I heard predictions that following Brexit, Britain would fall into chaos akin to Mad Max.

But things seem pretty quiet. So is anyone left alive over their?

quote:

Originally posted by BansheeOne:
Most importantly though, there's nowhere near the polarization about EU membership in any other European country as in the UK to expect even the close-run vote to leave there, except maybe in Greece.

Maybe right now, but that may not obtain for long.

Consider: EU in TURMOIL as study reveals these FOUR countries will pay HUGE price for Brexit

Excerpt:

quote:

Ukip MEP Jonathan Arnott, the party’s economy spokesman, said the news would spark a further rise in euroscepticism across the bloc.

He said: “The UK has been the second-largest contributor to the EU budget for many years, but after Brexit the EU won't be able to milk this cash cow any longer.

“Without the British taxpayer footing the bill, I wonder whether other countries will start to realise that the EU is all take and no give? The Austrian, Swedish and Dutch people aren't exactly happy with the EU right now anyway - how will they feel when they're suddenly expected to stump up more money?

Then there's the migrant crisis Brussels has fostered, which is beginning to wear on even the Dutch--famed the world over for their tolerance. If Turkey's Erdoğan follows-though with his threat to release another 3.6m refugees into Europe, one might reasonably expect that tolerance to degrade even further.

Not to mention the easternmost members of the EU, who were just looking for a little economic development when they joined up.

When they joined in 2004, they signed up for all the benefits and duties in the framework of the European Treaties at that point - Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice. Plus the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007, which as all of them needed to be agreed to and ratified by every single member.

When it comes to finances, there are broadly two camps in the EU: the northerners, which are for austerity and national responsibility for fiscal policy; and the southerners and easterners, which are for laxer spending policy, more EU investments and socialization of national debts. The former camp includes most of the net payers who pay more contributions into the EU budget than they get out of it in subsidies and structural aids, though Germany traditionally tries to play a bit of an intermediary role in controversial issues within Europe. The latter camp includes mostly net receivers, but also the net payers France and Italy.

The UK was part of the northern camp, which explains why the French were happy to let them go while the Germans would have liked to keep them in as an ally - even though the Brits leaving further strengthens Germany's position as the Union's biggest net and total payer. There are also variations in the southern/eastern camp - the southerners are more about lax spending/debt policy while the easterners are more about getting the money without the democratic obligations, though in the end it all boils down mostly to resentment of oversight for good governance as understood by Brussels. OTOH the latter, and the northern camp, resent having their money taken without regard for the connected treaty obligations. Poland as the biggest net receiver is a case in point:

quote:

Date 01.05.2019

Brussels tells Poland EU is 'not a cow you can milk'

A senior EU commissioner has warned that Poland can no longer treat the bloc as a cash cow. Brussels is currently looking at funding challenges that include plugging any post-Brexit budget gap.

Poland should stop treating the European Union as a source of financing and start making more of a financial contribution to the bloc, European Commission Vice President Jyrki Katainen said on Wednesday.

"The EU is not just a money machine, a cow that you can milk. We are expecting a more substantial contribution from Poland for the future of Europe," Katainen told journalists in Warsaw.

Poland is the biggest recipient of EU funding — having received more than €100 billion ($112 billion) for infrastructure and other projects.

Brussels has proposed a cut to EU cohesion funds, which are aimed at reducing regional disparities within the EU, as part of its next budget. The reduction is aimed at making up for any loss of British contributions to the EU when the UK finally leaves the bloc.

"We are expecting a more substantial contribution from Poland for the future of Europe," said Katainen, who is European Commission Vice-President for Jobs, Growth, Investment and Competitiveness.

[...]

https://www.dw.com/en/brussels...-can-milk/a-48561782

quote:

Date 24.02.2020

Poland fights its corner in EU budget spat

Warsaw wants the new EU budget to be bigger than the last one, and who can blame it given how well Poland has benefited from EU funds since 2004. But some want to start reining in the subsidies as Brexit leaves a hole.

"We don't need Britain to show disunity." French President Emmanuel Macron put his finger on it as the EU's budget negotiations stalled at the end of last week, the standoff exposing rifts between countries in the North and South of the now 27-member bloc and between East and West.

The so-called Frugal Friends (the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden and Denmark) want to lower the new seven-year budget to 1.00% of gross national income (GNI), while Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki wants the EU budget for 2021-2027 to increase to 1.3% from 1.16% in the budget period that expires at the end of 2020.

European Council President Charles Michel's 1.074% (and later 1.069%) compromise was rejected by both sides. The Frugalistas have the support of German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Germany, the EU's biggest contributor, has said it is prepared to accept a bit more, but that 1.074% is too high.

"I wouldn't call it a backlash," said Friedrich Heinemann, a professor at ZEW (the Liebniz Center for European Economic Research. "I think there is a readiness to continue the funding of the EU budget on its current generous levels. But net contributors want to send a clear signal that there are limits to the burden," he told DW.

Brexit, still

A second key question is how to fill the €75 billion ($81 billion) funding gap created by Brexit. Britain was the second-biggest net contributor to the budget after Germany, at around 7.8 billion pounds (€9.2 billion, $9.9 billion) per year. To help fill the Brexit gap, the Commission has also proposed ending rebates on budget contributions that many of the net payers now get. Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Denmark and Sweden all have their own rebates and want to keep them. The five countries' rebates were — in current prices — worth €6.4 billion in 2020, according to European Commission figures, with Germany the biggest recipient at €3.76 billion.

[...]

https://www.dw.com/en/poland-f...dget-spat/a-52490735

It should be noted that the rebates mentioned in the last paragraph are for additional payments on top of regular national contributions to make up for the gap created by the former rebate on British contributions negotiated by Margaret Thatcher. If you read the full article, Poland makes the argument that the buildup of the eastern economies with EU money also benefits the net payers through the Single Market. Which is true, and the reason the net payers keep paying, though it doesn't alleviate their anger about the flaunting of attached obligations - most manifestly because they fear the impact of eroding democratic checks and balances, of corruption and cronyism on security of investments and economic effectivity. And as it's their money, they tend to be in the stronger position.

Generally, one shouldn't rely on news sources with all-cap words in their headlines. The alternate reality created by the Brexit camp in the British national press (by far the larger one) of course actually impacted the referendum, but has little bearing outside the UK. Otherwise, a disunited EU would have given in to a Britain indispensable for its economic needs long ago, then quietly crumbled as hopefully predicted for the last four years. At the very least, one should get some balance by including the rest of British media.

quote:

‘Fighting like ferrets in a bag’ as EU tries to plug Brexit cash hole

UK’s withdrawal has left £62bn hole in bloc’s purse for the next seven years

Daniel Boffey

Sun 16 Feb 2020 07.44 GMT

Presidents, prime ministers and chancellors across Europe will pack their bags later this week in preparation for a long weekend in Brussels. They won’t, however, be taking in the baroque majesty of the Grand Place or savouring the local culinary treats. Instead, they will be preparing for that most infamous of events, a “four shirter”, to use the clothes-packing gauge adopted by male diplomats to measure the length and horror of EU leaders’ summits in the Belgian capital. The thorny subject this time around? Money. And the problem? Britain.

The UK’s withdrawal from the European Union has left a huge €75bn (£62bn) hole in the bloc’s budget for the next seven years, 2021 to 2027. “And now we are fighting like ferrets in a sack,” said one EU diplomat with a sigh.

Covering items ranging from agricultural subsidies to science programmes and the EU’s efforts to combat the climate emergency, the new multi-annual financial framework (MFF) needs to be agreed by the leaders and an increasingly unpredictable European parliament before the end of the year. Without agreement, everything risks grinding to a halt in just nine months’ time, including the flow of cohesion funds, the cash dedicated to supporting the poorest member states.

Budget discussions in Brussels are always rancorous affairs. But this one is of a different order: everyone will have to pay more. No one wants to. EU capitals are bristling for a fight when they come to Brussels on Thursday for day one. Ominously for the diplomatic corps, an end date for the summit has not been fixed, but four days of talking are on the cards.

There are two main rivals in the budget battle. On one side are those who proudly describe themselves as “the Frugals” – the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden and Denmark (although there are some concerns within the camp that the new Austrian coalition government, being a bit Green now, has been lost to them, and that the Swedes are going soft). As the biggest net payers, the Frugals have been insisting on a budget of no more than 1% of the EU’s gross national income. The European commission’s initial proposal was for 1.1% – around €1.25tn over the seven years.

Then there are the “Friends of Cohesion”. “The Friends of Corruption, you mean?” spat one EU diplomat from a Frugal state.

The 15 under the FoC flag are the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Estonia, Croatia, Malta, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Lithuania, Latvia, Romania, Portugal and Greece.

The Frugals say that the commission’s €90bn in cuts to agriculture and cohesion funding are not enough. The FoC say they are being unfairly targeted and that the richer countries should cough up some more, setting up a battle between east and west.

The debate is all the more toxic as the commission has proposed that cohesion funds should also, in the future, be conditional on member states respecting the rule of law. It is a red rag to the bulls in the nationalist governments of Hungary and Poland, who are already in a battle with Brussels over their judicial reforms, among other issues.

Then there is France and Germany. Berlin’s main concern is that they don’t come out of it looking worse than the French. In Paris, the government just worries about how much cash is going to go to its farmers, said one senior EU official. The fragmentation of the national debates leaves it impossible to say what will happen, said a second official, with even Irish politics in turmoil following the election that has made Sinn Féin the second largest parliamentary party.

[...]

“In this negotiation, we are not expecting member states to be happy, but the degree of dissatisfaction will be key,” said a senior EU official. “No chance,” responded a Frugal diplomat. “There is not a lot to say, except we won’t pay. And as the Rolling Stones song goes, ‘Time is on my side’.”

https://www.theguardian.com/wo...et-talks-post-brexit

After the first week of negotiations about post-Brexit relations, things look fishy.

quote:

EU-UK Brexit talks: Differences clear after first week

By Adam Fleming BBC News, Brussels

5 March 2020

More than 100 British negotiators are heading home from Brussels after the first week of talks with the EU over the future relationship with the UK.

The two sides sound quite positive and appear to agree on some technicalities in areas like transport and energy.

But there are some big disagreements about some big things.

The two sides agree that their new free trade agreement should include measures to ensure fair economic competition between them.

The EU wants this to be done by referring to current EU standards in some policy areas - which are also UK standards - for now. They would be used as a "reference point" to judge whether future standards had changed or not.

The UK sees this as being asked to follow EU rules in perpetuity - "dynamic alignment by another name", said a British official. The Brits also think it would prove impossible to work out in five or 10 years' time whether new EU and British rules were similar or not.

Law enforcement

If the sensitive personal data of EU citizens, such as DNA or criminal records, is going to be shared with the UK for crime-fighting purposes, then the EU wants the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to be the ultimate arbiter of the rules.

The EU also wants the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to apply.

The UK does not want the ECJ to be mentioned anywhere in any deal. It also says that committing to the ECHR in an international agreement ties the government's hands at a time when it's carrying out its own review into the operation of human rights law in the UK.

Governance: One deal or many?

The UK says most countries interact with the EU via a series of separate agreements covering individual policy areas. Individual agreements come with their own terms and conditions and means of settling disputes. This would be the easiest way to manage different areas which have different needs, London argues.

The EU wants one large agreement with a standard mechanism for settling disagreements, with the option of referring questions of EU law to the European Court of Justice. This would be the easiest way to manage different areas with different needs, Brussels argues. It would also be easier to get through the European Parliament and national parliaments.

It might sound like a pedantic row but it's a binary choice with no room for compromise, which means it could collapse the whole process.

Fish

This is turning out to be a big disagreement.

The EU wants to "uphold" its current rights to fish in British waters, and for those rights to be protected for several years. In theory, this is to give some predictability to a precarious industry.

It also thinks this would avoid having to have annual negotiations over all the fish stocks that exist in British and European waters, which would be impractical.

The UK wants to apply a different model called zonal attachment, where the UK would have full control over access to its waters.

A senior EU official suggested that European governments would have to decide whether to change their approach if the UK doesn't change its position.

The UK suspects the EU is still operating under assumptions from the Theresa May era. EU diplomats fears the UK is preparing to walk out in a few months' time, and to blame it on Brussels.

Separately, the Joint Committee that oversees the Withdrawal Agreement will have its first meeting on 30 March. The EU is demanding proof that the UK is implementing the Ireland protocol, which requires special treatment for Northern Ireland.

Looming over it all is the threat of disruption from coronavirus. The negotiating teams haven't discussed what they would do in that case.

But they have stopped shaking hands, just in case.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51751030

Oh no! Cod Wars, Pt. 2??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars

quote:

Originally posted by Oat_Action_Man:
Oh no! Cod Wars, Pt. 2??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars

Most countries in the world have a 200 mile economic exclusion zone whereby they own and govern all economic activity (i.e. fishing) in that area. If there is less than 200 miles between countries then the line is split down the middle.

Why does the EU think they should have it differently?

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
I heard predictions that following Brexit, Britain would fall into chaos akin to Mad Max.

But things seem pretty quiet. So is anyone left alive over their?

Yup. I'm alive, and so are all the rest of us. Around forty guests at our monthly gun club guest day were also alive, and proved it by shooting me out of every single one of my Minié bullets.

Don't fret about us [as if], we're doing just fine.

Italy next???

March 29, 2020
Globalism gone bust: Italians burn EU flag, vow to leave EU over EU's lousy coronavirus response

Now that Italy has recorded its 10,000th coronavirus death, a third of the global total, and nearly a thousand just yesterday, Italians are questioning the value of globalism, and more specifically asking what good its European Union membership does it. Sentiment is soaring for getting out and going it alone. Britain did it, why not Italy?

Locals are now burning European Union flags, and Italian politicians are ramping up the talk about getting the heck out of the European Union altogether. I suspected this was going to happen during the Italian balcony singing event, noting that most of the songs sung were classical Italian songs, not global pop hits.

The horror has since increased in that country and here's what's now going around on Twitter:


David C Bannerman ✔
@DCBMEP

This is serious for EU. Italy one of 4 big nation states including U.K.

A new trend is spreading on social media among Italians

— Under the slogan "We will save ourselves", Italians burn the flag of the EU while playing the Italian national anthem


Millwall Division ATA ✔
@AtaDivision

People all over Italy are burning EU flags while playing the Italian anthem and posting videos of it with the hashtag #cisalviamodasoli which translates to 'we save ourselves'

Italy has been hit horrifically by Coronavirus and the European union are still demanding payments


The discontent has boiled right into the halls of the European Union, which one Italian pol is calling "a den of snakes and jackals," calling for an "Italexit" or an Italian pullout from the European Union altogether.

There's quite a bit of bitterness -- and it's quite sparsely reported, the most reliable source of which is the pro-Brexit Express of London:

Here's March 29, today:

The coronavirus pandemic has sparked an unprecedented crisis throughout the European Union, with a huge rift erupting between the 27 member-states. This week's failure to agree a joint EU economic response to the crisis has already set off a wave of furious criticism from leaders in Italy, Portugal and Spain. On Thursday, Germany, the Netherlands and other northern European countries rejected the plea of nine EU countries for so-called "corona-bonds" to soften the economic impact of the pandemic.

Following the heated exchanges, Italian newspaper headlines condemned the EU response, describing Brussels as "dead" and "ugly".

Former Italian Prime Minister and main opposition leader Matteo Salvini said Italy should consider leaving the European Union once the country wins its fight against the outbreak.

On Friday he tweeted: “First let's beat the virus, then think about Europe again. And, if necessary, say goodbye. Without even thanking it."

Translation: No $1,200 coronavirus checks for you. That has got to be painful for Italy which is suffering so severely in the open borders of the European Union.

Here's March 13:

Enrico Franceschini, the foreign correspondent for the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, warned Brussels response reignited fears of a resurgence of demands for Italexit.

Speaking to Sky News, Mr Franceschini said: "Italy expects more of Europe at this time.

"Christine Lagarde from the Cental Bank…people were very disappointed.

"Decisions have to show that we are in this all together otherwise Italians are warning we might have again people pushing for Italexit after Brexit."

Here's another March 13, over the European Central Bank's refusal to issue bonds to help Italy recover. Italy was told in this instance it was on its own.

Mr Trichet's comments came after his successor Christine Lagarde sparked controversy after failing to confirm the ECB will do "whatever it takes" to protect the eurozone from a potential recession sparked by the coronavirus pandemic.

Ms Lagarde confirmed the institution will roll out measures to support commercial bank lending, effectively signalling governments are responsible for protecting the economies of indebted eurozone countries rather than the ECBs.

There is an argument to be made that this is an external shock, not typical Italian government bad bookkeeping going on here, which could justify the issuance of bonds to be repaid when the economy returns to normal. Italy's being treated like a typical miscreant instead, which has got to be infuriating to them.

What the Italians have learned in this instance is that globalization, as personified by the European Union, has failed. In their hour of need, they're getting aid from places like Albania, Russia and Cuba, not their big EU neighbors. Oh, the Germans did send in a jet the other day for grave cases to be taken to Germany for treatment - but the plane houses 44. It's unlikely to make much difference given what Italy is up against.

Caroline Glick wrote a tremendous piece on the high cost of globalization, citing Israel but the lesson applies to every nation in terms of its survival:

The coronavirus pandemic won’t destroy global markets. But it will change them radically and reduce their size and scope. In the case of agriculture, the coronavirus has exposed large-scale vulnerabilities in both agricultural import models and domestic production. At the outset of the crisis, cargo ships laden with foodstuffs from China and Italy were laid up in the ports for weeks until port workers and the Health Ministry could develop protocols for safely offloading them. Dozens of shipments were diverted to Cyprus, at great cost to importers.

Who is to say that food supplies in China or other countries won’t be compromised again in the future? And what happens in the event of war? Naval warfare can easily endanger food imports to Israel over a prolonged period. The model of dependence on foreign suppliers needs to be adapted in the face of what we are learning.

Nowhere is that more evident than Italy, whose nationalistic moves against the EU - are effectively an effort to save itself from total destruction.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.co...e.html#ixzz6I5gHVgLZ

^^^^
Can you imagine the fiduciary damage to EU coffers of Italy followed the Brits? And the flood that will follow that?

Who wants to lay odds that there will be a push to delay Brexit further, with hopes of nullifying, under the pretext of the “pandemic” not allowing enough time for an orderly exit from the EU?

Italy turned to the Russians and China for help and supplies after the EU didn't step up.

Political Agenda is alive and well vs Helping the People

quote:

EU leaders to consider climate in coronavirus recovery plan

https://www.rt.com/newsline/48...oronavirus-recovery/

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
^^^^
Can you imagine the fiduciary damage to EU coffers of Italy followed the Brits? And the flood that will follow that?

Since Italy is a net contributor: Yeah, that would be bad news for Brussels. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest that might well signal the beginning of the end of the EU--at least in its present form.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
^^^^
Can you imagine the fiduciary damage to EU coffers of Italy followed the Brits? And the flood that will follow that?

And then France likely next.

Everybody is pushing his usual agenda in the crisis, not just in domestic US politics. In the EU, the debt socialization/unionization camp including France and Italy is back demanding "Corona bonds" rather than "Eurobonds" as back in the Euro crisis. In Hungary, old Viktor Orban is pushing legislation that would permit him to rule by decree in a state of emergency that could be extended indefinitely without parliament authorization.

Meanwhile the Russians are cranking out their usual agitprop seeking to fan divisions and destabilize the West; note that the bit about the EU including climate change in adressing the crisis above is by RT. I suspect that a lot of the circumstancial reports about immigrants making problems in quarantine measures is also amplified via their networks of social media, inofficial and official news sites.

Even more than Russia, China is of course now trying to portray itself as a helper rather than the source of the crisis where Western governments supposedly fail, trying to gain global influence. For good measure, I saw yesterday that the vegetarian/vegan crowd is seizing on the general mechanism of viruses emerging from the animal reservoir via meat consumption, which was to be expected. And so on.

As people lift their view from the corona crisis they find other business still unfinished.

quote:

May 15, 2020 / 2:29 PM / Updated 14 hours ago

UK, EU demand each other give ground in trade talks or risk no deal

Gabriela Baczynska, Guy Faulconbridge, Andrew MacAskill

BRUSSELS/LONDON (Reuters) - Britain and the European Union both demanded that the other side give ground in talks on a new post-Brexit trade deal or risk severe damage in tetchy exchanges after the latest bout of bargaining ended with scant progress on Friday.

The United Kingdom left the EU on Jan.31 but the main terms of its membership remain in place for a transition period until the end of this year, giving it time to negotiate a new free trade deal with the bloc.

Failure to reach a deal would convulse global trade just as the world aims to exit the coronavirus lockdown. But so far the talks have not gone well - and that was the only thing on which both sides agreed on Friday.

“We made very little progress towards agreement on the most significant outstanding issues between us,” UK chief negotiator David Frost said after a third week-long round of talks.

The main sticking point has been so-called “level playing field” rules to ensure fair competition. The EU says they are indispensible to ensure Britain does not undercut its standards, but which Britain rejects as binding it to European laws.

“As soon as the EU recognises that we will not conclude an agreement on that basis, we will be able to make progress,” Frost said. “We very much need a change in EU approach for the next round beginning on 1 June.”

EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier fired back by saying the talks have been “very disappointing” and heading for a stalemate unless London changed tack.

“There will be no agreement with the UK without a balanced agreement on fisheries and a proper, balanced agreement on level playing field,” Barnier told a news conference, adding he was determined to get a deal but no longer optimistic it was coming.

“We will not bargain away our values for the benefit of the British economy,” he said.

He accused London of trying to pick and chose the tastiest morsels of the EU’s single market but rejecting conditions for access all the 27 member states honour.

Sterling weakened on Friday as Brussels and London dug their heels in ahead of a key deadline at the end of June.

Both sides are then due to assess progress so far in talked aimed at agreeing trade deal with no tarifss or quotas on any goods, and agree on whether to extend the talks, which London has refused to do.

A senior British official said London proposed exploring no tariffs or quotas on 98-99% of goods instead. The EU said honing the detail of such an arrangement would take years and the bloc would still demand level playing field guarantees.

BREXIT NO DEAL?

After years of Brexit political chaos in London, investors and companies are trying to work out if London and Brussels are simply ratchetting up the rhetoric or are so far apart that there could be a cliff-edge at the end of 2020.

Time is ticking and the EU has a strict timetable, further complicated by the coronavirus pandemic, which has sapped resources and political attention on both sides of the English Channel, as well as complicating the Brexit talks dependant on intense horse-trading done face-to-face, rather than virtually.

With no extension of the negotiating time, the EU says any talks would need to wrap up around October to allow for ratification of any new deal by the EU parliament and the 27 national capitals.

The EU is pushing for a broader deal with Britain that would also cover open access to fishing waters, deep security ties, specific obligations on climate, human and labour rights.

London is mostly focused on a narrower trade deal and rejects the strings the EU would want to attach to a more ambitious new relationship as Prime Minister Boris Johnson - a leading Brexit campaigner - wants to take Britain out of the bloc’s orbit and away from the jurisdiction of its courts.

Goldman Sachs said it still expected a minimalistic trade deal to be sealed this year, which would give Johnson the opportunity to publicly declare his Brexit mission accomplished.

However, the investment bank also said unresolved issues could be pushed into a new “implementation phase” of any new trade deal, meaning some EU rules would continue applying to Britain beyond the end of this year. Negotiations on many aspects of a broader new relationship would de facto continue.

https://www.reuters.com/articl...o-deal-idUSKBN22R146

quote:

May 14, 2020 / 3:33 PM / 2 days ago

Any U.S. trade deal must work for whole of UK: PM's spokesman

LONDON (Reuters) - Any trade deal agreed with the United States must work for the whole of Britain including farmers and any imports must meet the country’s “stringent food safety standards”, a spokesman for Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Thursday.

Earlier, the Financial Times newspaper reported the British government was drawing up plans to cut tariffs on U.S. agricultural imports to advance progress on a trade deal despite concerns about the damage they could cause to British farming.

“We have been clear that any future deal with the U.S. must work for the whole of the UK including our farmers, consumers and companies,” the spokesman told reporters. “Without exception imports into the UK will meet our stringent food safety standards.”

https://www.reuters.com/articl...kesman-idUSKBN22Q26W

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
I heard predictions that following Brexit, Britain would fall into chaos akin to Mad Max.

But things seem pretty quiet. So is anyone left alive over their?

I'M ALIVE, I'M ALIVE!!!!!

HONESTLY!!!

WOULD I LIE TO YOU GUYS???????

I'd hope the US and the UK take advantage of this opportunity to increase and improve trade between us.

The UK could be sneaky and try to negotiate individual bilateral deals with EU members, going around the EU central government. I'd try with Italy, Spain, and maybe Poland first. This would have the effect of driving a wedge between those countries and Brussels.

No, the EU has sole competence for trade policy; that's what it was founded on. The UK already tried the divide and conquer approach during the actual Brexit negotiations, but the problem is that all members must agree to a deal. See Spain threatening a veto over Gibraltar, for example.