If we vote for Brexit what happens

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

I don't think there's much real resentment towards the EU either; it's almost all misplaced resentment that should be pointed towards local government.

The EU is not responsible for most of the things people blame it for.

Like the politically fudged not for fit purpose Euro.......

Bend the fiscal rules whenever it suits.

setmefree2

Good article here.

Analysis: Great Britain can 'go global' with 'Hard Brexit' but what will be the cost?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/18/analysis-great-britain-can-go-global-with-hard-brexit-but-what-w/

Masomnia

setmefree2 wrote: »

And ultimately the ECoJ - oh the irony.

Surely they wouldn't dare. Or maybe they would...

That really would put the arguments over sovereignty to bed if a European court overruled a UK one over the mechanisms for Brexit.

setmefree2

Good article here on WTO tariffs.

Nick Clegg has been doing the rounds insisting that a hard or clean Brexit will lead to a rise in British food prices.
Nick Clegg is wrong, entirely so.

However, their real claim, from the full report, is this:

In the case of such a “hard Brexit” the UK will be obliged to impose tariffs on imports, while the EU and the rest of the world will be obliged to impose tariffs on our exports.

This is simply not true. To check our understanding we bothered to call a source in Geneva, something that perhaps Clegg and the Lib Dems should have done.
The claim is that a clean Brexit will mean that we must revert to WTO rules. Just for the avoidance of doubt yes, Britain is a member of the WTO in its own right, so definitely and definitively WTO rules would apply.

Those WTO rules say that there are ceilings to the tariffs which can be applied to imports from other WTO members. All British exports could and would face duties up to but possibly below those ceilings. Clegg is claiming that Britain would thus have to impose equal tariffs to imports into Britain. This is nonsense. We cannot apply higher tariffs than those ceilings, but we can apply any rate that we wish below them. Yes, we did check, 0% is an allowable rate below those ceilings.

Further, all that Most Favoured Nation means is that whatever rate we do decide to apply must be applied equally to products sourced from whatever WTO member nation. We can have a special low rate for camembert if we wish - as long as camembert from France gets charged the same rate as that from New Zealand then we're obeying the law.

The central contention here is therefore wrong. WTO and MFN rules allow us to increase tariffs up to the agreed ceilings on imports into Britain on the understanding that whatever rate chosen applies to all sources.

WTO and MFN rules do not insist that tariffs must be imposed upon imports. We are entirely at liberty to impose any rate we wish below those ceilings, including offering tariff rates of 0%. Which, given that we import some 40% of our food seems like a sensible idea. Why would we be so damn stupid as to make our own food more expensive for ourselves through our own actions?

Nick Clegg was once Deputy Prime Minister wasn't he? How well we must have been ruled back then.

http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/nick-clegg-is-flat-out-wrong-about-food-prices-and-brexit

Thrugelmir

Interesting article.

Paper currency – Euro paper notes and Greek drachma note

In the explosive interview with the journal Central Banking, Professor Issing, said “one day, the house of cards will collapse” as the European Central Bank (ECB) is becoming dangerously over-extended and the whole euro project is unworkable in its current form.

The founding architect of the monetary union has warned that Brussels’ dream of a European superstate will finally be buried amongst the rubble of the crumbling single currency he designed.

“Realistically, it will be a case of muddling through, struggling from one crisis to the next. It is difficult to forecast how long this will continue for, but it cannot go on endlessly,” he told the journal Central Banking in a remarkable deconstruction of the EU project.

The respected economist launched a withering attack on so called eurocrats and German Prime Minister Angela Merkel, accusing them of betraying the principles of the euro and demonstrating scandalous incompetence over its management.

And he savaged the whole idea of a federal “United States of Europe”, saying the attempt to push through federalisation in a stealth manner “by the back door” has turned the very foundations that the currency was built on into a complete mess of patchwork legislation, into which it is sinking fast.

As is frequently the case when there is substantive damaging criticism about the EU and ECB from respected and authoritative sources, the interview was treated in quite an Orwellian manner. It completely ignored and not reported by most state run media in Ireland, the UK and EU. Most state run media is overwhelmingly pro-EU and continues to ignore the serious problems and growing risks posed by the single currency and the undemocratic EU to the citizens of Europe. Nor was it reported in most corporate media in the EU which also tends to ignore all reasonable criticisms of the EU, ECB and especially the euro.

The explosive interview has been covered extensively in the more “right wing” euro “skeptic” media in the UK in papers such as The Telegraph and The Mail which means that most people in the EU will not even be aware of Otmar Issing’s very real and reasonable concerns and the growing risks posed to the currency they use in their lives every day and their very way of life.

http://thedailycoin.org/2016/10/18/otmar-issing-founder-and-creator-of-the-euro-warns-euro-will-collapse/

setmefree2

Masomnia wrote: »

Surely they wouldn't dare. Or maybe they would...

That really would put the arguments over sovereignty to bed if a European court overruled a UK one over the mechanisms for Brexit.

One source

If MPs vote against Article 50, the case could be appealed all the way up to the European Court of Justice — putting the pro-Leave camp in the odd position of begging the EU's top judicial forum to overrule the UK government.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-supreme-court-case-on-article-50-could-stop-brexit-2016-8

But many other sources too.

setmefree2

UK will be able to slash costs of consumer goods

From Prof David Blake and others. Sir, Nick Clegg is the latest misguided voice to claim that prices will rise should the UK trade under World Trade Organisation rules (“Clegg warns ‘hard Brexit’ will lead to 22% EU food tariffs”, FT.com, October 17)

Sir, Nick Clegg is the latest misguided voice to claim that prices will rise should the UK trade under World Trade Organisation rules (“Clegg warns ‘hard Brexit’ will lead to 22% EU food tariffs”, FT.com, October 17). Like others, he makes the absurd assumption that the UK would continue to maintain high EU level tariffs outside of the single market. The British Retail Consortium made the very same assumption last week when analysing the cost of goods outside the single market, and these same misleading claims on tariffs formed the central part of the Treasury project fear campaign during the referendum. They all fail on a most basic level to appreciate that trading under WTO rules under unilateral free trade means the UK will be free to cut tariffs and therefore will actually slash the costs of consumer goods. Our forecasts show that this will reduce consumer prices by an average of 8 per cent.
Current EU tariffs artificially keep our food prices up by an average of around 20 per cent, and any suggestion that this level would be maintained outside of the single market is to assume economically the worst of all possible worlds. Consumers in the UK suffer significantly from this protectionist position. It is clear that the vote to leave the EU was a vote by consumers who have become utterly fed up with suffering from this producer-led policy. We would urge the UK government to ignore this misleading pressure, led by producers’ self-interest, and embrace unilateral free trade for the benefit of consumers and the economy as a whole.
Prof David Blake
Roger Bootle
Ryan Bourne
Prof Tim Congdon

Prof Kevin Dowd
Martin Howe QC
Prof Graeme Leach
Warwick Lightfoot
Dr Gerard Lyons
Neil MacKinnon
Prof Kent Matthews
Prof Patrick Minford
Economists for Brexit

https://www.ft.com/content/6a83c8bc-9488-11e6-a80e-bcd69f323a8b

Shakethedisease

Is the above letter in the FT talking about this kind of Brexit ? Because if so, there's a backlash.

Brexit 5

Leave the single market and customs union with no free trade deal – but unilaterally scrap all import tariffs. This would permit a flood of cheap food, cheap goods and cheap commodity imports into the UK. This would also push down prices in the shops. But it would have a catastrophic impact on our farmers and manufacturers and all those who work in those sectors.


It would be politically explosive since, by Government choice, the exports of our industries would be subject to tariffs abroad, but imports from foreign competitors would not be. Also, under this Brexit, the UK would not even seek to strike free trade deals, meaning there would be zero help for our services firms, which are the dominant part of our economy, in breaking into foreign markets and bypassing their non-tariff barriers.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-eu-referendum-article-50-theresa-may-brexiteers-trade-deals-freedom-movement-choices-take-a7367896.html

Herzlos

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Like the politically fudged not for fit purpose Euro.......

Is the UK suffering because of the Euro?

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

Is the UK suffering because of the Euro?

Financial capital markets are intertwined. Events in Europe will ultimately impact elsewhere.