Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

mrginge

phillw wrote: »

So you want to impose immigration on people rather than them being free? I find this position to be more odious. "We want immigrants but we get to judge you first. You're ok, but your brother looks kinda funny."

I’m struggling to think of any major economic country in the world that does not have an immigration system and ‘judges you first’. Can you point any out to us?

Tromking

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wallace-gravity-commentary/commentary-in-brexit-britain-economic-gravity-will-take-its-toll-idUSKBN1E52DB

So how should Britain adapt to being poorer after Brexit?

Less money for services? Benefits? Infrastructure? The NHS?

Just trying to square off how an advocate of post Brexit Scottish independence would have the temerity to complain about the UK distancing itself from its most important and geographically closest market.

gfplux

Davis Davis can go on the Marr TV show but in Brussels they just keep to leaks!
This from today's Politico email.

---

"DIPLOMACY IN ACTION: Brussels has “hardened” its Brexit resolution for this week’s summit following David Davis’ ill-advised Marr Show interview, my POLITICO colleague Florian Eder reveals in his morning email Morgen Europa. Three EU diplomats tell him the draft statement due to be signed off by EU27 leaders on Friday has been toughened up following Davis’ suggestion the Brexit deal was “more a statement of intent than a legally enforceable thing.” DD was sent out onto LBC Radio yesterday to perform an urgent clarification, but Florian says that in Brussels the damage has been done. The draft resolution drawn up by EU27 sherpas yesterday says negotiations in phase 2 “can only progress as long as all commitments undertaken during the first phase are respected in full, and translated faithfully in legal terms as quickly as possible.”

And there’s more: The Times’ Brussels correspondent Bruno Waterfield has seen the same document, with an irritated EU source making clear they are unimpressed with Davis’ remarks. “It’s not helpful if people cast everything into doubt 24 hours later,” Waterfield is told. He also quotes another section of the draft resolution, which warns Britain not to expect preferential conditions that might upset other trading partners such as Canada. “The European Council will calibrate its approach as regards trade and economic cooperation to avoid upsetting existing relations with other third countries,” it states.

Today in Brussels: Summit prep continue with a meeting of the EU27’s general affairs council, where chief negotiator Michel Barnier is due to brief foreign ministers on the progress made so far. A press conference is scheduled at its conclusion — livestream promised here."
---

Herzlos

Davis' puts his foot in it again - shock horror.

When will these guys learn to just shut up, since no-one believes them anyway and every time they open their trap they make it worse?

Tromking

gfplux wrote: »

Davis Davis can go on the Marr TV show but in Brussels they just keep to leaks!
This from today's Politico email.....
............The draft resolution drawn up by EU27 sherpas yesterday says negotiations in phase 2 “can only progress as long as all commitments undertaken during the first phase are respected in full, and translated faithfully in legal terms as quickly as possible.
---

The keywords being “negotiations IN phase 2”of course.
As a supporter of the EU stance in these negotiations aren’t you a little perturbed at how the UK was not tied down more legally to the commitments it made in phase 1?

Herzlos

Tromking wrote: »

Just trying to square off how an advocate of post Brexit Scottish independence would have the temerity to complain about the UK distancing itself from its most important and geographically closest market.

Our geographically closest market has decided to hurl itself back into the dark ages, relatively speaking, for trade. Why would we choose a poor England on our doorstep over a prosperous EU over a small body of water on either side?
We'll still get to trade with England under the terms agreed by the EU, and can potentially steal a huge amount of their business if London loses passporting.

The UK is driving itself into the rocks on purpose, we want to head for the life rafts before they are destroyed too.

Tromking

Herzlos wrote: »

Our geographically closest market has decided to hurl itself back into the dark ages, relatively speaking, for trade. Why would we choose a poor England on our doorstep over a prosperous EU over a small body of water on either side?
We'll still get to trade with England under the terms agreed by the EU, and can potentially steal a huge amount of their business if London loses passporting.

The UK is driving itself into the rocks on purpose, we want to head for the life rafts before they are destroyed too.

It’s not England BTW, it’ll be the rUK. Every potential negative for the UK you cite re. Brexit, will be dwarfed by the immediate negative economic effects that’ll be visited on the Scottish people if they opt for independence. I think you know that deep down.

Rinoa

ilovehouses wrote: »

If we can manage perfectly well without a trade deal with the EU why would we be bothered about trade deals with others?

Trade deals with others will be mutually beneficial. Trade deals with the EU are always in their favour.

That's why most of the world prefer not to have trade deals with them.

Eric_the_half_a_bee

ilovehouses wrote: »

If we can manage perfectly well without a trade deal with the EU why would we be bothered about trade deals with others?

We want a trade deal with the EU, but not if it comes with onerous conditions. The same criterion applies to all trade deals. That should not be a difficult concept to grasp.

Rinoa

phillw wrote: »

What agreement? If nothing is agreed until everything is agreed then surely the quotas they are willing to give us are included in that?

Just to keep you updated here's the problem.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brexit-agriculture-deal-uk-eu-donald-trump-us-reject-trade-quotas-plan-theresa-may-a7986221.html

To appease the EU we've stupidly agreed the EU/UK share of WTO agricultural quotas. Which now means prospective future trade partners are limited to what they can sell us.