If we vote for Brexit what happens

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

Yup. We've given up an enhanced position with a seat at the table, to now interact with the EU like everyone else. We'll get by, but we've just given away a significant advantage.

This really is total garbage.
What significant advantage?

The usual one-way nonsense about how we'll have to do everything they tell us.
Rubbish. We have to what they want to sell into their market *and they have to do what we want in order to sell into ours*
The logical conclusion of which is we all do the same thing to keep things straightforward.

The bit you don't understand is that the market itself determines things like that. You don't have to be a member of a political organisation to organise barrier-free trade.
Now that people are actually looking at it, more and more of them are starting to realise that this great tariff-free single market is actually not all it's cracked up to be.

Herzlos

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

The widget I sell to India may only need to undergo 1 or 2 checks, or perhaps none. So the bureaucratic oversight is less therefore it will be easier and cheaper for me to produce, comply and sell to India than it would the EU. My widget business then just needs to make sure that widgets going to the EU comply with 4 checks and widgets going to India comply with 2. As part of the quality control process any of widgets that go to India can be removed from the rest of the checking process after they satisfy the requirements of India, saving money and increasing efficiency by no longer having to put all of your products through all 4 checks because our law encompasses everything handed down to us from Brussels.

Correct, as long as it's only going to India. If they then sell on a product with your widget to the EU, you'll still need to make the 4 EU checks before sending it to India, to send on to the EU. I don't know how many of these "non-exporting" companies in the UK export to the EU indirectly though, so that may be a red herring. I suspect most of them are local food/service places though.

So the seat on the table, giving us a voice but not a defining final say on the regulations that apply to 100% of UK businesses is not an enhanced position for UK business.

Also true. Being able to use different regulations for UK domestic stuff may be worthwhile. That almost invariably means poorer quality in some regard though.

Edit: Keeping in mind with the above that the EU only represents 7% of the world.

Also true, but it also represents our nearest 27 trading partners. We have road links to the EU and have similar time zones. We can get goods/services in/out of the EU in a fraction of the time as we can to anyone else.

kabayiri

StevieJ wrote: »

I am not suggesting anything, but now you mention it, maybe (shock horror) the electorate were lied to. Maybe the South Asians, were [STRIKE]'promised' [/STRIKE] suggested to that less Poles meant more South East Asian immigration.


http://www.workpermit.com/news/uk-tier-2-visas-u-turn-infuriates-brexit-backing-british-indian-restaurants-20170112

I have a lot of Indian IT contractor friends. Some live here; some in India; some have moved to places like USA.

We had a discussion about more opportunities for Indian companies, after the Brexit vote. Indian entrepreneurs buying into UK business has been happening for some time now. I suspect it will increase now.

I think we will have to shift our focus to the East even more now.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Herzlos wrote: »

Didn't we just trigger Article 50 to leave the EU?

Do you really think we'll still have MEPs or any say in how the EU runs from the outside? None of the rest of the world does, why would we be any different?

We have indeed triggered Article 50 but you have not answered the question:
Exactly what have we given away?
As of this date - and in all probability until two years have passed we have as yet given away exactly nothing.
You assume what has not yet occurred.
You also assume that there will still be an EU to have MEP's or indeed an EU left at all.

You may mock and decry but the fact remains that neither you nor anybody else can foretell the future, so stating "we have" before any change is implemented is pure fantasy.

The type of argument you are using is very similar to a severe version of the medical condition of hypochondria.
Not totally unlike running into A&E demanding to have immediate surgery for a heart transplant - because someone you vaguely know in Germany told you that you it is likely that you have a heart defect and may well suffer a heart attack.
Soon.
Despite this person never having examined you or your heart and only meeting you briefly whilst on a holiday a few times.
Okay so you may not have the best diet and maybe you don't exercise anywhere near as much as you should.
But really?

A_Medium_Size_Jock

kabayiri wrote: »

I have a lot of Indian IT contractor friends. Some live here; some in India; some have moved to places like USA.

We had a discussion about more opportunities for Indian companies, after the Brexit vote. Indian entrepreneurs buying into UK business has been happening for some time now. I suspect it will increase now.

I think we will have to shift our focus to the East even more now.

Quite so.

Dyson is far from the only person suggesting that greater trade and profitability are to be found outside the Eurozone.

Oh, ETA -
This may be an area where the EU really risk losing out as far as Brexit is concerned.
If the EU determinedly stalls trade talks at the same time as divorce proceedings, this opens a window of opportunity for the UK to talk trade elsewhere.
As said before, we can talk whenever we want and to whom we want without the EU's permission and without breaking EU rules.

kabayiri

cogito wrote: »

The hypocrisy of these people is breathtaking. When we said to the EU that we can sort out residence rights of EU citizens in the UK and vice versa immediately, they refused point blank. They were quite happy to use people as bargaining chips when it suited them.

It's just an opening war of words between the politicians; a flexing of muscles.

Each side wants to paint the other as the villain of the piece.

If PM May does indeed feel the only recourse is to drop out completely, she needs to convince the UK public that we were forced into this move by an autocratic inflexible EU.

LBC have been ranting on about the news headlines. They just need to take a deep breath; sit back; count to 1 million; and see what the narrative is like a few months from now.

Conrad

Arklight wrote: »

Or back in the real world. British widget manufacturers will conform to whatever the EU standard is, with no say at all about how that standard is set, because no-one wants a non compliant widget in their product.

You guys keep missing the point........


You keep banging on about widget safety standards, and yes our own standards will be the same or similar to the EU's, I'm not arguing about widget standards particularly.


I'm saying a plumbers merchant in Tooting ASIDE FROM PRODUCTS - will not be subject to rafts of EU regulation on everything from paternity to working day length, emissions to very over the top regulations around financial services.


Most UK firms do not trade in the EU and in future WE can tailor make policy and determine what is right for these firms.

Conrad

setmefree2 wrote: »

'And they warned both Mrs May and the leaders of other EU member states against trying to strike individual deals “behind our back”, saying such a move would be a deal breaker'.


http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/785487/Brexit-news-EU-parliament-veto-Brexit-deal-UK-Britain-trade

I'm very tempted to say we just tell 'em where to go, that our making global alliances has absolutely nothing to do with them.


I do hope we're not going to exhibit the usual soft touch slavish British adherence to 'the rules'.


What will they do, put up barriers and start harming their own citizens livelyhoods?


I do hope our team is made of the right stuff, I have this nagging fear people like Davis will be far too conciliatory as Brits have this need to be seen to follow rules to the letter (in the way France and others do not)

Herzlos

Conrad wrote: »

I'm saying a plumbers merchant in Tooting ASIDE FROM PRODUCTS - will not be subject to rafts of EU regulation on everything from paternity to working day length, emissions to very over the top regulations around financial services.

Cool, less environmental safety, financial stability and workers rights? That's exactly what we need!

Maybe there are things we can do to make hairdressers, nail bars and kebab shops easier to run, but offhand I can't think of any of them that don't directly shaft someone. Any ideas?

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

Correct, as long as it's only going to India. If they then sell on a product with your widget to the EU, you'll still need to make the 4 EU checks before sending it to India, to send on to the EU. I don't know how many of these "non-exporting" companies in the UK export to the EU indirectly though, so that may be a red herring. I suspect most of them are local food/service places though.

That should be left up to individual businesses in my view. I don't agree that we should be shackling UK business with regulation that benefits a majority of EU member states if we find we are in the minority.

If the widgets are used by a 3rd country and are then re-sold into the EU then of course the necessary compliance will need to be implemented down the supply chain. Which will for some industries just be adding unnecessary costs into the supply chain. So I would suppose it becomes cost prohibitive to do that when presented with other options around the globe. At the moment we're stuck with having to comply with 100% of the rules, 100% of the time.

Herzlos wrote: »

Also true. Being able to use different regulations for UK domestic stuff may be worthwhile. That almost invariably means poorer quality in some regard though.

I don't agree that it does mean poorer quality. It's less government oversight but business can still comply with EU regulation if required or even if desirable. There's nothing stopping them doing that.

Herzlos wrote: »

Also true, but it also represents our nearest 27 trading partners. We have road links to the EU and have similar time zones. We can get goods/services in/out of the EU in a fraction of the time as we can to anyone else.

Yes but I think we're conflating a love for the homogeneous rules of the single market with what's important. No one is saying that trading with countries nearby is not important, of course it is and we should all be looking for forge an amicable relationship now, it's mutually beneficial. But having to comply with the rules 100% of the time is different to having to comply with the rules less than 100% of the time.

What I would add is that if after we leave the EU don't like that UK producers are out-competing EU producers they may well alter their legislation to put us at a disadvantage. Which is where the protectionism they've always pushed but don't openly acknowledge will be naked to all across the world. At which point the businesses we have in those areas will need to be competitive under the new regulations or focus on the other 93% of the world instead, and then try to compete in the EU when you have a larger market share at a later date. Then the EU may well rinse and repeat the legislation game, but hopefully UK business would be wise to it and large enough to deal with it by that point.