The EU debate

andrewf75

mayonnaise wrote: »

Big business is interested in one thing only; making money.
And they seem to think they can make more of it by staying in the EU.
Why? Because trading with our biggest import/export partner will become dearer. I thought that was obvious.

I think more important than trade is that our economy is heavily reliant on foreign business setting up here. Look at all the car manufacturers for a start - BMW, Toyota, Nissan, Honda etc. Thats a hell of a lot of jobs which would be at risk if we left the EU. Not saying they will all leave, but they might. Even if we negotiated a free trade deal with the EU after leaving, its a much safer option for a company to set up inside rather than outside. All the Japanese car manufacturers set up in the UK specifically to get inside the EU because at the time there were trade barriers on exporting cars to Europe.

We'd have to look at other ways of attracting business, like having low taxes as Switzerland does.

Its a shame the debate didn't focus on the finer detail of these issues, because that is the crucial thing. If most of the business in the UK was British owned then it wouldn't be such a problem, but a lot of it isn't and by pulling out of a vast trading bloc we make the UK a less attractive place to invest.

Bantex_2

Would we stop buying BMWs and the Germans stop buying whatever we sell to them if we withdrew?

We do currently seem to do a hell of a lot of trade with countries such as Korea without having to harmonise employment, immigration, etc laws etc with them. How is that working?

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

I heard an interview on Radio 5 with Farage last summer when I was in the UK and the rest of the family were asleep with jet lag in the car (wusses).

He is a very good speaker indeed and very persuasive. Despite thinking that the UK is far better off in the EU than outside despite many failings in EU laws and institutions I found myself agreeing with each individual point.

It was only later when I constructed his entire argument that I could see the gaps. Basically he ignores the massive benefits from free trade and gets stuck into the detail which, unusually, he makes interesting and important.

What is really important is what is the net gain/loss from the EU to the UK. IMHO there is a massive net gain from trade that hugely outweighs costs. Can I prove that? No. I did read Riccardo though and understand that free trade is the best thing in almost all circumstances. If anything Britain should be pushing for more free trade in Europe, something that Boris talks about from time-to-time.

is free trade still free trade if is comes with a 1000 page book of rules and regulations?

the highly efficient UK style syphonic toilet flush is being phased out in favour of the water leaking continential standard to enable all countries to compete equally

is that free trade?

in any event the whole world is moving towards free trade so barriers to all markets are being reduced.

Generali

Bantex wrote: »

Would we stop buying BMWs and the Germans stop buying whatever we sell to them if we withdrew?

You'd pay a load more in tax on those pruchases.

Bantex wrote: »

We do currently seem to do a hell of a lot of trade with countries such as Korea without having to harmonise employment, immigration, etc laws etc with them. How is that working?

No you don't. The UK basically trades with the EU and the USA. In the EU she pretty much trades with the Dutch and Irish.

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

is free trade still free trade if is comes with a 1000 page book of rules and regulations?

the highly efficient UK style syphonic toilet flush is being phased out in favour of the water leaking continential standard to enable all countries to compete equally

is that free trade?

in any event the whole world is moving towards free trade so barriers to all markets are being reduced.

Yes, it's free trade. Government regulation is the problem there and that regulation is from the EU.

Having said that, how many articles do we read about conker trees being felled in case a conker falls off it or some such? All Governments seem to be incompetent, it's just that by being in the EU the UK gets some incompetence from Brussels rather than Westminster or the local town hall or parish council.

kteara

If we joined the EU wouldn't we have to adhere to their policies such as car insurance? Currently the whole of Europe has a policy similar to America, whereby you insure the car for the household, not each individual person as it is currently done in the UK. I would support the joining of the EU primarily for this reason. It seems as though the UK government is unable to continue their scamming practises if they join the EU hence the opposition.

Generali

kteara wrote: »

If we joined the EU wouldn't we have to adhere to their policies such as car insurance? Currently the whole of Europe has a policy similar to America, whereby you insure the car for the household, not each individual person as it is currently done in the UK. I would support the joining of the EU primarily for this reason. It seems as though the UK government is unable to continue their scamming practises if they join the EU hence the opposition.

The problem there is that there is a free market in goods, labour and capital but not in services.

You should be able to buy insurance from Sweden or Portugal if you want to buy and they want to sell.

andrewf75

kteara wrote: »

If we joined the EU wouldn't we have to adhere to their policies such as car insurance? Currently the whole of Europe has a policy similar to America, whereby you insure the car for the household, not each individual person as it is currently done in the UK. I would support the joining of the EU primarily for this reason. It seems as though the UK government is unable to continue their scamming practises if they join the EU hence the opposition.

what do you mean if we join the EU?!
We are talking about the UK....which joined in 1973! You've got something confused here but I'm not sure what!

mayonnaise

kteara wrote: »

If we joined the EU wouldn't we have to adhere to their policies such as car insurance?

andrewf75 wrote: »

what do you mean if we join the EU?!
We are talking about the UK....which joined in 1973! You've got something confused here but I'm not sure what!

Perfect example why a EU referendum is a bad idea.
No, I really don't want the likes of kteare deciding on the economic future of the UK, myself, family and friends.
Call me elitist if you like.

tomterm8

Generali wrote: »

What is really important is what is the net gain/loss from the EU to the UK. IMHO there is a massive net gain from trade that hugely outweighs costs.

But, if we left the EU we would still have a relationship with it, and since Europe benefits even more from the free trade agreement with the UK it is probable that they would want to keep it.

I say that as vaguely pro-european, but I have significant reservations. It appears to me that europe has changed and has now become an actual nation state.

I don't think we are in a free trade area anymore, or even a cooperation alliance like NATO. Europe is now basically sovereign and able to override the wishes of the UK population and its elected government. You see that in the banking regulations that Europe is bringing through against the wishes of the (basically tory) government. You see that in a whole heap of areas like immigration, and human rights law, and social policy, and employment and business law...

While I would probably vote for being part of the European state I think that the British people should be consulted. It should be a democratic decision.