The economic consequences of Brexit

[PurpleMoonlight]

Digga said:

Re-read your dismissal, out of hand, of a comment made on this thread. You seem to think it's okay to arrive on this forum with half-resolved opinions, despite having no actual skin in the game WRT to this topic, and tell people how it is, without any thought for a.) who you're engaging with and b.) how you're tangents disrupt the thread. Give it a break.

You may not like my opinion but I am entitled to it nonetheless. And posting it is not insolent in any way.

Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Wednesday 7th December 13:16

[Mrr T]

Digga said:

sidicks said:

Mrr T said:

I think you will find little difference between most products sold in the UK and those in the rest of the EU. The only obvious difference is plugs on electrical goods but most of these now are just adapters.

Even UK cars are most likely 95% similar to the same car sold in the rEU.

I think you miss the point regarding cars!

This is a motoring forum, you can't expect people to understand simple things about cars.

(I knew what you meant, I don't think it was the least big ambiguous, but clearly I'm wrong.)

Ever heard of irony?

[s2art]

sidicks said:

However, a UK car is not really a substitute for a French car or a German car etc etc

Only at the 'special' end. Car magazine, decades ago, started to refer to the bulk of cars as 'white goods'.

[JawKnee]

London424 said:

Finally someone raised the question at PMQ's about there has been a lot of talk about how much we might have to pay to access the EU...but not a lot on how much they would have to pay to access the UK.

Why would they pay to access the UK? We need them more than they need us.

[Digga]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Digga said:

Re-read your dismissal, out of hand, of a comment made on this thread. You seem to think it's okay to arrive on this forum with half-resolved opinions, despite having no actual skin in the game WRT to this topic, and tell people how it is, without any thought for a.) who you're engaging with and b.) how you're tangents disrupt the thread. Give it a break.

You may not like my opinion but I am entitled to it nonetheless. And posting it is not insolent in any way.

Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Wednesday 7th December 13:16

I was not the only one who found your response fatuous. I'd stop digging if I were you.

[andymadmak]

JawKnee said:

London424 said:

Finally someone raised the question at PMQ's about there has been a lot of talk about how much we might have to pay to access the EU...but not a lot on how much they would have to pay to access the UK.

Why would they pay to access the UK? We need them more than they need us.

That is not strictly true.

[sidicks]

s2art said:

Only at the 'special' end. Car magazine, decades ago, started to refer to the bulk of cars as 'white goods'.

Still disagree.

[anonymous-user]

RYH64E said:

jsf said:

RYH64E said:

I think the stumbling block is that the EU will be saying free movement and single market access go together, the UK want single market without free movement.

Canada does not now have free movement of people with the EU post CETA.
Canada now has a free trade agreement with the EU.
Canada's trade with the EU is not as important to the EU as the UK's trade.
The EU are in serious trouble if they cut off UK sourced financing.

So you're expecting negotiations to go well then? The EU will realise that they need us more than we need them and give us what we want?

What it will come down to is what the key decision makers want most. These decision makers are not the EU officials, they are the heads of state.

The choice they have to make is how important it is to their country, not the EU, to retain a good working relationship with the UK, how much they need our trade, finance, defence capability, intelligence capability and influence.

I don't care what the EU presidents think or want, they are irrelevant when it comes down to the brass tacks of how this will play out.

You now have a Europe that is desperate for finance, they are in the process of opening up the market to the world, I wouldn't be surprised if the compromise that comes with that is they fast track that legislation whilst they refuse us passporting. That way they look to have won a battle without changing anything material as the City could access the market via the new system. If they don't do that they are knackered, they cant lose the UK expertise in finance and insurance without destroying their economies.

Right now the Eastern states are very concerned about Russia, the last thing they can afford is to ps off the UK as both the UK and USA, who are going to be strong allies in the coming years post leaving the EU, are covering their backs, both militarily and diplomatically.

The EU countries heads of state will be committing political suicide if they don't come up with a workable agreement that doesn't impact on their citizens, the EU itself, who cares what they think, they are not as important as they think they are.

[williamp]

andymadmak said:

JawKnee said:

London424 said:

Finally someone raised the question at PMQ's about there has been a lot of talk about how much we might have to pay to access the EU...but not a lot on how much they would have to pay to access the UK.

Why would they pay to access the UK? We need them more than they need us.

That is not strictly true.

we need each other. We are still seen as "treasure island" by the car manufacturers:

http://www.eagleaid.com/AID-Newsletter-preorder-15...

yes we export more cars then almost any time in our history. I still think we need to think globally, and not just within the EU

[PurpleMoonlight]

Digga said:

I was not the only one who found your response fatuous. I'd stop digging if I were you.

You were the only one unnecessarily aggressive in your reply though.

Without disagreement there is no debate.

[alock]

jsf said:

What it will come down to is what the key decision makers want most. These decision makers are not the EU officials, they are the heads of state.

If we get a good deal, then the remain argument about democracy and sovereignty was more accurate. i.e. member parliaments being able to influence the EU for their own benefit.

If we get a bad deal, then the leave argument about democracy and sovereignty was more accurate. i.e. member parliaments have little influence over a EU wanting to punish us.

It's a win-win for both sides and a lose-lose for both side

[Burwood]

jsf said:

RYH64E said:

jsf said:

RYH64E said:

I think the stumbling block is that the EU will be saying free movement and single market access go together, the UK want single market without free movement.

Canada does not now have free movement of people with the EU post CETA.
Canada now has a free trade agreement with the EU.
Canada's trade with the EU is not as important to the EU as the UK's trade.
The EU are in serious trouble if they cut off UK sourced financing.

So you're expecting negotiations to go well then? The EU will realise that they need us more than we need them and give us what we want?

What it will come down to is what the key decision makers want most. These decision makers are not the EU officials, they are the heads of state.

The choice they have to make is how important it is to their country, not the EU, to retain a good working relationship with the UK, how much they need our trade, finance, defence capability, intelligence capability and influence.

I don't care what the EU presidents think or want, they are irrelevant when it comes down to the brass tacks of how this will play out.

You now have a Europe that is desperate for finance, they are in the process of opening up the market to the world, I wouldn't be surprised if the compromise that comes with that is they fast track that legislation whilst they refuse us passporting. That way they look to have won a battle without changing anything material as the City could access the market via the new system. If they don't do that they are knackered, they cant lose the UK expertise in finance and insurance without destroying their economies.

Right now the Eastern states are very concerned about Russia, the last thing they can afford is to ps off the UK as both the UK and USA, who are going to be strong allies in the coming years post leaving the EU, are covering their backs, both militarily and diplomatically.

The EU countries heads of state will be committing political suicide if they don't come up with a workable agreement that doesn't impact on their citizens, the EU itself, who cares what they think, they are not as important as they think they are.

agree with everything you say and i have said it from day 1. we will get a deal that stops free migration and the single market. Most of the Remainers here are only concerned about their personal situation. They know migration is out of control but would rather maintain their profits. You would think the worse case scenario is something like £500k profit to £100k. If you think that you are a very poor businessman. Im more than prepared to make a 20% hit for the greater good but i don't think there will be any such hit.

[London424]

JawKnee said:

London424 said:

Finally someone raised the question at PMQ's about there has been a lot of talk about how much we might have to pay to access the EU...but not a lot on how much they would have to pay to access the UK.

Why would they pay to access the UK? We need them more than they need us.

For the same reason that we need to pay to access their market. Apparently that's the way people are thinking. If we want to access the EU we will have to pay. On the flip side of that, how much are the EU willing to pay to access the 5th largest economy in the world?.

[ben5575]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Digga said:

Listen son, I know more about down-to-the-wire negotiations than you know about Balamory. I was sitting in meetings with barristers on both sides, while you were still trying to colour between the lines. Wind your pencil-neck in.

Why the aggression?

Because losing your temper at unknown people on the internet is born from years of hard, top level negotiation

Tantrum aside, Digga is absolutely correct in terms of negotiation stance.

[don4l]

JawKnee said:

Why would they pay to access the UK? We need them more than they need us.

Utter, utter baloney!

[PurpleMoonlight]

London424 said:

For the same reason that we need to pay to access their market. Apparently that's the way people are thinking. If we want to access the EU we will have to pay. On the flip side of that, how much are the EU willing to pay to access the 5th largest economy in the world?.

I don't believe we will need to pay to sell goods and services to the EU. That would only come with membership of the single market and that currently appears very unlikely. We will eventually end up with a trade agreement, possibly with free trade but who knows.

It is a possibility we may continue to fund the EU for a while post our leaving though, rather like spousal maintenance if you like.

[walm]

williamp said:

I still think we need to think globally, and not just within the EU

Absolutely.
And before Brexit no one had thought to sell to a country outside the EU.
It just didn't happen.

Now we desperately need to find new trading partners so we can just call up all those countries we didn't know existed until 24th June this year.

Thank goodness - you solved it!

[andymadmak]

walm said:

Absolutely.
And before Brexit no one had thought to sell to a country outside the EU.
It just didn't happen.

Now we desperately need to find new trading partners so we can just call up all those countries we didn't know existed until 24th June this year.

Thank goodness - you solved it!

Not quite. But of course what we CAN do once we leave the EU is to strike trade deals with other countries - deals that would be mutually beneficial to us. This would be more likely to happen quickly because the UK would represent the UK in those negotiations, rather than being represented by someone else who, in the final analysis still has to get the agreement of the 28 people he is representing before he can sign any deal.

So, more trade deals with more countries ( I think we can confidently state the the FCO knows about the existence of a fairly high percentage of the important countries on planet earth.. )

[walm]

andymadmak said:

Not quite. But of course what we CAN do once we leave the EU is to strike trade deals with other countries - deals that would be mutually beneficial to us.

That's true, of course and will certainly help.
Nevertheless, it's not like Brits have been sitting on their arses just dealing with EU trade.

[confused_buyer]

andymadmak said:

Not quite. But of course what we CAN do once we leave the EU is to strike trade deals with other countries - deals that would be mutually beneficial to us.

That is dependent on whether we leave the Customs Union or not. Leaving the EU but not the Customs Union would prevent us from doing that.