EU cracks down on the UK: Brexit negotiations under threat

[Tommi]

I just find it funny how there's a way to leave the EU, but when a country wishes to do it, suddenly they are bad and evil and scum for wishing to do so?

Why the fuck give the option to do something if you don't want anyone to use that option?

[Magicpot]

That's not a realistic situation, the EU will try to protect its economic interests what will happen is that certain sectors or companies will seek to broker something.

Not to mention the UK government simply can't it's not a realistic outcome, it would be a bloodbath that they can't sell regardless of how much they demonize the EU, nobody will care if your situation turns to the worse what the EU supposedly.

The EU (Or more specifically, the european comission) will protect its power interests first. And these call for the UK to be shafted as hard as at all possible to dissuade anyone else from attempting to leave.

I just find it funny how there's a way to leave the EU, but when a country wishes to do it, suddenly they are bad and evil and scum for wishing to do so?

Why the fuck give the option to do something if you don't want anyone to use that option?

Because it makes you look non draconian.

[Acidbaron]

I just find it funny how there's a way to leave the EU, but when a country wishes to do it, suddenly they are bad and evil and scum for wishing to do so?

Why the fuck give the option to do something if you don't want anyone to use that option?

Nobody official has named the UK any of that, however the barrage of attacks from the UK on the EU are almost endless. For the rest, the UK left due to wanting to control migration more especially on eastern europeans, those eastern europeans where the government of Blair advocated and put in motion, so stances like that make the UK look bad.

[Altariaz]

Nobody official has named the UK any of that, however the barrage of attacks from the UK on the EU are almost endless. For the rest, the UK left due to wanting to control migration more especially on eastern europeans, those eastern europeans where the government of Blair advocated and put in motion, so stances like that make the UK look bad.

You clearly have little idea why the UK voted to leave the EU. Individuals who don't pay much attention to UK politics think Brexit was all about immigration: This is completely wrong.

The UK is the second largest net contributer to the EU's budget, and in that the UK has very significant leverage.

[zealo]

If that is the case, with a similar population size as the USA, why doe the EU need 33 presidents (or equivalent) many of which are paid the same as the one US president?

I would suggest it is because the EU far from acts as one. But whatever, if anything demonstrates why the EU will never compete with the US it is this example, that extends from the highest rung of its government to its lowest.

Because the EU is an economical union even if not an outright federation?

That however doesn't mean that the EU won't act as one when negotiating trade deals, because again, economical union. It took about 15 minutes for EU leaders to agree on their stance towards how to approach this. The ball really is in the court of the UK right now, despite how they so like to scapegoat the EU for domestic politics purposes.

Trump already tried this approach pretty recently against Germany only for them to not go along with it, there's no reason to think the UKs situation would be much different.

[Acidbaron]

You clearly have little idea why the UK voted to leave the EU. Individuals who don't pay much attention to UK politics think Brexit was all about immigration: This is completely wrong.

The UK is the second largest net contributer to the EU's budget, and in that the UK has very significant leverage.

Immigration was a big point you can if you want to try to downplay it but it won't change that. Looking at contributions without subtracting the benefits is a very good way to paint a misinformed picture of the situation which is what took place that is correct.

The UK cannot pull out of certain deals they committed to before the brexit without having to deal with ramifications. That leverage is therefor not that immensely great and starting from that position will mean them burying themselves in a situation they'll have a hard time getting out of. Not to mention the global image created of a nation breaking contracts with other nations. They are however free to play that card but i don't see it happening beyond bluff poker

- - - Updated - - -

The EU (Or more specifically, the european comission) will protect its power interests first. And these call for the UK to be shafted as hard as at all possible to dissuade anyone else from attempting to leave.

It is not their position nor a realstic or even beneficial one for the EU to go "into the talks" with the pure intend to cause harm. The Brexit and the entire process on its own is an awakening enough for other nations, not to mention other nations have plenty of euro skeptics which is a good thing since criticism generates movements and movements generate political platforms what create progress, the hardliners of wanting to leave the EU are generally fringe groups and mostly an anti-political vote in general. This is more often not due to a dislike of the EU but a dislike of their own national politics, France is a good example of this.

EU and UK interests are connected and not exclusive that being the economic interests the hard points will be about other matters, freedom of travel, previously voted in contracts, payment of expats and subjects being it either currently employed or retirement funds. As i pointed out earlier you'll have conflicting economic interests like the fishing industry, i fully expect the UK to demand almost an UK exclusive fisher right, but things like that can also backfire badly, seeing their fish is only as valuable as the demand for it and if the EU impose a downright ban on those being imported or high enough tariff other markets will fill that void in the EU as a market position in the EU is highly desirable where as the UK will have a harder time finding new markets.

[padie]

You clearly have little idea why the UK voted to leave the EU. Individuals who don't pay much attention to UK politics think Brexit was all about immigration: This is completely wrong.

The UK is the second largest net contributer to the EU's budget, and in that the UK has very significant leverage.

Source?

My source says :
3rd largest, and if you count per capita 9th.
https://select-statistics.co.uk/blog/much-eu-cost-uk/

[Rockyreg]

Because the EU is an economical union even if not an outright federation?

That however doesn't mean that the EU won't act as one when negotiating trade deals, because again, economical union. It took about 15 minutes for EU leaders to agree on their stance towards how to approach this. The ball really is in the court of the UK right now, despite how they so like to scapegoat the EU for domestic politics purposes.

Trump already tried this approach pretty recently against Germany only for them to not go along with it, there's no reason to think the UKs situation would be much different.

The only thing the EU are united on at this point in time is they want to screw as much money out of the UK as possible in the so called 'divorce bill'. It always amuses me how much they all squabble over a couple of hundred million quid here or there when it comes to budget time.

After that they'll be shafting each other left right and centre trying to gain a trade advantage and its this that will be the biggest impediment to a deal being done.

The statement that the EU acts as one on trade deals is another fallacy. They only go as far as the EU's most protectionist states allow them to. Hows it going acting as one on the EU migrant quotas? How is the EU going acting as one with Merkel supporting China being recognised as a market economy with the WTO to try and facilitate a trade deal with them but the rest of the EU slamming that door firmly shut.

[Wikiy]

I just find it funny how there's a way to leave the EU, but when a country wishes to do it, suddenly they are bad and evil and scum for wishing to do so?

No one is saying the UK is scum. To be honest, the UK is being treated exactly as it deserves right now. It received the greatest benefits and exemptions from mandatory rules than any other country, and still acted like a little bitch.

- - - Updated - - -

The statement that the EU acts as one on trade deals is another fallacy. They only go as far as the EU's most protectionist states allow them to. Hows it going acting as one on the EU migrant quotas? How is the EU going acting as one with Merkel supporting China being recognised as a market economy with the WTO to try and facilitate a trade deal with them but the rest of the EU slamming that door firmly shut.

It doesn't matter whether the EU acts like one on this or that issue. The chief negotiator for the EU has already been named. Not only is the EU going to act like one in these talks, it's going to act like one person in these talks. I'm making a caricature, of course. It's not going to be that simple. But it will largely depend on him. And he wont be having talks with every single prime minister of every country to hear their concerns. He's likely not going to talk to anyone other than M&M.

[Rockyreg]

No one is saying the UK is scum. To be honest, the UK is being treated exactly as it deserves right now. It received the greatest benefits and exemptions from mandatory rules than any other country, and still acted like a little bitch.

You see its statements like these that make people query why you are all taking it so personally. All of the larger EU members get as much as they can and have a better chance because they have more power within the union

It doesn't matter whether the EU acts like one on this or that issue. The chief negotiator for the EU has already been named. Not only is the EU going to act like one in these talks, it's going to act like one person in these talks. I'm making a caricature, of course. It's not going to be that simple. But it will largely depend on him. And he wont be having talks with every single prime minister of every country to hear their concerns. He's likely not going to talk to anyone other than M&M.

You are being very naive to think like that.

[Pann]

Good thing that the EU side of things have a complex answer to this complex problem.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...t-negotiations

May's position that is completely unknown since we don't even know how she's going to get a government together and what that government will look like regards to the brexit. And all of that is bad for you.

You come across as a person that feels personally offended when pointed out that the politicians in charge have made a mess of things and aren't ready, it's simply the truth in the manner, the EU has already collected the information of the sectors tied to the UK, has already collected the requests, these requests if not being send in by the member state their own government they were being send in and talked about by representatives of each sector and those are things that has been happening for months. It also continues to be an ongoing process as i pointed out before groups playing a supportive role will continue to collect and feed the people in charge with up to date information, it's all been structured and if you believe the UK can achieve much by trying to isolate member states they are in for a rude awakening, since the UK doesn't even know what they want at this point nevermind what all member states and their individual sectors.

The reason i'm so aware of this is due to a few belgians their key roles in these upcoming talks. Anyway the link i provided you should tell you more about where the EU stands and how they will go about it, it's up to you if you wish to read it or accept it or not, it won't change a damn thing. I don't know what you seek to achieve by being in denial but to each their own.

Seriously?!? I haven't said anything about what systems are or are not in place I simply pointed out that the situation was more complex than had been presented.

Do I? Really? I mean it is not like I have pointed out in this very thread that the Cons had made a mess of it. But hey-ho.

Oh and I have never said that the UK will try to alienate member states.

The UK knows what it wants and probably, just like the EU, has a pretty good idea of what it will have to offer and what it will get. The difficulty is in selling this to public.

[Wikiy]

You see its statements like these that make people query why you are all taking it so personally. All of the larger EU members get as much as they can and have a better chance because they have more power within the union.

No, not really. France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain - none of them have any special privileges that aren't inherent in their size. The UK was given official, legal privileges. Tangible ones.

And I'm not taking it personally. I'm laying out my thoughts on how the bloc of which I am still a citizen should react to a certain action, and how it should treat the country that did that. If the reasons were good, I wouldn't be advocating a relatively hard stance on the country in question. With the reasons being either completely made up or shit, I can't advocate the EU continues acting like a complete pussy which they/we are on all the important issues.

[Shadowmelded]

I guess holding ourselves hostage is one way to negotiate.

[Slant]

If that is the case, with a similar population size as the USA, why doe the EU need 33 presidents (or equivalent) many of which are paid the same as the one US president?

I would suggest it is because the EU far from acts as one. But whatever, if anything demonstrates why the EU will never compete with the US it is this example, that extends from the highest rung of its government to its lowest.

You can talk about technicalities all day long and feel all smug about it, but what you just pointed out, the 33 presidents, is irrelevant in the context of this negotiation and the Brexit in general. You know that. I know that. You know that I know that you know that. That you're still trying to bring this idiotic argument after by now over a year on this topic is pathetic. You're not even attempting to get a point across, you're just trying to somehow... what, win an argument? Prove that you... know stuff?

When Trump was sent home by literally every European nation with the words "You should talk to Brussels, they act on our behalf..." was that not hint enough for you? What else do you need if explicitly spelling it out for your has just about as little effect as demonstrating it to you?

Yo, @Pann? This guy here... he's the reason why I'm not nicer to you.

[araine]

She ran an awful campaign and people are short sighted.

Folks found out she is just a typical tory with taxcuts for the rich and more poverty for the poor with the new programs from tory

Such as the dementia tax she spoke about before the election And suggestions to remove the triple lock that ensures the poorest old peoples pensions actually gets a meager increase she wanted to in typical rich party style make sure the poorest of the poor would see the pension not being increased despite everything else in the world getting more expensive each year.

The voters found out and the Labour got a huge surge from it. What we can learn from this and from the rhetoric from Donnys campaign is that voters are pissed of at the neo liberalism that has been destroying the world for the last 45 years, they want good old fashion socialism back to protect the healthcare and the care of our elderly poor. they saw what May and the Torys stand for and they said no thanks

[Slant]

I just find it funny how there's a way to leave the EU, but when a country wishes to do it, suddenly they are bad and evil and scum for wishing to do so?

Why the fuck give the option to do something if you don't want anyone to use that option?

Nobody is talking about the UK being bad or evil or scum. We're calling them stupid, if anything. A bit offensive for the reasons they decided to initiate the Brexit for. But none of what you said.

[Rockyreg]

No, not really. France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain - none of them have any special privileges that aren't inherent in their size. The UK was given official, legal privileges. Tangible ones.

And I'm not taking it personally. I'm laying out my thoughts on how the bloc of which I am still a citizen should react to a certain action, and how it should treat the country that did that. If the reasons were good, I wouldn't be advocating a relatively hard stance on the country in question. With the reasons being either completely made up or shit, I can't advocate the EU continues acting like a complete pussy which they/we are on all the important issues.

Really? The UK is the only nation with special privileges? Is the UK the only member state that gets a rebate? Is the UK the only member state not in Schengen (I assume from your location you know the answer to this)? Is the UK the only member state not using the Euro?

Who are you to say whether or not the reasons for leaving were good? Is it beyond the realms of people's comprehension that a democratic nation voted in the hope that their government to have more say over the laws that govern the nation, control their borders and be free to negotiate trade deals with whomever suits them best?

[Elegiac]

Really? The UK is the only nation with special privileges? Is the UK the only member state that gets a rebate? Is the UK the only member state not in Schengen (I assume from your location you know the answer to this)? Is the UK the only member state not using the Euro?

The UK was the only state to enjoy these privileges simultaneously. And rather than attempt to negotiate a better deal within the EU, it decided to burn its bridges and ensure the only deal they would get would be whatever Brussels dictated, and quite rightly so to boot.

Who are you to say whether or not the reasons for leaving were good? Is it beyond the realms of people's comprehension that a democratic nation voted in the hope that their government to have more say over the laws that govern the nation, control their borders and be free to negotiate trade deals with whomever suits them best?

The fact that the reasons for leaving were objectively stupid and did not warrant a clumsy exit in the fashion it happened.

[Slant]

The EU (Or more specifically, the european comission) will protect its power interests first. And these call for the UK to be shafted as hard as at all possible to dissuade anyone else from attempting to leave.

"Power interests" has nothing to do with the EU. The commission (proposed by national Governments and elected by the EP) is not in danger of "losing power" depending on the outcome of this Brexit. The treaties define how the commission works and they're quite independant from - this will hurt the ego of some - what is essentially bread and butter trade negotiation with a non-EU state. Yes, I know the drama added to this makes it a bit exciting for you folks on the island, but whether it's Australia or the UK knocking on the EU's door doesn't make much of a difference.

- - - Updated - - -

You clearly have little idea why the UK voted to leave the EU. Individuals who don't pay much attention to UK politics think Brexit was all about immigration: This is completely wrong.

The UK is the second largest net contributer to the EU's budget, and in that the UK has very significant leverage.

So why did the UK vote to leave the EU? If it's not immigration, if it's not "Duh, Empire!" then what is it? I still maintain it's a troll vote, because nobody thought it was serious.

So the UK is the second largest net contributor. And we've had almost a year now to prepare for the loss of that. Do you really think the EU is somehow.. unprepared to lose that net contribution? That they haven't somehow... known this since the evening of the referendum? In what world do you think is the EU still counting on the UK's contribution to the EU budget?

[Rockyreg]

The UK was the only state to enjoy these privileges simultaneously. And rather than attempt to negotiate a better deal within the EU, it decided to burn its bridges and ensure the only deal they would get would be whatever Brussels dictated, and quite rightly so to boot.

What does it matter whether they were on their own or simultaneous. Other nations also get 'privelages'. David Cameron did make a half-hearted attempt to negotiate a better deal remember.

The fact that the reasons for leaving were objectively stupid and did not warrant a clumsy exit in the fashion it happened.

In your opinion. I voted leave for about 1 and a half of the reasons that I mentioned and after the recent election its looking more likely that we'll get the option that I'm hoping for.