How do we think EU negotiations will go?
Discussion
Dr Jekyll said:
Actually another way for Greece to have a chance would be for Germany to leave the Euro, then the Euro would devalue to a level more appropriate for the siesta states. Won't happen though.
True. Mind you the odds are currently that eventually everyone will leave the Euro unless the EU, or at the least the Eurozone countries, become a single superstate.jjlynn27 said:
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.
http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia/article/17-ri...
You need to click on the box titled Explanations. Another direct quote from within that text:
"Source:
Official Journal of the European Union C 303/17 - 14.12.2007
Comment:
These explanations were originally prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Although they do not as such have the status of law, they are a valuable tool of interpretation intended to clarify the provisions of the Charter."
Otherwise I am not sure what on earth the point is you are trying to make.
Nobody said anything about Article 17 being a point for or against Brexit.
A previous poster posited the idea that the EU stops left wing governments from taking property for their various causes, the EUs own text makes it clear that this is not really the case as there is plenty of scope for governments to find perfectly legal ways to take property from people.
Maybe if you engage brain first before jumping on people like a prat we might actually be able to have a useful debate.
Nothingtoseehere said:
ORD said:
What are you on about?
I feel terribly sorry for the Greek people. But Brexit will only make their fate worse - a poorer EU will be less willing to forgive debt.
The fact remains that, as the poster observes, Greece has never been a properly functioning economy, and its people have indeed lived vastly beyond their mean. Not to say you cannot feel sympathy for them and think that they shouldn't have been allowed to get jnto such a deplorable state.
If brexit is going to be so bad for the southern states you would have thought Cameron would come back with quite some concessions.I feel terribly sorry for the Greek people. But Brexit will only make their fate worse - a poorer EU will be less willing to forgive debt.
The fact remains that, as the poster observes, Greece has never been a properly functioning economy, and its people have indeed lived vastly beyond their mean. Not to say you cannot feel sympathy for them and think that they shouldn't have been allowed to get jnto such a deplorable state.
Makes you think they don't give a toss...
Donkey Of The Damned said:
And BOOM, our trade deficit widens further.
The wailing by Brexiters for the fishermen were merely crocodile tears if at the same time they are happy for our beef producers to be massively undercut by another country, lose their subsidies at the same time as finding it harder to sell to its largest foreign market, the Eurozone.
The fishermen were in trouble because the EU effectively confiscated UK fishing grounds, they aren't asking for a subsidy.The wailing by Brexiters for the fishermen were merely crocodile tears if at the same time they are happy for our beef producers to be massively undercut by another country, lose their subsidies at the same time as finding it harder to sell to its largest foreign market, the Eurozone.
If the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country. Look at how New Zealand benefited when they scrapped farm subsidies.
Far more sensible to let the fishermen fish their fishing grounds and let the farmers graze their cattle with the minimum of state interference. If they make a profit great, if not they can do what everyone else has to do and find another business.
Tuna said:
I wouldn't disagree that barriers to trade with the EU may increase. However, we're talking percentage points here, not cessation of any trade.
What you see as 'blindingly obvious' takes you to a position where trade barriers terminally harm the UK economy. Whereas I'm watching the financial upsets we've seen over the last few years and think we can weather the storm - and even come out stronger at the end of it.
It also feels that a 'local' trading block is fantastically less relevant since global trading has genuinely transformed the landscape over the last couple of decades.
So I can agree with your start point - yes, trading conditions will change - but then I can't see your working (which you keep calling 'blindingly obvious' without much justification) that gets you from a change in conditions to a change our economy cannot absorb.
The bible of the Remoaners The Economist had another good moan about Brexit this week.What you see as 'blindingly obvious' takes you to a position where trade barriers terminally harm the UK economy. Whereas I'm watching the financial upsets we've seen over the last few years and think we can weather the storm - and even come out stronger at the end of it.
It also feels that a 'local' trading block is fantastically less relevant since global trading has genuinely transformed the landscape over the last couple of decades.
So I can agree with your start point - yes, trading conditions will change - but then I can't see your working (which you keep calling 'blindingly obvious' without much justification) that gets you from a change in conditions to a change our economy cannot absorb.
They claim that reverting to WTO rules will cut annual income per person by..................2.6%.
What price freedom?, well it actually seems to be foregoing one year's pay rise rather than the apocalypse.
Dr Jekyll said:
The fishermen were in trouble because the EU effectively confiscated UK fishing grounds, they aren't asking for a subsidy.
If the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country. Look at how New Zealand benefited when they scrapped farm subsidies.
Far more sensible to let the fishermen fish their fishing grounds and let the farmers graze their cattle with the minimum of state interference. If they make a profit great, if not they can do what everyone else has to do and find another business.
UK consumers spend £3Bn on beef a yearIf the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country. Look at how New Zealand benefited when they scrapped farm subsidies.
Far more sensible to let the fishermen fish their fishing grounds and let the farmers graze their cattle with the minimum of state interference. If they make a profit great, if not they can do what everyone else has to do and find another business.
80% is domestically produced.
We export 24,000 tons of beef, mainly to the EU (not UK, typo).
Not sure its a good idea to throw it under the bus along with FS - do you really want your steak or burger to be a tiny bit cheaper and destroy a domestic industry employing thousands.
Eye opening these posts, aren't they?
Edited by ///ajd on Sunday 23 July 21:01
spaximus said:
I am in Corfuatthe moment and speaking with a few Greek people they wish that they had a chance to vote on leaving the EU. As they see it the Germans tried to make them subjects by force and now are doing the same by economics.
They feel that they are being forced to accept what they do not want and have no say on anything of rel matter now.
With youth unemployment high, across Greece, they are taking more economic migrants than ever and no one seems to want to help in Kos for example, with the huge numbers they are seeing.
They accept that there is a need to pay their taxes, something they have avoided for years and to reform but it would be worth it to get back control that others now have.
They understand that we are to be punished as keeping the EU together is all that others want. Tensions are growing in these southern states as more people arrive in Italy and countries like Hungary refuse to accept their quota.
We will sort things out and for sure normal people do not see us as stupid for wanting out.
Everything in your story is as factual as this line; 'They accept that there is a need to pay their taxes'.They feel that they are being forced to accept what they do not want and have no say on anything of rel matter now.
With youth unemployment high, across Greece, they are taking more economic migrants than ever and no one seems to want to help in Kos for example, with the huge numbers they are seeing.
They accept that there is a need to pay their taxes, something they have avoided for years and to reform but it would be worth it to get back control that others now have.
They understand that we are to be punished as keeping the EU together is all that others want. Tensions are growing in these southern states as more people arrive in Italy and countries like Hungary refuse to accept their quota.
We will sort things out and for sure normal people do not see us as stupid for wanting out.
Dr Jekyll said:
If the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country.
While you may think it's great to lose all home production and import cheap alternatives, what about when those cheap alternatives decide to substantially increase their price because they no longer have any competition?///ajd said:
Dr Jekyll said:
The fishermen were in trouble because the EU effectively confiscated UK fishing grounds, they aren't asking for a subsidy.
If the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country. Look at how New Zealand benefited when they scrapped farm subsidies.
Far more sensible to let the fishermen fish their fishing grounds and let the farmers graze their cattle with the minimum of state interference. If they make a profit great, if not they can do what everyone else has to do and find another business.
UK consumers spend £3Bn on beef a yearIf the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country. Look at how New Zealand benefited when they scrapped farm subsidies.
Far more sensible to let the fishermen fish their fishing grounds and let the farmers graze their cattle with the minimum of state interference. If they make a profit great, if not they can do what everyone else has to do and find another business.
80% is domestically produced.
Not sure its a good idea to throw it under the bus along with FS.
Eye opening these posts, aren't they?
NJH said:
jjlynn27 said:
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.
http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia/article/17-ri...
You need to click on the box titled Explanations. Another direct quote from within that text:
"Source:
Official Journal of the European Union C 303/17 - 14.12.2007
Comment:
These explanations were originally prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Although they do not as such have the status of law, they are a valuable tool of interpretation intended to clarify the provisions of the Charter."
Otherwise I am not sure what on earth the point is you are trying to make.
Nobody said anything about Article 17 being a point for or against Brexit.
A previous poster posited the idea that the EU stops left wing governments from taking property for their various causes, the EUs own text makes it clear that this is not really the case as there is plenty of scope for governments to find perfectly legal ways to take property from people.
Maybe if you engage brain first before jumping on people like a prat we might actually be able to have a useful debate.
You used article 17 as a way of in your words; 'lots of scope for governments to one way or the other take your property'.
I've linked you exact text of article 17 and explained to you why you were wrong. EU, if anything, is adding additional level of protection to citizens via supra-national body.
You could say 'Thanks', or you could get angry. Your call, sweet-cheeks.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Dr Jekyll said:
If the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country.
While you may think it's great to lose all home production and import cheap alternatives, what about when those cheap alternatives decide to substantially increase their price because they no longer have any competition?and we can grow wheat and root crops ...
powerstroke said:
Yes very , more proof if needed you should shut your bum and let your mouth have a go instead ,
Power my old mucker, is this where I remind you about your inspired idea to turn bankers into fisherman?We all know you were serious, it is now part of PH brexit folklore.
Poor old powerstroke.
Dr Jekyll said:
Donkey Of The Damned said:
And BOOM, our trade deficit widens further.
The wailing by Brexiters for the fishermen were merely crocodile tears if at the same time they are happy for our beef producers to be massively undercut by another country, lose their subsidies at the same time as finding it harder to sell to its largest foreign market, the Eurozone.
The fishermen were in trouble because the EU effectively confiscated UK fishing grounds, they aren't asking for a subsidy.The wailing by Brexiters for the fishermen were merely crocodile tears if at the same time they are happy for our beef producers to be massively undercut by another country, lose their subsidies at the same time as finding it harder to sell to its largest foreign market, the Eurozone.
If the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country. Look at how New Zealand benefited when they scrapped farm subsidies.
Far more sensible to let the fishermen fish their fishing grounds and let the farmers graze their cattle with the minimum of state interference. If they make a profit great, if not they can do what everyone else has to do and find another business.
powerstroke said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Dr Jekyll said:
If the only way beef producers can survive in the UK is thanks to subsidies and tariffs, then we shouldn't be producing beef in this country.
While you may think it's great to lose all home production and import cheap alternatives, what about when those cheap alternatives decide to substantially increase their price because they no longer have any competition?and we can grow wheat and root crops ...
///ajd said:
powerstroke said:
Yes very , more proof if needed you should shut your bum and let your mouth have a go instead ,
Power my old mucker, is this where I remind you about your inspired idea to turn bankers into fisherman?We all know you were serious, it is now part of PH brexit folklore.
Poor old powerstroke.
For the record I started a thread that asked could we have to sacrifce the city or EVERY other industry to get a deal with the EU??
As remainers think we only have the FS and fishing as industries fishing is mentioned every time , Brexiteers know
we have engineering ,high tech , pharma , chemical ,oil and gas and 100s of other profitable industries and fishing isn't and never more than but a tiny part of our economy unless perhaps you dimwits are getting us mixed up with Iceland Which isn't just a chain of shops by the way Its a country outside the EU...
PurpleMoonlight said:
To illustrate the ludicrous opinion of the Dr in endangering our food supply for the sake of a subsidy.
Again, look at New Zealand. Farm subsidies stopped in the 80s, plentiful predictions of doom. But all that happened was that 1% of farmers left the business, and the rest found ways to be profitable. Farming productivity increased faster than the rest of the economy.Dr Jekyll said:
Again, look at New Zealand. Farm subsidies stopped in the 80s, plentiful predictions of doom. But all that happened was that 1% of farmers left the business, and the rest found ways to be profitable. Farming productivity increased faster than the rest of the economy.
An economy of not even a 10th of ours and the change was 30 years ago.Not comparable.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Again, look at New Zealand. Farm subsidies stopped in the 80s, plentiful predictions of doom. But all that happened was that 1% of farmers left the business, and the rest found ways to be profitable. Farming productivity increased faster than the rest of the economy.
An economy of not even a 10th of ours and the change was 30 years ago.Not comparable.
Isn't the premise of discussion that subsidies can be counter productive and stifle competitive production rather than a simple GDP comparison,
Dr Jekyll said:
Again, look at New Zealand. Farm subsidies stopped in the 80s, plentiful predictions of doom. But all that happened was that 1% of farmers left the business, and the rest found ways to be profitable. Farming productivity increased faster than the rest of the economy.
New Zealand used to pay its subsidies for lamb on head count.What happened under that system was they produced a high head count stock that was virtually worthless because they didn't invest in growing the meat content of each head of stock, they used to burn a lot of stock because of this.
What happened when the subsidies stopped was the farmers went back to good farming practices, which cut the head count but increased the quality of each lamb by investing in the stock and improving the meat content back to world standards.
Their profits and quality of product grew enormously.
Currently New Zealand Lamb makes up 74% of UK lamb imports, this is tariff free because New Zealand currently doesn't export enough lamb to the EU to hit their quota allowance. Next largest supplier is Australia at 15%, then Ireland at 6%. The rest of the EU excluding Ireland currently provide just 4%, so in total only 10% of our imports of lamb come from the EU.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff