Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The search for a definition of BINO – “Brexit in Name Only”

135

Comments

  • Freggles said:

    Sandpit said:

    This thread is as bad as the last two.

    Here's an interview with Baemy to cheer everybody up. I like the bit where Maddow brings up the oppo about her mistreating her staff and she deploys the stock answer to the classic "do you have any weaknesses" interview question.

    https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/klobuchar-campaign-launch-emphasizes-democrats-midwest-momentum-1441064515842

    [Edit: linked the wrong section]
    Two things.

    Firstly, are you not worried that she might be Ed Miliband?

    Secondly, don't the Dems need someone who can energise at least 2 out of the 3 of minority voters, moderates and the Left?
    1) No, she is extremely not Ed Miliband
    2) Yes, and they have someone: Donald Trump. Avoid freaking put the mid-west and they win.
  • Schrodinger's Brexit: we open the box on March 30, No Deal. I'm 95% sure of this.

    So what happens next?

    A lot of things will swing into action very quickly just to allow modern life to function. Yes, there will be queues at the borders, some headless chickens on the financial markets, a few of the nutters hosting spam fritter parties (or whatever) but - outside political and media bubbles - most people will simply have to roll their sleeves up and get on with their lives.

    My thoughts are:

    - some big, luminous agreement on settled status to kick in immediately so the 3 million EU citizens can get on with their lives (and more importantly, remove them from purgatory of not knowing what happens).
    - pragmatic solutions kick in at the border. It's amazing how many rules you can overlook just to wave the trucks through (to anyone looking to get anything/anyone into the country, now's your chance!)
    - snap election to lance the HoC boil?

    But it's a genuine question. What immediate, pragmatic things do you think will happen to allow us to continue to function? Our politicians are probably not thinking about this - so websites like this should...

    The 3 million EU citizens here is a red herring anyway. The Government already committed to enacting the settlement scheme that was part of the Deal even if No Deal results.
    That's what I thought. Seems an easy one to resolve. But talking to my EU friends, they are still very worried because of the uncertainty. Just because the government is *committed* to something doesn't mean that's what's going to *happen* on March 30.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Cyclefree said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Scott_P said:
    Listening to that idiot woman chuntering on on the Today programme put me in a filthy mood. She keeps talking about a negotiation which stopped last November. How thick must she be not to realise that?

    The fact that Juncker et al are too polite to shut the door in May’s face when she turns up bleating piteously for something she won’t get does not mean there is a negotiation going on.

    Leadsom, as an ex-HR person, reminds me of the many infuriatingly stupid HR persons I have had to deal with during my working life. No wonder HR stands for Human Remains.

    Grrrr.....!!!!
    Turn the radio off, step away from the keyboard. You can do nothing now. Let it wash over you. Wait.
    I find it best to accept no deal is happening, no more worries about whether it will happen. Obviously nothing is certain though.
    Quite. The lunatics are in charge. They are on an ideological crusade. They don’t want compromise and come up with something acceptable to non believers. They want their Brexit (whatever that means this week) no matter the cost.

    So we wait.
    What I’m waiting for is the time when I can take my revenge on these lunatics.
    May will go and a new fresh leader will come in for the Conservatives washing away any previous sins.
    Unless it's someone untainted by the current FUBAR (about as likely as me winning this year's London Marathon), I'm still taking my revenge.

    A Tory PM has deliberately sought to agree a WA which takes no account of 80% of the British economy. And the Tories think that by replacing their useless and deluded leader with some other equally useless and deluded ninny they wash away their sins. No - not for me. I'm taking the Sicilian approach to this. "La vendica se magna fredda."
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Dura_Ace said:



    no places like Morrocco or Florida or Turkey. Thats assuming they have a problem in the first place, all people with dual nationality will just continue with business as normal. And eventually places in the Med will want their investors back some resorts are stuffed full of Russians who seem to have no . </>

    They are not full of Russians who have very little money. FoM in the EU27 will now only apply to those few that can afford it.

    and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbe ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    so your view is the Spanish government will remove a major source of income just to keep Brussels happy.

    than before.

    so in effect there will be some inconvenience but money is money and things will continue

    so whats all the doom mongering about ?

    I am not doom-mongeribg, merely observing that only rich Brits wil insurance you’ll be fine.

    No its just wild conjecture the spanish government basically is who we should listen to

    https://www.politico.eu/article/spanish-pm-sanchez-brits-rights-wont-change-after-b

    “British citizensthat will change.

    I see no reason why spanish businesses will want to choke off future revenues. There will be more red tape but most of that gets hived off to agents and lawyers in any case.

    You could see no reason why the Irish border would be an issue. If it were down to businesses it wouldn’t be.

    the Irish border shouldnt be an issue, Varadkar made it one for electoral advantage, which is now turning out not to be so advantageous

    He is overwhelmingly backed by Irish voters. But putting that to one side, do you think Spanish politicians are going to reap big electoral rewards by proposing to make it easier to immigrate to Spain?

    That is the current PSOE approach although it increasingly looks as if a general is imminent and most of the polls would give a majority for the centre right. Overall Spain remains positive regarding UK immigrants.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413

    Dura_Ace said:



    no places like Morrocco or Florida or Turkey. Thats assuming they have a problem in the first place, all those people with dual nationality will just continue with business as normal. And eventually places in the Med will want their investors back some resorts are stuffed full of Russians who seem to have no problem.

    They are not full of Russians who have very little money. FoM in the EU27 will now only apply to those few that can afford it.
    and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbe ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    so your view is the Spanish government will remove a major source of income just to keep Brussels happy.

    than before.

    so in effect there will be some inconvenience but money is money and things will continue

    so whats all the doom mongering about ?

    I am not doom-mongeribg, merely observing that only rich Brits wil insurance you’ll be fine.

    No its just wild conjecture the spanish government basically is who we should listen to

    https://www.politico.eu/article/spanish-pm-sanchez-brits-rights-wont-change-after-brexit/

    I have no prior knowledge but Id gu to Spain

    “British citizensthat will change.

    I see no reason in any case.

    You could see no reason why the Irish border would be an issue. If it were down to businesses it wouldn’t be.

    the Irish border shouldnt be an issuegeous

    He is make it easier to immigrate to Spain?

    of course not,r interest.

    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    FoM can be in our interests but to claim that is always the case is stretching the point.

    It also depends on who "we" are. Well off people looking cheap labour yes, less well off people not so much.

    If FoM was such a clear cut benefit then there would be no borders anywhere on the planet and we'd all be advertising for people to come and join us.
  • Scott_P said:

    Back to the 16-1700's when merchantmen were converted to fighting ships and back again. All part of the Grand Tory Plan.
    I thought the whole point was we don't have enough ferries anyway. If so, how are we supposed to spare any to convert to other uses. (Ignoring the fact it is utterly impractical I would have thought)
    If we're buying the ferries it doesn't matter that they're currently registered abroad, which would be a problem as it means they aren't available to be requisitioned for war use as happened in the Falkland's War.

    Does the article say what they will be converted to do?
    I think the plan is to use them as the two Royal Marine base/support ships called Littoral Strike ships. One is to be based permanently in the Pacific as I understand it.
    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    I know nothing about ship construction, but it looks like you would need to do a lot of work to convert an existing ship to be a littoral strike ship. Perhaps the hull is by far the most expensive component and that makes it worth doing.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Pulpstar said:



    A guaranteed income of €32k a year is worth more than €500k...

    Southam said that you’d need to buy €500k of property and that only rich brits will be able to retire to Spain. That’s not true - you can get a long term residency visa without buying the property and proving €32k per year annual income. So it’s more affordable than he’s making out.

    Plus, as I say, you could always travel to Spain 90 days out of every 180 anyway. I’m not saying retiring to Spain is as easy as it is before Brexit, but it’s not totally unattainable.

    Do you know how big a pension pit would need to be to produce a gusranteed income of €32,000 a year?

    An awful lot of retired public sector workers have incomes exceeding that.
  • Cyclefree said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Scott_P said:
    Listening to that idiot woman chuntering on on the Today programme put me in a filthy mood. She keeps talking about a negotiation which stopped last November. How thick must she be not to realise that?

    The fact that Juncker et al are too polite to shut the door in May’s face when she turns up bleating piteously for something she won’t get does not mean there is a negotiation going on.

    Leadsom, as an ex-HR person, reminds me of the many infuriatingly stupid HR persons I have had to deal with during my working life. No wonder HR stands for Human Remains.

    Grrrr.....!!!!
    Turn the radio off, step away from the keyboard. You can do nothing now. Let it wash over you. Wait.
    I find it best to accept no deal is happening, no more worries about whether it will happen. Obviously nothing is certain though.
    Quite. The lunatics are in charge. They are on an ideological crusade. They don’t want compromise and come up with something acceptable to non believers. They want their Brexit (whatever that means this week) no matter the cost.

    So we wait.
    What I’m waiting for is the time when I can take my revenge on these lunatics.
    Hypothetically if we do leave without a deal (or a minimal series of mini deals) what will it take by the next election for you to determine it wasn't lunacy after all?

    Some here are dead set on thinking all will go wrong. Some here are dead set on thinking we will be fine. I don't know it hope we will be fine. What would convince you afterwards or is that bridge already burnt?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,254
    Definition of BINO?

    Yes, good one, and I am happy to play.

    The Leave mantra was to take back control of our money, laws and borders.

    - Still making large annual contributions to the EU violates Money.
    - Still subject to large chunks of EU regulation violates Laws.
    - Still accepting free movement of people from the EU violates Borders.

    A Brexit that violates ALL THREE of the above is therefore BINO. Impossible to contend otherwise.

    All other Brexits (even those that violate 2 of the 3) are BINABIR - Brexit in name and Brexit in reality.

    We can then break down the potential BINABIRs -

    A Brexit that satisfies 1 out of the 3 is a Soft BINABIR.
    A Brexit that satisfies 2 out of 3 is a Hard BINABIR.
    And one which satisfies all 3 is a BINABIR means BINABIR.

    So, allocating current offerings across categories we get -

    Labour is probably BINO.
    May Deal is either soft or hard BINABIR depending on how the Trade Talks go.
    No Deal is BINABIR means BINABIR.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,500
    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    no places like Morrocco or Florida or Turkey. Thats assuming they have a problem in the first place, all those people with dual nationality will just continue with business as normal. And eventually places in the Med will want their investors back some resorts are stuffed full of Russians who seem to have no problem.

    They are not full of Russians who have very little money. FoM in the EU27 will now only apply to those few that can afford it.
    and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    What do you think the chances are that Spain will refuse to allow any further immigration of Brits without them stumping up £500k post Brexit?

    50/50?
    As long as they can buy property and pay health care the Spanish will care not a jot.
    Agree, but that presupposes that the retirees can afford, in particular health care. I was quite fit and healthy until I retired. Since then I've had two types of cancer and I'm waiting for another, unrelated, operation. I can get travel insurance for accidents and so on, but not for 'developments' of the other two. However, as I don't expect any, or if there are they're highly unlikely to require emergency treatment that's OK, but it would cast a shadow over emigration plans.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Dura_Ace said:







    so your view is the Spanish government will remove a major source of income just to keep Brussels happy.

    than before.

    so in effect there will be some inconvenience but money is money and things will continue

    so whats all the doom mongering about ?

    I am not doom-mongeribg, merely observing that only rich Brits wil insurance you’ll be fine.

    No its just wild conjecture the spanish government basically is who we should listen to

    https://www.politico.eu/article/spanish-pm-sanchez-brits-rights-wont-change-after-brexit/

    I have no prior knowledge but Id gu to Spain

    “British citizensthat will change.

    I see no reason in any case.

    You could see no reason why the Irish border would be an issue. If it were down to businesses it wouldn’t be.

    the Irish border shouldnt be an issuegeous

    He is overwhelmingly backed by Irish voters. But putting that to one side, do you think Spanish politicians are going to reap big electoral rewards by proposing to make it easier to immigrate to Spain?

    of course not, I very much doubt its an election winning issue in Spain, the domestic agenda on the other hand is. But like all secondary issues if its worth doing it will get done, we;d do the same in reverse if it was in our interest.

    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006
    notme2 said:

    notme2 said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Andy_JS said:

    FPT:

    "Chris Grayling is a symbol of what is going wrong in Britain

    The transport secretary has racked up a litany of failures and should resign"

    https://www.ft.com/content/0e378da2-2def-11e9-8744-e7016697f225

    It's telling that some pb tories will even attempt a half-hearted, limp dicked defence of the Fireplace Salesman but none will ever go into bat for Grayteeth.
    Im not defending Gavin Williamson, but it is utterly cu**ish to deride him as a “fireplace salesman”. It seems he had a not unsuccessful career as a MD of a pottery company and a fireplace manufacturer.

    But you know all this, as it was discussed yesterday. Yet again you deride him.
    Tbh if that's your benchmark for utter cnutishness, you've kind of used up your ultimate deterrent on a bush war.
    The people mocking him for being an ex-Fireplace salesman are mocking the millions of people who work in sales while they’re at it. It isn’t a defence of Williamson to notice that.
    As someone who has previously done sales I can live with it TBH, doesn't feel like it's aimed at me.
    It kind of is though, other upperty oiks. It seems he thinks that people who aren’t part of the professions have any part to play in our democratic process. What he is saying is that Gavin Williamson is ‘trade’, and couldn’t possibly be allowed access to the higher echelons of British society, the fact that he has managed to get there is a disgrace.

    Gavin Williamson seems a bit ridiculous on many levels, but him been a former MD of a fireplace company is not one of them.
    #badedit
    He is attacking every one of us who have come from nothing. When I was born, my mother was in a homeless shelter. When I was growing up it was on a sink council estate, to a school that the LEA repeatedly attempted to close for failing inspections.

    I did alright, I got to university, and set up a small business. But I’ve worked in shops and felt the sneer when I dared to try and get involved in politics.

    I haven’t got a chip on my shoulder, but I do get a bit rattled by snobbery.
  • Schrodinger's Brexit: we open the box on March 30, No Deal. I'm 95% sure of this.

    So what happens next?

    A lot of things will swing into action very quickly just to allow modern life to function. Yes, there will be queues at the borders, some headless chickens on the financial markets, a few of the nutters hosting spam fritter parties (or whatever) but - outside political and media bubbles - most people will simply have to roll their sleeves up and get on with their lives.

    My thoughts are:

    - some big, luminous agreement on settled status to kick in immediately so the 3 million EU citizens can get on with their lives (and more importantly, remove them from purgatory of not knowing what happens).
    - pragmatic solutions kick in at the border. It's amazing how many rules you can overlook just to wave the trucks through (to anyone looking to get anything/anyone into the country, now's your chance!)
    - snap election to lance the HoC boil?

    But it's a genuine question. What immediate, pragmatic things do you think will happen to allow us to continue to function? Our politicians are probably not thinking about this - so websites like this should...

    I'm not so sure that all the regulations required to keep thing 'flowing as normal' will be overlooked.

    We have a very regulated society with fines if you ignore them.
    You may be confusing us with Germany.
  • _Anazina_ said:

    A bizarre mentality. Those who wish to restrict the rights of their fellow human being to live and work freely across our beautiful continent. What a miserable ethos.

    Why continent? Why not our beautiful planet?
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006
    Cyclefree said:

    Dura_Ace said:







    so your view is the Spanish government will remove a major source of income just to keep Brussels happy.

    than before.

    so in effect there will be some inconvenience but money is money and things will continue

    so whats all the doom mongering about ?

    I am not doom-mongeribg, merely observing that only rich Brits wil insurance you’ll be fine.

    No its just wild conjecture the spanish government basically is who we should listen to

    https://www.politico.eu/article/spanish-pm-sanchez-brits-rights-wont-change-after-brexit/

    I have no prior knowledge but Id gu to Spain

    “British citizensthat will change.

    I see no reason in any case.

    You could see no reason why the Irish border would be an issue. If it were down to businesses it wouldn’t be.

    the Irish border shouldnt be an issuegeous

    He is overwhelmingly backed by Irish voters. But putting that to one side, do you think Spanish politicians are going to reap big electoral rewards by proposing to make it easier to immigrate to Spain?

    of course not, I very much doubt its an election winning issue in Spain, the domestic agenda on the other hand is. But like all secondary issues if its worth doing it will get done, we;d do the same in reverse if it was in our interest.

    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    No Thatcher follower should be wanting us to boycott the single market. It was her liberal revolution across an entire continent. With a radical left opposition once again sniffing round the notion of owning industry the last thing we need is to be out of it.
  • malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    no places like Morrocco or Florida or Turkey. Thats assuming they have a problem in the first place, all those people with dual nationality will just continue with business as normal. And eventually places in the Med will want their investors back some resorts are stuffed full of Russians who seem to have no problem.

    They are not full of Russians who have very little money. FoM in the EU27 will now only apply to those few that can afford it.
    and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    What do you think the chances are that Spain will refuse to allow any further immigration of Brits without them stumping up £500k post Brexit?

    50/50?
    As long as they can buy property and pay health care the Spanish will care not a jot.
    Agree, but that presupposes that the retirees can afford, in particular health care. I was quite fit and healthy until I retired. Since then I've had two types of cancer and I'm waiting for another, unrelated, operation. I can get travel insurance for accidents and so on, but not for 'developments' of the other two. However, as I don't expect any, or if there are they're highly unlikely to require emergency treatment that's OK, but it would cast a shadow over emigration plans.
    But they already have to be able to afford health care in Spain. So that is no different.


  • and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    And as you've agreed before people with wealth find it easier to migrate.

    Now perhaps Spain will want to damage their economy by stopping the migration of people who can afford to buy property and who will be spending money in the local shops and bars.

    Or perhaps they'll let you down and continue to encourage migration of affluent British people.

    Yep, if you have €500,000 to spend on a property and can afford health insurance you’ll be allowed in, no problem.

    We have taken the decision to damage our economy. I am not sure why you think Spain would change its immigration laws to prevent potential damage to its economy.

    You've just been demolished on the numbers.

    And good to see that you're now admitting that British people who move to Spain boost the Spanish economy.

    By who?

    http://www.abadabogados.com/en/residency-in-spain-for-non-eu-members/

    Yes, bilateral immigration is a net benefit for Spain and the UK
    That depends on who the immigrants are.

    Affluent people moving to a poorer area - for example British people moving to Spain - tend to be more beneficial than poor people moving to a more affluent area - which are what most people who migrate to the UK are.

    Now if those poorer migrants are also highly skilled then it might benefit the affluent area (though likely at a cost to where they come from) but poor and low skilled immigrants certainly don't (though it may help where they come from to get rid of them).
  • notme2 said:



    No Thatcher follower should be wanting us to boycott the single market. It was her liberal revolution across an entire continent. With a radical left opposition once again sniffing round the notion of owning industry the last thing we need is to be out of it.

    We won't boycott the single market. We will trade with it from outside.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    So May is asking for another two weeks. What options do MPs actually have to reject that, if they wanted to?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    felix said:

    Pulpstar said:



    A guaranteed income of €32k a year is worth more than €500k...

    Southam said that you’d need to buy €500k of property and that only rich brits will be able to retire to Spain. That’s not true - you can get a long term residency visa without buying the property and proving €32k per year annual income. So it’s more affordable than he’s making out.

    Plus, as I say, you could always travel to Spain 90 days out of every 180 anyway. I’m not saying retiring to Spain is as easy as it is before Brexit, but it’s not totally unattainable.

    Do you know how big a pension pit would need to be to produce a gusranteed income of €32,000 a year?

    An awful lot of retired public sector workers have incomes exceeding that.
    Doubtless bought a house before the 94-05 boom too...
  • Scott_P said:

    Back to the 16-1700's when merchantmen were converted to fighting ships and back again. All part of the Grand Tory Plan.
    I thought the whole point was we don't have enough ferries anyway. If so, how are we supposed to spare any to convert to other uses. (Ignoring the fact it is utterly impractical I would have thought)
    If we're buying the ferries it doesn't matter that they're currently registered abroad, which would be a problem as it means they aren't available to be requisitioned for war use as happened in the Falkland's War.

    Does the article say what they will be converted to do?
    I think the plan is to use them as the two Royal Marine base/support ships called Littoral Strike ships. One is to be based permanently in the Pacific as I understand it.
    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    I know nothing about ship construction, but it looks like you would need to do a lot of work to convert an existing ship to be a littoral strike ship. Perhaps the hull is by far the most expensive component and that makes it worth doing.
    That was my view as well. I would have thought that things like fire suppression, blast walls and all the other stuff associated with a military vessel would have been extremely expensive to retro fit to a civilian vessel.


  • and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    And as you've agreed before people with wealth find it easier to migrate.

    Now perhaps Spain will want to damage their economy by stopping the migration of people who can afford to buy property and who will be spending money in the local shops and bars.

    Or perhaps they'll let you down and continue to encourage migration of affluent British people.

    Yep, if you have €500,000 to spend on a property and can afford health insurance you’ll be allowed in, no problem.

    We have taken the decision to damage our economy. I am not sure why you think Spain would change its immigration laws to prevent potential damage to its economy.

    You've just been demolished on the numbers.

    And good to see that you're now admitting that British people who move to Spain boost the Spanish economy.

    By who?

    http://www.abadabogados.com/en/residency-in-spain-for-non-eu-members/

    Yes, bilateral immigration is a net benefit for Spain and the UK
    That depends on who the immigrants are.

    Affluent people moving to a poorer area - for example British people moving to Spain - tend to be more beneficial than poor people moving to a more affluent area - which are what most people who migrate to the UK are.

    Now if those poorer migrants are also highly skilled then it might benefit the affluent area (though likely at a cost to where they come from) but poor and low skilled immigrants certainly don't (though it may help where they come from to get rid of them).

    As we know, EU immigration is a net benefit to the UK.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    RIP Gordon Banks
  • Schrodinger's Brexit: we open the box on March 30, No Deal. I'm 95% sure of this.

    So what happens next?

    A lot of things will swing into action very quickly just to allow modern life to function. Yes, there will be queues at the borders, some headless chickens on the financial markets, a few of the nutters hosting spam fritter parties (or whatever) but - outside political and media bubbles - most people will simply have to roll their sleeves up and get on with their lives.

    My thoughts are:

    - some big, luminous agreement on settled status to kick in immediately so the 3 million EU citizens can get on with their lives (and more importantly, remove them from purgatory of not knowing what happens).
    - pragmatic solutions kick in at the border. It's amazing how many rules you can overlook just to wave the trucks through (to anyone looking to get anything/anyone into the country, now's your chance!)
    - snap election to lance the HoC boil?

    But it's a genuine question. What immediate, pragmatic things do you think will happen to allow us to continue to function? Our politicians are probably not thinking about this - so websites like this should...

    The 3 million EU citizens here is a red herring anyway. The Government already committed to enacting the settlement scheme that was part of the Deal even if No Deal results.
    That's what I thought. Seems an easy one to resolve. But talking to my EU friends, they are still very worried because of the uncertainty. Just because the government is *committed* to something doesn't mean that's what's going to *happen* on March 30.
    Well the registration is already underway irrespective of what kind of Brexit we have.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    Cyclefree said:

    Dura_Ace said:







    so your view is the Spanish government will remove a major source of income just to keep Brussels happy.

    than before.

    so in effect there will be some inconvenience but money is money and things will continue

    so whats all the doom mongering about ?

    I am not doom-mongeribg, merely observing that only rich Brits wil insurance you’ll be fine.

    No its just wild conjecture the spanish government basically is who we should listen to

    https://www.politico.eu/article/spanish-pm-sanchez-brits-rights-wont-change-after-brexit/

    I have no prior knowledge but Id gu to Spain

    “British citizensthat will change.

    I see no reason in any case.

    You could see no reason why the Irish border would be an issue. If it were down to businesses it wouldn’t be.

    the Irish border shouldnt be an issuegeous

    He is overwhelmingly backed by Irish voters. But putting that to one side, do you think Spanish politicians are going to reap big electoral rewards by proposing to make it easier to immigrate to Spain?

    of course not, I very much doubt its an election winning issue in Spain, the domestic agenda on the other hand is. But like all secondary issues if its worth doing it will get done, we;d do the same in reverse if it was in our interest.

    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    what do you think the main benefits are ?
  • Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    notme2 said:



    No Thatcher follower should be wanting us to boycott the single market. It was her liberal revolution across an entire continent. With a radical left opposition once again sniffing round the notion of owning industry the last thing we need is to be out of it.

    We won't boycott the single market. We will trade with it from outside.
    We not be bound by it though.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Cyclefree said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Cyclefree said:
    Turn the radio off, step away from the keyboard. You can do nothing now. Let it wash over you. Wait.
    I find it best to accept no deal is happening, no more worries about whether it will happen. Obviously nothing is certain though.
    Quite. The lunatics are in charge. They are on an ideological crusade. They don’t want compromise and come up with something acceptable to non believers. They want their Brexit (whatever that means this week) no matter the cost.

    So we wait.
    What I’m waiting for is the time when I can take my revenge on these lunatics.
    Hypothetically if we do leave without a deal (or a minimal series of mini deals) what will it take by the next election for you to determine it wasn't lunacy after all?

    Some here are dead set on thinking all will go wrong. Some here are dead set on thinking we will be fine. I don't know it hope we will be fine. What would convince you afterwards or is that bridge already burnt?
    At the moment I feel that the Tories and Labour have, in their various ways, burnt their bridges with me.

    What might convince me I've implicitly set out in various thread headers.

    But - briefly - what might make me revisit is if we have a clear, realistic and workable strategy for what our relationship with the EU should be. Not one based on "I don't want this / I hate this / Look at that drunken EU politician / they're out to get us" which seems to be the limit of political discussion about the EU these days

    But one which thinks hard about what Britain's place in Europe and relationship with the rest of the Continent should be in light of (i) the US's withdrawal from the post-WW2 consensus; (ii) China's rise; and (iii) Russia's aggression. One which has a realistic view of how we are going to earn our living and share the fruits of what we earn fairly amongst our people. One which has a generous open-minded sense of what sort of society we are aiming to be, not one spitting with bile at people who admire us and want to contribute.

    Sorting out some mini-deals so that we can travel and get food without too much hassle is not enough for me I'm afraid. That is a pathetically low bar.

  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    Bulwark and Albion are definitely under threat because they use A LOT of crew and the initial crewing estimates for the QNLZ carriers have now been shown to be over-optimistic by a factor of approximately 100%.

    Conveniently paying off Albion and Bulwark would free up enough crew to make operating the PoW a realistic possibility. Something has to give...
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,620
    edited February 2019
    I'd guess that 90% of British people living in Spain are at least slightly better off than average, even if they like to think of themselves as ordinary.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    I think it will be difficult to tell if leaving with no deal is as bad as many are predicting. Once Brexit is out of the way the Tories will be able to resume ruining the country with non- Brexit related policies. It will be hard to tell them apart.
  • Schrodinger's Brexit: we open the box on March 30, No Deal. I'm 95% sure of this.

    So what happens next?

    A lot of things will swing into action very quickly just to allow modern life to function. Yes, there will be queues at the borders, some headless chickens on the financial markets, a few of the nutters hosting spam fritter parties (or whatever) but - outside political and media bubbles - most people will simply have to roll their sleeves up and get on with their lives.

    My thoughts are:

    - some big, luminous agreement on settled status to kick in immediately so the 3 million EU citizens can get on with their lives (and more importantly, remove them from purgatory of not knowing what happens).
    - pragmatic solutions kick in at the border. It's amazing how many rules you can overlook just to wave the trucks through (to anyone looking to get anything/anyone into the country, now's your chance!)
    - snap election to lance the HoC boil?

    But it's a genuine question. What immediate, pragmatic things do you think will happen to allow us to continue to function? Our politicians are probably not thinking about this - so websites like this should...

    The 3 million EU citizens here is a red herring anyway. The Government already committed to enacting the settlement scheme that was part of the Deal even if No Deal results.
    That's what I thought. Seems an easy one to resolve. But talking to my EU friends, they are still very worried because of the uncertainty. Just because the government is *committed* to something doesn't mean that's what's going to *happen* on March 30.
    Britain is not giving off a trustworthy vibe at the moment. My Irish wife is worried despite the assurances on the Common Travel Area for the reason of not trusting the British government.

    Things like Windrush, and her own experience of the difficulty of proving residency to Student Finance England, provide real evidence for this lack of trust.
  • Cyclefree said:


    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.

    This is simply wrong. We may have pushed for it to be completed but the idea of and development towards the single market was fundamental to the original Treaty of Rome in 1957. It is why the Customs Union was created in 1968 and was always an aim of the EEC - hence the name Common Market. At best the British were responsible for the tidying up exercise that finished it all off but even that was not primarily our doing even if we provided the political push.
  • Consumption per head in EU countries:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/consumptionperhead/2018

    In the UK its 114% of the EU average, in Spain its 89% of the EU average.

    Now I would expect that the average British person who moves to Spain has above average wealth and I would also expect that the Spanish regions where they tend to move to have below average wealth.


  • and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    And as you've agreed before people with wealth find it easier to migrate.

    Now perhaps Spain will want to damage their economy by stopping the migration of people who can afford to buy property and who will be spending money in the local shops and bars.

    Or perhaps they'll let you down and continue to encourage migration of affluent British people.

    Yep, if you have €500,000 to spend on a property and can afford health insurance you’ll be allowed in, no problem.

    We have taken the decision to damage our economy. I am not sure why you think Spain would change its immigration laws to prevent potential damage to its economy.

    You've just been demolished on the numbers.

    And good to see that you're now admitting that British people who move to Spain boost the Spanish economy.

    By who?

    http://www.abadabogados.com/en/residency-in-spain-for-non-eu-members/

    Yes, bilateral immigration is a net benefit for Spain and the UK
    That depends on who the immigrants are.

    Affluent people moving to a poorer area - for example British people moving to Spain - tend to be more beneficial than poor people moving to a more affluent area - which are what most people who migrate to the UK are.

    Now if those poorer migrants are also highly skilled then it might benefit the affluent area (though likely at a cost to where they come from) but poor and low skilled immigrants certainly don't (though it may help where they come from to get rid of them).

    As we know, EU immigration is a net benefit to the UK.

    Do you mean financially?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    Andy_JS said:

    I'd guess that 90% of British people living in Spain are at least slightly better off than average, even if they like to think of themselves as ordinary.

    Costa Del Final salary pension
  • Andy_JS said:

    I'd guess that 90% of British people living in Spain are at least slightly better off than average, even if they like to think of themselves as ordinary.

    They will be at least slightly better off than the average British person which makes them significantly better off than the average Spanish person and even more so than the people in the parts of Spain they are likely to live in.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    Andy_JS said:

    I'd guess that 90% of British people living in Spain are at least slightly better off than average, even if they like to think of themselves as ordinary.

    Agreed .


  • and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    And as you've agreed before people with wealth find it easier to migrate.

    Now perhaps Spain will want to damage their economy by stopping the migration of people who can afford to buy property and who will be spending money in the local shops and bars.

    Or perhaps they'll let you down and continue to encourage migration of affluent British people.

    Yep, if you have €500,000 to spend on a property and can afford health insurance you’ll be allowed in, no problem.

    We have taken the decision to damage our economy. I am not sure why you think Spain would change its immigration laws to prevent potential damage to its economy.

    You've just been demolished on the numbers.

    And good to see that you're now admitting that British people who move to Spain boost the Spanish economy.

    By who?

    http://www.abadabogados.com/en/residency-in-spain-for-non-eu-members/

    Yes, bilateral immigration is a net benefit for Spain and the UK
    That depends on who the immigrants are.

    Affluent people moving to a poorer area - for example British people moving to Spain - tend to be more beneficial than poor people moving to a more affluent area - which are what most people who migrate to the UK are.

    Now if those poorer migrants are also highly skilled then it might benefit the affluent area (though likely at a cost to where they come from) but poor and low skilled immigrants certainly don't (though it may help where they come from to get rid of them).
    Except all the evidence seems to be that in our case, no matter what the relative wealth of those migrants, so long as they are actually in work, they actually increase not only GDP but also GDP per capita and so are a net benefit to the country.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.


  • and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    And as you've agreed before people with wealth find it easier to migrate.

    Now perhaps Spain will want to damage their economy by stopping the migration of people who can afford to buy property and who will be spending money in the local shops and bars.

    Or perhaps they'll let you down and continue to encourage migration of affluent British people.

    Yep, if you have €500,000 to spend on a property and can afford health insurance you’ll be allowed in, no problem.

    We have taken the decision to damage our economy. I am not sure why you think Spain would change its immigration laws to prevent potential damage to its economy.

    You've just been demolished on the numbers.

    And good to see that you're now admitting that British people who move to Spain boost the Spanish economy.

    By who?

    http://www.abadabogados.com/en/residency-in-spain-for-non-eu-members/

    Yes, bilateral immigration is a net benefit for Spain and the UK
    That depends on who the immigrants are.

    Affluent people moving to a poorer area - for example British people moving to Spain - tend to be more beneficial than poor people moving to a more affluent area - which are what most people who migrate to the UK are.

    Now if those poorer migrants are also highly skilled then it might benefit the affluent area (though likely at a cost to where they come from) but poor and low skilled immigrants certainly don't (though it may help where they come from to get rid of them).

    As we know, EU immigration is a net benefit to the UK.

    So how has Rotherham benefited from thousands of East European Roma moving there ?
  • Cyclefree said:



    At the moment I feel that the Tories and Labour have, in their various ways, burnt their bridges with me.

    What might convince me I've implicitly set out in various thread headers.

    But - briefly - what might make me revisit is if we have a clear, realistic and workable strategy for what our relationship with the EU should be. Not one based on "I don't want this / I hate this / Look at that drunken EU politician / they're out to get us" which seems to be the limit of political discussion about the EU these days

    But one which thinks hard about what Britain's place in Europe and relationship with the rest of the Continent should be in light of (i) the US's withdrawal from the post-WW2 consensus; (ii) China's rise; and (iii) Russia's aggression. One which has a realistic view of how we are going to earn our living and share the fruits of what we earn fairly amongst our people. One which has a generous open-minded sense of what sort of society we are aiming to be, not one spitting with bile at people who admire us and want to contribute.

    Sorting out some mini-deals so that we can travel and get food without too much hassle is not enough for me I'm afraid. That is a pathetically low bar.

    Personally I think our relationship with the continent should be friendly allies and neighbours. Do you need something more than that?

    I think the desire to seek more than that is what has caused a lot of issues. We seek to lead or influence people who have their own aims and desires. We don't need to lead Europe. Let the EU do what it wants in peace and let us do what we want. Where our interests align (eg facing up to Russia) let us work together eg in NATO.
  • So May is asking for another two weeks. What options do MPs actually have to reject that, if they wanted to?

    They could support another MP to be PM.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    Bulwark and Albion are definitely under threat because they use A LOT of crew and the initial crewing estimates for the QNLZ carriers have now been shown to be over-optimistic by a factor of approximately 100%.

    Conveniently paying off Albion and Bulwark would free up enough crew to make operating the PoW a realistic possibility. Something has to give...
    Here's a radical thought. They could always invest in more crew. I know it would take time but it has to start somewhere.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    Bulwark and Albion are definitely under threat because they use A LOT of crew and the initial crewing estimates for the QNLZ carriers have now been shown to be over-optimistic by a factor of approximately 100%.

    Conveniently paying off Albion and Bulwark would free up enough crew to make operating the PoW a realistic possibility. Something has to give...
    Here's a radical thought. They could always invest in more crew. I know it would take time but it has to start somewhere.
    Where's the money going to come from?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,254

    For peoples vote types, the best option now is probably to agree to May's deal, purely because it ensures a juicy 2 year extendable transition period where we have officially left the EU but still remain so closely aligned as to either call the whole thing off in a year or so, extend the transition further while we "cross the t's and dot the i's" on whatever future agreement takes place. A second referendum would be much easier from a democratic point of view if you can say "well, we left the EU, we are no longer members, so the mandate of the first referendum has been implemented and we can move on".

    A good point IMO.

    The 2016 referendumb is properly and democratically extinguished on the day we leave.

    Another referendumb at any point after that is the bright and bushy tailed "Should we rejoin?" rather than the tired and tawdry "Shall we not leave at all because it's too damaging and difficult and the public had no clue about any of this when they voted for it?"
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    Pulpstar said:



    A guaranteed income of €32k a year is worth more than €500k...

    Southam said that you’d need to buy €500k of property and that only rich brits will be able to retire to Spain. That’s not true - you can get a long term residency visa without buying the property and proving €32k per year annual income. So it’s more affordable than he’s making out.

    Plus, as I say, you could always travel to Spain 90 days out of every 180 anyway. I’m not saying retiring to Spain is as easy as it is before Brexit, but it’s not totally unattainable.

    Do you know how big a pension pit would need to be to produce a gusranteed income of €32,000 a year?

    Depends how old you are, no?
  • Scott_P said:

    Back to the 16-1700's when merchantmen were converted to fighting ships and back again. All part of the Grand Tory Plan.
    I thought the whole point was we don't have enough ferries anyway. If so, how are we supposed to spare any to convert to other uses. (Ignoring the fact it is utterly impractical I would have thought)
    If we're buying the ferries it doesn't matter that they're currently registered abroad, which would be a problem as it means they aren't available to be requisitioned for war use as happened in the Falkland's War.

    Does the article say what they will be converted to do?
    I think the plan is to use them as the two Royal Marine base/support ships called Littoral Strike ships. One is to be based permanently in the Pacific as I understand it.
    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    I know nothing about ship construction, but it looks like you would need to do a lot of work to convert an existing ship to be a littoral strike ship. Perhaps the hull is by far the most expensive component and that makes it worth doing.
    That was my view as well. I would have thought that things like fire suppression, blast walls and all the other stuff associated with a military vessel would have been extremely expensive to retro fit to a civilian vessel.
    Or you don't retrofit that stuff and you tell people to serve in a death trap.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,653
    edited February 2019

    Consumption per head in EU countries:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/consumptionperhead/2018

    In the UK its 114% of the EU average, in Spain its 89% of the EU average.

    Now I would expect that the average British person who moves to Spain has above average wealth and I would also expect that the Spanish regions where they tend to move to have below average wealth.

    All you need to live in Spain currently is an income that allows you to rent somewhere and pay your bills. That is not a dream beyond many millions of Brits. Economically, it certainly makes sense for things to stay the same, but the UK has decided there are more important things than economics. One of the consequences of that decision, which you support, is that in future many of those who dream of retiring to the Med will no longer be able to. For that reason I expect FoM to return to the table. It doesn’t just affect foreigners.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Personally I think our relationship with the continent should be friendly allies and neighbours. Do you need something more than that?

    We were

    And Brexit has completely fucked it.
  • Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.
  • _Anazina_ said:

    A bizarre mentality. Those who wish to restrict the rights of their fellow human being to live and work freely across our beautiful continent. What a miserable ethos.

    Why continent? Why not our beautiful planet?
    Indeed. Once again we see the myopic view of the Remainer in action.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    kinabalu said:

    For peoples vote types, the best option now is probably to agree to May's deal, purely because it ensures a juicy 2 year extendable transition period where we have officially left the EU but still remain so closely aligned as to either call the whole thing off in a year or so, extend the transition further while we "cross the t's and dot the i's" on whatever future agreement takes place. A second referendum would be much easier from a democratic point of view if you can say "well, we left the EU, we are no longer members, so the mandate of the first referendum has been implemented and we can move on".

    A good point IMO.

    The 2016 referendumb is properly and democratically extinguished on the day we leave.

    Another referendumb at any point after that is the bright and bushy tailed "Should we rejoin?" rather than the tired and tawdry "Shall we not leave at all because it's too damaging and difficult and the public had no clue about any of this when they voted for it?"
    It'll be tougher to rejoin than remain in. But it will probably force a proper think from all concerned !
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006



    and brits who dont have much money arent there either, all youre saying is the beter off can afford to go places.

    Nonsense. The Costas are home to large numbers of Brits on very average incomes and of very average means. For the last 40 years living, working and retiring to the sun have been attainable dreams for millions. That is about to end. That may not bother you, but it will bother plenty of other Leave voters who never realised ending freedom of movement didn’t only apply to foreigners.

    Those people are probably in the top 25% of wealth among the EU population and richer than 90% of those who migrate to the UK from the rest of the EU.

    So what? They still lose their FoM.

    And as you've agreed before people with wealth find it easier to migrate.

    Now perhaps Spain will want to damage their economy by stopping the migration of people who can afford to buy property and who will be spending money in the local shops and bars.

    Or perhaps they'll let you down and continue to encourage migration of affluent British people.

    Yep, if you have €500,000 to spend on a property and can afford health e our economy. I am not sure why you think Spain would change its immigration laws to prevent potential damage to its economy.

    You've just been demolished on the numbers.

    And good to see that you're now admitting that British people who move to Spain boost the Spanish economy.

    By who?

    http://www.abadabogados.com/en/residency-in-spain-for-non-eu-members/

    Yes, bilateral immigration is a net benefit for Spain and the UK
    That depends on who the immigrants are.

    Affluent people moving to a poorer area - for example British people moving to Spain - tend to be more beneficial than poor people moving to a more affluent area - which are what most people who migrate to the UK are.

    Now if those poorer migrants are also highly skilled then it might benefit the affluent area (though likely at a cost to where they come from) but poor and low skilled immigrants certainly don't (though it may help where they come from to get rid of them).

    As we know, EU immigration is a net benefit to the UK.

    So how has Rotherham benefited from thousands of East European Roma moving there ?
    Big Issue sales will have rocketed.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Cyclefree said:



    At the moment I feel that the Tories and Labour have, in their various ways, burnt their bridges with me.

    What might convince me I've implicitly set out in various thread headers.

    But - briefly - what might make me revisit is if we have a clear, realistic and workable strategy for what our relationship with the EU should be. Not one based on "I don't want this / I hate this / Look at that drunken EU politician / they're out to get us" which seems to be the limit of political discussion about the EU these days

    But one which thinks hard about what Britain's place in Europe and relationship with the rest of the Continent should be in light of (i) the US's withdrawal from the post-WW2 consensus; (ii) China's rise; and (iii) Russia's aggression. One which has a realistic view of how we are going to earn our living and share the fruits of what we earn fairly amongst our people. One which has a generous open-minded sense of what sort of society we are aiming to be, not one spitting with bile at people who admire us and want to contribute.

    Sorting out some mini-deals so that we can travel and get food without too much hassle is not enough for me I'm afraid. That is a pathetically low bar.

    Personally I think our relationship with the continent should be friendly allies and neighbours. Do you need something more than that?

    I think the desire to seek more than that is what has caused a lot of issues. We seek to lead or influence people who have their own aims and desires. We don't need to lead Europe. Let the EU do what it wants in peace and let us do what we want. Where our interests align (eg facing up to Russia) let us work together eg in NATO.
    I'm not seeking for us to lead. I think Britain needs to have a strategy for Europe. It has not had one. It does not have one now. That is why it is thrashing around. We're not even behaving like friendly allies and neighbours but like an unstable madman you'd cross the road to avoid. It's why the bar for Brexit being a success is no traffic jams around Dover, being able to buy lettuces from Spain and boasting about having stockpiled sufficient bodybags. It's pathetic.

    I need to be off. I have done several thread headers over the years on what a European strategy for Britain might be. We seem to be no further forward. http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/01/08/trying-to-work-out-what-is-britains-european-strategy/.

    This is not just pathetic. It's damaging.
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    I think there are probably three hundred plus MPs who would seek this kind of position. But they are not all on the same side.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,732

    Cyclefree said:



    At the moment I feel that the Tories and Labour have, in their various ways, burnt their bridges with me.

    What might convince me I've implicitly set out in various thread headers.

    But - briefly - what might make me revisit is if we have a clear, realistic and workable strategy for what our relationship with the EU should be. Not one based on "I don't want this / I hate this / Look at that drunken EU politician / they're out to get us" which seems to be the limit of political discussion about the EU these days

    But one which thinks hard about what Britain's place in Europe and relationship with the rest of the Continent should be in light of (i) the US's withdrawal from the post-WW2 consensus; (ii) China's rise; and (iii) Russia's aggression. One which has a realistic view of how we are going to earn our living and share the fruits of what we earn fairly amongst our people. One which has a generous open-minded sense of what sort of society we are aiming to be, not one spitting with bile at people who admire us and want to contribute.

    Sorting out some mini-deals so that we can travel and get food without too much hassle is not enough for me I'm afraid. That is a pathetically low bar.

    Personally I think our relationship with the continent should be friendly allies and neighbours. Do you need something more than that?

    I think the desire to seek more than that is what has caused a lot of issues. We seek to lead or influence people who have their own aims and desires. We don't need to lead Europe. Let the EU do what it wants in peace and let us do what we want. Where our interests align (eg facing up to Russia) let us work together eg in NATO.
    The irony is that this view depends on seeing the EU as a country, not a system that allows countries to work together. If we choose to snub the system that France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland, Spain and Germany all use, then we are necessarily choosing worse relations with our neighbours.
  • Consumption per head in EU countries:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/consumptionperhead/2018

    In the UK its 114% of the EU average, in Spain its 89% of the EU average.

    Now I would expect that the average British person who moves to Spain has above average wealth and I would also expect that the Spanish regions where they tend to move to have below average wealth.

    All you need to live in Spain currently is an income that allows you to rent somewhere and pay your bills. That is not a dream beyond many millions of Brits. Economically, it certainly makes sense for things to stay the same, but the UK has decided there are more important things than economics. One of the consequences of that decision, which you support, is that in future many of those who dream of retiring to the Med will no longer be able to. For that reason I expect FoM to return to the table. It doesn’t just affect foreigners.

    I asked earlier, you must have missed it.

    What do you think the chances are of Spain only allowing Brits worth £500k to emigrate there post Brexit?

    50/50?
  • Dura_Ace said:

    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    Bulwark and Albion are definitely under threat because they use A LOT of crew and the initial crewing estimates for the QNLZ carriers have now been shown to be over-optimistic by a factor of approximately 100%.

    Conveniently paying off Albion and Bulwark would free up enough crew to make operating the PoW a realistic possibility. Something has to give...
    Here's a radical thought. They could always invest in more crew. I know it would take time but it has to start somewhere.
    Where's the money going to come from?
    If you don't have the crew why build the ships?
  • Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.

    And the Leavers did not stand against her. They could have done. They chose not to. They also chose not to have any workable plan for leaving. And they have also chosen not to back May’s plan.

  • notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    Schrodinger's Brexit: we open the box on March 30, No Deal. I'm 95% sure of this.

    So what happens next?

    A lot of things will swing into action very quickly just to allow modern life to function. Yes, there will be queues at the borders, some headless chickens on the financial markets, a few of the nutters hosting spam fritter parties (or whatever) but - outside political and media bubbles - most people will simply have to roll their sleeves up and get on with their lives.

    My thoughts are:

    - some big, luminous agreement on settled status to kick in immediately so the 3 million EU citizens can get on with their lives (and more importantly, remove them from purgatory of not knowing what happens).
    - pragmatic solutions kick in at the border. It's amazing how many rules you can overlook just to wave the trucks through (to anyone looking to get anything/anyone into the country, now's your chance!)
    - snap election to lance the HoC boil?

    But it's a genuine question. What immediate, pragmatic things do you think will happen to allow us to continue to function? Our politicians are probably not thinking about this - so websites like this should...

    The 3 million EU citizens here is a red herring anyway. The Government already committed to enacting the settlement scheme that was part of the Deal even if No Deal results.
    That's what I thought. Seems an easy one to resolve. But talking to my EU friends, they are still very worried because of the uncertainty. Just because the government is *committed* to something doesn't mean that's what's going to *happen* on March 30.
    Britain is not giving off a trustworthy vibe at the moment. My Irish wife is worried despite the assurances on the Common Travel Area for the reason of not trusting the British government.

    Things like Windrush, and her own experience of the difficulty of proving residency to Student Finance England, provide real evidence for this lack of trust.
    FFS your Irish wife? Really? Irish citizens have had unlimited unrestricted rights to live, work and vote in the UK since the partition.

    Instead of pandering to her fears. Tell her to stop being so stupid and to calm down a bit.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd guess that 90% of British people living in Spain are at least slightly better off than average, even if they like to think of themselves as ordinary.

    They will be at least slightly better off than the average British person which makes them significantly better off than the average Spanish person and even more so than the people in the parts of Spain they are likely to live in.
    True. Where I am the cost of living is around 25% less than the UK and the quality of life - pace, climate, food, environment is glorious .
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,732

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.
    You want someone to revel in it and not care about creating hassle?
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.

    And the Leavers did not stand against her. They could have done. They chose not to. They also chose not to have any workable plan for leaving. And they have also chosen not to back May’s plan.

    She’s chosen the hardest of hard Brexit and the purists still decry her as a traitor. Should have just gone for Norway model and ignored them.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Cyclefree said:


    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.

    This is simply wrong. We may have pushed for it to be completed but the idea of and development towards the single market was fundamental to the original Treaty of Rome in 1957. It is why the Customs Union was created in 1968 and was always an aim of the EEC - hence the name Common Market. At best the British were responsible for the tidying up exercise that finished it all off but even that was not primarily our doing even if we provided the political push.

    The idea of a single market was something that the British developed in the 18th and 19th centuries.

    Sure the concept was implicit in the Treaty of Rome. But it was Mrs T and Lord Cockfield who did a lot of the push to make sure that it really came about. And that was because Mrs T understood - unlike her successors in her party, however devoted they may be to her memory - its importance to a trading nation.

    Anyway, I have to earn my own living now.

    So have a good day all.
  • Miss Cyclefree, the political class had one. More engagement/integration with the EU.

    They were idiots, however.

    Not necessarily because that was the wrong choice (though I'm not fond of the EU) but because they behaved foolishly in executing the choice. Never asking the electorate if they agreed to give away more powers. Promising a referendum and reneging. Making sceptical noises in opposition and then committing pro-EU actions in office (a little like Cameron on immigration).

    Who actually made the case for the EU, beyond "it is good"?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,198
    edited February 2019
    Looks like May is not the only PM having trouble getting a key Bill through their Parliament, Australian PM Scott Morrison has just seen his Coalition government lose a vote on denying healthcare to refugees, the first defeat for Government legislation in the Australian House of Representatives for 80 years

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-47193899
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,010
    edited February 2019
    notme2 said:

    Tell her to stop being so stupid and to calm down a bit.

    It's like Claire Rayner has come back to life.
  • Consumption per head in EU countries:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/consumptionperhead/2018

    In the UK its 114% of the EU average, in Spain its 89% of the EU average.

    Now I would expect that the average British person who moves to Spain has above average wealth and I would also expect that the Spanish regions where they tend to move to have below average wealth.

    All you need to live in Spain currently is an income that allows you to rent somewhere and pay your bills. That is not a dream beyond many millions of Brits. Economically, it certainly makes sense for things to stay the same, but the UK has decided there are more important things than economics. One of the consequences of that decision, which you support, is that in future many of those who dream of retiring to the Med will no longer be able to. For that reason I expect FoM to return to the table. It doesn’t just affect foreigners.

    I asked earlier, you must have missed it.

    What do you think the chances are of Spain only allowing Brits worth £500k to emigrate there post Brexit?

    50/50?

    I think the chances of Spain unilaterally changing its immigration laws to make life easier for future generations of Brits are close to zero. I think a wider EU/UK deal will be done that looks pretty close to FoM.

  • notme2 said:

    Schrodinger's Brexit: we open the box on March 30, No Deal. I'm 95% sure of this.

    So what happens next?

    A lot of things will swing into action very quickly just to allow modern life to function. Yes, there will be queues at the borders, some headless chickens on the financial markets, a few of the nutters hosting spam fritter parties (or whatever) but - outside political and media bubbles - most people will simply have to roll their sleeves up and get on with their lives.

    My thoughts are:

    - some big, luminous agreement on settled status to kick in immediately so the 3 million EU citizens can get on with their lives (and more importantly, remove them from purgatory of not knowing what happens).
    - pragmatic solutions kick in at the border. It's amazing how many rules you can overlook just to wave the trucks through (to anyone looking to get anything/anyone into the country, now's your chance!)
    - snap election to lance the HoC boil?

    But it's a genuine question. What immediate, pragmatic things do you think will happen to allow us to continue to function? Our politicians are probably not thinking about this - so websites like this should...

    The 3 million EU citizens here is a red herring anyway. The Government already committed to enacting the settlement scheme that was part of the Deal even if No Deal results.
    That's what I thought. Seems an easy one to resolve. But talking to my EU friends, they are still very worried because of the uncertainty. Just because the government is *committed* to something doesn't mean that's what's going to *happen* on March 30.
    Britain is not giving off a trustworthy vibe at the moment. My Irish wife is worried despite the assurances on the Common Travel Area for the reason of not trusting the British government.

    Things like Windrush, and her own experience of the difficulty of proving residency to Student Finance England, provide real evidence for this lack of trust.
    FFS your Irish wife? Really? Irish citizens have had unlimited unrestricted rights to live, work and vote in the UK since the partition.

    Instead of pandering to her fears. Tell her to stop being so stupid and to calm down a bit.
    Don't be so insulting. I've tried to reassure.

    You've clearly not paid any attention to the Windrush scandal or had any experience of dealing with British bureaucracy as a non-Briton.
  • Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.
    You want someone to revel in it and not care about creating hassle?
    No I want someone competent who actually understood what was both practical and necessary rather than pushing a myopic, xenophobic agenda. There were and still are forms of Brexit out there which would have been acceptable to all sides and which would have fulfilled the word and spirit of the referendum. Nothing May has done has been to that end.
  • "BINO" is not a useful concept because it presupposes that there is some "true" or "real" form of Brexit, whereas the Leave campaign deliberately left the actual form of Brexit as nebulous as possible, hence our current problems. The referendum simply asked if we should leave the EU, and each of these options satisfies that. The ideal form of Brexit would be one that satisfies the median voter in the referendum. That median voter is a leave voter, but at the 96th percentile of leave voters - ie 96% of leave voters wanted a "harder" form of Brexit. It is therefore most likely that the "softest" form of Brexit possible, the SM+CU option, is closest to the preference of the median voter. (Whether Brexit in this form makes any sense is another question of course, but we have long moved beyond questions of logic).
  • Consumption per head in EU countries:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/consumptionperhead/2018

    In the UK its 114% of the EU average, in Spain its 89% of the EU average.

    Now I would expect that the average British person who moves to Spain has above average wealth and I would also expect that the Spanish regions where they tend to move to have below average wealth.

    All you need to live in Spain currently is an income that allows you to rent somewhere and pay your bills. That is not a dream beyond many millions of Brits. Economically, it certainly makes sense for things to stay the same, but the UK has decided there are more important things than economics. One of the consequences of that decision, which you support, is that in future many of those who dream of retiring to the Med will no longer be able to. For that reason I expect FoM to return to the table. It doesn’t just affect foreigners.

    I asked earlier, you must have missed it.

    What do you think the chances are of Spain only allowing Brits worth £500k to emigrate there post Brexit?

    50/50?

    I think the chances of Spain unilaterally changing its immigration laws to make life easier for future generations of Brits are close to zero. I think a wider EU/UK deal will be done that looks pretty close to FoM.

    Really? I guess we will find out sooner or later
  • Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.

    And the Leavers did not stand against her. They could have done. They chose not to. They also chose not to have any workable plan for leaving. And they have also chosen not to back May’s plan.

    The only person who did not stand against her having said he would was Boris. Thankfully.
  • notme2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort of traitor or enemy, had not gloried in insulting our neighbours, had been realistic about what it means to disengage from an institution of which we have been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.

    And the Leavers did not stand against her. They could have done. They chose not to. They also chose not to have any workable plan for leaving. And they have also chosen not to back May’s plan.

    She’s chosen the hardest of hard Brexit and the purists still decry her as a traitor. Should have just gone for Norway model and ignored them.
    Yep.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver.

    Everything she has said and done since the vote has been to reassure leavers, appease leavers, promote leavers, and facilitate leaving.

    What definition of "not a leaver" are you imagining?
  • Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had come up with some sort of sensible workable plan, had not treated anyone who disagreed as some sort been a member for 43 years, had been prepared to compromise since their victory was not an overwhelming one and the country was pretty evenly divided, then - fair enough - I'd have sat back and carried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.
    You want someone to revel in it and not care about creating hassle?
    No I want someone competent who actually understood what was both practical and necessary rather than pushing a myopic, xenophobic agenda. There were and still are forms of Brexit out there which would have been acceptable to all sides and which would have fulfilled the word and spirit of the referendum. Nothing May has done has been to that end.

    Who would have that been? Clearly none of the Buccaneers.

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    edited February 2019

    Dura_Ace said:

    So is this related to the rumour that the existing amphibious assault ships were to be scrapped?

    Bulwark and Albion are definitely under threat because they use A LOT of crew and the initial crewing estimates for the QNLZ carriers have now been shown to be over-optimistic by a factor of approximately 100%.

    Conveniently paying off Albion and Bulwark would free up enough crew to make operating the PoW a realistic possibility. Something has to give...
    Here's a radical thought. They could always invest in more crew. I know it would take time but it has to start somewhere.
    Where's the money going to come from?
    If you don't have the crew why build the ships?
    Because unless a politican (or royal) can cut a ribbon/smash a champagne bottle, they're not interested in funding it. Hence HS2 rather than upgrading the existing railway network.
  • Scott_P said:

    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver.

    Everything she has said and done since the vote has been to reassure leavers, appease leavers, promote leavers, and facilitate leaving.

    What definition of "not a leaver" are you imagining?
    One who actually voted and campaigned for it might be a start.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    One who actually voted and campaigned for it might be a start.

    They all ran away
  • Cyclefree said:



    At the moment I feel that the Tories and Labour have, in their various ways, burnt their bridges with me.

    What might convince me I've implicitly set out in various thread headers.

    But - briefly - what might make me revisit is if we have a clear, realistic and workable strategy for what our relationship with the EU should be. Not one based on "I don't want this / I hate this / Look at that drunken EU politician / they're out to get us" which seems to be the limit of political discussion about the EU these days

    But one which thinks hard about what Britain's place in Europe and relationship with the rest of the Continent should be in light of (i) the US's withdrawal from the post-WW2 consensus; (ii) China's rise; and (iii) Russia's aggression. One which has a realistic view of how we are going to earn our living and share the fruits of what we earn fairly amongst our people. One which has a generous open-minded sense of what sort of society we are aiming to be, not one spitting with bile at people who admire us and want to contribute.

    Sorting out some mini-deals so that we can travel and get food without too much hassle is not enough for me I'm afraid. That is a pathetically low bar.

    Personally I think our relationship with the continent should be friendly allies and neighbours. Do you need something more than that?

    I think the desire to seek more than that is what has caused a lot of issues. We seek to lead or influence people who have their own aims and desires. We don't need to lead Europe. Let the EU do what it wants in peace and let us do what we want. Where our interests align (eg facing up to Russia) let us work together eg in NATO.
    The irony is that this view depends on seeing the EU as a country, not a system that allows countries to work together. If we choose to snub the system that France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland, Spain and Germany all use, then we are necessarily choosing worse relations with our neighbours.
    Not worse just different.

    There is nothing wrong with being different.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,732

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.
    You want someone to revel in it and not care about creating hassle?
    No I want someone competent who actually understood what was both practical and necessary rather than pushing a myopic, xenophobic agenda. There were and still are forms of Brexit out there which would have been acceptable to all sides and which would have fulfilled the word and spirit of the referendum. Nothing May has done has been to that end.
    Nobody associated with the Leave campaign could have delivered a Norway-style Brexit because of their rhetoric on immigration, so it had to be a Remainer. George Osborne?
  • Scott_P said:

    One who actually voted and campaigned for it might be a start.

    They all ran away
    2 out of the 3 most vocal Tory MPs ran for the party leadership.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,198
    edited February 2019
    notme2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    FoM is in our interests. We are ending it.

    As is the Single Market. We practically invented it. We pushed for it. We benefited from it. It is Britain's single most important contribution to the EU.

    And that Leadsom woman was going on this morning about it being an achievement that we were withdrawing from it. Stupid is too polite a word to use about her and her ilk.
    I'm confused. This is a debate we literally had 3 years ago. All Vote Leave leaders and all Stronger In leaders made clear leaving meant leaving the Single Market. But for years I couldn't tell if you supported Remain or Leave. Now you seem as determined as Anna Soubry but I'm not sure what's changed?
    I was prepared to give the Leavers the benefit of the doubt. I have never been a particular fan of the EU. I have lots of criticisms of the EU - and made many of them on here.

    What has changed is seeing the utter fuck-up the Leavers have made of Brexit and their determination to continue fucking it up, regardless of the cost.

    That is what has hardened my soul on this. If they Brexiteers had arried on, much as I do when we have a government I haven't voted for, which is most of the time.

    It has been the Brexiteers utter intransigence, incompetence and frivolously damaging approach to the whole issue which has made me so furious about it.

    But @Jonathan is right. I should chill out. Hard to, though, when it is my childrens' futures these loons are messing with.
    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver. She has always been luke warm at best about the whole thing and was only ever interested in getting it out of the way with the minimum of hassle. That is no way to run a process like this.

    And the Leavers did not stand against her. They could have done. They chose not to. They also chose not to have any workable plan for leaving. And they have also chosen not to back May’s plan.

    She’s chosen the hardest of hard Brexit and the purists still decry her as a traitor. Should have just gone for Norway model and ignored them.
    I doubt the Norway model would get through the Commons either as many Labour MPs in Leave seats would vote against it as it requires free movement, Customs Union plus single market elements ie mirroring the NI backstop for GB is the only alternative to May's Deal I can see getting through the Commons. Only 126 MPs voted to stay in the EEA last year but 301 MPs voted to stay in the Customs Union

  • No I want someone competent who actually understood what was both practical and necessary rather than pushing a myopic, xenophobic agenda. There were and still are forms of Brexit out there which would have been acceptable to all sides and which would have fulfilled the word and spirit of the referendum. Nothing May has done has been to that end.

    Who would have that been? Clearly none of the Buccaneers.

    Michael Gove.
  • Scott_P said:

    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver.

    Everything she has said and done since the vote has been to reassure leavers, appease leavers, promote leavers, and facilitate leaving.

    What definition of "not a leaver" are you imagining?
    She doesn't do the goose-step and say "Heil Farage". Anyone that is not sympathetic to the BNP/UKIP cause is not a true believer. She still wouldn't be considered so even if the incompetent fool took us out on WTO rules. The disastrous result would be blamed on TMay because she was not pure.
  • Scott_P said:

    Once again you are blaming the wrong people. May was not and is not a Leaver.

    Everything she has said and done since the vote has been to reassure leavers, appease leavers, promote leavers, and facilitate leaving.

    What definition of "not a leaver" are you imagining?
    One who actually voted and campaigned for it might be a start.
    Which is why we should never have held a referendum in which the PM did not want the public to vote for the change offered.

    Whatever else happens that must not be allowed to happen again.
  • Mr Tyndall, Brexit is a myopic xenophobic agenda. Those of you that try to dress it up as something else are hopelessly attempting to kid yourselves and others.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,254
    Pulpstar said:

    It'll be tougher to rejoin than remain in. But it will probably force a proper think from all concerned !

    Tougher in one way (the practicalities) but perhaps easier in another (democratically) because the original referendum will have been respected and we will have a clean slate.

    Personally, if we ever do rejoin, I would prefer it to be via a party winning a general election with that in its manifesto.

    Still, steady the buffs, let's divorce the woman first before we start plotting how best to woo her back.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,620
    "The Moggcast. He is “very concerned” delaying Brexit would allow “Tommy Robinson to win the European elections”."

    https://www.conservativehome.com/audio/2019/02/the-moggcast-he-is-very-concerned-delaying-brexit-would-allow-tommy-robinson-to-win-the-european-elections.html
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    edited February 2019
    Scott_P said:
    Looks like something's going on now?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    It'll be tougher to rejoin than remain in. But it will probably force a proper think from all concerned !

    Tougher in one way (the practicalities) but perhaps easier in another (democratically) because the original referendum will have been respected and we will have a clean slate.

    Personally, if we ever do rejoin, I would prefer it to be via a party winning a general election with that in its manifesto.

    Still, steady the buffs, let's divorce the woman first before we start plotting how best to woo her back.
    Brexit - Better than the Solis story arc in Desperate Housewives.
  • Mr. Me, that was an extremely odd state of affairs, I agree.

    "Things should stay as they are. Let's hold a vote on changing them."

    That said, the gulf widening between the electorate and the political class over the EU was not, despite the comfort the media/political class felt, a good thing.

    Said it before, but the time to hold a referendum was Lisbon, if not earlier.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    Imagine how the Tories would be doing if they sacked failing Grayling ?
  • Cyclefree said:



    At the moment I feel that the Tories and Labour have, in their various ways, burnt their bridges with me.

    What might convince me I've implicitly set out in various thread headers.

    But - briefly - what might make me revisit is if we have a clear, realistic and workable strategy for what our relationship with the EU should be. Not one based on "I don't want this / I hate this / Look at that drunken EU politician / they're out to get us" which seems to be the limit of political discussion about the EU these days

    But one which thinks hard about what Britain's place in Europe and relationship with the rest of the Continent should be in light of (i) the US's withdrawal from the post-WW2 consensus; (ii) China's rise; and (iii) Russia's aggression. One which has a realistic view of how we are going to earn our living and share the fruits of what we earn fairly amongst our people. One which has a generous open-minded sense of what sort of society we are aiming to be, not one spitting with bile at people who admire us and want to contribute.

    Sorting out some mini-deals so that we can travel and get food without too much hassle is not enough for me I'm afraid. That is a pathetically low bar.

    Personally I think our relationship with the continent should be friendly allies and neighbours. Do you need something more than that?

    I think the desire to seek more than that is what has caused a lot of issues. We seek to lead or influence people who have their own aims and desires. We don't need to lead Europe. Let the EU do what it wants in peace and let us do what we want. Where our interests align (eg facing up to Russia) let us work together eg in NATO.
    The irony is that this view depends on seeing the EU as a country, not a system that allows countries to work together. If we choose to snub the system that France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland, Spain and Germany all use, then we are necessarily choosing worse relations with our neighbours.
    Not worse just different.

    There is nothing wrong with being different.
    Well, they're certainly not better - or even as good. So that makes them worse, surely.
This discussion has been closed.