Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brexit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Bow View Post
    I think the Britexers are in for a rude awakening in the world......your Empire went tits up in 1947 and other smaller countries have departed the so called Commonwealth, so if you think things will be like it was before, dream along.trade treatys are not arranged over night and take many years to arrange....you do not get a first place in the line up when dealing with say, Canada just because you were a member of the Commonwealth ...take a number and wait to be called......if you are dealing with that dick head Trump, no special deal for you in his "America First".....you backed out of paying your portion of EU expenses so you cant be trusted. so what gives you the impression you can just demand trade concessions......Good luck boys you will need it.....to show my disgust with the UK and its stupid decission I have returned my dual citizen (Canadian/British) passport and wont be visiting that sad little island set in a silver sea...

    Toulon France..
    You have to understand this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xq-gWv91WM&t=400s

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post
      It already is extended I think ?

      Wasn't there somewhere in between all hysterics the sobering announcement of a "transition period" untill 2020 whereby all current arrangements would simply be maintained ?

      I can very well see that being extended a number of times untill the Brexiteers have died of old age, and the referendum has lost all political relevancy...
      That's not gonna happen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czE7dkSSFB0

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post


        May's proposal went against the limits the EU had set - and which the EU will not be compromising. That proposal really was doomed from the beginning. I'm rather surprised that wasn't obvious in the UK.
        You need to understand the mindset. They really really really believe the UK is the cornerstone of the EU. That without UK funding the EU will fall apart and that the EU members are secretly desperate to keep 'our' money and will give us any terms we demand if we just ask. Beastly Johny Foreigner is in for a shock when they are no longer being kept afloat by the UK contribution. At present huge concrete mountains are being constructed all around the UK and massive chains are being forged (in Korea-cheaper there!) and anchored to them so as to keep the islands from floating into the stratosphere when 'our' economy booms and we are free of the repressive and undemocratic dead hand of the 'Fourth Reich' An era of unparalleled wealth and prosperity beckons and 'we' will once again assume our rightful place as the No 1 trading nation in the world.

        Land Of Hope And Glory,
        Mother Of the Free......

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Surrey View Post
          i am genuinely surprised the EU didn’t bite May’s hand off when she made her offer. She even went to Berlin to get her boss to approve and edit it before making it public.
          Likely that would be because the interpretation of how the EU works you just offered here, his completely untethered to the rather more mundane reality.

          The EU, as in the 27 (all of them, Germany just the first among equals), has no reason to accept anything that risks interfering with the balance of how the 27 are integrated, and will continue to be integrated with the UK out, and certainly not just because it would provide the UK with preferential treatment beyond what they accord each other.

          What they will do, and what seems to be happening, is that they will insist that the UK refrain from such demands, and instead accepts interacting with them on some basis that does not require giving the UK preferential treatment.

          It's what the four freedoms mean. The EU isn't going to start tinkering in an uncontrolled fashion with the actual fabric of that part of the union that actually works (which the bit the UK still wants in on, somehow) just to be amenable towards the UK.

          Comment


          • It does seem that Barnier and the EU could actually save us from ourselves by rejecting the Chequers proposals and enabling a 'No deal senario'. At the least that would save us the £39bn..

            In the UK ruling party there are basically three factions, the fanatical EU supporters lead by Demonic Grieve (known as Le Marechal due to his French ancestry) who would be prepared to see a Marxist government in the UK if it meant that we stayed in the EU.
            Those who supported Brexit during the referendum who will most likely vote down any deal that does not entail leaving the single market completely or allows freedom of movement.
            Then you have those who supported Remain during the referendum but are prepared to honour the referendum. These are mostly uncomfortable with the PM's proposals and will vote with whomever they think will win or in some cases would most benefit their leadership hopes. Given that the rank and file members are overwhelmingly in favour of Remain and despise May and her Chequers proposals any with leadership aspirations are being very half hearted in supporting her.

            In Labour (the opposition), when they can tear themselves away from their Jew hunts with their BNP buddies, Corbyn and his supporters secretly wish to leave the EU and have always done so. However they want to cause maximum difficulty for the government and will vote wihich ever way seems to do this, even if it means voting in favour of staying in the EU or for a second (or third or fourth) referendum. Those MPs who are not close to Corbyn are mostly pro EU except for a select group who are opposed to the EU, are not Corbyn supporters and thus are prepared to vote to leave and against any deal that is like the Chequers proposals.

            Ideally there will be continuous prevarication with no decision until it gets to the end of March and we leave the EU by default. After which some sensible arrangements can be made.




            "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Surrey View Post
              At the least that would save us the £39bn..
              Nope, it would not.
              Ideally there will be continuous prevarication with no decision until it gets to the end of March and we leave the EU by default. After which some sensible arrangements can be made.
              Not quite. Especially not unless the UK actually fulfills its obligations - including those £39bn. Why would any other trading partner trust UK when it renegades its existing agreements and obligations? And it is far from certain that UK would be able to trade even in accordance to WTO rules - at first that is. As per the headline of the news piece i linked here: 'No-deal Brexit: 'Not realistic' for UK to start trading under WTO rules in March, says WTO boss'.
              Which means that instead of using the current WTO tariffs (which are lower) they could default into using higher (or highest) rates for the imports from the UK - and UK would also not be able to benefit from the 'most favored nation' rule.
              It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

              Comment


              • I think you will find that the £39bn is conditional on their being an acceptable exit deal. No deal, no beer money for the greedy Eurocrats. Legal view of UK obligations is very grey plus there is the UK share of EU assets. So in practice there would be no downside to not paying.

                the view from the WTO is that members have to use the same tariffs to all nations that they don’t have a specific agreement with.
                "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Surrey View Post
                  I think you will find that the £39bn is conditional on their being an acceptable exit deal. No deal, no beer money for the greedy Eurocrats. Legal view of UK obligations is very grey plus there is the UK share of EU assets. So in practice there would be no downside to not paying.
                  Not quite. That £39bn are mostly the financial obligations UK has already signed & agreed to. The downside for not paying would be a guarantee of not having transition period until 12/2020 and a it would place UK in rather peculiar light exact at the time it is supposed to start negotiating international agreements which depend on countries upholding their obligations.
                  the view from the WTO is that members have to use the same tariffs to all nations that they don't have a specific agreement with.
                  Yes, and no. That is the most favorable nation rule - and it only applies to fellow WTO member states. So yes on the part that it really applies to the members but since UK status due to trade import/export quotas sizes and tariffs schedules is somewhat unclear at the moment (and seemingly disputed by some of the WTO member states) - it is far from certain that UK would be able to trade from the position of an full WTO member state.
                  It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by m kenny View Post

                    You need to understand the mindset. ...
                    I do believe that Vaeltaja is well aware of the mindset but it is good to read one of our British member restating it

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Johan Banér View Post

                      Likely that would be because the interpretation of how the EU works you just offered here, his completely untethered to the rather more mundane reality.

                      The EU, as in the 27 (all of them, Germany just the first among equals), has no reason to accept anything that risks interfering with the balance of how the 27 are integrated, and will continue to be integrated with the UK out, and certainly not just because it would provide the UK with preferential treatment beyond what they accord each other.

                      What they will do, and what seems to be happening, is that they will insist that the UK refrain from such demands, and instead accepts interacting with them on some basis that does not require giving the UK preferential treatment.

                      It's what the four freedoms mean. The EU isn't going to start tinkering in an uncontrolled fashion with the actual fabric of that part of the union that actually works (which the bit the UK still wants in on, somehow) just to be amenable towards the UK.
                      And yet nations like Greece are failing, their economies in collapse, their populations on the verge of rebellion against failing governments. Apparently, the EU doesn't actually work the way it was designed to. The member nations place their own welfare first and the group welfare somewhere around last, if that.

                      I truly believe that the real problem is that the major nations, at the end of WWII, ignoring history and precedent, short-circuited the functional processes developed over millennia, setting the stage for world-wide economic failure in the future.
                      Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                        . Apparently, the EU doesn't actually work the way it was designed to.
                        That presupposes you understand why the EU was created in the first place.

                        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        The member nations place their own welfare first and the group welfare somewhere around last, if that.
                        And that confirms you have no understanding of how it is working today.

                        Comment


                        • Regardless of what's been brought up, the extent to which the EU is not inclined to tinker with its own internal operations in deference to the UK is not really about the EU's future relationship with the EU, but about they EU's future interna relationship without the UK.

                          The expectation it should accept compromising it for the UK's sake is outlandish. ESPECIALLY if, for argumemt's saje, as the slightly Europhobic observations here claim, the EU internal functions are somehow subpar.

                          Really, some people think that could actually be a REASON for it to go ahead and just screw itself up further? All it says that the more there is reason for the EU to steer well clear of handing the UK any benefits that even remotely might interfere with those internal functions that are actually working. Which is the common market, which is the part the UK is really loathe to have to give up. Because it works.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                            Not quite. That £39bn are mostly the financial obligations UK has already signed & agreed to. The downside for not paying would be a guarantee of not having transition period until 12/2020 and a it would place UK in rather peculiar light exact at the time it is supposed to start negotiating international agreements which depend on countries upholding their obligations.

                            Yes, and no. That is the most favorable nation rule - and it only applies to fellow WTO member states. So yes on the part that it really applies to the members but since UK status due to trade import/export quotas sizes and tariffs schedules is somewhat unclear at the moment (and seemingly disputed by some of the WTO member states) - it is far from certain that UK would be able to trade from the position of an full WTO member state.
                            The Uk is a member of the wto so post Brexit, assuming no deal the EU would have to charge the same tariffs on goods that it charges to other wto members and vice versa.

                            Given the fairly high tariff rates charged by the EU this would have the potential to reduce food prices significantly in the U.K. as excluding tariff sanctions it is much cheaper so source most food supplies from outside the EU. Same for clothing. Indeed when the UK joined the EU in the 70s there was a large price hike in food.
                            The EU was set up with high tariffs on food imports to protect French farmers. High tariffs on cloths to protect Italian clothing manufacturers and high tariffs on cars to protect the German car industry.

                            Overall for the UK a 'no deal' solution is the best, provided that we have a competent government to exploit it.
                            "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Surrey View Post

                              The Uk is a member of the wto so post Brexit, assuming no deal the EU would have to charge the same tariffs on goods that it charges to other wto members and vice versa.

                              Given the fairly high tariff rates charged by the EU this would have the potential to reduce food prices significantly in the U.K. as excluding tariff sanctions it is much cheaper so source most food supplies from outside the EU. Same for clothing. Indeed when the UK joined the EU in the 70s there was a large price hike in food.
                              The EU was set up with high tariffs on food imports to protect French farmers. High tariffs on cloths to protect Italian clothing manufacturers and high tariffs on cars to protect the German car industry.

                              Overall for the UK a 'no deal' solution is the best, provided that we have a competent government to exploit it.
                              EU use no tariff inside and WTO outside safe for specific trade agreement.

                              Comment


                              • It appears Turkey is being lined up to cover the UK farm-produce shortage. However one problem is that Turkey will make easier access for its citizens to the UK part of any Trade Deal. India is known to be insisting on the same for any of its deals with the UK. It seems the UK is seen as an easy mark by her trading-partners-to-be!

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X