Merged Now What?

[Planigale]

Not the way I read it, more that the UK should not be rewarded.



Has anyone other than you made that claim ?



One of these things is not like the other. That's like me wondering why my neighbour has a much nicer car than I do when I earn more. The reason is that he prioritised spending over other spending (or saving) items.

The U.K. is a large net contributor due to the size of our country and the strength of our economy. When net contribution per head is considered the UK is well down the list.

The UK has contributed a great deal to the EU over the years. The UK was part of the ERM moving towards joining the Euro until it collapsed costing the UK billions. The EU allowed countries who did not meet criteria to join the Euro bringing about the Euro crisis. The more people here argue that the EU is perfect and that it is beyond improvement the more you convince me that exiting the EU was right. (And I was wrong!)

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

The UK has contributed a great deal to the EU over the years. The UK was part of the ERM moving towards joining the Euro until it collapsed costing the UK billions. The EU allowed countries who did not meet criteria to join the Euro bringing about the Euro crisis. The more people here argue that the EU is perfect and that it is beyond improvement the more you convince me that exiting the EU was right. (And I was wrong!)

Can you quote a single person here claiming the EU is perfect?

 

[Amazer]

No I am saying that arguments that they should be 'punished' are wrong. Indeed I think the truly moral approach is to maximise good for all (OK my college has a stuffed body in its entrance). If the EU can improve the lives of others at no cost why not do it? If the UK can be better off without being a member of the EU why prevent that?

I agree that there's no need for the UK to be punished. That said, I also don't see why the UK should get preferential treatment over other non-EU members, other than what they (UK and EU) can negotiate in a deal. And there I don't think the EU should give any freebies, without getting anything in return.

 

[Klimax]

No I am saying that arguments that they should be 'punished' are wrong. Indeed I think the truly moral approach is to maximise good for all (OK my college has a stuffed body in its entrance). If the EU can improve the lives of others at no cost why not do it? If the UK can be better off without being a member of the EU why prevent that?

Punished? just a POV. But there is zero reason to give you anything cheaply whatsoever. Want access to single market? Pay a lot (see Norway, but don't forget to adjust for GDP/Population), mandatory acceptance of regulations and mandatory free movement. (Central and Eastern Europe will ensure that). Financial passport? If option at all then very expensive. And so on.

Expect that whatever is reached, your position will be substantially worse then current state. (And no other country will give you much of deals either. They'll be always far worse then the ones by EU) No agreement would make your life "fun".

BTW: Economy and markets are already punishing you anyway...

 

[jimbob]

Punished? just a POV. But there is zero reason to give you anything cheaply whatsoever. Want access to single market? Pay a lot (see Norway, but don't forget to adjust for GDP/Population), mandatory acceptance of regulations and mandatory free movement. (Central and Eastern Europe will ensure that). Financial passport? If option at all then very expensive. And so on.

Expect that whatever is reached, your position will be substantially worse then current state. (And no other country will give you much of deals either. They'll be always far worse then the ones by EU) No agreement would make your life "fun".

BTW: Economy and markets are already punishing you anyway...

I really can't see what there could be to gain in leaving except the frankly rather minimal membership fee that the UK pays at the moment.

The benefits far outweigh the costs.

There aren't too many immigrants.

 

[Ambrosia]

I agree that there's no need for the UK to be punished. That said, I also don't see why the UK should get preferential treatment over other non-EU members, other than what they (UK and EU) can negotiate in a deal. And there I don't think the EU should give any freebies, without getting anything in return.

We don't want preferential treatment.

Dave (he of the ex-Prime Minister) recently tried to renegotiate preferential treatment prior to the referendum, and the EU told him (and the UK) to do one.

Now the UK voters have told the EU to do one.

That's about where we are today. Ideally we want access to the EU single market, but you never start negotiation where you want to end up, so the UK is asking for more than it will accept, and the EU is offering less than it will accept, and eventually there'll be a compromise and we'll end up with sort of access for sort of free movement of people.

Technically until we invoke article 50 we're still an EU member, so Junker et al can foam at the mouth all they want for the time being, we're still paying our £350m/week and we still uphold all of the EU regulations etc we signed up to.

Many people, both posters here, and talking heads in the media, express incredulity that we will get "sweet deals" or "special treatment". We won't. We don't want that, or need that. We'll get a deal that's good for both the UK and the remainder of the EU going forward. (a deal that's not as good as either would like ideally)

 

[McHrozni]

Many people, both posters here, and talking heads in the media, express incredulity that we will get "sweet deals" or "special treatment". We won't. We don't want that, or need that. We'll get a deal that's good for both the UK and the remainder of the EU going forward. (a deal that's not as good as either would like ideally)

I'll nitpick here, but UK does want sweet deals and special treatment. It currently has both with the EU, but it has decided to throw it away in favor of who knows what.
It is silly to expect it will receive more than it already has because it's leaving.

McHrozni

 

[Aepervius]

This view may be personal but if it represents an EU view just shows that the EU is anti-democratic.

No it represent the view we are fed up with your insularism , asking for boon, and sending back insult. And it represent the view of a certain part of the population therefore politician acting on it would be democratic rather than anti democratic.

Maybe next time you participate in an alliance or a club of sort, try avoiding constantly throwing poo at the member. Maybe they will then appreciate you a little more.

And it is not a punishment. It is jsut a "why in the hell should we give UK a friendly and preferential treatment AGAIN after getting more poo slinged our way ?"

 

[The Don]

The UK has contributed a great deal to the EU over the years. The UK was part of the ERM moving towards joining the Euro until it collapsed costing the UK billions. The EU allowed countries who did not meet criteria to join the Euro bringing about the Euro crisis. The more people here argue that the EU is perfect and that it is beyond improvement the more you convince me that exiting the EU was right. (And I was wrong!)

The highlighted is a strawman argument. AFAIK no-one has made this claim - rather like your earlier statement that people had claimed that the UK had contributed nothing.

For the other members of the EU, the UK has been a difficult partner. The UK has been like a demanding employee, asking for preferential treatment. Now that it looks like the UK is "quitting its job" (in the analogy) we also seem to expect that we can continue to use the company car park and executive wash -room free of charge.

 

[The Don]

Technically until we invoke article 50 we're still an EU member, so Junker et al can foam at the mouth all they want for the time being, we're still paying our £350m/week and we still uphold all of the EU regulations etc we signed up to.

Even knowing that the highlighted is a gross exaggeration - it is still repeated

 

[Hlafordlaes]

The UK has contributed a great deal to the EU over the years. The UK was part of the ERM moving towards joining the Euro until it collapsed costing the UK billions. The EU allowed countries who did not meet criteria to join the Euro bringing about the Euro crisis. The more people here argue that the EU is perfect and that it is beyond improvement the more you convince me that exiting the EU was right. (And I was wrong!)

Perfect?!? Heavens no. No good plan survives contact with reality. Right now, since the single currency was introduced too soon and too broadly, we have commissions and work-arounds attempting to get member states to behave in fiscal terms. This is producing a "democracy deficit," but is no coups. The transition from walking on all fours to two legs involves a good deal of stumbling.

 

[Planigale]

No it represent the view we are fed up with your insularism , asking for boon, and sending back insult. And it represent the view of a certain part of the population therefore politician acting on it would be democratic rather than anti democratic.

Maybe next time you participate in an alliance or a club of sort, try avoiding constantly throwing poo at the member. Maybe they will then appreciate you a little more.

And it is not a punishment. It is jsut a "why in the hell should we give UK a friendly and preferential treatment AGAIN after getting more poo slinged our way ?"

The only 'poo' thrown were wads of cash. There is also a phrase he who pays the piper calls the tune. In your terms why should people who are not paying membership fees dictate to those who are. The EU is not a club and this is a poor analogy. One could make an analogy and say it is like a company and influence should be proportionate to investment. The EU is none of these. It is a political structure and the essential function of all national governments is to negotiate within the structures the best deal addressing their own national interests. Any exceptions were not unilateral decisions of the UK but collective decisions of the EU. Are you shouting about France and its failure to meet Euro deficit rules? Sweden for failing to join the Euro? What are the EU rules the UK failed to adhere to?

 

[Aepervius]

The only 'poo' thrown were wads of cash.

And the accusation of EU dictating everything to UK, and the accusation of EU of all malaise in UK economy, and I pass many others. look at what your own politician and media keep stating. Heck look at how much was slung toward the continent during the referendum campaign.

There is also a phrase he who pays the piper calls the tune. In your terms why should people who are not paying membership fees dictate to those who are.

Everybody is paying a fee. That some get more back than others will always happen. This is about as stupid a reflection as stating that the rich should dictate how the tax are spent and the poor should have no word whatsoever on it.

It is a political structure and the essential function of all national governments is to negotiate within the structures the best deal addressing their own national interests. Any exceptions were not unilateral decisions of the UK but collective decisions of the EU. Are you shouting about France and its failure to meet Euro deficit rules? Sweden for failing to join the Euro? What are the EU rules the UK failed to adhere to?

Yes, I actually do shoot about that, for all country not meeting their obligation.

As for your last sentence it is a strawman. We never pretended that UK did not meet their obligation, we stated that at every point they kept asking for special treatment. From keeping currency, to the latest "we don't want free movement of people". There is a difference.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Ideally we want access to the EU single market, but you never start negotiation where you want to end up, so the UK is asking for more than it will accept, and the EU is offering less than it will accept, and eventually there'll be a compromise and we'll end up with sort of access for sort of free movement of people.

While I agree that that's a very likely outcome, the worrying thing is that I think a large proportion of the 52% have been convinced by the Leave campaigners that what we can actually expect is complete access to the single market together with absolute prohibition of anybody with a slightly different accent getting anywhere north-west of Dover. When what we actually get turns out to be not much different to, but slightly worse than, what we started out with, they're going to look for somebody to blame, and based on their record it won't be the people who lied to them by saying something better was possible. At that point, just getting another round of the same sort of bickering we've already had becomes practically a best case scenario.

Dave

 

[Darat]

We don't want preferential treatment.

Dave (he of the ex-Prime Minister) recently tried to renegotiate preferential treatment prior to the referendum, and the EU told him (and the UK) to do one.

Now the UK voters have told the EU to do one.

That's about where we are today. Ideally we want access to the EU single market, but you never start negotiation where you want to end up, so the UK is asking for more than it will accept, and the EU is offering less than it will accept, and eventually there'll be a compromise and we'll end up with sort of access for sort of free movement of people.

Technically until we invoke article 50 we're still an EU member, so Junker et al can foam at the mouth all they want for the time being, we're still paying our £350m/week and we still uphold all of the EU regulations etc we signed up to.

Many people, both posters here, and talking heads in the media, express incredulity that we will get "sweet deals" or "special treatment". We won't. We don't want that, or need that. We'll get a deal that's good for both the UK and the remainder of the EU going forward. (a deal that's not as good as either would like ideally)

Just a correction even after we leave the EU we will still have to follow all those pesky EU laws etc. because they are in fact UK laws. So any changes you may be hoping for in your area of interest are very unlikely to happen anytime soon.

 

[Planigale]

And the accusation of EU dictating everything to UK, and the accusation of EU of all malaise in UK economy, and I pass many others. look at what your own politician and media keep stating. Heck look at how much was slung toward the continent during the referendum campaign.



Everybody is paying a fee. That some get more back than others will always happen. This is about as stupid a reflection as stating that the rich should dictate how the tax are spent and the poor should have no word whatsoever on it.



Yes, I actually do shoot about that, for all country not meeting their obligation.

As for your last sentence it is a strawman. We never pretended that UK did not meet their obligation, we stated that at every point they kept asking for special treatment. From keeping currency, to the latest "we don't want free movement of people". There is a difference.

So are you equally angry at Ireland and Denmark for their exceptions / opt outs?

 

[The Don]

So are you equally angry at Ireland and Denmark for their exceptions / opt outs?

How does the volume and scope of Irish/Danish opt-outs compare to the UK opt-outs ? My understanding, based on nothing more reliable than hearsay, is that the UK has a larger number of opt-outs across a larger range of subjects with broader implications than any other EU country.


edited to add....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opt-outs_in_the_European_Union

Though I think that the Wikipedia article only begins to scratch the surface and seems to consider macro-opt-outs, i'm not sure whether there are a much larger number of micro-opt-outs.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

The only 'poo' thrown were wads of cash.

Can you actually have sat through the Brexit referendum campaign from Leave and say that with a straight face? The EU has been a handy whipping boy for years and plenty poo has been figuratively thrown in its direction - and by electing Farage as an MEP I'd say we went one better and made it literally true.

 

[Ambrosia]

Even knowing that the highlighted is a gross exaggeration - it is still repeated

Fine - we pay ~250m/week to the EU when you account for the rebate and the EU sends some money back to the UK in the form of grants and what have you, that we have little to no control over. I think on balance we send somewhere in the region of 140m/week in "membership fees" to the EU. i.e. if post Brexit we funded all of the things that the EU funds now we'd have ~140m/week (7ish billion a year) in savings.

The point is that we are still a fully paid up EU member state, bound by all the EU treaties we signed up to, and will remain so until we conclude the article 50 negotiations, or until 2 years elapse after we invoke article 50.

Is that accurate enough for you now?

 

[Ambrosia]

Just a correction even after we leave the EU we will still have to follow all those pesky EU laws etc. because they are in fact UK laws. So any changes you may be hoping for in your area of interest are very unlikely to happen anytime soon.

I read recently, and can't remember where, that it's likely that we'll just adopt all of the EU based laws into UK law where that applies and then un-do the ones we don't want at some future point.

AIUI a lot of the EU directives stuff we wrote national UK laws to follow those guidelines, but there are a number of EU based laws too that we still follow.

It'll likely be a decade before all that lot get unpicked and rewritten properly.