The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 3)
Discussion
EddieSteadyGo said:
frisbee said:
Craftiness implies some degree of competence and forward thinking, something I find very difficult to attribute to any current politician or bureaucrat.
I think you are underestimating some politicians. You might not like them but I know one or two who are quite cunning and clever b
ds. The Dangerous Elk said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
frisbee said:
Craftiness implies some degree of competence and forward thinking, something I find very difficult to attribute to any current politician or bureaucrat.
I think you are underestimating some politicians. You might not like them but I know one or two who are quite cunning and clever bds. PurpleMoonlight said:
p1stonhead said:
Everyone knows this already. Getting agreed terms for the WTO isn’t going to be a walk in the park. Especially considering who we have in charge.
Who is this everyone?What it ever mentioned by either side of the referendum campaign?
But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
p1stonhead said:
Ok, people who read about the WTO knew it.
But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
Not true.But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
Even with a EU trade deal, we would still need to trade with the RoW on WTO.
Why did nobody flag up that our proposed WTO rates would be subject to RoW ratification and possible influence?
PurpleMoonlight said:
p1stonhead said:
Ok, people who read about the WTO knew it.
But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
Not true.But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
Even with a EU trade deal, we would still need to trade with the RoW on WTO.
Why did nobody flag up that our proposed WTO rates would be subject to RoW ratification and possible influence?
Also, some of other countries who have a deal with the EU also (I think) may have to clear a deal with us with the EU before they are allowed to make it
So much for the f
kwits plans of saying ps off to the £50b exit payment and getting them to agree to that then. Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 07:09
p1stonhead said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
p1stonhead said:
Everyone knows this already. Getting agreed terms for the WTO isn’t going to be a walk in the park. Especially considering who we have in charge.
Who is this everyone?What it ever mentioned by either side of the referendum campaign?
But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
It's interesting how slowly the EU has taken over control under the pretext of saving money but ends up destroying a counties ability to function without the EU, why does the EU need embassies around the world ? How long before that is a function given over to the EU, time to get out before it's to late, if there is no deal people have to ask themselves why? Why can deals be given to Japan, Canada etc but not the UK who has been a member for 40 years with all the alignment that entails.
PRTVR said:
p1stonhead said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
p1stonhead said:
Everyone knows this already. Getting agreed terms for the WTO isn’t going to be a walk in the park. Especially considering who we have in charge.
Who is this everyone?What it ever mentioned by either side of the referendum campaign?
But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
It's interesting how slowly the EU has taken over control under the pretext of saving money but ends up destroying a counties ability to function without the EU, why does the EU need embassies around the world ? How long before that is a function given over to the EU, time to get out before it's to late, if there is no deal people have to ask themselves why? Why can deals be given to Japan, Canada etc but not the UK who has been a member for 40 years with all the alignment that entails.
Apparently the EU may get a say in our trade deals with the 60 countries they already have deals with as our deal may affect them.
Brexiteers say trade with third countries would be easier. Perhaps, but the EU has free-trade deals with some 60 countries, including South Korea and Mexico, and is negotiating one with Japan [now done]. It will not be easy for Britain to “grandfather” these deals, especially if it has walked out with no deal, if only because doing so would need EU agreement, too.
https://www.economist.com/britain/2017/11/30/brexi...
Even before that we also have to come up with all of our proposals for what we want as a separate WTO member. I believe we intimated to the WTO already that we would please just like to have an exact copy of the EU terms under the WTO and they kindly said something along the lines of ‘get f
ked’ Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 07:27
p1stonhead said:
PRTVR said:
p1stonhead said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
p1stonhead said:
Everyone knows this already. Getting agreed terms for the WTO isn’t going to be a walk in the park. Especially considering who we have in charge.
Who is this everyone?What it ever mentioned by either side of the referendum campaign?
But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
It's interesting how slowly the EU has taken over control under the pretext of saving money but ends up destroying a counties ability to function without the EU, why does the EU need embassies around the world ? How long before that is a function given over to the EU, time to get out before it's to late, if there is no deal people have to ask themselves why? Why can deals be given to Japan, Canada etc but not the UK who has been a member for 40 years with all the alignment that entails.
Apparently the EU may get a say in our trade deals with the 60 countries they already have deals with as our deal may affect them.
Brexiteers say trade with third countries would be easier. Perhaps, but the EU has free-trade deals with some 60 countries, including South Korea and Mexico, and is negotiating one with Japan [now done]. It will not be easy for Britain to “grandfather” these deals, especially if it has walked out with no deal, if only because doing so would need EU agreement, too.
https://www.economist.com/britain/2017/11/30/brexi...
Even before that we also have to come up with all of our proposals for what we want as a separate WTO member. I believe we intimated to the WTO already that we would please just like to have an exact copy of the EU terms under the WTO and they kindly said something along the lines of ‘get f
ked’ Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 07:27
p1stonhead said:
Not saying they would make it difficult for us to make arrangements with others (if it’s in their existing terms with said country that they have to approve it) but if we piss them off, such as telling them to do one on the payment we have already agreed (I think BoJo suggested doing this) then they may well make it difficult.
Apparently the EU may get a say in our trade deals with the 60 countries they already have deals with as our deal may affect them.
Brexiteers say trade with third countries would be easier. Perhaps, but the EU has free-trade deals with some 60 countries, including South Korea and Mexico, and is negotiating one with Japan [now done]. It will not be easy for Britain to “grandfather” these deals, especially if it has walked out with no deal, if only because doing so would need EU agreement, too.
https://www.economist.com/britain/2017/11/30/brexi...
Even before that we also have to come up with all of our proposals for what we want as a separate WTO member. I believe we intimated to the WTO already that we would please just like to have an exact copy of the EU terms under the WTO and they kindly said something along the lines of ‘get fked’
I think the UK has proposes matching EU tariffs and the WTO isn't opposed to that. Some of the WTO member countries may though.Apparently the EU may get a say in our trade deals with the 60 countries they already have deals with as our deal may affect them.
Brexiteers say trade with third countries would be easier. Perhaps, but the EU has free-trade deals with some 60 countries, including South Korea and Mexico, and is negotiating one with Japan [now done]. It will not be easy for Britain to “grandfather” these deals, especially if it has walked out with no deal, if only because doing so would need EU agreement, too.
https://www.economist.com/britain/2017/11/30/brexi...
Even before that we also have to come up with all of our proposals for what we want as a separate WTO member. I believe we intimated to the WTO already that we would please just like to have an exact copy of the EU terms under the WTO and they kindly said something along the lines of ‘get f
ked’ Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 07:27
The EU may seek to flex its trade agreement muscles with third countries to try to protect its markets. Why shouldn't they. That's the power of a combined economy ten times ours.
The world trade utopia promised by leavers is never going to materialise.
p1stonhead said:
PRTVR said:
p1stonhead said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
p1stonhead said:
Everyone knows this already. Getting agreed terms for the WTO isn’t going to be a walk in the park. Especially considering who we have in charge.
Who is this everyone?What it ever mentioned by either side of the referendum campaign?
But WTO was never supposed to be on the cards anyway. No deal was inconceivable a couple years ago.
It's interesting how slowly the EU has taken over control under the pretext of saving money but ends up destroying a counties ability to function without the EU, why does the EU need embassies around the world ? How long before that is a function given over to the EU, time to get out before it's to late, if there is no deal people have to ask themselves why? Why can deals be given to Japan, Canada etc but not the UK who has been a member for 40 years with all the alignment that entails.
Apparently the EU may get a say in our trade deals with the 60 countries they already have deals with as our deal may affect them.
Brexiteers say trade with third countries would be easier. Perhaps, but the EU has free-trade deals with some 60 countries, including South Korea and Mexico, and is negotiating one with Japan [now done]. It will not be easy for Britain to “grandfather” these deals, especially if it has walked out with no deal, if only because doing so would need EU agreement, too.
https://www.economist.com/britain/2017/11/30/brexi...
Even before that we also have to come up with all of our proposals for what we want as a separate WTO member. I believe we intimated to the WTO already that we would please just like to have an exact copy of the EU terms under the WTO and they kindly said something along the lines of ‘get f
ked’ Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 07:27
PurpleMoonlight said:
I think the UK has proposes matching EU tariffs and the WTO isn't opposed to that. Some of the WTO member countries may though.
The EU may seek to flex its trade agreement muscles with third countries to try to protect its markets. Why shouldn't they. That's the power of a combined economy ten times ours.
The world trade utopia promised by leavers is never going to materialise.
I guess 'utopia' makes a pleasant change from the usual nonsense about 'cake' or unicorns'.The EU may seek to flex its trade agreement muscles with third countries to try to protect its markets. Why shouldn't they. That's the power of a combined economy ten times ours.
The world trade utopia promised by leavers is never going to materialise.
sidicks said:
I guess 'utopia' makes a pleasant change from the usual nonsense about 'cake' or unicorns'.
No no no, there's always room for cake. 
GettyCake-1400x788 by Don Beech, on Flickrpowerstroke said:
Great isn't it from Ted Heath ,Major and all the way to May we have been screwed by people purporting to act in our best interests , thank god we voted out maybe its not to late !!!!
It isn't too late, but people are kidding themselves if they think that leaving with "no deal" whatsoever will not be highly disruptive. It is however preferable to staying in, so if the EU maintain their stance over the NI border and that becomes the choice then so be it.
If you are talking about disruption how about the aftermath of WW2?. The equivalent of 56% of GDP was being spent on all aspects of the war effort in 1944. We were also left with a debt to GDP ratio of 237% in 1946.
We survived and the economy adjusted back to a peacetime footing again, but with decisive government action.
sidicks said:
I don't really like cake, what's in it for me?
Cherry pie?
2635272a-61b1-4bdd-8ed9-3126d238d465_Landscape by Don Beech, on Flickr
p1stonhead said:
I think they did.
Also, some of other countries who have a deal with the EU also (I think) may have to clear a deal with us with the EU before they are allowed to make it
So much for the fkwits plans of saying ps off to the £50b exit payment and getting them to agree to that then.
So, you are suggesting that where the EU has an existing trade agreement with country X, part of that agreement will be a clause that stipulates that country X cannot agree a new trade deal with another country ( such as the UK post Brexit) without the prior agreement of the EU?Also, some of other countries who have a deal with the EU also (I think) may have to clear a deal with us with the EU before they are allowed to make it
So much for the f
kwits plans of saying ps off to the £50b exit payment and getting them to agree to that then. Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 07:09
Any evidence to support that?
andymadmak said:
So, you are suggesting that where the EU has an existing trade agreement with country X, part of that agreement will be a clause that stipulates that country X cannot agree a new trade deal with another country ( such as the UK post Brexit) without the prior agreement of the EU?
Any evidence to support that?
The EU are all about 'fair trade'. Any evidence to support that?
andymadmak said:
p1stonhead said:
I think they did.
Also, some of other countries who have a deal with the EU also (I think) may have to clear a deal with us with the EU before they are allowed to make it
So much for the fkwits plans of saying ps off to the £50b exit payment and getting them to agree to that then.
So, you are suggesting that where the EU has an existing trade agreement with country X, part of that agreement will be a clause that stipulates that country X cannot agree a new trade deal with another country ( such as the UK post Brexit) without the prior agreement of the EU?Also, some of other countries who have a deal with the EU also (I think) may have to clear a deal with us with the EU before they are allowed to make it
So much for the f
kwits plans of saying ps off to the £50b exit payment and getting them to agree to that then. Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 07:09
Any evidence to support that?
I’ve read it on numerous articles. Including the one I posted a few up from the economist. I haven’t seen it explicitly written in the actual documents though (they run to hundreds of pages) but understand it’s part of the Japan one at least and the economist mentions its part of 60 others.
Hence the ‘I think’ part. Would love to be proven wrong on this one but it’s certainly been said in a few places.
Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th August 08:31
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff