How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 4)
Discussion
leglessAlex said:
crankedup said:
crankedup said:
sidicks said:
crankedup said:
At the moment it looks very much like it’s going down to a ‘no deal’ outcome, but as our PM said at the outset it’s better than a ‘bad deal’.
The U.K. will move onto the WTO and will feel the heat for five years or likely more in terms of finance and standards of living for its majority population.
My question is how will a no deal affect the major EU Countries, Germany, France, Italy and Spain for example.
It really doesn’t, that likelihood is vastly exaggerated.The U.K. will move onto the WTO and will feel the heat for five years or likely more in terms of finance and standards of living for its majority population.
My question is how will a no deal affect the major EU Countries, Germany, France, Italy and Spain for example.
Okay, if we look at BMW, then they sell 9.8% (in 2017) of their cars in the UK market. If, after we leave, that number goes down by half, they can ride it out I imagine. The board won't be happy, but I doubt the impact to their business would be that severe.
I imagine the CEOs of those companies are indeed talking to the respective leaders in the countries they are based, but to what end? The EU has made it abundantly clear that they won't break their own 'red lines', so any kind of soft brexit/fudge that could benefit these companies is off the table anyway.
If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
PRTVR said:
crankedup said:
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
I am sure the British government has a "fly" on more than one wall. 
crankedup said:
Thanks for input, VW may be more concerned as it’s market share overall is greater. Either way looking at the stock price of both Companies and the trend is sharply downwards. If I were an investor I would be looking for the exit, which many seem to be actively right now.
If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
It is interesting that while posting up every news story that even hints at British companies worrying about the future remainers confidently proclaim that all eu companies can "take the hit" If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
leglessAlex said:
crankedup said:
crankedup said:
sidicks said:
crankedup said:
At the moment it looks very much like it’s going down to a ‘no deal’ outcome, but as our PM said at the outset it’s better than a ‘bad deal’.
The U.K. will move onto the WTO and will feel the heat for five years or likely more in terms of finance and standards of living for its majority population.
My question is how will a no deal affect the major EU Countries, Germany, France, Italy and Spain for example.
It really doesn’t, that likelihood is vastly exaggerated.The U.K. will move onto the WTO and will feel the heat for five years or likely more in terms of finance and standards of living for its majority population.
My question is how will a no deal affect the major EU Countries, Germany, France, Italy and Spain for example.
Okay, if we look at BMW, then they sell 9.8% (in 2017) of their cars in the UK market. If, after we leave, that number goes down by half, they can ride it out I imagine. The board won't be happy, but I doubt the impact to their business would be that severe.
I imagine the CEOs of those companies are indeed talking to the respective leaders in the countries they are based, but to what end? The EU has made it abundantly clear that they won't break their own 'red lines', so any kind of soft brexit/fudge that could benefit these companies is off the table anyway.
It will obviously have an impact on BMW if UK demand drops by 50%, but arguably the larger impact will be in the UK if EU demand drops by 50%.
Mike
andymadmak said:
jjlynn27 said:
andymadmak said:
And yet a 10 second use of the PH search tool, using the keywords "toxic Fin" shows that I am telling the truth (and thus not a Walt)
Quote it here. The part where I claimed that using 'Fin' was racist. Thanks.You are Walt, for different reasons, but you knew that.
I have not actually said that you said that using the phrase "toxic Fin" (Copyright Andymadmak 2017) was racist. I asked the question "Did he think that......etc" because it was alluded to on this thread.
It turns out that your chum Slasher/Glo was offended on your behalf... which is nice for you to know that someone, somewhere cares about your feelings.
andymadmak said:
...
Did he think that that was racist? rofl He needs to understand that I called him the toxic Fin because he is toxic AND comes from Finland (ie, not racist) as opposed to him being toxic BECAUSE he comes from Finland (which would be racist)
But given that JJ has a history of misinterpreting the English language, (often as a way of obfuscating his own mistakes) it is perhaps not surprising that he's got hold of the wrong end of the stick (again)
This is your post. Pretend "question" followed by the narrative to fit the "presumed" answer to the question. The bold part fits into the 'it was a question' spiel, doesn't it?Did he think that that was racist? rofl He needs to understand that I called him the toxic Fin because he is toxic AND comes from Finland (ie, not racist) as opposed to him being toxic BECAUSE he comes from Finland (which would be racist)
But given that JJ has a history of misinterpreting the English language, (often as a way of obfuscating his own mistakes) it is perhaps not surprising that he's got hold of the wrong end of the stick (again)
Is your ego that fragile that you can't say when you get things wrong?
Edited by jjlynn27 on Wednesday 22 August 19:23
mike9009 said:
I know I am deviating from the question, but in 2017 over half of the UK's car output was exported to Europe. So given a similar deterioration of sales into Europe, 25% of automotive demand/ jobs 'could' go in the UK as opposed to 5% in BMW (as an example).
It will obviously have an impact on BMW if UK demand drops by 50%, but arguably the larger impact will be in the UK if EU demand drops by 50%.
Mike
I guess it will depend on tariffs if low we will continue to buy EU made cars and commercials same for the Europeans they would continue to buy ours otherwise It will obviously have an impact on BMW if UK demand drops by 50%, but arguably the larger impact will be in the UK if EU demand drops by 50%.
Mike
joe average with a family hatchback in mind would be saying is a golf with a TDI soot chucker or chocolate timing chain oil burning tsi worth the extra on the monthly payment over say a civic , if the EU impose extra tax on our cars and we do the same with our taxes maybe japanese cars will take more of the market and we will export more to them than we currently do
our market is heavily influenced by taxes especially commercials the EU charge 22% duty on them hence our market is dominated
by euro trucks .. it will be interesting to see what happens , one thing is for sure the Euro manufactures won't want to lose us as a market ...
Vanden Saab said:
crankedup said:
Thanks for input, VW may be more concerned as it’s market share overall is greater. Either way looking at the stock price of both Companies and the trend is sharply downwards. If I were an investor I would be looking for the exit, which many seem to be actively right now.
If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
It is interesting that while posting up every news story that even hints at British companies worrying about the future remainers confidently proclaim that all eu companies can "take the hit" If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
Any business of any size is not content to ‘take the hit’. That makes no sense to anybody, aka BMW estimate from previous poster suggests a 9.8% drop, that’s over one year I assume. What shareholder would stand for that sort of loss. Politics over business isn’t going to work, the bottom line is the issue.Vanden Saab said:
crankedup said:
Thanks for input, VW may be more concerned as it’s market share overall is greater. Either way looking at the stock price of both Companies and the trend is sharply downwards. If I were an investor I would be looking for the exit, which many seem to be actively right now.
If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
It is interesting that while posting up every news story that even hints at British companies worrying about the future remainers confidently proclaim that all eu companies can "take the hit" If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
Jockman said:
Vanden Saab said:
crankedup said:
Thanks for input, VW may be more concerned as it’s market share overall is greater. Either way looking at the stock price of both Companies and the trend is sharply downwards. If I were an investor I would be looking for the exit, which many seem to be actively right now.
If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
It is interesting that while posting up every news story that even hints at British companies worrying about the future remainers confidently proclaim that all eu companies can "take the hit" If multinationals are happy to pressure the U.K. into a fudge-it why is it that the EU are not being pressured by the Corporates affected within the EU Countries. Answering my own question, is it because the U.K. is not significant enough? I don’t think so.
Agreed with you that the CEO are talking with the EU negotiations team, love to be a fly on the wall.
Given the overall threat to business and Social wellbeing I find the intransigence of the EU very last minute.com.
mx5nut said:
Rich_W said:
And therein lies the biggest problem with the EU. They don't change. They don't even consider that what they are doing might not be in the best interests of people other than themselves. If just the UK was unhappy at things. You could argue we were wrong, as it happens.
Of course the reality is that they are quite happy to do FTA with non EU countries. Japan most recently. They don't NEED to force 4 Freedoms into a FTA. But they choose to when it comes to one of the wealthiest countries in Europe. It's almost like they have an agenda
You can tell by the amount of foot stamping now going on that some really did buy in to the "they need us more than we need them" line and are furious that it turned out not to be true.Of course the reality is that they are quite happy to do FTA with non EU countries. Japan most recently. They don't NEED to force 4 Freedoms into a FTA. But they choose to when it comes to one of the wealthiest countries in Europe. It's almost like they have an agenda
How dare they act in their interests instead of ours! Don't they know we used democracy and are entitled to them putting our interests first!?
Now if I was representing the remaining 27 states. It might make for a difficult conversation in 5-10 years when the amount exported to a nearby major country (and I appreciate the idea of us being important to the world offends you) has dropped by 2/3rds. How do you think Bavaria (Audi and BMW) and Baden-Württemberg (Mercedes and Porsche) will take that news? Especially given in that cases we are the 3rd biggest consumer of German cars after Germany themselves and America. How are the Spanish farmers going to react when they learn that their EU overlords made their products less desireable (and thus lose sales) than those from a non EU country?
Of course, as I said in my first post. The EU are pushing for any FTA to include the 4 freedoms* and thus completely unworkable by the UK Government. Yet a similar FTA with Canada or Japan doesn't include this. Which begs the question why we should have it, but others should not.
* My second point was of course that 4 freedoms with the addition of the ECJ having final say over sovereign courts have been 2 of the things that have caused the greatest rise in Euroscepticism across the bloc. Not as you would have it, just the UK, but look at the rise of overtly populist movements in Austria, Hungary etc. Yet even when faced with this, the EU stick to their guns. The idea of modifying any part of its push towards a USoE is alien to them. Go back to 97 or so, Euroscepticism was no where near as widespread as now. The EU need to realise their actions have caused this rise. And eventually you get a reaction like the vote to Leave.
But hey its their toyset. They can do whatever they want. And the UK will still survive just fine. It's not a case of stamping feet, (and when it is it will be EU exporters more than UK importers I beleive) Its a query as to why they would cut their nose to spite their face. Unless of course they have an agenda
HTH
Garvin said:
I am also intrigued that the thread was on a track where I thought a Remainer may have posted up the vision for the EU that they voted for and would act as some form of ‘advert’ and that vision might, just might, have started to convert Leavers to see that such a vision might be worth voting for.
Unfortunately only Leavers have posted their view of where the EU is heading and, obviously, those views do not paint a good picture. It is as if the Remainers are afraid to post their view of the future EU and why it should be voted for. Is that because they know, deep down, that the future is not all that rosy?
My honest opinion is that many Remainers don't care where the EU is going. So long as they can still go abroad easily and the price of "things" stays at a level they are comfy with. They probably didn't engage with politics much until the things they value above everything else were threatened. Unfortunately only Leavers have posted their view of where the EU is heading and, obviously, those views do not paint a good picture. It is as if the Remainers are afraid to post their view of the future EU and why it should be voted for. Is that because they know, deep down, that the future is not all that rosy?
Many on Twitter talk about loss of this or loss of that. Relative short termism. I believe that on along enough timeline, if there had not been a ref in 2016. That a ref in say 2030 would result in a larger percentage of Leave than Remain than the last one. As in that time other little EU "Improvements" would have started to bug Remain voters.
For example
https://euobserver.com/institutional/139630
On 24 October last year Juncker proposed to reduce the power of Vetos. Most likely the veto for Taxation. Why would the EU need to control the whole EU28 taxation? If taxes are set by Brussels, that is the sort of thing that will start to hit Remainers in the pocket. And if (as I suspect) that would mean higher taxes for the UK/FR/DE/IT and lower ones for others then it makes it harder to argue that staying in is a benefit for our people.
Couple of months back
https://www.ft.com/content/19eba02a-75fd-11e8-b326...
Germany and France want "joint fiscal capacity" and this far a few nations have used their vetos. Again why would FR/DE leaders want this? Why would the EU want to encourage this? If it went through. And the UK veto was powerless to stop it (hypothetical if we stayed in) that only underlines the notion that we are run by people that we cant elect or deselect.
jjlynn27 said:
I'd like to hear anyone (well almost everyone) who has been called racist on this thread, with a quote.
So, before you went around the houses with distraction attempts, you asked this.Now that your memory is jogged, will you accept that it was probably Slasher who was calling people racists when you were identified as a Toxic Finn?
jjlynn27 said:
This is your post. Pretend "question" followed by the narrative to fit the "presumed" answer to the question. The bold part fits into the 'it was a question' spiel, doesn't it?
Is your ego that fragile that you can't say when you get things wrong?
I must have missed your retraction re your hilarious interpretation of Osborne's Is your ego that fragile that you can't say when you get things wrong?
Edited by jjlynn27 on Wednesday 22 August 19:23
totally unwarranted call for an " Emegency Budget".
Or perhaps you failed to rectify your error. Never mind, I 'm sure this is purely an
oversight on your behalf and will be no doubt corrected asap. TIA.
I’ll start this by admitting that I’m halfway through a gorgeous Chardonnay. (Yes, there is.)
I may have mentioned on this thread that I’d picked up a copy of Varoufakis’s “Adults in the Room” for a holiday read a few weeks ago; basically his viewpoint of how the Greek/Troika negotiations unfolded during (and before) his term as Finance Minister, up until he wasn’t.
He observed, amongst many things, that the EU, IMF et al adopted the very successful tactic of Divide and Conquer – and went on to show how we, as a conquering nation back in the day, utilised the same methods to achieve quite extraordinary ‘success’ in developing ‘Great Britain’.
As an aside, it’s a great read and not quite as myopic as you might think; if you’ve a few hours lazing away the stress on holiday, I can heartily recommend it – if nothing else for the insight into the inner workings and thinking of those that we now face in our negotiations.
We have to be prepared to walk away. It’s that simple. And we have to be prepared to accept the pain if push comes to shove.
However, and getting back to the Divide and Conquer point, I think we should shortly be speaking not only to the EU negotiating team(s) but also to the peoples of the countries that will bear the brunt of us leaving the EU, and explaining to them that our wish is to continue trading as before, and to continue our relationships with them as individual nations, just as we did before. Explaining to them that we are perfectly willing to accept our financial responsibilities (the divorce settlement) and that the barrier to this was not our respective relationships with each individual country (quoting specific individual examples) but in fact what was hindering this is/was the EU management intransigence.
We won’t make many friends at the EU, but then, when did we ever?
(If I get flamed, I’m blaming it on the vino!)
I may have mentioned on this thread that I’d picked up a copy of Varoufakis’s “Adults in the Room” for a holiday read a few weeks ago; basically his viewpoint of how the Greek/Troika negotiations unfolded during (and before) his term as Finance Minister, up until he wasn’t.
He observed, amongst many things, that the EU, IMF et al adopted the very successful tactic of Divide and Conquer – and went on to show how we, as a conquering nation back in the day, utilised the same methods to achieve quite extraordinary ‘success’ in developing ‘Great Britain’.
As an aside, it’s a great read and not quite as myopic as you might think; if you’ve a few hours lazing away the stress on holiday, I can heartily recommend it – if nothing else for the insight into the inner workings and thinking of those that we now face in our negotiations.
We have to be prepared to walk away. It’s that simple. And we have to be prepared to accept the pain if push comes to shove.
However, and getting back to the Divide and Conquer point, I think we should shortly be speaking not only to the EU negotiating team(s) but also to the peoples of the countries that will bear the brunt of us leaving the EU, and explaining to them that our wish is to continue trading as before, and to continue our relationships with them as individual nations, just as we did before. Explaining to them that we are perfectly willing to accept our financial responsibilities (the divorce settlement) and that the barrier to this was not our respective relationships with each individual country (quoting specific individual examples) but in fact what was hindering this is/was the EU management intransigence.
We won’t make many friends at the EU, but then, when did we ever?
(If I get flamed, I’m blaming it on the vino!)
tumble dryer said:
I’ll start this by admitting that I’m halfway through a gorgeous Chardonnay. (Yes, there is.)
I may have mentioned on this thread that I’d picked up a copy of Varoufakis’s “Adults in the Room” for a holiday read a few weeks ago; basically his viewpoint of how the Greek/Troika negotiations unfolded during (and before) his term as Finance Minister, up until he wasn’t.
He observed, amongst many things, that the EU, IMF et al adopted the very successful tactic of Divide and Conquer – and went on to show how we, as a conquering nation back in the day, utilised the same methods to achieve quite extraordinary ‘success’ in developing ‘Great Britain’.
As an aside, it’s a great read and not quite as myopic as you might think; if you’ve a few hours lazing away the stress on holiday, I can heartily recommend it – if nothing else for the insight into the inner workings and thinking of those that we now face in our negotiations.
We have to be prepared to walk away. It’s that simple. And we have to be prepared to accept the pain if push comes to shove.
However, and getting back to the Divide and Conquer point, I think we should shortly be speaking not only to the EU negotiating team(s) but also to the peoples of the countries that will bear the brunt of us leaving the EU, and explaining to them that our wish is to continue trading as before, and to continue our relationships with them as individual nations, just as we did before. Explaining to them that we are perfectly willing to accept our financial responsibilities (the divorce settlement) and that the barrier to this was not our respective relationships with each individual country (quoting specific individual examples) but in fact what was hindering this is/was the EU management intransigence.
We won’t make many friends at the EU, but then, when did we ever?
(If I get flamed, I’m blaming it on the vino!)
I think that was the point of her jaunt to see Macron. But like Merkel that's the wrong person since they both LOVE the EU more than their own countries. I may have mentioned on this thread that I’d picked up a copy of Varoufakis’s “Adults in the Room” for a holiday read a few weeks ago; basically his viewpoint of how the Greek/Troika negotiations unfolded during (and before) his term as Finance Minister, up until he wasn’t.
He observed, amongst many things, that the EU, IMF et al adopted the very successful tactic of Divide and Conquer – and went on to show how we, as a conquering nation back in the day, utilised the same methods to achieve quite extraordinary ‘success’ in developing ‘Great Britain’.
As an aside, it’s a great read and not quite as myopic as you might think; if you’ve a few hours lazing away the stress on holiday, I can heartily recommend it – if nothing else for the insight into the inner workings and thinking of those that we now face in our negotiations.
We have to be prepared to walk away. It’s that simple. And we have to be prepared to accept the pain if push comes to shove.
However, and getting back to the Divide and Conquer point, I think we should shortly be speaking not only to the EU negotiating team(s) but also to the peoples of the countries that will bear the brunt of us leaving the EU, and explaining to them that our wish is to continue trading as before, and to continue our relationships with them as individual nations, just as we did before. Explaining to them that we are perfectly willing to accept our financial responsibilities (the divorce settlement) and that the barrier to this was not our respective relationships with each individual country (quoting specific individual examples) but in fact what was hindering this is/was the EU management intransigence.
We won’t make many friends at the EU, but then, when did we ever?
(If I get flamed, I’m blaming it on the vino!)
But I agree that talking to the other nations, unofficially and off the record, (I daresay even un publicised!) would be a good idea. Especially if those nations have historically been goof friends with us. Netherlands. Scandinavian countries etc
Jockman said:
We will need to speak to individual countries about immigration in any case but I don't see any need to get in a spin about it.
You see what I did there?
I did. You see what I did there?
Maybe better put would be TM (god help us) addressing the people, individually, and the larger corporations, specifically, about our wishes for the future; and focusing 'blame' on the EU for disallowing this to happen.
If there's enough squealing from the losers of the 27, from the ground up (piano wire and lamposts; a bit strong, I grant you) then maybe change could be effected from the other side.
Put it another way, so far our tactics ain't working too well.
If I were the EU I would simply note that solidarity is working and insist on maintaining the line. They will be confident that May is going to capitulate...more than she already has.
May should have played the "no deal" card much more positively, sooner. Earlier in the year with the EU dicking about and quite obviously not wanting to actually negotiate she should have set the wheels moving much more firmly (that should actually have been done day 1) and told the EU we'd busy ourselves with that. Pull up the drawbridge for a bit and ignore the faux invites from Merkel and Macron.
She evidently didn't feel she could do this, most likely because (a) she's an idiot, (b) her heart isn't in it and (c) the caterwauling from a number of Tory MPs would have made (a) and (b) worse.
Lot of water to go under the bridge yet. Maybe she'll have found some spine on her holidays. Either that or we can prepare for her giving more away, BRINO and then an even bigger s
t show for the next 10yrs.
May should have played the "no deal" card much more positively, sooner. Earlier in the year with the EU dicking about and quite obviously not wanting to actually negotiate she should have set the wheels moving much more firmly (that should actually have been done day 1) and told the EU we'd busy ourselves with that. Pull up the drawbridge for a bit and ignore the faux invites from Merkel and Macron.
She evidently didn't feel she could do this, most likely because (a) she's an idiot, (b) her heart isn't in it and (c) the caterwauling from a number of Tory MPs would have made (a) and (b) worse.
Lot of water to go under the bridge yet. Maybe she'll have found some spine on her holidays. Either that or we can prepare for her giving more away, BRINO and then an even bigger s
t show for the next 10yrs.tumble dryer said:
However, and getting back to the Divide and Conquer point, I think we should shortly be speaking not only to the EU negotiating team(s) but also to the peoples of the countries that will bear the brunt of us leaving the EU, and explaining to them that our wish is to continue trading as before, and to continue our relationships with them as individual nations, just as we did before. Explaining to them that we are perfectly willing to accept our financial responsibilities (the divorce settlement) and that the barrier to this was not our respective relationships with each individual country (quoting specific individual examples) but in fact what was hindering this is/was the EU management intransigence.
An interesting concept - but how would you envisage '(speaking) to the peoples of the countries that will bear the brunt of us leaving the EU'? - taking out advertisements in the various national newspapers, televsion and social media, making the point that 'what was hindering this is/was the EU management intransigence.'?Because if you go down that route, what's sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander....can you imagine the reaction in this section of PH if UK media outlets - for example Haymarket - started carrying lucratively EU-funded advertisements making the case for continued UK membership and a call for a second referendum?
I suspect there would be ruffled feathers among some members of the PH parish, and - I'll wager - quite a degree of harrumphing....
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff