Brexit

[798686]

I noticed a post elsewhere which pointed out that German car manufacturers actually manufacture a lot of cars inside the USA. Presumably so they get classed as american, and Mr Trump will smile upon them. Presumably German car exporters faced with tariffs against their direct sales to us, will export from the US. Not much for them to fear there then.

At the other end of the scale, I heard about a Northern Ireland small company which sells seaweed to southern Ireland. And anticipates being put out of business if it has to pay 20% import tax on food entering the EU. Presumably will also apply to all the produce of the Uk fishing industry.

Rolls Royce (cars) today stated it has no intention of moving from the UK.

Despite being German-owned, the potential imposition of tariffs to Europe will be offset by the fact that their largest markets are China & US, which will potentially see a lowering of tariffs. They also feel the 'Britishness' of a Rolls is important.

There are numerous good news stories coming out, which you refuse to acknowledge - from record breaking auto exports & production, to reassurance from Honda & Nissan, to new deals clinched by JCB and statements of confidence in future UK strength by economics studies.

Why are you choosing to focus on the possible, unknown fears of a seaweed company?! In a similar vein (in terms of businesses), Anglesey's Halen Mon sea salt company continues to grow - with sales booming to America - including the household of Pres Obama. This can only improve if tariffs are removed on our trade with the US.

I agree with the above comment about negative posting. We need to focus on what we DO want to happen - and how to achieve it, rather than what we fear and how it may be unavoidable. You're wallowing in victim status.

PS: The weaker pound helped Jaguar to increase sales by 77% over 2015 (and JLR as a whole by 20%). Why are you not focusing on this?

 

[dandelion]

1) None of us know if there will be a tariff on import of food by the EU. If there is it is most unlikely to be as high as 10%.

The man being interviewed said that he had been looking into this because of the impact on his business. What he said is that import duty on food is currently 20%, so that is what he expects will apply to his business if the Uk leaves the EU. He said he expected this would make his business uneconomic compared to someone doing just the same thing as him a little way down the road in southern Ireland instead of Northern Ireland.

2) The Northern Ireland company has the benefit of a lower pound. This counteracts a tariff barrier.

But the cost of anything imported will rise in proportion. Fuel, for example. machinery. bricks to build houses. Doctors.

It's curious that seaweed is harvested in NI and sold to Ireland (which has the same seaweed readily available).

Rather, this illustrates precisely the point. Why manufacture anything outside the EU if it will be cheaper at the point of sale inside the EU if it is made there. He is really saying the same thing I have all along.

.., there's enough can-do spirit among the Brits to douse the flames of the Remoaners - who, I'd gamble good money on - are secretly (and some not-so-secretly) praying for an independent UK to fail.

Whereas I think the people praying for both negotiations to fail and for the Uk to suffer as a result are the same ones who have pushed Brexit all along. You can plainly see the result of all this. The one time UK 'special relationship' is now about to be awarded to Russia. The US is only interested in being friends with winners.

Rolls Royce (cars) today stated it has no intention of moving from the UK. Despite being German-owned, the potential imposition of tariffs to Europe will be offset by the fact that their largest markets are China & US, which will potentially see a lowering of tariffs. They also feel the 'Britishness' of a Rolls is important.

And your point is? A company which wishes to sell to outside the EU is happy to be based ouside the EU? 45% of our export go to the EU, however. It wasnt the other 55% I was worried about. Though now you mention it, any company which loses half its business might go out of business anyway, so the rest must be at risk as well.

Why are you choosing to focus on the possible, unknown fears of a seaweed company?

I'm not. Its an example of why the Uk farming industry as a whole is toast if we leave the EU. Suddenly imports become 20% cheaper, their labour supply is cut off and they lose their subsidies. This guy was explaining the problems he faces and willing to do so on air. Right now he is making money, just as the car companies are because we have not left the EU.

 

[southeastone]

"I'm not. Its an example of why the Uk farming industry as a whole is toast if we leave the EU. Suddenly imports become 20% cheaper, their labour supply is cut off and they lose their subsidies. This guy was explaining the problems he faces and willing to do so on air. Right now he is making money, just as the car companies are because we have not left the EU."

I am not sure where you get the idea that the farming industry as a whole will be worse off, last week in the papers the farmers union was saying that EU regulation on crops is costing the UK farming industry billions, farmers must grow 3 set crops under EU rules, some of these crops make no money and a literally ploughed back into the ground as they are not worth harvesting(even with the cheap EU labour), much of the farm land is left fallow under EU rules, this is not good for farming and contributes hugely to the massive food deficit we suffer here. Once farmers can grow crops which they and the market want and are profitable they will be better off, also maybe the thousands of acres of for example Kent orchards that have been grubbed out in recent years may become viable again when farmers are able to compete with the massively subsidised french fruit farmers or the thousands of commercial glasshouses which have gone to ruin while we import most of the tomatoes and salad we consume from Spain. Be good to go in a supermarket and see more than a token of UK grown crops on offer. UK farmers may find that the home market will return to be their main market so export duties will not be so relevant and air miles will be reduced with that cost saving, also do you not think the UK will be able to tax imported food to level the playing field if we are taxed on EU exports, not to mention the huge possibilities for export to non EU countries whose markets will hopefully open up to us under new trade deals?

 

[chrisrobin]

Just remember trade is a two way thing, we want them to buy our items, they want us to buy their items, therefore when push comes to shove there will be a compromise. While the EU negotiators will try and make it as tough and difficult for the UK to make good deals at the end of the day it will be down to national requirements, and in the EU one thing they have in common is vested interests.
And Scotland, well, that's a fun item just there to make one laugh, imagine the tariffs we could put on their imports, would Scottish workers wanting to work in England come under the "quota" system.
And as for Corbin, well he doesn't know what he wants, his Baroness also confused, does he want to contain immigration or is he happy, will he cap footballers wages or just a few via taxes. My favourite moment was when referring to the so called crisis in the NHS he said "the government want to wake up...." when he was finding it hard to keep his bleary eyes open.
When in the UK we refer to the incestuous relationship Trump has with his nepotistic family you have to look in the UK no further than the Labour party to find all sorts of odd bedfellows!

 

[dandelion]

I am not sure where you get the idea that the farming industry as a whole will be worse off, last week in the papers the farmers union was saying that EU regulation on crops is costing the UK farming industry billions, farmers must grow 3 set crops under EU rules, some of these crops make no money and a literally ploughed back into the ground as they are not worth harvesting(even with the cheap EU labour),

I have no idea where you get this?If farmers grow and plow in crops it is because someone paid them to do it, but they do not. The EU no longer subsidises specific crops but gives flat rate subsidies per acre whatever a farmer grows. It is possible a farmer will plough in a failed crop (perhaps because of the british weather) because it isnt worth harvesting. I did hear the referendum has already created labour shortages for harvesting.

much of the farm land is left fallow under EU rules,

Did you read something from 20 years ago when we had wine lakes, beef mountains and set aside? All gone now. This seems to be a re-run of the lies told in the referendum campaign about payments to the EU. Where did you get it?

this is not good for farming and contributes hugely to the massive food deficit we suffer here. Once farmers can grow crops which they and the market want and are profitable they will be better off,

But they have a free choice of crops right now.

also maybe the thousands of acres of for example Kent orchards that have been grubbed out in recent years may become viable again when farmers are able to compete with the massively subsidised french fruit farmers

Have you never eaten new zealand apples, even when they had to pay those huge inport tariffs? If food import tariffs disappear, so will UK farming.

or the thousands of commercial glasshouses which have gone to ruin while we import most of the tomatoes and salad we consume from Spain.

Or maybe Israel, or Africa? Theyre cheaper flown in from just about anywhere hot! It was expensive oil which killed the Uk greenhouse industry.

Be good to go in a supermarket and see more than a token of UK grown crops on offer.

The reason we have farm subsidies is because Uk food production is not competitive compared to world markets. Remember New Zealand Lamb? We had UK subsidies of farmers even before we joined the EU. About the only way UK farming works is by massive economies of scale. Huge farms, massive fields, monocultures of whatever grows best. All destroying the traditional countryside pattern other factions think must be preserved. Which incidentally is why subsidy right now pays farmers for conserving the natural environment, such as Trees, strips around fields where animals can hang out and native species establish.

do you not think the UK will be able to tax imported food to level the playing field if we are taxed on EU exports,

Ok..so we will tax grain imports from Canada or the US. All that stuff coming from Africa or Australasia. They will retaliate by taxing something we sell them right now tariff free?

not to mention the huge possibilities for export to non EU countries whose markets will hopefully open up to us under new trade deals?

??? You do recall that for years protestors have demanded the EU remove its farm subsidies and stop dumping the surplus food in developing countries where it is so cheap it undercuts local competition? The point is that the EU only created a food surplus because farmers were subsidised to do so. No subsidy and production is too expensive to sell abroad. In fact, they will be selling here. The Uk climate is mediocre as is the land. And just how do you imagine we will be able to negotiate deals better than the EU did, which we enjoy right now? We cannot.

 

[dandelion]

Just remember trade is a two way thing, we want them to buy our items, they want us to buy their items, therefore when push comes to shove there will be a compromise.

Just remember the EU is a members club which gives special rights to members compared to non members. The whole purpose of this is to discourage trade with nations which are not members. So no, the EU deliberately wants to discourage external trade with the UK if it is no longer a member. The whole idea is that it is closed market

While the EU negotiators will try and make it as tough and difficult for the UK to make good deals at the end of the day it will be down to national requirements, and in the EU one thing they have in common is vested interests.

If one country of 27 vetos, there will be no deal. German car manufacturers also have plants in the US. Why would they care if there are trade barriers between Germany and the UK? They will assemble cars in the US using parts from Germany to sell to us. While we sell 45% of goods to the EU, no member country sells more than 7% to us. https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

And Scotland, well, that's a fun item just there to make one laugh, imagine the tariffs we could put on their imports, would Scottish workers wanting to work in England come under the "quota" system.

And May just made a speech saying the spirit of the Uk is how we look after our member nations and those worse off.

And as for Corbin, well he doesn't know what he wants,

An unusually honest politician then?

does he want to contain immigration or is he happy,

You mean, like the conservatives are planning to increase immigration from non EU countries, and introduce a scheme to allow in even more people? (if the UK economy grows, which is quite another issue). The conservatives are not against immigration and never have been.

My favourite moment was when referring to the so called crisis in the NHS he said "the government want to wake up...."

???May was just forced to admit the NHS is in crisis once again. Chap interviewed on the radio yesterday said his hospital had been ordered not to tell anyone it was in crisis. May has been forced to backtrack on lies there was no problem.

When in the UK we refer to the incestuous relationship Trump has with his nepotistic family you have to look in the UK no further than the Labour party to find all sorts of odd bedfellows!

?? So why shouldnt Trump employ his family? Thats how he succeeded in business! UK MPs employ their families on the parliamentary payroll and always have.

 

[southeastone]

I have no idea where you get this?If farmers grow and plow in crops it is because someone paid them to do it, but they do not. The EU no longer subsidises specific crops but gives flat rate subsidies per acre whatever a farmer grows. It is possible a farmer will plough in a failed crop (perhaps because of the british weather) because it isnt worth harvesting. I did hear the referendum has already created labour shortages for harvesting.

Did you read something from 20 years ago when we had wine lakes, beef mountains and set aside? All gone now. This seems to be a re-run of the lies told in the referendum campaign about payments to the EU. Where did you get it?

But they have a free choice of crops right now.

Have you never eaten new zealand apples, even when they had to pay those huge inport tariffs? If food import tariffs disappear, so will UK farming.

Or maybe Israel, or Africa? Theyre cheaper flown in from just about anywhere hot! It was expensive oil which killed the Uk greenhouse industry.

The reason we have farm subsidies is because Uk food production is not competitive compared to world markets. Remember New Zealand Lamb? We had UK subsidies of farmers even before we joined the EU. About the only way UK farming works is by massive economies of scale. Huge farms, massive fields, monocultures of whatever grows best. All destroying the traditional countryside pattern other factions think must be preserved. Which incidentally is why subsidy right now pays farmers for conserving the natural environment, such as Trees, strips around fields where animals can hang out and native species establish.

Ok..so we will tax grain imports from Canada or the US. All that stuff coming from Africa or Australasia. They will retaliate by taxing something we sell them right now tariff free?

??? You do recall that for years protestors have demanded the EU remove its farm subsidies and stop dumping the surplus food in developing countries where it is so cheap it undercuts local competition? The point is that the EU only created a food surplus because farmers were subsidised to do so. No subsidy and production is too expensive to sell abroad. In fact, they will be selling here. The Uk climate is mediocre as is the land. And just how do you imagine we will be able to negotiate deals better than the EU did, which we enjoy right now? We cannot.

Maybe read up on some of the crop diversification rules (greening)

 

[dandelion]

Article here from the Irish Times. Suggests that UK banks have given up on trying to persuade the government to stay inside the EU trading zone and instead are trying to lobby Europe, presumably to give concessions to encourage the Uk to stay. http://www.irishtimes.com/business/...ing-battle-against-brexit-to-europe-1.2931898

That might explain why we then have comments from the bank of England's Mark carney, arguing Europe would be hit badly by losing the Uk banking sector. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38582690

In contrast here we have a guardian report how various city people are arguing the Uk risks losing the city through brexit. It talks about a domino effect if financial operations start to relocate. https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-global-financial-system-city-chiefs-tell-mps .There is a clear prospect that the EU may choose to relocate euro clearing operations to inside its own borders.

The Times has a world Bank report downgrading UK growth forecasts again. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/world-bank-cuts-uk-growth-forecast-jhsc9m89b

Taken together, it looks as though city people really believe the city financial industry is severely under threat, and are seeking any way they can find to try to protect it, from both the UK government and the EU. Wonder what all this is going to do to London property prices in a few years?

The Uk balance of payments deteriorated again in the most recent figures just published. If the economy did grow more than expected, it spent its money sucking in more imports. Although the figures were distorted by ropening of oil fields after maintenance shutdown, and the constructions sector of the economy may be in a formal recession.

 

[798686]

The Uk balance of payments deteriorated again in the most recent figures just published. If the economy did grow more than expected, it spent its money sucking in more imports. Although the figures were distorted by ropening of oil fields after maintenance shutdown, and the constructions sector of the economy may be in a formal recession.

No it did not. The trade deficit reduced by over 2% in October (following an increase in the previous 3 months).

 

[dandelion]

Today we had a speech by prime minister May on her plans for Brexit. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38641207

She announced an intention to create a completely novel deal with the EU. if they didn't go for it, she would start a trade war with them. The Uk would become Hong Kong in the North Sea. She didnt use that example, but she envisioned us becoming a tax shelter for international business just handy for Europe. While we might attract a few more millionairs, who will want chauffeurs and cleaners, I dont see how it could work. The difficulty with becoming a tax haven is not the distance from the EU but the reaction of the EU to an attempt to undercut it. It would inevitably respond with trade sanctions against the UK. In the long run the Uk would lose. In the short run the UK would lose.

However, May has decided to leave th EU, or at least her party has done so. Electorally, they have pinned their colours to Brexit, and it is too late for them to back out now and remain credible electorally. The whole point of raising the question of Brexit was to destroy the growing UKIP political party, and to abandon the policy now would be to see its failure, and a resurgent UKIP. With the tories disgraced for incompetence and untrustworthiness as well.

So whatever awful results await Britain from Brexit, the conservatives are committed to bringing them about. The logic for them is simple. To abandon the policy now is to suffer political collapse of the party now, so not acceptible. To go forward with Brexit is at minimum to spin matters out for years. Who knows, there may be a deal which will allow trade to continue more or less as now. If not, the full effects of Brexit could be years in appearing and could be blamed on transitional difficulties, probably for at least another election cycle. May announced there would be a transistional arrangement, so clearly her mind is heading in this direction.

The big problem is it isnt going to work. Threatening the EU with loss of trade is a very hollow threat, when it is the UK pulling out of the EU which will cause this disruption, not anything the EU has done. The Uk sells 45% of its exports to the EU, whereas the EU sells about 8% of its goods to the UK. It is a massive imbalance which means the UK can only be the loser in this trade war. https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

 

[798686]

Still convinced Article 50 won't be invoked, and Brexit won't happen?

 

[southeastone]

However, May has decided to leave th EU, or at least her party has done so. Electorally, they have pinned their colours to Brexit, and it is too late for them to back out now and remain credible electorally. The whole point of raising the question of Brexit was to destroy the growing UKIP political party, and to abandon the policy now would be to see its failure, and a resurgent UKIP. With the tories disgraced for incompetence and untrustworthiness as well.

https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

If as you keep telling us there is no real support for brexit amongst the people and it is such an unpopular course of action only wanted by a handful of uneducated and ill informed sheep why would the tories be willing to piss the country and their party up the wall (according to you) for fear of UKIP? You say it would cause a resurgent UKIP, how would that happen in your world of the europe loving population?

 

[dandelion]

Nissan once more worried about the risks to it from brexit, now May has stated her position. https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-sunderland-plant-competitiveness-post-brexit

Ghosn for Nissan said "Obviously when the package comes, you are going to have to re-evaluate the situation, and say, ‘OK, is the competitiveness of your plant preserved or not?"

and

"A senior Toyota executive at the Swiss ski resort told the Financial Times that the carmaker’s UK plants also needed to be competitive after Brexit. Takeshi Uchiyamada, Toyota’s chair, said: “We have seen the direction of the prime minister of the UK, [so] we are now going to consider, together with the suppliers, how our company can survive.”

And all that before the government starts writing new trade deals with the US which will allow them preferential terms to sell US made cars in the UK.

 

[dandelion]

duplicate post

 

[dandelion]

If as you keep telling us there is no real support for brexit amongst the people and it is such an unpopular course of action only wanted by a handful of uneducated and ill informed sheep why would the tories be willing to piss the country and their party up the wall (according to you) for fear of UKIP? You say it would cause a resurgent UKIP, how would that happen in your world of the europe loving population?

I said very little of what you suggest. Two years ago, few woters cared very much about UK membership of the EU. They have only come to a decision because the issue was forced by UKIP and Farage. The essential plan to encourage people to vote leave has been much the same as UK governments have used over the years: blame the EU for everything which has gone wrong. A lot has gone wrong and it is squarely the fault of Uk governments, world governments in particular US foreign intervention, international conflict both military and economic, and very little is to do with the EU. UKIP succeeded in harnessing a feeling of dissatisfaction and falling relative wealth in a protest vote against the staus quo, expressed as EU membership.

Faced with this, the conservatives could either have opposed it or embraced it. If they opposed it, they would be the establishment opposing the outsider, conservatives pitched against UKIP. They decided to take control of the process of Brexit, rather than hand it over to UKIP to implement. The big idea is hardly novel, it is for the conservatives to stay in power. if you notice over the years they have attacked labour policies, and then quietly adopted them. They proclaim how they have made people richer by steeply increasing the starting point for income tax, which was a liberal policy. If your opponents policies are popular, adopt them.

But equally, this means they will drop Brexit just as quickly if the public turns against it. The problem then would be to justify having adopted it in the first place, and the best way to do that is probably exactly what they have been doing. Stress that they adopted it because of the will of the voters, and because they honestly believed it could work. Then, when it all goes horribly wrong, they can say they did their very best to implement something which they honestly believed was a good course for the country, which voters had asked for, but then eventually had to accept that it was not achievable.

Right now they are trying to spin the EU as to blame for the failure of Brexit. It has not yet even failed, and they are blaming the EU for the failure they are expecting to happen! Fundamentally this is an absurd argument. If the Uk leaves the EU, it must expect its new relations will be on terms similar to other nations currently outside enjoy, and not similar to those nations currently inside enjoy. That ought to be clear to everyone.

What is likely to happen, is that trade will decline slowly, taking account of the new terms. Brits will not stop buying luxury german cars just because they are a bit dearer. Europeans may more readily stop buying budget british cars, because they are no longer budget. More significant will be rules and regulations about how trade is conducted, which in the modern world are more effective at stopping unwanted trade than simple taxes on imports. For example, if the UK decides to drive on the opposite side of the road to the EU, that immediately puts Uk car manufacturers at disadvantage. The Uk will probably continue to enforce and adopt very many trade rules decided by the EU, even if we wholly withdraw from any mutual agreements. because it benefits our exporters to follow the unified rules which apply to all goods used across the EU. leaving will not restore any Uk sovereignty in this respect.

The real danger is that half the UK economy is based on trade with the EU. Much of this presupposes that the EU is a member with free trading access to all the countries. That is why the Uk has a car industry, because companies like Nissan needed a base inside the EU. Similarly, the financial city of London has grown hugely, trading into Europe. This draw to the Uk will go into reverse if we leave the EU. It isnt just that goods made in the Uk will become a bit more expensive in the Eu, it is that the manufacturers of those goods will move their operations to another EU country, and then the Uk will lose the entire operation. Both the parts selling into the EU, and the parts selling to the rest of the world.

The government, somewhat desperate I fancy, is currently latching onto trump as their saviour. A person many government ministers reviled when they thought he could never win. Trump has stated very very clearly his policy is 'America first'. His aim is to bring car manufacturers back into the US. Banks back into the US. Sell the UK US farm produce, raised to much lower US safety and animal wlefare standards. Get the UK to pay full price for expensive US drugs for the NHS. Yes, Trump would love a trade deal with the Uk to achieve all these things the US could not achieve in deals with the EU.

The government understands that in order to retain popular support, it has to wait until brexit fails before it changes course and stops it. The problem is that by this time, irreperable damage will have been done to the Uk economy. It has already started.

 

[southeastone]

I said very little of what you suggest. Two years ago, few woters cared very much about UK membership of the EU. They have only come to a decision because the issue was forced by UKIP and Farage. The essential plan to encourage people to vote leave has been much the same as UK governments have used over the years: blame the EU for everything which has gone wrong. A lot has gone wrong and it is squarely the fault of Uk governments, world governments in particular US foreign intervention, international conflict both military and economic, and very little is to do with the EU. UKIP succeeded in harnessing a feeling of dissatisfaction and falling relative wealth in a protest vote against the staus quo, expressed as EU membership.

Faced with this, the conservatives could either have opposed it or embraced it. If they opposed it, they would be the establishment opposing the outsider, conservatives pitched against UKIP. They decided to take control of the process of Brexit, rather than hand it over to UKIP to implement. The big idea is hardly novel, it is for the conservatives to stay in power. if you notice over the years they have attacked labour policies, and then quietly adopted them. They proclaim how they have made people richer by steeply increasing the starting point for income tax, which was a liberal policy. If your opponents policies are popular, adopt them.

But equally, this means they will drop Brexit just as quickly if the public turns against it. The problem then would be to justify having adopted it in the first place, and the best way to do that is probably exactly what they have been doing. Stress that they adopted it because of the will of the voters, and because they honestly believed it could work. Then, when it all goes horribly wrong, they can say they did their very best to implement something which they honestly believed was a good course for the country, which voters had asked for, but then eventually had to accept that it was not achievable.

Right now they are trying to spin the EU as to blame for the failure of Brexit. It has not yet even failed, and they are blaming the EU for the failure they are expecting to happen! Fundamentally this is an absurd argument. If the Uk leaves the EU, it must expect its new relations will be on terms similar to other nations currently outside enjoy, and not similar to those nations currently inside enjoy. That ought to be clear to everyone.

What is likely to happen, is that trade will decline slowly, taking account of the new terms. Brits will not stop buying luxury german cars just because they are a bit dearer. Europeans may more readily stop buying budget british cars, because they are no longer budget. More significant will be rules and regulations about how trade is conducted, which in the modern world are more effective at stopping unwanted trade than simple taxes on imports. For example, if the UK decides to drive on the opposite side of the road to the EU, that immediately puts Uk car manufacturers at disadvantage. The Uk will probably continue to enforce and adopt very many trade rules decided by the EU, even if we wholly withdraw from any mutual agreements. because it benefits our exporters to follow the unified rules which apply to all goods used across the EU. leaving will not restore any Uk sovereignty in this respect.

The real danger is that half the UK economy is based on trade with the EU. Much of this presupposes that the EU is a member with free trading access to all the countries. That is why the Uk has a car industry, because companies like Nissan needed a base inside the EU. Similarly, the financial city of London has grown hugely, trading into Europe. This draw to the Uk will go into reverse if we leave the EU. It isnt just that goods made in the Uk will become a bit more expensive in the Eu, it is that the manufacturers of those goods will move their operations to another EU country, and then the Uk will lose the entire operation. Both the parts selling into the EU, and the parts selling to the rest of the world.

The government, somewhat desperate I fancy, is currently latching onto trump as their saviour. A person many government ministers reviled when they thought he could never win. Trump has stated very very clearly his policy is 'America first'. His aim is to bring car manufacturers back into the US. Banks back into the US. Sell the UK US farm produce, raised to much lower US safety and animal wlefare standards. Get the UK to pay full price for expensive US drugs for the NHS. Yes, Trump would love a trade deal with the Uk to achieve all these things the US could not achieve in deals with the EU.

The government understands that in order to retain popular support, it has to wait until brexit fails before it changes course and stops it. The problem is that by this time, irreperable damage will have been done to the Uk economy. It has already started.

I think regurgitating the same doom laden story does not answer my post which could have been done in far less words, you keep saying throughout this and the Ireland thread that brexit was not wanted by the majority of the country, why then was UKIP such a threat to the government that they have had to take this course?

 

[dandelion]

Because only about 25% or less of the country supports the conservative government. More voted to remain, and yet more voted to leave. But still only about 1/3 voted to leave.

All this talk about whether there was a decisive vote to leave or remain, far fewer voted for the government which in practice has absolute power to make the decision.

In order to threaten the government, UKIP need only draw away 10-20% of the popular vote, which on the whole would probably have caused a labour government, perhaps in coalition. To avoid this, the conservatives needed to neutralise UKIP. This is an example of how our system allows minorities power. If UKIP had permanently split the right wing vote they could have cast the conservatives out of power permanently. That is why the conservatives needed to destroy UKIP.

 

[dandelion]

The conservatives are in an interestingly difficult position. A huge catch-22.

As I already eplained, they dare not reverse their position on Brexit for fear that UKIP will come thundering back as a political party, quite likely splitting the right wing vote and allowing labour a victory. We will shortly see a by-election in a traditional labour seat, but with labour very unpopular right now. UKIP will be campaigning exactly on this issue, that they are the only party who can be trusted to see through Brexit. While the conservatives have to respond by campaigning as hard as they can to stop UKIP. Which will of course split the leave vote. Labour has its own supporters who are pro-leave and therefore might defect to one of the other parties, but it still has the initial advantage of past majorities, while the libs who are definitely remain have little local support so remainers may move to labour. Therefore a three way race, of the sort the conservatives are desperate to avoid occurring nationally.

There is another twist however, to May's insistence that brexit can work. Polls suggest that the voters like her rhetoric, and like the idea she presents of a brand new type of deal with the EU which will satisfy everyone. The trouble is, they also make it clear they think it vey unlikely she will succeed. A spate of professional economists, civil servants and diplomats have publicly stated they think May's strategy cannot work because it conflcits with the fundamental structure of the EU. It seems the public agrees with them and me that May is going to fail to get what they want. It is hard to see how May herself can believe that what she wants is possible. if you listen to her speech, what she says it that she will seek the best deal possible. She does not say she believes it is possible to get what she has outlined. She agrees with the rest of us, it isnt going to work.

Her problem is that she cannot be honest. She has tried to hide behind a pretence that she is protecting the Uk bargaining position. Thats silly. We have no bargaining position, except perhaps in detail. In the big questions of what we are aiming for, these have to be stated openly at the start of negotiations. And ten seconds later it will be explained what is not possible. May's real problem is that she cannot go into negotiations admitting she believes it is a mistake for the nation. Naturally this would help UKIP as above. But equally importantly, consider the future. In a year or two when it becomes clear that Brexit is a disaster, the voters would simply turn on her and demand to know why she had ever started negotiations knowing they would fail, and therefore placed the nation is such a mess. Thus she has to hide behing this 'will of the people' camouflage and pretend she is not expecting a very bad outcome.

And if you don't think it will be bad, just consider what else she is doing. She is going about trying to create industrial strategies, training strategies, state involvement to help industry, spending more money. All the things the conservatives hate. They could have been doing all these things to help the UK economy before the referendum, but they did not. They are doing it now because they believe Brexit will be very bad and are therefore desperate to try to mitigate the consequences.

 

[dandelion]

Well Theresa May has been globetrotting and was seen holding hands with Donald Trump.

May and her party spent the last year disparaging Trump, but now they are in a hole and desperate for just about any help they can get. So Theresa was off to America to talk up a deal with a man whose rhetoric says just about the opposite of what May believes. The salvation for Brexit britain will be free trade. trump wants to rip up all the trade deals, and impost punitive surcharges on all imports. Bring back torture, throw out refugees.

In her desperation May seems to have gone too far, and now has to face down attacks for her appeasment of someone who believes the opposite of her and her party. brexiteers believe Britain just voted for torturing and throwing out foreigners, but maybe this was not what Brits understood their vote to mean.

The price for being allowed to be the US poodle is too high. May offered Trump a state visit, but it sounds as though the Uk could not protect him if he came.

 

[185248]

Well Theresa May has been globetrotting and was seen holding hands with Donald Trump.

May and her party spent the last year disparaging Trump, but now they are in a hole and desperate for just about any help they can get. So Theresa was off to America to talk up a deal with a man whose rhetoric says just about the opposite of what May believes. The salvation for Brexit britain will be free trade. trump wants to rip up all the trade deals, and impost punitive surcharges on all imports. Bring back torture, throw out refugees.

In her desperation May seems to have gone too far, and now has to face down attacks for her appeasment of someone who believes the opposite of her and her party. brexiteers believe Britain just voted for torturing and throwing out foreigners, but maybe this was not what Brits understood their vote to mean.

The price for being allowed to be the US poodle is too high. May offered Trump a state visit, but it sounds as though the Uk could not protect him if he came.

If our Prime Minister turns up waffling the same drivel, the press here will chew his arse off.

Off-course if he does speak his mind, it could mean an executive order for Australians to be banned from the US