I want to be prime minister . . .

[Gob]

And we are only one country. The EU has something like 36 trade agreements, all of which the UK will now be shut out of until it can negotiates separate agreements on its own.

And why would the countries these agreements are with want to jeopardise their trade with the UK by tearing up those agreements?

[Gob]

Brexit seems a massive resource suck and I’m struggling to understand the massive benefits supporters expect? Are Brexiters essentially equivalent to MAGAs?

How about the benefit of making decisions in Parliament, rather than having to kowtow to an overriding body, one which does not have the UK's interest as it's priority?

[Gob]

The referendum question, as presented to "the people" was fundamentally flawed....Though I do agree that, as worded, the question probably implied a "hard", "no-deal" Brexit: if this was what was truly being offered, the pro-Brexit people, and the question as voted, should have made that explicit, and the politicians should not have tried —should not have even been ALLOWED to try—to work out a deal with the EU. (That would certainly have saved a lot of time and effort!)

The people voted for a hard Brexit. They did not vote for a fudge, imposed by Merkel and Macron, one in which the EU decides what the UK can and cannot do, and how much should be paid to the Wehrmacht.

[Scooter]

And why would the countries these agreements are with want to jeopardise their trade with the UK by tearing up those agreements?

They wouldn't be tearing anything up, the agreements simply would not exist with a UK that is no longer part of the EU. And any agreement that would be negotiated with those countries would necessarily be different, on both sides, than an agreement reached with the EU as a whole.

I'm not saying that some or all of those agreements wouldn't eventually be replaced. But it would take time, and in the interim, trade relationships that have developed will be disrupted.

[Scooter]

The people voted for a hard Brexit.

Now here I'm gonna call bullshit, because practically all that was heard during the campaign from the yes side was that, by leaving, the UK could retain all the advantages of EU membership without having to put up with any of the elements you didn't like. Implicit in that having your cake and eating it too promise was that there would have to some sort of agreement reached with the EU, regardless of whether its proponents were prepared to admit that or not.

[Gob]

They wouldn't be tearing anything up, the agreements simply would not exist with a UK that is no longer part of the EU. And any agreement that would be negotiated with those countries would necessarily be different, on both sides, than an agreement reached with the EU as a whole.

I'm not saying that some or all of those agreements wouldn't eventually be replaced. But it would take time, and in the interim, trade relationships that have developed will be disrupted.

UK: "Carry on with the usual agreements, until we negotiate new ones?"
Canada: "That would be nice."

[Gob]

Now here I'm gonna call bullshit, because practically all that was heard during the campaign from the yes side was that, by leaving, the UK could retain all the advantages of EU membership without having to put up with any of the elements you didn't like.

I don't know where you heard that, but I can tell you it isn't true.

Implicit in that having your cake and eating it too promise was that there would have to some sort of agreement reached with the EU, regardless of whether its proponents were prepared to admit that or not.

Again, I don't think you are right.

[Bicycle Bill]

They wouldn't be tearing anything up, the agreements simply would not exist with a UK that is no longer part of the EU. And any agreement that would be negotiated with those countries would necessarily be different, on both sides, than an agreement reached with the EU as a whole.

I'm not saying that some or all of those agreements wouldn't eventually be replaced. But it would take time, and in the interim, trade relationships that have developed will be disrupted.

UK: "Carry on with the usual agreements, until we negotiate new ones?"
Canada: "That would be nice."

Most sensible way of working it out that I've heard so far.
Which, of course, means it will never happen.....

-"BB"-

[Scooter]

Except that there are no agreements in place with the entity called the United Kingdom, and other countries cannot simply pretend that they exist. If they traded with the UK as if the terms of their agreements with EU were in place, then they would be required under WTO rules to extend the same terms to every WTO member. The only way to selectively lower tariffs or other trade barriers is to create a trade agreement that applies only to trade within that grouping.

eta - This is why one of the big issues facing the UK is the massive scaling up of its customs inspection infrastructure in order to process imports from the EU that are currently exempt from inspection because the UK is a member. The UK can't simply say that it will forego inspection of EU goods entering the country to some future point in time, or streamline its inspection requirements for those goods, because then every WTO member in the world would be entitled to the same treatment for everything they export to the UK.

[Gob]

Except that there are no agreements in place with the entity called the United Kingdom, and other countries cannot simply pretend that they exist. If they traded with the UK as if the terms of their agreements with EU were in place, then they would be required under WTO rules to extend the same terms to every WTO member. The only way to selectively lower tariffs or other trade barriers is to create a trade agreement that applies only to trade within that grouping.

Change "EU" to "UK" on the agreements.

eta - This is why one of the big issues facing the UK is the massive scaling up of its customs inspection infrastructure in order to process imports from the EU that are currently exempt from inspection because the UK is a member. The UK can't simply say that it will forego inspection of EU goods entering the country to some future point in time, or streamline its inspection requirements for those goods, because then every WTO member in the world would be entitled to the same treatment for everything they export to the UK.

The infrastructure is already there. Hey, more jobs and employment when we upscale!!

[Scooter]

Change "EU" to "UK" on the agreements.

And until you do that, those agreements do not exist. And other countries may or may not be interested in operating on the same terms with a market of 65 million people, as they do with a market of 500 million, and they may or may not be in a hurry to get it done. Come March 29, there will be a massive void where the UK once had trade relationships around the world. You can buy into the rhetoric that pretends it will not matter if you choose, but that doesn't make the problem disappear.

The infrastructure is already there.

No, it isn't, actually. It has been recognized as a major challenge to address.

[Gob]

And until you do that, those agreements do not exist. And other countries may or may not be interested in operating on the same terms with a market of 65 million people, as they do with a market of 500 million, and they may or may not be in a hurry to get it done. Come March 29, there will be a massive void where the UK once had trade relationships around the world. You can buy into the rhetoric that pretends it will not matter if you choose, but that doesn't make the problem disappear.

Wrong, there will not be a "massive void", there will be a bureaucratic anomaly, one which can be fixed. The UK is the world's fifth biggest economy, (by GDP,) it is in the interest of our trading partners, as well as the UK, to address the issue as quickly and amicably as possible.

]No, it isn't, actually. It has been recognized as a major challenge to address.

Let me point you at some of the other "major challenges" predicted...

George Osborne’s remainer Treasury infamously predicted a loss of 500,000 jobs after the Brexit vote. In reality, unemployment is at the lowest rate since 1975.

JP Morgan just after the Brexit vote claimed Scotland would leave the United Kingdom and get a new currency. Support for Scottish Independence is 12 points behind support for the Union.

The former Chancellor also claimed there would be an emergency budget with higher taxes and borrowing, he was later sacked by Theresa May and no such budget was introduced.

Former Health Minister Stephen Dorrell claimed Brexit would “undermine” funding for the NHS. Theresa May recently announced a £20bn boost to the NHS’s budget, partly paid for by reduced contributions to the European Union after Brexit.

According to European Council President Donald Tusk Brexit could “be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also Western political civilization in its entirety,”. Civilisation remains intact (as of yet).

The IMF claimed Brexit would lead to a recession but since the vote, Britain’s GDP has grown in every quarter.

A new world war was predicted by David Cameron, who claimed “Can we be so sure that peace and stability on our Continent are assured beyond any shadow of doubt? Is that a risk worth taking? I would never be so rash as to make that assumption.” No wars have yet taken place in Europe.

Former US President Barack Obama warned Britain would be at the “back of the queue” for a trade deal. Donald Trump has confirmed this is far from the case.

Meanwhile, back in the EU....

The euro region’s third-biggest economy (Italy) is seen growing 0.6 percent in 2019, down from an October estimate of 1 percent, the IMF said Monday in an update to its World Economic Outlook. The gross domestic product is forecast to rise 0.9 percent in 2020, unchanged from the prior projection, the Washington-based fund said.

The export-reliant country’s slowdown is part of a broader weakening in the euro region, with powerhouse Germany’s economic prospects also revised down. Italy’s projected 2019 growth is the lowest among the nations listed individually in the IMF overview of its latest projections.

Italy is also singled out for the risks related to its public debt, which at more than 130 percent of output is the euro region’s second-biggest ratio after Greece.

An indicator assessing the state of the German economy fell to a four-year low, while analysts in January revealed a slightly less negative sentiment for their outlook, according to a key survey.

The Zew survey’s assessment of the current economic situation in Germany dropped 17.7 points to 27.6 points, the lowest reading since January 2015, the research group revealed on Tuesday.

The survey of German analysts indicated a slight improvement, but still negative, in sentiment for the biggest eurozone economy this month, with a 2.5-point rise to minus 15, which extended a 6.6-point increase in December.

The contraction in France’s private sector in December was more pronounced than initially thought, according to a range of data and surveys released on Friday that may serve to heighten fears of a slowdown in the eurozone.

A closely watched survey of purchasing managers’ confidence in France’s manufacturing and services sectors dropped to 48.7 in December, below the expectations of analysts polled by Reuters of 49.9 and below an earlier flash reading of 49.3. That was a steep fall from November’s reading of 55.1 — with a figure below 50 delineating a contraction.

The decline in private sector activity — the first in two and a half years, according to IHS Markit — was blamed on weeks of disruption caused by the “ yellow vests” protests about falling living standards. Executives’ confidence about business outlook also fell in December for the third month in a row, to its lowest point since November 2016, while new orders declined for the first time in 34 months.

[Scooter]

Oh well, Donald Trump is willing to talk deal, I guess that solves everything then. Just be sure to count your fingers after he shakes your hand, because, from experience, nothing he proposes in the way of a trade deal is going to be anything that is in your interest.

[Big RR]

nor is any proposal likely to be firm.

[rubato]

Bullshit.


California is the 5th largest economy in the world with only 39 million people.

Maybe if you were energetic and hard-working like the Danes?

https://www.businessinsider.com/califor ... -uk-2018-5

A few seconds with Mr Google turned up this item from those pinkos at the Financial Times, from December 2017. I won't quote it because, as you all know because wes has told you, I am testicularly challenged and it would be a breach of the FT's terms and conditions to copy and paste it. And I don't want the FT lawyers chasing the owner of this website because someone here ignored their t&c.

The point of the article (one of hundreds I have seen in the last year or two along similar lines - major exception among UK newspapers is the Daily Torygraph - sorry, Telegraph - old habits die hard) is that UK manufacturers have grown into EU regs and pulling out would achieve nothing. You don't like EU car safety - or pharmaceutical or chemical or food - regulations? Fine, leave the EU and make your own. But you will not sell one car or pill or molecule or sausage in the EU unless it conforms to those same regulations.

Brexit is slow motion suicide for UK industry.

Ka-CHing!

But go ahead and build that "big beautiful wall" around your island and see who gives a rats ass.

[Gob]

Oh well, Donald Trump is willing to talk deal, I guess that solves everything then. Just be sure to count your fingers after he shakes your hand, because, from experience, nothing he proposes in the way of a trade deal is going to be anything that is in your interest.

Oh come on Scooter, you're better than that. No one is relying on the US president for anything. It was just an example.

Like these examples..

In 2001, the Financial Times predicted that Greece in particular was set to draw huge benefits from Eurozone membership. “With Greece now trading in euros, few will mourn the death of the drachma,” it predicted. “Membership of the Eurozone offers the prospect of long-term economic stability.” There are countless reports and columns from the newspaper in the 2000s either advocating Britain’s membership of the Eurozone, or extolling its many positives on the continent. Until the Eurozone crisis first flared up, that is.

Pro-euro cabinet members such as Charles Clarke and Patricia Hewitt grumbled that the decision had been a Treasury stitchup, but Brown's position was unassailable. Euro membership was off the agenda for the foreseeable future.

A jolly good thing too, of course. The euro has proved to be exactly the job-destroying, recession-creating, undemocratic monster the doubters always warned it would be. This was not the received wisdom on the left at the time, when to suggest that the euro would be supercharged monetarism, Thatcherism with knobs on, was deemed unseemly. People who liked the euro were civilised, supported the arts, went to Tuscany or the Dordogne for their holidays. People who didn't like the euro drove white vans decorated with the flag of St George.

Today, it is hard to find even the most fervent euro enthusiasts in the Liberal Democrat party arguing for UK membership of the single currency. Disillusionment with what was once called "the Project" is almost total in the face of grinding austerity, a double-dip recession that has already lasted 18 months and a jobless rate of 12.2% and rising.

[rubato]

Yanis Varoufakis argued against Greece joining the EU but as he has pointed out with Brexit once in, getting out is worse.


https://www.growthbusiness.co.uk/yanis- ... s-2555632/

According to the ONS, overall business investment in the UK has fallen by £22 billion in the last two and half years as larger businesses continue to reign in spend and reduce their risk by hiring more contractors instead of permanent staff. Also, a Boston consulting group report found that smaller businesses in the UK and Europe are the most likely to be badly affected by Brexit disruption.

Here he has some optimistic thoughts:

https://www.project-syndicate.org/comme ... is-2018-12

And yet, paradoxically, while the current Brexit impasse is pregnant with risk, the British should welcome it. Since 1945, the Europe question has obscured at least eight other questions fundamental to Britain – about itself, its political institutions, and its place in the world. Brexit is now bringing all of them to the fore, and the prevailing discontent is the first condition of addressing them. Indeed, Brexit may empower British democracy to resolve several of the country’s long-standing crises.

First, there is the Irish question. Though partly settled by the Good Friday Agreement a generation ago, Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party is re-opening it by insisting that the province, which is part of the UK, must not in any way be distinguished from, say, Wales or the Home Counties.

The Scottish question has been revived as well. Just two years after Scotland’s failed independence referendum in 2014 left nationalists deflated, the 2016 Brexit referendum put wind in their sails again.

There is an English question as well. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s incomplete devolution made the English the UK’s only people not to have their own dedicated assembly or parliament, leaving them dependent on a Westminster parliament that many feel is distant and unrepresentative of their concerns. (see link for more)

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/b ... ayed-along

n 2016, shortly before the EU referendum, Yanis Varoufakis warned that the UK was destined for a “Hotel California Brexit”: it could check out but it could never leave. The former Greek finance minister spoke from experience. In 2015, his efforts to end austerity – “fiscal waterboarding” – were thwarted by the EU (a struggle recorded in his memoir Adults in the Room: My Battle With Europe’s Deep Establishment).

hotel California too, funny.


In order for the EU to be democratic there will have to be trans-national parties who run candidates in multiple countries based on shared values and goals. It is only difficult to conceive for racists who cannot accept that French, Swiss, Spanish, English, Belgian liberals or greens are more similar than different and can unite based on common goals. And the same is true for other groupings like fiscal conservatives who are social liberals.

yrs,
rubato

[Burning Petard]

"In order for the EU to be democratic there will have to be trans-national parties who run candidates in multiple countries based on shared values and goals."

This is the 21st Century. Why bother with all that stuff? Just run an opinion polling process (perhaps a simple phone ap.) Every issue could be democratically solved almost immediately. The wisdom of the crowd.

snailgate.

[Bicycle Bill]

This is the 21st Century. Why bother with all that stuff? Just run an opinion polling process (perhaps a simple phone ap.) Every issue could be democratically solved almost immediately. The wisdom of the crowd.

snailgate.

Sorry, BP.  Whenever I hear someone talking about things like "public opinion", "the will of the people", or "the group conscience", the first thing that comes to mind is this —



-"BB"-

[Burning Petard]

Which is exactly why very few people really want democracy. For similar reasons, very few businessmen actually want real free-market capitalism.

snailgate