How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)

[Dr Jekyll]

Brooking10 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Brooking10 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

No country has ever become worse off as a result of becoming more free, so I doubt we'll be the first.

Exhibit A

Rhodesia/Zimbabwe.

There are plenty others which could be posited

This is why the “Freedom” angle is the preserve of jingoistic stupidity

Zimbabwe went communist, hardly a beacon of free trade.

That isn’t what you were implying and well you know it Mel Gibson.

I was totally explicit, free countries are richer. Can anyone seriously argue that Zimbabwe under Mugabe was a free country economically or otherwise? Even compared to southern Rhodesia?

[anonymous-user]

Dr Jekyll said:

Brooking10 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Brooking10 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

No country has ever become worse off as a result of becoming more free, so I doubt we'll be the first.

Exhibit A

Rhodesia/Zimbabwe.

There are plenty others which could be posited

This is why the “Freedom” angle is the preserve of jingoistic stupidity

Zimbabwe went communist, hardly a beacon of free trade.

That isn’t what you were implying and well you know it Mel Gibson.

I was totally explicit, free countries are richer. Can anyone seriously argue that Zimbabwe under Mugabe was a free country economically or otherwise? Even compared to southern Rhodesia?

Ok let’s try another for sts and giggles

What’s your perspective on the former Soviet states ?

[stongle]

Brooking10 said:

Ok let’s try another for sts and giggles

What’s your perspective on the former Soviet states ?

Edge cases, or what?

The problem is, DeepEnd is only correct in a vacuum of EU trade. As you know that number is getting compensated with a shift in stimulus. It's going onto the message of all of the top 23 central banks in the world, and certainly that of the ECB under Draghi and even more under Lagarde.

There are many variables at play here, without that shock of exit - it's highly unlikely we would have changed political / economic irection for decades - if at all. In fact if they continue the path to Federalisation, we could end up in a worse place.... and that would fit your Soviet analogy better...

We voted to the leave the club, so full benefits no longer apply. However the are realities to face. It makes little economic sense for both sides to get into a trade spat, but both sides are thinking with their dicks right now. Evidently, the noise coming out of Barniers team is we ain't bluffing and the EC needs to gets its canister around that. To get close to what both sides want, we are going to have to throw each other a bone. The problem is, we have less time to swallow that as Boris is on the clock - the deadline gets the EU a concession.

[Murph7355]

DeepEnd said:

....

If you don’t have an argument, just say “it’s open to widely different interpretations”. Just a guess then on gut feeling, done.
...

You would do everyone including yourself a service if you ate your own dog st.

Dr Jekyll said:

I was totally explicit, free countries are richer. Can anyone seriously argue that Zimbabwe under Mugabe was a free country economically or otherwise? Even compared to southern Rhodesia?

To be fair DrJ, I thought you meant self determination. That's what Zim got. For worse (no "better",certianly not in recent times).

More pertinently, free trade agreements are not "free" if they have political ties.

Brooking10 said:

Ok let’s try another for sts and giggles

What’s your perspective on the former Soviet states ?

You should have left it at Zim I suspect Trev.

Are you saying the former Soviet States were better off under Soviet rule? Especially when "better off" isn't merely an economic concept.

(Zim still stands out as the exception to the rule on pretty much all counts).

[Blackpuddin]

stongle said:

To get close to what both sides want, we are going to have to throw each other a bone.

Or maybe a stone. It sometimes works for Trump.

[Jazzer77]

Dr Jekyll said:

No country has ever become worse off as a result of becoming more free, so I doubt we'll be the first.

Lmao, that's a gutter level statement even for a Brexiteer.

Were you waving a flag while typing?

[rdjohn]

Can I recommend that everyone takes a look at the Andrew Neal show last night.

In the middle there was a very interesting piece on what the EU agenda actually says. Not reported in the news today. Which is somewhat odd.

[wc98]

Brooking10 said:

No, not at all. Just that I hope red lines are drawn for the right reasons.

Point I was trying to make is that as and when concessions have to be made and given I hope that they are done so with an eye on long term economic consequences as opposed to short term political ones.

got you, hopefully that is what happens. there is a definite possibility of some poor decisions being made, particularly in this brave new age of instant information.

as long as those making the decisions on both sides stay away from twitter, instagram and facebook ,mistakes should be kept to a minimum

[anonymous-user]

wc98 said:

got you, hopefully that is what happens. there is a definite possibility of some poor decisions being made, particularly in this brave new age of instant information.

as long as those making the decisions on both sides stay away from twitter, instagram and facebook ,mistakes should be kept to a minimum

I’d agree with your last point 100% !

[anonymous-user]

rdjohn said:

Can I recommend that everyone takes a look at the Andrew Neal show last night.

In the middle there was a very interesting piece on what the EU agenda actually says. Not reported in the news today. Which is somewhat odd.

Can you give us the precis?

[Earthdweller]

RTE reporting the U.K. could walk away from the talks in June if no significant progress

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0227/1117850-uk-brexi...

[Sway]

The last decent FTA the EU signed, walking away was exactly what the other party had to do in order for the EU to start working in good faith to actually make a deal...

Amazingly, Canada wasn't vilified by doing so - it was entirely understandable at the time why they do so, and it worked to their benefit.

[Carl_Manchester]

Forget Canada what about....Zimbabwe !

[crankedup]

Gove has stood up in Parliament and advised the House that unless the EU arrive at a broad outline of a trade deal the U.K. will walk away. Tick tock fighting talk, good, very good.

[anonymous-user]

Sway said:

The last decent FTA the EU signed, walking away was exactly what the other party had to do in order for the EU to start working in good faith to actually make a deal...

Amazingly, Canada wasn't vilified by doing so - it was entirely understandable at the time why they do so, and it worked to their benefit.

Do you believe starting from a position of regulatory alignment will reduce the time taken to make a deal?

I’m mindful that CETA took 7+ years.

[paulrockliffe]

Sway said:

The last decent FTA the EU signed, walking away was exactly what the other party had to do in order for the EU to start working in good faith to actually make a deal...

Amazingly, Canada wasn't vilified by doing so - it was entirely understandable at the time why they do so, and it worked to their benefit.

It was reported as an embarrassment for the EU if I remember rightly. No doubt if we walk away it'll be reported differently.

[Earthdweller]

I think you may have a point Sway, reading the EU position this morning it almost seems that they don’t want a deal.

If they do, it seems as though they do not understand the concept of independence and self determination.

It’s not just about the fish but the whole document is hedged towards parallelism and equivalence right through all sectors from Defence to financial services et al

It all strikes me as a bit “Hotel California”

Given the U.K. position .. free and independent state making its own decisions as Red lines, I really don’t see how there can be a deal

I think it’s certainly going to be an interesting few months but if the U.K. sticks to “ independent sovereign nation” unless the EU moves considerably there ain’t gonna be a deal

[soupdragon1]

Earthdweller said:

RTE reporting the U.K. could walk away from the talks in June if no significant progress

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0227/1117850-uk-brexi...

Quite refreshing that- reading a news article and it actually gives you the news, rather than a 'reporter' bending the story out of shape like Uri Gellar doing a spoon trick.

EU said x
UK said y

Bravo!

[amgmcqueen]

Earthdweller said:

RTE reporting the U.K. could walk away from the talks in June if no significant progress

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0227/1117850-uk-brexi...

Why wait until June? It's obvious the EU are not interested in a trade deal and are wasting our time. Walk away NOW!

[Sway]

Sam.M said:

Sway said:

The last decent FTA the EU signed, walking away was exactly what the other party had to do in order for the EU to start working in good faith to actually make a deal...

Amazingly, Canada wasn't vilified by doing so - it was entirely understandable at the time why they do so, and it worked to their benefit.

Do you believe starting from a position of regulatory alignment will reduce the time taken to make a deal?

I’m mindful that CETA took 7+ years.

It 'should'.

As per the then reporting on CETA, by EU parliamentarians and commissioners - the failure was of the EU's making, by trying to include politics into trade.

The basis for 'level playing field' is in every FTA globally. As long as outcomes are broadly equal, it's a level playing field. Job done. Commitment from both sides to conform to WTO/OECD/et al outcomes - boxes ticked.

Dispute arbitration mechanisms - the same. Panel made up equally of members of the "Supreme Courts" of each party, with WTO arbitration on a split. Boxes ticked.

Special interest industries? List them out, and either agree to exclude from FTA, or thrash out a compromise. Boxes ticked.

Currently, that's how the UK is viewing things (methinks the hand of Crawford Falconer is pretty visible...). The EU is currently working on the opposite basis - every aspect starts with EU full retention of full control and oversight.

Whether we get to the 'norm' of trade negotiations (and therefore rattling through in quick time all the easy stuff, then focusing on the more contententious bits) is entirely predicated on how the EU respond to our entirely reasonable (in many ways "more reasonable" than Canada's response at the time) position.