European Union - Ramifications
Discussion
audidoody said:
Scotland would have to kiss goodbye to £20 billion a year they get from the Treasury under the Barnett Formula. With oil prices in the toilet I doubt they will be voting to lose that any time soon. They'd also have to establish their own central bank to issue Euros.
Or maybe they just block the exit legislation in the Scottish Parliament. See other threads for details. This is going to be messy.Edited to add:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headline...
Edited by ou sont les biscuits on Sunday 26th June 17:44
What exactly are our strengths in negotiations after article 50 invoked?
It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
philv said:
What exactly are our strengths in negotiations after article 50 invoked?
It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
Worst case is WTO rules, 10% tariff. Which might increase the price of our exports by 10%, similar to normal currency fluctuations. Except that isn't the pound supposed to collapse? In which case export prices will drop by much more than 10%.It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
Hardly an apocalypse.
philv said:
What exactly are our strengths in negotiations after article 50 invoked?
It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
ISTR it took Greenland 3 years to negotiate an exit and all they had to talk about was fish. The EU deal with Canada kicked off in 2004 and still hasn't been ratified from what I can tell, and Obama has said we're at the back of the queue as far as a deal with the USA is concerned. I think it's probably safe to assume any immediate triggering of Article 50 would see us timing out and trading under WTO rules for quite a while.It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
Dr Jekyll said:
philv said:
What exactly are our strengths in negotiations after article 50 invoked?
It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
Worst case is WTO rules, 10% tariff. Which might increase the price of our exports by 10%, similar to normal currency fluctuations. Except that isn't the pound supposed to collapse? In which case export prices will drop by much more than 10%.It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
Hardly an apocalypse.
Not sure the current bit offsets like that so simply.
I wonder how many of ten 35 million voters know any of tne answers.
Edited by philv on Sunday 26th June 18:25
philv said:
Dr Jekyll said:
philv said:
What exactly are our strengths in negotiations after article 50 invoked?
It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
Worst case is WTO rules, 10% tariff. Which might increase the price of our exports by 10%, similar to normal currency fluctuations. Except that isn't the pound supposed to collapse? In which case export prices will drop by much more than 10%.It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
Hardly an apocalypse.
ou sont les biscuits said:
ISTR it took Greenland 3 years to negotiate an exit and all they had to talk about was fish. The EU deal with Canada kicked off in 2004 and still hasn't been ratified from what I can tell, and Obama has said we're at the back of the queue as far as a deal with the USA is concerned. I think it's probably safe to assume any immediate triggering of Article 50 would see us timing out and trading under WTO rules for quite a while.
But then this:http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/683117/US-an...
Can't say for sure, but it seems that the three above want to maintain trade relations with the UK post-Brexit. If that's true it certainly supercedes your Obama 'quote' above and should also guarantee that it isn't again used as an argument...but it won't.
Cherry picking quotes and continually quoting mistruths (genuinely not directed at anyone
) is adding nothing to the discussion. Anybody who is serious about understanding the implications of the Brexit argument has to make a concerted effort to read and digest both sides of the argument. I'd argue that some haven't and, as a result, only search out information which confirms their predetermined position.FWIW, I don't believe the above article is definitive, but it goes some way to addressing some of the oft-quoted scaremongering. What it also shows is that the leader of the free world has also, potentially, made a u-turn on his initial assessments. Nobody knows for sure and very few people understand the real implications.
The only conclusion I can draw is that I should absolutely NOT trust anybody who states that they 100% know the correct answer, because they don't!
Edited by pushthebutton on Sunday 26th June 18:54
philv said:
What exactly are our strengths in negotiations after article 50 invoked?
It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
You do understand that the EU has asked to start these negotiations ASAP? They are in a hurry, the UK is not.It seems to me we have 2 years and then WTO rules, which would screw us.
So the EU can stall and at the last minute make us sign whatever they want.
Ten EU are experts in trade negotiations.
We are not. We don't do it. The EU does.
This will end very badly.
We have no Negotiators? Seriously? Are you aware of the enormous exclusive exemptions that are available to the UK? Were they pure luck?
About time you had a wee bit more confidence in your Country.
ou sont les biscuits said:
ISTR it took Greenland 3 years to negotiate an exit and all they had to talk about was fish. The EU deal with Canada kicked off in 2004 and still hasn't been ratified from what I can tell, and Obama has said we're at the back of the queue as far as a deal with the USA is concerned. I think it's probably safe to assume any immediate triggering of Article 50 would see us timing out and trading under WTO rules for quite a while.
It's not safe to assume that at all.It all depends what you have to offer.
pushthebutton said:
But then this:
http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/683117/US-an...
Can't say for sure, but it seems that the three above want to maintain trade relations with the UK post-Brexit. If that's true it certainly supercedes your Obama 'quote' above and should also guarantee that it isn't again used as an argument...but it won't.
Cherry picking quotes and continually quoting mistruths (genuinely not directed at anyone) is adding nothing to the discussion. Anybody who is serious about understanding the implications of the Brexit argument has to make a concerted effort to read and digest both sides of the argument. I'd argue that some haven't and, as a result, only search out information which confirms their predetermined position.
FWIW, I don't believe the above article is definitive, but it goes some way to addressing some of the oft-quoted scaremongering. What it also shows is that the leader of the free world has also, potentially, made a u-turn on his initial assessments. Nobody knows for sure and very few people understand the real implications.
The only conclusion I can draw is that I should absolutely NOT trust anybody who states that they 100% know the correct answer, because they don't!
From the Sunday Express?http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/683117/US-an...
Can't say for sure, but it seems that the three above want to maintain trade relations with the UK post-Brexit. If that's true it certainly supercedes your Obama 'quote' above and should also guarantee that it isn't again used as an argument...but it won't.
Cherry picking quotes and continually quoting mistruths (genuinely not directed at anyone
) is adding nothing to the discussion. Anybody who is serious about understanding the implications of the Brexit argument has to make a concerted effort to read and digest both sides of the argument. I'd argue that some haven't and, as a result, only search out information which confirms their predetermined position.FWIW, I don't believe the above article is definitive, but it goes some way to addressing some of the oft-quoted scaremongering. What it also shows is that the leader of the free world has also, potentially, made a u-turn on his initial assessments. Nobody knows for sure and very few people understand the real implications.
The only conclusion I can draw is that I should absolutely NOT trust anybody who states that they 100% know the correct answer, because they don't!
Edited by pushthebutton on Sunday 26th June 18:54
Do me a favour.
Jockman said:
You do understand that the EU has asked to start these negotiations ASAP? They are in a hurry, the UK is not.
The only angle I can think of is to say 'OK, you want us to hit Article 50 and quit asap, fine, then just sign these deals wot I have here (pushes piece of A4 across table) and we'll press the button.'It's not a strong hand TBH, especially when you have 27 countries to appease all at once. And the easier they make it for us, the more Europeans will queue for referendums. Exactly what the EU fears most.
I'm sure there's a board game to be invented from it - a cross between 'Monopoly' and 'Colditz'.
Simpo Two said:
Jockman said:
You do understand that the EU has asked to start these negotiations ASAP? They are in a hurry, the UK is not.
The only angle I can think of is to say 'OK, you want us to hit Article 50 and quit asap, fine, then just sign these deals wot I have here (pushes piece of A4 across table) and we'll press the button.'It's not a strong hand TBH, especially when you have 27 countries to appease all at once. And the easier they make it for us, the more Europeans will queue for referendums. Exactly what the EU fears most.
I'm sure there's a board game to be invented from it - a cross between 'Monopoly' and 'Colditz'.
We could do with an agreement before invoking article 50.
Once we invoke, we are at a big disadvantage re time, they are not.
At the moment, we should wait.
ou sont les biscuits said:
pushthebutton said:
But then this:
http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/683117/US-an...
Can't say for sure, but it seems that the three above want to maintain trade relations with the UK post-Brexit. If that's true it certainly supercedes your Obama 'quote' above and should also guarantee that it isn't again used as an argument...but it won't.
Cherry picking quotes and continually quoting mistruths (genuinely not directed at anyone) is adding nothing to the discussion. Anybody who is serious about understanding the implications of the Brexit argument has to make a concerted effort to read and digest both sides of the argument. I'd argue that some haven't and, as a result, only search out information which confirms their predetermined position.
FWIW, I don't believe the above article is definitive, but it goes some way to addressing some of the oft-quoted scaremongering. What it also shows is that the leader of the free world has also, potentially, made a u-turn on his initial assessments. Nobody knows for sure and very few people understand the real implications.
The only conclusion I can draw is that I should absolutely NOT trust anybody who states that they 100% know the correct answer, because they don't!
From The Sunday Express?http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/683117/US-an...
Can't say for sure, but it seems that the three above want to maintain trade relations with the UK post-Brexit. If that's true it certainly supercedes your Obama 'quote' above and should also guarantee that it isn't again used as an argument...but it won't.
Cherry picking quotes and continually quoting mistruths (genuinely not directed at anyone
) is adding nothing to the discussion. Anybody who is serious about understanding the implications of the Brexit argument has to make a concerted effort to read and digest both sides of the argument. I'd argue that some haven't and, as a result, only search out information which confirms their predetermined position.FWIW, I don't believe the above article is definitive, but it goes some way to addressing some of the oft-quoted scaremongering. What it also shows is that the leader of the free world has also, potentially, made a u-turn on his initial assessments. Nobody knows for sure and very few people understand the real implications.
The only conclusion I can draw is that I should absolutely NOT trust anybody who states that they 100% know the correct answer, because they don't!
Edited by pushthebutton on Sunday 26th June 18:54
MarshPhantom said:
The Brexiteer's Bible.
Obama didn't say it? Merkel hasn't said what she's said? They'll do whatever is in the interests of their country. No more or less relevant than the quotes that've been used, but it does turn the cherry pick in to a fruit pick for a less myopic view.Here's a Guardian link for you:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/br...
ETA Link
Edited by pushthebutton on Sunday 26th June 21:54
Simpo Two said:
Jockman said:
You do understand that the EU has asked to start these negotiations ASAP? They are in a hurry, the UK is not.
It's not a strong hand TBH, especially when you have 27 countries to appease all at once.....smifffymoto said:
I think the bigger problem now rather than Brexit is the implosion of UK polictically parties and the UK now appearing to be a rudderless ship.
There is a lot of uncertainty which markets tend to hate and it won't encourage large corporations to invest whilst the relationship with the EU is up in the air, on the other hand Belgium survived without a government for quite a while.Well Osborne didn't sound like he plans on packing up any time soon, made some promising noises to start with then I got bored of his waffle. Probably just enough to calm people down, but the political headlessness will be at the fore and the longer it lasts, the greater the pressure
smifffymoto said:
I think the bigger problem now rather than Brexit is the implosion of UK polictically parties and the UK now appearing to be a rudderless ship.
Agreed; we've heard from everyone except Boris who we expect, and by rights jolly well ought to, lead us through this. Instead Sturgeon has stolen the headlines and caused extra trouble. We need to see a viable Leave government starting to make real plans.And please, no more bloody Guardian links. Not are they only incredibly unhelpful, my FB feed is full of aggrieved Remainders firing them about like stucco.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff