New terms: Bregret & Breverse

[Lofos-5]

From today's Economist Espresso:

EU-turn: calls for a Brexit exit

​Could Britain find Breverse gear? In the summer lull, whispers that the referendum could be overturned have become a louder hum. Brexit is a “stitch-up”, says David Miliband, a former foreign secretary; Parliament is “deadlocked”, says Vernon Bogdanor, Britain’s foremost constitutionalist; a new party should derail the process, suggests a disgruntled former chief of staff to the Brexit secretary. They and others want a second referendum on whatever deal the government cuts in Brussels. They face three obstacles. First, Britain’s triggering of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to leave the EU may be irreversible—though it is likely the bloc would play ball. Second, trade arrangements will be finalised only after Britain has left in 2019, making it impossible to vote on the final deal before Brexit has happened. Third, public opinion has hardly changed since the referendum. “Bregret” may kick in if Britain’s economy plunges. By then it may be too late.

[Dominic]

Let's analyse that article:

whispers that the referendum could be overturned have become a louder hum.

This is the basic gist.

Second referendum on final deal wanted.

That is the acton wanted.

But:

1. Article 50 may be irreversible
2. Won't know final deal until after Brexit.

Now, 1 and 2 can be disguarded, however:

3. public opinion has hardly changed since the referendum.

But if public opinion has hardly changed, surely the vote would go the same way anyway?

[Royal]

I think public opinion has changed.

Project FEAR 2 + EU intransigence and bluster + constant Remoaning has hardened Brexiteers and has not been successful in even retaining Remainers.

Just my opinion of course...

[Poppy]

Also just my opinion and not hard fact but I am now living here in the UK and the people I speak to are actually saying that they did not vote to leave but were they to vote again they would vote leave - this i.s from people of all ages.

[Lofos-5]

Also just my opinion and not hard fact but I am now living here in the UK and the people I speak to are actually saying that they did not vote to leave but were they to vote again they would vote leave - this i.s from people of all ages.

An interesting observation and/but I truly hope it won't turn into an epic act of national self-harm in the end as some papers and people predict!

A.

[Poppy]

I really don't think so Lofos-5 but for it to be a total success it needs everyone,especially the Media to be more positive. It really does seem that some people want BREXIT to fail just so they can say they told us so.

[Dominic]

I've just asked on a UK facebook group I am still a member of.

This was my question:

Non-political question about Brexit:
This isn't meant to start a political debate, but somebody said something to me about people changing their minds (in both directions). I didn't think they had, but in the interest of fairness I thought I would ask here.

Have you changed your mind?

An additional question is, if you have, what do you now favour? Even if you don't want to answer the second question, could you answer the first please? I don't need or want to know why, just if you have or not.

So far 25 have responded. 23 said no they hadn't changed their mind. 2 had changed their mind. Of those 2, 1 had gone from leave to remain, the other from remain to leave.

[Royal]

It's not that people WANT Brexit to fail; Brexit was destined to fail from the outset, because it was a stupid, half-baked idea which had not been thought through. All possible implications and outcomes were not spelt out clearly to those who would vote. Nationalistic hubris overtook reason and rational debate.

The UK will now pay the price.

Yes, we (Remainers) did try to warn you...but you wouldn't listen. Remember?

We did tell you so

Dear old Lloyd,

He keeps his head down until we get another negative story about Brexit then takes great delight in crowing about it, often ending his missives with an “I told you so…!” and then he retires (not so gracefully) back to his trench desperately waiting for the next article that seems to agree with his jaundiced views. He really does believe that 17.4 million people were hoodwinked by 3 people and that he was one of the minority of people who really know the truth and what's best for the country.

There, George Osborne says what I've been saying all along: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/eu-upper-hand ... 18675.html

This is the same George Osborne who started Project Fear (all truth and no lies or deceit of course as befits all Remainers). You know, the George Osborne who before the Referendum said that if we voted Brexit there would be an emergency budget (didn't happen) with £15Bn tax increases (didn't happen) and £15Bn spending cuts (didn't happen). He confidently predicted that a vote to leave would push the UK into a recession (didn't happen) and that 500,000 people would lose their jobs (didn't happen).

George Osborne failed, after university to get a placement for his chosen career of journalism so instead…became a politician! With absolutely no experience of business, industry or economics (his 2:1 degree was in Modern History) he was put in charge of the nations finances. Like so many of our modern day politicians - he was a career politician with little real life experience to guide him.

Now our George has fallen from the dizzy heights of Chancellor of the Exchequer to a become a newspaper editor. Of course he is unlikely to have reached this level in journalism without having had the ‘leg-up’ of his political career behind him…

…and you now hold up his view as some sort of gospel? The EU has the upper hand? Really? We could walk away at any time from the EU and owe nothing (but the EU has the upper hand). We could fall off the cliff in Mar 19 and also owe nothing (but the EU has the upper hand). We would have to rely on WTO rules which means that we could buy far cheaper oranges from Brazil, the US or China rather than Spain (but of course the EU has the upper hand). Germany would stand to lose £25Bn per year in trade with the UK, and the rest of the EU would lose £45Bn collectively (but - you guessed it - the EU have the upper hand.

Thank you George Osborne for your views. They will go in the Project Fear bin with all your other predictions. Maybe instead of editing the Standard, you should be writing the horoscopes section.

...and it seems even Theresa May has finally woken up to the reality: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/signs-may-apo ... 28677.html

So Lloyd, what is this meant to prove? What do you not understand about the ECJ having no ‘direct’ involvement in the affairs of the UK? Indirectly, they can pontificate all they like, but after Brexit, their judgements will not be legally binding on the UK. We have our own Supreme Court to make binding decisions.

[kingfisher]

Royal, you are on superb form this morning. Thank you for a positive start to our day.
Only 581 days 15 hours 34 minutes and 13 seconds more of BBC, Yahoo, Guardian and “Independent” propaganda and fake news. Thank God.

[Jimgym]

Superb post Royal, thank you.

[Rita Sherry]

Royal

Good post but you cannot be serious terming "The Evening Standard" a newspaper - here in London its given away for free

Rita

[Royal]

Ah! I thought that we'd get another missive from HIC overnight. I'm not sure if he worries so much about Brexit that he simply can't sleep or if he purposefully sits up until the until the small hours of the morning waiting for the advance newspaper headlines to be promulgated.

So, the Japanese would rather have a solid trading relationship with the EU than the UK, which will soon be out on a limb. Surprise, surprise. Talking about trading partners, just where are the Australians, Indians, Canadians and Americans when you most need them? They were supposed to be coming to the UK's aid, weren't they?

Do you ever actually read the articles you link into your posts or do you just search for headlines which fit your agenda? Your assertion that “the Japanese would rather have a solid trading relationship with the EU than the UK” is nowhere in the article at all. What it ACTUALLY says is that trade talks can't start until after Brexit (EU rules, which we already know) and that before trade talks can start, Japan needs to know what the post Brexit UK relationship with the EU is going to be. This makes eminent sense to me - can you not see that? As far as the Australians, Indians, Canadians and Americans are concerned - wait and see. It seems that I have to repeat that we cannot have substantive trade talks with them whilst still members of the EU. Trading with the rest of the world will certainly not be a case of them “coming to the UK’s aid”. It will be what trade should be - mutually beneficial, and the UK trading within the protectionist Single Market and Customs Union is not currently beneficial to the UK as a major importer of world goods.

Patience, dear HIC, patience.

Back to Royal: jaundiced views? With a good chunk of the two year negotiation period now well under way, and with no positive outcomes to speak of, I wonder whose predictions of the outcome of Brexit are closest to reality?

Instead of actually negotiating, Michel Barnier is simply repeating the same old mantra of insisting that the question of how much money the UK is willing to pay the EU is settled first. There is no amount (as far as I am aware) actually on the table. The UK position is “tell us how much we owe in an itemised list and we can discuss it.” Of course the UK should (and have agreed to) pay for any projects/commitments we have already agreed to, but the EU pulling figures out of thin air like €36Bn, €50Bn and €100Bn are simply unrealistic. Legally, we could walk away from the EU and owe nothing. The EU, however, are using this single agenda item as a form of extortion. There is no other word for it when you say “give me your money or else…”

In the fullness of time, Michel Barnier’s delaying tactics will not work. The closer we get to March 2019, the more desperate the EU will be to secure what we want to secure now - a mutually beneficial Brexit deal which includes our future trading relationship. Personally, I would be happy for the UK to take a more aggressive stance and to walk away from the negotiations if we cannot get past Agenda Item 1 and if the constant disparaging of our negotiating team doesn't cease.

Even the Labour Party has now done a volte-face. I wonder how long before TM wakes up to the hopelessness of it all and throws the towel in? Or calls another election. It wouldn't surprise me one little bit.

No surprise about the Labour Party.

The “hopelessness” you refer to, is the constant line coming from the Remoaners, both in politics and the mass media which is certainly debilitating. However, the more intransigence we get from the EU, the more they try to belittle or humiliate our government and our army of civil servants working behind the scenes, and the more drip, drip, drip we hear from those who, like you, wish to overturn the democratic will of the people, the more resolved we will be.

Brexit will happen. Like it or not.

[Dominic]

He keeps his head down until we get another negative story about Brexit then takes great delight in crowing about it, often ending his missives with an “I told you so…!” and then he retires (not so gracefully) back to his trench desperately waiting for the next article that seems to agree with his jaundiced views.

Given that you could apply the same comment to Poppy et al's pro-Leave posts, I have to ask, why don't you?

[Poppy]

Ha Ha but I usually post in response to HIC . He asks for positives, I provide some,he ignores them!!!

[Dominic]

Ha Ha but I usually post in response to HIC . He asks for positives, I provide some,he ignores them!!!

So what are these topics you posted in the Politics section?

Is this the EU remainers still want to be a part of?

EU facing serious problems it seems


Both posted without any help from HiC.

[Jimgward]

Royal. You’re assertion that trade talks can’t beigin until Brexit is baloney. It takes years of negotiations to establish trade deals. Nothing stops these happening in the background. I know for sure that at least one EU member has already had informal talks about how to continue to work with Britain.

If Britain aren’t close to deals with other naturns, are we going to leave and be unable to trade, except with the EU under whatever terms are agreed?

It is obvious on here, that most fervent posters are pro-brexit and will easily jump in to ‘support’ one of the brood’s views. Equally, HiC’s views are informed and at times personal, but valid never the less and certainly much more informed than most of the ‘well done’ broods happy clapping.

I don’t for a minute believe there will be anything other than Brexit. I also believe it is in our interests that it is good for Britain, but sadly, it’s looking more and more negative time, and nothing to do with the media.... they are often simply reporting events. For every Pro-Remain story, there are at least as many pro-brexit ones. The press, tv channels and radio stations in the uk are certainly overwhelmingly Tory supporting.

[Royal]

Given that you could apply the same comment to Poppy et al's pro-Leave posts, I have to ask, why don't you?

Not really, Dominic. HIC has become rather predictable in an overnight posting whenever there is a negative headline about Brexit which he takes to be the general and genuine belief of most 'sensible' people. As the negotiations resumed yesterday with an equally predictable accusation from Barnier of the UK being behind the curve in all matters Brexit, I rather suspected that HIC would have been posting during the early hours of this morning. However, he surprised me somewhat by quoting the story from the FT which was (in my opinion) non-news in that we knew we couldn't arrange a trade deal until after actual Brexit and that clearly any future trade deal would depend very much on our post Brexit trading relationship with the EU.

Things are usually fairly quiet in the Politics Forum now as (with regards to Brexiteers and Remainers) - "ne'er the train shall meet".

[Dominic]

Given that you could apply the same comment to Poppy et al's pro-Leave posts, I have to ask, why don't you?

Not really, Dominic. HIC has become rather predictable in an overnight posting whenever there is a negative headline about Brexit which he takes to be the general and genuine belief of most 'sensible' people. As the negotiations resumed yesterday with an equally predictable accusation from Barnier of the UK being behind the curve in all matters Brexit, I rather suspected that HIC would have been posting during the early hours of this morning. However, he surprised me somewhat by quoting the story from the FT which was (in my opinion) non-news in that we knew we couldn't arrange a trade deal until after actual Brexit and that clearly any future trade deal would depend very much on our post Brexit trading relationship with the EU.

Things are usually fairly quiet in the Politics Forum now as (with regards to Brexiteers and Remainers) - "ne'er the train shall meet".

Ah but I wasn't talking about what HiC posted. I was talking about Polly.

[Royal]

Royal. You’re assertion that trade talks can’t beigin until Brexit is baloney. It takes years of negotiations to establish trade deals. Nothing stops these happening in the background. I know for sure that at least one EU member has already had informal talks about how to continue to work with Britain.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, Jimgward, but my assertion is certainly not baloney. EU rules quite specifically and categorically prohibit us from making trade deals with other countries whilst still a member of the EU. Agreed that nothing stops the UK from unofficially discussing future, post Brexit, trade deals now, but of course, as I have stated, such trade deals will also be dependent upon our future trading relationship with the EU and our access to the Single Market (given that we cannot be a member post Brexit). It also crucially hinges on our exiting the Customs Union which currently requires us to levy tariffs on all non EU goods entering the UK.

Why do trade deals usually take so long? Mainly because there are currently 28 member states of the EU which have to be consulted and considered before a trade deal can take place. Let's not forget that a province of a single rather small member state - Walloon - held up the Canada trade deal. When a sovereign nation (eg UK) cuts a trade deal with another sovereign nation (eg India) its far, far simpler than trying to negotiate with a protectionist trading bloc (eg EU). As far as the UK cutting a trade deal with the EU is concerned, of course it should be easier than you are making out. As current members of the EU we are fully compliant with all aspects of trade in all areas - agriculture, electrical equipment, car manufacture etc etc. There is simply no reason for a UK/EU trade deal to take years.

If Britain aren’t close to deals with other naturns, are we going to leave and be unable to trade, except with the EU under whatever terms are agreed?

What nonsense. When cutting a trade deal between sovereign nations, the UK is going to try to get free trade agreements (ie no tariffs). Of course we can and will trade with other nations without a trade deal in place, but such deals may be made under WTO rules. It will still make world wide goods cheaper than EU goods which are artificially ‘protected’ by the Single Market and the Customs Union.

It is obvious on here, that most fervent posters are pro-brexit and will easily jump in to ‘support’ one of the brood’s views. Equally, HiC’s views are informed and at times personal, but valid never the less and certainly much more informed than most of the ‘well done’ broods happy clapping.

I don’t for a minute believe there will be anything other than Brexit. I also believe it is in our interests that it is good for Britain, but sadly, it’s looking more and more negative time, and nothing to do with the media.... they are often simply reporting events. For every Pro-Remain story, there are at least as many pro-brexit ones. The press, tv channels and radio stations in the uk are certainly overwhelmingly Tory supporting.

Of course HICs views are valid as are yours - that's why I respond to them. If they were not valid, no-one would give a hoot and ignore them, surely? I also take time to read links and long articles posted in view of either side and respond accordingly. I of course believe that HIC’s opinions on Brexit are wrong, as he clearly believes mine are. Unfortunately, most media reporting nowadays consists of just opinion which is dressed up as ‘news’.

[Royal]

Ah but I wasn't talking about what HiC posted. I was talking about Polly.

i think that Poppy has adequately answered that for herself.

HIC had crowed about the lack of Brexit good news and challenged Brexiteers to "give just one.."

The responses were fairly immediate but were met with silence from his trench until the next bad news when he predictably put his head above the parapet again, ignoring in the meantime the evidence set before him!