5 ms·

Or, you know, they're trying to quickly forge an agreement that's as similar as possible to the previously-agreed legal, economic, and governmental frameworks u

Or, you know, they're trying to quickly forge an agreement that's as similar as possible to the previously-agreed legal, economic, and governmental frameworks under which they've been operating for decades ? An agreement that avoids rehashing settled issues of law that neither side cares to change? Applying that razor, it seems a mite more likely to me than some octogenarians forgetfully bumbling their way into a thousand page agreement.

geofft 6y ago
The charitable interpretation is that the people who insisted that it would be better for Britain to leave the onerous regulatory regime of the EU have put their country in a position where the best option is to intentionally copy/paste 20-year-old EU regulations into a binding treaty?
- makomk 6y ago
  When those regulations are about the exchange of information with other EU countries and everyone involved seems to have decided that it is absolutely, totally crucial for that exchange of information to continue uninterrupted? Absolutely.
  - geofft 6y ago
    Isn't the whole point of Brexit that no, we've decided that it's not actually totally crucial to continue Britain's relationship with the EU the way it has been in the past, and disruptions are totally fine and perhaps to be desired if they are in the service of Britain being free of EU regulation? (I mean, I certainly am of the opinion that allowing that exchange to be uninterrupted is very important, but I also have that opinion about everything else Brexit wants to sever. I'm definitely not the person you need to convince that maintaining relationships with the EU is worth doing even if the cost is abiding by EU regulations.)
    - brigandish 6y ago
      > Isn't the whole point of Brexit that no, we've decided that it's not actually totally crucial to continue Britain's relationship with the EU the way it has been in the past, and disruptions are totally fine and perhaps to be desired if they are in the service of Britain being free of EU regulation? You answered your own question with "and perhaps to be desired if they are in the service of Britain". That's what sovereignty is and that's what the whole point has been - or at least a very large part - not to disrupt things for the sake of it. Does leaving the EU mean the UK must become its enemy?
      - TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
        You'll have to ask the people who have been threatening gunboat action against foreign fisherman and have spent the best part of the last year threatening to tear up any and all existing agreements with the EU. Sovereignty apparently means whatever they want it to mean. If it means trashing the 80% of GDP devoted to services, strangling small businesses with expensive and time consuming red tape, trampling all over the goodwill that Europe used to have towards the UK by creating a hostile environment for EU citizens, and wasting everyone's time and money on vapid nationalistic posturing - then apparently that's "in the service of Britain." Except it isn't. It's really only in the service of a corrupt, delusional, entitled, and frankly rather stupid rump aristocracy who saw their so-called sovereign power - and ability to evade taxes - being diminished by EU membership and decided to do something about it. The idea that anyone could argue that low-rent cut and paste legal boilerplate is somehow evidence of national sovereignty is - really quite strange.
        jacquesm 6y ago
        I don't think there will be many statues of David Cameron once all the scores are tallied up.
        ben_w 6y ago
        > and ability to evade taxes I would say this claim has been debunked, but in fairness the debunk is talking about reality while many of the most famous Leave campaigners have explicitly claimed they want to leave because of what they incorrectly believe about what EU law does. https://fullfact.org/online/brexit-not-concealing-offshore-accounts/ https://fullfact.org/online/brexit-not-concealing-offshore-a...
- hayd 6y ago
  > people who insisted that it would be better for Britain to leave the onerous regulatory regime of the EU You mean the electorate.
  - danudey 6y ago
    In fairness, the electorate was repeatedly lied to and misinformed about the situation by the people who actually insisted it would be better, baselessly - that is, politicians.
    - TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
      Indeed. If Brexit was such a good idea Team Leave could simply have told the truth. They didn't. Ever. At no point have any of their many promises - to stay in the Single Market, to eliminate red tape, to pay an extra £350m a week to the NHS, to be able to trade globally without restrictions, to continue Erasmus membership, and on and on and on - been in any danger of coming true. So the voters voted for the most ridiculous lies, and apparently that's "democracy." No, it isn't. It's fraud - plain and simple.
      - guntars 6y ago
        Even if people are misinformed, it’s still democracy. There’s simply no other way. Maybe it will destroy the country, but at least they will have done it themselves.
        CodeMage 6y ago
        You're right that it's technically democracy. You're wrong that there's simply no other way. I don't know what that other way is, but the society needs to keep evolving. The current state of democracy in countries like UK and US brings to mind that famous Churchill quote: "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." The common conclusion seems to be "oh, okay, guess that's it, then" rather than "maybe it's time to try something we haven't yet".
trentnix 6y ago
Exactly. Besides the fact that the need to copy and paste such asinine, archaic terms and details in an agreement is exactly why a country shouldn’t want to be ruled by the Vogons in Brussels. It’s Pournelles Law on steroids.
- rusk 6y ago
  I don’t think Douglas Adams was talking about eurocrats.... everything in HHGTTG was far closer to home than that. Never once did Arthur blame the EU for the demolition of his house. Prosser was the name of the official overseeing it ... and if I recall correctly he was a reincarnation of Genghis Khan? I often wonder what Douglas Adams would have thought of all this. The quintessential intersection of proud Englishman and citizen of the world. He would have had some choice words for this whole mess I am sure.
arp242 6y ago
"Keep your pull requests as small as possible".

geofft 6y ago

The charitable interpretation is that the people who insisted that it would be better for Britain to leave the onerous regulatory regime of the EU have put their country in a position where the best option is to intentionally copy/paste 20-year-old EU regulations into a binding treaty?

makomk 6y ago
When those regulations are about the exchange of information with other EU countries and everyone involved seems to have decided that it is absolutely, totally crucial for that exchange of information to continue uninterrupted? Absolutely.
- geofft 6y ago
  Isn't the whole point of Brexit that no, we've decided that it's not actually totally crucial to continue Britain's relationship with the EU the way it has been in the past, and disruptions are totally fine and perhaps to be desired if they are in the service of Britain being free of EU regulation? (I mean, I certainly am of the opinion that allowing that exchange to be uninterrupted is very important, but I also have that opinion about everything else Brexit wants to sever. I'm definitely not the person you need to convince that maintaining relationships with the EU is worth doing even if the cost is abiding by EU regulations.)
  - brigandish 6y ago
    > Isn't the whole point of Brexit that no, we've decided that it's not actually totally crucial to continue Britain's relationship with the EU the way it has been in the past, and disruptions are totally fine and perhaps to be desired if they are in the service of Britain being free of EU regulation? You answered your own question with "and perhaps to be desired if they are in the service of Britain". That's what sovereignty is and that's what the whole point has been - or at least a very large part - not to disrupt things for the sake of it. Does leaving the EU mean the UK must become its enemy?
    - TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
      You'll have to ask the people who have been threatening gunboat action against foreign fisherman and have spent the best part of the last year threatening to tear up any and all existing agreements with the EU. Sovereignty apparently means whatever they want it to mean. If it means trashing the 80% of GDP devoted to services, strangling small businesses with expensive and time consuming red tape, trampling all over the goodwill that Europe used to have towards the UK by creating a hostile environment for EU citizens, and wasting everyone's time and money on vapid nationalistic posturing - then apparently that's "in the service of Britain." Except it isn't. It's really only in the service of a corrupt, delusional, entitled, and frankly rather stupid rump aristocracy who saw their so-called sovereign power - and ability to evade taxes - being diminished by EU membership and decided to do something about it. The idea that anyone could argue that low-rent cut and paste legal boilerplate is somehow evidence of national sovereignty is - really quite strange.
      - jacquesm 6y ago
        I don't think there will be many statues of David Cameron once all the scores are tallied up.
      - ben_w 6y ago
        > and ability to evade taxes I would say this claim has been debunked, but in fairness the debunk is talking about reality while many of the most famous Leave campaigners have explicitly claimed they want to leave because of what they incorrectly believe about what EU law does. https://fullfact.org/online/brexit-not-concealing-offshore-accounts/ https://fullfact.org/online/brexit-not-concealing-offshore-a...
hayd 6y ago
> people who insisted that it would be better for Britain to leave the onerous regulatory regime of the EU You mean the electorate.
- danudey 6y ago
  In fairness, the electorate was repeatedly lied to and misinformed about the situation by the people who actually insisted it would be better, baselessly - that is, politicians.
  - TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
    Indeed. If Brexit was such a good idea Team Leave could simply have told the truth. They didn't. Ever. At no point have any of their many promises - to stay in the Single Market, to eliminate red tape, to pay an extra £350m a week to the NHS, to be able to trade globally without restrictions, to continue Erasmus membership, and on and on and on - been in any danger of coming true. So the voters voted for the most ridiculous lies, and apparently that's "democracy." No, it isn't. It's fraud - plain and simple.
    - guntars 6y ago
      Even if people are misinformed, it’s still democracy. There’s simply no other way. Maybe it will destroy the country, but at least they will have done it themselves.
      - CodeMage 6y ago
        You're right that it's technically democracy. You're wrong that there's simply no other way. I don't know what that other way is, but the society needs to keep evolving. The current state of democracy in countries like UK and US brings to mind that famous Churchill quote: "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." The common conclusion seems to be "oh, okay, guess that's it, then" rather than "maybe it's time to try something we haven't yet".

trentnix 6y ago

Exactly. Besides the fact that the need to copy and paste such asinine, archaic terms and details in an agreement is exactly why a country shouldn’t want to be ruled by the Vogons in Brussels. It’s Pournelles Law on steroids.

rusk 6y ago
I don’t think Douglas Adams was talking about eurocrats.... everything in HHGTTG was far closer to home than that. Never once did Arthur blame the EU for the demolition of his house. Prosser was the name of the official overseeing it ... and if I recall correctly he was a reincarnation of Genghis Khan? I often wonder what Douglas Adams would have thought of all this. The quintessential intersection of proud Englishman and citizen of the world. He would have had some choice words for this whole mess I am sure.

arp242 6y ago

"Keep your pull requests as small as possible".