|
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
On aggregate it will almost certainly be bad for the economy, dependent on what kind of deal we can thrash out. What's annoying me is that the government are setting out their best case scenario and the EU are giving their harshest warnings, and all we're getting is a blizzard of articles and commentary chattering about this incompatibility.
The obvious truth is that both sides are starting out with everything they want, even if they know they won't get it all. I feel that the UK will ultimately get a lot of compromise from the EU, as there are simply too many fragile economies in the bloc (Spain, Italy, Greece, etc.) to risk destabilising the region just to set an example of the perils of leaving the EU. |
This is a strand of logic that I have a very hard time following, although I see it very often from my university-educated middle-class friends, all of whom were against Brexit. You all admit that Brexit will be economically damaging to the UK, yet then you argue it won't be too bad because the EU is too afraid of economic damage to go all-out on what would turn into a Pyrrhic victory. It's the same optimism in rationality regarding economic outcomes, and, thus, economic determinism, which led everyone to tell me that Brexit would never happen.
I'm not just not sure if it's correct, I'm not even sure if I want it to be correct. The EU is about so much more than simple economics. I certainly don't want the UK (and, specifically, London) to lose out economically, but I would prefer that to more countries leaving the EU.
Ultimately, however, I think it's impossible to play game-theory with the current inputs. We need to see how the 2017 elections in key EU states go, to see how their leaders end up valuing outcomes. It's really difficult to forecast until we see how that happens.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
The other annoying factor is that all the pro-Remain media and politicians are still campaigning for a Brexit that is as least like a Brexit as possible. They want us to leave the EU but keep single market access and everything that comes with it. It would be completely pointless and wouldn't solve any of the problems that lead to people voting Leave in the first place. Nonetheless there's a never-ending stream of articles, comments and opinions slating Theresa May for not trying to pussy out of the whole thing. |
On one hand I think it could be argued that the Leave vote was never clear about WHAT Brexit was going to be, so that it would have been quite possible to Brexit and have a, say, Norway-esque deal. On the other hand, some people still seem to be running the spring Remain campaign... As I've said to many of my aforementioned university-education, middle-class British friends, one of the things that I love the most about British culture, one of the things I find most attractive, is the stiff upper lip - and it seems to be completely lacking in those who voted Remain. Their entire campaign WAS 'Project Fear' and they haven't given it up. To finish this paragraph with a Trumpian flourish - Embarassing!
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
The thing about democracy is that an inherent part of the system involves discrediting the current government. Arguably, that is the system. You have to slag off your opponent at every opportunity to try and weaken them and convince the public you should have power. It's a grinding, never-ending and thoroughly hypocritical war of attrition. Normally this is just a background hum that is safely ignorable, but the amount of headline political events in 2016 brought this kind of partisan shit-flinging to the forefront of public life, and it's grown remarkably tedious. |
The joys of democracy!
___________________
Quarantine Classics Brunello di Montalcino (In Transit) Edition [Progressive Classics] (August 2020)
Quarantine Classics - Puligny-Montrachet Edition [Progressive Classics] (April 2020)
What Is Progressive Anyways? [Progressive House Classics] (November 2019)
|
