To wonder how many of you are ready for hard Brexit, after today's Common's vote?

[flibbertyfive]

Because that's what's now happening, very soon.

PS According to the civil servants I know, it will be utter chaos - there has been literally basically no preparation for this at all. Because the bloody politicians can't make up their minds for what they want/expect to happen. So there are no contingency plans whatsoever.

Hope you're happy and looking forward to the chaos if you voted for Leave.

There are 11 net contrbutors.

Of the other 16, 11 get less than 1bn euros a year more than they contribute.

The idea that the UK or the EU net contributors are some how subsidising a free for all in other countries is ridiculous,

Also the idea is that other countries will start being net contributors over time, as they grow in prosperity.

You are in denial user.

No, she is not.

This is all to do with their engines not being able to the quality expected and requiring a lot of repairs and that is combined with their future developments all failing to deliver.

Not a Brexit a problem at all.

RR has increased market share and are continuing to make ground. It looks like they will have engines in 50% of commercial airliners in a decade or two. This isn't about brexit.

Still were subsidising he other countries as well.
Regardless of how much they take, we are still paying for them.

I support remain but his daft to suggest that we're not being taken for a bit of a ride ehre

" We are still paying for them"

We benefit far more from our trade with the EU than the money that we pay in.

Our exports to Poland are worth about the same as our net contribution. Our exports to Central and Eastern Europe are worth more than our entire gross contribution plus the rebate.

topcat1980 It looks like the top is supporting the bottom to me

topcat1980 So we will not be exporting to Poland or anywhere else in Europe after Brexit ?

But again you can't deny we are still paying for other countries.

topcat1980 And what sort of time frame are we expecting before the other countries grow in prosperity Greece join 2002, Poland 2004, you know as well as I do even if they could pay more, the EU would never reduce contributions paid

"But again you can't deny we are still paying for other countries."

I never did, but as our net contribution is something under 1% of public spending, I think its pretty negligible.

Other countries will contribute more or less when the next rounds of funding are agreed.

Greece joined the EU in 1981 btw.

topcat1980 Yes, sorry, 2002 was the Euro, mind you it’s worked out very well for them

Just read 911 messages and now for some reason I have 'The Wheels on the bus*' playing on a loop in my head

*A normal bus, not a 350m a week NHS bus

And here we have the reality - Brexit will harm our economy, the most vocal and ardent Brexiteers know this and say this in private, and yet they still continue to pretend in public that a hard Brexit will be the best of all possible.

In a nutshell: Jacob Rees-Mogg is lying to us, and he knows he's lying. And now we know he's lying.

So what are we going to do about it???

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/14/brexit-warning-investment-firm-somerset-capital-management-jacob-rees-mogg

Flibberty

Two years of your kind of propaganda have made this wholly about the economy. At heart the Brexit vote was a political decision, not a - primarily - economic one.

But you have your wish - our governing classes don’t like it so, as if by magic, it is all now becoming too difficult.

So well done you :)

Flibberty

Apologies just reread your post. When I accused you of propaganda, what I should have said was rabid hysterical propaganda

Forgive me the omission

Heyduggeesflipflop

??

Don't understand your point. (Got that you meant to be rude. Was that it? Or were you trying to actually make a point?)

"Two years of your kind of propaganda have made this wholly about the economy. At heart the Brexit vote was a political decision, not a - primarily - economic one."

But lots of it was economic, the main tenet of the leave campaign was around fiscal spending and the pressures brought on the country by immigration - economics.

Lets be honest when a huge number of leavers criticise British judges for making British laws, and our sovereign parliament for exercising its democratic rights, it wasn't really about democracy and sovereignty.

You lost that one when you did the above.

Top I think most peoples minds were made up before the campaigns. The campaigns may have simply persuaded those who weren't sure.

But most renainers wouldn't have cared less about slogans etc and same with leavers.. Both sides lied... Including remain.. It's just what happens. A poster mentioned way back that they had wages undercut in trucking industry.
Is that posters going to vote or care for about what was written on bus?! Same with remainders who have personal vested interests in remaining..

Same with remainders who have personal vested interests in remaining

Can you expand on this statement ohsuch ? which remainers have a vested interest in remaining and why ?

We aren't remaining. I think there was a referendum about this.
My vested interest in Remaining is the same as everyone else's.

The options on the ballot paper were 'Remain' or 'Leave'.

The Remain campaign did a terrible job of promoting the positive reasons for remaining in the EU, preferring to engage in the negatives of leaving.

The Leave campaign did a very smooth job of blaming all of the UK's ills on the EU and at the same time promising all of the things that various demographics of Leavers asked for - control over immigration, more money for the NHS, sovereignty, continued free access to the benefits of the EU with none of the costs, etc.

The big problem now facing the Leave politicians is that they have to deliver on these promises.

The EU has not rolled over and agreed to any of the UK's demands. When Barnier diligently sticks to his brief, which is to look after the interests of the 27 EU members according to the instructions that the 27 sovereign parliaments have given him, he is accused of bullying, being obstructive and looking to punish the UK.

When Johnson promised that the heads of he German auto industry would demand that Merkel did a favourable deal, they instead told her that the integrity of the EU was politically and economically more important to them than the comparatively small market that is the UK [e.g. VW sells 4 million vehicles a year to China, and only 250,000 a year to the UK, from a total worldwide production of 10 million, so the UK accounts for less than 3%]

The rest of the world has not been knocking down the door to get a deal with the UK - the Japanese ambassador said that a deal with the EU was far more important and that the £80bn already invested in the UK would not continue if Japanese companies could not make a profit.

There is still no workable solution to the Irish border question.

Triggering Art 50 has already cost the UK far more than the proposed savings before the UK even leaves, when £20bn of increased costs on Customs infrastructure alone will make UK exports even less competitive and wipe out any of the supposed gains that Brexit would delver.

In order for the sovereign EU countries to discuss and ratify the final leaving agreement, there are fewer than 20 weeks remaining for the UK to come up with a proposal that satisfies the EU, the Leavers and the rest of the world. At the moment, both major parties in parliament are divided and arguing both amongst themselves and with each other about what this should look like.

I have no problem with the UK leaving the EU, provided that it is to the benefit of everyone in the UK - i.e. better welfare, wages, education, healthcare, prospects, housing, infrastructure etc. - but two years after the referendum, there is no evidence at all that this will be the case. Quite the contrary - the danger of a catastrophic 'No Deal' Brexit gets ever closer.

Everything Havanananana says with bells on.

Yep i agree frumpety

I think dismissing the campaigns because people had made up their minds is poor. Why would both leave campaigns spend all that money, and one of them break electoral commission rules in order to do things that had such little traction.

With such a small majority the campaigns were vital.

The repeated trope that remain lied is also inaccurate. When you ask people to identify what the lies were they tell you:

a) Emergency budget. Well, Cameron resigned, that left Osborne as a dead duck, a Chancellor does not have the authority to make the decisions on the economy alone and the job is appointed by the P.M. Without the P.M Osborne could do nothing, and was sacked a few weeks later.

On top of this Hammond in the autumn statement announced that we would no longer aim to be in fiscal surlpus by 2020, but by 2032. That meant 16 more years of austerity, he also at the time announced tax increases on the self employed, but they were then scrapped.

This is pretty in line with what was predicted.

2. WW3. Cameron never said this, it was sensationalist reporting by the pro leave media.

3. The recession predicted never happened. But then the terms of that recession happening were never met. All were predicted on Cameron staying and declaring art 50 straight away ( by which point Brexit would be upon us in the next week or so). He didn't, and it got delayed, and the bank of England intervened. As it is many of the economic circumstances such as inflation, falling investment.

I'll admit the remain campaign was rubbish but that was for a key reason, many people are angry about things that were caused by austerity and government decisions. Who led the campaing? The leader of the government, they couldn't admit that this was down to them, so the other side blaming EU and immigration for it won those arguments.

2) WW3. Cameron never said this, it was sensationalist reporting by the pro leave media.

It was Boris that did the sensationalising.

Cameron said: “Can we be so sure peace and stability on our continent are assured beyond any shadiow of doubt? Is that a risk worth taking?”

Boris blew that up into: “No, I don't believe that leaving the EU would cause World War Three to break out on the European continent.”

The eu is not the only geopolitical check on Russia - have you perhaps heard of something called nato? An organisation that, unlike the eu), possesses a credible conventional and nuclear military capability? I know the eu would dearly love to have its own military (in line with its political ambitions) but it can’t afford it so takes security (underwritten and paid for by the USA you might note) from nato instead

Had no idea threatening Russia with conventional and nuclear war was preferable to trading with the former soviet satellites... well i never lol!
Such overwhelming NATO force has certainly stopped Putin venturing into Georgia or the Ukraine, surely without such a deterrent, he d be shooting down airliners and annexing places like Crimea - oh hang on!!!
Regardless, Trumps America is hardly a reliable ally and when you say the EU takes its security under written by the yanks.. you must also mean the British do too?