EU Brexit impact - Treasury Analysis

mwpt

Alan_Brown wrote: »

Can you answer my question please?

What are the benefits to you personally of being in the EU?

Sorry, I thought I'd answered it by stating what I think could potentially go away if we leave. All those things are positives to me right now, in my daily life, which could go away if we leave the EU. Would you like me to type them out again?

Alan_Brown

Rinoa wrote: »

Well, the EU in it's various forms has been in existence for 60 years. Where's the free trade deal with the US, China, India?

In reality every EU country with an industry threatened by a specific trade deal veto's it. It will be far easier to conclude deals on our own.

And far more relevant to the type of industries that both your country and your trading partner are interested in promoting.

Instead we have massive, ponderous agreements that take decades to write and contain dangerous loopholes that get exploited. Such as the proposed TTIP agreement that could sound the death knell to the UK Health Service.

mwpt

For the record Alan, I'm not being antagonistic by default here. It's just a vigorous debate. And also, I do believe you have a very good point about the Euro, something which I have mentioned many times on this forum. It is an elephant in the room that I think needs addressing at some point. How can a single currency union and monetary policy work without a - at least somewhat - unified fiscal policy? Though to be fair, the USA doesn't have a unified fiscal policy afaik. But they don't have the political and historical baggage to deal with so much.

BobQ

Alan_Brown wrote: »

Or the UK one, where a country of 64 million consumers (not 5m like Norway or 8M like Switzerland) and a total GDP of $2.678 trillion (not the Norwegian $512.6 billion, or the Swiss $685.4 billion) can negotiate it's own individual deal.

.

Its own deal fine but to do what ? and at what cost?

BBC Reality Check indicates Gove is telling porkies.

Reality Check verdict: Full access with no regulation may be Mr Gove's hope but it looks impossible to deliver in practice.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36086987

BobQ

michaels wrote: »

How does a worse trade deal lead to high prices - I haven't seen many countries applying export tariffs recently.

When we are outside the CAP will we be able to benefit from the below cost of production agricultural produce the EU currently dumps on Africa undermining the African nations domestic farming industries?

Just taking the default case of using WTO terms will involve a tariff which will increase prices.

I agree that we can benefit from the surplus food that the is available on world markets. But what happens when foodstuff is not in surplus? One of the benefits of EU membership is that we can benefit from say Spanish oranges without a tariff, but who is to say they will sell them to us if there is high demand?

Thrugelmir

BobQ wrote: »

One of the benefits of EU membership is that we can benefit from say Spanish oranges without a tariff, but who is to say they will sell them to us if there is high demand?

They would simply grow more. Enough land to do so.

Why does the EU support and subsidise uneconomic farming?

BobQ

Alan_Brown wrote: »

Posted on a different thread:

The European Commission is not exactly the same as any UK National body, but you seem to misunderstand what it does. It is an EXECUTIVE body appointed by the ELECTED Council of Ministers. Its members are analogous to UK Permanent Secretaries that run functional departments comprising unelected civil servants. Its President is appointed by the ELECTED MEPs. It proposes actions but it is the responsibility of the Parliament and the Council of Ministers to enact decisions. Which countries have government bodies undertaking executive functions which they elect? In the UK who produces the legislation that the UK Parliament debates and often passes? The UNELECTED CIVIL SERVICE. Even Private Member Bills are written with the help of the civil servants and few actually pass into law.

There is nothing wrong with the UK being in the EU and outside the Euro. Cameron has negotiated an agreement that makes the UK pound an EU currency. Your perception of UK being half in and half out and that this is not good for either is just how you want to view a situation that the EU does not want to change. In fact very few parties, organisations or other nations want UK to leave. The US our natural ally thinks it will be a disaster for us and the EU.

BobQ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

They would simply grow more. Enough land to do so.

Why does the EU support and subsidise uneconomic farming?

The EU currently has enough capacity to support most of its food needs and is sheltered from fluctuating world markets by the effects of CAP to maintain a degree of supply quality.

Personally I still think that the CAP needs further reform, but surely the point is that now there is an abundance of many foods on the world market, but there may be a time when there is a shortage of it. Outside of EU we would be more vulnerable to such shortages.

CLAPTON

BobQ wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with the UK being in the EU and outside the Euro. Cameron has negotiated an agreement that makes the UK pound an EU currency. Your perception of UK being half in and half out and that this is not good for either is just how you want to view a situation that the EU does not want to change.

there is of course nothing wrong with the UK being in the EU but be part of the free movement of people and being able to set their own rate of vat on sanitary products .

In fact very few parties, organisations or other nations want UK to leave. The US our natural ally thinks it will be a disaster for us and the EU.

If an individual in USA really does think that brexit will be a disaster for the UK and the EU then they must think the EU foundation are built on sand. The will probably be proved right.

BobQ

cells wrote: »

The UK actually produces most [of?] the foods it consumes.

.

Why then did we import £40bn worth in 2014 and exported £19bn?