Theresa May

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Ghibli said:
s2art said:
Trump wants a comprehensive free trade deal. zero tariffs on oranges would be irrelevant to him if that was the status quo.
And with no deal and us on WTO he will have us begging for a deal. Trump doesn't like his trade deficit.

You need to wash Brexit out of your head and think about the realities of trading. Countries will want what's best for them and they will work to get it.
It starts here;

https://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/201...

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
s2art said:
Wow, Dan Hannan has written a free trade deal. How exciting.

Let's hope it's better than the one they are writing for our EU deal.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Ghibli said:
s2art said:
Wow, Dan Hannan has written a free trade deal. How exciting.

Let's hope it's better than the one they are writing for our EU deal.
And wrong again. Try reading for comprehension.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
s2art said:
And wrong again. Try reading for comprehension.
Just one question. Have the US agreed to this trade deal.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Ghibli said:
s2art said:
And wrong again. Try reading for comprehension.
Just one question. Have the US agreed to this trade deal.
Just read the article. All your questions will be answered.

PurpleMoonlight

22,362 posts

156 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Despite what Rees-Mogg may want, the UK has already proposed EU matching tariffs to the WTO.

jjlynn27

7,935 posts

108 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Tuna said:
It's hardly worth the bother, but alright.

WTO - the no-deal backdrop neither specifies a fixed set of tariffs, nor zero tariffs. It merely requires that for a given type of good, the same tariff is applied to all imports, regardless of the country of origin. WTO specifies maximum tariffs (to prevent protectionist measures), but compliant nations are free to set whatever levels they feel suitable.

Note again, that WTO allows us to drop tariffs completely on goods that we don't produce locally - such as oranges, coffee, chocolate - whilst maintaining tariffs on other items - such as steel or cars. Dropping tariffs on foodstuffs that are not natively grown would potentially save the average consumer 10% on their food bill without affecting government revenue or 'decimating industries'. It would also benefit third world countries such as Africa which are currently frozen out of the European markets by protectionist tariffs demanded by the mediterranean countries.
My bold. Any source on that?

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
s2art said:
Just read the article. All your questions will be answered.
If you can tell me it's been agreed I will read it. If it hasn't I will assume it's the cartoon sketch that it looks like.

Tuna

19,930 posts

283 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
jjlynn27 said:
Tuna said:
Note again, that WTO allows us to drop tariffs completely on goods that we don't produce locally - such as oranges, coffee, chocolate - whilst maintaining tariffs on other items - such as steel or cars. Dropping tariffs on foodstuffs that are not natively grown would potentially save the average consumer 10% on their food bill without affecting government revenue or 'decimating industries'. It would also benefit third world countries such as Africa which are currently frozen out of the European markets by protectionist tariffs demanded by the mediterranean countries.
My bold. Any source on that?
Not to hand so the figure is from memory. It was in an early report on the effect of WTO tariffs shortly after the Referendum (not the report that madly assumed we'd apply maximum tariffs to all goods). It may have been the one that was talking about the negative effects on Africa of the EU's trade policies around foodstuffs. Google is your friend if you want to argue the point.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Ghibli said:
s2art said:
Just read the article. All your questions will be answered.
If you can tell me it's been agreed I will read it. If it hasn't I will assume it's the cartoon sketch that it looks like.
LOL.

jjlynn27

7,935 posts

108 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Tuna said:
jjlynn27 said:
Tuna said:
Note again, that WTO allows us to drop tariffs completely on goods that we don't produce locally - such as oranges, coffee, chocolate - whilst maintaining tariffs on other items - such as steel or cars. Dropping tariffs on foodstuffs that are not natively grown would potentially save the average consumer 10% on their food bill without affecting government revenue or 'decimating industries'. It would also benefit third world countries such as Africa which are currently frozen out of the European markets by protectionist tariffs demanded by the mediterranean countries.
My bold. Any source on that?
Not to hand so the figure is from memory. It was in an early report on the effect of WTO tariffs shortly after the Referendum (not the report that madly assumed we'd apply maximum tariffs to all goods). It may have been the one that was talking about the negative effects on Africa of the EU's trade policies around foodstuffs. Google is your friend if you want to argue the point.
I remember Azevedo (dir-gen of WTO) saying that there would be significant costs associated with going down WTO route, not savings.

Savings of 10% on food bill, by dropping tariffs on things like 'oranges, coffee, chocolate' doesn't seem plausible to me, far from it. Hence asking for the source.

If you don't have one that's ok too.

Tuna

19,930 posts

283 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
jjlynn27 said:
I remember Azevedo (dir-gen of WTO) saying that there would be significant costs associated with going down WTO route, not savings.

Savings of 10% on food bill, by dropping tariffs on things like 'oranges, coffee, chocolate' doesn't seem plausible to me, far from it. Hence asking for the source.

If you don't have one that's ok too.
I'll see if I can find it. Do you have a link for Azevedo's comments?

MC Bodge

21,551 posts

174 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
SpeckledJim said:
abzmike said:
s2art said:
Trump wants a comprehensive free trade deal. zero tariffs on oranges would be irrelevant to him if that was the status quo.
The US rarely offers a feee trade deal without significant conditions... would you like some chlorine washed chickens with those oranges?
I know it doesn't sound very attractive, but it's actually just a huge red herring. Ever eaten chicken in the US? It's chicken. It's fine.

Ever been in a swimming pool? How did the rest of your chlorine washed life turn out? Fine? Fine.
I'd be more concerned about the quantities of high fructose corn syrup that just about everything seems to contain.

Although there are good restaurants in the US, US cheap, mainstream food isn't great.

US farmers are also allowed to feed pharmaceuticals to their animals that are not permitted in the EU, although I'm not sure of this is a bad thing or not.

MaxSo

1,910 posts

94 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
She is laughably bad at (at least) this part of her job:

www.cbsnews.com/news/theresa-may-says-she-trusts-p...


Murph7355

37,649 posts

255 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
MC Bodge said:
I'd be more concerned about the quantities of high fructose corn syrup that just about everything seems to contain.

Although there are good restaurants in the US, US cheap, mainstream food isn't great.

US farmers are also allowed to feed pharmaceuticals to their animals that are not permitted in the EU, although I'm not sure of this is a bad thing or not.
Whack a US flag on it and people can buy what they want at the price point they want. If they don't like fructose laden food, they won't buy it.

As long as the stuff isn't poisonous (and there was a good breakdown on the chlorinated chicken nonsense by someone in the industry and here a while back) then what's the issue?


MC Bodge

21,551 posts

174 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Murph7355 said:
Whack a US flag on it and people can buy what they want at the price point they want. If they don't like fructose laden food, they won't buy it.
Have you seen the size and condition of the typical Brit? They'll be wolfing it down!

It won't have a US flag on it, unless it helps sell more.

Jazzy Jag

3,412 posts

90 months

Monday 24th September 2018
quotequote all
Tuna said:
I'll see if I can find it. Do you have a link for Azevedo's comments?
ISWYDT.

Not holding my breath.

wisbech

2,939 posts

120 months

Tuesday 25th September 2018
quotequote all
s2art said:
Ghibli said:
s2art said:
And wrong again. Try reading for comprehension.
Just one question. Have the US agreed to this trade deal.
Just read the article. All your questions will be answered.
I Read it. It has no understanding of US domestic politics. Trade treaties in the US need to be approved by Congress. Congress will not agree to give up oversight of regulations etc. to a foreign country. Even within the US, regulations between states differ, and are not mutually recognised (a lawyer in Arizona can’t rock up and be a lawyer in Florida. Petrol and pollution standards are different in California to Hawaii).



anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 25th September 2018
quotequote all
wisbech said:
I Read it. It has no understanding of US domestic politics. Trade treaties in the US need to be approved by Congress. Congress will not agree to give up oversight of regulations etc. to a foreign country. Even within the US, regulations between states differ, and are not mutually recognised (a lawyer in Arizona can’t rock up and be a lawyer in Florida. Petrol and pollution standards are different in California to Hawaii).
The USA has FTA's with the following countries.

Australia
Bahrain
Canada
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Guatemala
Honduras
Israel
Jordan
Korea
Mexico
Morocco
Nicaragua
Oman
Panama
Peru
Singapore

wisbech

2,939 posts

120 months

Tuesday 25th September 2018
quotequote all
And? None of the US FTA have what the article refers to - recognition of each other’s regulations and regulators including services. If you want to sell a car to US, it has to meet US regulations, FTA or not.

Within the US for example, insurance is a state matter. You cannot buy car or health insurance from a Georgia regulated company if you are resident in Idaho.


TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED