How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[PurpleMoonlight]

Dr Jekyll said:

Not endless riches, just riches. All riches come from trade after all.That' why the WTO exists to keep tariffs down. The argument for the 'common market' was initially to allow free trade within Europe. At this rate it's only a matter of time before Europhiles start demanding internal tariffs.

Yes, a trade advantage among similar members.

Can that justification be extrapolated to the whole world though?

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Coolbanana said:

No, many Leavers have expressed wanting to leave the EU based upon a belief, incorrect in my view, that the EU is holding the UK back, retarding the ability to trade more effectively.

I am stating that overall, there would be no improvement and a risk of going backwards.

My point being...using economy as a reason, is not a good one. I then gave an example of a good reason.

There is a strand of leaver thought which says the labour and environmental protections and trade policies of the EU hold us back from being a free wheeling Atlantic Hong Kong. You only need to look at how the Labour party cite these things as reasons to remain to see that they have a point.

I have some sympathy with this view but I think the electorate will hold us back from this idea in or out.


Your sensible reason is sensible. I would imagine I rate "identity" as a higher priority than you, and would say it goes a bit deeper than passport covers and what flags fly above the town hall.

FOM could have been handled better but it wasn't. As I recall the Labour government at the time underestimated it, at least for public consumption, but didn't actually say it was completely beyond their control. It was pointed out then that other countries had found ways to limit the flow. They made the argument that on the whole it was in our economic and cultural interests, and the right thing to do as good Europeans.

Reforming from within has been the stated aim of every PM since before we even joined. Macmillan had plans for that before de Gaulle vetoed our first application on the sound basis that we had no place in a continental political project.

For me it's ultimately about democracy. There can't ever be a European democracy, at least not in our life times, because there isn't a European demos. People don't feel bought into the project, and even the strongest Remainer arguments all come down to what we get out of it. With no common language, history, media or political parties and wildly different legal and political systems, there never will be. The attempt to impose it from above is doomed to failure and only kept alive at all by the sort of high handed arrogance we have seen by the bucket load since 2016. This is ultimately storing up bigger failure for the future.

I have some respect for the ideologues who say we should throw our whole lot in with the US of E but they are a tiny minority, who make the libertarian Atlantic Hong Kong crowd look like populists.

[don'tbesilly]

bhstewie said:

don'tbesilly said:

So had I condemned all the Politicians you've condemned above whilst not naming them (I do know to whom you refer by the way) prior to me posting about Juncker it would have justified me posting about Juncker, is that what you're suggesting?

Do you know what my own thoughts are in regards Johnson/Mogg and Farage?
How do you know I haven't condemned them and for the same reasons you've mentioned?
Do you think the same people were responsible for me forming my opinions on the EU?
Do you think anything that they wrote/said were the reasons I voted to leave the EU?

As I posted the video it seems the accusation of double standards was/is aimed at me, if so can you tell me how you arrived at that decision, I can only assume it was something you gleaned from my posts, if so can you cite some examples?

I think you're taking personally what wasn't aimed at you personally.

What I posted was a very general point.

Edited by bhstewie on Monday 17th December 07:33

In general Remainers condemn Boris Johnson because of his womanising ways, but John Major (back to basics John!) who betrayed his wife and had an affair with Edwina Currie is OK, why? Major supports a 2nd referendum.

In general Remainers condemn Nigel Farage because he's a racist xenophobe, but Amber Rudd who was accused of similar and condemned by many and went onto resign in disgrace is OK, Why? Rudd supports a 2nd referendum.

In general Remainers condemn Jacob Rees Mogg because of his religion and beliefs, but Tim Farron who stood down as leader of the Lib-Dems because he couldn't support Gay marriage is OK, why? Farron stood on a manifesto of a 2nd referendum.

Just generalising of course

[Nickgnome]

otis criblecoblis said:

The original claim - made by Helicopter who did a runner and doesn't answer - was about how it could be controlled. You advocating deporting people, and presumably their families if they have no job, does not control numbers .

The current government has a 100k target for immigration. I personally think it a bit silly to set an actual number, but that's another conversation. The 50k figure is simply half of this to represent the split between EU and rest of world. So you were asked in a hypothetical situation how you would actually control numbers to get close to that figure. I clearly wasn't advocating a 50K total immigration figure.

Odd that we now have Remainers advocating deporting those from the EU. The optics of that done on any scale would really play well to the Guardian crowd, what with kids being removed from schools and deported.
The reason it's not widely used is because it's very expensive and does nothing to control numbers in the way the public wants to see.
Given the current numbers of immigration from outside the EU, the UK doesn't seem to have a shortage of people wanting to come and work here. I don't see the problem in those from the joining the same kinda system.

I suggest you endeavour not to interpertate a very straightforward point that’ steered you where you could ascertain the Eu regulations. I passed no opinion on them.

Where did I advocate deporting Unemployed Eu nationals?

[Nickgnome]

amusingduck said:

The GBP/EUR exchange rate is ~15% worse than pre-referendum, USD about ~12% worse.

About half (£279bn) of our imports are from Eurozone countries, and another £66bn from the USA. So about 60% of our imports now cost about 12-15% more than pre-referendum? I could see that quite easily being 2-3% worse off overall.

If that's the case, no maths needed. They've lived it, and has anyone really noticed any difference?

Yes

[bitchstewie]

don'tbesilly said:

In general Remainers condemn Boris Johnson because of his womanising ways, but John Major (back to basics John!) who betrayed his wife and had an affair with Edwina Currie is OK, why? Major supports a 2nd referendum.

In general Remainers condemn Nigel Farage because he's a racist xenophobe, but Amber Rudd who was accused of similar and condemned by many and went onto resign in disgrace is OK, Why? Rudd supports a 2nd referendum.

In general Remainers condemn Jacob Rees Mogg because of his religion and beliefs, but Tim Farron who stood down as leader of the Lib-Dems because he couldn't support Gay marriage is OK, why? Farron stood on a manifesto of a 2nd referendum.

Just generalising of course

I didn't say I condemn them.

I said you have to look at all sides of things because life isn't as black and white as Junckers = bad pisshead but Mogg or Boris = good.

Juckers has some appalling traits but being objective he must be doing something right to be where he is.

Boris and Farage and Mogg have some appalling traits but I find myself agreeing with them very often.

Life's a lot more nuanced than I think it's painted by a lot of the leave/remain debate.

[amusingduck]

Nickgnome said:

amusingduck said:

The GBP/EUR exchange rate is ~15% worse than pre-referendum, USD about ~12% worse.

About half (£279bn) of our imports are from Eurozone countries, and another £66bn from the USA. So about 60% of our imports now cost about 12-15% more than pre-referendum? I could see that quite easily being 2-3% worse off overall.

If that's the case, no maths needed. They've lived it, and has anyone really noticed any difference?

Yes

Good Post

[Dr Jekyll]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Not endless riches, just riches. All riches come from trade after all.That' why the WTO exists to keep tariffs down. The argument for the 'common market' was initially to allow free trade within Europe. At this rate it's only a matter of time before Europhiles start demanding internal tariffs.

Yes, a trade advantage among similar members.

Can that justification be extrapolated to the whole world though?

Yes. The more dissimilar the trading partners, the more to gain from trade.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Dr Jekyll said:

Yes. The more dissimilar the trading partners, the more to gain from trade.

Unless you are a home based producer that simply cannot compete with $1 a day wages and little employment costs.

[philv]

amusingduck said:

bhstewie said:

Crackie said:

That's a pretty big generalisation based upon some unsupported anecdotes. Would it not be better to use up to date research from people with credible credentials.

If someone thinks 20% over 5 years is the figure, that is fine. I'd rather go with the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics instead. Their most recent research put the no deal figure between 1.0% and 3.1%...…..not good I grant you but significantly better than the projected impact of May's backstop deal.

http://ukandeu.ac.uk/new-research-shows-economic-a...

Apologies, I should and could have been clearer.

The 20% over five years was the financial hit someone said they were prepared to personally take if things went badly.

Most people seem to work on the principle "I don't believe it will happen".

I think many people look at studies with an air of "It'll never happen to me".

If it should happen to them I'd like to know how much of a hit people are prepared to take personally, and how well they've prepared for it.

People change jobs and they do the maths to see if they can afford it.

People change car and they do the maths to see if they can afford it.

Who's done the maths to see if they can afford to be 2% worse off or 3% worse off etc.

The GBP/EUR exchange rate is ~15% worse than pre-referendum, USD about ~12% worse.

About half (£279bn) of our imports are from Eurozone countries, and another £66bn from the USA. So about 60% of our imports now cost about 12-15% more than pre-referendum? I could see that quite easily being 2-3% worse off overall.

If that's the case, no maths needed. They've lived it, and has anyone really noticed any difference?

Well let’s see...

Several hundred more in spending on tne annual ho.iday.
Several thousand difference in visitation costs and maintenance payments for child in eu.

So 3 to 4 k difference a year.

If brexit goes ahead we can add -
Travel/medical insurance
Visa fees
And who knows what else

I would think a lot of people have been severely affected.

Edited by philv on Monday 17th December 09:30

Edited by philv on Monday 17th December 09:32

[Crackie]

Nickgnome said:

amusingduck said:

The GBP/EUR exchange rate is ~15% worse than pre-referendum, USD about ~12% worse.

About half (£279bn) of our imports are from Eurozone countries, and another £66bn from the USA. So about 60% of our imports now cost about 12-15% more than pre-referendum? I could see that quite easily being 2-3% worse off overall.

If that's the case, no maths needed. They've lived it, and has anyone really noticed any difference?

Yes

Oh well, never mind eh. You made it clear yesterday by saying "At least whatever the consequence I can ensure the outcome will not impact my family and me."

[Dr Jekyll]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Yes. The more dissimilar the trading partners, the more to gain from trade.

Unless you are a home based producer that simply cannot compete with $1 a day wages and little employment costs.

In which case you are in the wrong business. Why should consumers have to subsidise producers? Quite apart from cases where those 'home based' producers are in Spain and the consumers in the UK.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Dr Jekyll said:

In which case you are in the wrong business. Why should consumers have to subsidise producers? Quite apart from cases where those 'home based' producers are in Spain and the consumers in the UK.

I'm happy to pay a little more to keep someone employed here rather than wherever.

The world is not a level playing field.

[Piha]

Dr Jekyll said:

In which case you are in the wrong business. Why should consumers have to subsidise producers? Quite apart from cases where those 'home based' producers are in Spain and the consumers in the UK.

That is a nasty statement. Care to back it up?

Why don't you tell everyone what industry you and your family work/worked in, so we can decide if we consumers "subside" you and your family.

[PositronicRay]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Dr Jekyll said:

In which case you are in the wrong business. Why should consumers have to subsidise producers? Quite apart from cases where those 'home based' producers are in Spain and the consumers in the UK.

I'm happy to pay a little more to keep someone employed here rather than wherever.

The world is not a level playing field.

Isn't that the whole point of capitalism though, everything just sort of levels naturally.

[Piha]

pgh said:

Piha said:

Dr Jekyll said:

In which case you are in the wrong business. Why should consumers have to subsidise producers? Quite apart from cases where those 'home based' producers are in Spain and the consumers in the UK.

That is a nasty statement. Care to back it up?

Why don't you tell everyone what industry you and your family work/worked in, so we can decide if we consumers "subside" you and your family.

Why would you consider a free market "nasty"?

I am replying to DrJ's comment. Can you show me where I stated I "consider a free market nasty"?

[Jinx]

philv said:

Well let’s see...

Several hundred more in spending on tne annual ho.iday.
Several thousand difference in visitation costs and maintenance payments for child in eu.

So 3 to 4 k difference a year.

If brexit goes ahead we can add -
Travel/medical insurance
Visa fees
And who knows what else

I would think a lot of people have been severely affected.

Edited by philv on Monday 17th December 09:30

Edited by philv on Monday 17th December 09:32

Erm Phil - a lot of people (many who probably/possibly voted for brexit) don't have the money for a foreign holiday each year or even ever. I suspect they might not have much sympathy for your position.

[Mrr T]

Jonesy23 said:

including some of the problems, the one sided solutions and the bullying.

Or as some would suggest the solution which best suits the EU countries.

How can the EU countries bully the UK? Leave said they needed us more than we needed them.

[saaby93]

Mrr T said:

Jonesy23 said:

including some of the problems, the one sided solutions and the bullying.

Or as some would suggest the solution which best suits the EU countries.

How can the EU countries bully the UK? Leave said they needed us more than we needed them.

Where do the allegations of bullyling come from?
Have any of the negotiators said they were bullied?
The UK has voted to leave the EU and the EU has been helping achieve a decent trade deal on exit - i..e business wont have to worry too much
Either that or the UK can leave with no deal, but it's the UK's choice

Is it someone making up stuff to be mischievous?

[TEKNOPUG]

Jinx said:

philv said:

Well let’s see...

Several hundred more in spending on tne annual ho.iday.
Several thousand difference in visitation costs and maintenance payments for child in eu.

So 3 to 4 k difference a year.

If brexit goes ahead we can add -
Travel/medical insurance
Visa fees
And who knows what else

I would think a lot of people have been severely affected.

Edited by philv on Monday 17th December 09:30

Edited by philv on Monday 17th December 09:32

Erm Phil - a lot of people (many who probably/possibly voted for brexit) don't have the money for a foreign holiday each year or even ever. I suspect they might not have much sympathy for your position.

Surely you have a holiday budget of X and only go wherever that budget allows? In which case it wont cost you anymore?

Or do you insist on repeating last year's holiday, in exact detail, regardless of the cost? In which case it may well cost more from one year to the next but that doesn't seem to matter if you refuse to consider other options.

Or holiday to one of the 170+ countries outside the EU.

HTH