Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

phillw

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Adds weight to the question of what's the benefit of being a member.If the EU at National level remains highly protectionist.

The benefit is that we did amazingly well as a direct result of membership. Our country was on a serious decline and it reversed it. They stopped a lot of our self destructive policies. Government using tax revenue to prop up industries etc, polluting rivers and seas, overfishing etc.

If you're an Employee then you've really benefited. I can see why sociopathic Employers have a different view.

No matter what they promise today, I can't see the working time directive surviving. For the very reason that the government has been repeatedly fighting in the EU courts to find loopholes in it. Unfortunately their tactics involve using logic that a five year old come up with.

Eric_the_half_a_bee

phillw wrote: »

The benefit is that we did amazingly well as a direct result of membership. Our country was on a serious decline and it reversed it.

Reversed it? Our country went bankrupt 3 years after joining and had to go begging to the IMF for the largest loan in its history.

TrickyTree83

phillw wrote: »

This is the cake and eat it delusion. When you decide that we're superior and "they" should do what we want, then it's all too easy to put demands on other people without any regards to the consequences. This kinda of behaviour keeps marriage guidance counsellors in business.



David Davis is not a bank. Not everyone thinks "If THEY'RE having a holiday then I'M having a holiday". It's that type of thinking that got us into this mess. A lot of people don't have the choice.



Rules of origin is for products imported into the EU, once inside it's irrelevant & is waived through. Making those checks is not quick, the products sit at the EU border while they work out which country it's from. The rules are the same into each EU member are the same, so it doesn't matter where they come in. Of course a country may illegally allow non EU goods in, but if that is found then the EU courts will punish them. The UK is saying that we don't want to be governed by the EU courts.

Therefore there is no movement possible.

http://exporthelp.europa.eu/thdapp/display.htm?page=cd%2Fcd_RulesOfOrigin.html&docType=main&languageId=en



I don't have his mobile number. However the EU have been saying exactly the same thing since before the referendum result, so it's not like it's a huge surprise.



Sorry, but it is you who misunderstands.

http://exporthelp.europa.eu/thdapp/display.htm?page=cd%2Fcd_RulesOfOrigin.html&docType=main&languageId=en



I'm not convinced, you are throwing around the same misinformation. Hoping to keep momentum long enough that by the time people figure out really what is going to happen, then it's too late.

Oh dear, oh dear.

You still haven't read things properly have you?

You understand that the rules of origin isn't exclusively an EU thing right? That a free trade area/agreement between multiple countries doesn't involve a customs union and requires internal checks on the origin of products to stop the very scenario you highlighted regarding re-exportation.

When there is a customs union it ceases to be a mere FTA and moves towards economic integration. Everyone has the same external tariffs and non-tariff checks on the rules of origin... I'm pretty sure I explained all this before this post.

What you've essentially said here is "No no, the difference is that you have to have a customs union to be like the EU", whilst that may be correct for the EU since it's an economically integrated bloc, it's not the same for those of an FTA. Therefore leaving the EU and going into an FTA with the EU does not make us the EU - do you follow? The customs union is not a requirement for a free trade area/agreement/deal between the UK and the EU as you say it is.

I'm not trying to mislead anyone, I'm just stating what the actual differences between an FTA and the EU (an economic integration) are. If anyone was misleading people it would be yourself as you're incorrect on the requirement for customs union membership for an FTA with zero tariffs.

phillw

Eric_the_half_a_bee wrote: »

Reversed it? Our country went bankrupt 3 years after joining and had to go begging to the IMF for the largest loan in its history.

Yes, you've proved my point. We were on the verge, we had to beg three times to get let in. We then had to get a loan, but as a member of the EU we've turned it round.

These things take time to change. I am surprised at how quickly brexit has had a negative impact on the UK economy, I see the real problems hitting us 5 or 10 years down the line.

Using the gym membership analogy, we were flabby, we joined the gym and got progressively fitter, now we want to stop going to the gym to save some money but we still expect our fitness to carry on increasing.

phillw

ilovehouses wrote: »

Very bland - after all the arguments there's little controversy in assuming brexit is going to mean the relocation of banking jobs to Europe. A gentle drip feed for now.

It's all about money, if they can relocate for free or save money in the process then they will do it.

London is still a good short term prospect for financial services, taking a financial hit without solid evidence is not a good move. Things will probably escalate when we lose our passport.

If enough people leave that it becomes a no-brainer decision to follow, then that is when an exodus would start.

always_sunny

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Adds weight to the question of what's the benefit of being a member.If the EU at National level remains highly protectionist.

So what do you call what the USA is doing to say to the car industry? Trump is a big advocate.
Why would Britain want to strike a FTA with such county then? i.e. leaving one protectionist union (the EU) and attach to another.

Protectionism mostly relates to goods [really], how do you think it applies to a country like Britain with services? isn't stopping FoM essentially an act of [people] protectionism?

Isn't the UK also highly protectionist? (pot calling the kettle black)

phillw

always_sunny wrote: »

So what do you call what the USA is doing to say to the car industry? Trump is a big advocate.
Why would Britain want to strike a FTA with such county then? i.e. leaving one protectionist union (the EU) and attach to another.

Trump talks about signing trade deals, but he's telling the people who voted for him that he's stopping imports. Therefore it's safe to assume that any trade deal is just a way for them to flood our shops with their substandard food products, but not buy anything from us. The horse meat lasagna will start looking like a good idea.

always_sunny wrote: »

Isn't the UK also highly protectionist? (pot calling the kettle black)

Ironically the EU is strong and stable, trying to do the best for 28 countries. Which I don't think deserves to be called protectionist, which as you rightly say is what we're doing. With any luck the EU is going to continue growing, to the point where all countries are members. We won't like that as we still look fondly on our days of ruling the world, kicking the little guy. But it's what we need.

Other countries have behaved badly as well, but we are the only current EU member that still hold onto the idea of "ruling the waves".

mayonnaise

UK car sales fall for fourth month in a row in July

British new car registrations fell for a fourth consecutive month in July, the longest run of declines since 2011, in the latest sign of how uncertainty about Brexit is hitting Britain's economy

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-autos-registrations-idUKKBN1AK0SF

Herzlos

mayonnaise wrote: »

UK car sales fall for fourth month in a row in July


http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-autos-registrations-idUKKBN1AK0SF

That's probably why my old car has gone up in value - which usually happens when new sales dry up. I don't blame them; I wouldn't be taking out finance on a new car right now.

It's a shame though, I was hoping to buy a 3 year old car in 3 years, but that requires people to be buying them new, now.

gfplux

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Adds weight to the question of what's the benefit of being a member.If the EU at National level remains highly protectionist.

I don't think it adds weight. For example imports and exports between UK and a France may not be mutually beneficial but both Country's having 27 others to trade with balances out.

However "free trade deals" with America and others have been touted by Brexiters as a win. It can only be a win for Britain if we export more to America than we import AND things we import do NOT damage British manufacturing or services.
I am not in favour of protecting industry at all costs. However when negotiating a free trade deal if things are equal we have to hope the only vested interest Britains negotiators have is purely British interests. However when the other side (America) hold most of the cards any industry can be at the mercy of someone wanting a deal at any price.