Confused Yorkshire people

But we didn't remove protectionist policies, we just put ourselves on the outside of them.

 

To quote the Bard of Barking "not everyone that voted for Brexit was a racist. But all racists voted for Brexit". Seems spot on to me.

 

Yeh your probably right.

 

But isn't it the case of anything you pay into, that you benefit from being inside it, not outside?

And why would the EU breach all it's concepts such as the pillars of the single market and customs unions for a country who have said they don't want to be in it at all?

It's simple cakeism. We were told the Germans ran the EU and we wanted their cars. We were told the French still wanted to sell us their wine and cheese (probably largely for Downing St parties) and we were told they needed us more than we needed them.

All found to be empty words as time has lapsed. if we don't want friction, if we want access to markets to sell to, if we want to enter the EU area easily and speedily, then we can. We pay for the privileges of those concepts and we benefit accordingly. if we want hassle, then we don't. And we accept that life is worse outside the EU.

You pay for the benefits, or you don't. It's our choice. We've made it. And people said they knew what they were voting for.

So it seems people have 2 choices. Back rejoining. Or don't. And if you don't, stop bellyaching about what you were never going to get by being outside the single market and customs union.

 

Yes, an add on question to yours B.

 

'Cakeism' LoL

On a serious note that is not my point. Many of the rules within the club are simply to protect the EU cartel and come at a considerable cost to people both on the outside and inside. Trade barriers are not overall beneficial. to anyone in or out. The additional costs are manufactured and artificial due to tariffs. The whole level of EU bureaucracy is a huge cost to the member states. The perceived savings from being inside are the simply that the add on costs of all the tariffs and legislation are waived. The barriers to free trade/movement are artificial. Visas are just another form of discriminating free movement and yet people pillory the UK Govt from limiting migrants .
EFTA and subsequently what started out as the EEC were the original trade organisations and were advantageous. Unfortunately the EEC has morphed and become another unwieldy and costly level of administration and government. Co-ordinating member states to make common standards obviously requires considerable resources but the whole thing has got out of hand and been hijacked by the advocates of creating a federal state. In short my argument has been all along that in or out the EU for all its benefits is flawed and ultimately heading for a fall. The Eurozone is becoming more and more fragile and the ECB has no real answer to the two speed structure North vs South. The people who argue that the EU gave the UK lots of money ignore the fact that it was OUR money and we were net contributors so paid more in than we get out. The 'financial benefit' of being a member of the club amounts to an 'I'm alright jack mentality' since those on the outside are penalised for reasons I have outlined above. The perception of more money from EU comes from the fact that they did distribute the money more even handedly so deprived regions like S.Yorkshire ignored by a London / SE centric Govt got money and investment that otherwise would have stayed in London.
Life outside the EU is , for the UK is, for now, worse, but most of the rest of the World is also outside the EU and will remain so. It is rate of change and adapting that many people are reluctant to engage in.

 

Cakeism.

 

How so?

 

You missed 'former'

It was quite obvious from the 2019 election, that the Brexiteers didnt go back to voting Labour.

Pedants corner? it's more of an alcove.

 

Most of the rest of the world isn't on the EU's doorstep.

 

That is a different issue altogether. We are talking about logistics here and in 2020 around 50% of of the stuff we import, does not grow/is not manufactured or materials are not present in the EU. This is where adapt and change comes in... We have a ludicrous situation of exporting produce. e.g. potatoes where we export more than we import. Whilst on paper that is beneficial financially, the environmental cost makes the whole concept ludicrous.
Export surplus by all means but why import stuff we could be self sufficient in. There are many other examples where money trumps common sense? Pork and bacon... again, UK farmers threatening to slaughter pigs because they have lost their EU market whilst, at teh same time we import about half a billion pounds worth worth of bacon/ham mostly from the EU. That is slowly falling post Brexit. Again , over time switching suppliers (many businesses do this time and again) is a long term project. Given the disregard for air-miles it is in many instances cheaper to import some goods from Asia, Australasia, Africa and the Far East than it is to get them from the EU. Adapt and survive... many firm have done ths and are doing this. Brexit or not the markets and business environment are in a constant state of flux.

Those who recognise this respond. Those who keep moaning about something that has happened and cannot be changed will likely be those that fail.

'Buy British' campaigns are often mocked but doing so would provide jobs boost the economy (reduces imports), helps the environment. Long term, costs due to domestic sourcing would fall as transportation costs (especially in a time of huge increases in fuel prices), and elimination of tariffs and import duties on home made/home grown produce. It cannot happen overnight as manufacturing in UK was decimated when Thatcher turned UK PLC into a service industry but it is not totally irreversible (provided we get the right government in place to stimulate growth/loosen the block on foreign workers) .

 

Err no...

Apart from the fact it did not come into full force until 2019...

Failure to enforce discard ban threatens the future of EU fish stocks, report warns
Despite many fishing quotas being significantly increased to facilitate the implementation of the E.U.’s Landing Obligation (LO), also known as the “discard ban,” there has been no decrease in the volume of fish being discarded and no enforcement of the rules, which in turn is providing a platform for overfishing throughout the region and undermining science-based fisheries management decisions, according to a new report.

Compiled by fisheries scientist and FishFix CEO Lisa Borges, and partly funded by the non-governmental organization Our Fish, “The Unintended Impact Of The European Discard Ban,” finds that total allowable catches (TACs) across E.U. fisheries have increased by an average of 36 percent above pre-landing obligation levels annually since 2015, and that this increase climbed even further recently – reaching 50 percent in 2019-2020, including a 60 percent rise for demersal fish species.
Borges said that since discarding has not declined in E.U. fisheries at any significant level, the magnitude of these increases may likely have resulted in a substantial widespread increase in fish mortality being exerted on European stocks, and could lead to an “implosion” of the E.U. TAC system. The problem is that the TAC system is not limiting the fishing effort, she said......

 

The concept of cakeism is really straight forward. You want all the upsides.

So you want the bits that you benefit from being in the EU, and lucky for you, given you live within the EU, you still do... while also having another positive of not having to pay for it.

But anyway, cakeism.

 

Reading how people voted for Brexit and Tory is like reading the confessions of the burglars who robbed my house. Except it's worse as that stuff was only taken once, where I as I'm losing money and rights every week. And apparently we're supposed to be OK and polite about how that voting took things away from us.