You can do all of that without EU membership, if y'all want to, no need to be part of the EU to make such deals. You can ditch the negatives and keep the positives by leaving, by staying you have to keep the negatives, clearly a worse deal.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:56 amHow about frictionless trade with the world's largest free trade zone?StCapps wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:14 amThere are no benefits of membership that can't be had without membership. You can have your own currency without membership, you don't need to veto policies that don't effect you without membership, you don't have to be part of Schengen without membership.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 6:27 am
Thereby proving that Parliament is supreme and sovereignty was never in doubt.
To throw away the benefits of membership to return to sovereignty we never lost is the worst argument that the leavers came up with.
Pretending that leaving the EU would result in "benefits being taken away" is the worst argument the remoaners came up with. It's a false dichotomy because you can negotiate a deal to keep all the benefits without membership, best of both worlds. By pretending it was all or nothing, that was the only way to make staying in the EU look good by comparison, but the only people the remoaners were fooling were themselves.
How about free movement, rights of residence and the ability to work in that zone?
How about reciprocal healthcare arrangements which mean that if I fall ill in any of the other member states I will receive full care free of charge to me?
Somehow it is a great deal to lose the benefits that come with the EU in order to ''take back control'' which we never lost in the first place?
Brexit
-
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Re: Brexit
*yip*
-
- Posts: 5297
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:43 am
- Location: suiþiuþu
Re: Brexit
Incredible how easy it is to get people to lust after being ruled by an unelected byzantine foreign bureaucracy.
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur? - Axel Oxenstierna
Nie lügen die Menschen so viel wie nach einer Jagd, während eines Krieges oder vor Wahlen. - Otto von Bismarck
-
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Re: Brexit
Just pretend all other alternatives will result in the sky falling, and pretend that no clearly better alternatives exist, that's the key to selling such a shitty plan.
*yip*
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Brexit
No, you can't. If you could there would be no EU in the first place and America and China wouldn't resent Europe so much.StCapps wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:58 amYou can do all of that without EU membership.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:56 amHow about frictionless trade with the world's largest free trade zone?StCapps wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:14 amThere are no benefits of membership that can't be had without membership. You can have your own currency without membership, you don't need to veto policies that don't effect you without membership, you don't have to be part of Schengen without membership.
Pretending that leaving the EU would result in "benefits being taken away" is the worst argument the remoaners came up with. It's a false dichotomy because you can negotiate a deal to keep all the benefits without membership, best of both worlds. By pretending it was all or nothing, that was the only way to make staying in the EU look good by comparison, but the only people the remoaners were fooling were themselves.
How about free movement, rights of residence and the ability to work in that zone?
How about reciprocal healthcare arrangements which mean that if I fall ill in any of the other member states I will receive full care free of charge to me?
Somehow it is a great deal to lose the benefits that come with the EU in order to ''take back control'' which we never lost in the first place?
Without membership of such a large trade block the UK's bargaining position is much weaker and now it has to negotiate new trade deals with China and the US. Not to mention the new trade deals it has to agree with the EU.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Re: Brexit
It's negotiation position is stronger, because they don't have include bullshit EU baggage in those trade deals with other nations, which cost them many concessions they would otherwise get if they weren't part of the EU. If free trade between Britain and the EU is clearly beneficial for both parties, then the EU or UK refusing to give such a deal to the other party would be shooting themselves in the foot for no good reason, just because of butthurt over Brexit. The EU and UK can negotiate a bilateral deal that does everything the EU does without the EU, bilaterally instead of multilaterally, the sky is not falling SIFCLF.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:09 amNo, you can't. If you could there would be no EU in the first place and America and China wouldn't resent Europe so much.StCapps wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:58 amYou can do all of that without EU membership.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:56 am
How about frictionless trade with the world's largest free trade zone?
How about free movement, rights of residence and the ability to work in that zone?
How about reciprocal healthcare arrangements which mean that if I fall ill in any of the other member states I will receive full care free of charge to me?
Somehow it is a great deal to lose the benefits that come with the EU in order to ''take back control'' which we never lost in the first place?
Without membership of such a large trade block the UK's bargaining position is much weaker and now it has to negotiate new trade deals with China and the US. Not to mention the new trade deals it has to agree with the EU.
Last edited by StCapps on Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:20 am, edited 2 times in total.
*yip*
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Brexit
Never heard of MEPs?
Elected representatives in the EU Parliament.
Unelected rulers is a busted meme.
The unelected part of the EU system is the Commission which has no power to create rules. All it can do is suggest policy which must pass through the elected EU parliament and then pass through the UK elected parliament before it becomes law.
It is rule by consent, the same as every other democratic system on the planet.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Re: Brexit
If the EU wants to be knee-jerk protectionist against everyone not in the EU, that's reason enough to leave, because that baggage is holding the UK back in it's trade negotiations with everyone not in the EU.
*yip*
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Brexit
Examples please, what bullshit baggage are you talking about? Shit like food standards which are high enough that you don't have to bleach your chickens to make them safe to eat?StCapps wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:10 amIt's negotiation position is stronger, because they don't have include bullshit EU baggage in those trade deals with other nations, which cost them many concessions they would otherwise get if they weren't part of the EU. If free trade between Britain and the EU is clearly beneficial for both parties, then the EU or UK refusing to give such a deal to the other party would be shooting themselves in the foot for no good reason, just because of butthurt over Brexit. The EU and UK can negotiate a bilateral deal that does everything the EU does without the EU, bilaterally instead of multilaterally, the sky is not falling SIFCLF.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:09 amNo, you can't. If you could there would be no EU in the first place and America and China wouldn't resent Europe so much.
Without membership of such a large trade block the UK's bargaining position is much weaker and now it has to negotiate new trade deals with China and the US. Not to mention the new trade deals it has to agree with the EU.
Bullshit like not allowing dangerous growth hormones to be injected into livestock?
Crap like workers' rights and environmental regulations?
Name one such ''baggage'' that we should be happy to drop in order to be granted the privilege of being able to trade with the rest of the world.
What about investment from countries like Japan who create jobs in the UK in order to gain access to EU markets?
How about the damage being done to the UK banking industry now that London has lost its position as the financial capital of Europe?
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Re: Brexit
That's not a thing. Being in the EU isn't as important as you think it is, it is not a prerequisite for being the financial capital of Europe.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:35 amHow about the damage being done to the UK banking industry now that London has lost its position as the financial capital of Europe?
*yip*
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Brexit
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/busi ... 68231.htmlStCapps wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:37 amThat's not a thing. Being in the EU isn't as important as you think it is, it is not a prerequisite for being the financial capital of Europe.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:35 amHow about the damage being done to the UK banking industry now that London has lost its position as the financial capital of Europe?
https://www.siliconrepublic.com/jobs/br ... n-mckinley
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/busi ... 16506.html
https://www.toptal.com/finance/market-r ... ial-sector
Jobs are fleeing from London to Dublin and Frankfurt.
Last edited by Montegriffo on Fri Jan 31, 2020 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.