27 EU Leaders Agree on Theresa May's Brexit Withdrawal Deal

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
13,444
2,084
126
The first time around I honestly thought that the Remain campaign was going to pull out the big guns close to the election date as part of some kind of 'having the last word' tactic. This time around I'm not going to make any assumptions that revolve around the idea of political competence, and I'm trying to think of the best way to get politically active.

@pmv

Considering that a few fucktards selling sub-prime mortgages were capable of what was generally considered to be the most severe recession in nearly 100 years, this time around a hard brexit would be causing businesses to lose tonnes of European clients because the UK would no longer be a cost-effective place to do business (one of my Brexit-voting customers told me that they've lost 80% of their customers post referendum and Brexit hasn't strictly speaking even happened yet), then in turn causing thousands of job losses and giving international companies no reason to invest in the UK because of its lack of access to the EU, etc. That's just aside from the fact that a hard brexit would mean that the UK needs to invest a shedload into customs and border management (at a time when a recession is on the cards, and with an investment-shy government) for the fleets of lorries that deliver goods every day, and without which supermarket shelves are not filled, business materials are not delivered, and the UK grinds to a halt in many respects.

@DigDog

Y2K by comparison was something that organisations knew was coming since forever and there wasn't any political influence exerted to try and convince organisations not to prepare for it, unlike Brexit on both counts. Talk of negative consequences regarding Brexit has been labelled as "Project Fear" and "completely unfounded" by the government ever since the referendum.
Im just saying that exageration exists also in the Remain side (which im part of, kinda). I dont think medicines will become scarce or food supplies fail, but there will be price hikes and red tape.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
45,890
32,677
136
I dont think medicines will become scarce or food supplies fail, but there will be price hikes and red tape.

That this is considered a remotely acceptable risk to run perched on top of the raft of lies Leave spun about how amazing the UK would do leaving the EU seems a very questionable rationalization.

Kind of like "Hey there there is only one live bullet in this revolver so let's play some Russian roulette since my odds are good".
 

cfenton

Senior member
Jul 27, 2015
277
99
101
I think a second referendum makes sense at this point. Publish the proposed deal in its entirety, tell people it's this or nothing, and let them decide if they still think leaving the EU is a good idea. I bet lots of people who voted for Brexit had completely unrealistic ideas about the terms of leaving the EU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,972
7,890
136
Im just saying that exageration exists also in the Remain side (which im part of, kinda). I dont think medicines will become scarce or food supplies fail, but there will be price hikes and red tape.


Yeah, my best guess is that it will make everything slightly worse (in a context where lots of things have been getting worse as it is), with very little in the way of up-side.

My main objection to the EU has always been that there's too much economic integration and too little political integration, the former has run too far ahead of the latter. Which probably puts me in a tiny minority (as most Brexiters seem to take the opposite view).
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,972
7,890
136
I think a second referendum makes sense at this point. Publish the proposed deal in its entirety, tell people it's this or nothing, and let them decide if they still think leaving the EU is a good idea. I bet lots of people who voted for Brexit had completely unrealistic ideas about the terms of leaving the EU.


Yeah but nobody can even agree what the options would be on such a refendum. Half say it should be between May's awful deal and remain, becuase no-deal is unthinkable, and the other half say it should be between May's deal and no-deal, because 'we already voted to leave'. And even the opinion polls vary greatly over which option would win in each scenario.

Up the creek, we are. with no paddle, we are - as Yoda would put it.
 

cfenton

Senior member
Jul 27, 2015
277
99
101
Yeah but nobody can even agree what the options would be on such a refendum. Half say it should be between May's awful deal and remain, becuase no-deal is unthinkable, and the other half say it should be between May's deal and no-deal, because 'we already voted to leave'. And even the opinion polls vary greatly over which option would win in each scenario.

Up the creek, we are. with no paddle, we are - as Yoda would put it.

I was thinking it would be between May's deal and remaining in the EU, since no-deal is such a bad idea I can't believe anyone would vote for it. My understanding of the Brexit campaign, which could be wrong, is that many people voted for Brexit because politicians promised them completely unrealistic outcomes. Since it's now clear how unrealistic those outcomes were, the vote should be between May's deal (presumably the best deal the UK is going to get) and remaining in the EU.
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,972
7,890
136
I was thinking it would be between May's deal and remaining in the EU, since no-deal is such a bad idea I can't believe anyone would vote for it. My understanding of the Brexit campaign, which could be wrong, is that many people voted for Brexit because politicians promised them completely unrealistic outcomes. Since it's now clear how unrealistic those outcomes were, the vote should be between May's deal (presumably the best deal the UK is going to get) and remaining in the EU.

True of many leave-voters, certainly, and many I think just voted to express a general pissed-offness. But plenty now say they always wanted 'no-deal' (they may be lying, in that they might not have thought it through to that degree to start with, but _now_ they clearly want that option). And at least some opinion polls seem to show that. Those people would be enraged at a second vote that didn't allow that option. And of course May doesn't want a referendum at all, and Labour is very ambiguous about it. And is there even time to organise one?

Edit - I mean, I think it would have to be some sort of single-transferable-vote thing between all three options, but I'd be nervous 'no deal' might even win.
 
Last edited:

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,800
9,002
136
You English blokes voting for Brexit due to migrant fears could've saved a lot of money by just blowing up the Chunnel.
 

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
13,444
2,084
126
Guys, as someone who lives here, when they speak of a second vote, i can only think of 10 years of Leavers telling me "everything would have been great if we left the EU".

Let them eat that pile of steaming shit which is Brexit and let's see how they like it.
Im sorry for all the sane people who voted Remain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,330
10,232
136
Full EU membership rides on four freedoms: Free movement of people, capital, goods and services. A full EU member gets a say in EU lawmaking, and in order to facilitate the freedoms, EU standards and legislation have to be in place so that quality of say goods meets a common standard. As a full member you can't pick and choose which of the freedoms you want.

The UK was a full EU member but we kept our own currency. We also had a veto allowing us to torpedo just about any proposal we didn't like. Pretty freaking sweet deal.

However, the UK has never taken EU politics seriously. EU politics almost never reach UK mainstream media except for right-wing idiots to complain about rules regarding bendy bananas and act like we have no say when in fact ring wingers prefer to complain about the EU rather than participate in it and forge relationships in the EU that benefit us and the EU as a whole. The only times when the UK would try to negotiate with the EU was to demand more privileges and our proposals would get shot down every time.

IMO the UK has suffered from 'British empire' thinking way past its sell-by date: If there's a notion of getting something for nothing, the UK loves it.

So after 30 years of the right wing media sources telling us that the EU wants to steal our babies and replace them with horrid foreign ones, the previous PM (in a desperate gambit to win the 2015 election) promised a referendum on EU membership, then on winning the election proceeded to run an utterly unspirited 'remain' campaign with lots of vague allusions that we'll be sorry to leave ladedadeda, meanwhile the leave campaign continued the rhetoric of the last 30 years along with the positive-sounding "take back our country" message and got a very narrow majority of the electorate.

The argument for 'Leave' was basically along the lines of that we have no say in EU politics (which was incorrect), that even more horrid foreigners will be allowed into the EU (FUD), and we need to "take back control of our borders" despite the fact that we could choose to control our borders more if we wanted to, but the fact remains that big businesses love to have cheaper employment that comes from immigration.

So the current deal basically says we will have no say over EU rules but we have to abide by them in order to trade with the EU. Yes, no more horrid EU foreigners coming in willy-nilly, but frankly most of them are white (or near enough not to matter), and the horrid foreigners that 9/10 Brexiteers complain about are not white and not from the EU so logically nothing changes as a result of us leaving the EU for them.

Also, the current deal deprives us of our 'financial passport' which has to do with the UK financial industry and freely trading in Europe that makes up about 20% of our economy, so we're throwing them under the bus as well.

The reason why there are so few deals on the table for us is the Northern Ireland border. N.I and Ireland share a land border and as a result of the Good Friday Agreement (to stop the hostilities between north and south), that has to stop being a border of any real importance. N.I is part of the UK so in leaving the EU we either have to jettison N.I from the UK (and since the conservatives paid £2bn to a Northern Ireland political party in exchange for propping up the minority conservative government here, that's not really an option if they want to get this deal through UK parliament), or we have to have a relationship with the EU which is compatible with a soft border between N.I and Ireland.

Of course, the N.I border was mentioned during the referendum campaign, but as a footnote and the Brexiteers told the electorate that they had had enough of experts so stop listening to pretty much all the economists telling the public that Brexit is an insanely bad idea, and that any other criticisms are nothing more than the FUD being circulated by the Dark Lord and his nefarious plan called "Project Fear".

It is utter insanity. I had been hoping against all reason that the conservative government was going to go through a massive song-and-dance to then conclude that Brexit is an insanely bad idea and constitutes a loss on pretty much every front, but seemingly May (who was a very quiet Remainer btw) is announcing full steam ahead despite everything. My only hopes now are one or both of these possibilities:

1 - Parliament grows a spine and tells the government to get fucked.
2 - Lacking a mandate (and/or feeling cold feet), the government resorts to another referendum.

I'm sceptical about Parliament because the Labour/opposition party is hopelessly divided by Jeremy Corbyn being pro Brexit and his party being mostly anti Brexit, the Scottish National Party are often abstaining from votes that aren't strictly about Scotland, and the conservatives are still kowtowing to wingnuts like the Christian fundamentalist Jacob Rees-Mogg (who is against abortion for any reason) and the British version of Donald Trump-lite being Boris Johnson.
Thanks for your detailed post. Yeah, why can't option 1 or 2 happen? Has it something to do with the parliamentary structure of government, or is it, let's say political inertia that would keep those options from happening.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,575
9,266
136
Thanks for your detailed post. Yeah, why can't option 1 or 2 happen? Has it something to do with the parliamentary structure of government, or is it, let's say political inertia that would keep those options from happening.

Both the Conservative and Labour party appear to have a bee in their bonnet about wanting Brexit to happen seemingly no matter what ("respecting the referendum result" is apparently very important despite the instruction set forward by the referendum result being rather vague), so option 1 is a tug-of-war between "respecting the referendum result" and MPs not wanting the UK to go off the rails. Option 2 is seen as the spineless option by the Conservative party so they're resisting that for as long as they're pretending that they actually have spines, and then they'll realise that if they don't do a second referendum, this entire mess will be hung around their necks (which is mostly deserved except insofar as Brexit being a shit idea isn't the Conservatives' fault per se, though the first referendum was their idea in the first place).
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,575
9,266
136
Im just saying that exageration exists also in the Remain side (which im part of, kinda). I dont think medicines will become scarce or food supplies fail, but there will be price hikes and red tape.

Considering that no supermarkets currently stockpile food enough to handle transport delays (they all operate on a 'just in time' schedule and replenish the shelves overnight / out of store hours), food scarcities are a real risk. I intend to stockpile some supplies closer to the time, especially considering that I'm on a very restricted diet so eating any old crap is not an option for me.

Yeah but nobody can even agree what the options would be on such a refendum. Half say it should be between May's awful deal and remain, becuase no-deal is unthinkable

Except of course that the Conservatives and many other Brexiteers refuse to admit that hard brexit / no deal is unthinkable. I'm all for it being a third option in the referendum because it will dilute the Leave voter base :) That may well become the intention of the Conservative party should things come to a second referendum, then they can "who, me?" their way out of Brexit.

Guys, as someone who lives here, when they speak of a second vote, i can only think of 10 years of Leavers telling me "everything would have been great if we left the EU".

Let them eat that pile of steaming shit which is Brexit and let's see how they like it.
Im sorry for all the sane people who voted Remain.

I'd be all for a Brexit that only affects Brexiteers, then they'd change their tune pretty sharpish. TBH I think the only outcome that doesn't involve Brexiteers whining forever more is the one where the Remain campaign wins the second referendum by some freakish margin like 80-20. Even if they won a second referendum, they'll complain that they didn't get the solid gold Brexit with free hookers that they always wanted.
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
The prospect of there being food shortages is very real.

Look at what happens when we have a couple of days of snow.

There were shortages during the fuel strikes back in 2000.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
45,890
32,677
136
I think, for me, the most flat out insane part is the risk (however tiny) being run that Northern Ireland ends up with a hard border again. Like really, did you actually all miss the goddamned Troubles or something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,575
9,266
136
I think, for me, the most flat out insane part is the risk (however tiny) being run that Northern Ireland ends up with a hard border again. Like really, did you actually all miss the goddamned Troubles or something?

The likes of Boris Johnson just don't give a crap about that sort of thing. There's also the Gibraltar issue.

It's basically conservatism at its most deluded: Having a rose-tinted, nostalgic view of a Britain that never really existed before the dreaded EU came along.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,972
7,890
136
I think, for me, the most flat out insane part is the risk (however tiny) being run that Northern Ireland ends up with a hard border again. Like really, did you actually all miss the goddamned Troubles or something?

I think some of the Brexiters simply don't care because they are such patrician Empire loyalists - they think Ireland should just rejoin the UK like in the good-old-days. Others just assume it won't be a problem. And the left Brexiters (there are some - Corbyn is almost one, I guess that's debatable) think Ireland should be one country anyway (I kind of think that, really...in the long run I think it will happen, but, er, yeah, its not going to happen in time for Brexit).
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
12,972
7,890
136
I'd be all for a Brexit that only affects Brexiteers, then they'd change their tune pretty sharpish.

In more Nihilist (and slightly snobbish) moments I think they should just break the country up and let the leave-voting regions leave and the remain-voting ones remain. Not really a practical solution though. Plus the trouble with my 'independence for London" moments is that I don't want to share a Brexit escape-pod with George Osborne and David Cameron. It also seems to involve embracing an elite-liberal position that means writing-off great swathes of the (post-industrial?) working class.
I don't see any good solution.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
how does England expect a good deal when they already put all their cards on the table?
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,004
12,069
146
Those are unrealistic, like the y2k bug disaster predictions.
Ahem, the y2k bug predictions were accurate, and would have occurred, if it wasn't for the planning and implementation of changes and fixes which precisely prevented the y2kpocalypse from happening. It wasn't 'much ado about nothing', it was 'much ado about something that resulted in people doing stuff to prevent something from happening'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
13,444
2,084
126
Ahem, the y2k bug predictions were accurate, and would have occurred, if it wasn't for the planning and implementation of changes and fixes which precisely prevented the y2kpocalypse from happening. It wasn't 'much ado about nothing', it was 'much ado about something that resulted in people doing stuff to prevent something from happening'.
They predicted planes falling from the sky (insert 9-11 joke here?) which i guess could have happened if nobody made ANY effort to do anything at all which is just as unrealistic. The same way that "just in time" (a technique pioneered by Toyota) is being used now because it saves money, but nothing prevents Tesco from NOT using it for a week or so, which they will.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,004
12,069
146
They predicted planes falling from the sky (insert 9-11 joke here?) which i guess could have happened if nobody made ANY effort to do anything at all which is just as unrealistic. The same way that "just in time" (a technique pioneered by Toyota) is being used now because it saves money, but nothing prevents Tesco from NOT using it for a week or so, which they will.
Ironically, just last OCT an Indonesian aircraft crashed precisely because of a software bug.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/world/asia/indonesia-lion-air-crash-.html
The point is, people made efforts to effect change, and just because the major problems were averted via those efforts, doesn't mean other events cannot be just as bad/worse than those predicted by the y2k bug.

It's completely illogical to relate the delta between predicted and actual results of brexit to the predicted and actual results of the y2k bug. You might as well say the same for climate change.
 

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
13,444
2,084
126
NOT a software bug, but a sensor malfunction. A sensor is hardware.

Now, off the completely irrelevant and back to Brexit. The TV just announced that option 3 is being weighted, which would mean no Brexit at all.

As for the y2k thing, "people did stuff" and what exactly is stopping people from again doing stuff? What stops Tesco from picking up the phone and telling the olive oil vendor "hey pal, im gonna need you to ship 10 more pallets this week, mmk??" which is the very equivalent of coders implementing a new date system in 1999. Or rather, substantially easier.

The example fits perfectly; the y2k bug is gonna destroy us all UNLESS WE PRESS THE RED BUTTON. Brexit is also gonna destroy us all unless we (reads hastly scribbled note) PRESS THE RED BUTTON.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,575
9,266
136
They predicted planes falling from the sky (insert 9-11 joke here?) which i guess could have happened if nobody made ANY effort to do anything at all which is just as unrealistic. The same way that "just in time" (a technique pioneered by Toyota) is being used now because it saves money, but nothing prevents Tesco from NOT using it for a week or so, which they will.

You mean, as soon as supermarkets all over the nation invest millions in building warehouses with refrigeration facilities that may end up not being used at all and quadrupling their fleet of HGVs and staff on the off-chance that the UK decides to commit economic suicide.

Nope, nothing prevents them at all from doing that, just as they could build mountains of cash and set them alight. If a no-deal scenario occurs, it's very likely to occur at short notice, which kinda screws up the chance of having sufficient time for supermarkets to prepare with such massive investments, and that's aside from the fact of those corporations having literally no idea whatsoever of how much to stockpile because how does one go about predicting with any accuracy the fallout from a once-in-a-lifetime economic suicide attempt?

It's probably easier to just sue the government for lost earnings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,800
9,002
136
NOT a software bug, but a sensor malfunction. A sensor is hardware.
Gonna go back off-topic for a sec and say that in the normal course of things, a failing sensor should not have led to a crash. The "software bug" was how the aircraft was set to ignore pilot inputs and stick with the sensor, and human error was Boeing not fully communicating how the system worked and Lion Air for not updating pilot training materials or taking the plane out of rotation.