, so there will be a delay periode where they probably cant do much bussiness.
UK reverts to World Trade Rules, on international trade, and lose the benefits the single markets gave them (when dealing with other EU countries).
Tarrifs would force the prices of certain things up, and could result in some UK work force being moved away from the UK.


UK gains controll over immigration.
However UK citizens working the EU might find their qualifications no longer apply in the EU, and wont be able to work there based on them anymore.
There would have to be much tougher safty controll when sailing or flying between EU and UK.

UK can choose to adopt, the laws they supported, when they where members of the EU, and put them into their own.
UK no longer has to follow EU court of law, or the EU court of Human Rights.

 

The UK doesnt have to pay a member fee anymore (~13bn).
The farmers wont get ~4bn back from the EU as support to their industry. You might see food prices rise in the UK.

There will be a Hard Border placed between Northen Irland and Southern Irland.
You might need a pass to cross over from one to another, and pass through safty checks.

 

Thats about it.



Number of days to reach 50M from 40M : 198 days
Number of days to reach 60M from 50M : 187 days
Number of days to reach 70M from 60M : 175 days
Number of days to reach 80M from 70M : 227 days

Necro-bump this 2020: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=229249

JRPGfan said:
Scoobes said:
I have to ask (I'm probably going to regret this), what do some of you guys think "no deal" actually means?

It means they have absolutely no withdrawal agreements in place, at the time the leave is finalised.

It means that the UK does NOT get 21months + more to slowly adjust to the new ways of doing things.
There will be a day where suddenly, when no trade can happend again until, you have deals in place again and worked out the bussiness side of things.

UK bussiness will have to follow the law, so there will be a delay periode where they probably cant do much bussiness.
UK reverts to World Trade Rules, on international trade, and lose the benefits the single markets gave them (when dealing with other EU countries).
Tarrifs would force the prices of certain things up, and could result in some UK work force being moved away from the UK.


UK gains controll over immigration.
However UK citizens working the EU might find their qualifications no longer apply in the EU, and wont be able to work there based on them anymore.
There would have to be much tougher safty controll when sailing or flying between EU and UK.

UK can choose to adopt, the laws they supported, when they where members of the EU, and put them into their own.
UK no longer has to follow EU court of law, or the EU court of Human Rights.

 

The UK doesnt have to pay a member fee anymore (~13bn).
The farmers wont get ~4bn back from the EU as support to their industry. You might see food prices rise in the UK.

There will be a Hard Border placed between Northen Irland and Southern Irland.
You might need a pass to cross over from one to another, and pass through safty checks.

 

Thats about it.

Pretty good enumeration

Some things to add:

Almost all imports and exports will get more expensive until trade deals are realized.

Since the UK is heavily reliant on food imports, foods will get much more expensive from the 1-2 punch of import taxes and the loss of EU subsidies in that... ehem...field.

You were talking about UK citizens potentially no longer meeting qualifications in the EU (mostly that means that they will have to have a job or be retired to be able to stay over long term, just like any other non-refugee from a non-EU country), but the reverse would also be true. Considering that many EU citizens work for the NHS, and the latter already being critically short on staff, this could potentially deal a heavy blow to UK healthcare.

As for trading at WTO rules, UK already stated copying the EU schedules (how the EU trades with any country they have no trade deal with). However, the EU, due to it's sheer economic size, has a better negotiation position that the UK alone. Hence why Taiwan already stated that they won't accept trading with the UK under those rules. Not all is bad though, as the UK can still get better deals for them since the ones from the EU are tailored to benefit the Union as a whole, not specific countries.



Yeah the farming industry in the UK is going to take a massive hit, because of this "No deal" vote winning.
Same is true with the financial sector in the UK, alot of where it made its money, was due to a type of transaction they wont be able to do anymore.

If I lived in the UK, then leading up to the end of March, I would probably stockpile some nessesity's.
Any food that can last for abit, Id make sure to get lots of, just incase the transition periode doesnt go to smoothly.
Same with medicine, if your dependent on something, stockpile abit of it, just to be on the safe side.



Number of days to reach 50M from 40M : 198 days
Number of days to reach 60M from 50M : 187 days
Number of days to reach 70M from 60M : 175 days
Number of days to reach 80M from 70M : 227 days

Necro-bump this 2020: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=229249