5 ms·

>Theresa May was initially against building a submarine out of cheese, obviously. Because it’s a completely insane thing to do. Leaving the EU is not a complet

by qfq 8y ago

>Theresa May was initially against building a submarine out of cheese, obviously. Because it’s a completely insane thing to do. Leaving the EU is not a completely insane thing to do. The UK (and many other countries) have legitimate grievances about some things the EU is foisting on them (immigration for example) and the EU is giving them the cold shoulder and fining them if they don't comply. Labelling people who are against that as "insane" isn't going to help anybody.

jvreeland 8y ago
Leaving the EU and expecting to get most of if not all the benefits with no sacrifices, as it was sold to people is insane.
komali2 8y ago
How is it not insane? Why would the EU give the UK a "better deal" than it would to members? From the start, it was insane.
mprev 8y ago
If "insane" is not the right word then perhaps "immature" is a better fit. Part of being an adult is understanding that most choices in life are compromises. On balance, the UK is better in Europe, despite its human-made failings. Trying to achieve some impossible ideal, without understanding or acknowledging the realities, might not be insane but it's not the way the world works.
roywiggins 8y ago
If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement. The UK was never going to be able to have one without the other because it's a fundamental principle of the EU as an institution. It's a package deal.
- blibble 8y ago
  > If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement. > ... > It's a package deal. how do you explain the existence of the EU-Canada deal where Canada has essentially complete tariff free access to the EU's Single Market without freedom of movement? here's the commission's factsheet on it: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/images/infographics/ceta-explained-in-60-seconds.jpg http://ec.europa.eu/trade/images/infographics/ceta-explained...
  - roywiggins 8y ago
    CETA is not a customs union- there are still customs controls between Canada and the EU. If you don't have EU regulations enforced in Canada, those controls do it at the border with the EU. That works. But if you want into the customs union (and therefore being allowed to just walk things across the border to the EU, no checks) you have to sign up to pretty much all the EU regulations. And that's the point that the four freedoms kick in, and you have to take freedom of movement. If you have a Canada-style deal, you need customs controls, which could be built at Dover, but the sticking point is, and probably always will be, the Northern Ireland border. Put the checks on the border, and you're imperiling the peace process. Put them in the sea, and you're splitting the UK into two regulatory zones. It's an impossible problem.
    - blibble 8y ago
      > CETA is not a customs union this is correct, but not at all relevant to your original point: > If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement. this statement is objectively not true, as is proven by the existence of CETA > But if you want into the customs union (and therefore being allowed to just walk things across the border to the EU, no checks) you have to sign up to pretty much all the EU regulations. And that's the point that the four freedoms kick in, and you have to take freedom of movement. this statement is also not true: Turkey forms a customs union with the EU: goods travel freely between the EU and Turkey without customs checks, and the EU does not have freedom of movement with Turkey
      - roywiggins 8y ago
        As a practical matter, the Turkey/EU border is not a frictionless one, because it's only free movement of goods, not (for instance) the actual trucks hauling the goods: https://www.ft.com/content/b4458652-f42d-11e6-8758-6876151821a6 https://www.ft.com/content/b4458652-f42d-11e6-8758-687615182... > The EU has agreed open-access road transport deals only with a handful of neighbouring countries. This includes members of the European Economic Area, which Britain has said it will not join, and Switzerland, which has a special bilateral agreement. > Crucially, all the transport deals are premised on participation in the EU’s free movement of people area, which Britain also hopes to leave. In other words, even if Britain mirrors the EU rules on haulage, it may not be enough to secure free access for trucks to the EU market... > The goal, said a Turkish official, was to complete as much paperwork as possible before actually reaching the border. On the other end, Bulgarian border officers examine each truck, going over the paperwork and doing random drug and migrant checks. Refrigerated trucks are x-rayed as are 5 per cent of other trucks, at random, according to Mr Ereke. “For the UK, I wish them good luck,” he said, pointing to the lines behind him. “It is not going to be easy.”
- chlvsl 8y ago
  what other trade agreement asks for freedom of movement in addition to access to the common market? can you name one other deal on the planet which does this?
  - roywiggins 8y ago
    Does it matter? The EU chose to tie them together into the Single Market. Freedom of labor movement was meant to put give people the same rights as capital. Giving people fewer rights than capital seemed like a bad idea at the time, so it was all tied together. Maybe those should be uncoupled, but the EU isn't about to do it to stop a member state from leaving.
- ataturk 8y ago
  And that package deal was wrecked the instant Soros and his cronies opened the refugee/illegal migrant taps and flooded Europe with too many idiots.
decebalus1 8y ago
> Leaving the EU is not a completely insane thing to do. Leaving is not insane in itself. Leaving with a favorable deal with questionable leverage is irrational. Not sure if insane, but at least it's borderline fantasyland
DonHopkins 8y ago
Yeah, Putin knows what's best for the UK. /s
randomsearch 8y ago
Giving them the cold shoulder and fining them? What?
wbl 8y ago
The EU never set immigration policy for the UK. The UK never enforced any of the restrictions on freedom of movement it could have.
TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
The EU isn't foisting immigration on the UK. EU freedom of movement isn't unconditional. You can only move to a different EU country if you have a job or can support yourself. You have three months to make it work, and then if you can't make it work, you can be asked to leave. The UK deliberately opted out of this requirement. Until recently, the UK was one of the most generous and open states for EU immigration. The UK also made the most noise about allowing the former Soviet Bloc countries to join the EU - coincidentally, the countries which have sourced a lot of supposedly objectionable immigration. This is because the UK likes to play a game. First it imports cheap foreign labour to keep wages down. Then the same political group which quietly promotes this makes a big show of saying "Oh no! Look at all the immigrants! How terrible! We should do something!" in public. And this reliably wins elections. It's been winning them for well over a century now. You can be absolutely sure that if Brexit happens this game will be played again - most likely with cheap labour from the former commonwealth countries.

by qfq 8y ago

jvreeland 8y ago

Leaving the EU and expecting to get most of if not all the benefits with no sacrifices, as it was sold to people is insane.

komali2 8y ago

How is it not insane? Why would the EU give the UK a "better deal" than it would to members? From the start, it was insane.

mprev 8y ago

If "insane" is not the right word then perhaps "immature" is a better fit. Part of being an adult is understanding that most choices in life are compromises. On balance, the UK is better in Europe, despite its human-made failings. Trying to achieve some impossible ideal, without understanding or acknowledging the realities, might not be insane but it's not the way the world works.

roywiggins 8y ago

If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement. The UK was never going to be able to have one without the other because it's a fundamental principle of the EU as an institution. It's a package deal.

blibble 8y ago
> If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement. > ... > It's a package deal. how do you explain the existence of the EU-Canada deal where Canada has essentially complete tariff free access to the EU's Single Market without freedom of movement? here's the commission's factsheet on it: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/images/infographics/ceta-explained-in-60-seconds.jpg http://ec.europa.eu/trade/images/infographics/ceta-explained...
- roywiggins 8y ago
  CETA is not a customs union- there are still customs controls between Canada and the EU. If you don't have EU regulations enforced in Canada, those controls do it at the border with the EU. That works. But if you want into the customs union (and therefore being allowed to just walk things across the border to the EU, no checks) you have to sign up to pretty much all the EU regulations. And that's the point that the four freedoms kick in, and you have to take freedom of movement. If you have a Canada-style deal, you need customs controls, which could be built at Dover, but the sticking point is, and probably always will be, the Northern Ireland border. Put the checks on the border, and you're imperiling the peace process. Put them in the sea, and you're splitting the UK into two regulatory zones. It's an impossible problem.
  - blibble 8y ago
    > CETA is not a customs union this is correct, but not at all relevant to your original point: > If you want access to the single market, you have to sign up to freedom of movement. this statement is objectively not true, as is proven by the existence of CETA > But if you want into the customs union (and therefore being allowed to just walk things across the border to the EU, no checks) you have to sign up to pretty much all the EU regulations. And that's the point that the four freedoms kick in, and you have to take freedom of movement. this statement is also not true: Turkey forms a customs union with the EU: goods travel freely between the EU and Turkey without customs checks, and the EU does not have freedom of movement with Turkey
    - roywiggins 8y ago
      As a practical matter, the Turkey/EU border is not a frictionless one, because it's only free movement of goods, not (for instance) the actual trucks hauling the goods: https://www.ft.com/content/b4458652-f42d-11e6-8758-6876151821a6 https://www.ft.com/content/b4458652-f42d-11e6-8758-687615182... > The EU has agreed open-access road transport deals only with a handful of neighbouring countries. This includes members of the European Economic Area, which Britain has said it will not join, and Switzerland, which has a special bilateral agreement. > Crucially, all the transport deals are premised on participation in the EU’s free movement of people area, which Britain also hopes to leave. In other words, even if Britain mirrors the EU rules on haulage, it may not be enough to secure free access for trucks to the EU market... > The goal, said a Turkish official, was to complete as much paperwork as possible before actually reaching the border. On the other end, Bulgarian border officers examine each truck, going over the paperwork and doing random drug and migrant checks. Refrigerated trucks are x-rayed as are 5 per cent of other trucks, at random, according to Mr Ereke. “For the UK, I wish them good luck,” he said, pointing to the lines behind him. “It is not going to be easy.”
chlvsl 8y ago
what other trade agreement asks for freedom of movement in addition to access to the common market? can you name one other deal on the planet which does this?
- roywiggins 8y ago
  Does it matter? The EU chose to tie them together into the Single Market. Freedom of labor movement was meant to put give people the same rights as capital. Giving people fewer rights than capital seemed like a bad idea at the time, so it was all tied together. Maybe those should be uncoupled, but the EU isn't about to do it to stop a member state from leaving.
ataturk 8y ago
And that package deal was wrecked the instant Soros and his cronies opened the refugee/illegal migrant taps and flooded Europe with too many idiots.

decebalus1 8y ago

> Leaving the EU is not a completely insane thing to do. Leaving is not insane in itself. Leaving with a favorable deal with questionable leverage is irrational. Not sure if insane, but at least it's borderline fantasyland

DonHopkins 8y ago

Yeah, Putin knows what's best for the UK. /s

randomsearch 8y ago

Giving them the cold shoulder and fining them? What?

wbl 8y ago

The EU never set immigration policy for the UK. The UK never enforced any of the restrictions on freedom of movement it could have.

TheOtherHobbes 8y ago

The EU isn't foisting immigration on the UK. EU freedom of movement isn't unconditional. You can only move to a different EU country if you have a job or can support yourself. You have three months to make it work, and then if you can't make it work, you can be asked to leave. The UK deliberately opted out of this requirement. Until recently, the UK was one of the most generous and open states for EU immigration. The UK also made the most noise about allowing the former Soviet Bloc countries to join the EU - coincidentally, the countries which have sourced a lot of supposedly objectionable immigration. This is because the UK likes to play a game. First it imports cheap foreign labour to keep wages down. Then the same political group which quietly promotes this makes a big show of saying "Oh no! Look at all the immigrants! How terrible! We should do something!" in public. And this reliably wins elections. It's been winning them for well over a century now. You can be absolutely sure that if Brexit happens this game will be played again - most likely with cheap labour from the former commonwealth countries.