How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 11)

[gooner1]

DeepEnd said:

gooner1 said:

DeepEnd said:

He actually said "don't cling to the blue" - i.e. sod the EU trade 45% not important.

What did you think "don't cling to" means? Something like "Retain the exact same benefits" (Brexit Err promise, DDavis, c 2017)

Why post it and say "don't cling to this" if you really don't mean "don't cling to EU trade".

It's not a strawman, it's setting fire to such a daft argument.

And that my slippery friend is nothing but a downright lie.
Someone, like yourself, would report that in an effort to get the poster of such a blatant lie banned.
Not to mention the deliberate act of altering a posters actual words.

I’m trying to make sense of his post.

The context is around the impact of no deal and the damage it may do to our trade with the EU.

ADuck then posts his graph saying “don’t cling to the blue” - which is EU trade.

It implies he is saying don’t worry about damaging the blue it doesn’t matter. Is there another explanation?

It’s a daft argument given EU trade is still huge and growing.

If you can’t understand why it’s daft, then it helps explain why you don’t fear no deal - perhaps you don’t understand the consequences or chose to ignore the risks.

PS I certainly haven’t reported you, did you not get an email saying why you were banned from the Nigel thread? My guess would be it is linked to the ethnicity attack. Learn from it.

Edited by DeepEnd on Monday 26th August 14:22

,


You put your own words in quotes and attempted to pass them off as AD's.
A deliberate act to deceive others. Please don't compound your lies.

What exactly do you consider I was attacking when I told you my ethnicity, and then asked if
you MINDED telling me yours? There was no attempt to drag it out of you, you just went to your
usual stance of crying wascist. As for an email saying why I was banned, no such email was sent.
Interesting how you were telling other posters that I was banned though, seeing as I or anyone
else hadn't mentioned it.


Now do you want to carry on lying or admit you were wrong to alter a post for your own benefit?

[anonymous-user]

S1KRR said:

The key problem here is that the WA "Deal" is not the future deal. Its by very nature a can kicking exercise for the next 2 years which we "try" to set out a mutually beneficial long term arrangement with the EU. It doesn't set out with tariffs if any will be set. all it does is tie us to the Eu for ANOTHER 2 years, we pay £39bn and they "MIGHT" do a deal. Which tbh, I don't hang too much hope on. The problem is that May binned "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" early on, and no one picked up on it!


In other news. Rather amusing pic from Biarritz



When Tusk realises the 3 on the left make ALL the important decision.

In fact what G7 nation does Tusk represent? If you allow that he's there because Germany, Italy and France are members, then why is Merkel, Conte and Macron there if the EU can decide what it wants its members to do

Average EU external tariff rate is 4%. The highly protected agricultural sector is where the rates ramp up most.

Hence why the farming sector is the most problematic, both for UK and EU producers. Thats why UK matching EU tariffs outside membership will screw Ireland.

[amusingduck]

DeepEnd said:

You are quite right.

Please clarify what point you were making with respect to “don’t cling to” re EU trade.

I think we’ve all judged your analysis correctly anyway but have a go.

This explained most of it, which you avoided using CGT3 as a get-out

amusingduck said:

Focusing on RoW exports after we leave with worse trading terms, which are already growing faster than EU exports whilst we're members, is a nonsense argument? You'll have to explain that one.

What I actually said originally, which for any other goldfish was:

amusingduck said:

Focus on the red, instead of trying to cling to the blue? It's a big old world out there, plenty of opportunities

The key word was trying. As in, it seems to me that trying to maintain existing trade levels with the EU under a no-deal scenario is going to be more difficult, and less beneficial, than focusing on the RoW exports which are growing at a faster rate than EU exports even before we're on no deal terms. It's not either/or, it's a matter of prioritisation. RoW seems an easier win to me, I invited you to argue otherwise and you chose not to.

[DeepEnd]

amusingduck said:

The key word was trying. As in, it seems to me that trying to maintain existing trade levels with the EU under a no-deal scenario is going to be more difficult, and less beneficial, than focusing on the RoW exports which are growing at a faster rate than EU exports even before we're on no deal terms. It's not either/or, it's a matter of prioritisation. RoW seems an easier win to me, I invited you to argue otherwise and you chose not to.

"trying to maintain existing trade levels with the EU under a no-deal scenario is going to be more difficult"

So you are saying focus on RoW and allow EU trade to be damaged if necessary as part of negotiations?

The perception was correct and it is a reckless and ill-informed mindset as it dismisses the impact of damaging EU trade which could be far reaching.

You may believe that focusing on RoW exports will make up the damage, and that damage and lost jobs "will be worth it" but there is no evidence for that, and unfortunately no one with any credibility agrees with you. Your graph doesn't say that anyway as RoW exports are growing whilst we are in the EU. Their growth is not being stopped, is it?

[amusingduck]

DeepEnd said:

amusingduck said:

The key word was trying. As in, it seems to me that trying to maintain existing trade levels with the EU under a no-deal scenario is going to be more difficult, and less beneficial, than focusing on the RoW exports which are growing at a faster rate than EU exports even before we're on no deal terms. It's not either/or, it's a matter of prioritisation. RoW seems an easier win to me, I invited you to argue otherwise and you chose not to.

"trying to maintain existing trade levels with the EU under a no-deal scenario is going to be more difficult"

So you are saying focus on RoW and allow EU trade to be damaged if necessary as part of negotiations?

The perception was correct and it is a reckless and ill-informed mindset as it dismisses the impact of damaging EU trade which could be far reaching.

You may believe that focusing on RoW exports will make up the damage, and that damage and lost jobs "will be worth it" but there is no evidence for that, and unfortunately no one with any credibility agrees with you. Your graph doesn't say that anyway as RoW exports are growing whilst we are in the EU. Their growth is not being stopped, is it?

What on earth are you talking about "allow"? Do you have a solution for a no deal brexit not damaging EU trade? We can have a no deal brexit without damaging it?! Why do you spend so much time arguing against it then

It's simply a case of pragmatism. If focusing on EU is the best route in a no deal landscape, great. If not, we should focus on what is the best route.

As ever you fail to answer the question.

[NoNeed]

gooner1 said:

,


You put your own words in quotes and attempted to pass them off as AD's.
A deliberate act to deceive others. Please don't compound your lies.

What exactly do you consider I was attacking when I told you my ethnicity, and then asked if
you MINDED telling me yours? There was no attempt to drag it out of you, you just went to your
usual stance of crying wascist. As for an email saying why I was banned, no such email was sent.
Interesting how you were telling other posters that I was banned though, seeing as I or anyone
else hadn't mentioned it.


Now do you want to carry on lying or admit you were wrong to alter a post for your own benefit?

He is one of a group that contains a MOD I believe, the reason is, a few weeks ago I reported a post by one of them for using words Identical to my own that got me a ban and the offender got to modify the post rather than receive any ban.

[anonymous-user]

gooner1 said:

,




What exactly do you consider I was attacking when I told you my ethnicity, and then asked if
you MINDED telling me yours? There was no attempt to drag it out of you, you just went to your
usual stance of crying wascist. As for an email saying why I was banned, no such email was sent.
Interesting how you were telling other posters that I was banned though, seeing as I or anyone
else hadn't mentioned it.

Probably best you keep all that and post it up in the Nigel thread Goon.

It’s of zero relevance here.

[Mrr T]

jsf said:

Average EU external tariff rate is 4%. The highly protected agricultural sector is where the rates ramp up most.

Hence why the farming sector is the most problematic, both for UK and EU producers. Thats why UK matching EU tariffs outside membership will screw Ireland.

Thats both part of Ireland. So 1.8M UK citizen will be screw by a no deal brexit. Have you told them?

[NoNeed]

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Average EU external tariff rate is 4%. The highly protected agricultural sector is where the rates ramp up most.

Hence why the farming sector is the most problematic, both for UK and EU producers. Thats why UK matching EU tariffs outside membership will screw Ireland.

Thats both part of Ireland. So 1.8M UK citizen will be screw by a no deal brexit. Have you told them?

There are 1.8 million farmers or people dependant on farming in Northern Ireland?


This is why people don't believe remain scare stories, if they aren't made up they are grossly exaggerated.

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

Thats both part of Ireland. So 1.8M UK citizen will be screw by a no deal brexit. Have you told them?

NI wont have any tariffs selling to its major market, rest of UK, its competitors just got more expensive too.

Ideally UK leaves with a deal that works for all, if not NI wont be as badly impacted as ROI.

The current ROI position is beginning to sink in how absurd it is for them.

[S1KRR]

jsf said:

Average EU external tariff rate is 4%. The highly protected agricultural sector is where the rates ramp up most.

Hence why the farming sector is the most problematic, both for UK and EU producers. Thats why UK matching EU tariffs outside membership will screw Ireland.

Ta

The ~10% I read, was as you say, because one sector has the highest rates. 4% seems pretty reasonable tbh considering.


I don't know, but are there tariffs on financial services into and out of the EU? And similar into and out of the USA?

[Mrr T]

NoNeed said:

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Average EU external tariff rate is 4%. The highly protected agricultural sector is where the rates ramp up most.

Hence why the farming sector is the most problematic, both for UK and EU producers. Thats why UK matching EU tariffs outside membership will screw Ireland.

Thats both part of Ireland. So 1.8M UK citizen will be screw by a no deal brexit. Have you told them?

There are 1.8 million farmers or people dependant on farming in Northern Ireland?


This is why people don't believe remain scare stories, if they aren't made up they are grossly exaggerated.

You do realise the comment about being screwed did not come from a remainder?

[anonymous-user]

S1KRR said:

Ta

The ~10% I read, was as you say, because one sector has the highest rates. 4% seems pretty reasonable tbh considering.


I don't know, but are there tariffs on financial services into and out of the EU? And similar into and out of the USA?

Tariffs are on goods, not services.

You are likely to see digital taxes becoming more prevalent in future.

The issue for services is the regulatory barriers in the market, there is currently no single market in the EU for services.

The trajectory over the last 10 years has been for the EU to make the service sector more open not only to EU members, but also to ROW.

[NoNeed]

Mrr T said:

NoNeed said:

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Average EU external tariff rate is 4%. The highly protected agricultural sector is where the rates ramp up most.

Hence why the farming sector is the most problematic, both for UK and EU producers. Thats why UK matching EU tariffs outside membership will screw Ireland.

Thats both part of Ireland. So 1.8M UK citizen will be screw by a no deal brexit. Have you told them?

There are 1.8 million farmers or people dependant on farming in Northern Ireland?


This is why people don't believe remain scare stories, if they aren't made up they are grossly exaggerated.

You do realise the comment about being screwed did not come from a remainder?

Yes I do, but you had to take it exagerate, and apply it to an area of the UK

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

You do realise the comment about being screwed did not come from a remainder?

You do realise that most people now use the term Ireland to refer to Eire (ROI).

It was also bloody obvious in the context of the discussion i was referring to the non-UK part of Ireland.

[Mrr T]

jsf said:

NI wont have any tariffs selling to its major market, rest of UK, its competitors just got more expensive too.

Ideally UK leaves with a deal that works for all, if not NI wont be as badly impacted as ROI.

The current ROI position is beginning to sink in how absurd it is for them.

The figures I see suggest Ireland exports to the UK (including NI) 11% of exports, NI exports to Ireland 33% of exports.

[Mrr T]

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

You do realise the comment about being screwed did not come from a remainder?

You do realise that most people now use the term Ireland to refer to Eire (ROI).

It was also bloody obvious in the context of the discussion i was referring to the non-UK part of Ireland.

I realised what you meant. I was pointing out tariffs on UK exports to the EU would have a similar affect on NI. But I know most leavers have no interest in the people of NI.

[NoNeed]

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

You do realise the comment about being screwed did not come from a remainder?

You do realise that most people now use the term Ireland to refer to Eire (ROI).

It was also bloody obvious in the context of the discussion i was referring to the non-UK part of Ireland.

I realised what you meant. I was pointing out tariffs on UK exports to the EU would have a similar affect on NI. But I know most leavers have no interest in the people of NI.

But like I said, you are grossly exaggerating to the point of telling lies.

You said 1.8 million are screwed, the population of NI is indeed 1.8 million but agriculture is just 2.4% of its economic output, agriculture exports less than 1%


This was you post

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Average EU external tariff rate is 4%. The highly protected agricultural sector is where the rates ramp up most.

Hence why the farming sector is the most problematic, both for UK and EU producers. Thats why UK matching EU tariffs outside membership will screw Ireland.

Thats both part of Ireland. So 1.8M UK citizen will be screw by a no deal brexit. Have you told them?

Are you going to apologize to the northern Irish for your scare tactics?

[NoNeed]

Remainers and the truth are like two magnets repelling each other

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

I realised what you meant. I was pointing out tariffs on UK exports to the EU would have a similar affect on NI. But I know most leavers have no interest in the people of NI.

You know that how exactly?