Why UK won't be worse off.

In Markel speech saying " benefits for both UK and EU states will reach a deal that works for both "

Ofc they are going to work for something that suits both.

1. > Immigration, not cut off but reform highly likely.

This is a meaningless description by you. They have to decide at what level they are willing to accpet the free movement of people and then the EU have to decide whether its negotiable or not. Previous instances , then it has been non negotiable.


2. > No recession

Still based on forcasts, but if correct then we have already lost £21 billion, which is nearly the equicalent of the amount we pay to the EU. £150m v £161m per week.

3. Both sides have a say

Meaningless again. Ofc both sides have a say , thats why its bilateral negotiations.

4. Closer relations with Canada, USA, China, India coming.

Jam tomorrow. The new trade deals need to be in place by the time of Brexit and they need to be of benefit to us. A poor deal is worse than none at all.

5. More competition for workers = increase in wages (after we leave EU not at very beginning)

You simply dont know if there will be more competition as you dont know the state of the economy or what is agreed in respect of freedom of movement.
Wage rises also brings downward pressure on competitiveness.

All a bit premature and a flimsy argument by you. You will have to wait and see.

ARM has already gone to the Japanese.

Putin has already gone to UK to find you.

I wish he did

1) No single market without it, also immigration will go down because our economy has joined the rest with lower growth/lower pound value

2) Recession was predicted, when left just downgraded. The world isn't normal unhealthy growth all over, UK just joined them
.
3) May isn't weak like Cameron

4) Closer ties because we not in EU, they already said they would like closer ties, infact China/India already want a trade deal.

5) Yes, lower the pressure so they'll have high skilled workers in the jobs thats required.

ARM has already gone to the Japanese.

From the article:

it was clear that Germany would hold the "balance of power" in the negotiations to come and although Mrs Merkel did want to make the UK's departure work, the UK's "leverage had really faded" following the decision to leave. ...

They have suggested no special exceptions can be made for Britain in terms of continued access to the EU's single market if, as Mrs May has insisted, the UK seeks controls on freedom of movement rules.

My comment to someone on reddit regarding Brexit, which is relevant:

You mention George Osborne, and his claim that Brexit will "damage" the UK economy. You'll have noticed that after the vote George Osborne was nowhere to be seen, his claim that harsher austerity measures would take place immediately upon Brexit, was simply a lie. George Osborne also claimed that leaving the European Union would entail higher taxes, too - this was a lie. George Osborne, like many politicians during the campaign used a tactic called "scaremongering", we all know that it entails the use of scare tactics to sway public opinion, it did not work. It was clear after we voted Leave, that there would be no 'Brexit Budget' of the sort.

You go onto give a link of the United Kingdom's growth rate, though it doesn't entail any new information, as we are not fully through the second quarter, therefore the initial impact of leaving the European Union is yet to be seen, though, I see that you have given me a link to previous growth, which you say is a link to "shrinking export and direct investment" - that is not the truth, as there are no forecasts currently for the Q2. It is a fact though that the UK is one of the largest importers in the world, we import £600 billion worth of goods annually in 2015, a large proportion of what the UK imports comes from Germany, this means that Germany will want to ensure any deal with the UK runs smoothly. The United Kingdom means a lot to the EU, trade wise, we are extremely important. The United Kingdom runs a trade deficit, we import more than we export. The United Kingdom is a integrally vital artery for the EU, this means we will get a free-trade agreement, we may even join an EEA > EFTA type agreement, this benefits the EU and the UK. Though, mostly importantly the UK will get to set its own trade deals, which is what I'll cover shorty. Here is a blog outlining a transition from the EU to an EEA > EFTA agreement. This will ensure the UK has open-access to the single market, though without the EU bureaucracy that tangles the UK.

Furthermore, it is quite apparent that some of the most successful countries in Europe are not within the EU. The European Union hasn't stopped Norway or Switzerland from developing economic ties with the EU via EFTA or EEA. These countries have tactfully made sure that their sovereignty is in tact, yet have access to the free-market and still have FDI. In fact, Switzerland is in the top ten of countries with Foreign Direct Investment stock - it is not in the EU. My direct rebuttal to your point on FDI is simple, if Switzerland can retain FDI, the UK will, I can reinforce this point with two examples: Recently the UK has seen investment from Santander and the UK has seen a £3 billion investment from Boeing after brexit - this illustrates these companies have confidence to invest within the United Kingdom, they see that the UK is resilient and will be stronger after Brexit. The EU isn't the foundations of the UK economy, the United Kingdom is.

As you'll know with your economics degree, market volatility during political turbulence is normal, these unprecedented times of the UK leaving the EU will make the pound slump, though The pound reached a post Brexit high of 1.3480, it looks like the pound will continue to recover. Political uncertainty not good, though to suggest that this will have a long term detrimental impact on GBP and the UK economy is wrong, as knee-jerk forecasts will assume the worst, though clearly the UK will forge a new relationship with the EU and the world, in the long-term it will prosper as it isn't strangled by EU regulation, which means it can adopt trade agreements with countries like Canadaor Australia - in fact, numerous countries are lining up to divulge in a market of over 65 million people.

Evidently, it is clear that the number of EU nationals in the United Kingdom is far greater than UK citizens in the EU - in fact there are as the source states, 3 million EU nationals living in the United Kingdom, and 1.2 UK citizens in the EU. This means that we hold the cards, it is basic politics, they have more to lose than we do. The regulations and rules surrounding immigration will be for the EU and UK to decide, though clearly with the UK holding a far greater proportion of EU nationals that UK citizens in the EU - it is quite apparent that the UK will find itself with a good deal on immigration, while having access to the free market, and at the same time gaining regulations on EU immigration. If there us an influx of EU migration to the UK, then this could also entail emergency legislation, as the Secretary of state for Exiting the European Union has mentioned.

Also, you claim that the UK will somehow diverge from its Human Rights, the UK has a long tradition of Human Rights and is a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights, this is not going to change. The UK has Human Rights legislation dating back before the EU existed. You also claim that the UK is "alone", the UK has opted to leave a mass bureaucratic political union, it is now going to join the rest of the world. Your view that the UK us going it alone is quite absurd, the UK is going global. This country founded parliamentary democracy, it will never turns its back on giving people their rights. The Human Rights Act 1998 is another matter.

In conclusion, you have gave no real argument to suggest the UK will decline, in fact I have argued the opposite and set out numerous examples. In that the United Kingdom is traditionally a strong exporting nation, it shares culture and links throughout the world. Foreign investors have done deals after brexit, they will continue long into the future. As the terms of our exit comes clear, the UK will lead a successful withdrawal, from a corrupt EU that the UK has never really been part of. The UK will remain a vast financial centre, strong import and exporter to the world - exiting the EU will not hamper its trade, as proven the EU has more to lose than the UK does, in terms of a Brexit.

Here is a blog outlining a transition from the EU to an EEA > EFTA agreement. This will ensure the UK has open-access to the single market, though without the EU bureaucracy that tangles the UK.

Furthermore, it is quite apparent that some of the most successful countries in Europe are not within the EU. The European Union hasn't stopped Norway or Switzerland from developing economic ties with the EU via EFTA or EEA. These countries have tactfully made sure that their sovereignty is in tact, yet have access to the free-market and still have FDI. In fact, Switzerland is in the top ten of countries with Foreign Direct Investment stock - it is not in the EU. My direct rebuttal to your point on FDI is simple, if Switzerland can retain FDI, the UK will, I can reinforce this point with two examples: Recently the UK has seen investment from Santander and the UK has seen a £3 billion investment from Boeing after brexit - this illustrates these companies have confidence to invest within the United Kingdom, they see that the UK is resilient and will be stronger after Brexit. The EU isn't the foundations of the UK economy, the United Kingdom is.

As you'll know with your economics degree, market volatility during political turbulence is normal, these unprecedented times of the UK leaving the EU will make the pound slump, though The pound reached a post Brexit high of 1.3480, it looks like the pound will continue to recover. Political uncertainty not good, though to suggest that this will have a long term detrimental impact on GBP and the UK economy is wrong, as knee-jerk forecasts will assume the worst, though clearly the UK will forge a new relationship with the EU and the world, in the long-term it will prosper as it isn't strangled by EU regulation,

Evidently, it is clear that the number of EU nationals in the United Kingdom is far greater than UK citizens in the EU - in fact there are as the source states, 3 million EU nationals living in the United Kingdom, and 1.2 UK citizens in the EU. This means that we hold the cards, it is basic politics, they have more to lose than we do. The regulations and rules surrounding immigration will be for the EU and UK to decide, though clearly with the UK holding a far greater proportion of EU nationals that UK citizens in the EU - it is quite apparent that the UK will find itself with a good deal on immigration, while having access to the free market, and at the same time gaining regulations on EU immigration. If there us an influx of EU migration to the UK, then this could also entail emergency legislation, as the Secretary of state for Exiting the European Union has mentioned.

Also, you claim that the UK will somehow diverge from its Human Rights, the UK has a long tradition of Human Rights and is a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights, this is not going to change.

the UK has opted to leave a mass bureaucratic political union,

In conclusion, you have gave no real argument to suggest the UK will decline, in fact I have argued the opposite and set out numerous examples. In that the United Kingdom is traditionally a strong exporting nation, it shares culture and links throughout the world. Foreign investors have done deals after brexit, they will continue long into the future. As the terms of our exit comes clear, the UK will lead a successful withdrawal, from a corrupt EU that the UK has never really been part of. The UK will remain a vast financial centre, strong import and exporter to the world - exiting the EU will not hamper its trade, as proven the EU has more to lose than the UK does, in terms of a Brexit.

My comment to someone on reddit regarding Brexit, which is relevant:

You mention George Osborne, and his claim that Brexit will "damage" the UK economy. You'll have noticed that after the vote George Osborne was nowhere to be seen, his claim that harsher austerity measures would take place immediately upon Brexit, was simply a lie. George Osborne also claimed that leaving the European Union would entail higher taxes, too - this was a lie. George Osborne, like many politicians during the campaign used a tactic called "scaremongering", we all know that it entails the use of scare tactics to sway public opinion, it did not work. It was clear after we voted Leave, that there would be no 'Brexit Budget' of the sort.

You go onto give a link of the United Kingdom's growth rate, though it doesn't entail any new information, as we are not fully through the second quarter, therefore the initial impact of leaving the European Union is yet to be seen, though, I see that you have given me a link to previous growth, which you say is a link to "shrinking export and direct investment" - that is not the truth, as there are no forecasts currently for the Q2. It is a fact though that the UK is one of the largest importers in the world, we import £600 billion worth of goods annually in 2015, a large proportion of what the UK imports comes from Germany, this means that Germany will want to ensure any deal with the UK runs smoothly. The United Kingdom means a lot to the EU, trade wise, we are extremely important. The United Kingdom runs a trade deficit, we import more than we export. The United Kingdom is a integrally vital artery for the EU, this means we will get a free-trade agreement, we may even join an EEA > EFTA type agreement, this benefits the EU and the UK. Though, mostly importantly the UK will get to set its own trade deals, which is what I'll cover shorty. Here is a blog outlining a transition from the EU to an EEA > EFTA agreement. This will ensure the UK has open-access to the single market, though without the EU bureaucracy that tangles the UK.

Furthermore, it is quite apparent that some of the most successful countries in Europe are not within the EU. The European Union hasn't stopped Norway or Switzerland from developing economic ties with the EU via EFTA or EEA. These countries have tactfully made sure that their sovereignty is in tact, yet have access to the free-market and still have FDI. In fact, Switzerland is in the top ten of countries with Foreign Direct Investment stock - it is not in the EU. My direct rebuttal to your point on FDI is simple, if Switzerland can retain FDI, the UK will, I can reinforce this point with two examples: Recently the UK has seen investment from Santander and the UK has seen a £3 billion investment from Boeing after brexit - this illustrates these companies have confidence to invest within the United Kingdom, they see that the UK is resilient and will be stronger after Brexit. The EU isn't the foundations of the UK economy, the United Kingdom is.

As you'll know with your economics degree, market volatility during political turbulence is normal, these unprecedented times of the UK leaving the EU will make the pound slump, though The pound reached a post Brexit high of 1.3480, it looks like the pound will continue to recover. Political uncertainty not good, though to suggest that this will have a long term detrimental impact on GBP and the UK economy is wrong, as knee-jerk forecasts will assume the worst, though clearly the UK will forge a new relationship with the EU and the world, in the long-term it will prosper as it isn't strangled by EU regulation, which means it can adopt trade agreements with countries like Canadaor Australia - in fact, numerous countries are lining up to divulge in a market of over 65 million people.

Evidently, it is clear that the number of EU nationals in the United Kingdom is far greater than UK citizens in the EU - in fact there are as the source states, 3 million EU nationals living in the United Kingdom, and 1.2 UK citizens in the EU. This means that we hold the cards, it is basic politics, they have more to lose than we do. The regulations and rules surrounding immigration will be for the EU and UK to decide, though clearly with the UK holding a far greater proportion of EU nationals that UK citizens in the EU - it is quite apparent that the UK will find itself with a good deal on immigration, while having access to the free market, and at the same time gaining regulations on EU immigration. If there us an influx of EU migration to the UK, then this could also entail emergency legislation, as the Secretary of state for Exiting the European Union has mentioned.

Also, you claim that the UK will somehow diverge from its Human Rights, the UK has a long tradition of Human Rights and is a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights, this is not going to change. The UK has Human Rights legislation dating back before the EU existed. You also claim that the UK is "alone", the UK has opted to leave a mass bureaucratic political union, it is now going to join the rest of the world. Your view that the UK us going it alone is quite absurd, the UK is going global. This country founded parliamentary democracy, it will never turns its back on giving people their rights. The Human Rights Act 1998 is another matter.

In conclusion, you have gave no real argument to suggest the UK will decline, in fact I have argued the opposite and set out numerous examples. In that the United Kingdom is traditionally a strong exporting nation, it shares culture and links throughout the world. Foreign investors have done deals after brexit, they will continue long into the future. As the terms of our exit comes clear, the UK will lead a successful withdrawal, from a corrupt EU that the UK has never really been part of. The UK will remain a vast financial centre, strong import and exporter to the world - exiting the EU will not hamper its trade, as proven the EU has more to lose than the UK does, in terms of a Brexit.

ARM has already gone to the Japanese.