This analysis is ridiculous. Why should the EU give them a better deal just because there's no deadline? What extra concessions can Britain try to get by dragging this thing out? The EU is in the position right now of being able to say here's what we're offering, take it or leave it, no matter whether Britain drags it out or not.
Pretty sure the President Elect and Congress (and of the states remaining in the union) the new population majority would merely wave bye bye (NYC might be upset but who cares). As part of the deal we'd collect enough funds from them first to build the great western wall so they could enjoy their new (W)estern (U)nited (S)tates (WUS) in private... and we'd thoroughly enjoy our good ole USA.
Watch your mouth. Everyone in Britain knew the referendum wasn't binding. Cameron said he himself will honor the results but obviously he couldn't have spoken for everyone in the (new) government. Did you think the heads of government have the power of medieval kings? It might be the United Kingdom but things have changed, luckily.
What do you think this is, 10 pages of a buy/sell contract? There are reams of regulation to sift through or do you just think they should jump in without any game plan? UK gov't already has admitted they don't have enough people to complete this mammoth task at the moment. Your trading results must be terrible if that's how you do things.
The point of the article was that they would get a better deal by dragging it all out till later. I don't think that's true. I don't think the EU has any incentive to be more compliant the longer it goes on. Or didn't you even read the article and my response before you started flapping your gums? Apparently not. Talk about detrimental to trading results.
It makes sense to wait as they have an attempt at getting information from various EU leaders, this all takes time. And if they can sway some countries, the better. There is a reason why the EU heads are pushing for a quick exit, it's not because that's good for UK, it's because that's good for the EU. Read what the insiders are saying about Brexit, about the real pragmatic problems, not quoting some yellow trash paper like Daily Mail whose specialty is taking beach photos of B-list stars.
I can't believe how dumb you are. I literally can't believe it. You called it naive to expect the gov't to do what it said it was going to do after the referendum. But now, when the gov't says it will go through with Brexit sometime later, off in the future somewhere, you take it as gospel. You are not only a hypocrite, you are an idiot.
You mean the insiders who said the stock mkt would crash after brexit and the economy would tank? You call me naive and then you tell me to listen to those same charlatans. You're the king of naive.
Parliament voted on the European Union and Referendum Act of 2015, and it passed, setting in motion the Brexit vote. "In April 2016, after the bill was passed, the government circulated an advisory leaflet: "Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK". This leaflet clearly stated: "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide".[12]"-wikipedia This is what the people of the UK were told by the gov't. So far, they've done nothing but talk. I'll be surprised if they ever do anything but talk.