Confusion of VIs
-
Posts
17,206 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Confusion of VIs
-
-
5 minutes ago, Take Me Back To London! said:
As like the Cameron talks, due to the EU's uncompromising and hostile attitude, the current 2 years of negotiations will be meaningless and we will be out and trading by WTO rules just like the USA, China, Japan et al.
The USA, China, Japan et al don't trade on WTO terms, they all have dozens of trade deals drawn up over 20-30 years of detailed negotiations with other states.
As far as I can tell no country has ever torn up all its trade deals and tried to start again while relying on WTO.
-
3 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:
Wonder why engineers (anecdotally) are pro leave.
Probably because we are all living in our own bubbles, I know no-one in London (mainly medics, IT and scientists) who voted Leave but go to Blackpool and almost everyone seems to have voted Leave.
-
42 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:
Nice anecdote.
I know plenty of engineers, scientists, pilots, and doctors who voted for Brexit.
Presumably you also know around 4-5 times as many who voted Remain.
-
3 hours ago, ccc said:
Less than an hour for you to back up exactly the point they were making.
Superb.
Perhaps it would helped if I had put JOKE!!! at the end of the post.
-
11 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-39434978/theresa-may-uk-will-get-same-benefits-after-brexit
"The same benefits"...How is this going to be possible in the short, medium & long term?
Well if we just pretend to leave...
-
26 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:
If we went down the EEA route, then the services sector would be largely uneffected...
Yes, but at the moment that's been ruled out and it will take a lot of backtracking from May and a willingness to face down a large section of her own party to put it back on the agenda.
If we get that far, I would be surprised if we ever "left" the EU in any real sense. We would probably end up staying in the EEA as a sort of shadow member.
-
1 hour ago, Dave Beans said:
The problem with CETA that it isnt a good template for our FTA...Its extremely limited in regards to services...
https://capx.co/the-canada-eu-trade-deal-is-no-model-for-brexit/
We are very unlikely to get anything more than an extremely limited deal on services, the rest of the EU will be very happy with just a tariff free zone for goods.
-
56 minutes ago, the gardener said:
I think that's called the bargaining stage of grief. Progress! Well done.
Now. Are you ready?
...The UK is leaving the EU. We are not seeking membership of the single market or customs union.
The days of the UK paying huge amounts into the EU are gone. It may have made more sense in the past (it didn't) but the importance of EU trade for the UK is in decline (down from ~55% to 44% and falling).
Remind me again, how much does Canada pay under their agreement? That's right, a bit fat zero dollars. Granted the EU saves about twice the amount due to the removal of tariffs as Canada but then since import tariffs are in effect a tax on a country's own consumers one could argue that the greatest benefit is to the Canadian side.
Edit: No Canadians or EU citizens were harmed or punished in the making of this agreement.
Just a factual post, time will tell if there is any truth in the rumor but it has been remarkably consistent since it first surfaced a few days after the vote.
In the meantime feel free to continue blathering on about grief stages, if it makes you feel better, and try not to get too upset when we enter into a very expensive transition deal.
-
3 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:
One way she might present it, is to have some shadowing of the EEA agreement, possibly with some adaptations..."a red, white & blue Brexit"; EEA in all but name...The problem is that she'd be sailing very close to the wind, timewise to implement it...
Within Brussels, there are thoughts that the EEA would be the preferable route... http://www.politico.eu/article/eu-brussels-suggests-norway-model-for-uk-after-brexit-talks-negotiations/
In Brussels that is referred to a the Black, Red and Gold Brexit, as it protects everything important to the Germans while still being very painful for the UK.
-
1 minute ago, Dave Beans said:
Moving into the EEA means that we would have left the EU. Norway has had two accession referendums, which have both rejected EU membership.
I realise that, but hasn't this already been ruled out by May as it would not satisfy the right wing of her party; who would regard it as a betrayal of the referendum vote.
Of course it is possible that once re-elected with a huge majority and no longer needing the right wingers votes she will feel secure enough to do make the case for EEA membership.
Alternatively the Brussels gossip is still that, once it is clear what the final deal will be (and we can clearly see there is a cliff edge) an offer made which lets the UK remain and restrict FoM for a long period along the lines of the EEA article, in return for an additional payment into the structural fund that will look very small compared to the cost of leaving. This rumor circulated within days of the vote and so far has panned out (even down to the exact language being used to describe the EU position) as suggested.
-
3 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:
It is a bit weighty...in its conclusion..
If we do in spite of May's rhetoric to date transition into the EEA, does anyone seriously think we will ever leave.
Isn't Norway officially still in a transition period.
-
2 hours ago, kzb said:
Boost for Brexit free trade deal chances after landmark EU court ruling
Apparently this should make the UK-EU free trade deal easier, because it will not need ratifying by the whole number of states within the EU. So the Walloons cannot hold it up single-handed like they did with the Canada-EU trade deal.
Rather depends on what we ask for.
Sounds to me like anything that intrudes on national competencies will trigger the requirement for agreement from all national and devolved parliaments (wonder if that includes Scotland and Wales?).
-
15 minutes ago, hotairmail said:
Agreed. But the story was in Bloomberg (a Remain, anti Trump organ) for information.
Sorry, didn't look and assumed it was a link to the Express rant.
-
10 minutes ago, hotairmail said:
EU-Singapore Ruling Offers U.K. Clues in Bid for Brexit Deal
The idea that 28 nations can agree (quickly and with little hassle or silly buggers) is pie in the sky.
You can either see that as a negative (for Brexit), or a positive (something unwieldy to get out of).
Beneath the usual Express nonsense, it's a common sense decision.
The EU can agree a deal that falls within its remit, if the deal strays outside this into areas that are still the responsibility of national governments it has to be agreed by them.
Imagine the screams of outrage from the Express if the EU tried to impose a deal that impacted our ability to take decisions at national level.
-
54 minutes ago, F-sake said:
Not known at the moment. I am not sure whether they actually meant their tax credit - they mentioned online calculator which still shows that they should have £500 every 4 weeks, although they aren't very keen on talking about it at the moment and provide details. Their personal details are still the same - a family of five with combined income under £20k. I always wondered how they could ever afford anything, leave along going on holiday abroad every year and renewing a car.
Probably the benefits cap reduction coming in on 7th of Nov. There is an on-line calculator and if they are on maximum benefit would reduce their benefits by about those numbers.
-
1 hour ago, F-sake said:
Meanwhile, our friends from Latvia just cancelled our bowling night out. They said they had their income benefits reduced from £500pm down to £70pm.
I sincerely feel sorry for them and don't have any desire to gloat. At the same time can't help thinking that all those years they were receiving income support which was almost equal to the share of my income tax going to social benefits.
What caused the change.
-
1 hour ago, ccc said:
Your logic is we are not in the EU = we don't get any of the member benefits.
That is nonsense. End of story. Liechtenstein is an example of this. Amongst others.
No that's just a statement you made up.
I said we will get a deal that is substantially better than no deal, but we will need to pay into the EU for those benefits and thinking that our deal will be similar to Liechtenstein's is madness for reasons obvious to just about anyone but you.
The interesting thing will be whether May accepts the deal, or has backed herself into such a tight corner she has to choose to leave without a deal.
-
55 minutes ago, ccc said:
Poor response. No logic. Try again.
The logic will be clear to most, so no need to try again.
If you don't get it, I cannot help you.
-
5 minutes ago, ccc said:
Thanks for backing up my point.
So how does the Lichtenstein deal not undermine the EU then......
Too small to matter.
As Brexiteers are often keen to point out, the UK being the 6th largest economy makes a difference. In this case it makes us too big to ignore,so the final deal needs to be in line with the principles of the single market.
-
Just now, EUBanana said:
Unfortunately the alternative was subjugation, which is no alternative at all.
And yeah as I said, I'd be okay with it in a Hobbesian realpolitik sense, I just hope that at that point it becomes clear that the EU nomenklatura are the enemy, indeed probably our #1 enemy, and should be treated as such.
Not the enemy but we will be a competitor, so when any of the EU states has a disagreement with the UK they can look for support from the other 27.
-
5 minutes ago, ccc said:
Other countries not in the EU get some of the benefits without being members. Why would the EU NOT give us the same type of deal when we are one of the most powerful and economically important nations in Europe (#2 to be precise I think).
The only reason is political. There is no logical reason NOT to give us access to the single market but with zero freedom of movement. As someone else mentioned - Liechtenstein have this.
If they get this - and we do not - then it shows its all political IMO.
We are not Liechtenstein. Giving the UK the benefits of the single market without accepting the principles that underpin the market would undermine the whole point of being in the EU - I cannot see how you can fail to understand that.
Its all very simple really the EU are saying to us Brexit means Brexit, you should be happy.
-
7 minutes ago, EUBanana said:
Like I said, I imagine if Scotland became independent we would expedite agreeing to a new framework.
Deliberate obstruction is a thing, is it not. It's an option Michel Barnier may indeed choose, a bit of footdragging. You disagree that is not possible? This is how coercion works on the international stage.
If that's the option they take it's a very hostile one.
Of course it is, and all states use it as a matter of routine to further their own interests; that's why no sane person would willingly put their country in a position where they are relying on others to protect their vital national interests.
We will be offered a deal that is substantially better than no deal, if we are daft enough to paint ourselves into a corner where we cannot accept it we need to be prepared to accept the consequences of no deal, hopefully without lots of jingoistic whining about punishment..
-
1 minute ago, EUBanana said:
Single European Sky. They are still working out the details though.... they've been doing that for the past ten years, in fact.
And the hostility is them turning down any replacement agreement. If Scotland was declared independent I seriously doubt rUK would demand that planes from Edinburgh are banned from Heathrow. That would be a hostile act, even if we 'didnt do anything' and it was hostile by inaction.
You are misrepresenting the position.
There would be no ban, it would be the lack of a legal mechanism that would prevent planes from flying under UK rules. To expect all of the EU and other European states to jump to attention and rush to give the UK some bespoke deal because we have torn up the existing one seems rather hopeful.
-
7 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:
That's a pretty fair assessment.
Though I like some of JC's policies - he is a useless leader.
Is it therefore a better move to vote Tory, to have the greatest chance of him standing down as Labour leader?
He is not going to stand down whatever the result. His will blame the result on disunity.
Foxtons Share Price And The Housing Market - Merged
in House prices and the economy
Posted
Equally could be someone building a stake providing a support level.