Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

Rusty_Shackleton

Conrad wrote: »

It concerns some of us that the EU has an appalling trade deal delivery in terms of value. A key reason is to extract ourselves from the talking shop mentality where things happen at glacial speed.

Things happen slowly in the EU because there's a lot of discussion to take into account the wants and needs of 28 different countries. While you might not like the speed, it flies in the face of the idea of the EU as a superstate that disregards the wants and needs of individual countries, doesn't it?

We could learn a thing or two about compromise from our European neighbours - the winner takes all approach favoured by the brexiters works well for the US because it can throw it's weight around. We can't - in every way that matters the UK is just too small to behave like that.

Rusty_Shackleton

Sapphire wrote: »

It's not just that they are lumbering and indecisive (unelected) bureaucrats – it is impossible for them to negotiate because there are so many widely differing nations, each with its own interests, involved (27). The Barnier fellow doesn't really have a mandate to 'negotiate'.

Unelected bureaucrats consulting with the governments of the people they work for? How dare they. All this acknowledgement of the EU consulting it's member governments (alongside directly elected MEPs) makes it sound an awfully lot like the EU is democratic after all, doesnt it.

Sapphire wrote: »

All they could agree on collectively would be on things like the oft-quoted 'Britain must be punished', which is absurd, not to mention very bad, antagonistic diplomacy.

Can you provide some evidence that the EU wants to punish Britain, as opposed to the EU removing the benefits that we are choosing to forego by leaving? There is a world of difference, and perhaps if the brexiters and our government could tell the difference the UK wouldn't be coming across as antagonistic and lacking in diplomacy!

Conrad

setmefree2 wrote: »

It would be great to see some useful information come out of the EU - some sort of grown up conversation really needs to happen - they seem to have their heads buried in the sand....

From your Singapore post I spotted this in case u missed it, what a find!

'UK-EU FTA EU boosted as ECJ said EU would not need trade deal ratification by member states on key areas'.


http://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/singapore-may-renegotiate-eu-trade-deal-after-brexit-removes-british-markets-36052157.html

Conrad

Institute of Economics Affairs report on trade policy has been well-received by ministers. It argues that no deal with the EU on trade would not be a disaster for the UK, recommending Britain commits to a policy of unilateral free trade with the rest of the world, eliminating all barriers to imports regardless of whether other countries impose tariffs on their imports from the UK.


It would then be up to the EU if it wanted to impose tariffs, which would hurt EU consumers by raising prices. In such a scenario, the IEA report concludes the UK would likely be given tariff free access to the single market:


“There are many myths being perpetuated about trade policy – and more specifically about the UK’s relationship with the EU – that must be debunked.


Many people believe that disaster will befall us if we do not forge a deal with the EU. In fact, we could unilaterally eliminate all import tariffs, which would give us most of the benefits of trade, and export to the EU under the umbrella of the WTO rules. Then we can seek free trade deals with all major trading partners, including the EU.”

If a bad deal is offered by the EU, the UK should say thanks but no thanks, walk away and unilaterally set tariffs at zero…

https://order-order.com/2017/08/18/iea-brexit-britain-should-commit-to-unilateral-free-trade/

Rusty_Shackleton

Conrad wrote: »

Institute of Economics Affairs report on trade policy has been well-received by ministers. It argues that no deal with the EU on trade would not be a disaster for the UK, recommending Britain commits to a policy of unilateral free trade with the rest of the world, eliminating all barriers to imports regardless of whether other countries impose tariffs on their imports from the UK.


It would then be up to the EU if it wanted to impose tariffs, which would hurt EU consumers by raising prices. In such a scenario, the IEA report concludes the UK would likely be given tariff free access to the single market:


“There are many myths being perpetuated about trade policy – and more specifically about the UK’s relationship with the EU – that must be debunked.


Many people believe that disaster will befall us if we do not forge a deal with the EU. In fact, we could unilaterally eliminate all import tariffs, which would give us most of the benefits of trade, and export to the EU under the umbrella of the WTO rules. Then we can seek free trade deals with all major trading partners, including the EU.”

If a bad deal is offered by the EU, the UK should say thanks but no thanks, walk away and unilaterally set tariffs at zero…

https://order-order.com/2017/08/18/iea-brexit-britain-should-commit-to-unilateral-free-trade/

Agriculture will be the most obvious first casualty of this idea. How do you think farmers will feel when the sector is decimated by cheap food imports? Do you think it's acceptable for our national security and stability to have such a crucial sector damaged like that?

Conrad

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

There is a world of difference, and perhaps if the brexiters and our government could tell the difference the UK wouldn't be coming across as antagonistic and lacking in diplomacy!

This helps us sculpt a good deal - we play along with 'Brexit is so hard, don't anyone else try it' narrative as the French and then the German elections came along, and to deter other leavers, and when the time is right both sides OBVIOUSLY will agree a no-harm trade deal.


The point you guys always miss is that harming us, harms them and so no one will vote to harm for example the 9% of Dutch exports UK bound.


As the Hungarian FO Minister recently intimated, if we get offered a bad deal we will become aright royal threat to EU trade as we become a beacon for tariff free world goods and thus much more competitive than the EU (thousands of examples of how this could harm EU competiveness)

Rusty_Shackleton

Conrad wrote: »

This helps us sculpt a good deal - we play along with 'Brexit is so hard, don't anyone else try it' narrative as the French and then the German elections came along, and to deter other leavers, and when the time is right both sides OBVIOUSLY will agree a no-harm trade deal.

The point you guys always miss is that harming us, harms them and so no one will vote to harm for example the 9% of Dutch exports UK bound.

And what percentage of Dutch exports go to rEU?

The point you're missing and brexiters should fully understand, since they're willing to cut off their nose to spite their face, is that to the rEU the most important thing is protecting the single market. It's why the German car industry laughed off ideas that they'd pressure Merkel into helping our cause. The single market is far more important than the losses they'll suffer by not trading with us (or in a reduced capacity/with increased costs).

Their losses as a group to the UK are spread thinly, while the UK is looking at 44% of our exports. We have the weaker hand.

setmefree2

Conrad wrote: »

From your Singapore post I spotted this in case u missed it, what a find!

'UK-EU FTA EU boosted as ECJ said EU would not need trade deal ratification by member states on key areas'.


http://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/singapore-may-renegotiate-eu-trade-deal-after-brexit-removes-british-markets-36052157.html

UK Brexit boost as ECJ rules trade deals do not require extra ratification

Surprise ruling confirms EU officials have key negotiation powers in trade talks with approval of state parliaments not needed

The European court of justice has raised a ray of hope for British trade negotiators with a surprise ruling that will make it harder for national parliaments to block key components of any future post-Brexit deal between the EU and the UK.
In a long-awaited test case that had been expected to complicate the Brexit process, the court instead ruled that EU officials had exclusive powers to negotiate international trade deals without ratification by national and regional parliaments.
Ratification is still required in specific areas, such as inward investment and dispute resolution, but the definition of the EU “competences” is much broader than had been expected.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/may/16/uk-brexit-boost-ecj-rules-trade-deals-parliament-ratification

Conrad

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

Agriculture will be the most obvious first casualty of this idea. How do you think farmers will feel when the sector is decimated by cheap food imports? Do you think it's acceptable for our national security and stability to have such a crucial sector damaged like that?

Classic paint-by-numbers small vision logic from a Remainer. We can do any number of things to boost our farming sector as the Kiwis & Aussies found out.


Remainers fatalistic hopeless linear thinking is so un-British


As an aside I thought you Remoaners were terrified by historically modest inflation rate so would welcome cheaper food?

Rusty_Shackleton

setmefree2 wrote: »

"Ratification is still required in specific areas, such as inward investment and dispute resolution, but the definition of the EU “competences” is much broader than had been expected."

:rotfl: The irony that brexiters will be celebrating the EU gaining more power than they previously thought it had.

It's funny that brexiters know they'd rather deal with one party covering a huge number of people for a trade deal, rather than multiple parties representing their respective small groups. Now if only they could somehow imagine how other potential trade partners might see the UK compared to the EU when considering trade deals....