How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 2)
Discussion
Sway said:
It would also cause chaos - considering the hardly stellar growth shown despite a trillion euros being pumped south for free (on top of all the additional borrowing and refinancing) - what do you think would happen to the southern economies without that cash inflow?
Yes, it would eventually unwind as the 'SudEuro' devalued and the tourist and export cash started flowing, but that'll make zero difference to the current debts and liabilities.
Oh I agree. Yes, it would eventually unwind as the 'SudEuro' devalued and the tourist and export cash started flowing, but that'll make zero difference to the current debts and liabilities.
But I'm not sure what the proposed current end game is that doesn't result in large degrees of chaos, either in Germany or the southern States or both.
Murph7355 said:
Sway said:
It would also cause chaos - considering the hardly stellar growth shown despite a trillion euros being pumped south for free (on top of all the additional borrowing and refinancing) - what do you think would happen to the southern economies without that cash inflow?
Yes, it would eventually unwind as the 'SudEuro' devalued and the tourist and export cash started flowing, but that'll make zero difference to the current debts and liabilities.
Oh I agree. Yes, it would eventually unwind as the 'SudEuro' devalued and the tourist and export cash started flowing, but that'll make zero difference to the current debts and liabilities.
But I'm not sure what the proposed current end game is that doesn't result in large degrees of chaos, either in Germany or the southern States or both.
That's the plan - those wishing it have always been clear on that. Also, that crises are the best way of achieving it, small steps at a time.
Whether it'll work remains to be seen, personally I think they underestimate the European people. Not sure many truly buy into the 'one nation Europe' goal many in Brussels (and national parliaments) adore.
Sway said:
Rapidly implemented full fiscal Union and centralised monetary policy. Presented as the 'least worst' option once the SHTF.
That's the plan - those wishing it have always been clear on that. Also, that crises are the best way of achieving it, small steps at a time.
Whether it'll work remains to be seen, personally I think they underestimate the European people. Not sure many truly buy into the 'one nation Europe' goal many in Brussels (and national parliaments) adore.
The latter view I share... I suspect if they force that route, the chaos will simply shift to Germany. That's the plan - those wishing it have always been clear on that. Also, that crises are the best way of achieving it, small steps at a time.
Whether it'll work remains to be seen, personally I think they underestimate the European people. Not sure many truly buy into the 'one nation Europe' goal many in Brussels (and national parliaments) adore.
How do we think EU negotiations will go...according to the opposition's speechless shadow foreign secretary, the answer is in a more focused manner than if Labour were mismanaging the talks.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/922730/Brexit-ne...
Link said:
The shadow foreign secretary claimed the Government did not have a clear position on Brexit. She also revealed the Labour Party would work for a new form of customs union after leaving the bloc.
LBC caller Jake in Leeds pointed out that he, like others, does not understand Labour’s position on Brexit. He said: “You mentioned in response to the previous caller you have a policy on this and the Tories don’t.
“Now I, like a lot of the other Labour supporters who would like you to be in Government, simply don’t understand your position.
“The Tories have said they are going to be out of the single market, out of the customs union and your front bench has at least three different positions. So I don’t quite understand how they don’t have a position and you do.”
Ms Thornberry paused and said: “I don’t know what to say.”
She did manage to say something. More at the link including the studio vid.LBC caller Jake in Leeds pointed out that he, like others, does not understand Labour’s position on Brexit. He said: “You mentioned in response to the previous caller you have a policy on this and the Tories don’t.
“Now I, like a lot of the other Labour supporters who would like you to be in Government, simply don’t understand your position.
“The Tories have said they are going to be out of the single market, out of the customs union and your front bench has at least three different positions. So I don’t quite understand how they don’t have a position and you do.”
Ms Thornberry paused and said: “I don’t know what to say.”
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/922730/Brexit-ne...
turbobloke said:
She did manage to say something. More at the link including the studio vid.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/922730/Brexit-ne...
Thornberry's the worst kind of politician, and seemingly the sort Corbyn likes. A more odious woman it would be hard to imagine.https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/922730/Brexit-ne...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/23/w...
it’s good to know the government has finally agreed a policy. It seems we are going to have divergence but not a lot of divergence, or maybe more divergence, or even some divergence, or divergence plus, or maybe divergence extra.
All this based on mutual acceptance of standards which no one has ever agreed except with in a SM, and the EU has already rejected.
Finally progress, well maybe progress plus, or negative progress, or maybe progress on cake.
it’s good to know the government has finally agreed a policy. It seems we are going to have divergence but not a lot of divergence, or maybe more divergence, or even some divergence, or divergence plus, or maybe divergence extra.
All this based on mutual acceptance of standards which no one has ever agreed except with in a SM, and the EU has already rejected.
Finally progress, well maybe progress plus, or negative progress, or maybe progress on cake.
Labour's position is that if they turned up in Brussels the EU would instantly grant them all the benefits of the Single Market without having to accept Freedom of Movement and allow the UK to join in a Customs Union which is a nice fluffy one with all of the benefits and none of the downsides rather than the Customs Union and also allow us a say and veto over the EU signing us up to 3rd party trade deals.
In other words they seem to think if they buy Barnier better Coffee and maybe take a Bakewell Tart with them they'll get a completely different deal.
As far as I can work out that seems to be the extent of the "policy".
In other words they seem to think if they buy Barnier better Coffee and maybe take a Bakewell Tart with them they'll get a completely different deal.
As far as I can work out that seems to be the extent of the "policy".
confused_buyer said:
Labour's position is that if they turned up in Brussels the EU would instantly grant them all the benefits of the Single Market without having to accept Freedom of Movement and allow the UK to join in a Customs Union which is a nice fluffy one with all of the benefits and none of the downsides rather than the Customs Union and also allow us a say and veto over the EU signing us up to 3rd party trade deals.
In other words they seem to think if they buy Barnier better Coffee and maybe take a Bakewell Tart with them they'll get a completely different deal.
As far as I can work out that seems to be the extent of the "policy".
With beer and sandwiches at the TUC as a backstop deal maker.In other words they seem to think if they buy Barnier better Coffee and maybe take a Bakewell Tart with them they'll get a completely different deal.
As far as I can work out that seems to be the extent of the "policy".
Mrr T said:
All this based on mutual acceptance of standards which no one has ever agreed except with in a SM, and the EU has already rejected.
http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/goods/international-aspects/mutual-recognition-agreements_enFunny how no one has agreed a MRA without entering the Single Market...
confused_buyer said:
Labour's position is that if they turned up in Brussels the EU would instantly grant them all the benefits
Honestly, they'd probably get more of what they wanted than our current lot just by turning up in Brussels having decided between themselves what they want.Mrr T said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/23/w...
it’s good to know the government has finally agreed a policy. It seems we are going to have divergence but not a lot of divergence, or maybe more divergence, or even some divergence, or divergence plus, or maybe divergence extra.
All this based on mutual acceptance of standards which no one has ever agreed except with in a SM, and the EU has already rejected.
Finally progress, well maybe progress plus, or negative progress, or maybe progress on cake.
The UK will promise to match the CU/SM in everything in return for a comprehensive FTA?it’s good to know the government has finally agreed a policy. It seems we are going to have divergence but not a lot of divergence, or maybe more divergence, or even some divergence, or divergence plus, or maybe divergence extra.
All this based on mutual acceptance of standards which no one has ever agreed except with in a SM, and the EU has already rejected.
Finally progress, well maybe progress plus, or negative progress, or maybe progress on cake.
Didn't May rather state that as a default to solve the NI issue?
mx5nut said:
confused_buyer said:
Labour's position is that if they turned up in Brussels the EU would instantly grant them all the benefits
Honestly, they'd probably get more of what they wanted than our current lot just by turning up in Brussels having decided between themselves what they want.mx5nut said:
Honestly, they'd probably get more of what they wanted than our current lot just by turning up in Brussels having decided between themselves what they want.
Yes, but they haven't and even if they did agree what I think they would probably ask for Brussels said No to it before anyone even asked it.andymadmak said:
You think that Labour has a clearly defined policy on what it wants? Please do explain it, because just about every credible observer has yet to decipher Labour's position!
Their answer is the same as they come up with when they come up with massive spending plans and someone asks where they'd get the money from which is usually somewhere along the lines of "well, under us economic growth would be more, so we'd have more money". Brilliant. So we'll just do that then - make a policy of having more growth and less inflation. Everything solved.With the EU, it is that because they are nice fluffy people unlike the nasty mean Tories the EU will embrace them and agree to everything they have categorically ruled out.
Sway said:
Mrr T said:
All this based on mutual acceptance of standards which no one has ever agreed except with in a SM, and the EU has already rejected.
http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/goods/international-aspects/mutual-recognition-agreements_enFunny how no one has agreed a MRA without entering the Single Market...
Mrr T said:
All this based on mutual acceptance of standards which no one has ever agreed except with in a SM, and the EU has already rejected.
Mutual acceptance of standards is normal for an FTA across the world (and quite normal outside an FTA in services). Countries with FTA's don't have to have the same standards, they usually agree to have similar standards that both are happy with.If you read the CETA FTA you will see how standards are not the same but there is cooperation to ensure both sides have mutual benefits and the standards used are complementary.
put this into adobe reader and search "standards", there are a huge number of returns. http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/februar...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff