The cost of Brexit for us; the ordinary people

More weapons? A tax haven?

Cunco,

Do you have any information on the destination of the exports you've listed (I'm going out soon, no time to google).

I wonder how many are part of the 44% exports to the EU and how the imposition of EU tariffs will affect them.

Tax haven, dd? Isn't that what Amazon is relocating it's HQ here for?

(Which, I am informed, is a technical 'relocation' which involves very few staff and creates no jobs.)

ahhhhh thank you Maisie x

It's already started...

www.independent.co.uk/voices/george-osborne-is-trying-to-turn-post-brexit-britain-into-a-tax-haven-and-it-wont-benefit-anyone-a7119211.html

The SWiss have just had to climb down today- after 2 years of f
negotiations with the EU re free movement of people- after the Feb 2014 Referendum - as they realise the cost in so so many ways will be just too high, not just in business terms, but for research, tourism, food prices, etc, etc.

The Swiss referendum took place in early 2014, and the Federal Government has to implement measures within 3 years of a referendum, so this period ends early next year. Although the Swiss Federal Government has not done anything to restrict EU nationals yet, as soon as the referendum result was announced the EU pulled ALL cooperative research funding from Swiss universities. So far the Swiss government has made up this shortfall, but if the government actually implements any restrictions on movement then the EU's reaction is likely to be quite significant, harming the Swiss economy in a more major way. Unfortunately those advocating leave in the UK managed to gloss over the reality of what was and is happening in Switzerland. I understand from some of my former work colleagues (I worked in Switzerland from 2007 to 2011) that a new referendum is quite likely and that support for restricting movement appears now to have dropped to about 24% in light of the consequences.

Shouldn't worry about it, granjura. You still live in the 2nd happiest country in the world - after Denmark.

UK is 23rd, which is explained by all the unhappy Brexiteers, unhappy because we haven't left the EU yet, and still might not.

The happiest appear to be mainly those who have a more equal distribution of wealth, and don't penalise the old and sick for being old and sick.

OECD figures show UK export of goods in 2015 at $435.2 bn and UK export of services at $344.5 bn. A UK source shows financial services as significant but not the largest source of exported services which are the 'professional, scientific and technical activities sector'.

If 44% of UK export of goods are to the EU, I suspect the contribution of export of goods to the EU is 44%. Other things equal, a tariff rise would be expected to reduce exports but, if the Pound remains lower, this would be expected to reduce the negative impact.

dj pssst it depends whether you are paid in CHF or £ ;)

Not just Boris that can't make decisions. David Davis has no idea what is going on.
However, he does appear to think that Brexit could be stopped.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-article-50-stopped-brexit-latest-select-committee-a7475231.html

Sorry, Cunco, but you will have to explain your second paragraph to me. I do not understand.

Can't you still be happy to live there rather than here, granjura?

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/my_brawl_over_brexit_with_prime_minister_theresa_may_1_4807899

oh yes we can --- the psssst was to indicate I was only jesting- in view os ome recent posts on the subject of my bitterness - lol. TBH I could be happy anywhere, moi- providing I am not starving or in a war zone- as I have such a pleasant dispostion x

It is now generally accepted that Putin's Russia swung the US eldction in favour of Trump.

But did they also promote Brexit? In this new post truth era it seems that they did.

Putin's agendae is to destabilise the west by influincing gullible voters

I think the fact the EU will use , what I call others will not, threatening behaviour towards countries who allow their population to use their democratic right to vote on matters such as membership of the EU says it all. I am not surprised the Swiss are finding themselves in the position they are as we have discussed this subject previously on other threads.

If the only way the EU Commission /Parliament can survive is by insisting it has to be 'their way or the highway' then it is in more trouble than they think they are.

It will probably get it's way , as it did with Ireland, but it is putting a sticking plaster on a festering wound and will only serve to make people realise they are in some sort of 'Stockholm Syndrome'.

I keep repeating this but if the EU Commission had a modicum of respect for the people and democracy it would be revisiting past treaties and coming up with new, progressive ideas for the 21st Century.

If the EU had moved from it's principles of 'Ever Closer Union', 'The Free Movement of People', 'Federal Europe' and accepted these were /are contentious issues for many of the 28 countries 'STILL' in the European Union we might not be where we are today. Had the European Commission been listening to the voices of the people not just listening to themselves they might just have noted people are happy to trade freely, providing 'sensible' conditions apply, move freely between countries for employment but not for welfare, cooperate over security etc. What they see happening is an erosion of their sovereignty by a beaurocratic system that does not allow power to be anything other than held by a political elite in Brussels and they could well reap what they sow. Unless of course they do as they have promised and make life as difficult as possible for any country that shows any sign of Free Thinking or even worse Defiance to scare the voters into maintaining the status quo to keep the European Union dogma of achieving a ' Federal Europe' run by them.

Ironic really that the Brexit vote has condemned us to a Tory government that has no respect for anyone 'ordinary'. I think I'd rather be disrespected by a more remote organisation which has a minimal effect on my daily life and that of my fellow citizens and isn't doing its best to demolish our public services.

Oddly, I turn to twitter and here's barrister Jolyon Maugham saying something similar:

"Jo Maugham QC‏ @JolyonMaugham
I wish I knew what Brexit was for. I might then get why we destroy all - the Union, economy, trust in Govt, social cohesion - to achieve it."

varian, it seems increasingle certain that Putin is doing just that. And THAT is truly scary and 'trumps' any other concerns or hopes we may have, on both sides.

I'd like to hear from anyone who voted 'leave', for whatever reason, to come and say this is not so (and their reasons, of course).

And for all of you terrified at the thought of a united Europe it seems that you just might be playing into Putin's hands:

Putin’s government was widely seen as favouring Brexit, as a way of assisting its long-term strategic aim of weakening and dividing Europe and Nato. Any evidence of direct or indirect Russian interference in the British referendum campaign would be politically explosive.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/10/russian-involvement-in-us-vote-raises-fears-for-european-elections

The business of people moving country for welfare is a bit of a red herring really. Many of the other EU countries require people to have some sort of resident term before they qualify for any hand outs - the requirement is that it is the same for all residents - the indiginous as well as those recently moving. You cannot get any welfare payments in France straight away - as we have never needed to apply for any I have no idea of exactly what the rules are but I believe you need to live in the country for a few months. The U.K. could have been doing this for years but CHOSE not to.
To not have reciprocal healthcare is a bit short sighted - the EHIC card gives travellers the right to the same care as nationals of the country get. If you are a resident and pay into the system for a period then you qualify or if you are a pensioner- in the case of UK citizens the UK pays reimbursement using bi-lateral agreement.
There is also a minimum income level for people to be allowed to live permanently in some countries.

Oh, sorry. Missed varian's post and cross posted with granjura.

I too am very concerned about Putin and his ultimate aims in Europe. It is not, for me, a point at issue. We all need a strong Nato and, whatever we may all think of Trump, we need strong US support in Nato to counter-balance the threat of Putin.

I want strong and friendly alliances between the UK, EU and other European countries. What I do not want is the UK as a state within a United States of Europe, particularly one that, I believe, has made a huge mistake in creating the Eurozone, which is now contributing to its economic and political problems.

There is no shortage of people on both sides of the EU argument who believe the EU needs reforming. Sadly, there is no consensus about the nature of reform; or how, when or, if ever, it might be achieved. As it is, the EU seems to be becoming more divisive than unifying among the people of Europe, if not their governments.

We were offered a vote to say Remain or Leave the EU by Parliament. We were not offered a constructive plan to reform the EU. We had a stark but simple choice.

In or out of the EU, I would put more faith in Nato in restraining Putin than the EU; but co-operation and friendly alliance among countries of common interest makes sense whatever happens. All the more reason why, if Brexit happens, both sides should seek an amicable divorce.

With Putin's mate Trump in the US presidency I'd be very wary of putting much trust in Nato.

I'm sure you're aware that Trump has said that he will reconsider the US's role in NATO and believes the country pays too much.

I'm having difficulty in following a coherent argument in your post. You seem to be confusing a number of issues.

Daphne: I was trying to respond to a question which I thought confused several issues so I apologise if my response was also confusing.

As regards Nato, without the full support of the US, Europe will have a major problem with Putin whether the UK is in or out of the EU. If Trump wants Europe to contribute more to its own defence through a larger contribution to Nato, he may have a point but, in any case, Europe needs the US fully committed to Nato. Otherwise, I share everyone's real fears for the future.

Elsewhere, I was putting the view there are MPs from both Remain and Leave who recognise the need for reform of the EU but have no consensus and no plan for change. I think there would have been a majority for a reformed EU but this was a pipe-dream.

Now, whether in or out, the UK should have strong friendly relationships with EU and non-EU countries. Co-operation through Nato is a must; elsewhere, it is desirable.

If Brexit happens, it would be better for all, if it were an amicable divorce.