Brexit negotiations 'have not begun well' - Sir Simon Fraser

[Warning]

I disagree, I think most of the EU population at this point would just love to fuck UK as much as possible (except for people who are stuck trading with them). The commission is taking a more nuanced position.

I can only speak for myself of course, but that wouldn't be my position. Ideally, for me, these negotiations would lead to the following outcome:

1. A tough but fair deal that will undeniably leave the UK in position that is measurably inferior to their previous position inside the EU.
It's clear that a point must be made: leaving the EU was a mistake, and that fact needs to be felt. So far this point has actually been illuminated quite well, in part due to the UK's complete unpreparedness to deal with an actual Brexit, but it has to be clear for the longer term as well. That way the rhetoric of "short term loss, long term gain" can die off.

2. Avoid the feeling that the UK is being spited, or punished.
The United Kingdom is still a good friend and close ally, and the deal should reflect this. Measures taken should not go further than those resulting directly from loss of EU membership, in fact, some of these should be mitigated. We are not spiteful, and we respect democratic decisions made by our close friends.

3. The door to return stays open, but this should not be repeated too often or too early.
So far Macron and some others have made this point, but I actually don't feel this point should be hammered upon. It is good to remind UK citizens, especially those that wished to remain that we don't turn our backs on them and that the cause of UK membership is not dead, however overstating the fact can have the opposite effect. It may even come to sound desperate which doesn't accurately reflect that the EU without the UK among its members will be just fine, and that the UK even without EU membership will be too, even if it means they end up somewhat poorer.

All these factors together should contribute to the following goal: That a large majority of UK as well as other EU citizens consider the brexit in the future, and think "Why the hell did that happen, all it did was cause a mess and make the UK a little poorer."

I think we are well on track.

[Warning]

In all honesty if the UK was well prepared for Brexit (and it was really obvious they weren't) perhaps they could have gotten out of this ahead (not that likely, but at least they'd have a chance). Even if it ends up being a complete dumpster fire other eurosceptics looking to exit the Union may try to tell people that unlike the UK they actually have a solid plan on what to do. Which is bollocks; you cannot have a good plan because the most important part is the trade treaties with third parties and noone is going to discuss imaginary treaties before your country even has had its referendum.

It would've been impossible for the UK to come out of this deal ahead, even if they had been prepared. It is not possible to negotiate an advantageous deal against capable negotiators that have a far superior starting position. If it were the EU as a trading bloc would not wield the considerable power it does. I think that at least for the foreseeable future, euroscepticism and to a degree, the far right (and in some cases far left, these two actually have come to overlap to a degree, thanks to similar economic positions and partly thanks to Russian influence) extremism that fuels it, has been dealt a significant blow. In that sense we should be thankful to the UK (and to the US) to a degree.

The blame for brexit I would put mainly with politicians that tried to use it as their ladder: The Nigel Farrages who sold out the UK to serve their own as well as Russian interests, the weak opposition that sought to benefit from the division among the ruling party, and the foolish prime minister that, in a volatile climate of outside influence and refugee crisis, held a referendum and failed to win it.

[Tinch]

It would've been impossible for the UK to come out of this deal ahead, even if they had been prepared. It is not possible to negotiate an advantageous deal against capable negotiators that have a far superior starting position. If it were the EU as a trading bloc would not wield the considerable power it does. I think that at least for the foreseeable future, euroscepticism and to a degree, the far right (and in some cases far left, these two actually have come to overlap to a degree, thanks to similar economic positions and partly thanks to Russian influence) extremism that fuels it, has been dealt a significant blow. In that sense we should be thankful to the UK (and to the US) to a degree.

The problem is your looking at the economic impact of the decision and that alone. The Remain side did the same thing in the referendum and it played into the idea that the EU is run in the interests of the elite and big business.

Its why the mantra of 'taking back control' proved to be so effective during the campaign. People felt like they had no say over who governs us, no say over who comes into the country and no control over the direction of travel the country is taking. If the vote was purely based on the economical impact then I would have been very surprised if Leave would have won.

[dribbles]

The problem is your looking at the economic impact of the decision and that alone. The Remain side did the same thing in the referendum and it played into the idea that the EU is run in the interests of the elite and big business.

Its why the mantra of 'taking back control' proved to be so effective during the campaign. People felt like they had no say over who governs us, no say over who comes into the country and no control over the direction of travel the country is taking. If the vote was purely based on the economical impact then I would have been very surprised if Leave would have won.

Along with top economists I have to disagree. The UK has carried Europe for a century, it's time to let them stand on their own two feet. Europe is economically stagnating into insignificance trying but failing to catch up with almost every other developed economy. In fact is there any economy in the world that does worse than Europe? You know from many peoples stand point, including mine, the negotiations as the clock ticks are going exceptionally well. It used to be said that no deal was better than a bad deal but really no deal is better than any deal.



I am not sure what medication some European people are being dosed with in their EU regulation eggs for breakfast to believe the crap they spout, well actually I am it's all over the news, just glad we won't have to eat them going forward.

[Noradin]

I mean that whilst you might expect leaks from the EU team, which will be a cause of some transparency, this will also apply to the UK's side.

However, the fact that the EU side might leak is not the same as saying the EU will openly set forth its real positions (ie, the ones it will not accept a worse deal on) in public. The Eurocrats running the negotiations will, quite rightly, ask for more than their minimum positions, and I expect them to, if necessary, lie about what those minimum positions are*.

*That's not a moral judgement. I expect the British team to do the same. Furthermore, I consider both sides obligated to do so. Matters of state tend to ride roughshod over matters of morality, and I see it as stupid to pretend or hope otherwise.

If leaks are all that we get to hear from th EU side then they will be brought to court again.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is your looking at the economic impact of the decision and that alone. The Remain side did the same thing in the referendum and it played into the idea that the EU is run in the interests of the elite and big business.

Its why the mantra of 'taking back control' proved to be so effective during the campaign. People felt like they had no say over who governs us, no say over who comes into the country and no control over the direction of travel the country is taking. If the vote was purely based on the economical impact then I would have been very surprised if Leave would have won.

Ironically, they had more control over the MEPs than they seem to have over their own.

[Dizzeeyooo]

Its why the mantra of 'taking back control' proved to be so effective during the campaign. People felt like they had no say over who governs us, no say over who comes into the country and no control over the direction of travel the country is taking

and in a few years time when the country is poorer overall as a result of leaving the EU, plus people who voted to leave to "take back control" are noticing that practically nothing has changed in terms of the direction that the country is going in, since right wing conservative twats will continue to be right wing conservative twats and left wing labour idiots will continue to be left wing labour idiots, what happens then?

no say over who comes into the country

funny story - if I moved to Germany tomorrow, and lived there for 6 months without finding a job + without having proof of actively looking for a job, I would be removed from the country and sent back to the UK

same situation in France

same situation in Belgium

potentially the same situation in the UK - dependant on choices that UK politicians are free to make

The leave argument that we "have no say" over who comes into our country / stays in our country because of our EU membership was literally complete rubbish, shame for all the people who believed what the daily mail was telling them

Eh do you know what that graph shows?

did you see who you are replying to?

the graph shows the EU below the UK, I doubt he bothered to read any more about it after noticing that single point

[dribbles]

Eh do you know what that graph shows? It's GDP growth since 2008 and for the EU it shows the Eurozone average. If we are talking about absolute numbers, Germany alone has +30% larger GDP than the UK; the UK has about the same GDP as France+Greece. Also using the Q1 2008 is quite disingenous since the UK and the US absorbed part of the financial shock of the crisis in Q3-4 2007 while the EU mostly felt the shock after 2008

Looking at:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/...ge=&start=2006
would be more accurate.

Why bring Germany into an illustration of the EU economy in the sewer? Are you saying that Germany = Europe and the rest don't count and isn't that a bit insulting? However you try to spin it, the EU economy for a decade at least has been bumbling along the bottom. The UK would and will have a performance nearer the US set free from the EU chains that hold us back.

[Tinch]

and in a few years time when the country is poorer overall as a result of leaving the EU, plus people who voted to leave to "take back control" are noticing that practically nothing has changed in terms of the direction that the country is going in, since right wing conservative twats will continue to be right wing conservative twats and left wing labour idiots will continue to be left wing labour idiots, what happens then?

Then they are free to vote in whoever they think will make the changes they want, not elect another 70-odd MEPs who have to represent the UK's interests alongside another 700 from other countries.

funny story - if I moved to Germany tomorrow, and lived there for 6 months without finding a job + without having proof of actively looking for a job, I would be removed from the country and sent back to the UK

same situation in France

same situation in Belgium

potentially the same situation in the UK - dependant on choices that UK politicians are free to make

The leave argument that we "have no say" over who comes into our country / stays in our country because of our EU membership was literally complete rubbish, shame for all the people who believed what the daily mail was telling them

I'm not particularly against freedom of movement so you won't see much argument from me here, although I do think we should treat everyone equally no matter where in the world they come from. Why are you happy to give preferential treatment to someone from Europe over someone from South America for example?

[Pann]

We can choose which products we subject to tariffs if we want to protect particular industries. It could potentially lead to a fall in food prices which is obviously going to be a benefit to the average person in the UK. (I accept this is a disputed subject as with most Brexit issues)

Those subsidies are paid forby taxpayers, don't you think we can find better use for some of it than to give billionaires millions of pounds?

That's a fair comment however I am concerned with what will happen not what might. Given that the UK has enjoyed a great deal of influence within the EU it is reasonable to assume that the UK was reasonably happy with the current tariffs set by the EU and is unlikely to significantly reduce them post Brexit. It is also reasonable to assume that the UK would not want to undermine its own agricultural industry's ability to feed the UK population in favour of foreign suppliers therefore it is likely that it will continue with protective tariffs and/or be required to subsidise UK farmers.

Not all the subsidies find their way into the pockets of wealthy landowners but there certainly is room to improve the way CAP payments are made. However according to Greenpeace 16 of the largest 100 pay-outs under the single payment scheme last year went to entities owned or run by people featured in the Sunday Times Rich List.

The total payments to the top 100 were in the region of £88million so even the 16 who appeared on the times rich list accounted for half of the payments my house would benefit by less than £2 per year. No doubt this figure would be swallowed up by the systems and people needed to audit the CAP subsidies payments. So where is the benefit to me?

[Dizzeeyooo]

Why are you happy to give preferential treatment to someone from Europe over someone from South America for example?

you may as well ask why paying members of a club are allowed to use club facilities when non members of a club are not allowed to use club facilities

the answer is - its one of the many reasons for being in the club in the first place

[Mittens]

I disagree, I think most of the EU population at this point would just love to fuck UK as much as possible (except for people who are stuck trading with them). The commission is taking a more nuanced position.

Thats germany right?

- - - Updated - - -

Eh do you know what that graph shows? It's GDP growth since 2008 and for the EU it shows the Eurozone average. If we are talking about absolute numbers, Germany alone has +30% larger GDP than the UK; the UK has about the same GDP as France+Greece. Also using the Q1 2008 is quite disingenous since the UK and the US absorbed part of the financial shock of the crisis in Q3-4 2007 while the EU mostly felt the shock after 2008

Looking at:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/...ge=&start=2006
would be more accurate.

That doesn't take away from his point. Europr is falling behind with Germany being the only one managing to keep up.

[dribbles]

Thats germany right?

[That doesn't take away from his point. Europr is falling behind with Germany being the only one managing to keep up.

Well if Germany = Europe as some here suggest I hope they have broad shoulders. Lets see what the IMF project, sure as rotten eggs are EU eggs doesn't look like Europe has a safe pair of hands at the helm. No wonder 70% of people are now in favour of a hard Brexit, the other 30% seem to be on mmoc.

[Mittens]

Well if Germany = Europe as some here suggest I hope they have broad shoulders. Lets see what the IMF project, sure as rotten eggs are EU eggs doesn't look like Europe has a safe pair of hands at the helm. No wonder 70% of people are now in favour of a hard Brexit, the other 30% seem to be on mmoc.

You do know that's a stupid graph right? That just tells me that developing nations are well... developing.

[Kiri]

Well if Germany = Europe as some here suggest I hope they have broad shoulders. Lets see what the IMF project, sure as rotten eggs are EU eggs doesn't look like Europe has a safe pair of hands at the helm. No wonder 70% of people are now in favour of a hard Brexit, the other 30% seem to be on mmoc.

Everyone is talking about GDP, Dribbels tries to make an argument regarding market share. You do realize that someone can do exactly as good over a period of 40 years and still lose market share, right? If the world market expands, an individual's market share can fall naturally. You can easily see that on your very own graph, where the sharpest decline can be seen around 1990, which just so happens to coincide with the world market growing substantially due to communism falling.

[dribbles]

You do know that's a stupid graph right? That just tells me that developing nations are well... developing.

I agree with you most of the time the IMF are stupid and produce stupid graphs, but aren't all nations developing? All bar the EU it seems.

[Mittens]

I agree with you most of the time the IMF are stupid and produce stupid graphs, but aren't all nations developing? All bar the EU it seems.

Poor nations develop faster. In this case, China and other Asian countries that had spectacular growth during those years due to rapid industrialization.

[Mittens]

And that is patently wrong. Look here:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/...ge=&start=2006
I added Germany to the graph. Germany's growth rates follow the Eurozone average very closely (and are below the UK aggregate). If you actually just look at the graphs you will see almost all of them follow the average pattern with very specific outliers (e.g. Ireland which is growing at unsustainable paces because they are playing the dangerous game of being the EURO tax haven)
The UK has higher growth rate than the EU because the significant difference we are seeing here is the Eurozone currency crisis in 2012 that the UK suffers no effect from. They are an outlier themselves, simple as that. In fact they benefited from the currency crisis since they were a safe haven for EU assets in that period. That crisis was over by the summer of 2015 and since then UK and EU are in convergence.

What I'm seeing is that smaller economies are doing well, whereas the bigger ones are falling behind. France and UK. I don't know if that is a good signal tbh. A 3.2% growth in Spain is not nearly as impressive as a 1.9% growth in Germany for obvious reasons.

[Kiri]

I agree with you most of the time the IMF are stupid and produce stupid graphs, but aren't all nations developing? All bar the EU it seems.

If you follow the Solow-Swann model of economic growth, economies have something of a cap when it comes to economic growth. This is due to the fact that, in general, capital has diminishing returns. The more you already have, the less a new unit adds to productivity ceteris paribus, i.e. the marginal product of capital falls. Since capital in an economy diminishes over time, you eventually reach a point where there is barely enough new capital induced as depreciates on a period to period basis.
Now, this is of course only the bare-bones construct of the model. Even fully developed it omits a lot of factors, but there are some things that can be explained by this.

Mittens noted that poor nations develop faster, which plays into this. Poor nations often have very little capital, which means that investment into capital can lead to high returns. The same thing also applies to countries that had a lot of their capital destroyed. Germany and Japan for example had astounding growth in the years after the second world war, which slowed down considerably in the end. By now, they too have come close to the equilibrium point. However, this also shows the differences between those two, the BRICKS states (to a certain extent) and on the other hand perpetually poor countries. Macroeconomics can only explain the upper bound, so to say, but proper policies are required to achieve a growth of Japanese levels and not end up in perpetual poverty. However, the Solow-Swan model gives a good explanation as to why developed countries grow more slowly - at a certain point you can only achieve growth through trade, drastic policy shifts, population growth and technological advancement. It is much harder to developed countries to achieve high growth levels. In fact, many Brexit arguments are rooted in this as well. 'Less stupid regulations will cause growth' for example plays into this as well. At some point, those, along with stimuli and trade agreements, are the only ways how a government can regulate growth.

[Mittens]

Spain is not really a small economy and the 3,2% growth is mostly a correction after significant recession. France has been stagnant for quite a while now with a sliding trade balance and Econ 101 tells you stagnancy or recession + net importer status means you are heading south. For the UK it's even more perplexing cause unlike France their politics are exceedingly pro-corporatist for the past decade. Honestly the problem is that outside their exemplary service department, there is little excellence in their other sectors of economy.

Well that's just worse. TBH. How many of these nations are recovering vs showing continued growth? Can I get another indicator that Europe is not falling behind?
This one sucks Mr Nymrohd

[Shadowmelded]

Taking back control~~~