AACSC wrote:

whereas with the EU we have no chance to effect meaningful influence.

Thats just not true we currently have just shy of 13% of the vote and we are also able to vote for our own MEP's.

Click image to enlarge

Of course, after brexit we won't have any influence.

Gazellio @ Prestige Cars wrote:

1. We are not leaving Europe (its a Continent)
2. We will still do most of our business with Europe
3. Europe will still do lots of business with UK
4. We will still holiday in Europe
5. Europe with still Holiday in UK
6. We will still be close friends with all European Countries and vise versa
7. We will not however be part of the Bureaucratically led European Union or European Court of Justice.
8. We will decide our own future and make our own rules.
9. We will trade with whom we choose to trade with including Europe and lots of new trading partners.
10. We will defend the UK and continue to help defend our European friends and Allies.

We may be a little worse off at the beginning with but we know that and can live it. The British people simply do not like to be told how to run their country by a bunch of un-elected Eurocrats most of whom have never lived in the UK and do fully understand the effect of its unique history and geography (Island) and how that effects peoples thinking.

I believe a lot of other European citizens feel the same.

Have copied it from a red bus?
Still surprising that only 51.8% voted leave

highlands wrote:

When we were very much in the EU there was press coverage on issues the EU had.
There has been a coup de bureaucratie at the EU, but hardly anyone really noticed because we are so engaged with Brexit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/11/world/e...ssion.html

I can't see that if the focus were to turn back to the EU that people would think well of it.

In any event, as said, it was never to be a 'best of 3' type deal.

So all the press in UK is now covering the events from EU. Project Silence? Remoaners? Russians?

How many times are you going to post the same news?

Stuff wrote:

This will divide the nation for 30 years or more.

Stuff wrote:

Tropes about beastly EU behaviour will continue to distract public debate in the UK.

Pelyma wrote:

Economics is not a science, they can make forecasts and predictions, but they are just that. A+B doesn’t always make C.

The trick is to know the difference between what is economics, and what is econometrics. The detailed, maths-based economic forecasting is the latter, and is increasingly regarded with scepticism. The former contains many useful and sound principles that are based in science and logic, but they are easily abused as they are often counterintuitive and little understood. It's also key to know what assumptions are being made.

The problem is always how the scientific bits are used and portrayed; there are few sounder principles in economics than the understanding of trade, on which the vast, vast, vast majority of economists agree but how one applies it matters greatly. The core implication of trade theory is that free trade is mutually and unilaterally beneficial. Barriers inflict harm, first and foremost, on the country that imposes them.

Therefore, all one has to do to create a report criticising Brexit is to assume that Britian will apply tariff and non-tariff barriers when we leave - often at the maximum WTO level. You can then apply complete scientific rigour to the report and come up with the biased result you so desire.

The fallacy is to equivocate leaving the EU with protectionism - the two are different things. We don't ahve to do that. Flip the political assumption and you get the opposite result from the same analysis. At the heart of it lies a political question, not an economic one.

The other thing is to weight heavily on a gravity-based model of trade. That is, the closer countries are, the more they will trade. It was once quite accurate, but with transportation costs falling, distance matters less and less, so it's no longer an accurate proxy for the transactions costs. It also ignores commonality in lanuage, culture, law and business practices that will lead to increased trade between those countries.

Most of the reports are economically quite sound - they just aren't measuring based on a neutral interpretation of Brexit. What the reports really say is that we shouldn't be protectionist after Brexit; not that we shouldn't have Brexit - something Brexiteers and Remainers alike should be able to agree on.

 Current: Discovery 3 06MY (55 reg) HSE Auto Zambezi Silver Allisport Fast Road Intercooler, V8 Brakes, Silicone IC Hoses, EGRs Blanked, Remapped, De-Cat pipe, FBHIC
Freelander 2 2007 HSE Manual Tambora Flame
Previous: FL2 56 reg SE Manual Black (written off )
Disco 3 06 reg B7S Manual Rimini Red
Disco 2 TD5 Y reg ES Manual Blue - Chipped
Several Discovery 300 TDis
 

Riccardo wrote:

Stuff wrote:

This will divide the nation for 30 years or more.

For me that was the worst aspect of Brexit. I have always seen (and appreciated) the UK as a country where the people is always unite and the fracture produced by the vote is big

The vote hasn't produced any fracture - people just disagree on things and always have done. Votes aren't devisive; the issues behind them are. That's not a reason to not have votes, or why one view is better than another.

In the grand scheme of things, being divided for thirty years is nothing but a tiny blip in hundreds, thousands even, of years of political disagreement.

 Current: Discovery 3 06MY (55 reg) HSE Auto Zambezi Silver Allisport Fast Road Intercooler, V8 Brakes, Silicone IC Hoses, EGRs Blanked, Remapped, De-Cat pipe, FBHIC
Freelander 2 2007 HSE Manual Tambora Flame
Previous: FL2 56 reg SE Manual Black (written off )
Disco 3 06 reg B7S Manual Rimini Red
Disco 2 TD5 Y reg ES Manual Blue - Chipped
Several Discovery 300 TDis