How do we think EU negotiations will go?
Discussion
///ajd said:
s2art said:
///ajd said:
Anyone care to name a UK export to RoW where our exports are currently strangled by EU trade conditions?
Wherever EU tariffs prevent a non-EU country from earning money from our purchasing their goods. Thus reducing the amount they can spend on purchasing our goods.Any examples where Foxy can create huge market gains by tearing down non-EU tariffs?
But the real reason we don't buy from them is because they don't buy from us so we don't have the money to buy from them.
Or something like that.
jsf said:
Switzerland has the most direct democracy in the developed world, many decisions at local and national level are carried through via referendum. I suggest the Swiss wont be agreeing with your position.
They will as they had a similar problem with their ref - they are doing a much better job of getting around theirs. They also managed to get SM access despite some tricky politics - as they realised it was so important to them economically.
On the whole they have managed their own, er, demographic related challenges, much better than the UK.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Oh well, never mind. I don't drink wine so wont benefit if tariffs are significantly reduced.
Tariffs on Chilean wine are already nil under an EU agreement. We'll do better to improve on that (perhaps cunning Foxy can get them to pay us to buy it?), though if we go WTO the tariffs will actually increase.
One of Daniel Hannan's finer cock ups.
///ajd said:
Let me put it another way - as post above - the way we can secure better trade with RoW countries is to step outside the current tariffs applied between EU/RoW countries on our exports.
Can you give me any examples?
Trade with RoW has been increasing whilst we are in the EU despite these terrible barriers that Foxy will pull down. Can you name any? Can't be that bad, can they?
Are you disputing that the EU charges import tariffs?Can you give me any examples?
Trade with RoW has been increasing whilst we are in the EU despite these terrible barriers that Foxy will pull down. Can you name any? Can't be that bad, can they?
https://tradebetablog.wordpress.com/2016/08/18/eu-...
///ajd said:
Tariffs on Chilean wine are already nil under an EU agreement.
We'll do better to improve on that (perhaps cunning Foxy can get them to pay us to buy it?), though if we go WTO the tariffs will actually increase.
One of Daniel Hannan's finer cock ups.
If we go to WTO all EU wine will be dearer. Prosecco lovers won't be happy.We'll do better to improve on that (perhaps cunning Foxy can get them to pay us to buy it?), though if we go WTO the tariffs will actually increase.
One of Daniel Hannan's finer cock ups.
PurpleMoonlight said:
///ajd said:
Tariffs on Chilean wine are already nil under an EU agreement.
We'll do better to improve on that (perhaps cunning Foxy can get them to pay us to buy it?), though if we go WTO the tariffs will actually increase.
One of Daniel Hannan's finer cock ups.
If we go to WTO all EU wine will be dearer. Prosecco lovers won't be happy.We'll do better to improve on that (perhaps cunning Foxy can get them to pay us to buy it?), though if we go WTO the tariffs will actually increase.
One of Daniel Hannan's finer cock ups.
NJH said:
Depends what you mean by confiscate ORD, you need to read what Article 17 says as there is lots of scope for governments to one way or the other take your property. The most obvious means for a socialist democratic government would be to crank up a massive LVT or rates rise, this would then force people out via "The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties."
Whichever site told you that art17 is good argument against EU; they lied to you. Same/similar is incorporated in any constitution around the world. Otherwise govts wouldn't be able to force compulsory purchases.
It's nothing to do with socialist. Unless you think that current UK govt is socialist, as they are using the same legislation at the moment to buy properties to make space for HS2.
Full text
Article 17 - Right to property said:
1. Everyone has the right to own, use, dispose of and bequeath his or her lawfully acquired possessions. No one may be deprived of his or her possessions, except in the public interest and in the cases and under the conditions provided for by law, subject to fair compensation being paid in good time for their loss. The use of property may be regulated by law in so far as is necessary for the general interest.
2. Intellectual property shall be protected.
2. Intellectual property shall be protected.
jsf said:
Only if we set a tariff on imported wine. If we set our WTO tariff at nil all wine will have to compete on an equal import cost formula, which will drive down prices and elevate quality as the differentiator.
Yes, true.It will be very interesting to see how committed the UK Government is to free trade when they set our WTO rates.
PurpleMoonlight said:
jsf said:
Only if we set a tariff on imported wine. If we set our WTO tariff at nil all wine will have to compete on an equal import cost formula, which will drive down prices and elevate quality as the differentiator.
Yes, true.It will be very interesting to see how committed the UK Government is to free trade when they set our WTO rates.
ORD said:
It would have to absolutely sky rocket to make good the many billions of pounds that leaving the EU will cost in the medium term.
I don't doubt that leaving the EU may confer benefits over the long term, in theory.
My pessimism arises from the likely combination of hard Brexit with a Corbyn government. There won't be much left of this country to grow once that has unfolded!
How much EU trade are you assuming is going to cease on exit? It's not going to be 100%. I think we can all agree on that. But beyond that?I don't doubt that leaving the EU may confer benefits over the long term, in theory.
My pessimism arises from the likely combination of hard Brexit with a Corbyn government. There won't be much left of this country to grow once that has unfolded!
I too fear a Corbyn government and think May was utterly stupid to call the election when she did. The likelihood of it ending as she wanted it to was slim even before she ran the campaign she did (our politicians have learnt NOTHING in the last 12mths - concentrate on what you're going to do to make things better rather than denigrate the opposition).
However...
- I do not believe we will see any horrific collapse as a result of Brexit in the next 5yrs
- Labour had Brexit on their manifesto
- much water has to go under the bridge in the EU yet beyond Brexit
- they have since come clean about other major aspects of their manifesto not being feasible
I am reasonably confident Corbyn has peaked. I'm also confident that the outcomes of Brexit will be nowhere near as heinous as many...chicken lickens...would have us believe (or perhaps even want). I think May will step down once the Brexit furore is history, say 2020. And hopefully by then we'll have a decent leader able to take the Tories through. Perhaps one who can then say "Brexit wasn't so bad, now to set to our deficit" with some positive policies.
But you know what...despite me being able to think of little worse than Corbyn in government, if that's what hand democracy deals then I'll handle it. It won't be Brexit that caused that. It will be the (then) opposition's competence to put forward a good argument.
Pan Pan Pan said:
alfie2244 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
No one provided a heavy burden of proof, about what would happen to the UK when it was duped into the EU via the EEC. If that burden of proof had been provided in 1975, it is quite likely that the referendum vote to remain or leave the EEC in 1975, would have been overwhelmingly for the UK to get out of the EEC.
The double standards applied by the remoaners is quite staggering, Not a single person in the UK voted, for, or was even given the chance to vote on whether or not they wanted the UK to be a member of the EU.
Yet now we have a situation where vastly more amounts of information were available for the citizens of the UK in the run up to the 2016 referendum, than was ever available to them in the 1975 EEC referendum, and the UK voted to leave the EU.
That would make the vote to leave the EU in in the 2016 referendum much more valid, than the dodgy, quite possibly illegal way the citizens of the UK were taken into the EU via the EEC without being given any vote on the matter.
I said much the same in this thread yesterday..........without looking back I think it is safe to say replies were minimal to say the leastThe double standards applied by the remoaners is quite staggering, Not a single person in the UK voted, for, or was even given the chance to vote on whether or not they wanted the UK to be a member of the EU.
Yet now we have a situation where vastly more amounts of information were available for the citizens of the UK in the run up to the 2016 referendum, than was ever available to them in the 1975 EEC referendum, and the UK voted to leave the EU.
That would make the vote to leave the EU in in the 2016 referendum much more valid, than the dodgy, quite possibly illegal way the citizens of the UK were taken into the EU via the EEC without being given any vote on the matter.
The more I see of the EU. the more it seems to align itself with the selective use of democracy carried out by the Nazis to justify their actions in the run up to WW2.
When it came to the 1971 "Great Debate" in Parliament much of the time was actually spent arguing about whether MPs were entitled to vote on an issue of such importance in a way that opposed the views of most of their constituents.The 2017 leave vote when the electorate were actually allowed to vote on the matter some 40+ years later shows, IMO, MP's were wrong to ignore their electorate's wishes in 1971and a wrong has now been righted, albeit 40+ years later.
///ajd said:
They will as they had a similar problem with their ref - they are doing a much better job of getting around theirs.
They also managed to get SM access despite some tricky politics - as they realised it was so important to them economically.
On the whole they have managed their own, er, demographic related challenges, much better than the UK.
"Getting around theirs" ain't over yet. They also managed to get SM access despite some tricky politics - as they realised it was so important to them economically.
On the whole they have managed their own, er, demographic related challenges, much better than the UK.
Ignoring referenda is a risky strategy for any government in a democratic country.
Now to the Swiss economy - can you spot any material differences to our position? I would think even you will be able to note at least a dozen which would indicate we should be able to secure a "better" deal.
Dr Jekyll said:
///ajd said:
Let me put it another way - as post above - the way we can secure better trade with RoW countries is to step outside the current tariffs applied between EU/RoW countries on our exports.
Can you give me any examples?
Trade with RoW has been increasing whilst we are in the EU despite these terrible barriers that Foxy will pull down. Can you name any? Can't be that bad, can they?
Are you disputing that the EU charges import tariffs?Can you give me any examples?
Trade with RoW has been increasing whilst we are in the EU despite these terrible barriers that Foxy will pull down. Can you name any? Can't be that bad, can they?
https://tradebetablog.wordpress.com/2016/08/18/eu-...
Don't get fixated on them selling to us to have money to buy our exports. This is free trade remember!
Edited by ///ajd on Sunday 23 July 15:38
Murph7355 said:
How much EU trade are you assuming is going to cease on exit? It's not going to be 100%. I think we can all agree on that. But beyond that?
I too fear a Corbyn government and think May was utterly stupid to call the election when she did. The likelihood of it ending as she wanted it to was slim even before she ran the campaign she did (our politicians have learnt NOTHING in the last 12mths - concentrate on what you're going to do to make things better rather than denigrate the opposition).
However...
- I do not believe we will see any horrific collapse as a result of Brexit in the next 5yrs
- Labour had Brexit on their manifesto
- much water has to go under the bridge in the EU yet beyond Brexit
- they have since come clean about other major aspects of their manifesto not being feasible
I am reasonably confident Corbyn has peaked. I'm also confident that the outcomes of Brexit will be nowhere near as heinous as many...chicken lickens...would have us believe (or perhaps even want). I think May will step down once the Brexit furore is history, say 2020. And hopefully by then we'll have a decent leader able to take the Tories through. Perhaps one who can then say "Brexit wasn't so bad, now to set to our deficit" with some positive policies.
But you know what...despite me being able to think of little worse than Corbyn in government, if that's what hand democracy deals then I'll handle it. It won't be Brexit that caused that. It will be the (then) opposition's competence to put forward a good argument.
I suspect the impact on UK-EU trade could be a hit of 5-10% perhaps more depending on how much the French and Germans etc. take advantage in any deal. They will play hard with FS for sure. It won't necessarily happen overnight.I too fear a Corbyn government and think May was utterly stupid to call the election when she did. The likelihood of it ending as she wanted it to was slim even before she ran the campaign she did (our politicians have learnt NOTHING in the last 12mths - concentrate on what you're going to do to make things better rather than denigrate the opposition).
However...
- I do not believe we will see any horrific collapse as a result of Brexit in the next 5yrs
- Labour had Brexit on their manifesto
- much water has to go under the bridge in the EU yet beyond Brexit
- they have since come clean about other major aspects of their manifesto not being feasible
I am reasonably confident Corbyn has peaked. I'm also confident that the outcomes of Brexit will be nowhere near as heinous as many...chicken lickens...would have us believe (or perhaps even want). I think May will step down once the Brexit furore is history, say 2020. And hopefully by then we'll have a decent leader able to take the Tories through. Perhaps one who can then say "Brexit wasn't so bad, now to set to our deficit" with some positive policies.
But you know what...despite me being able to think of little worse than Corbyn in government, if that's what hand democracy deals then I'll handle it. It won't be Brexit that caused that. It will be the (then) opposition's competence to put forward a good argument.
Even a 5% impact on EU trade would be a shedload of dosh lost - dwarfing the cost of being in the EU.
I doubt May will survive to Christmas let alone brexit being done. The unthinkable, a Corbyn govt, has been made possible only by brexit. He will destroy the country. His view on brexit on Marr was stark - more Human rights and more eco stuff than the EU (!).
Edited by ///ajd on Sunday 23 July 15:45
///ajd said:
Dr Jekyll said:
///ajd said:
Let me put it another way - as post above - the way we can secure better trade with RoW countries is to step outside the current tariffs applied between EU/RoW countries on our exports.
Can you give me any examples?
Trade with RoW has been increasing whilst we are in the EU despite these terrible barriers that Foxy will pull down. Can you name any? Can't be that bad, can they?
Are you disputing that the EU charges import tariffs?Can you give me any examples?
Trade with RoW has been increasing whilst we are in the EU despite these terrible barriers that Foxy will pull down. Can you name any? Can't be that bad, can they?
https://tradebetablog.wordpress.com/2016/08/18/eu-...
Don't get fixated on them selling to us to have money to buy our exports. This is free trade remember!
Donkey Of The Damned said:
I suspect something to do with beef will be high up on the Yanks' wish list. With the end of EU subsidies for British farmers and then direct competition with US mega ranches who can produce beef for a fraction of the cost, I have a feeling our farmers are in for a tougher time than anything our fishermen have been through.
That is just dropping tariffs to allow cheap imports.Where is the drive to reduce the tariffs applying to our goods to drive up our exports? E.g. get RR Ghost imports to India zero rated to boost sales. That sort of thing.
Any examples? Foxy must have loads of things like that on his wish list, otherwise how are these trade deals good for UK industry? Its not just to import cheaper widgets to put in our products to re export, is it.
///ajd said:
I suspect the impact on UK-EU trade could be a hit of 5-10% perhaps more depending on how much the French and Germans etc. take advantage in any deal. They will play hard with FS for sure. It won't necessarily happen overnight.
Even a 5% impact on EU trade would be a shedload of dosh lost - dwarfing the cost of being in the EU.
A 5% reduction in EU exports would be ~£12bn.Even a 5% impact on EU trade would be a shedload of dosh lost - dwarfing the cost of being in the EU.
The UK net contribution is ~£8.6bn.
The reduction of £12bn, assuming profit at 20% of sales and tax at 20% of profits means HMRC would forego £0.24bn of tax revenues, but the loss of sales is not just about profit and it also means a loss of work for employees at the firms losing the equity exports.
Of course, our currency has dropped, so even if the EU places tariffs on our goods, it will still be cheaper now for them to buy them than it was before the Brexit vote.
loafer123 said:
A 5% reduction in EU exports would be ~£12bn.
The UK net contribution is ~£8.6bn.
The reduction of £12bn, assuming profit at 20% of sales and tax at 20% of profits means HMRC would forego £0.24bn of tax revenues, but the loss of sales is not just about profit and it also means a loss of work for employees at the firms losing the equity exports.
Of course, our currency has dropped, so even if the EU places tariffs on our goods, it will still be cheaper now for them to buy them than it was before the Brexit vote.
Don't just focus on tax - its £12Bn of work, salaries, supply chain, income tax, flowing into the wider economy supporting local infra. The UK net contribution is ~£8.6bn.
The reduction of £12bn, assuming profit at 20% of sales and tax at 20% of profits means HMRC would forego £0.24bn of tax revenues, but the loss of sales is not just about profit and it also means a loss of work for employees at the firms losing the equity exports.
Of course, our currency has dropped, so even if the EU places tariffs on our goods, it will still be cheaper now for them to buy them than it was before the Brexit vote.
The impact of closing e.g. a steelworks is felt much more deeply than just the loss of corp tax.
I'm sure you must know this, but your post suggests not.
///ajd said:
Donkey Of The Damned said:
I suspect something to do with beef will be high up on the Yanks' wish list. With the end of EU subsidies for British farmers and then direct competition with US mega ranches who can produce beef for a fraction of the cost, I have a feeling our farmers are in for a tougher time than anything our fishermen have been through.
That is just dropping tariffs to allow cheap imports.Where is the drive to reduce the tariffs applying to our goods to drive up our exports? E.g. get RR Ghost imports to India zero rated to boost sales. That sort of thing.
Any examples? Foxy must have loads of things like that on his wish list, otherwise how are these trade deals good for UK industry? Its not just to import cheaper widgets to put in our products to re export, is it.
Can you really not understand that the benefit of trade is imports?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff