$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 67.95

4,746 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
29.9% of Goal | 28 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
68 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Brexit, doing the imposible. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Walt
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
In memorium. Bob Hoover died 25 Oct 2016 at 94. In WWII he was shot down in a Spitfire and stole an FW-190 to escape. He spent decades at air shows flying Ole Yeller, shown
badge
Please contact me about board gaming in Orange County.
mbmbmbmbmb
CPG Grey did a video on Brexit, and he guessed 55% non-Brexit Brexit, mentioning that the pre-Brexit vote negotiations could be picked up, which is what this seems like.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.


If they'd been more like this before, brexit would have never passed.
They just need to buy about 20 years and a majority of the population of uk will consider itself EU citizens first.

The EU government officials in Brussels were really arrogant, really dumb, terrible politicians and negotiators.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.


If they'd been more like this before, brexit would have never passed.
They just need to buy about 20 years and a majority of the population of uk will consider itself EU citizens first.

The EU government officials in Brussels were really arrogant, really dumb, terrible politicians and negotiators.
Pretty much.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bojan Ramadanovic
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Key point is - would this deal allow UK to strike trade deals with outside world independent of EU.
If yes then it is strictly better then EU membership. If not it is garbage.

It does show that EU politicians are in the end reasonable/pragmatic and that UK negotiating position is not nearly as bad as was said over and over by the remain campaign.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.


I may be reading it wrong, but it looks like the opt out is temporary with a time limit of seven years. If that is the case it will be interesting what the reaction would be from the Brexit side.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Kumitedad wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.


I may be reading it wrong, but it looks like the opt out is temporary with a time limit of seven years. If that is the case it will be interesting what the reaction would be from the Brexit side.
Yes is is for a period of 7 years. But as for me the issue was never immigration I have no issue with it.

Also we do not know what will happen once that sever years are up, will we be bound by free movement rules, or will there be more negotiation.
Remember free movement was the EU's red line. This shows it is not the red line that we were told, and that in fact anything is on the table as long as the bankers and business men can still make money, and that is (now) what the EU is all about.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Kumitedad wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.


I may be reading it wrong, but it looks like the opt out is temporary with a time limit of seven years. If that is the case it will be interesting what the reaction would be from the Brexit side.
Yes is is for a period of 7 years. But as for me the issue was never immigration I have no issue with it.

Also we do not know what will happen once that sever years are up, will we be bound by free movement rules, or will there be more negotiation.
Remember free movement was the EU's red line. This shows it is not the red line that we were told, and that in fact anything is on the table as long as the bankers and business men can still make money, and that is (now) what the EU is all about.


After re reading the article, it still seems like a red line. The "brake" will be limited in time 7 to 10 years bandied about. With a definite end date But I agree with you about the businessmen and bankers. They will be the ones trumpeting this as a great concession, when there appears only to be a pause. Here's hoping that at farmers will at least not be hurt by the end of EU subsidies. Is the Government pledged to make up that amount to them?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Kumitedad wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.


I may be reading it wrong, but it looks like the opt out is temporary with a time limit of seven years. If that is the case it will be interesting what the reaction would be from the Brexit side.
Yes is is for a period of 7 years. But as for me the issue was never immigration I have no issue with it.

Also we do not know what will happen once that sever years are up, will we be bound by free movement rules, or will there be more negotiation.


It seems to me that what was discussed was a temporary relief. That after 7 years we go back to freedom of movement.

The article also mentions that the UK will also have to fund the EU (although maybe a slightly lesser amount than it does now), and of course it will still have to implement various EU regulations.

The article doesn't really talk about what France (and the few other countries that have made slightly favourable noises) really wants in return. Also of course this hasn't come from the EU, either the Commission of the Council, so a spanner could easily appear in the works along the way.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Kumitedad wrote:
Here's hoping that at farmers will at least not be hurt by the end of EU subsidies. Is the Government pledged to make up that amount to them?


Why so favourable to the farmers?

The Govt hasn't pledged to provide the same subsidies for anything. In fact 4 days ago the farming minister said he could not guarantee that future agricultural support programmes will be as generous as current EU subsidies.

Indeed many in the UK whether in government or not have moaned about the CAP for a long time. Personally subsidies should be re-organised to give more to the smaller farms and less to the large mega-farms (which are already reasonably profitable) and less to the non-agricultural large-scale land owners.
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Of course the French and the Polish will veto this deal.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:
If they'd been more like this before, brexit would have never passed.


I doubt the UK even considered offering a deal like this before.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Kumitedad wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Kumitedad wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-fr...

So they are in fact considering the impossible, and may in fact allow Britain to opt out of free movement whilst giving access to free trade.


I may be reading it wrong, but it looks like the opt out is temporary with a time limit of seven years. If that is the case it will be interesting what the reaction would be from the Brexit side.
Yes is is for a period of 7 years. But as for me the issue was never immigration I have no issue with it.

Also we do not know what will happen once that sever years are up, will we be bound by free movement rules, or will there be more negotiation.
Remember free movement was the EU's red line. This shows it is not the red line that we were told, and that in fact anything is on the table as long as the bankers and business men can still make money, and that is (now) what the EU is all about.


After re reading the article, it still seems like a red line. The "brake" will be limited in time 7 to 10 years bandied about. With a definite end date But I agree with you about the businessmen and bankers. They will be the ones trumpeting this as a great concession, when there appears only to be a pause. Here's hoping that at farmers will at least not be hurt by the end of EU subsidies. Is the Government pledged to make up that amount to them?


is there no reason 7 to 10 years could not be extended "temporarily" another 3 to 5 years until such time as polls show further brexit's would fail?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vapix
msg tools
mbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:
is there no reason 7 to 10 years could not be extended "temporarily" another 3 to 5 years until such time as polls show further brexit's would fail?

It might be possible later, but it's not possible for the EU to even talk about such options now.

This is a very early gambit in a very long game.

It's too soon for even a 7-year "brake" to have been discussed by the organization as a whole. This is more likely to be something that was kited by either the UK or someone on an EU negotiating team while looking for a way to defer the inevitable, or to establish some reference points for later discussions.

The EU needs to rethink its objectives and key principles, including the "four freedoms", but I doubt this is an indication that they're doing so.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Dolphinandrew wrote:
maxo-texas wrote:
If they'd been more like this before, brexit would have never passed.


I doubt the UK even considered offering a deal like this before.


Many MPs and others who supported Brexit said before the vote that all they wanted was some reasonable accommodation to limit the movement of people without jobs into the UK and they would support staying in the EU. That would have been plenty to sway the vote---it only won by a few points. The EU just never felt like putting it on the table.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
maxo-texas wrote:
If they'd been more like this before, brexit would have never passed.


I doubt the UK even considered offering a deal like this before.


Many MPs and others who supported Brexit said before the vote that all they wanted was some reasonable accommodation to limit the movement of people without jobs into the UK and they would support staying in the EU. That would have been plenty to sway the vote---it only won by a few points. The EU just never felt like putting it on the table.


I highly doubt being a member of the common market but with no seat at the negotiating table, the thing the article talks about in terms of what the UK would be giving up in return, was on the table before the referendum. Mainly because that essentially means being out of the EU.

And sure, I doubt the EU put free movement on the table when negotiating with the UK as a member of the EU. The other member states would have hated such a deal, and probably would have vetoed it. What would have been the point?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Dolphinandrew wrote:
And sure, I doubt the EU put free movement on the table when negotiating with the UK as a member of the EU. The other member states would have hated such a deal, and probably would have vetoed it. What would have been the point?


Well, from my point of view, the point would be to both improve the internal policies of the EU, and also to keep the UK in the EU. So that would be win-win. Of course, "people would hate it" often trumps good policy.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
And sure, I doubt the EU put free movement on the table when negotiating with the UK as a member of the EU. The other member states would have hated such a deal, and probably would have vetoed it. What would have been the point?


Well, from my point of view, the point would be to both improve the internal policies of the EU, and also to keep the UK in the EU. So that would be win-win. Of course, "people would hate it" often trumps good policy.


I suspect a large proportion, if perhaps not a majority, of the people would love it. Personally I wouldn't like it, nor do I think it's a good idea.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Dolphinandrew wrote:
Personally I wouldn't like it, nor do I think it's a good idea.


As you would expect, that increases my approval of it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
Personally I wouldn't like it, nor do I think it's a good idea.


As you would expect, that increases my approval of it.



Sure. You're never one to let real world experience get in the way of your opinion of how you think the world is.

In any case, my point was that if EU politicians generally though free movement was a bad idea, there's more than enough political support with 'the people' for ending it, or at least gradually curbing it. Certainly some people wouldn't like it (international businesses, academia, etc).

On the other hand, what there would be massively little support for (outside the UK) would be treating the UK (even more) as a special case with it's own grab bag of membership benefits/requirements while still being a new member.

In any case, giving up the option to vote on EU law while still being subject to it seems to me a pretty awful deal, even if one really wants those immigration curbs. Particularly if they are temporary.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Vapix wrote:
maxo-texas wrote:
is there no reason 7 to 10 years could not be extended "temporarily" another 3 to 5 years until such time as polls show further brexit's would fail?

It might be possible later, but it's not possible for the EU to even talk about such options now.

This is a very early gambit in a very long game.

It's too soon for even a 7-year "brake" to have been discussed by the organization as a whole. This is more likely to be something that was kited by either the UK or someone on an EU negotiating team while looking for a way to defer the inevitable, or to establish some reference points for later discussions.

The EU needs to rethink its objectives and key principles, including the "four freedoms", but I doubt this is an indication that they're doing so.
Just like there was no possibility of them getting a deal like this you mean?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vapix
msg tools
mbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Just like there was no possibility of them getting a deal like this you mean?

I know people were saying this, but IIRC I wasn't one of them.

I do remember saying something like I hoped the EU would look for the right compromise rather than being spiteful, or deliberately making a bad deal with the UK to discourage other countries from leaving.

IMO (then and now) the EU should be looking for something that:
* Perfectly balances the EU's and the UK's interests
* Leaves the EU as an organization that all member countries' voters prefer to be part of
* Leaves room for the UK to rejoin as a full member **

If achieving any of these requires changes to the EU's fundamental treaties, laws, and/or principles I think they should change them. It's a good organization as it is, but IMO they went too far towards becoming a supra-national organization. This is an excellent opportunity to "tune" it.

(**)
This míght be conceptually difficult right now, but I don't think it would all that hard in practice if the UK was prepared to maintain most of its "EU-centric" organizations and activities.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Ackroyd
United Kingdom
Brighton
E Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
IMHO leaving the EU only to join again later (anytime soon) is ridiculous given the amount of change and then change back. Especially given that now it seems that the majority of UK citizens want to stay in the EU.

This kind of deal sounds like just what is needed, a non-Brexit, Brexit. Just effectively a renegotiation of the UK deal, using the threat of exit as leverage to get something that satisfies those who wanted to leave and doesn't make the rest despair (which is what is happening now).

Leaving seems like the worst option - abiding by a non-binding poll that now wouldn't have the same result. Madness.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Dolphinandrew wrote:
In any case, my point was that if EU politicians generally though free movement was a bad idea, there's more than enough political support with 'the people' for ending it, or at least gradually curbing it. Certainly some people wouldn't like it (international businesses, academia, etc).


Why would any of those people care? They wouldn't be affected at all by a policy that allows any EU resident to travel to any EU country, and that makes it easy but not automatic to permanently reside in another EU country with employment.

Quote:
On the other hand, what there would be massively little support for (outside the UK) would be treating the UK (even more) as a special case with it's own grab bag of membership benefits/requirements while still being a new member.


Yeah, I certainly don't like that idea, but it seems to be what will happen now. What would have been better is general cross-EU reforms that apply everywhere.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Why would any of those people care? They wouldn't be affected at all by a policy that allows any EU resident to travel to any EU country, and that makes it easy but not automatic to permanently reside in another EU country with employment.


That depends on the details of the policy. Certainly the EU has made my life in regards to moving from country to country within the EU much easier compared to those from outside it. In particular, I would have been in a very difficult situation when there was a couple of months gap in my funding had I not been an EU citizen. Many people in academia and Europe-wide businesses are in the same situation.

Of course, the EU could replace what we have now with a different system that is not too much more bother than the current situation. But any system is going to be more onerous than what we have now, since what we have now makes moving no more difficult than someone moving across country. At least as far as government interaction is concerned.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.