From what I remember the terms set by the EU would've put the UK in a worse position than what caused Brexit in the first place, making people steadily lean more and more towards a "just get it over with, no-deal Brexit".
The UK’s position “we want to keep free trade, but don’t want to abide to the rules that go with it, and there definitely can’t be a border between the UK and Ireland in Northern Ireland, but there must be one between Europe and the UK” won elections at home, but they never could have expected the EU to accept them.
- a brit.
At the start, Barnier's "negotiation" consisted of a series of demands of the form "after leaving, why don't you continue to obey us in all respects, except without any representation and oh, keep paying us lots of money: the only alternative is a Canada style free trade deal". He proposed this knowing Theresa May felt a simple Canada style deal wasn't acceptable.
BoJo replaced May and the first act after the leadership change was to go back to the EU and say - OK, we've thought about it and we'll take the Canada style deal.
Guess what? Suddenly Barnier decided actually a Canada style deal wasn't on the table after all. This, after years of using it as an example of the loosest possible outcome. Now the EU invented a new rule, that this kind of loose trade deal is only available to countries geographically far away. Why? Because screw Brexit, that's why. There's literally no justification for this.
As a Brit I've come to hold the EU in absolute contempt. It isn't interested in any kind of reasonable post-Brexit relationship. It's gambling everything on an attempt to crush British independence completely. At this point the EU's position is simply: stay in the EU or we won't work together on anything, anywhere at all. That's unacceptable. Time to go.
They don't have to be better than what caused the Brexit, they have to be better than a no-deal Brexit. Why would they expect to get better treatment by leaving than by staying?
The EU's position can be boiled down like this: if you're geographically in or close to Europe, you must submit to total control by the EU Commission and its courts or be frozen out of all intra-European collaboration completely. Any attempt at compromise just results in them starting to talk about cherries and cakes. It's been like that for years.
This is a problem because the EU is not a democratic body. There's a "parliament" but its members can't actually change EU law, and at any rate, a single parliament for all of Europe works about as well as you'd expect. For them to issue ultimatums to European populations of the form "submit entirely or we'll force other Europeans to shun you" is totalitarian and should be raising massive alarm bells around the world. UK today, but it could be your country tomorrow.
There is no exit that puts the UK in a better position because it imagines itself to have power and influence that it does not possess. Personally, I am now resigned to looking forward to no-deal Brexit so that the midlands, coastal fishing villages that should have ceased to exist decades ago, and rural counties can get the royal economic fucking they deserve.
Boris somehow thinks that by sucking up to Trump he is going to get some magic trade deal to save himself, but any deal needs to get through the US House and they are not even going to bother putting it on the calendar. Nothing will happen until the start of the Biden administration and since they will be focused on domestic issues and repairing frayed foreign ties in this first 100 days you are looking at nothing for at least a year. The UK is so hosed it is almost funny, but at least it will drive down London property prices...
It is standard negotiating OP by both sides. Just take a look at the Troika / Greece negotiations: breakthroughs come at the very last minute.
Extending the transition period merely lengthens the phoney negotiations.
> There is no exit that puts the UK in a better position because it imagines itself to have power and influence that it does not possess.
Viewed through an economic lens, Brexit will do damadge, certainly in the short term. Medium to long term depends on whether the Tories learn drop austerity and to love Keynes . It seems Sunak does, going by short record so far.
Viewed through a political / sovereignty lens the argument for Brexit is on a stronger footing.
Debts get repaid, one way (with repayment) or another (welshing and never being trusted again)
The UK has the advantage of printing its own currency so it can engage in monetary financing if the situation warrants it; an option not available to Euro economies.
I have my serious doubts. Spending large amounts of money wisely or blowing it wildly can look the same (HS2?) but the outcome is different.
> The UK has the advantage of printing its own currency
I'm not an economist - how does this work? Is this any different from a person getting indebted on a credit card? Honest question.
Austerity takes money out of a contracting economy making the situation worse, creating a vicious cycle, and whats worse hollowing out govt services (NHS, policing, education). Austerity is dangerous on a number of levels.
> Is this any different from a person getting indebted on a credit card? Honest question.
Yes, its completely different. Debt creates a liability, it needs to be paid back.
Monetary financing - aka helicopter money - is precisely the opposite.
The central bank "prints" money: it can be credited to the govt's account, or the CB can directly credit household bank accounts with money created from thin air. No new liabilities are created.
The problems with monetary financing is that it can get addictive; its use outside of situations of extreme economic distress is the biggest risk with its use.
Because it undermines CB policy and leads to hyper inflation and ruining the economy. Some CBs are legally proscribed from engaging in helicopter money for good reason.
> There have to be liabilities to it.
You mean balance sheet liabilities? None. The money is recorded as an asset "receivable" on CB balance sheet.
It does add up :D Japan has been doing it for a decade (for the wrong reasons unfortunately).
For layman overview; most mainstream financial news sites like the FT and Bloomberg do a good job:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-05/how-long-...
https://www.ft.com/content/fd1d35c4-7804-11ea-9840-1b8019d9a...