4 ms·

Britain has basically a Communist running the country right now so it's not really a surprise. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-minister

Britain has basically a Communist running the country right now so it's not really a surprise. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-minister-the-government-doesnt-always-know-whats-best/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-mini... Theresa May could have done all kinds of things to force favourable Brexit terms for the UK. For example she could continuously lower corporate taxes for foreign investment for while not activating Article 50 and simply wait until it really hurts the EU. If the EU doesn't give in the UK continues to wait and makes a lot of money in the process, if it does then the UK also wins. I suspect that the UK's prime minister actually wants to tank the economy to do another Brexit vote. (the EU loves this, just repeat until you get the desired result - that's one of the reasons why the EU will fail) She really wants to join her friends at the Soviet High Command in Brussels again.

slgeorge 10y ago
Don't really think that's realistic. In all honesty, the easiest way to tank the Brexit vote would have been to allow MP's a vote in Parliament - which would have been perfectly constitutionally valid - since the majority of politicians "appear" to be against Brexit. If anything, I see a firmer commitment to Brexit over time - as demonstrated by allowing the banks to leave London by not closing down "hard" Brexit.
Xylakant 10y ago
> For example she could continuously lower corporate taxes for foreign investment for while not activating Article 50 and simply wait until it really hurts the EU. If the EU doesn't give in the UK continues to wait and makes a lot of money in the process, if it does then the UK also wins. As the irish figured out, arbitrarily low corporate taxes are just not possible in the EU. This approach would also alienate all partners that she needs to work with later in the process, so that's probably a pretty bad idea. Additionally, it would put her under massive pressure from the brexit fraction that wants migration control yesterday, no matter the costs. Last but not least, the EU could just take the stance that the continued announcements of the legal government to invoke article 50 constitute sufficient grounds to start the proceedings. The UK could certainly fight this, but well, there's sufficient ways for the EU to make the UK sufficiently miserable in turn. All in all, negotiation tactics that alienate the people on the other side are not a good idea if you're an island and the economy right across the channel is bigger than yours.
- DominikR 10y ago
  > As the irish figured out, arbitrarily low corporate taxes are just not possible in the EU. Well but sorry, you are wrong here. The Irish selectively made deals with companies, that was ruled illegal. Not having low taxes, which works great in case of Malta. (5% tax for foreign investors) http://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2016/09/05/the-eu-case-against-apples-irish-tax-deal/#6a2e7b0d7e2b http://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2016/09/05/the-eu-ca... > Last but not least, the EU could just take the stance that the continued announcements of the legal government to invoke article 50 constitute sufficient grounds to start the proceedings. I suspect more countries would leave the EU if it did something highly illegal like that, but can't be ruled out. The EU is like the Soviet Union so criminality is part of its nature.
  - tremon 10y ago
    So sad. If you had left out your last sentence, you could have actually made a valuable contribution to this discussion.
danielbln 10y ago
You must be one of those delusional Brexiters I've heard so much about.
ionised 10y ago
She a Conservative traditionalist and most definitely a right-winger. How is that communist? I swear I have no clue how so many people don't know basic enough history that they are so mistaken by what communism is.
- DominikR 10y ago
  I didn't mean it in the literal sense that she actually wants government to own and direct 100% of the economy, but she is in my view closer to a Socialist than to a right winger. A right winger would not want to expand an already bloated government to direct even more of the economy, that just doesn't make sense.
  - vidarh 10y ago
    > A right winger would not want to expand an already bloated government to direct even more of the economy, that just doesn't make sense. Bismarck, who was right wing under the original definition - as a monarchist, and loyal servant of of the Prussian crown - massively expanded the German government by creating the first part-public welfare state, so clearly it's not that clear cut. Meanwhile the Tories under Theresa May are doing her best to tear down the UK welfare sector. I don't know from where you got the idea she wants to expand government.
    - DominikR 10y ago
      > Bismarck, who was right wing under the original definition No right winger alive today holds Bismarck or the original right wingers in French monarchy as his ideal. I see that people often cite this but I'm really mystified why they do as it adds nothing to the discussion. Maybe you hope to convince others to like the welfare state because Bismarck did too? > Meanwhile the Tories under Theresa May are doing her best to tear down the UK welfare sector. Her attempts are very weak for a right winger. > I don't know from where you got the idea she wants to expand government. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-minister-the-government-doesnt-always-know-whats-best/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-mini...
    - 10y ago
vidarh 10y ago
> For example she could continuously lower corporate taxes for foreign investment The UK already has very low corporate taxes. If corporate tax rates was sufficient, we should have a steady stream of companies moving from the US, which has nearly twice as high corporation tax, for example. But as it happens, low corporation tax is not sufficient. And certainly not while uncertainty over Brexit terms is wreaking havoc on confidence, and many companies are already planning to move.
- DominikR 10y ago
  Funny how people suddenly loose all creativity, Brits are known to be one of the best in making others suffer with legalese moves so I'd definitely expect better. She could for example say the EU is not cooperative, the UK will stay for the next 5 years and lower taxes for foreign investments to 5% like Malta does. That would hurt the EU a lot and I bet they'd be more open for discussions after that. If not then continue with other creative ideas, the EU can't survive a remaining UK that is actively working towards hurting the EU. (the EU probably will not be able to survive anyway the way things stand right now) From a moral perspective you couldn't even argue that it's immoral if the UK did this as highest EU officials have publicly proclaimed that they will make the UK suffer so it'll be an example for others.
  - DocTomoe 10y ago
    > That would hurt the EU a lot and I bet they'd be more open for discussions after that. Or they would just boot them out. Article 7 TFEU does exist.
    - DominikR 10y ago
      Or you could actually try and read Article 7. It does nowhere state that you can sanction a country without breach of fundamental laws like basic human rights. And the most you could do with this Article is take the UK's voting rights. I'm sure the UK can come up with ways to punish the EU into submission without breaching any laws. (5% tax would be legal) Also how about vetoing almost everything. That's a political tool that has shown to be very effective for centuries. Either way you slice it, if the UK wants access to the market at advantageous terms she will get it. The question is only how much does she want it.

slgeorge 10y ago

Don't really think that's realistic. In all honesty, the easiest way to tank the Brexit vote would have been to allow MP's a vote in Parliament - which would have been perfectly constitutionally valid - since the majority of politicians "appear" to be against Brexit. If anything, I see a firmer commitment to Brexit over time - as demonstrated by allowing the banks to leave London by not closing down "hard" Brexit.

Xylakant 10y ago

> For example she could continuously lower corporate taxes for foreign investment for while not activating Article 50 and simply wait until it really hurts the EU. If the EU doesn't give in the UK continues to wait and makes a lot of money in the process, if it does then the UK also wins. As the irish figured out, arbitrarily low corporate taxes are just not possible in the EU. This approach would also alienate all partners that she needs to work with later in the process, so that's probably a pretty bad idea. Additionally, it would put her under massive pressure from the brexit fraction that wants migration control yesterday, no matter the costs. Last but not least, the EU could just take the stance that the continued announcements of the legal government to invoke article 50 constitute sufficient grounds to start the proceedings. The UK could certainly fight this, but well, there's sufficient ways for the EU to make the UK sufficiently miserable in turn. All in all, negotiation tactics that alienate the people on the other side are not a good idea if you're an island and the economy right across the channel is bigger than yours.

DominikR 10y ago
> As the irish figured out, arbitrarily low corporate taxes are just not possible in the EU. Well but sorry, you are wrong here. The Irish selectively made deals with companies, that was ruled illegal. Not having low taxes, which works great in case of Malta. (5% tax for foreign investors) http://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2016/09/05/the-eu-case-against-apples-irish-tax-deal/#6a2e7b0d7e2b http://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2016/09/05/the-eu-ca... > Last but not least, the EU could just take the stance that the continued announcements of the legal government to invoke article 50 constitute sufficient grounds to start the proceedings. I suspect more countries would leave the EU if it did something highly illegal like that, but can't be ruled out. The EU is like the Soviet Union so criminality is part of its nature.
- tremon 10y ago
  So sad. If you had left out your last sentence, you could have actually made a valuable contribution to this discussion.

danielbln 10y ago

You must be one of those delusional Brexiters I've heard so much about.

ionised 10y ago

She a Conservative traditionalist and most definitely a right-winger. How is that communist? I swear I have no clue how so many people don't know basic enough history that they are so mistaken by what communism is.

DominikR 10y ago
I didn't mean it in the literal sense that she actually wants government to own and direct 100% of the economy, but she is in my view closer to a Socialist than to a right winger. A right winger would not want to expand an already bloated government to direct even more of the economy, that just doesn't make sense.
- vidarh 10y ago
  > A right winger would not want to expand an already bloated government to direct even more of the economy, that just doesn't make sense. Bismarck, who was right wing under the original definition - as a monarchist, and loyal servant of of the Prussian crown - massively expanded the German government by creating the first part-public welfare state, so clearly it's not that clear cut. Meanwhile the Tories under Theresa May are doing her best to tear down the UK welfare sector. I don't know from where you got the idea she wants to expand government.
  - DominikR 10y ago
    > Bismarck, who was right wing under the original definition No right winger alive today holds Bismarck or the original right wingers in French monarchy as his ideal. I see that people often cite this but I'm really mystified why they do as it adds nothing to the discussion. Maybe you hope to convince others to like the welfare state because Bismarck did too? > Meanwhile the Tories under Theresa May are doing her best to tear down the UK welfare sector. Her attempts are very weak for a right winger. > I don't know from where you got the idea she wants to expand government. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-minister-the-government-doesnt-always-know-whats-best/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-mini...
  - 10y ago

vidarh 10y ago

> For example she could continuously lower corporate taxes for foreign investment The UK already has very low corporate taxes. If corporate tax rates was sufficient, we should have a steady stream of companies moving from the US, which has nearly twice as high corporation tax, for example. But as it happens, low corporation tax is not sufficient. And certainly not while uncertainty over Brexit terms is wreaking havoc on confidence, and many companies are already planning to move.

DominikR 10y ago
Funny how people suddenly loose all creativity, Brits are known to be one of the best in making others suffer with legalese moves so I'd definitely expect better. She could for example say the EU is not cooperative, the UK will stay for the next 5 years and lower taxes for foreign investments to 5% like Malta does. That would hurt the EU a lot and I bet they'd be more open for discussions after that. If not then continue with other creative ideas, the EU can't survive a remaining UK that is actively working towards hurting the EU. (the EU probably will not be able to survive anyway the way things stand right now) From a moral perspective you couldn't even argue that it's immoral if the UK did this as highest EU officials have publicly proclaimed that they will make the UK suffer so it'll be an example for others.
- DocTomoe 10y ago
  > That would hurt the EU a lot and I bet they'd be more open for discussions after that. Or they would just boot them out. Article 7 TFEU does exist.
  - DominikR 10y ago
    Or you could actually try and read Article 7. It does nowhere state that you can sanction a country without breach of fundamental laws like basic human rights. And the most you could do with this Article is take the UK's voting rights. I'm sure the UK can come up with ways to punish the EU into submission without breaching any laws. (5% tax would be legal) Also how about vetoing almost everything. That's a political tool that has shown to be very effective for centuries. Either way you slice it, if the UK wants access to the market at advantageous terms she will get it. The question is only how much does she want it.