Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Whirlwind wrote:


Well the Times headlines, if true, made me laugh. What was this about Trump favouring the UK in trade deals? Oh no wait they want one with the EU first. Guess we'll end up with the scraps then. Still we have our cakes, biscuits and tea (that we would like to sell to India).

If only someone, say a POTUS or someone, had said something about this prior to the referendum ?

Oh wait.....

A trade deal with just the UK can be done in a fraction of the time it takes to do one with the EU. Possibly simultaneously too.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
A trade deal with just the UK can be done in a fraction of the time it takes to do one with the EU. Possibly simultaneously too.

Also... doesn't a US-to-UK trade deal have to happen at, or right after the brexit?

If you recall we cannot in fact sign any trade agreements until we've formalised our EU exit.

Until such a deal was negotiated we would, of course, be worse off as we lose the current Eu related deals we do have.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-trade-negotiation-deal-us-brexit-european-union-member-philip-hammond-a7548641.html

 Future War Cultist wrote:
A trade deal with just the UK can be done in a fraction of the time it takes to do one with the EU. Possibly simultaneously too.

We have to please 4 states in effect at most.
EU has 26.

Umm I know which is easier to negotiate with.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/donald-trump-reveals-eu-trade-deal-more-important-to-us-than-deal-with-britain-after-brexit-a3521051.html

Last year, American exports to the bloc were worth $270 billion dollars compared to $55b worth of goods exported to the UK.

Imports to the EU made $147b compared to just $54b imported into Britain.

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-most-important-us-air-force-base-youve-never-heard-of/


will probably play a factor as well.

 Darkjim wrote:


It's a good point, but in my own personal pseudo-liberal totalitarian utopia, everyone would think precisely the way I do, so it wouldn't be a problem

. Well the only way you could achieve that would be to lobotomise everyone else. But I think we should be careful Tories might steal the idea for their election manifesto... (probably by making it law to read the Daily Fail and/or Scum at least three times a day).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
A trade deal with just the UK can be done in a fraction of the time it takes to do one with the EU. Possibly simultaneously too.

if they were going to do that, they would say that but they didn't. The UK might get some concessions early on (free trade deal for tea, because they seriously need to know what decent tea is!) but to have a wide range free trade deal will still take years.

For the EU there is almost one ready. Trump will probably do the same thing as he did with Obamacare, read it, get bored 10% the way down so bin the rest; cross off Obama's name off the top and put his name on it instead and advertise it as the TTIP agreement (or Trump's Trade and Investment Partnership) .

Something weird has happened, I'm seeing people who have never given 2 gaks about politics, getting interested and riled up, at least where I live there seems to have been a very noticeable shift toward labour ??? Personally I can't stand Corbyn, even as a labour supporter normally.

Has anyone else noticed this ?

 Formosa wrote:
Something weird has happened, I'm seeing people who have never given 2 gaks about politics, getting interested and riled up, at least where I live there seems to have been a very noticeable shift toward labour ??? Personally I can't stand Corbyn, even as a labour supporter normally.

Has anyone else noticed this ?

The divisions are getting more noticeable. At the rate we are going we won't need terrorists as we'll be throttling each other... Seriously though the last GE, the referendum and now this GE are seriously dividing the country. I suppose they have been growing for years. Politicians of all sides have failed to communicate with the public and are acting more in their own best interest. So it's not a surprise people are getting more involved. There's a lot of people that don't want a hard right government and will head towards any party that might stop that happening.

I wonder if that's anything to do with people treating others who have different political focuses and beliefs to oneself as idiotic minions of some sort of evil Galactic Empire.

 Compel wrote:
I wonder if that's anything to do with people treating others who have different political focuses and beliefs to oneself as idiotic minions of some sort of evil Galactic Empire.

Only the ones who say idiotic things.

I don't think that anything earth shattering is going to happen, the Torys will likely be returned with a majority, Brexit will happen, and hopefully at the next GE we will have a reformed and stronger opposition, the Conservatives will have fractured into bitter infighting as they always do, people will review what has actually happened and vote the conservatives out.
Time will have passed sufficiently for us to be able to actually assess Brexit, and how the EU is doing, and a future Give will take us back into it again and we'll all breathe a sigh of relief that this ridiculous state of affairs is finally over and the eurosceptics have had their chance, and fethed it up good and proper.

 r_squared wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I wonder if that's anything to do with people treating others who have different political focuses and beliefs to oneself as idiotic minions of some sort of evil Galactic Empire.

Only the ones who say idiotic things.

I don't think that anything earth shattering is going to happen, the Torys will likely be returned with a majority, Brexit will happen, and hopefully at the next GE we will have a reformed and stronger opposition, the Conservatives will have fractured into bitter infighting as they always do, people will review what has actually happened and vote the conservatives out.
Time will have passed sufficiently for us to be able to actually assess Brexit, and how the EU is doing, and a future Give will take us back into it again and we'll all breathe a sigh of relief that this ridiculous state of affairs is finally over and the eurosceptics have had their chance, and fethed it up good and proper.

That's all assuming Trump hasn't started WWIII in the mean time, but then the UK will just be a smouldering hole with a few super mutants and ghouls running around so at least it will look better than 3am on a Sunday morning in the middle of a city...

 Compel wrote:
I wonder if that's anything to do with people treating others who have different political focuses and beliefs to oneself as idiotic minions of some sort of evil Galactic Empire.

It is because the EU Referendum pushed a highly divisive issue to the front of the social/political consciousness and had an un-decisive result.

Don't talk about 51.8% being decisive. It isn't in psychology terms. The referendum act should have called for a 2/3rd majority to be binding. The fact that the result has been treated as supremely binding, when in law it wasn't, simply makes things worse.

I can't believe May believes the splits are beginning to heal. They won't heal for a generation at least, unless the post-Brexit UK becomes a splendid utopia of health, wealth, optimism, and no foreigners. It is obvious to everyone that this will not happen, because it can't.

The best we can hope for is that eventually things may improve a bit compared to now, but Remainers still will have lost their freedom of movement, while Leavers will not find there is a large reduction in immigration, so both sides will still have significant disgruntles to mull on for decades to come.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I wonder if that's anything to do with people treating others who have different political focuses and beliefs to oneself as idiotic minions of some sort of evil Galactic Empire.

It is because the EU Referendum pushed a highly divisive issue to the front of the social/political consciousness and had an un-decisive result.

Don't talk about 51.8% being decisive. It isn't in psychology terms. The referendum act should have called for a 2/3rd majority to be binding. The fact that the result has been treated as supremely binding, when in law it wasn't, simply makes things worse.

This is what I cannot understand about this whole thing. Basically because the vote came down one way close enough to be basically within the margin of error, essentially whatever side of the bed 1% of the population woke up on that morning, and the government took a nonbinding vote and treated it like an iron mandate with the full backing of the united masses and pushed it to the front of the agenda...then promptly pooped itself with no plan and no real idea of what to do or really why they're even doing it...but they're gonna insist on doing whatever "it" is...


Like...seriously?

There's no plan here, there's no clear core concept of what people want out of Brexit or what the goals should be or what the UK's relationship with the Europe should look like, much less how to actually accomplish those, internal tensions with the various constituent parts of the UK are now inflamed and offers the SNP a golden opportunity for a potential IndyRef2 coup...then doubling down with a snap election, and yet inexorably it all goes on..."just because"

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Something weird has happened, I'm seeing people who have never given 2 gaks about politics, getting interested and riled up, at least where I live there seems to have been a very noticeable shift toward labour ??? Personally I can't stand Corbyn, even as a labour supporter normally.

Has anyone else noticed this ?

The divisions are getting more noticeable. At the rate we are going we won't need terrorists as we'll be throttling each other... Seriously though the last GE, the referendum and now this GE are seriously dividing the country. I suppose they have been growing for years. Politicians of all sides have failed to communicate with the public and are acting more in their own best interest. So it's not a surprise people are getting more involved. There's a lot of people that don't want a hard right government and will head towards any party that might stop that happening.

The reality is that all current UK political parties are indistinguishable in day to day operation. This is exacerbating divisions that have long been held.

Looking at what is on offer for this upcoming election its more of the same. Corbyn has taken a leaf out of Trumps play book, not playing by the rules etc. Tories are promising lots but will still be on the side of the rich and Farron and the lib dems can only win if 16-17 year olds are allowed to vote.
UKIP wants face veil bans....

The Greens.....have ideology vs real politik yet again.

The SNP will control Scotland.

Call me a crank but the appetite for real change evaporates when it may involve hard times.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Something weird has happened, I'm seeing people who have never given 2 gaks about politics, getting interested and riled up, at least where I live there seems to have been a very noticeable shift toward labour ??? Personally I can't stand Corbyn, even as a labour supporter normally.

Has anyone else noticed this ?

The divisions are getting more noticeable. At the rate we are going we won't need terrorists as we'll be throttling each other... Seriously though the last GE, the referendum and now this GE are seriously dividing the country. I suppose they have been growing for years. Politicians of all sides have failed to communicate with the public and are acting more in their own best interest. So it's not a surprise people are getting more involved. There's a lot of people that don't want a hard right government and will head towards any party that might stop that happening.

The reality is that all current UK political parties are indistinguishable in day to day operation. This is exacerbating divisions that have long been held.

Looking at what is on offer for this upcoming election its more of the same. Corbyn has taken a leaf out of Trumps play book, not playing by the rules etc. Tories are promising lots but will still be on the side of the rich and Farron and the lib dems can only win if 16-17 year olds are allowed to vote.
UKIP wants face veil bans....

The Greens.....have ideology vs real politik yet again.

The SNP will control Scotland.

Call me a crank but the appetite for real change evaporates when it may involve hard times.

I'd generally agree with this, though I think it's harsh on the Greens. I don't think they ever expect to get into power, but the more seats they get the more they can have an influence on long term environmental issues and hopefully offset some of the more short term thinking that usually means environmental issues are the last thing thought about. I'd like to vote Greens but that results in one vote less for the next party that might remove the Tory MP in the area which what frustrates me about the whole FPTP system.

However you are right, for a vast proportion of the population they think it's terrible that NHS is failing, education is in tatters and social care is imploding, but ask many in the £30k + crowd (which is a reasonable wage and at least allows things to be reasonably comfortable) to pay an extra £500 in taxes a year and the response is "but it makes me worse off immediately" (one of my brothers definitely falls into this category). This attitude favours the Tories and hence we go round the same issues again and again whilst the people really suffering are those on the very low pay grades that generally rely on the state more than others to help them (so subsidised bus services etc).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I wonder if that's anything to do with people treating others who have different political focuses and beliefs to oneself as idiotic minions of some sort of evil Galactic Empire.

It is because the EU Referendum pushed a highly divisive issue to the front of the social/political consciousness and had an un-decisive result.

Don't talk about 51.8% being decisive. It isn't in psychology terms. The referendum act should have called for a 2/3rd majority to be binding. The fact that the result has been treated as supremely binding, when in law it wasn't, simply makes things worse.

This is what I cannot understand about this whole thing. Basically because the vote came down one way close enough to be basically within the margin of error, essentially whatever side of the bed 1% of the population woke up on that morning, and the government took a nonbinding vote and treated it like an iron mandate with the full backing of the united masses and pushed it to the front of the agenda...then promptly pooped itself with no plan and no real idea of what to do or really why they're even doing it...but they're gonna insist on doing whatever "it" is...


Like...seriously?

And it's even worse when you think that 30% of the population didn't actually vote which could have had a major impact on the outcome (but no one really seems interested in what they want despite still being part of the population). The worrying thing is that in GEs the turnout is even lower so if one day the 40% that don't usually vote suddenly got up and all voted Monster Raving Looney Party then they would suddenly become the incumbent party. The only advantage of the referendum is that it does appear to have engaged more people in politics, but conversely some are getting tired of it (think the BBC interview last week).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


I can't believe May believes the splits are beginning to heal. They won't heal for a generation at least, unless the post-Brexit UK becomes a splendid utopia of health, wealth, optimism, and no foreigners. It is obvious to everyone that this will not happen, because it can't.

I don't think she does that's why she keeps saying it. If there were no splits and ongoing divisions you wouldn't even mention it. The reason it is mentioned because the divides are there and she is trying to persuade people that the divides are healing and people feel obligated to fall in line (we are after all a social group species and none like feeling they are on the outside).

The big risk is that the divides won't heal and whatever things go wrong will be blamed on Brexit (whether real or imagined) and one side get angry about what is lost and will say "See, we told you so" and the other will get angry that what they were told doesn't come to pass and that they are being 'blamed' for the issues. This could just further divide the country. It's really a failing of the government because if they wanted a referendum then there should have been agreed document explaining all the pro's and con's of leaving or remaining. Instead we ended up will all sorts of nonsense soundbites (WWIII vs £350m) etc that meant many were ill informed from both sides about the decision they were making.

Admittedly, I'm only providing anecdotal evidence, but I personally think this talk of a divided nation is pure horsegak.

In the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum, the country was supposed to be 'divided' in the aftermath. And yet, I'm still friends with people who voted to stay in the UK, ditto the EU referendum.

Just because some idiots have a war of words on twitter, and just because our gak poor newspapers think the nation is on the brink of civil war, doesn't make it so.

I remain unconvinced.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Admittedly, I'm only providing anecdotal evidence, but I personally think this talk of a divided nation is pure horsegak.

In the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum, the country was supposed to be 'divided' in the aftermath. And yet, I'm still friends with people who voted to stay in the UK, ditto the EU referendum.

Just because some idiots have a war of words on twitter, and just because our gak poor newspapers think the nation is on the brink of civil war, doesn't make it so.

I remain unconvinced.

From an SNP supporter looking to divide the UK? I think you're talking out of your arse sunshine.

I suppose it depends on how you define divided, one way to look at it is how cooperative we are as a nation. This GE will give us an indication of that. However the referendum highlighted the divide between the city and the country, between the supposed geographical haves, and have-nots. It has also highlighted ideological differences between friends and families, and the horrible and confrontational nature of the "debates" has lead to us labelling people and categorising them. Continuing to label people as remoaners in the national press nearly a year after the referendum hardly helps.

The divisions are there, and tbh, if you can't seem them you're being disingenuous.

 r_squared wrote:


From an SNP supporter looking to divide the UK? I think you're talking out of your arse sunshine.

I suppose it depends on how you define divided, one way to look at it is how cooperative we are as a nation. This GE will give us an indication of that. However the referendum highlighted the divide between the city and the country, between the supposed geographical haves, and have-nots. It has also highlighted ideological differences between friends and families, and the horrible and confrontational nature of the "debates" has lead to us labelling people and categorising them. Continuing to label people as remoaners in the national press nearly a year after the referendum hardly helps.

Or indeed saboteurs, enemies of the states, quitlers and so on.

It's more social divides than anything. You only have to peruse BBC comments section (despite in theory being moderated). You have issues like G. Miller (sp?) having death threats against her and so on to see that there are deep divisions over these issues and the political parties don't help with soundbites that aren't really helpful and antagonise another part of the electorate - it all becomes verbal 'punch and judy' with "you're not competent, no your aren't" which really doesn't help the electorate make any rational decision.

 r_squared wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Admittedly, I'm only providing anecdotal evidence, but I personally think this talk of a divided nation is pure horsegak.

In the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum, the country was supposed to be 'divided' in the aftermath. And yet, I'm still friends with people who voted to stay in the UK, ditto the EU referendum.

Just because some idiots have a war of words on twitter, and just because our gak poor newspapers think the nation is on the brink of civil war, doesn't make it so.

I remain unconvinced.

From an SNP supporter looking to divide the UK? I think you're talking out of your arse sunshine.

I suppose it depends on how you define divided, one way to look at it is how cooperative we are as a nation. This GE will give us an indication of that. However the referendum highlighted the divide between the city and the country, between the supposed geographical haves, and have-nots. It has also highlighted ideological differences between friends and families, and the horrible and confrontational nature of the "debates" has lead to us labelling people and categorising them. Continuing to label people as remoaners in the national press nearly a year after the referendum hardly helps.

The divisions are there, and tbh, if you can't seem them you're being disingenuous.

You know what I mean

The newspapers would have us believe that roaming gangs of Brexit supporters are trawling the streets for remain supporters and anybody who looks foreign, ready to send them back to Calais or wherever.

And at any rate, there's always a divide between the urban and the rural. That goes back centuries.

 jhe90 wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
A trade deal with just the UK can be done in a fraction of the time it takes to do one with the EU. Possibly simultaneously too.

We have to please 4 states in effect at most.
EU has 26.

Umm I know which is easier to negotiate with.

The one that doesn't have Trump, I'd assume.

Or are you wanting a good deal?

Herzlos wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
A trade deal with just the UK can be done in a fraction of the time it takes to do one with the EU. Possibly simultaneously too.

We have to please 4 states in effect at most.
EU has 26.

Umm I know which is easier to negotiate with.

The one that doesn't have Trump, I'd assume.

Or are you wanting a good deal?

If we are smart ernough to use similar terms to the older trade deals and edit them abit, that saves quite abit of negotiations, agreeable already and cut alot of trouble.

No need to start from sqaire one.

On the flip side, the UK has a fraction of the EU's clout in negotiating these trade deals. The US and the EU negotiating are two rougly equal entities. The US and the UK notsomuch.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
On the flip side, the UK has a fraction of the EU's clout in negotiating these trade deals. The US and the EU negotiating are two rougly equal entities. The US and the UK notsomuch.

Yeah, but we can offer trump literal gold played carriages.

 welshhoppo wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
On the flip side, the UK has a fraction of the EU's clout in negotiating these trade deals. The US and the EU negotiating are two rougly equal entities. The US and the UK notsomuch.

Yeah, but we can offer trump literal gold played carriages.

He'd probably only mistake it for something to take a golden shower in though....

 Whirlwind wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
On the flip side, the UK has a fraction of the EU's clout in negotiating these trade deals. The US and the EU negotiating are two rougly equal entities. The US and the UK notsomuch.

Yeah, but we can offer trump literal gold played carriages.

He'd probably only mistake it for something to take a golden shower in though....

True we can offer him bling. Gold plated carriages, we have a gold crowns for the queen and plenty of pomp and ceramony.
Wr can have marching perfect red coats and gun salutes.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I wonder if that's anything to do with people treating others who have different political focuses and beliefs to oneself as idiotic minions of some sort of evil Galactic Empire.

It is because the EU Referendum pushed a highly divisive issue to the front of the social/political consciousness and had an un-decisive result.

Don't talk about 51.8% being decisive. It isn't in psychology terms. The referendum act should have called for a 2/3rd majority to be binding. The fact that the result has been treated as supremely binding, when in law it wasn't, simply makes things worse.

This is what I cannot understand about this whole thing. Basically because the vote came down one way close enough to be basically within the margin of error, essentially whatever side of the bed 1% of the population woke up on that morning, and the government took a nonbinding vote and treated it like an iron mandate with the full backing of the united masses and pushed it to the front of the agenda...then promptly pooped itself with no plan and no real idea of what to do or really why they're even doing it...but they're gonna insist on doing whatever "it" is...


Like...seriously?

There's no plan here, there's no clear core concept of what people want out of Brexit or what the goals should be or what the UK's relationship with the Europe should look like, much less how to actually accomplish those, internal tensions with the various constituent parts of the UK are now inflamed and offers the SNP a golden opportunity for a potential IndyRef2 coup...then doubling down with a snap election, and yet inexorably it all goes on..."just because"

just because ... the press would incite national disorder if anyone tried to stop it. Not saying they'd achieve it, but they'd do their damnedest.

Excellent summary and yes, at this point we just have to go through with it. We might one day want back in - whether there is an EU to want back into is another matter. Perhaps there will just be a Europe full of proud, nationalistic nations, living peacefully side by side for hundreds of years, like it used to be.

Certain elements of the "press" already tried to incite national disorder. "Enemies of the people" -- the judges upholding citizens' constitutional rights against the unfettered power of the prime minister.

In some sense the best argument against Brexit is some of the irretrievable gaks like the Daily Mail who have fought so long and hard for it.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 r_squared wrote:


From an SNP supporter looking to divide the UK? I think you're talking out of your arse sunshine.

I suppose it depends on how you define divided, one way to look at it is how cooperative we are as a nation. This GE will give us an indication of that. However the referendum highlighted the divide between the city and the country, between the supposed geographical haves, and have-nots. It has also highlighted ideological differences between friends and families, and the horrible and confrontational nature of the "debates" has lead to us labelling people and categorising them. Continuing to label people as remoaners in the national press nearly a year after the referendum hardly helps.

Or indeed saboteurs, enemies of the states, quitlers and so on.

It's more social divides than anything. You only have to peruse BBC comments section (despite in theory being moderated). You have issues like G. Miller (sp?) having death threats against her and so on to see that there are deep divisions over these issues and the political parties don't help with soundbites that aren't really helpful and antagonise another part of the electorate - it all becomes verbal 'punch and judy' with "you're not competent, no your aren't" which really doesn't help the electorate make any rational decision.

Indeed, if any newspaper was likely to promote a groundswell of support for the left, then you can rely on the DM.

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2017/04/19/daily-mail-crush-saboteurs-front-page-chilling-fascistic-hateful-deranged-oh-lenin-said-1918/

I mean that black front page with that weird staring, portrait of May, what is that all about? Are they trying to intimidate people? because if anything it's going to have the absolute opposite effect. No one is intimidated by the DM, but anyone who sees that front page is going to be motivated to tell them to shove their Brexit up their arse.

I know it's the daily mail and they are the lowest form of journalistic fuckwits chasing sales, but ffs, everytime someone whinges about being thought of as a stupid for voting Leave, I'm going to post that front page up.
I'm sick to death of being called a remoaner, I'm sick to death of seeing the right wing press publish rubbish like this yet have to endure people whinging about left wing bias in the media, I'm sick to death of having to endure this low-level, passive aggressive bs from a puerile, insecure, media driven, right wing who seem to think that because some things have gone their way recently they have the god given right to silence all opposition and debate.

If it wasn't for a robust sense of humour, and a healthy interest in beer, and fast motorbikes, I feel like I may have popped a vein already.

Yep.

Just going back to Vaktathis question about going through with, the other reason we can't go back on it is a sense of fair-play, British or otherwise.

If T May turned round tomorrow (after a moment of clarity during a stroll to the shops) and said 'sorry, I've though it through and it really is daft, let's call the whole thing off', then why would those who voted for Brexit ever take part in politics again. Sadly the fact it wasn't legally binding both wasn't pushed (or even mentioned, I don't think) by anyone in a position of authority beforehand, and has been so roundly ignored since that it may as well not be a fact at all at this point.

So, stiff upper lip, disengage higher cognitive functions, and forwards!