The Political Thread

[IndigoPrime]

Being out of the EU does not mean economic chaos. It means trading under well established global rules already in place, such as those of the WTO - many of which offer better deals and lower tariff

That's just not the case. Outside of the EU, we lose our direct and deep access to the market right on our doorstep, which is by far the most important one. Complexity will go up, tariffs to our biggest market will for some goods skyrocket, and non-tariff barriers are a huge concern too. Add to that losing a ton of businesses here specifically because we are in the EU and you absolutely will get economic chaos. (And that's before you consider the customs mess for physical goods. The UK's days of being a 'just in time' economy will evaporate, which means we will lose a big chunk of what's left of manufacturing.)

Don't fall for the scaremongering - it's just pro-EU factions trying to frighten us, and other member states, in order to protect their gravy train.

No. It's people saying: actually, you have a bloody good deal right now, including FTAs via the EU to markets the UK's now going to have to fight for alone, so why hurl that out of the window in the hope of getting better deals with much smaller and more distant markets (or tying yourself to US requirements in things like agriculture and healthcare)?

This isn't scaremongering. We're going to be in serious shit from an economic standpoint, and precisely no-one on the leave side is providing anything beyond "it'll all be fine – don't worry!" (As for WTO, that'll be fun when the likes of Argentina start making life difficult for the UK by making demands.)

[IndigoPrime]

Which begs the question, why would they? We hold none of the cards, we import more than we export, why should any world power wish to trade with us on OUR terms?!

The UK has cards and power today. We are a major power in terms of finance, for example. But we'll chuck a big chunk of that out of the window the second we leave the EU. (Euro clearing, for example, goes away.) We're big in science, but largely because we can be a leading power within the EU, and utilise its people and resources. In services, we have some great things going, but again we may lose a lot of that when the EU is suddenly a competitor rather than a partner.

And, yeah, from a manufacturing standpoint, we're screwed. Still, I'm sure everyone will be very excited about paying far more for their groceries, fuel, smartphones, clothes, and cars, so we can fashion a half-arsed FTA with a country halfway around the world that'll increase our trade by 0.3%, and that we probably already had an FTA with via the EU anyway.

[Tjm86]

Lets be honest, the only reason we are a financial power is because of our access to Euro clearing and our laundering of dirty money. 

[IndigoPrime]

Well, there's lots of bad shit in finance. But we're also a world financial power because Sterling has until now been a reserve currency. It'll be a bloody miracle if that's still the case post-Brexit – at least for a very long while.

[The Legendary Shark]

...that we probably already had an FTA with via the EU anyway.

A Free Trade Agreement doesn't require a protectionist body like the EU to exist! The EU is NOT a free trade organisation - it's a protectionist body. Free Trade, by definition, is trade free of governmental interference.

Leaving the EU does not mean all trade with European countries must cease or become prohibitively expensive. What would be the point of that for either side beyond a nosectomy for spite exercise? Yes, tariffs imposed by the EU might increase but only in line with WTO regulations. Conversely, the UK will be in a position to trade with lower or no tariffs, making doing business in the UK potentially cheaper and more attractive for all our trading partners. There will be down sides, of course, but it won't be nothing but down sides as everyone seems to fear.

It always seems to hinge on "Our Terms".

Which begs the question, why would they? We hold none of the cards, we import more than we export, why should any world power wish to trade with us on OUR terms?!

What does trade on "our terms" mean anyway? Trade on "our terms" means, to me, deals dictated by and beneficial only to us. That's not what trade's about, trade is about mutually beneficial deals. The EU might do deals based on "my way or the highway" which benefit one side more than the other and mean goods being cheaper than they should be - but are such deals morally right? Trading alone, the UK will be in a better position to yes pay a little more for certain goods - like we do for "Fair Trade" goods.

The biggest problem from Brexit will be punishment tariffs and barriers imposed by the EU.

[IndigoPrime]

Free Trade, by definition, is trade free of governmental interference.

Yes, but back in the real world, you will not find any free trade area free of governmental interference and requirements.

Leaving the EU does not mean all trade with European countries must cease or become prohibitively expensive.

It does not mean it will cease. It does mean that if we fall back to WTO rules, we will end up with massive tariffs on exports. Without being in the customs union, we have rules of origin checks on everything. The just in time economy is gone. Anything that requires EU membership is gone. This is not a small thing.

Conversely, the UK will be in a position to trade with lower or no tariffs, making doing business in the UK potentially cheaper and more attractive for all our trading partners.

And how will that benefit us, exactly? And, as noted, non-tariff barriers are also a major issue – bigger, in fact, than tariffs in many cases.

There will be down sides, of course, but it won't be nothing but down sides as everyone seems to fear.

I don't see any upsides. Possibly being able to get some low-tariff deals with countries halfway around the world, rather than frictionless trade across everything from manufacturing to digital with the half-billion-population bloc on our doorstep? No contest whatsoever.

That's not what trade's about, trade is about mutually beneficial deals.

The reality of trade, though, means minnows get eaten. Mutual benefit is all well and good, but when the UK goes up against any major economy, it's going to recognise that it's no longer a major world power, and will be treated accordingly.

Trading alone, the UK will be in a better position to yes pay a little more for certain goods - like we do for "Fair Trade" goods.

It won't be a little more. Current estimates on the basis of Sterling's value and other economic issues are that the average household will effectively be paying about a grand a year more on average, forever, just to maintain what we have now. And that's before our industries run into a wall of reality, and jobs start to evaporate.

The biggest problem from Brexit will be punishment tariffs and barriers imposed by the EU.

"Punishment tariffs" makes you sound like someone like Daniel Hannan. The EU has import tariffs. They're not punishment. They're because the UK has made a decision to become a third country and on top of that has embarked on a course to separate itself from European institutions almost entirely. Perhaps this will change. But if not, none of this is the fault of the EU per se – it's down to the position the British government is taking, which could have been a much smarter compromise. Hell, even things like open skies haven't been considered yet, according to David Davis, but, hey, no-one needs to fly any more, do they? After all, we'll have that £100 million yacht instead. I'm sure all the norms will be welcome on that, right?

EDIT: On that last point, it's notable that the EU assumed the UK would go for a Norway or Norway-plus deal. More to the point, it would have accepted that, according to reports. It was ready to give the UK probably the best non-member deal around, but instead May trampled all over every last vestige of goodwill. Still, we all voted for that, so there you go. I mean, I'm sure we did. My vote form only had a single checkbox, but there must have been something on there about, as May says, changing forever the way the UK works.

[Tjm86]

. Still, we all voted for that, so there you go. I mean, I'm sure we did. My vote form only had a single checkbox, but there must have been something on there about, as May says, changing forever the way the UK works.

I think you nailed it on the head there.  We actually have no idea what we voted for and unfortunately the crowd now running the show are having orgasms over being able to define it to be whatever the hell they want and screw the rest of us.  This is Thatcherism on steroids, amphetamines, ecstasy, crack slab and slide.  I think the best vision for the future now is probably a combination of all of the worst dystopian nightmares we have seen over the years rolled into one and amped up to the nth degree.  I wonder if we can start a petition to try Cameron for treason against the British people?

[IndigoPrime]

It still sickens me that May wrote in that white paper: "And let us do it not for ourselves, but for those who follow. For the country's children and grandchildren too."

You're doing it only for yourselves, given that the margin in favour of Brexit among the under 40s was high, and it was colossal with those in their 20s and younger. They don't want this.

Also, it's notable why Brexiters want this change to be huge and swift, and to keep banging on about this being forever: they know that demographics alone would make it a 50/50 vote within just a few years, and shortly after that the result would be reversed. If we were still quite tied to the EU, we could potentially step back in. But if the bridges are all burnt, that process will be a lot harder.

Oddly, I'm now more optimistic in the long term about that. The EU itself continues to make clear it doesn't want the UK to leave, that it can stop the process (although perhaps not unilaterally), and could rejoin later. I suspect we will (or perhaps start with baby steps, like rejoining the EEA), but not for at least a decade.

[Tjm86]

Plus there is no way they will let us back in with the same level of influence as now, albeit dwindling.  Let's face it, British politicians have behaved like petulant school children at the EU table, particularly when the Tories have been in power.  I would suggest that if the campaign were to be rerun today with everything that has come out since last year then the vote may well go the other way already.

[IndigoPrime]

I think we'd get the same level of influence, in the sense that votes are broadly speaking driven by population size. But trust would certainly take a long time to rebuild, and we would be very unlikely to get the many opt-outs we currently enjoy (from not really having any obligation to use the Euro or join Schengen, to the large rebate).

Really, we've existed in a kind of soft Brexit for years, but people weren't aware of how good we had it. (Nor did many apparently have the slightest idea about projects funded by EU money, and the nature in which it redistributes funds – something Conservatives aren't too fussed about doing.) Almost every time the UK demanded something (including the single market), we got it. And then we threw our toys out of the pram over a rounding error on child benefit, and immigrants having the audacity to move to a prosperous country where people could get away with paying them fuck all for work natives didn't want to do anyway.

[The Legendary Shark]

Trump Twitter Trolled From The Edge of Space

[TordelBack]

"MOAB 's wuh-Warzone One".  And these 100 days feel like a century.

Next Prog: "For Ratwar one needs a Rat King".

[Steve Green]

I think we'd get the same level of influence, in the sense that votes are broadly speaking driven by population size. But trust would certainly take a long time to rebuild, and we would be very unlikely to get the many opt-outs we currently enjoy (from not really having any obligation to use the Euro or join Schengen, to the large rebate).

Really, we've existed in a kind of soft Brexit for years, but people weren't aware of how good we had it. (Nor did many apparently have the slightest idea about projects funded by EU money, and the nature in which it redistributes funds – something Conservatives aren't too fussed about doing.) Almost every time the UK demanded something (including the single market), we got it. And then we threw our toys out of the pram over a rounding error on child benefit, and immigrants having the audacity to move to a prosperous country where people could get away with paying them fuck all for work natives didn't want to do anyway.

I can't imagine a UK re-joining referendum winning if adopting the Euro was part of the deal.

[TordelBack]

Apparently 6% of divorced couples remarry each other, so you never know.

[IndigoPrime]

I can't imagine a UK re-joining referendum winning if adopting the Euro was part of the deal.

Likewise, unless there's wiggle room in a similar manner to Sweden.

Still, lots of fun happening with the Exiting the EU Dept Twitter account, which is akin to a parody now. One graph speaks of the UK's "long and successful history as a trading nation", which people replying helpfully noted were twice bumped significantly around 1973 and 1992. GOSH, I WONDER WHAT HAPPENED THERE? It then bafflingly threw up this bar chart, managing to mis-spell Liechtenstein and simultaneously make out it's a major opportunity for trade (its population is under 40,000, and even from a dodgy GDP standpoint, someone pointed out it's a fifth of a Sainsbury's), while also ignoring that of the remainder, six have trade deals with the EU, two have EU association agreements, and five ARE ACTUALLY IN THE EU. Oh, and one of the countries doesn't actually exist any more.

This would be hilarious if this wasn't out country's future at stake. (Economists are now predicting anything up to a 25 per cent drop in trade post-Brexit. Sick man of Europe will be making a comeback, to say the least.)