Confusion of VIs Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 hours ago, crouch said: These are trade offs. Being part of the EU means, quite rightly, that you follow the collective interest of the 28. Being outside means that you don't have the same heft but can tailor your trade policy to something nearer to your interests. This is swings and roundabouts; trade offs. As to the hardcore negotiators I agree but the reason we don't have them is because we don't have an independent trade policy; this is done by the EU. I'd recruit from wherever I could get people. We have a highly developed diverse economy. As a whole the EU also has a highly developed diverse economy. As such there is not that much to be gained from designing trade deals specific to the UK rather than as part of the EU. I would guess not nearly enough to offset our reduced clout in trade negotiation v the EU. And that's without considering the cost of Brexit during the years it takes us to negotiate these slightly inferior deals and the impact on our trade with the EU itself. If you want to do some research there are links to studies into possible benefit from tailored trade deals upthread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 19 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: We are a guarantor of the legally binding handover treaty, so what we should be doing is holding China to account, in just the same way as the EU is with us over the Good Friday treaty. That we are afraid to do anything is a reflection of the weak position we have put ourselves in. I don’t see how being in the EU (no brexit) would make any difference to our influence against China. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said: I don’t see how being in the EU (no brexit) would make any difference to our influence against China. If all European powers had fully merged their sovereignty in the 1970s, including overseas territories, negotiations over the handover might have been very different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouch Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: We have a highly developed diverse economy. As a whole the EU also has a highly developed diverse economy. As such there is not that much to be gained from designing trade deals specific to the UK rather than as part of the EU. This implicitly assumes that our objectives are the same as the EU. I was assuming they may not be in which case things may be different as we are not subsumed under the EU's objectives. The point about the trade aspects of Brexit is that it does enable us to strike out in a different direction. 5 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: I would guess not nearly enough to offset our reduced clout in trade negotiation v the EU. And that's without considering the cost of Brexit during the years it takes us to negotiate these slightly inferior deals and the impact on our trade with the EU itself. You may be right but, as I said above, the context may be different. Clout can't be dismissed and there's no doubt that we'll have much less heft. By different direction I mean our strengths might be in innovation, tech type industries or high grade services. The fact is that the EU has to compromise in its trade policy because it has to proceed on the basis that it secures the interests of 28; we can proceed on the basis of one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said: If all European powers had fully merged their sovereignty in the 1970s, including overseas territories, negotiations over the handover might have been very different. LMFAO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, crouch said: You may be right but, as I said above, the context may be different. Clout can't be dismissed and there's no doubt that we'll have much less heft. By different direction I mean our strengths might be in innovation, tech type industries or high grade services. The fact is that the EU has to compromise in its trade policy because it has to proceed on the basis that it secures the interests of 28; we can proceed on the basis of one. The UK is not one nation, let alone a unified single interest group. Brexit does nothing to further the unified pursuit of a national objective. In fact it furthers the interests of those who want to abolish the UK. You’re a useful idiot. Edited June 24, 2019 by thecrashingisles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pig Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 17 minutes ago, crouch said: This implicitly assumes that our objectives are the same as the EU. I was assuming they may not be in which case things may be different as we are not subsumed under the EU's objectives. The point about the trade aspects of Brexit is that it does enable us to strike out in a different direction. You may be right but, as I said above, the context may be different. Clout can't be dismissed and there's no doubt that we'll have much less heft. By different direction I mean our strengths might be in innovation, tech type industries or high grade services. The fact is that the EU has to compromise in its trade policy because it has to proceed on the basis that it secures the interests of 28; we can proceed on the basis of one. No. Similar to the 'nobody can argue against more control' this is a simplistic statement that sounds OK on the surface but glosses over the fact its completely misleading in principle. The EU isn't a single country with a nationalist policy. Its comprises 28 countries all with different 'objectives'. If there is an objective it is general rather than specific ie to collaborate and cooperate to mutual advantage. Slightly more specific is the divergence from the anglo-american economic model - but then we've been free to try this and it seems to have brought us a lot of grief, including the misdirection of Brexit. More specific than that of course are the four freedoms and the single market but thats still pretty 'general'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 Asking salaries in the construction industry are rising despite Brexit uncertainty, according to new research from specialist recruiter Randstad Construction, Property & Engineering. The survey into almost 6,800 permanent placed construction jobs shows salaries across the sector rose by an average 9% in the 12 months to May 30 2018 – despite a drop in the number of vacancies being advertised. http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/jun-2019/construction-pay-soars-brexodus-skills-shortage-bites-says-new-report Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMHAL Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 7 hours ago, Dorkins said: Just get on with what though? May negotiated a minimal withdrawal agreement which was just ending the UK's membership of the EU and leaving all end states on the table to be decided afterwards and Brexiteers don't seem to even want that. If they want WTO that's fine but they should win a mandate for it, the UK is a democracy. The single most convincing argument against a no deal brexit... bar none. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 53 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said: I don’t see how being in the EU (no brexit) would make any difference to our influence against China. Hard to see how you could think that. For most people the loss of influence as we move from being a leading EU member to a being a medium sized country desperate for trade deals is blindingly obvious. If we were still a leading member of the EU we may have organised, or threatened to, sanctions against China. I suspect the prospect of taking on the EU at the same time as the US wouldn't have been that appealing to China. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yodigo Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 1 hour ago, Confusion of VIs said: Hard to see how you could think that. For most people the loss of influence as we move from being a leading EU member to a being a medium sized country desperate for trade deals is blindingly obvious. If we were still a leading member of the EU we may have organised, or threatened to, sanctions against China. I suspect the prospect of taking on the EU at the same time as the US wouldn't have been that appealing to China. Loss of influence arises from handing over our manufacturing industry to China, and not having the guts to shut down imports from there if necessary to make a point. Trump sees it as it is, shame remoaners can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 7 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Hard to see how you could think that. For most people the loss of influence as we move from being a leading EU member to a being a medium sized country desperate for trade deals is blindingly obvious. If we were still a leading member of the EU we may have organised, or threatened to, sanctions against China. I suspect the prospect of taking on the EU at the same time as the US wouldn't have been that appealing to China. In or out of the EU; no one stands a chance against China; not even the USA. I agree our standing is diminished; overwhelmingly due to our pathetic politicians. That doesn’t mean I want to be lead by Brussels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 1 hour ago, crouch said: This implicitly assumes that our objectives are the same as the EU. I was assuming they may not be in which case things may be different as we are not subsumed under the EU's objectives. The point about the trade aspects of Brexit is that it does enable us to strike out in a different direction. You may be right but, as I said above, the context may be different. Clout can't be dismissed and there's no doubt that we'll have much less heft. By different direction I mean our strengths might be in innovation, tech type industries or high grade services. The fact is that the EU has to compromise in its trade policy because it has to proceed on the basis that it secures the interests of 28; we can proceed on the basis of one. I understand but the scope for this is limited by our economy, and therefore our requirements from any deal, not being that different from the EU's as a whole. If we were a highly lopsided economy, we would have more scope for gaining from making our own deals. We could I suppose decide that financial services are our specialism and go all in for trying to grow it at the expense of our manufacturing sector. This is pretty much Minford's vision for Brexit and while I don't find it appealing, so far it is the most credible vision for making a success of Brexit I have seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 11 minutes ago, yodigo said: Loss of influence arises from handing over our manufacturing industry to China, and not having the guts to shut down imports from there if necessary to make a point. Trump sees it as it is, shame remoaners can't. That's because it is not true. Trump's tariffs are harming America in the short term and while for China the short term impact is higher, forcing China to build its own high end chip design and fabrication industries means that in the long term they will a stronger competitor no longer reliant on US technology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zugzwang Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, yodigo said: Loss of influence arises from handing over our manufacturing industry to China, and not having the guts to shut down imports from there if necessary to make a point. Trump sees it as it is, shame remoaners can't. Trump has his head up his ass. The chief beneficiaries of globalisation have been Wall Street's financial criminals and Silicon Valley's monopoly capitalists. So what does the Tangerine Ape do? Arranges a trillion dollar tax cut for the undeserving bastards and runs the US national debt up into the stratosphere to pay for it! Meanwhile the US trade deficit with China soars to an all-time high on his watch; $419.2bn for 2018, up from the previous record of $375.5bn in 2017. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 9 minutes ago, yodigo said: Loss of influence arises from handing over our manufacturing industry to China, and not having the guts to shut down imports from there if necessary to make a point. Trump sees it as it is, shame remoaners can't. I can't see what remainers have to do with Blair, and successive NuLabour governments (including the current one), handing over our manufacturing industry (including the machine tools) to China. By the way, when (individual) Brexiteers use the term "remoaners" it shows them up for the petty minded, antagonistic, soon to be losers, they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMHAL Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 5 hours ago, crouch said: Irrelevant. The most restrictive interpretation of the FOM rules gives less control than we could have as a completely sovereign nation. As I said your unicorn gynamistics are spectacular today. How can it be irrelevant? Your argument was about adequacy of immigration controls.....which is subjective.... total contol is absolute . I am callng you out. You are talking ******** Crouchypoos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dances with sheeple Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: That is true in part. Brexit has created circumstances that will force change but I fear the massive economic/political resources already consumed, plus the prospect of having a permanently smaller economy, will make it near impossible to achieve an overall positive outcome. They don`t run out though, there are plenty of able politicians in waiting and the printing presses won`t stop just yet, all we have seen so far is a Remainer led Panto designed to wear people down so we just stay in through boredom with the process, it isn`t working though, people need to vote the present set of clowns out of office so we can see real change IMO. Let Boris deliver Brexit and then give JC his chance I say, then lets take it from there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollover Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, GrizzlyDave said: Asking salaries in the construction industry are rising despite Brexit uncertainty, according to new research from specialist recruiter Randstad Construction, Property & Engineering. The survey into almost 6,800 permanent placed construction jobs shows salaries across the sector rose by an average 9% in the 12 months to May 30 2018 – despite a drop in the number of vacancies being advertised. http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/jun-2019/construction-pay-soars-brexodus-skills-shortage-bites-says-new-report EE's are going home en masse, new ones are not coming and most English lads don't want to work hard. I would guess, similar situation is in the NHS with nurses. Edited June 24, 2019 by rollover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zugzwang Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 41 minutes ago, dances with sheeple said: They don`t run out though, there are plenty of able politicians in waiting and the printing presses won`t stop just yet, all we have seen so far is a Remainer led Panto designed to wear people down so we just stay in through boredom with the process, it isn`t working though, people need to vote the present set of clowns out of office so we can see real change IMO. Let Boris deliver Brexit and then give JC his chance I say, then lets take it from there. Why bother with Johnson at all?JC as caretaker PM could do Brexit all by himself. A genuine Eurosceptic at that! All he needs is the support of couple of Tory wets in September... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smash Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyDave Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, rollover said: EE's are going home en masse, new ones are not coming and most English lads don't want to work hard. I would guess, similar situation is in the NHS with nurses. Aye. And the impact of cheap EE labour leaving the UK - in the construction industry - is wages increasing an average of 9% p/a. Makes a pretty compelling piece of evidence supporting the theory that FOM suppresses wage growth. http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/jun-2019/construction-pay-soars-brexodus-skills-shortage-bites-says-new-report Edited June 25, 2019 by GrizzlyDave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouch Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 8 hours ago, IMHAL said: How can it be irrelevant? Your argument was about adequacy of immigration controls.....which is subjective.... total contol is absolute . I am callng you out. You are talking ******** Crouchypoos. No. The fact remains that, after all is said and done, we cannot control EU migration as well as we could control non EU migration. Note the use of the word "could" (also in my post) not "can". We are in the course of revising our whole immigration policy in the light of Brexit (there is a draft White Paper) so the future policy may not be what it is now - it could be more liberal of course. But no matter the use of the present tense is OK and it would be just as true. And immigration controls are not subjective; they are laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragging boot straps Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 12 minutes ago, crouch said: No. The fact remains that, after all is said and done, we cannot control EU migration as well as we could control non EU migration. Note the use of the word "could" (also in my post) not "can". We are in the course of revising our whole immigration policy in the light of Brexit (there is a draft White Paper) so the future policy may not be what it is now - it could be more liberal of course. But no matter the use of the present tense is OK and it would be just as true. And immigration controls are not subjective; they are laws. Exactly this. The government is being forced to act on immigration or they will no longer be the government. EU influx is dropping off a cliff and then the laws will choke off non EU immigration. Or we will vote in somebody who will. People are sick of migrants destroying the fabric of society. Taking much and offering little. The good times are over for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouch Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 10 hours ago, pig said: The EU isn't a single country with a nationalist policy. Its comprises 28 countries all with different 'objectives'. If there is an objective it is general rather than specific ie to collaborate and cooperate to mutual advantage. As far as trade policy is concerned the EU negotiates on behalf of all 28 members. Its negotiating stance is a compromise position - it has to be. This means that the interests of the particular are subsumed under the general. These things are a trade off - more heft in general but less attention to your specific interests. I'm describing how most of the World works and trade deals are struck and life goes on without the tender mercies of the EU being involved. 10 hours ago, pig said: Slightly more specific is the divergence from the anglo-american economic model - but then we've been free to try this and it seems to have brought us a lot of grief, including the misdirection of Brexit. More specific than that of course are the four freedoms and the single market but thats still pretty 'general'. Whatever the merits of any particular direction these are choices which we will have to make post Brexit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.