Sunlit uplands. Are we there yet?

[TheCat]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > brexit is 'done'. That's it.

>

> Was it any good, then?

I had a great time. Woke up on 1 Jan, and glad it was in the past. You?

[TheCat]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "It does bemuse me how much my very existence

> clearly irritates you."

>

> Absolute scenes

>

> an absolute chance for the shyster-in-chief to

> parlay his position into real world "look farming

> chaps - I know it;'s tricky - but sunlit uplands

> ahead!!" A chance to talk about victims, cost

>

> and he makes it about him!

>

> he always always always swerves the issues. he

> should replace Boris for all that we would notice

Some bloke living in Dulwich, posting his off-the- cuff thoughts about brexit (amongst other things) on a suburban internet forum...

A.k.a. "Shyster-in-Chief"....:)...

You really are too much.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > TheCat Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > brexit is 'done'. That's it.

> >

> > Was it any good, then?

>

> I had a great time. Woke up on 1 Jan, and glad it

> was in the past. You?

Bit crap tbh. Turns out no-one had done any preparation so there were no trade deals, no regulatory opportunities seized, no useful bits of legislation passed that were previously impossible under the EU...

[TheCat]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > TheCat Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > brexit is 'done'. That's it.

> > >

> > > Was it any good, then?

> >

> > I had a great time. Woke up on 1 Jan, and glad

> it

> > was in the past. You?

>

> Bit crap tbh. Turns out no-one had done any

> preparation so there were no trade deals, no

> regulatory opportunities seized, no useful bits of

> legislation passed that were previously impossible

> under the EU...

That sux. Sounds like you've got a problem with a government not good at completing all those sort of things....;)

[Sephiroth]

.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sounds like you've got a problem with a

> government not good at completing all those sort

> of things....;)

Agreed. Successful Brexit would have been difficult and time-consuming, and required diplomacy and sophistication that was far beyond the array of wide boys, fantasists, sociopaths and bullshitters that constituted the Brexit bunch. Of course, slightly less than half of us could see that ahead of time.

I wonder how Mystic Meg voted?

[JohnL]

Why did we not sit in EFTA/EEA for a few years and make a choice from there - you know good old British caution and pragmatism.

It was after the "Citizens of Nowhere" speech where the country split into 2 groups with no quarter given between them - I blame Mays advisors for that - and one of them at least still thinks he did nothing wrong.

[Sephiroth]

Sunlit uplands.. for Australia

British fishermen - not so much

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-australia-trade-deal-94m-hit-uk-farming-forestry-and-fishing-government-study-reveals-1361797

But in 10 years they will be winning because... fish?

[TheCat]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sunlit uplands.. for Australia

>

> British fishermen - not so much

>

> https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-australia

> -trade-deal-94m-hit-uk-farming-forestry-and-fishin

> g-government-study-reveals-1361797

>

> But in 10 years they will be winning because...

> fish?

Sigh....

You've linked to an article about a report which concludes the overall impact of the UK/australia trade deal is POSITIVE for the UK, to the tune of ?2.3bn.

It cites a 'reallocation of resources within the economy'..farmers lose a bit, manufacturing wins a bit. Overall impact positive.

I'll give you a hand...if you wanted to criticise this deal in the context of brexit, you could argue it's benefits are very small in the overall context of the British economy. That would be a reasonable argument...not a half-arsed knee-jerk comment about 'farmers being sold down the river'.....

Please read the whole article next time, it's tiring having to make rational arguments for you and we'll as making my own....

[Sephiroth]

"not a half-arsed knee-jerk comment about 'farmers being sold down the river'..... "

But I didn't

I said fishermen voted for sunny uplands

And they aren't getting them

As even you concede

The ?2.3bn impact is only an "expected" number - expected by a Govt desperate to crow about anything positive,- so let's see shall we.

[TheCat]

'lets see'?!!! What?! That's crazy talk

I thought you had all the 'evidence' you need that the entire thing is 'objectively wrong'. Case closed.

There's no room for debate you said. Others who might have wanted to 'wait and see' weren't even worthy of "agreeing to disagree" you said.

People like me who are suggesting we judge impacts in a few years are a vanishingly small group of oddballs, kooks and cranks you said.

You constantly refer to groups of people in different industries who are 'screwed', with no possibility that things might change for the better in the future at all.

And now, on just this sole, specific issue. Only on the australia/UK trade deal (and nothing else, right?)....'lets see'.....

You'll forgive me if I'm a bit confused!.....

(You'll also forgive me for going over the top with my response in this comment. Of course we should wait and see!!! But I've been dismissed and mocked constantly for quite some time by you and others for having the temerity to suggest we should give things some time, and that impacts we see today are not necessarily the impacts we should judge the whole thing by)

[Sephiroth]

I think you may have misread my "let's see"

I don't actually mean "let's see" - I was clear I think the projections are "optimistic", I was clear that the main people affected who voted for brexit will suffer badly and they were lied to unacceptably. You are very airy in your dismissal of these problems

And then there are other details like the UK dropping environmental standards to get the deal

Of course - it has yet to be ratified by UK parliament

You seem to think it's some kind of marvellous win. So that will be the govt (who we know are pretty useless) and you

[TheCat]

I don't think it's a particularly marvelous win at all. I think you've imagined that little soundbite.

It's a nice incremental positive, which is small in context.

All I did was fill in the missing bits you ignored from the article you linked to, which you didn't mention in your post. Surely I can't be castigated for quoting information which you have provided to the thread?

Fascinated to know why this particular economic forecast you believe is optimistic? What specific assumptions in the calculations would you point to as being optimistic? Its nice to see you critically analysing estimates and forecasts from various bodies, as previously when you've linked to forecasts and estimates that support your existing position, you haven't seemed to question them at all. I'm glad we'll be evolving towards a more sophisticated level of discussion. Or will we only be making judgement calls on forecasts where you don't like the conclusion?

[j.a.]

@thecat

?Farmers lose a bit?

Dude, it?s a lot worse than that.

Farming in this country is on a precipice.

[TheCat]

j.a. Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @thecat

>

> ?Farmers lose a bit?

>

> Dude, it?s a lot worse than that.

>

> Farming in this country is on a precipice.

Fair enough J.a.. And I'm not unsympathetic to people doing it tough (despite screeching from some people that I don't care about anything or anyone)

But putting the conversation over this deal in context.....agriculture is around 120billion sterling industry in the UK, and according to those stats being bandied around, this deal will have a 94m sterling impact on the agriculture sector...so a 0.08percent hit to the farming sector. I'd argue that probably qualifies as 'a bit'. Of course I might not be comparing Apple's with apples on those two figures..as this is just off the cuff calls, so happy to be told otherwise if I should be thinking different numbers. And of course am aware that specific impacts will be felt more keenly by certain types of farmers than others, it won't be a uniform hit of 0.08percetn across the sector.

In anycase...as I've said...this deal is small in the context of the overall economy...but with positive impacts on the manufacturing sector (around 18percent of British GDP, versus less than 1 percent for farming) that's a core reason why the net impact is positive.

More broadly, surely if we're talking about impacts on the national economy, we should be considering national impacts. At the individual level someone will always lose out from any decision or agreement to some degree unfort, but hopefully on balance positive changes from a national perspective can be the aim.

[Sephiroth]

I?d say you should be looking at the promises made to fishermen and farmers before the referendum

Not only have they been shafted

But without their vote Brexit wouldn?t have happened. Still it only took several posts for you to clear your throat and do a very Johnson ?I?m not unsympathetic?

Translation: ?I could give a flying f@@@?

It?s all a con

And you, with no skin in the game, grift away

Price of everything. Value of nothing.

[TheCat]

I see your tactic when you've been pushed into a corner in a discussion/debate, is to just double down on the personal attacks and whataboutery...

I'd remind you that you were actually the one who raised the issue of this aussie trade deal today by unthinkingly posting links to headlines you liked the sound of. I'm sorry if, upon closer inspection, the numbers and discussion didn't go your way on this occasion. But that's not really my fault, or problem.

[Sephiroth]

Easy to avoid discussing damage to farming and fishing (despite promises made to them) when you can just go ?someone I disagree with on the internet?

?I?d remind you? like some cheap Rees Mogg clone

I know what I raised. I know what points I made. And I know why you ignore them

[Sephiroth]

Johnson earlier this year

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/brexit-boris-johnson-rejects-claim-uk-australia-trade-deal-would-see-farmers-lose-their-livelihoods-12310969

? Brexit: Boris Johnson rejects claim UK-Australia trade deal would see farmers 'lose their livelihoods'

The Department for International Trade says any trade deals signed will not "undercut UK farmers" or compromise high standards.?

Lies like this are not sustainable

Large parts of Tory constituencies are fisher/farmer based. Telling them in a haughty voice ?net win tho!!! Think of the manufacturing chaps!? Won?t pay their bills. There will be consequences for any govt screwing over their voters like this.

[j.a.]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Fair enough J.a.. And I'm not unsympathetic to

> people doing it tough (despite screeching from

> some people that I don't care about anything or

> anyone)

>

> But putting the conversation over this deal in

> context.....agriculture is around 120billion

> sterling industry in the UK, and according to

> those stats being bandied around, this deal will

> have a 94m sterling impact on the agriculture

> sector...so a 0.08percent hit to the farming

> sector. I'd argue that probably qualifies as 'a

> bit'. Of course I might not be comparing Apple's

> with apples on those two figures..as this is just

> off the cuff calls, so happy to be told otherwise

> if I should be thinking different numbers. And of

> course am aware that specific impacts will be felt

> more keenly by certain types of farmers than

> others, it won't be a uniform hit of 0.08percetn

> across the sector.

>

> In anycase...as I've said...this deal is small in

> the context of the overall economy...but with

> positive impacts on the manufacturing sector

> (around 18percent of British GDP, versus less than

> 1 percent for farming) that's a core reason why

> the net impact is positive.

>

> More broadly, surely if we're talking about

> impacts on the national economy, we should be

> considering national impacts. At the individual

> level someone will always lose out from any

> decision or agreement to some degree unfort, but

> hopefully on balance positive changes from a

> national perspective can be the aim.

All of that may well be (probably is) true. But consider the following?

Part of how Brexit was sold to us was that we could take back control of our fishing and allow our farmers to sell around the world. This was a large part of what I call the ?emotional? arguments in favour of Leave. The idea - and is was just an idea, because the ?how? of it was never defined - that we could have greater command over how fish and meat was reared, butchered and sold, theoretically around the world.

So far? I?m sure you?re aware of how hard fishing is having it. Meat farming is not doing much, if any, better. While on the grand scheme of things the numbers may be small, I can assure you it?s 100% for those involved.

Put crudely, what you?re supporting is basically a death knell for high-quality, high-welfare animal husbandry in this country.

Let us ask what will happen next. Well, once those farmers are out of business, those who replace them will in all likelihood *not* be so interested in maintaining such high standards, because the only people in a position to take over will be the big conglomerates. We will lose the skill set and the desire to raise good-quality and humanely cared-for beef, pork, chicken and lamb. The stuff coming over from your homeland? I?m sorry, but it isn?t always that wonderful - and yes, I really do know what I?m talking about. You know how the energy market is your area of expertise? This kind of thing is mine.

Now, there are those who might feel that if the current crop of farmers can?t compete in the market as it is, then they should get out of it. This is of course a point of view. But I would say that people in this country have become disconnected from the real cost of what it takes to create high-quality food. People want it cheap, but they don?t want it bad. Well, when it comes to meat and fish, quality costs. If you can?t afford it, go veggie or even vegan. But frankly, lower your expectations about how little you feel you should pay for that leg of lamb.

My point is this - when you focus on results at the strategic level then a deal like this seems pretty sweet. But zoom down to the actual people involved and it becomes apparent there are real human costs involved, as well as a literal danger to the quality of food we consume. If you?re willing to go that route then fine, but what are you going to do about the farmers and fishers who see their livelihoods evaporate? Because some of them are going to put a shotgun in their mouth.

To me this is another example of those mistakes made early in the Brexit process about which I harp on relentlessly. There?s a *lot* of Leave voters for whom control of this kind of thing was exactly what they wanted from it. But as you point out, there precious little money in it, not many votes, so the Tories just sold it down the river.

[j.a.]

Over the last fifty years we?ve had repeated examples of industries dying and those involved not being helped to find new work. In this country the demise of coal and manufacturing in the North and the Midlands is the perfect example, but there?s plenty of others.

Brexit was supposed to be something that helped everyone. Those communities, as well as the coastal towns, are supposed to be the prime beneficiaries of this. Thus far that promise is not being kept, and if we keep screwing over people like farmers because the big picture is pretty???well, we?re just repeating the mistakes of the past, regardless of the motivations behind it.

In twenty years time, what will they say, if we take away their livelihood and give nothing in return?

ETA - I will admit, however, to a certain amount of cautious optimism at the appointment of Truss to run EU negotiations. Frost may be an astute political operator (or he may not, I disagree with your assessment of him), but he was also a bully, a thug, a devotee of the ?tough it out? school of negotiating and entirely unsuited to the job assigned to him. Once again we have a Tory party being threatened by it?s extremist wing and all Frost did was play to them. He failed as a negotiator (seriously, he agreed a deal and then tried to get out of it - WTF?), and it is to be hoped Liz Truss will be able to make headway.

[JohnL]

Darren Grimes has been selling Brexit again ->

"Its been a year since the the Brexit Deal was agreed....

Has anyone starved to death? No"

[Sephiroth]

I agree with so much of JA posts

But the cautious optimism about Truss? Not for me

I will have optimism when a British minister displays any grasp of Irish history or awareness. She has zero

[Seabag]

My fear with Truss is she?ll play to the gallery. Her comments and actions in Belarus are telling, she likes to play it tough, much like others that Johnson?s put in place. And that in the end brings its own problems.

Can?t we have a smart, grounded, sensible person to do the job please? Not another populist/flag waving nationalist who one way or the other ends up upsetting the situation.

What happened to our quite, respected diplomacy. Where did that go?

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

j.a. Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> ETA - I will admit, however, to a certain amount

> of cautious optimism at the appointment of Truss

> to run EU negotiations.

Truss is both bonkers AND thick. She is the bottom of the barrel.