Comments by "TheEvertw" (@TheEvertw) on "The New Statesman" channel.

  1. "The naivete of the UK political system" The phrasing is very complimentary towards the Johnson government. They had been warned, many, many times that they were massively underestimating the complexity of Brexit, but chose to ignore those warnings. This can not be wholly attributed to naivety, but rather to disinterest. I think the Johnson government was pursuing different goals from what they admitted to. Their biggest priority was getting the UK out from under EU monetary regulations by 1-1-2020 because of the stricter EU controls on money laundering & financial transparency.
    156
  2. I wonder where he gets the figures for the "benefits" of regulatory relaxation from. Lowering regulations can make you more competitive in markets where regulations are lower, but closes markets where regulations are stricter. As the EU is by far the largest trading partner of the UK, this means that lowering regulations will mainly make it easier for other countries to export to you, while local production needs to maintain high standards in order not to lose their existing market. A company can not change its standards depending on who they produce for: they need to comply with the highest common denominator. This undercuts local production, which is exactly what we see happening in e.g. UK agriculture. Soon other branches of the economy will see the same effect. Also, new foreign markets can never make up lost exports to the EU, as it is the largest trading block in the world, conveniently placed at UK's doorstep. That is the biggest Brexit fallacy. There was nothing preventing companies from targeting those markets pre-Brexit. Economically, both short and long term, deregulation therefore makes no sense. That is not even talking about the social and environmental effects, as being able to compete with low-regulated markets means UK living standards will need to drop substantially. Which is exactly why the EU is raising standards: to improve living standards for its citizens. Which is why one of the very few examples of Brexit success we saw was a company exporting glass eel: a protected species that should not be trade in this way.
    22
  3. Exactly. The deadline for this is already set: by the 1st of July, 2025, clearing Euro transactions will no longer be allowed outside the Euro zone, and companies that do it inside the Euro zone will need their workers and capital underwriting those transactions to also be inside the Euro zone. I expect businesses to move shop ahead of the deadline, 'cause that takes time: you have to find offices, workers need to move, the capital needs to move, etc, etc. It will be a bloodbath for the UK economy.
    21
  4. A lot of blabla, mostly making some sense, but I lack a vision of how to solve things. I hear some buzz words like a government needing to take a step back which will surely be misinterpreted by right-wing loons, and others like "increased government spending" that can also easily be abused in hand-outs to friends of the government. What is needed is a government that focuses on its key tasks of providing excellent education, infrastructure and essential services to facilitate business. And that aggressively combats all forms of corruption, because corruption is the biggest drain on the economy. Corruption is what destroyed Italy, and corruption is what is destroying the UK.
    11
  5. Staying in sync with EU regulations is the only sensible thing that can be done in the near future. It is a per-requisite to rejoining the EU. For all the morons wanting Starmer to commit to rejoining the EU: in order for that to become an option, a LOT of the damage that the Tories did to the UK will FIRST need to be fixed, permanently. That will take a decade at least. Starmer is wise to not commit to such a far-off project while the country is still split over Brexit and how to rejoin. Face it, Britain. The Tories did considerable harm to the UK and the relationship with the EU. That has consequences. If you don't like the consequences, you should have been more forceful in telling your government to behave, because you were warned by many that there would be severe consequences. But you didn't, so now you have to lie in the bed you made. In a democracy, votes have consequences, but so has inaction and remaining mute on a subject. Don't blame the media (well, the media should face the consequences for misleading you), every Briton is to blame with the exception of Steve Bray. Why for F's sake was he alone protesting against this mad government? OK, James O'Brien did his bit as well, and Phil Moorhouse. But very, very, very few Britons in Britain joined them in fighting the madness. I get really angry with the turds calling on Starmer to take the anti-Brexit route, or maligning him for not doing that. THERE IS NO QUICK WAY TO UNDO BREXIT. But getting Labour in power is the first step of a decades long process of recovery, whereas leaving the Tories in power is continuing the slide back into the 19th century MINUS the empire. You think you can be forceful against Starmer to make up for your laxness against the Tories these past 6 years? You are wrong. Starmer is not blocking rejoining. It is the EU you insulted and attacked in so many mean little ways. They will roll on the floor laughing if you were to ask to rejoin now. Before telling you to study the Copenhagen Criteria, and study them well. And give annual reports on your progress towards compliance. Ukraine will join the EU long before the UK rejoins. You think Ukraine is corrupt? The UK is even more corrupt, and at least Ukraine is fighting corruption and jailing corrupt politicians. As it stands, there are no laws to jail all those corrupt Tories. But jail them, and make the BBC impartial, and replace the House of Lords with something elected, and do a hundred other things, and we can talk about rejoining.
    3
  6.  @baronvonlimbourgh1716  That was deep and well considered. Thank you.
    1