• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
And yet for many a remainer, that exact same logic is not good enough views of the Economy(and Brexit in general). I see it as more ironic than hypocritical, but its worth pointing out none the less.

People seem very quick to believe any negative essay that comes up, yet want to 'wait and see' on a different matter?



It was a passing comment. In reality its likely to be a mix of both, different sectors having differing fortunes.

The point is, its a piece of string argument. tinkle into the wind and see what way it blows. Far to many moving parts at this time to really get an understanding. So what exactly do you expect?

If they say itll be better there will be 1000 naysayers calling foul. If they say it will be worse its political suicide. And either way is just a punt, isnt it?

Look at the variables, at even the highest level
Soft Brexit : Economy = good? Marginally down?
Soft Brexit + no financial passport : Economy significantly down?
Hard Brexit : ITS THE END OF THE WORRRLD!!!
Hard Brexit + CETA/variant trade deal : Actually pretty good?
Hard Brexit + WTO terms : Is it actually that bad? Having factored in NOT paying into the EU budget over the long term?
...

I mean, seriously - where to even begin? What is it you are expecting to have been delivered exactly?



I dont make such an assumption at all. I posit they MAY be doing valuable work, in which instance - does your view on the impact assessments change?
YOU assume they arent. I am categoric in saying I dont know...


Now dont get me wrong, the papers look pathetic. What I dont know is why.

As I said, if these were done just to pander to the house while the department get on with more important things - then honestly I really dont care. Storm in a tea cup. If this is the actual quality of work they are doing? Well things should get interesting pretty quick because its hilariously poor.

This is from the 'About Us' section on their site:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-exiting-the-european-union/about

Our objectives are to:
  1. lead the UK’s negotiations to leave the EU and establish a deep and special partnership between the EU and the UK;

  2. work with the devolved administrations, Parliament, EU Member States and Institutions and a wide range of other interested parties throughout the negotiations;

  3. lead and coordinate cross-government work to seize the opportunities and ensure a smooth process of exit, including the required domestic legislation, on the best possible terms;

  4. continue our work across Whitehall and in Brussels to coordinate European business, exercise our rights and meet our obligations as a member of the EU until we exit;

  5. attract and develop great people and organise ourselves flexibly to deliver our objectives efficiently and effectively.
Which does sound to me like they have plenty to be getting on with, so I hope its the former more than the latter (of course).

Of course, if you feel you can do better it seems they also have some roles available:
Perhaps that last one being open is why the papers werent up to scratch?! ;O)
Click to expand...

Not my skill set mate. And not sure what the caliber of candidates they expect with those wages.
I wouldn' do any of those roles for those salaries. And I would hope they would be aiming a lot lot higher than me... even if it was in my skills set... It's that important.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
And yet for many a remainer, that exact same logic is not good enough views of the Economy(and Brexit in general). I see it as more ironic than hypocritical, but its worth pointing out none the less.

People seem very quick to believe any negative essay that comes up, yet want to 'wait and see' on a different matter?



It was a passing comment. In reality its likely to be a mix of both, different sectors having differing fortunes.

The point is, its a piece of string argument. tinkle into the wind and see what way it blows. Far to many moving parts at this time to really get an understanding. So what exactly do you expect?

If they say itll be better there will be 1000 naysayers calling foul. If they say it will be worse its political suicide. And either way is just a punt, isnt it?

Look at the variables, at even the highest level
Soft Brexit : Economy = good? Marginally down?
Soft Brexit + no financial passport : Economy significantly down?
Hard Brexit : ITS THE END OF THE WORRRLD!!!
Hard Brexit + CETA/variant trade deal : Actually pretty good?
Hard Brexit + WTO terms : Is it actually that bad? Having factored in NOT paying into the EU budget over the long term?
...

I mean, seriously - where to even begin? What is it you are expecting to have been delivered exactly?



I dont make such an assumption at all. I posit they MAY be doing valuable work, in which instance - does your view on the impact assessments change?
YOU assume they arent. I am categoric in saying I dont know...


Now dont get me wrong, the papers look pathetic. What I dont know is why.

As I said, if these were done just to pander to the house while the department get on with more important things - then honestly I really dont care. Storm in a tea cup. If this is the actual quality of work they are doing? Well things should get interesting pretty quick because its hilariously poor.

This is from the 'About Us' section on their site:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-exiting-the-european-union/about

Our objectives are to:
  1. lead the UK’s negotiations to leave the EU and establish a deep and special partnership between the EU and the UK;

  2. work with the devolved administrations, Parliament, EU Member States and Institutions and a wide range of other interested parties throughout the negotiations;

  3. lead and coordinate cross-government work to seize the opportunities and ensure a smooth process of exit, including the required domestic legislation, on the best possible terms;

  4. continue our work across Whitehall and in Brussels to coordinate European business, exercise our rights and meet our obligations as a member of the EU until we exit;

  5. attract and develop great people and organise ourselves flexibly to deliver our objectives efficiently and effectively.
Which does sound to me like they have plenty to be getting on with, so I hope its the former more than the latter (of course).

Of course, if you feel you can do better it seems they also have some roles available:
Perhaps that last one being open is why the papers werent up to scratch?! ;O)
Click to expand...

Also if they doing all this other important work... why are they not actually telling us about it? Why are they not singing from the rooftops about the work they are doing, and the prospects it will lead to?

Instead... they are celebrating the fact that we will get our blue passports back.... now blue is my favourite colour and everything... But seriously What the actual fudge.... they are taking the tinkle out if us.

And out of Brexiteers especially.
 
DTA said:
Not my skill set mate. And not sure what the caliber of candidates they expect with those wages.
I wouldn' do any of those roles for those salaries. And I would hope they would be aiming a lot lot higher than me... even if it was in my skills set... It's that important.
Click to expand...

Fair point :D

There is the ability to get involved though, for those who feel strongly enough.

DTA said:
Also if they doing all this other important work... why are they not actually telling us about it? Why are they not singing from the rooftops about the work they are doing, and the prospects it will lead to?

Instead... they are celebrating the fact that we will get our blue passports back.... now blue is my favourite colour and everything... But seriously What the actual fudge.... they are taking the tinkle out if us.

And out of Brexiteers especially.
Click to expand...

As to impact assessments, at this point I just dont care. I cant really say why. Honestly Im a little confused as to why people are so up in arms about it.

Its all a complete unknown. Had the department put every resource into it, even then would they actually be accurate? I doubt it, just more wordy and professional looking.

Thats the thing that gets me, its so obviously a fudge, they obviously dont give a brick about the assessments at this stage - so why does everybody else?

Think about it, think about what these documents are supposed to achieve - and just how likely they are to be of a quality to actually serve that purpose at this stage?

Now - where I agree entirely - is in them promoting what they have been doing. Just as the government should be really setting potential visions for Brexit and trying to sell it (for want of a better term) to the nation.

And I can see why its easy for people to think its because they dont know what they want, such has the lack of quality communication.

Im holding fire on that point for now, just until we see where negotiations go next. Up to now its been frantic just trying to get to a point where we can talk.

I figure this next stage will clarify just how much of a vision we have.
 
I think we are losing sight of what's important here. New passports.

xb2fk2M9
 
I don't think there is a secrete government vision of Brexit, just a tightrope walk with them trying to get any kind of brexit agreement through that might work. Its uncharted territory, the gov are learning as they go, and to presume there is some grand plan and undercover expertise that we don't know about its naive imo. The Brexit deal the government will serve to us will not come about from them dictating terms. It is more of a case of what they manage to cobble together that has a whiff or respectability. In a sense @nayimfromthehalfwayline is correct, whats the point in impact assessments when we're not going to be able to control negotiations? It's not like we'll be in the driving seat with a trade deal with the EU. Same applies to trade deals we'll try and do with the US and China. Even Russia, Brazil etc won't be easy to set up trade deals with, because we're not a massive market and their populations dwarf ours.

As for whether it matters if we lose out financially...its not just a few quid less in your pocket - yes already our money doesn't buy as much - but its also a downgrading of the UK. We've already dropped from 5th largest economy to 6th since the Brexit vote. When we go abroad we're not as rich as we were, we can't afford as much. Brexit is also hitting the UK Exchequer. Just as the world is emerging from the effects of the credit crunch, and we would have been able to spend more again on the NHS, schools etc. we're now facing another freeze on spending. That has a very real impact on the level of health care, the level of spending on our kids education etc. Real impacts. The UK also becomes more peripheral, we don't have a seat at the top table. Diplomatically the UK becomes less important.

On the flip side, Brexit offers what? @nayimfromthehalfwayline a year and 2 months away it is late in the day to say it's "too early" for us to outline what benefits Brexit will bring. If Brexit is going to deliver something, why can't it be talked about? Brexit is the Emperors New Clothes is it not? It's just waiting for someone to shout out: it will do nothing for us, apart from make us poorer, and more peripheral in a global world.

Happy to listen to more expansive positive Brexit scenarios.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Fair point :D

There is the ability to get involved though, for those who feel strongly enough.



As to impact assessments, at this point I just dont care. I cant really say why. Honestly Im a little confused as to why people are so up in arms about it.

Its all a complete unknown. Had the department put every resource into it, even then would they actually be accurate? I doubt it, just more wordy and professional looking.

Thats the thing that gets me, its so obviously a fudge, they obviously dont give a brick about the assessments at this stage - so why does everybody else?

Think about it, think about what these documents are supposed to achieve - and just how likely they are to be of a quality to actually serve that purpose at this stage?

Now - where I agree entirely - is in them promoting what they have been doing. Just as the government should be really setting potential visions for Brexit and trying to sell it (for want of a better term) to the nation.

And I can see why its easy for people to think its because they dont know what they want, such has the lack of quality communication.

Im holding fire on that point for now, just until we see where negotiations go next. Up to now its been frantic just trying to get to a point where we can talk.

I figure this next stage will clarify just how much of a vision we have.
Click to expand...

Why are people up in arms about the lack of impact assessment?

Because producing comprehensive impact assessments is the basis of the beginings of planning of any major change. Are they 100% accurate all the time? Of course they aren't, but they are very useful as a tool to put plans in place, to you know "assess the impact". That's why companies do them.

As for your assertion that these documents are ok if he is using it to pander to MPS.... how very disrespectful to our parliamentary democracy!

Also if they are so busy doing 'important things' to tell us the benifits of Brexit.... then why take the time to tell us about the blue passports.

I will say it again.... Brexiteers they are taking the tinkle out of you!

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2017...ctually-copied-and-pasted-from-wikipedia/amp/
 
Last edited:
And if, at this time, those documents have virtually no chance of being accurate - why emphasize their importance so much at this time?

Why is it such a big deal NOW?

I know what an impact assessment is for - which is why I dont understand why people are so OTT when at this time an impact assessment is going to be about as useful as a chocolate tea pot.

Negotiations on future arrangements start in the new year (remember, nothing has been done with this to date), once they are underway do you not think we are going to be in a much better position to start putting these things together? When we know what options are available, what the EU's stance is, what we think we can secure?

If parliament is demanding something at a time it is pointless, then yes, fudge them. It has been proven it is largely full of macarons who lack all perspective anyway, I honestly couldnt care less if that is what is going on. Were this nearer the end of the process, when it matters and has weight? Whole different conversation. Now? Seriously not bothered. Parliament wants to waste their time so the fob them off, big deal.



I will say again - I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING. They COULD be doing more valuable work. In which case I am ok. They COULD NOT be doing more valuable work, in which case Id be asking what the fudge they are doing and indeed will be angry.

Right now? I dont have the information to actually make a judgement - and I recognise that.
 
SpurMeUp said:
I don't think there is a secrete government vision of Brexit, just a tightrope walk with them trying to get any kind of brexit agreement through that might work. Its uncharted territory, the gov are learning as they go, and to presume there is some grand plan and undercover expertise that we don't know about its naive imo. The Brexit deal the government will serve to us will not come about from them dictating terms. It is more of a case of what they manage to cobble together that has a whiff or respectability. In a sense @nayimfromthehalfwayline is correct, whats the point in impact assessments when we're not going to be able to control negotiations? It's not like we'll be in the driving seat with a trade deal with the EU. Same applies to trade deals we'll try and do with the US and China. Even Russia, Brazil etc won't be easy to set up trade deals with, because we're not a massive market and their populations dwarf ours.

As for whether it matters if we lose out financially...its not just a few quid less in your pocket - yes already our money doesn't buy as much - but its also a downgrading of the UK. We've already dropped from 5th largest economy to 6th since the Brexit vote. When we go abroad we're not as rich as we were, we can't afford as much. Brexit is also hitting the UK Exchequer. Just as the world is emerging from the effects of the credit crunch, and we would have been able to spend more again on the NHS, schools etc. we're now facing another freeze on spending. That has a very real impact on the level of health care, the level of spending on our kids education etc. Real impacts. The UK also becomes more peripheral, we don't have a seat at the top table. Diplomatically the UK becomes less important.

On the flip side, Brexit offers what? @nayimfromthehalfwayline a year and 2 months away it is late in the day to say it's "too early" for us to outline what benefits Brexit will bring. If Brexit is going to deliver something, why can't it be talked about? Brexit is the Emperors New Clothes is it not? It's just waiting for someone to shout out: it will do nothing for us, apart from make us poorer, and more peripheral in a global world.

Happy to listen to more expansive positive Brexit scenarios.
Click to expand...

Lets be quite honest. You havent got a clue. For all the absolutes you speak, you dont actually know anything.

Neither to I.

To now we have agreed a divorce bill. Nothing more. We as plebs do not really know what the government have up their sleeve, what they think we should go for, what they think we will achieve or even where they will draw their own "red lines".

So how is it, you can speak with such authority?

And this is the point. I read this thread, and honestly I dont even see a pro/anti Brexit conversation as I see Labour and Conservative supporters trying to score points off of each other. People divided on partisan lines.

So much of this conversation is entirely premature because we have literally no facts.

As facts are revealed then yes, absolutely, have a position on them - even a strong or passionate one - Id expect as much.

Right now? We have no idea what we will lose in the process, or indeed what we will gain. It is not a foregone conclusion we will come out worse off, or if we do - how much so. And whether or not the cost was indeed worth the loss.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
And if, at this time, those documents have virtually no chance of being accurate - why emphasize their importance so much at this time?

Why is it such a big deal NOW?

I know what an impact assessment is for - which is why I dont understand why people are so OTT when at this time an impact assessment is going to be about as useful as a chocolate tea pot.

Negotiations on future arrangements start in the new year (remember, nothing has been done with this to date), once they are underway do you not think we are going to be in a much better position to start putting these things together? When we know what options are available, what the EU's stance is, what we think we can secure?

If parliament is demanding something at a time it is pointless, then yes, fudge them. It has been proven it is largely full of macarons who lack all perspective anyway, I honestly couldnt care less if that is what is going on. Were this nearer the end of the process, when it matters and has weight? Whole different conversation. Now? Seriously not bothered. Parliament wants to waste their time so the fob them off, big deal.



I will say again - I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING. They COULD be doing more valuable work. In which case I am ok. They COULD NOT be doing more valuable work, in which case Id be asking what the fudge they are doing and indeed will be angry.

Right now? I dont have the information to actually make a judgement - and I recognise that.
Click to expand...

Two words: logic and foresight. Applying them might not be I00% accurate, but there is still a great deal you can discern about the future if you choose to look. The alternative, is to blindly follow in the dark which is what makes @dza so frustrated with the seeming lack of impact assessment. Of course the real reason for a lack of public impact assessments is that logic and foresight paints a pretty gloomy picture. Hence not publishing a true assessment - imo.

So what do we know? What facts have we got to build analysis upon so far?

1. The economy now - how the world has reacted to the vote. Investment is down, our currency is down and ratings agencies have reduced the uks credit rating. The uk is the slowest growing large economy in the world.
All fact.

2. The EU will not give free trade without free movement. Do you agree? Maybe we could pay through the nose to circumvent this but I doubt it. Thus we should be able to agree that our trading position with our neighbours will be less good it is now.

3. Maybe trade will grow with the rest of the world, and this will stimulate investment, jobs etc what’s not clear is how and why. Maybe low taxation, limited rights for workers, no pollution red tape might attract investment. But there are a number of issues with this. If we undermine EU standards we won’t get a FTA with them. To say attract car production we need to be able to sell into the EU.

Pre-vote most of this was clear. Does hiding from truth and logic and blindly following shows great loyalty, or great nativity? History has shown how blind faith can be dangerous.

Now of course we’re not talking about implications that lead to genocide or anything on that level. The impacts regard trade, wealth, the UKs place in the world, the ability for the UK to invest in its own peoples care, their education and services. Albeit day to day things it affects all of us and our off spring. So to pretend we can’t model likely outcomes is putting tribal loyalty above rationale imo.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
And if, at this time, those documents have virtually no chance of being accurate - why emphasize their importance so much at this time?

Why is it such a big deal NOW?

I know what an impact assessment is for - which is why I dont understand why people are so OTT when at this time an impact assessment is going to be about as useful as a chocolate tea pot.

Negotiations on future arrangements start in the new year (remember, nothing has been done with this to date), once they are underway do you not think we are going to be in a much better position to start putting these things together? When we know what options are available, what the EU's stance is, what we think we can secure?

If parliament is demanding something at a time it is pointless, then yes, fudge them. It has been proven it is largely full of macarons who lack all perspective anyway, I honestly couldnt care less if that is what is going on. Were this nearer the end of the process, when it matters and has weight? Whole different conversation. Now? Seriously not bothered. Parliament wants to waste their time so the fob them off, big deal.



I will say again - I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING. They COULD be doing more valuable work. In which case I am ok. They COULD NOT be doing more valuable work, in which case Id be asking what the fudge they are doing and indeed will be angry.

Right now? I dont have the information to actually make a judgement - and I recognise that.
Click to expand...

Two words: logic and foresight. Applying them might not be I00% accurate, but there is still a great deal you can discern about the future if you choose to look. The alternative, is to blindly follow in the dark which is what makes @DTA so frustrated with the seeming lack of impact assessment. Of course the real reason for a lack of public impact assessments is that logic and foresight paints a pretty gloomy picture. Hence not publishing a true assessment - imo.

So what do we know? What facts have we got to build analysis upon so far?

1. The economy now - how the world has reacted to the vote. Investment is down, our currency is down and ratings agencies have reduced the uks credit rating. The uk is the slowest growing large economy in the world.
All fact.

2. The EU will not give free trade without free movement. Do you agree? Maybe we could pay through the nose to circumvent this but I doubt it. Thus we should be able to agree that our trading position with our neighbours will be less good than it is now.

3. Maybe trade will grow with the rest of the world, and this will stimulate investment, jobs etc what’s not clear is how and why. Maybe low taxation, limited rights for workers, no pollution red tape might attract investment. But there are a number of issues with this. If we undermine EU standards we won’t get a FTA with them. To say attract car production we need to be able to sell into the EU.

Pre-vote most of this was clear. Does hiding from truth and logic and blindly following show great loyalty, or great nativity? History has shown how blind faith can be dangerous.

Now of course we’re not talking about implications that lead to genocide or anything on that level. The impacts regard trade, wealth, the UKs place in the world, the ability for the UK to invest in its own peoples care, their education and services. Day to day things that affect all of us and our off spring. So to pretend we can’t model likely outcomes is putting tribal loyalty above rationale imo.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
Two words: logic and foresight. Applying them might not be I00% accurate, but there is still a great deal you can discern about the future if you choose to look. The alternative, is to blindly follow in the dark which is what makes @dza so frustrated with the seeming lack of impact assessment. Of course the real reason for a lack of public impact assessments is that logic and foresight paints a pretty gloomy picture. Hence not publishing a true assessment - imo.

So what do we know? What facts have we got to build analysis upon so far?

1. The economy now - how the world has reacted to the vote. Investment is down, our currency is down and ratings agencies have reduced the uks credit rating. The uk is the slowest growing large economy in the world.
All fact.

2. The EU will not give free trade without free movement. Do you agree? Maybe we could pay through the nose to circumvent this but I doubt it. Thus we should be able to agree that our trading position with our neighbours will be less good it is now.

3. Maybe trade will grow with the rest of the world, and this will stimulate investment, jobs etc what’s not clear is how and why. Maybe low taxation, limited rights for workers, no pollution red tape might attract investment. But there are a number of issues with this. If we undermine EU standards we won’t get a FTA with them. To say attract car production we need to be able to sell into the EU.

Pre-vote most of this was clear. Does hiding from truth and logic and blindly following shows great loyalty, or great nativity? History has shown how blind faith can be dangerous.

Now of course we’re not talking about implications that lead to genocide or anything on that level. The impacts regard trade, wealth, the UKs place in the world, the ability for the UK to invest in its own peoples care, their education and services. Albeit day to day things it affects all of us and our off spring. So to pretend we can’t model likely outcomes is putting tribal loyalty above rationale imo.
Click to expand...

Your bias is showing. Thats the problem with "logic and foresight". It is still often informed by ones own preference.

And I am not blindly following anything, I am simply not making an uniformed opinion.

What do we know?

1) The economy is down. As stated countless times - this is proof only of the uncertainty we have NOW. Once a clear picture comes into view the economy will react accordingly. This is not a foreshadowing state. It is a direct response to current uncertainty and no more.

2) CETA. A COMPREHENSIVE free trading agreement where the only freedom of movement involved is streamlining of visa for certain workers. Yes, I know, this isnt the same level of access as full EU membership - but it is not a million miles away either. So, the FACT, is that the EU is in fact willing to enter trade agreements - without fees - and without free movement.

3) This is not fact, rather observation. I would observe that Africa is a rich an untapped opportunity, hamstrung by current EU import fees. I agree, changes in regulation etc could attract business/help the economy. I also suggest - what if this was post Brexit, post new EU agreement? What say do they have then in how we choose to conduct ourselves?

So, from my "logic and foresight", your post amounts to very little of substance. And, genuinely, I am not looking to offend there. I am trying to illustrate just how much people assume as fact when it isnt, its opinion or perspective.

Just as I tried to illustrate yesterday, even at the highest, most conceptual level - given the variables - how are we actually supposed to reliably model anything? Genuinely, at this point, I think its an impossible task. If we tried to produce the kind of impact assessments people demand we would have hundreds documents all at thousands of pages each all amounting to "basically anything can happen at this point". So what does that achieve?

Thats not blind faith or following. Frankly I resent the notion you put forward. Thats simply looking at the situation.

OK, we leave the EU, then what? We dont know.
OK, "what if" we leave on Norway terms. But, of course, they wont be exactly the same, but work with that. OK, lets start having a look at the terms...
OK, BUT - what if we also get a nice little bonus around agriculture? Ok, Ill add that
Now - WHAT if we also start trading with Africa on a secondary trade channel? Ok, theres little precedent so thats tricky...
Now - What if we chose to de regulate industry X? Sure, why not add that to the mix.

And there is the beginnings of the endless complication in just one scenario. Now do hard brexit. Now do a CETA-like version. Do one where we pay for membership. One where we dont. One where we get a good fishing quota deal. One where we dont. WTO terms..

And, when this mamouth amount of guesswork is complete, and presented as the collected works of Shakespeare - would you be any the wiser?

Im pretty sure the answer is "not in the slightest".

How about we take on that exercise when we begin to understand what is and isnt possible? You think maybe then it might hold some more value?
 
Yes it’s complex. But does that mean we don’t look!?

Furthermore, you don’t have model all the offshoot complexities. Most of our trade is with our neighbours - which is true to all countries.

How else do you make a judgment about anything? You don’t buy a house without looking at it do you?

As for CETA (you modelling something incidentally) does it include services?

The devaluing of the UK and massive reductions in investment are of course based on likely Brexit outcomes. Investors and businessman making decisions based on their own foresight into the prospects for the uk. Sure there maybe a wait and see element too, but things like the currency devaluation is directly linked to projected prospects for the UK.

Wasn’t it said that Brexit was the success of simple lies over complex truth? It’s perpetuation is based on not looking.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
Yes it’s complex. But does that mean we don’t look!?

Furthermore, you don’t have model all the offshoot complexities. Most of our trade is with our neighbours - which is true to all countries.

How else do you make a judgment about anything? You don’t buy a house without looking at it do you?

As for CETA (you modelling something incidentally) does it include services?

The devaluing of the UK and massive reductions in investment are of course based on likely Brexit outcomes. Investors and businessman making decisions based on their own foresight into the prospects for the uk. Sure there maybe a wait and see element too, but things like the currency devaluation is directly linked to projected prospects for the UK.

Wasn’t it said that Brexit was the success of simple lies over complex truth? It’s perpetuation is based on not looking.
Click to expand...

As usual, haste in posting a rebuttal leads to the missing of the intention or point.

Of course you have to model the offshoot/other factors. What if, say, part of our strategy was to trade heavily with India to supplement any potential loss of EU trade? You wouldnt just model the EU part of that equation would you? And if you did, what good would your model be?

And that key point, is after you have completely over looked what I have repeatedly said. Which was, why are models so important AT THIS TIME...

Ive been making it italic and everything, to point out that timing is key. Just as Ive stated my point of view is based entirely on that factor. RIGHT NOW I really dont see the big deal. Later on? Maybe anger will be entirely justified.

And that leads to another fairly pertinent point - why should we be making judgements NOW? When we have only got to stage 1 in the process at which point we have agreed to settle our debts, no more. We havent even begun to look forward.

All the anger and passion and indignation, and yet all the people so effected are yet to realise now isnt the time!

My pointing to CETA is not me modelling anything, incidentally. Repeatedly I have used it to illustrate two things, and two things alone
1) The EU will set up a free trade deal with countries not part of the EU
2) The EU will set up a free trade deal that DOES NOT include free movement of people.

These are facts. Something you are keen on. And yet, facts that directly counter opinions you repeatedly state as fact.

My OPINION is that using CETA as both a precedent, and potential starting point for a SIMILAR (read:not the same) deal is a good idea.

Lets try and flip your belief on the economy on its head, because an extremely basic idea seems to allude you.

Do YOU think that the economy is now set, and that post Brexit it will be the same? Simple yes or no.

If Yes, fine - we have to agree to disagree. If no - then what exactly is your point? Because "no" is my point. "No" dictates the economy will change because our future status will be understood. Which also dictates the economy today is nothing but a reaction to the current uncertainty, something Brexit will rectify for better or worse.

And again, I resent the notion I am somehow not looking. Somehow being lead blindly. I am very simply being dispassionate about the situation and looking at it for what I think it is. At no point have I stated I am blindly behind Brexit, no matter what. At no point have I said I think it will all be great. Nor have I denied potential down sides.

AllI have done is refuted rather flimsy points made against, while essentially keeping my powder dry on responding in a big way until I know what actually is going to happen.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
And if, at this time, those documents have virtually no chance of being accurate - why emphasize their importance so much at this time?

Why is it such a big deal NOW?

I know what an impact assessment is for - which is why I dont understand why people are so OTT when at this time an impact assessment is going to be about as useful as a chocolate tea pot.

Negotiations on future arrangements start in the new year (remember, nothing has been done with this to date), once they are underway do you not think we are going to be in a much better position to start putting these things together? When we know what options are available, what the EU's stance is, what we think we can secure?

If parliament is demanding something at a time it is pointless, then yes, fudge them. It has been proven it is largely full of macarons who lack all perspective anyway, I honestly couldnt care less if that is what is going on. Were this nearer the end of the process, when it matters and has weight? Whole different conversation. Now? Seriously not bothered. Parliament wants to waste their time so the fob them off, big deal.



I will say again - I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING. They COULD be doing more valuable work. In which case I am ok. They COULD NOT be doing more valuable work, in which case Id be asking what the fudge they are doing and indeed will be angry.

Right now? I dont have the information to actually make a judgement - and I recognise that.
Click to expand...

What you suggest in terms of multiple impact assements on the various scenarios is exactly what should be done.... 100s of impact assessments with thouands of pages is is the bare minimum of due diligence I would expect from any serious government on a decision that is this monumental.

Apple produced over million pages on their latest court case.... the court want 1.2 million more. They are being fined 25k a day for not providing the additional 1.2million pages

The Government of the UNITED KINGDOM have copied brick from Wikipedia.... (that'
Not a joke they actually done that)

Like I said before they are taking the tinkle out if you Brexiteers. And anyone who believes in Brexit being a succss and the right thing to do, should be much more outraged than i, because to put it in the most simple of terms.... they are not doing it properly.
 
Seriously - how good, how detailed, or how accurate do you suppose these assessments can be when at this time.

You will see in consequent posts, I simply dont think it is possible to give you what you want at this stage in things. There is virtually an infinite number of variables to try and account for, how could it possibly be accurate?

Which is the only reason I dont see what the big deal is, at this time.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Seriously - how good, how detailed, or how accurate do you suppose these assessments can be when at this time.

You will see in consequent posts, I simply dont think it is possible to give you what you want at this stage in things. There is virtually an infinite number of variables to try and account for, how could it possibly be accurate?

Which is the only reason I dont see what the big deal is, at this time.
Click to expand...

Here is where you are wrong. There is not an infinite number of variables. The EU have outlined clearly where the negotiations can possibly lead. Like they did for the first round.... which after months of bluster we basically agreed to everything they wanted.

It will be the same in the second round.... more so in fact because we have already agreed to a the financial settlement that they wanted... we have very few cards left to play.

So cross sector analysis of the various options available to us would be the minimum that i would expect.

Let me ask you a question.... are you happy with them copying off Wikipedia (again not a joke they actually done this)
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Seriously - how good, how detailed, or how accurate do you suppose these assessments can be when at this time.

You will see in consequent posts, I simply dont think it is possible to give you what you want at this stage in things. There is virtually an infinite number of variables to try and account for, how could it possibly be accurate?

Which is the only reason I dont see what the big deal is, at this time.
Click to expand...

Also "at this stage" "At this time" "Now" is exactly when impact assements should be used because they should inform our negociating stance
 
DTA said:
Here is where you are wrong. There is not an infinite number of variables. The EU have outlined clearly where the negotiations can possibly lead. Like they did for the first round.... which after months of bluster we basically agreed to everything they wanted.

It will be the same in the second round.... more so in fact because we have already agreed to a the financial settlement that they wanted... we have very few cards left to play.

So cross sector analysis of the various options available to us would be the minimum that i would expect.

Let me ask you a question.... are you happy with them copying off Wikipedia (again not a joke they actually done this)
Click to expand...

Can you please explain to me these restricted options from which we are bound.
 
I wont lie, when it was released I didnt follow that graphic well at all - my understanding was that it appears to show we would be happy with a CETA style deal, before a hard brexit.

This article confirms my understanding as correct.

Then it quotes some online response, including "a blogger".

That article doesnt actually say much else. So Im not sure what you think it proves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back