Brexit has officially happened.

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

As of today, the United Kingdom has officially left the EU. Not just planning on it, not just claiming they will. It has actually happened.

I feel this will have some major consequences for the UK, but I will admit that I am not very educated on how, so rather than give my own thoughts, I'll just post a source to confirm this as real, and leave it to others more in the know to discuss the ramifications.

Source [https://apnews.com/e48bf51838ced94e2d92adba189b4944]

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

 

[Trunkage]

I'd wait and see what trade deals they make by December to see what impact it will have.

Also, keep an eye on the Irish border.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Is there now a Hard Border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the island?

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Might as well become a left wing terrorist now. Not sure what it demands, but seems to work for the other political leanings and there's a distinct void in that area begging to be filled as it is. We all know how touchy conservatives are about scary lefties, am curious how they'd be with an actual reason for once. Probably psychotic hysteria if am not mysteriously disappeared 2 hours after this post.

 

[Silvanus]

I'd wait and see what trade deals they make by December to see what impact it will have.

Fuck all.

Trade deals routinely take many years to negotiate, particularly between large economies. A trade deal with the US would be expected to take at least 2-3 to sign, and perhaps three times as long to implement.

An EU trade deal will take far longer. Consider that it took between 3-4 years to negotiate a withdrawal agreement alone, which is a great deal simpler than a trade deal. I believe the average there is about 7-10 years.

The idea that a comprehensive trade deal would be completed in 1 year was a political fantasy, sold by Johnson to play to the domestic audience and win an election. They banked on the public just not knowing how long these things take, so they could sell them any old rubbish.

 

[Seanchaidh]

So, is it a catastrophe? A tragedy? A cataclysmic, apocalyptic, monumental calamity?

 

[Silvanus]

So, is it a catastrophe? A tragedy? A cataclysmic, apocalyptic, monumental calamity?

Well, we're now in a transition period, in which the UK stays aligned with EU trade rules and regulations anyway. So there wouldn't be expected to be any direct trade-related fallout for another 11 months anyway.

Of course, we've already seen prices rise and companies downsizing just due to slower growth. The country has spent more in 3 years on leaving the EU than we spent on membership in over 40 years. So, for public finances, yes-- pretty catastrophic.

 

[Agema]

Is there now a Hard Border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the island?

Nope. There's a transition period to the end of 2020, when absolutely nothing will change between the UK and EU (except that the UK ceases to have any representation in the EU). Trade rules, freedom of movement etc. don't change.

* * *

It is kind of funny though, because the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) have fucked themselves and the case of NI unionism. They imagined Brexit would work like some massive wall around GB&NI keeping everyone out, especially the Republic of Ireland. Instead, they've found that Boris Johnson will probably sell them out: they'll be trade aligned with the EU (and thus Republic of Ireland), and the border will be between NI and GB. In a way, this betrayal will almost be a kindness to save them from themselves: the Northern Irish, outside DUP hardliners, want frictionless trade with the rest of Ireland so much they'd leave the UK rather than lose it. The DUP came closer to achieving nationalist aims of a unified Ireland than 100 years of nationalist effort.

What a bunch of muppets.

 

[Agema]

So, is it a catastrophe? A tragedy? A cataclysmic, apocalyptic, monumental calamity?

Mostly not.

It is, largely, bad for Britain economically and politically. Probably the worst likely end result is that the UK may cease to exist in not too long: it greatly increases the likelihood that Scotland will vote to leave the union, and potentially NI will go, too. Already the UK's control of Gibraltar is threatened, as the EU has said Spain will get its full support so Spain will force the UK to concede a lot of sovereignty. Can't see the remnant UK holding its UN security council seat if it breaks up either.

Probably a decade or so of weak growth / stagnation; reduced investment, social services, deficits. Trade deal with the USA potentially ruinous for certain sectors of the UK (agriculture), and the US will certainly want to fuck the NHS thoroughly so their private healthcare and drugs companies can riot over it.

But there's a lot of ruin in a country, as the saying goes. It'll be a humbling and depressing period, but it'a not like it'll be a disaster.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Personally, I'm worried for my friends in Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands. Oh, and the UK proper, of course.

 

[Trunkage]

I'd wait and see what trade deals they make by December to see what impact it will have.

Fuck all.

Trade deals routinely take many years to negotiate, particularly between large economies. A trade deal with the US would be expected to take at least 2-3 to sign, and perhaps three times as long to implement.

An EU trade deal will take far longer. Consider that it took between 3-4 years to negotiate a withdrawal agreement alone, which is a great deal simpler than a trade deal. I believe the average there is about 7-10 years.

The idea that a comprehensive trade deal would be completed in 1 year was a political fantasy, sold by Johnson to play to the domestic audience and win an election. They banked on the public just not knowing how long these things take, so they could sell them any old rubbish.

I'd point out that he did get Brexit done... with a deal that I cannot see as being better than May's. Is this really the 'good' Brexit leavers were waiting for, because I think May's was better? It all felt like a rush to get done by a certain date. Why didn't they back May when Johnson plan is a copy but a little worse?

 

[Satinavian]

I'd point out that he did get Brexit done... with a deal that I cannot see as being better than May's. Is this really the 'good' Brexit leavers were waiting for, because I think May's was better? It all felt like a rush to get done by a certain date. Why didn't they back May when Johnson plan is a copy but a little worse?

Because they never cared about the deal, they only cared about looking tough. And because they had to follow the impossible demands of the DUP after Mays botched election but can ditch them now. And because Johnson is more popular than May for reasons i simply can't fathom.

 

[Kwak]

Because they never cared about the deal, they only cared about looking tough. And because they had to follow the impossible demands of the DUP after Mays botched election but can ditch them now. And because Johnson is more popular than May for reasons i simply can't fathom.

Because people will cheer on a man acting reckless and boorish over a woman being pragmatic and boring.

 

[Baffle]

Personally, I'm worried for my friends in Gibraltar

I wouldn't worry about them, you can get quite far with Duolingo without paying anything.

 

[Satinavian]

Because people will cheer on a man acting reckless and boorish over a woman being pragmatic and boring.

Still feels strange.

But them i am living in a country where Merkel was elected four times in a row.

 

[Agema]

Because people will cheer on a man acting reckless and boorish over a woman being pragmatic and boring.

Still feels strange.

But them i am living in a country where Merkel was elected four times in a row.

The end result of Brexit is, on the face of it, bizarre.

Brexit was initially sold mostly as a "soft" Brexit - where the UK would depart, but not that much would change. However, the process of Brexit was run by the Tories, and so instead of being an issue determined by national sentiment, it became an issue determined by Tory sentiment.

In essence, imagine half the country wanted soft Brexit, a quarter wanted a middling Brexit, and a quarter wanted a hard Brexit. But the Tories largely represent the middle and hard: the soft Brexiters nearly all vote for other parties. Therefore, soft Brexit was jettisoned right from the off. May tried for a middling Brexit, and was destroyed by the hard Brexiters. Having sabotaged the middle Brexit, the hard Brexiters then successfully used the frustration with lack of progress on Brexit (that they themselves manufactured) and fear of Jeremy Corbyn to take over the Tory Party and ram through a what was ultimately a fringe view. Crazy. But that's how the political machinery worked out.

Too many of the public I fear simply don't really appreciate the costs - the UK is forecast ~1% growth for 5 years, which is miserably poor for a Western economy, and also assuming a recession doesn't arrive. After 5 years, the economic pressures and creaking will be obvious and unavoidable, but by then it'll be far, far too late. But that stagnation is perhaps hard to really conceive, never mind the blind hope that things will be great or the acceptance that the UK being shit is somehow worth leaving the EU, because the EU has been built up as an enemy to the point where damaging the country is considered better than it being a member - very much an arse about face way to view international alliances.

I still suspect that the UK will end up rejoining the EU or aligning very closely with it again, because the Brexit agenda will be so damaged by the pain of leaving, and as enough older, pro-Brexit fanatics die of old age. Might be 10-20 years, though.

 

[Agema]

Personally, I'm worried for my friends in Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands.

To be fair, even in the absolute worse case where the UK surrenders Gib to Spain wholesale, it's not like Spain isn't a civilised, advanced nation. They'll be okay. Unhappy to an extent, perhaps, but okay.

Leaving the EU also damages the degree to which the UK would be supported by EU countries over the Falklands. If enough countries decide to back Argentina's claim, EU countries may decide it's more politically worthwhile to let the UK go hang where they would always back the UK were it an EU member. However, I suspect this is still a relatively remote chance. The UK is worth a lot to Europe even outside the EU, and it would sour UK-European relations to a staggering degree when the EU would more prefer close relations and even persuade the UK to eventually rejoin.

 

[Silvanus]

[I'd point out that he did get Brexit done... with a deal that I cannot see as being better than May's. Is this really the 'good' Brexit leavers were waiting for, because I think May's was better? It all felt like a rush to get done by a certain date. Why didn't they back May when Johnson plan is a copy but a little worse?

Johnson's withdrawal agreement was almost identical to May's. Over 95% of the text was identical, word for word.

So, it's pretty much the same withdrawal agreement that took 3 years to negotiate. And as I said before, an actual trade deal is far more complex than a withdrawal agreement.

 

[Trunkage]

Because people will cheer on a man acting reckless and boorish over a woman being pragmatic and boring.

Still feels strange.

But them i am living in a country where Merkel was elected four times in a row.

The end result of Brexit is, on the face of it, bizarre.

Brexit was initially sold mostly as a "soft" Brexit - where the UK would depart, but not that much would change. However, the process of Brexit was run by the Tories, and so instead of being an issue determined by national sentiment, it became an issue determined by Tory sentiment.

In essence, imagine half the country wanted soft Brexit, a quarter wanted a middling Brexit, and a quarter wanted a hard Brexit. But the Tories largely represent the middle and hard: the soft Brexiters nearly all vote for other parties. Therefore, soft Brexit was jettisoned right from the off. May tried for a middling Brexit, and was destroyed by the hard Brexiters. Having sabotaged the middle Brexit, the hard Brexiters then successfully used the frustration with lack of progress on Brexit (that they themselves manufactured) and fear of Jeremy Corbyn to take over the Tory Party and ram through a what was ultimately a fringe view. Crazy. But that's how the political machinery worked out.

Too many of the public I fear simply don't really appreciate the costs - the UK is forecast ~1% growth for 5 years, which is miserably poor for a Western economy, and also assuming a recession doesn't arrive. After 5 years, the economic pressures and creaking will be obvious and unavoidable, but by then it'll be far, far too late. But that stagnation is perhaps hard to really conceive, never mind the blind hope that things will be great or the acceptance that the UK being shit is somehow worth leaving the EU, because the EU has been built up as an enemy to the point where damaging the country is considered better than it being a member - very much an arse about face way to view international alliances.

I still suspect that the UK will end up rejoining the EU or aligning very closely with it again, because the Brexit agenda will be so damaged by the pain of leaving, and as enough older, pro-Brexit fanatics die of old age. Might be 10-20 years, though.

Well, I dont think you've take into account that the world might be heading into a downturn soon. 1% growth rate might be the good rate. Not that I think the UK would maintain a 1% rate if we have another recession