Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Rough_Justice

Regarding the WTO route, before I go this evening I leave you with this - a suggestion of reading material (and indeed a forthcoming lecture) from LSE economists so that all may better understand why Brexit need not be a negative occurrence..
http://www.lse.ac.uk/Events/2018/01/20180117t1830vSZT/clean-brexit

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Clean-Brexit-Liam-Halligan-ebook/dp/B075422X53/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1510764191&sr=1-1
This includes a great many facts, including these which in order to avoid any copyright infringement are taken from reviews :

Access to the single market is not granted by the EU, but is available to all nations. We do not have to be in the single market to trade with it. The USA is not in the single market yet it exported 247 billion euros’ worth of goods to the EU last year. China is not in the single market yet it exported 345 billion euros’ worth of goods to the EU last year. Russia is not in the single market yet it exported 119 billion euros’ worth of goods to the EU last year.

No deal is better than a bad deal.’ State this clearly and often. ‘No deal’ simply means we don’t strike a UK-EU FTA before March 2019. Again, this is by no means a disaster – and has its benefits. Negotiating up against a hard deadline, the terms of any FTA with the EU, which we must live with for years, would be far worse than a deal settled under less time pressure. Under ‘no deal’, UK and EU exporters pay relatively low WTO tariffs. Britain’s EU trade deficit would generate substantial net tariff revenues, which could be used to compensate UK exporters

Unless the EU sees that we are prepared not to sign an FTA, we will only be offered a bad one. Signing a bad FTA because we are desperate to ‘get a deal’ would disadvantage UK exporters and consumers for a long time

gfplux

Rough_Justice wrote: »

Regarding the WTO route, before I go this evening I leave you with this - a suggestion of reading material (and indeed a forthcoming lecture) from LSE economists so that all may better understand why Brexit need not be a negative occurrence..
http://www.lse.ac.uk/Events/2018/01/20180117t1830vSZT/clean-brexit

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Clean-Brexit-Liam-Halligan-ebook/dp/B075422X53/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1510764191&sr=1-1
This includes a great many facts, including these which in order to avoid any copyright infringement are taken from reviews :

Given that David Davis has the guidance and advice of the best experts available including those from the LSE we will see from his actions what he has been advised is best for Britain.
As trade talks will not start untill the end of March 2018 perhaps he will in due course publish those findings.
Presently all we have to go on is his desire for Canada plus plus plus. That of course may be a red herring.

The lecture will be interesting. However being
"Unashamedly optimistic about Britain’s future, Clean Brexit draws on extensive discussions with leading politicians and diplomats across the UK, Europe and the world to argue that leaving the EU provides an opportunity for the UK to re-invent its economy, while reclaiming our place as a premier global trading nation."
It might be a little one sided.
I hope they Podcast it. I have now signed up to LSE podcasts.
Thank you Rough.

BobQ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

For the majority of us I suspect it's the future that matters. As unlike a divorce. The relationship still exists. The one thing you don't want. Is the ex still meddling in your personal domestic affairs. Long after separation has been agreed.

Yes but in this case the ex living next door to you and you have to decide whether to live in harmony or continually argue about maintaining the fence and who is making too much noise.

BobQ

Rough_Justice wrote: »

Well what a busy Sunday it has been in this thread. Even from a quick flick through the pages, it's immediately obvious that the pro-EU contingent here are more than a little ........ is "miffed" polite enough?
From "moronic" abuse to intimidation (I'm partial to an old Scotch single malt as my "surprise" FYI, ilovehouses ) and the usual deceit and distractions, IMHO if there was anyone left who was unsure of how insulting some of the pro-remainers feel they need to be in their obviously overwhelming desire to prove the glory of the EU they have been enlightened today.

Whatever happened to the debate of the forum title I don't know.
What I do know is that far too much of what I have seen posted today is not debate, it's an ill-intentioned foot-stamping temper tantrum by some pro-remainers.

Now on a slightly lighter note for once at least today, this.
"Brexit: Can Leavers and Remainers call a Christmas truce?"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42198627



Amen to that. We can but hope.


(Had you not posted the central paragraph of your post your apology may have garnered more credence BTW.)

Where in your post do you claim to be contributing to the debate in the title?

The future is what matters. I am still unclear why the Cabinet has not yet debated the desired end state of the Phase 2 negotiations. The broad options are:

-Those who want to maintain our position as far as possible have a clear plan with an EFTA like solution.

- Those who want the closest possible relationship outside of single market need to focus on an EU/UK trade deal and perhaps some form of Customs area. That plan needs to offer a flexible movement of EU citizens with the UK but with some controls and enable us to adopt those trade deals that already exist with the EU that we have signed up to.

-Those that want an independent fiefdom that has no trade deals or negotiates its own deals from scratch and bans or controls all economic migration with strict caps or rules.

We all have our views and the referendum did not provide a clear mandate of any of them, all of which would see us outside the EU.

But the problem is that we have a Cabinet that not only do not agree of any of them but also have never bothered to debate the options for fear of finding how divided they really are.

If we could agree on which is our preferred option, the EU27 would at least know what we want to negotiate. Frankly it is shambolic that we do not know what we collectively want.

Arklight

Rough_Justice wrote: »

Personally speaking, with each and every anti-Brexit utterance from senior EU officials that POV from them has become increasingly obvious.
Quite why we are wasting our time and effort when these EU officials openly state their intransigence I do not honestly know.

Because people who don't start drinking port at 11am every day expect a trade deal and the government are going to deliver one.

Sorry if that grates on you but you were quite keen on democracy when you won your referendum. Sadly for you, it's carrying on.

Herzlos

tracey3596 wrote: »

Whereas the federalist views of Junckers, Tusk, Schulz etc. and indeed of much of the EU do not attract me.
I'm a worker who will fight for her rights and the rights of her children and will not just bend over to the elites of a would-be-superpower EU.

So what are you doing about the rights the Tories are talking about taking away?

gfplux

I listen to a number of podcasts that discuss and debate the long hard and difficult process of Britain leaving the EU.
ALL but one are biased on either side of the argument.
I therefore do not recommend anyone who has a strong opinion about Britains future to listen to any of them,
BUT ONE
There is a podcast published by the Financial Times called "Brexit Unspun"
It is completely free.
It's tag line is "Debunk the Political Spin around Brexit"
I believe it is unbiased.
Have a listen they are not long +/-15 minutes.
https://www.ft.com/brexit-unspun-podcast

tracey3596

Herzlos wrote: »

So what are you doing about the rights the Tories are talking about taking away?

Didn't you know that people are allowed to talk and throw forward ideas?
Some refer to that process as brainstorming and it is widely accepted as being a useful part of the process in formulating effective new strategies.

When the talk becomes a proposal in Parliament we can wittle and worry but before then is at best premature.

Ballard

Rough_Justice wrote: »

Personally speaking, with each and every anti-Brexit utterance from senior EU officials that POV from them has become increasingly obvious.
Quite why we are wasting our time and effort when these EU officials openly state their intransigence I do not honestly know.

Unless I’m completely misremembering, one of the main mantras of the leave campaign was that they need us more than we need them and that they’d be banging down our door to sign trade deals. The likes of BMW & Volkswagen were predicted to have been pressuring Merkel to ensure that they didn’t lose the massive UK market.

With hindsight that all seems a rather optimistic viewpoint now but hopefully things will change soon.

Tromking

ilovehouses wrote: »

Surely December 2018 can't be the first time the 'brexit cabinet' have attempted to agree what they'd like the UK's future relationship with the EU to look like?

Don't say Davis is going to saunter up to the next phase of talks with nothing but a confused look on his face - again.

I think any conversation like you describe may well have ended TM’s premiership, such are the alleged differences within cabinet. There’s no avoiding the conversation now though. BJ’s comment yesterday about the danger of the UK becoming a vassal state if we remain too aligned to the EU is telling, as was the warm reception TM got from the EU last week too. The battle within our political elite for a hard/soft Brexit is gathering pace.