Direct consequences of Brexit

This is a forum for discussing philosophical theories of government and social structure. It is not a venue for partisan rants or plugging favored candidates.

Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Natural ChemE on June 24th, 2016, 5:23 pm 

Yesterday, the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. Assuming that the other procedural steps go smoothly to implement the ballot result, what are the direct consequences of Britain leaving the EU?

For example, does the UK promote the British pound over the Euro?* Do British citizens and EU citizens need passports to visit each other? Are there tax implications for British citizens?


* Looks like the UK hadn't yet adopted the Euro over the pound (United Kingdom and the euro, Wikipedia).
Natural ChemE
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2755
Joined: 28 Dec 2009


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Natural ChemE on June 24th, 2016, 5:36 pm 

Looks like this is a useful article:The gist that I get is that there're questions still to be worked out, and that it's possible that the UK's exit may not fully reverse all of the EU's policy benefits.

The article does remind that, at current, no changes are official:
The UK's EU referendum: All you need to know, Brian Wheeler & Alex Hunt for the BBC (2016-06-24) wrote:Citizens' Advice has reminded people their rights have not changed yet and asked anyone to contact them if they think they have been discriminated against following the Leave vote.

Kinda curious about the practical impact on scientific research in the EU. For example, I was a big fan of the policy noted in European scientific articles to be freely accessible by 2020, though I'd guess that this doesn't automatically apply to research in the UK if it's no longer part of the EU?
Natural ChemE
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2755
Joined: 28 Dec 2009


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Paul Anthony on June 24th, 2016, 6:29 pm 

Brexit is a reaction to a series of overly bureaucratic dictates from Brussels combined with fear of the continuing immigration from the Middle East.

It is NOT a refusal to cooperate with European nations.

Trade exists not because of membership in a unified Europe, but because it is beneficial to all parties involved. The reasons remain valid, so trade will continue, although some renegotiating may result in new restrictions and tariffs - not because they are necessary but because they are possible. President Obama has said that it could take 5-10 years to renegotiate trade agreements between the UK and the US. Nonsense. That is political posturing from someone who was in favor of a "stay" vote and who is ignorant of the workings of business.

The scientific community has never been all that concerned with politics. Scientific cooperation will likely continue unabated.
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ
vivian maxineronjanec liked this post


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Lomax on June 25th, 2016, 12:33 am 

Paul Anthony » June 24th, 2016, 11:29 pm wrote:Trade exists not because of membership in a unified Europe, but because it is beneficial to all parties involved. The reasons remain valid, so trade will continue, although some renegotiating may result in new restrictions and tariffs - not because they are necessary but because they are possible. President Obama has said that it could take 5-10 years to renegotiate trade agreements between the UK and the US. Nonsense. That is political posturing from someone who was in favor of a "stay" vote and who is ignorant of the workings of business.

Trade agreements aren't just about trade, they're about agreement - if a country already has an agreement with the EU to buy its fish for another three years then they have something to lose (reputation) by buying UK fish instead. The UK won't be out of pocket forever but this is what the period of renegotiation is, and will almost certainly dent the GDP. You should see the exaggerated, blind panic on my facebook feed though.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Paul Anthony on June 25th, 2016, 12:48 am 

Lomax » Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:33 pm wrote:
Trade agreements aren't just about trade, they're about agreement - if a country already has an agreement with the EU to buy its fish for another three years then they have something to lose (reputation) by buying UK fish instead. The UK won't be out of pocket forever but this is what the period of renegotiation is, and will almost certainly dent the GDP.


Perhaps I'm missing something, but if it was economically beneficial to buy EU fish I don't see why such trade would not continue. If, however, it didn't make economic sense to do so, then the UK should benefit from being released from the obligation. Seems like a win-win for the UK to me.
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Lomax on June 25th, 2016, 9:44 am 

Paul Anthony » June 25th, 2016, 5:48 am wrote:
Lomax » Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:33 pm wrote:
Trade agreements aren't just about trade, they're about agreement - if a country already has an agreement with the EU to buy its fish for another three years then they have something to lose (reputation) by buying UK fish instead. The UK won't be out of pocket forever but this is what the period of renegotiation is, and will almost certainly dent the GDP.


Perhaps I'm missing something, but if it was economically beneficial to buy EU fish I don't see why such trade would not continue. If, however, it didn't make economic sense to do so, then the UK should benefit from being released from the obligation. Seems like a win-win for the UK to me.

I think I phrased the example badly. Suppose some third county - say, China - agrees to buy EU fish until 2019. They take a slight hit to their reputation for reliability if they drop the bargain in 2018 and switch to UK fish. The UK is now at the back of the queue for a few years. It's only a temporary problem, provided it doesn't lead to a recession.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby vivian maxine on June 25th, 2016, 10:19 am 

The article in New York Times Large Print Weekly (and doubtless in the regular paper) seemed to stress quite heavily the wish to be able to tell "free-entry" immigrants to go home. Should sound very familiar to Americans excepting that theirs had a legal right to enter. There seems to be a desire to put all immigrants on the same footing, following the same rules of entry.

Right, though, that this doesn't much stir up trouble for science. On the whole, scientific groups from all over the planet have managed to ignore politics and get on with the job. No time for political squabbling.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby ronjanec on June 25th, 2016, 11:26 am 

Now Turkey is saying they may no longer pursue EU membership, because the whole thing looks like it may be falling apart anyway. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... s-possible

If that does turn out to be the case: Will they still honor their recent commitments to the EU leadership, to continue in their very successful efforts in stopping the previous flood of refugee/migrants from their country to Greece this year? Not doing so could of course have enormous repercussions inside the EU, and possibly become another full blown refugee/migrant crisis this summer, just like last summer, if they do give up the fight.

Trying to make any future predictions about "the direct consequences of Brexit" so soon after it happened are really hard to do(in particular the financial consequences): Or like that very famous American philosopher Yogi Berra said: "Its really hard to make predictions...especially about the future" :)
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4409
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs
Paul Anthony liked this post


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Paul Anthony on June 25th, 2016, 1:10 pm 

Aziz, author of "Azizonomics" (the focus of which is economics, as you may have guessed) voted to remain.
He has been very vocal about his reasons. Most of his loyal readers disagree.

https://azizonomics.com/2016/06/24/britain-is-finished/#comments
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby ronjanec on June 25th, 2016, 2:14 pm 

Paul Anthony » Sat Jun 25, 2016 11:10 am wrote:Aziz, author of "Azizonomics" (the focus of which is economics, as you may have guessed) voted to remain.
He has been very vocal about his reasons. Most of his loyal readers disagree.

https://azizonomics.com/2016/06/24/britain-is-finished/#comments


What is going to happen to the world's financial system because of "Brexit" is anyone's guess here Paul;

With almost the entire world being completely buried in debt at this time, and with the combined world value of the very risky derivatives market being something along the line of 1.5 quadrillion, it may take only one more large EU country to say that they are going to have a Leave/Remain referendum in the near future to have many people really panicking both politically and financially.

Or on the other hand, things could actually settle down here after a few very anxious days...or at least until the next major EU crisis. :)
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4409
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Paul Anthony on June 25th, 2016, 2:32 pm 

Lomax » Sat Jun 25, 2016 6:44 am wrote:
I think I phrased the example badly. Suppose some third county - say, China - agrees to buy EU fish until 2019. They take a slight hit to their reputation for reliability if they drop the bargain in 2018 and switch to UK fish. The UK is now at the back of the queue for a few years. It's only a temporary problem, provided it doesn't lead to a recession.


The idea of the UK being "at the back of the queue" was provided by President Obama. I've already stated my opinion of that. Pure unadulterated political posturing. Today, he walked his way back from that as gracefully as possible. The US is not going to wait 5-10 years to renew trade with the UK.

Economic decisions are made for economic reasons, not political ones. Well, at least economic decisions made by businesses. Central banks make their decisions for different reasons. ;)
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby ronjanec on June 26th, 2016, 1:17 pm 

Oops. Posted in wrong thread.
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4409
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby vivian maxine on June 26th, 2016, 1:35 pm 

ronjanec » June 26th, 2016, 12:17 pm wrote:Oops. Posted in wrong thread.


That makes me feel better - I'm not the only one. Easy to do.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Lomax on June 27th, 2016, 12:14 am 

Paul Anthony » June 25th, 2016, 7:32 pm wrote:
Lomax » Sat Jun 25, 2016 6:44 am wrote:
I think I phrased the example badly. Suppose some third county - say, China - agrees to buy EU fish until 2019. They take a slight hit to their reputation for reliability if they drop the bargain in 2018 and switch to UK fish. The UK is now at the back of the queue for a few years. It's only a temporary problem, provided it doesn't lead to a recession.
Economic decisions are made for economic reasons, not political ones.

Contractual obligations to trade have economic consequences, as I'm sure you must know.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Paul Anthony on June 27th, 2016, 12:32 am 

Lomax » Sun Jun 26, 2016 9:14 pm wrote:
Contractual obligations to trade have economic consequences, as I'm sure you must know.


Are we discussing the obligations of private businesses or of governments?
When companies fail to honor their obligations, such action often leads to the courtroom. When governments renege, it sometimes leads to war. It's important to know which is the subject of our discussion.
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Lomax on June 27th, 2016, 1:05 pm 

Paul Anthony » June 27th, 2016, 5:32 am wrote:
Lomax » Sun Jun 26, 2016 9:14 pm wrote:
Contractual obligations to trade have economic consequences, as I'm sure you must know.


Are we discussing the obligations of private businesses or of governments?
When companies fail to honor their obligations, such action often leads to the courtroom. When governments renege, it sometimes leads to war. It's important to know which is the subject of our discussion.

Governments, mainly. I'm not suggesting there would be war, but reticence for trade. I'm saying if you go back on a deal to trade with another nation, it mars that nation's readiness to make trade deals with you in the future. Nations often do renege on promises in various ways, but this is at least an inhibiting factor.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby Paul Anthony on June 27th, 2016, 1:31 pm 

Lomax » Mon Jun 27, 2016 10:05 am wrote:
Governments, mainly. I'm not suggesting there would be war, but reticence for trade. I'm saying if you go back on a deal to trade with another nation, it mars that nation's readiness to make trade deals with you in the future. Nations often do renege on promises in various ways, but this is at least an inhibiting factor.


I see your point. The reason you are right is, governments do things for many reasons and not all of them are driven by good economic sense. A government may engage in trade at an economic loss, solely to prevent another nation from gaining influence in that area of the world. Poor economics but good politics (maybe). It may refuse to trade with another nation to punish that nation for actions that have nothing to do with economics ("sanctions").

Brexit will no doubt have economic repercussions that have little to do with economics. Despite all the talk about the benefits of free trade, when governments are involved, trade is rarely free.
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Lomax liked this post


Re: Direct consequences of Brexit

Postby zetreque on June 12th, 2017, 4:29 pm 

Brexit: The Scientific Impact - Round Table Debate
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3735
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)



Return to Political Theory

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests