Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

mayonnaise

Mr Fox was in Washington earlier this month to meet US commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, and US trade representative, Robert Lighthizer.

Wilbur Ross

Brexit is a ‘God-given opportunity’ to steal trade from UK: Wilbur Ross

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/27/brexit-is-a-god-given-opportunity-to-steal-trade-from-uk-wilbur-ross.html

Herzlos

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

UK/USA trade talks will start 24th July:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-trade-deal-liam-fox-uk-us-24-july-a7815751.html


I have said repeatedly before that the UK can talk to who it wants and when it wants. There is absolutely nothing to prevent the UK from having trade deals ready to sign immediately we become separated from the EU.

Whilst I haven't dug out references, it's worth remembering that the US have said they'd favour a deal with the EU over the UK, so will do that first, and Trump has made favouring local manufacturing over foreign (with talks of a 35% tariff on German cars).

So be under no illusion that any deal we make with the US will heavily favour the US, who are keen to get access to our medical sector, amongst others.

It's good that we're starting to get involved in trade agreements with the ROW, but I'm really not optimistic we'll get anything that counts as a "good deal".

mayonnaise

Herzlos wrote: »

So be under no illusion that any deal we make with the US will heavily favour the US, who are keen to get access to our medical sector, amongst others.

Opening up our borders to heavily subsidized US agricultural produce is another one.

cogito

Has anyone seen the latest EU position paper which demands that they can fine UK companies for alleged infractions before, during and after the UK leaving the EU.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/essential_principles_ongoing_union_judicial_and_administrative_procedures.pdf

The only possible answer is the one given in the case of Arkell v Pressdram. They should be told very clearly that this is not even open to discussion. Next item, move on.

Even the most rabid Europhiles must surely start to realise the nature of this !!!!!-like organisation.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

mayonnaise wrote: »

Wilbur Ross

Brexit is a ‘God-given opportunity’ to steal trade from UK: Wilbur Ross

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/27/brexit-is-a-god-given-opportunity-to-steal-trade-from-uk-wilbur-ross.html

From December?

Much has changed since then, hence:

US and UK to start trade talks next month to ensure deal soon after Brexit

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/06/20/us-uk-start-trade-talks-next-month-ensure-deal-soon-brexit/
As well as:

Hopes of EU-US trade agreement put on ice, say Brussels sources

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/05/hopes-of-eu-us-trade-agreement-put-on-ice-say-brussels-sources

cogito wrote: »

I'm not even sure that we need a trade deal with the US given the massive amounts of trade flowing in both directions without one. That won't change after Brexit. If we did negotiate one though, it would be a big poke in the eye for the EU.

And the last sentence is exactly what I was alluding to in my previous post. :cool:

CKhalvashi

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Proof of that please?

Or is that statement purely to detract attention from the ongoing mess that is the Labour party?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/30/labour-chaos-deputy-leader-tom-watson-hits-brexit-rebels-tried/

I wouldn't know as I'm not a Labour supporter.

I have given my opinion on the current situation within Labour elsewhere, I can't be bothered to repeat it here.

cogito wrote: »

Has anyone seen the latest EU position paper which demands that they can fine UK companies for alleged infractions before, during and after the UK leaving the EU.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/essential_principles_ongoing_union_judicial_and_administrative_procedures.pdf

The only possible answer is the one given in the case of Arkell v Pressdram. They should be told very clearly that this is not even open to discussion. Next item, move on.

Even the most rabid Europhiles must surely start to realise the nature of this !!!!!-like organisation.

If a British company is operating unfairly in the single market, then those that manage the said single market are well within their rights to fine the companies involved. I fully expect any EU activities I may have (read that as will keep) after Brexit to be monitored by the EU, and if they become of a size or nature of concern for them to act on them.

For those of us that play by the rules, no problem, whereas dodgy companies that participate in illegal acts should rightly be stamped out as it's in the interests of everyone.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

CKhalvashi wrote: »

I wouldn't know as I'm not a Labour supporter.

I have given my opinion on the current situation within Labour elsewhere, I can't be bothered to repeat it here.

But what about the proof?
Of your statement: "Someone has finally found it, and there is loads of magic money left for the NHS, Police, Fire and remaining in the Single Market it seems."
Either substantiate what you wrote or admit you were incorrect please.

CKhalvashi

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

But what about the proof?
Of your statement: "Someone has finally found it, and there is loads of magic money left for the NHS, Police, Fire and remaining in the Single Market it seems."
Either substantiate what you wrote or admit you were incorrect please.

£1bn is £700ish for every NHS employee, which likely would pay for an additional 1% increase for the 2 years the DUP want it over. Fire and Police would require a share of this, however the numbers are smaller.

Of course it could be used more short-term to bring back the bursaries, thus saving the NHS the 50% overtime premium so many of their staff are having to claim due to retirements and nobody available to do the jobs before spending part of that on payrises averaged out over everyone with the remainder being reinvested into not having Mrs May flog hospital sites to Mr May on the cheap.

There is, therefore, a magic money tree somewhere that the Tories are plucking from, which is creating inefficiency and waste within at least the NHS of a sort that can't be reduced without temporary spending.

It could, however, be that they're planning to increase the national debt by more than they did in the last 7 years (remember the Conservatives have increased the national debts by more than any other party when they have been in power) and if so I apologise.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

CKhalvashi wrote: »

£1bn is £700ish for every NHS employee, which likely would pay for an additional 1% increase for the 2 years the DUP want it over. Fire and Police would require a share of this, however the numbers are smaller.

Of course it could be used more short-term to bring back the bursaries, thus saving the NHS the 50% overtime premium so many of their staff are having to claim due to retirements and nobody available to do the jobs before spending part of that on payrises averaged out over everyone with the remainder being reinvested into not having Mrs May flog hospital sites to Mr May on the cheap.

There is, therefore, a magic money tree somewhere that the Tories are plucking from, which is creating inefficiency and waste within at least the NHS of a sort that can't be reduced without temporary spending.

It could, however, be that they're planning to increase the national debt by more than they did in the last 7 years (remember the Conservatives have increased the national debts by more than any other party when they have been in power) and if so I apologise.

£1 Billion?
Where?
Ah, you're still rambling on about the DUP (*yawn*) in which case blame Jezza and the millions of voters who put the country in this position. Hardly surprising with the level of bribes being promised though.
But that's democracy for ya.

£1 billion to save us from Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn is a bargain

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/27/1-billion-save-us-prime-minister-jeremy-corbyn-bargain/

mayonnaise

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

From December?

Is the Wilbur Ross from December a different one from the current Wilbur Ross then? (*yawn*)