JRPGfan said:
A joke reply. edit: This is from jan 2019: "The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists. The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU. It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true. “No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.” There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule: 20 over goods and three over services. To make it more complicated, there are no “default terms” Britain can crash out on, Howard said, while at the same time, the UK has been blocked by WTO members from simply relying on the EU’s “schedule” – its existing tariffs and tariff-free trade quotas. The second hurdle is the sheer volume of domestic legislation that would need to be passed before being able to trade under WTO rules: there are nine statutes and 600 statutory instruments that would need to be adopted. The government cannot simply cut and paste the 120,000 EU statutes into UK law and then make changes to them gradually, Howard said. “The UK will need to set up new enforcement bodies and transfer new powers to regulators to create our own domestic regimes,” she said. “Basic maths shows that we will run out of time but any gap in our system will create uncertainty or conflict,” said Howard. “Some of these regimes carry penalties such as fines – even criminal offences in some sectors.” “Negotiating and ratifying the international free trade deals with the rest of the world alone could take over seven years,” she said. “A no-deal Brexit could double prices for some products like meat and dairy. There is also a greater risk of trade disputes and sanctions, resulting in reduced market access for UK businesses. “It’s not just about money,” she said. “We are dependent on imports for a lot of things that we don’t make any more or don’t make enough of, or simply cannot make as they are patented or subject to rules of origin – like lifesaving drugs, radioactive isotopes, chemicals (such as helium for MRI scans), medical equipment, chemicals, electricity, petrol, even milk. Shortages and delays could cause panic buying or even civil unrest.” Howard dismissed ideas of a transition period enabling a “gradual transition” to WTO rules as “unicorns”. “The UK will have to start negotiating over 50 free trade agreements from scratch once we leave the EU. In the meantime we will have to pay tariffs.”" Back in jan 2019, 23 nations didnt agree to UK just getting membership of WTO, due to concerns over goods&services.
|
Said I was going to go back to it and forgot it, sorry.
Since you are a very strong supporter of stay let me just tell you what I think so you can, maybe, understand me better.
I do not think brexit was a good idea. For me it would be MUCH BETTER if stay had won, as I'm a latin american with EU citizenship living in Britain. So, yeah I'm one of the directly impacted by the brexit decision. I am also against simple majority people votes. A result of 52-48 should not be a definitive result and on those votes, in my opinion, a minimum threshold of 55% or even 60% should be used when making such decision. 52-48 just means the country is divided and probably if you had another note 6 months down the road there was a good chance the result would be inverted. The same goes for people's votes on independence and other decisions that can impact a country decades or even centuries down the road. I am also against the decision that made (2 million?) british citizens living outside england to not be able to vote, although that was the rule and if I'm not wrong you also cant vote for normal elections. At the end of the day you left the country.
The best option would have been for the EU to tackle the problems and criticisms people have on EU, face the problem, discuss it with society. Instead what everybody did was just shame people who had a different opinion. A few problems:
- EU started as an economic bloc and with time became a political bloc. When people voted to join EU back in early 70's (if Im not wrong) it was to join an economic bloc which is absolutely amazing and definitely (almost) nobody would be against it. With time the integration just became more complex, it transformed into a political bloc with almost no power to each country population to make any change on it. Yes there is a parliament but even if, let's say, evil conservatives in england elected 100% of the british representatives in EU parliament, well there is nothing you can achieve, it's just a couple of votes. With time that leads to even grater insanities such as creating an EU army and fiscal union (which will need to happen to keep euro alive).
- Since british people have no say in EU decisions, or at least almost no say since it is just a couple of votes, that leads to creation of several rules and regulations and laws that well you just need to suck it up and accept it, like for example the fishing quotas or environmental regulations that the british people may not agree with and need to follow anyway.
- Inclusion of a lot of countries in the EU that not necessarily were properly prepared for it or that have a very different cultural and economical approach
- And last but not least the real reason for brexit but it cannot be mentioned by british people as they will be shamed, immigration. I dont wanna go on this subject but it definitely is a problem in britain especally with the huge mass immigration that happened in the country. While most left leaning people dont care and actually support mass immigration, there is a lot of people that thinks there should be a limit to it and that despite the economical growth in GDP it brings, it also creates a lot of cultural problems and a strain in infrastructure. Immigration wasnt a huge issue in Britain during the 80's and 90's but once you start to have 500k people arriving per year and even reaching 700k in one year, well a lot of people thinks the problem must be discussed. And since the problem cannot be discussed the only place where you can safely give your opinion besides the pub or the dinner table, will be the ballot box.
- Then you have the elections and the campaign with SO MANY LIES from both sides, the shaming of everybody that did not agree with the Guardian, the ridculous approach on BBC and iTV of always bringing to the discussion from the conservative side a very stupid person to give the impression the conservatives are ignorant and racist, and all the projections and predictions about the economy that just didnt make any sense at all, totally project fear. As if britan would not survive outside EU, like if britain could not be just a regular country like many other first world countries. Predictions that just didnt happen, and now stay supporters are just creating more updated predictions that really cannot be trusted at all. And in the end the left always defend that economic growth should not be the end game of all decision but that is exactly what the left did with brexit. And it didnt happen, why should why believe it will happen this time. How can I trust the predictions, the people that makes the predictions, how do I know if they are considering everything necessary in the calculations, considering not only risks but also opportunities? Once you loose trust it is really difficult to get it back.
- After the voting, the british had ALL THE CHANCES to stay in EU in an unofficial way through Theresa May deal. She could not get the votes as the tories were tore in two, but labour could have accepted it. They could have voted with May. The deal was AMAZING for those who voted to stay. All Karl Marx Corbyn wanted was power and another election. Time and time again they could have helped and put the interests of those who voted to stay in first place but no. In the end he got the election he wanted and well, the results were not good. For him.
So considering everything, I understand and respect the will of the british people and maybe I would have done the same if I as british.
Just to finish, the press also tried to put fear that we Eu citizens would be mistreated, shuned, would be deported etc. Of course nothing happened and the process to get the right to stay was easier than paying a car parking bill.
