Jump to content


The Consequences of Brexit (part 3)

Recommended Posts

What's next for EU citizens in UK and UK citizens in EU?

It will be subject to negotiations after article 50?

 

It may be settled next month. Official article 50 negotiations will start very soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It may be settled next month. Official article 50 negotiations will start very soon.

 

Lots of things may be stated and laid down.

 

But it will never be settled, ever, or at least not for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lots of things may be stated and laid down.

 

But it will never be settled, ever, or at least not for a long time.

 

Well nothing is ever irrevocable. But a simple and separate bilateral agreement could emerge very quickly and I'm not convinced that it would need ratification by national legislatures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched David Dimbleby's Question Time on BBCi earlier, and it was the first time I have seen Jacob Rees-Mogg lose his composure. :)

 

Matthew Parris had wound him up regarding the slovenly way this government are going about brexit, and he was visibly rattled.

 

He used the word 'remoaner' and immediately realised he was in danger of losing his 'upper crust' demeanor, and quickly recovered.

 

it was amusing to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I watched David Dimbleby's Question Time on BBCi earlier, and it was the first time I have seen Jacob Rees-Mogg lose his composure. :)

 

Matthew Parris had wound him up regarding the slovenly way this government are going about brexit, and he was visibly rattled.

 

He used the word 'remoaner' and immediately realised he was in danger of losing his 'upper crust' demeanor, and quickly recovered.

 

it was amusing to see.

 

And you don't think the SNP's complete floundering over the basic question of what currency their independent Scotland would use was a bit more significant.

 

For all the complaints over the detail of the plan for Brexit, there were at least broad strokes. You would at least get an answer to key questions when you asked campaign leaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you don't think the SNP's complete floundering over the basic question of what currency their independent Scotland would use was a bit more significant.

 

For all the complaints over the detail of the plan for Brexit, there were at least broad strokes. You would at least get an answer to key questions when you asked campaign leaders.

 

I don't think she was floundering at all.

She was just gobsmacked at the appalling insult the Scottish people had been dealt by the pig ignorant southern Jessie in the crowd.

As usual Dimbleby did nothing to stop the insults being thrown at anyone not of his background or persuasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think she was floundering at all.

She was just gobsmacked at the appalling insult the Scottish people had been dealt by the pig ignorant southern Jessie in the crowd.

As usual Dimbleby did nothing to stop the insults being thrown at anyone not of his background or persuasion.

 

Excellent. Then you will have gleaned from her response what currency the independent nation of Scotland will be using.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just leave this here...

Pundits and MPs kept saying ‘why isn’t Leave arguing about the economy and living standards’. They did not realise that for millions of people, £350m/NHS was about the economy and living standards – that’s why it was so effective. It was clearly the most effective argument not only with the crucial swing fifth but with almost every demographic. Even with UKIP voters it was level-pegging with immigration. Would we have won without immigration? No. Would we have won without £350m/NHS? All our research and the close result strongly suggests No. Would we have won by spending our time talking about trade and the Single Market? No way.

http://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/vote-leave-director-admits-won-lied-public/08/02/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the one to read though:

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/dominic-cummings-brexit-referendum-won/

 

A bit long but worth it as it also sets out his opinion in much more detail, and he does not mention that leave won because they lied as per the other link headline. He also explains in detail why he believes remain lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Scotland would have no other choice but to use the pound. However, the Bank of England would not be Scotland's lender of last resort and the country would have no say in the setting of interest rates or over the money supply. Scotland would be in the same position as the countries which use the dollar as their main currency (i.e. small third world countries).

 

Then, if Scotland sought to join the EU, it would have to make a commitment to join the euro, something which is hardly likely to appeal to Scottish voters.

 

It could, of course, set up its own currency as soon as it became independent. But with the loss of the Barnett and other subsidies from the UK and also the low revenues from oil, this would be the riskiest policy of all. I think the likelihood would be that there would be a run on the banks and capital flight soon afterwards. I cannot see the Scottish people voting for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Brexit referendum was called by a government which wanted us to remain. Not laying out the plan for leaving was part of the strategy to get us to vote remain. It didn't work, but that's why they left us in the dark.

In this case, the government of Scotland doesn't want the people to vote to stay. So they must be made to lay out their plans and seek permission from the Uk government for anything which would require their cooperation.

 

For example Scotland can't be part of the UK internal market and part of the EU internal "single" market at the same time. This is an absolute. The SNP must specify which one they intend be in.

Also, there can only be a currency union between the UK and an independent Scotland if the UK government permits it. If they just carry on using Sterling without a currency union they'll be in Greek territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well nothing is ever irrevocable. But a simple and separate bilateral agreement could emerge very quickly and I'm not convinced that it would need ratification by national legislatures.

 

Leaving the EU with our current terns and conditions is!

 

We will never have the opportunities that we have today.

 

You thought the pound was low after the Brexit vote? - I predict over the next 2 years we will dip below parity.

 

David Cameron has well and truly sold us down the river, destroyed any form of stable and successful future for my family and is en route to making us a bit player in a 3rd world democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.