[JohnRawls]

What I mean by this is that UK is literally doing nothing with Brexit right now. UK exited the European Union with a sort of medium soft deal but are not trying to do anything after that. As much as I see it, there has always been 2 options in this regard.

Option 1: For Brexit to be successful, the main idea is deregulation and very low taxation to outcompete the rest of the world by almost non-existent regulation and very low taxes. This would require fully privatising the NHS and most other government services that are not related to the governments main functions. Removal of most environmental, worker safety, parental, financial and so on regulations to make the businesses more lucrative. This has always been the main idea behind Brexit and anyone with any shred of sanity has said this from Blair, Brown to Cameron or Johnson.(May be even Corbyn, not sure of that) Whenever this is the right choice is a whole different idea but the people voted for Brexit.

Option 2: Not to leave. If you are not willing to cut the NHS and sell it, privatise most of the government services not related to its main functions and severely deregulate then what is the point of leaving. There is literally no reason to leave if you are going to use the same or relatively the same regulations as the EU without having input in them. Even worse is that UK will have harder time to diverge from EU standards if Uk doesn't start right now. So the option 2 main idea is that UK should not have left or should join back in due time to there being no progress and just being harmful.

So my question is, why is the UK not doing 1 or 2 right now? It feels like UK is not doing anything at all and just stuck in limbo which is the worst possible outcome. (2 choices for voting)

[B0ycey]

Perhaps because they are doing option three? Trying to make trade deals whilst retaining the NHS budget and keeping the parts of regulations that suit UK standards which they want to keep? Only you think the NHS is linked to Brexit. God know why? But the real question is will any trade deals make up for the reduction in trade within the EU as they are our biggest trade partner and always will be. Can't really tell right now as Covid came at the right time to mask the clusterfuck. But what I do know is when Brexit was first enacted last year we were sending half trucks back over the Channel. This seems to have recovered somewhat right now but in any case the EU is moving forward with Macrons vision and sooner or later the UK is going to left behind one way or another even if it isn't necessarily related to trade. So you need not worry John. The UK is destined to be a US proxy, if it isn't already, and the EU is already making it impossible for a UK US trade deal to occur under the Bidens administration and we can't sell them our beef. So Brexit is already a failure even if people can't see it. The whole point of Brexit was to move our market over the Atlantic and at the moment in time the best way to get into the US market is through TTP (if America join) given they have given us the FU.

[JohnRawls]

Perhaps because they are doing option three? Trying to make trade deals whilst retaining the NHS budget and keeping the parts of regulations that suit UK standards which they want to keep? Only you think the NHS is linked to Brexit. God know why? But the real question is will any trade deals make up for the reduction in trade within the EU as they are our biggest trade partner and always will be. Can't really tell right now as Covid came at the right time to mask the clusterfuck. But what I do know is when Brexit was first enacted last year we were sending half trucks back over the Channel. This seems to have recovered somewhat right now but in any case the EU is moving forward with Macrons vision and sooner or later the UK is going to left behind one way or another even if it isn't necessarily related to trade. So you need not worry John. The UK is destined to be a US proxy, if it isn't already, and the EU is already making it impossible for a UK US trade deal to occur under the Bidens administration and we can't sell them our beef. So Brexit is already a failure even if people can't see it. The whole point of Brexit was to move our market over the Atlantic and at the moment in time the best way to get into the US market is through TTP (if America join) given they have given us the FU.

Considering how things are going, UK is not interesting in being anyone's proxy, be it in a form of a member state or any other form. UK people considered membership in the EU as being a soft satellite state of sorts so I am not sure they will accept being a full satellite state of America, that is not going to happen.

[B0ycey]

Considering how things are going, UK is not interesting in being anyone's proxy, be it in a form of a member state or any other form. UK people considered membership in the EU as being a soft satellite state of sorts so I am not sure they will accept being a full satellite state of America, that is not going to happen.

People voted for Brexit for a number of reasons. But the one on the specific subject of your thread given it is based on trade was to have the ability to set up their own trade deals. Being part of the EU would prevent that actually. The UK wouldn't be able to join the TTP (for example), or make a trade deal with Australia in the EU. But neither of these deals will be better than the single market. The only deal that will make the logic of being able to make our own trade deals is to have one with the US. And that isn't going to happen under the Biden administration. So in terms of trade, Brexit is a failure.

As for being a US proxy, we already are. We joined AUKUS and are moving our diplomacy stateside. We are doing that to please the Americans and we are not getting anything in return. But I guess that is the problem with being a bitch. You have to give licks to receive scraps and have no voice beyond that of your master.

[Fasces]

Brexit was the last populist vote against a decaying Western elite which was coopted by shortsighted imbecelic thatcher/reaganites who thought they coopt the movement and got stuck with their filthy oligarchic trousers down.

[Rugoz]

Brexit happened.

For Brexit to be successful, the main idea is deregulation and very low taxation to outcompete the rest of the world by almost non-existent regulation and very low taxes. This would require fully privatising the NHS and most other government services that are not related to the governments main functions. Removal of most environmental, worker safety, parental, financial and so on regulations to make the businesses more lucrative. This has always been the main idea behind Brexit and anyone with any shred of sanity has said this from Blair, Brown to Cameron or Johnson.(May be even Corbyn, not sure of that)

I doubt anyone with any shred of sanity has said this.

[JohnRawls]

:eh:

Brexit happened.



I doubt anyone with any shred of sanity has said this.

Brexit main point is more trade deals and deregulation from EU rules to allow for those trade deals? What is that then?

[pugsville]

What I mean by this is that UK is literally doing nothing with Brexit right now. UK exited the European Union with a sort of medium soft deal but are not trying to do anything after that. As much as I see it, there has always been 2 options in this regard.

Option 1: For Brexit to be successful, the main idea is deregulation and very low taxation to outcompete the rest of the world by almost non-existent regulation and very low taxes. This would require fully privatising the NHS and most other government services that are not related to the governments main functions. Removal of most environmental, worker safety, parental, financial and so on regulations to make the businesses more lucrative. This has always been the main idea behind Brexit and anyone with any shred of sanity has said this from Blair, Brown to Cameron or Johnson.(May be even Corbyn, not sure of that) Whenever this is the right choice is a whole different idea but the people voted for Brexit.

Option 2: Not to leave. If you are not willing to cut the NHS and sell it, privatise most of the government services not related to its main functions and severely deregulate then what is the point of leaving. There is literally no reason to leave if you are going to use the same or relatively the same regulations as the EU without having input in them. Even worse is that UK will have harder time to diverge from EU standards if Uk doesn't start right now. So the option 2 main idea is that UK should not have left or should join back in due time to there being no progress and just being harmful.

So my question is, why is the UK not doing 1 or 2 right now? It feels like UK is not doing anything at all and just stuck in limbo which is the worst possible outcome. (2 choices for voting)

The Briexitiers promised a more funded NHS.

[pugsville]

Brexit main point is more trade deals and deregulation from EU rules to allow for those trade deals? What is that then?

Lower taxes for the Rich.

[Potemkin]

The Briexitiers promised a more funded NHS.

It seemed to me at the time that people who voted for Brexit did so for three main reasons:

1. Stop giving money to Brussels!
2. Give the money we save from Brussels to the NHS!
3. Keep the filthy furriners out! They tukurjerbs!

The British government then had the task of making sense of this farrago, and then implementing it through legislation and treaties. Lol.

[JohnRawls]

The Briexitiers promised a more funded NHS.

Sure from the money that usually went to brussels. But it doesn't fix the competitiveness problem of UK economy outside of EU which was the main idea behind Brexit. It is like shuffling money from 1 place from a bigger benefit to a smaller benefit in a sense.

[Rugoz]

Brexit main point is more trade deals and deregulation from EU rules to allow for those trade deals? What is that then?

The main point of Brexit is sovereignty, obviously.

Generally speaking that doesn't come with economic benefits in the age of globalization, at least in the foreseeable future.

[pugsville]

Sure from the money that usually went to brussels. But it doesn't fix the competitiveness problem of UK economy outside of EU which was the main idea behind Brexit. It is like shuffling money from 1 place from a bigger benefit to a smaller benefit in a sense.

I pointing out that Brixitiers campaign on More funding for the NHS, privatization of the NHS would be a betrayal of the voters.

Brexit was not sold to the British public as part of the NHS being dismantled.

The Link between Brexit and the NHS being privatized is one of your creation.

[Patrickov]

I pointing out that Brixitiers campaign on More funding for the NHS, privatization of the NHS would be a betrayal of the voters.

Brexit was not sold to the British public as part of the NHS being dismantled.

The Link between Brexit and the NHS being privatized is one of your creation.

I am quite sure Rawls is making a prediction of what would happen, despite what the parties' manifesto says.

Do you genuinely not think many if not most politicians are constant liars and traitors?



That said, I am yet to see why the OP sees Brexit as a failure.

Especially for the loss of human resources, they can get it back from Hongkongers, many of whom are eager to come.
(frankly I was just lazy and / or don't want to pester the good folks in Britain, but a significant number of my acquaintances have actually moved)

[pugsville]

I am quite sure Rawls is making a prediction of what would happen, despite what the parties' manifesto says.

Do you genuinely not think many if not most politicians are constant liars and traitors?



That said, I am yet to see why the OP sees Brexit as a failure.

Especially for the loss of human resources, they can get it back from Hongkongers, many of whom are eager to come.
(frankly I was just lazy and / or don't want to pester the good folks in Britain, but a significant number of my acquaintances have actually moved)

Mort are liars to some degree, a few are shameless lairs, just they tend to rise further, honesty limits your political career,
I would say almost none are traitors, though some are corrupt, the line between justified accepted self interests and corruption is vague and easily crossed. I think there is large element of class/privilege interests over the general population.

Develop policy to deal with the issues in the modern world is complex. Populist slogans are so much easier to campaign with. The Influence of money, the comprise/corruption./acceptance of "the way things work" wears done the good intentions of many and the rewards tend to paper over the qualms, seduction/joining the team

There are number of very successful populist grafters/shameless lairs, who are easily captured by privileged interests.

Increasing it;'s easy to build political support around extremist/simplistic bubbles.

There has been a general erosion of the independent public service, accountability, and increasingly semi corrupt practices.

We have a failure of governance, accountability and policy debate. The problems aere easy to define but very hard to fix,

The NHS remains popular, and it Government action to reduce./privatize are likely to be stealth,

[Unthinking Majority]

:eh:

The main point of Brexit is sovereignty, obviously.

Generally speaking that doesn't come with economic benefits in the age of globalization, at least in the foreseeable future.

Why can't you have sovereignty and a thriving economy? Sovereignty means other countries do not decide domestic policy.

The EU went too far and the UK want control of their country. That doesn't mean they can't have free trade with the rest of the EU, it means it happens on their terms.

[pugsville]

Why can't you have sovereignty and a thriving economy? Sovereignty means other countries do not decide domestic policy.

The EU went too far and the UK want control of their country. That doesn't mean they can't have free trade with the rest of the EU, it means it happens on their terms.

No. it does not. One side cannot generally unilaterally set trade terms. There is little trade without some compromise.
Generally the bigger side of the trade deal sets more of the terms than the smaller.

And generally the EU is not going to import things that no longer meet EU standards.

Brexit has caused a lot of disruption upsetting terms which have been around for a long time. As the smaller economy Britain is going to feel more of the pain. That the British Government has managed the whole process appallingly badly the pain going to be worse. Britain position had been a useful entry point for large corporations into Europe, but that is no longer the case. Business will reconsider their investment and location of business hubs in Britain not attractive as it was before Brexit.

The British had negotiated baldy seemingly wanting to have their cake and eats it too, and have been making much noise about not abiding by previous agreement which hardy makes others keen to comprise further with people unable to keep their signed agreements in the pat,

The More trade a country does with the rest of the world the more there economy is dependent upon the rest of the world, it involves compromises. And a nation that relies on others is less independent. There a trade off between political independence of globalization. It's a complex relationship and not a simple one, but a economy that is dependent on others is less sovereign.

So called "Free Trade" (actual Free Trade is like the Free Market is mythical) is the product of agreements where nations declare they will do certain things and not do other certain tings. It's a restriction of future action, for hopefully better economic outcomes.

e

[JohnRawls]

I am quite sure Rawls is making a prediction of what would happen, despite what the parties' manifesto says.

Do you genuinely not think many if not most politicians are constant liars and traitors?



That said, I am yet to see why the OP sees Brexit as a failure.

Especially for the loss of human resources, they can get it back from Hongkongers, many of whom are eager to come.
(frankly I was just lazy and / or don't want to pester the good folks in Britain, but a significant number of my acquaintances have actually moved)

To a degree. Note that I didn't say Brexit is a failure. There are several options on the subject.

My question was why UK is stuck in a sort of limbo or Brexit purgatory if you will.

[noemon]

Brexit: ‘the biggest disaster any government has ever negotiated’

Exclusive: British cheesemaker says Brexit and subsequent trade deals have cost his firm £270,000

A British cheesemaker who predicted Brexit would cost him hundreds of thousands of pounds in exports has called the UK’s departure from the EU single market a disaster, after losing his entire wholesale and retail business in the bloc over the past year. Simon Spurrell, the co-founder of the Cheshire Cheese Company, said personal advice from a government minister to pursue non-EU markets to compensate for his losses had proved to be “an expensive joke”.

“It turns out our greatest competitor on the planet is the UK government because every time they do a fantastic deal, they kick us out of that market – starting with the Brexit deal,” he said.

Spurrell predicted in January that Brexit would cost him £250,000 in sales. “We lost £270,000, so I got one thing right,” he said, describing the post-Brexit EU trade deal as the “biggest disaster that any government has ever negotiated in the history of trade negotiations”.

His online retail business was hit immediately after the Brexit negotiator David Frost failed to secure a frictionless trade deal addressing sales to individual customers in the EU.

Spurrell said he had lost 20% of sales overnight after discovering he needed to provide a £180 health certificate on each order, including gift packs costing £25 or £30. He said the viability of his online retail had come to a “dead stop”.

After he embarked on a personal crusade to draw attention to the plight of UK exporters involving almost 200 media interviews around the world, he was invited to an online meeting with Victoria Prentis, a minister at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. She suggested that emerging markets could compensate for the Brexit-related hole in the Cheshire Cheese Company’s finances.

Spurrell said he had pursued new business in Norway and Canada but post-Brexit trade deals sealed by the government had put barriers in place.

“We no longer have any ability to deal with the EU as our three distributors in Germany, France and Italy have said we have become too expensive because of the new checks and paperwork.

“And now we’ve also lost Norway since the trade deal, as duty for wholesale is 273%. Then we tried Canada but what the government didn’t tell us is that duty of 244% is applied on any consignment over $20 [£15].”

That meant Canadian customers who ordered a gift pack worth £50, including transport fees, were asked to pay £178 extra in duty when the courier arrived at their door, Spurrell said. “As you can imagine, customers were saying: ‘You can take that back, we don’t want it anymore’.”

Norwegian duty on a £30 cheese pack amounted to £190 extra, he said.

Spurrell is now pursuing the domestic market with greater vigour but says the cost of marketing has gone “through the roof” because all his competitors are having to do the same.

“Before we could sell across the EU, now we are all fishing in the same pond. We used to be the biggest online sellers but now we are absolutely bombarded with attacks by all our cheese rivals because they are buying all the ads on Google to try to beat us. These are competitors who would never have bothered us before,” he said.

The “sad” thing, Spurrell said, is that it is the small to medium-sized companies such as his, important employers up and down the country, have been hammered by Brexit and other trade deals struck by the government, rather than giant rivals.

He noted that the Canadian company Saputo, with a market capital of more than C$14bn (£8.3bn), had done well out of the Norwegian deal as producers of three of the four “premier” cheeses singled out for “significantly reduced tariffs”.

John Rawl's is correct about the Brexiteer claim to turn into Singapore-on-Thames tax wise in order to divert exports from Europe to third countries and this is what the ministers tell industrial leaders to do without providing though either the tax-free environment or customs-free trade deals.

[Unthinking Majority]

No. it does not. One side cannot generally unilaterally set trade terms. There is little trade without some compromise.
Generally the bigger side of the trade deal sets more of the terms than the smaller.

And generally the EU is not going to import things that no longer meet EU standards.

Brexit has caused a lot of disruption upsetting terms which have been around for a long time. As the smaller economy Britain is going to feel more of the pain. That the British Government has managed the whole process appallingly badly the pain going to be worse. Britain position had been a useful entry point for large corporations into Europe, but that is no longer the case. Business will reconsider their investment and location of business hubs in Britain not attractive as it was before Brexit.

The British had negotiated baldy seemingly wanting to have their cake and eats it too, and have been making much noise about not abiding by previous agreement which hardy makes others keen to comprise further with people unable to keep their signed agreements in the pat,

The More trade a country does with the rest of the world the more there economy is dependent upon the rest of the world, it involves compromises. And a nation that relies on others is less independent. There a trade off between political independence of globalization. It's a complex relationship and not a simple one, but a economy that is dependent on others is less sovereign.

So called "Free Trade" (actual Free Trade is like the Free Market is mythical) is the product of agreements where nations declare they will do certain things and not do other certain tings. It's a restriction of future action, for hopefully better economic outcomes.

e

What I meant is that Britain will longer be required to enter any trade deal that they do not want to be a part of.

On top of that they now have full control again of their immigration and borders.

Sure the EU is great as a trading bloc to increase leverage in trade deal negotiations, but the EU went beyond that and turned itself into the united states of europe.