For variants such as entry to EFTA/EEA, see Richard Tyndall for further details. For renegotiating every treaty from scratch with everyone, see schizoid personality disorder.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
Most likely is that we start negotiations a year or two before invoking exit procedure, and deal would be done in that time.
Cameron has said on the floor of the House of Commons that the morning of a Leave result he would invoke Article 50 and the 2 year clock would start counting down
He's said a lot of things, many of which have not happened.
On the morning of a Leave result he would do one of two things:
1. Get on the first plane to Brussels to see what they can offer to make sure the peasants vote Remain in a second referendum.
2. Resign.
Or......do what he's said he'd do......as with SINDYREF a lot of Cameron's critics are choosing to ignore what he's said and make random stuff up....
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
Well no one really knows, but if it is more than 5% I would be very surprised.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to vote, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
An excellent article for Leave, highlighting the bureaucratic nightmare that is the EU.
In any event, since the EU countries have a strong economic incentive to do a deal, then it is likely interim measures will be put in place, before a deal is finalised.
Both parties will want this happen, even if there is a bit of huffing and puffing for show.
Some EU member states have a relatively strong incentive to do a deal, others don't. No deal can be done until all EU member states are on board with it.
Key ones have the strong incentive and can 'arrange' for the others to fall into line.
They can do some horse trading. And they will weight up whether it is worth it. And all that will take time. What percentage of Germany's imports into the UK will be genuinely at risk without a trade deal, for example?
It's 3 million jobs at risk, right?
(You can't look at gross percentages, because the impact will be concentrated. Absolute numbers are more useful - and don't forget that because they will be marginal production they will have a disproportionate impact on profit)
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
Mike/TSE - how many articles submitted by Leave supporters have you so far received and how many have you refused to publish?
I can't speak for Mike, but I've not received any.
If anyone ever wants to submit a piece for consideration on any topic, Vanilla message me, and I'll see what we can do.
Well, I've already written one in the comments...
I'm fully booked for article writing until at least January 2016, but I'm a bit short thereafter. If you're willing to guarantee anonymity, I'll send you my CV later in the year
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
Well no one really knows, but if it is more than 5% I would be very surprised.
So if only 5% of imports stop without a deal, what incentive is there for surplus countries in the EU to do a deal with us, let alone the deficit countries or those with neither?
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
what we will actually be doing when free from the EU and organising our own trade deals is making imports from other countries cheaper and more easily available - rolling back EU protectionism
An obvious question is what the default position would be while negotiations trundled on. Presumably we would remain members until we'd negotiated our exit? Since that would become increasingly awkward as we half-participated in whatever issues were going on (British PM: "I think that we in Europe should..." 27 others: "It's going to be nothing to do with you, so do shut up"), perhaps initial negotiations would be on an interim status, allowing us to withdraw while retaining some involvement for a two-year period?
It would be nice if someone on either side explored this, but they don't really have an incentive. Leavers want to foster the idea of a swift, clean break; Remainers don't want to look at ways of making withdrawal look workable.
It seems fairly obvious that there would be an initial period of reflection.
The future of Cameron would need to be decided, and a new PM/lead negotiator would most likely need to be appointed.
The vote would bring the european risks more clearly into focus for each of the european leaders, in line with eurozone debacle precedents where bond auctions failed, or Greek debt repayments were missed.
There is a reasonable chance that the EU27 will find it difficult to agree among themselves, as that seems to be their default reaction to everything.
The EU 27 are not twenty seven like minded countries with equal amounts to win or lose from making or breaking a new deal.
My guess is that the big countries will end up stomping on the little ones and the johnny-came-latelies, because that is where the form points.
The PM would be able to play his/her Article 50 card at the time they deemed most suitable.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
Fair enough. I also treasure freedom of movement. I don't see my freedom of speech at risk by being an EU member state. I do see my freedom of movement being at risk if we pull out.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
The customer is King and the U.K. Is the EU's biggest customer. I dare say German cars would get cheaper post-liberation.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
Well no one really knows, but if it is more than 5% I would be very surprised.
So if only 5% of imports stop without a deal, what incentive is there for surplus countries in the EU to do a deal with us, let alone the deficit countries or those with neither?
Or us to do a deal with them. If the EU puts up trade barriers that reduce our exports by more then it gets interesting, but I find that highly unlikely.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
Most likely is that we start negotiations a year or two before invoking exit procedure, and deal would be done in that time.
Cameron has said on the floor of the House of Commons that the morning of a Leave result he would invoke Article 50 and the 2 year clock would start counting down
He's said a lot of things, many of which have not happened.
On the morning of a Leave result he would do one of two things:
1. Get on the first plane to Brussels to see what they can offer to make sure the peasants vote Remain in a second referendum.
2. Resign.
Or......do what he's said he'd do......as with SINDYREF a lot of Cameron's critics are choosing to ignore what he's said and make random stuff up....
Do I need to repost the list of broken promises, he has form for talking bollox, from "no increase in VAT" through "10's of thousands" through protecting child tax credit, launch tax free childcare, 3 days of for volunteering, the social care cap, refugee camps in kent ... the list is practically endless.
We already have the same rules as the Single Market by definition. So it should be a lot quicker for us to sign a new agreement. Plus you may find we are a higher priority than the likes of San Marino.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
Well no one really knows, but if it is more than 5% I would be very surprised.
So if only 5% of imports stop without a deal, what incentive is there for surplus countries in the EU to do a deal with us, let alone the deficit countries or those with neither?
Or us to do a deal with them. If the EU puts up trade barriers that reduce our exports by more then it gets interesting, but I find that highly unlikely.
and they would be in trouble with WTO if they did.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
The customer is King and the U.K. Is the EU's biggest customer. I dare say German cars would get cheaper post-liberation.
Indeed - in the meantime whilst the deals were negotiated, trade would carry on as it does now. Any side stupid enough to fire up a tariff would soon lose out as a reciprocal one was slapped on.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
The flaw being they are going to get nasty with us??
The club you want us to stay a member of??
This is what is becoming known as the 'Hague fallacy'. The EU is cr8p and nasty. Let's stay in!!
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
Fair enough. I also treasure freedom of movement. I don't see my freedom of speech at risk by being an EU member state. I do see my freedom of movement being at risk if we pull out.
That also fair enough. WRT freedom of movement, my own view is that a foreign country ought to be entitled to impose the same immigration controls on me, as it would on any non-EU national. I'm not a supporter of free migration into this country, and I would certainly never claim any rights in relation to a foreign country that I would deny to their nationals.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
Well no one really knows, but if it is more than 5% I would be very surprised.
Doesn't the UK government get to keep the tariffs as well...that might appeal to one George Osborne.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
If the Eurocrats want certainty in their dealings with us, they will rapidly make a deal. Or else, people might see that the Earth doesn't stop spinning without a trade deal and think "what was all the fuss about?" And that would NEVER do in the Eurocrat mentality. I mean, people might query their WORTH! Heavens to Betsy....
"Forty years of integration cannot be undone instantly. Brexit would be a staged process, not an event. Like most newly-independent nations we would retain the body of law and avoid unravelling treaties in order to minimise disruption. "
"We would, however, see a change of mood in our country. Domestic politics would slowly emerge from parochialism and mediocrity as our politicians are made responsible for the serious affairs of governance and prestige is restored to Parliament. "
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No we don't. We import 10% of their exports, we export 45% of our exports.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
Well no one really knows, but if it is more than 5% I would be very surprised.
Doesn't the UK government get to keep the tariffs as well...that might appeal to one George Osborne.
Yes, given our very high level of EU imports it might be a pretty tasty figure for chancellor Gove (Osborne is definitely going to be a dead man walking if we leave).
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
Fair enough. I also treasure freedom of movement. I don't see my freedom of speech at risk by being an EU member state. I do see my freedom of movement being at risk if we pull out.
But in reality, how will it be at risk.
You are educated and, I believe, a high earner. So you would be an attractive candidate if you wanted to settle abroad. In addition, we'd pretty quickly get a visa waiver programme in place.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No we don't. We import 10% of their exports, we export 45% of our exports.
I don't see why percentage share is more important than the absolute value. Especially when you consider there'd be a fair degree of import substitution.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
The flaw being they are going to get nasty with us??
The club you want us to stay a member of??
This is what is becoming known as the 'Hague fallacy'. The EU is cr8p and nasty. Let's stay in!!
Eh?
Firstly I don't want to stay a member, I'd be delighted if a plausible and better alternative was developed.
Secondly, who said anything about being nasty? We are talking about the length of time it will take to finalise an agreement. I've negotiated with big US companies and sometimes it takes years. No-one is being nasty, that's just what it takes.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No we don't. We import 10% of their exports, we export 45% of our exports.
What do we do with the 55% of our exports we don't export?
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
Fair enough. I also treasure freedom of movement. I don't see my freedom of speech at risk by being an EU member state. I do see my freedom of movement being at risk if we pull out.
What loss of freedom do you worry about? Travel for holidays? Passport (without visas most likely). Travel for work? Again, passport probably without visas, but not the end of the world if they are required? Loss of freedom to live full time? To buy property? What benefit is there in say France doing so?
I think the whole fear element is massively overdone. Even if say France wanted to be an arse, it doesn't mean it would be Europe wide. Spain has a massive property glut. Does it want to tell UK passport holders to sod off? What possible benefit is there? The Remainers have made no case beyond irrational fear.
I note the reference to a "Poisonous atmosphere". Is this similar to the hostility one often sees exhibited from somebody who's been "dumped"? Would Remain enthusiasts, including those who promised a referendum, have a tendency to sulk poisonously if Leave wins?
Chile's was only around 4 years as well as I recall
On Korea, the deal came into force provisionally in 2011 so the table is misleading really. Like some of these other agreements there is a phase in period during which tariffs etc. are removed - this is designed to allow adjustments in sensitive sectors. Clearly a UK-EU deal would not require any such period as there are no tariffs now.
Both Mexico and Canada were left out of the table. I am waiting for Mr Meeks to explain the reasoning for this.
If the Eurocrats want certainty in their dealings with us, they will rapidly make a deal. Or else, people might see that the Earth doesn't stop spinning without a trade deal and think "what was all the fuss about?" And that would NEVER do in the Eurocrat mentality. I mean, people might query their WORTH! Heavens to Betsy....
Actually the Eurocrats will want a quick deal. Brexit, if it happens, is going to be a massive distraction, as well as economically disruptive.
However, it's not the Eurocrats who get to decide.
So if we vote leave, the chances are we'll actually get a proper renegotiation. My £40 on the Lib Dems under 8.5 seats at next GE wasn't to get jam immediately tommorow. It's looking to the long term as any deal with the EU should be.
One should not rush a negotiation, 10 years seems like a reasonable enough time frame for something so fundamental.
Interestingly I've just filled in a YouGov poll on what the impact of Brexit would be for me personally, the organisation I work for, and the skills in the UK.
And of course virtually nobody can answer such questions, let alone normal plebians...which will get the answer "Britian's uncertain about what Brexit means for their job / business / career"...
Does this mean that there could be a gap of several years before we were able to import those lovely expensive German cars?
No apparently the Germans will still be able to export everything they make to us, but we won't be able to export anything to the EU as they are going to build a wall to stop us.
Chile's was only around 4 years as well as I recall
On Korea, the deal came into force provisionally in 2011 so the table is misleading really. Like some of these other agreements there is a phase in period during which tariffs etc. are removed - this is designed to allow adjustments in sensitive sectors. Clearly a UK-EU deal would not require any such period as there are no tariffs now.
Both Mexico and Canada were left out of the table. I am waiting for Mr Meeks to explain the reasoning for this.
They are both on his table. I explained the Canada thing below.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No you just have to be prepared to be utterly risk averse and prepared to just manage decline. The lack of ambition is pitiful.
Does this mean that there could be a gap of several years before we were able to import those lovely expensive German cars?
No apparently the Germans will still be able to export everything they make to us, but we won't be able to export anything to the EU as they are going to build a wall to stop us.
Taking lessons off The Donald's approach to world politics?
I apologise if I'm not taking these EU threads seriously. The reason lies back in 1975, when I was 25, young, idealistic and believed the lies that Political Union was not the aim. We were voting only for a trade agreement. Surely so many senior politicians wouldn't lie to us?
But they did. They told bare-face lies while laughing behind their hands at us mugs. We are now much older and wiser. The oldies are usually risk averse and keen on the status quo, unwilling to see much change. But as the saying goes ...
"Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice, shame on me."
We remember. Why should we believe a word from proven liars? If you want Political Union, that is fine, you can vote for it and know you will get what you want. Otherwise, caveat emptor.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
I think that up to 8 years of economic and investment uncertainty is a little more than "administrative inconvenience!"
We had at least 8 years of economic and investment uncertainty under Gordon Brown's chancellorship, seem to have survived it more or less though.
Odd that lefties see leaving the EU as a source of economic uncertainty, but don't see the near flawless ability of Labour chancellors to crash the economy into the rocks in the same light, although the later is almost certainly more severe than the former.
Sorry but bluster and trying to conflate leaving the EU and Brown's chancellorship is the sort of daft argument that will eventually lead to a REMAIN win. Although I actually started off on the fence I've switched to REMAIN because I really think the BREXIT case is starting to unravel now the spotlight is turned on it. For too long the ant-EU "facts" that UKIP, the Mail, Express made on a daily basis went unchallenged. The next 4 months will be a very different story I suspect.
Hmmm. Agree with Alistair on the likelihood of any negotiation taking years. But that's just because the EU is disfunctional, and is a reason to leave not stay.
The logic seems to be "we can't leave because it is too complicated and too difficult". That is also a reason to cut the Knot of Gordian sooner rather than later.
The CFP caused waste of millions of tons of fish - never mind the liquidation of the fishing industries - and was known to be a problem in the 1980s. It has taken a generation to get any movement towards a solution.
It has also taken a generation to move the CAP moved a little in the right - market oriented - direction.
We have the Zombie Parliament Building at Strasbourg for nearly 2 decades years now, and others before it, for the sake of 4 days per month, currently costing iirc about 100m Euro a year.
Our trade with the EU is significantly reduced in importance over a short period of years, despite 13 new countries added since 2000.
Do we really want to spend the next century in this unreformable bureaucratic death grip?
The question surely answers itself - Better Off Out.
I note the reference to a "Poisonous atmosphere". Is this similar to the hostility one often sees exhibited from somebody who's been "dumped"? Would Remain enthusiasts, including those who promised a referendum, have a tendency to sulk poisonously if Leave wins?
I am sure we Leavers would be restrained and not gloat.... well not too much anyway
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No we don't. We import 10% of their exports, we export 45% of our exports.
I don't see why percentage share is more important than the absolute value. Especially when you consider there'd be a fair degree of import substitution.
Percentages are always more important, especially when you're dealing with a blockquote that has nearly nine times our population. If you tell two families they will lose 10% of their income or 45% of their income respectively then who hurts more? The reality is that our 10% of imports from the EU is much smaller individually.
The other way of looking at it is looking nation by nation but remember that all our exports to the EU are involved but only their exports to us are. So let's take Germany, you want to compare German exports to the UK with the UK's exports to the rest of the EU. Rinse and repeat for all nations.
I still think we should Leave and would get a deal swiftly but be realistic here.
Does this mean that there could be a gap of several years before we were able to import those lovely expensive German cars?
No apparently the Germans will still be able to export everything they make to us, but we won't be able to export anything to the EU as they are going to build a wall to stop us.
It depends on what we export, doesn't it? many agricultural products, widgets etc are generally replaceable, it is the high-cost, high-quality stuff that there will still be a demand for on both sides of the equation.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
I think that up to 8 years of economic and investment uncertainty is a little more than "administrative inconvenience!"
We had at least 8 years of economic and investment uncertainty under Gordon Brown's chancellorship, seem to have survived it more or less though.
Odd that lefties see leaving the EU as a source of economic uncertainty, but don't see the near flawless ability of Labour chancellors to crash the economy into the rocks in the same light, although the later is almost certainly more severe than the former.
Sorry but bluster and trying to conflate leaving the EU and Brown's chancellorship is the sort of daft argument that will eventually lead to a REMAIN win. Although I actually started off on the fence I've switched to REMAIN because I really think the BREXIT case is starting to unravel now the spotlight is turned on it. For too long the ant-EU "facts" that UKIP, the Mail, Express made on a daily basis went unchallenged. The next 4 months will be a very different story I suspect.
Pish you were another "undecided" in the mold of Meeks and Nabavi.
The point in anycase is valid. Most estimates even from Remain are suggesting an economic cost of 1.5-2% of GDP per year, in one year of Brown we lost almost four times that, and yet here we are with a nicely growing economy only a few years later. The doom and gloom is completely overblown and just sounds like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness
If the Eurocrats want certainty in their dealings with us, they will rapidly make a deal. Or else, people might see that the Earth doesn't stop spinning without a trade deal and think "what was all the fuss about?" And that would NEVER do in the Eurocrat mentality. I mean, people might query their WORTH! Heavens to Betsy....
Actually the Eurocrats will want a quick deal. Brexit, if it happens, is going to be a massive distraction, as well as economically disruptive.
However, it's not the Eurocrats who get to decide.
You're probably right, it will be a bit disruptive. It's a risk I'm prepared to take to get sovereignty back. But I understand those who think the other way.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
Fair enough. I also treasure freedom of movement. I don't see my freedom of speech at risk by being an EU member state. I do see my freedom of movement being at risk if we pull out.
That also fair enough. WRT freedom of movement, my own view is that a foreign country ought to be entitled to impose the same immigration controls on me, as it would on any non-EU national. I'm not a supporter of free migration into this country, and I would certainly never claim any rights in relation to a foreign country that I would deny to their nationals.
I don't see why Freedom of Movement would be significantly threatened.
I don't need a Visa now to go to Argentina or Japan. Why on earth would Denmark or Belgium demand one, unless it was EU officialdom being petulant?
Does this mean that there could be a gap of several years before we were able to import those lovely expensive German cars?
No apparently the Germans will still be able to export everything they make to us, but we won't be able to export anything to the EU as they are going to build a wall to stop us.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
Fair enough. I also treasure freedom of movement. I don't see my freedom of speech at risk by being an EU member state. I do see my freedom of movement being at risk if we pull out.
What loss of freedom do you worry about? Travel for holidays? Passport (without visas most likely). Travel for work? Again, passport probably without visas, but not the end of the world if they are required? Loss of freedom to live full time? To buy property? What benefit is there in say France doing so?
I think the whole fear element is massively overdone. Even if say France wanted to be an arse, it doesn't mean it would be Europe wide. Spain has a massive property glut. Does it want to tell UK passport holders to sod off? What possible benefit is there? The Remainers have made no case beyond irrational fear.
We organise conferences as part of our business. We are doing a big one in Spain in June. It is to all intents and purposes like organising one in the UK. Go to North America and Asia, as we also do, and it becomes a whole lot more complicated. Likewise, we could set up an office anywhere in the EU tomorrow, try doing the same elsewhere in the world (Hong Kong excepted). That's the freedom I am talking about.
So the European Court of Justice has ruled refugees can move to any EU state?? Does that include UK even though we are outside EU immigration policy?? Also, don't this ruin the quota policy as any migrants assigned to Slovakia can move straight back to Germany??
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No we don't. We import 10% of their exports, we export 45% of our exports.
What do we do with the 55% of our exports we don't export?
So the European Court of Justice has ruled refugees can move to any EU state?? Does that include UK even though we are outside EU immigration policy?? Also, don't this ruin the quota policy as any migrants assigned to Slovakia can move straight back to Germany??
The answer to your three questions are No, No and No (or maybe, for the last).
Does this mean that there could be a gap of several years before we were able to import those lovely expensive German cars?
No apparently the Germans will still be able to export everything they make to us, but we won't be able to export anything to the EU as they are going to build a wall to stop us.
It depends on what we export, doesn't it? many agricultural products, widgets etc are generally replaceable, it is the high-cost, high-quality stuff that there will still be a demand for on both sides of the equation.
I guess we'll have to start making high-cost, high-quality stuff in the UK again. Won't that be awful.
We organise conferences as part of our business. We are doing a big one in Spain in June. It is to all intents and purposes like organising one in the UK. Go to North America and Asia, as we also do, and it becomes a whole lot more complicated. Likewise, we could set up an office anywhere in the EU tomorrow, try doing the same elsewhere in the world (Hong Kong excepted). That's the freedom I am talking about.
Yes, so you will vote Remain, because it suits your circumstances, others will vote Leave because it suits theirs. No one is ever going to convince you given what you have said, of the merits of Leave so it all becomes a bit pointless. It would however be foolish to suggest that other people voting to support their view of how things will turn out for their interests is any more or less valid that your view of how it will affect yours.
So the European Court of Justice has ruled refugees can move to any EU state?? Does that include UK even though we are outside EU immigration policy?? Also, don't this ruin the quota policy as any migrants assigned to Slovakia can move straight back to Germany??
No it absolutely hasn't. It's ruled they can move within the EU state unless there are special circumstances. Eg a refugee with right to remain in Germany can move between Berlin and Frankfurt. Not that they can move to London.
Hmmm. Agree with Alistair on the likelihood of any negotiation taking years. But that's just because the EU is disfunctional, and is a reason to leave not stay.
The logic seems to be "we can't leave because it is too complicated and too difficult". That is also a reason to cut the Knot of Gordian sooner rather than later.
The CFP caused waste of millions of tons of fish - never mind the liquidation of the fishing industries - and was known to be a problem in the 1980s. It has taken a generation to get any movement towards a solution.
It has also taken a generation to move the CAP moved a little in the right - market oriented - direction.
We have the Zombie Parliament Building at Strasbourg for nearly 2 decades years now, and others before it, for the sake of 4 days per month, currently costing iirc about 100m Euro a year.
Our trade with the EU is significantly reduced in importance over a short period of years, despite 13 new countries added since 2000.
Do we really want to spend the next century in this unreformable bureaucratic death grip?
The question surely answers itself - Better Off Out.
I see the decision as similar to that which a Scottish voter had to make in 2014. If you think Scotland is better off outside the UK, then go for independence. If you think that Scotland is better off inside the UK, then vote for the Union. But, never base your decision on the fact that the details of any future relationship between an independent Scotland and RUK will take a lot of time and effort to work out.
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Risk of what?
As I explained to Richard yesterday, uncertainty isn't always a bad thing. Look at Japan or this country under "no boom and bust" Brown. You just end up drifting as a nation.
Eight years without access to the single market might just be bad for the economy.
It would be an even worse disaster for the Eurozone nations. Those who suggest that the day after a LEAVE we would simply not trade with the EU are insane. No Range Rovers going to Ireland or BMWs arriving from Germany? Yeah right! Maybe they'd just stop assembling Airbuses for a few years while the negotiations trundled on. Germany in particular relies on abuse of its position in the Euro to maintain an export model it should not by rights be able to sustain. We are a huge and vital market for the Eurozone. The EU could keep eg South Africa in the slow lane because nothing was going to break by so doing. Trying the same with the UK could actually precipitate the EU collapse SeanT was referring to.
How is our absence from a market of 450 million better than the absence of a market of 450 million from us? You know - if I were a bungee jumper I would not want you measuring the length of the elastic for me. Put it another way - don't take up parachute packing for a living.
I'm going to break my rule of not replying to your stupidity, but it's simple, we have a massive deficit with the EU. £85bn including re-exports through EU ports, higher if we strip those out. Our £30bn services surplus is not even close to making up for our gargantuan deficit.
And how much of that trade stops without a deal? That, surely, is the key issue. Consumers will still want to buy European cars, for example. Why would a British government decide to make them more expensive?
The customer is King and the U.K. Is the EU's biggest customer. I dare say German cars would get cheaper post-liberation.
The UK is among the biggest customers of some EU member states - Germany, Spain and Ireland are, I think, the most dependent. But how much of their trade with us suffers as a result of a Brexit with no deal is a moot point. The more high-end the product, the less will be the problem, I'd have thought.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No we don't. We import 10% of their exports, we export 45% of our exports.
I don't see why percentage share is more important than the absolute value. Especially when you consider there'd be a fair degree of import substitution.
Percentages are always more important, especially when you're dealing with a blockquote that has nearly nine times our population. If you tell two families they will lose 10% of their income or 45% of their income respectively then who hurts more? The reality is that our 10% of imports from the EU is much smaller individually.
The other way of looking at it is looking nation by nation but remember that all our exports to the EU are involved but only their exports to us are. So let's take Germany, you want to compare German exports to the UK with the UK's exports to the rest of the EU. Rinse and repeat for all nations.
I still think we should Leave and would get a deal swiftly but be realistic here.
Right but the family example don't work because its not money going to each other. If the 10% family is getting that income via gifts from 45% family, and vice versa, its not clear which will be worse off.
If the Eurocrats want certainty in their dealings with us, they will rapidly make a deal. Or else, people might see that the Earth doesn't stop spinning without a trade deal and think "what was all the fuss about?" And that would NEVER do in the Eurocrat mentality. I mean, people might query their WORTH! Heavens to Betsy....
Actually the Eurocrats will want a quick deal. Brexit, if it happens, is going to be a massive distraction, as well as economically disruptive.
However, it's not the Eurocrats who get to decide.
So, what are you saying - that it is down to other European leaders blocking such a trade deals? Why? And if so - why in the name of feck would you want to be chained together with such people?
Is moving me back to Remain. Brexit is just too much of a risk.
Life is a risk. Deciding to Leave or Remain shouldn't be based upon administrative inconvenience.
So which of the personal and business freedoms I currently enjoy do you think I should be prepared to risk?
I think you need to decide whether you think that EU membership is, on balance, a positive thing for this country, or a negative thing. If you conclude the former, vote Remain. If you conclude the latter, vote Leave.
A lawyer's answer :-). You want me to risk - even give up - freedoms I currently enjoy. The emphasis is kind of you to explain why.
I've given my views, here and elsewhere, as to why I think we should leave on plenty of occasions. Accept or reject them as you like. I really can't tell you what freedoms you should risk. I don't know you, I don't know what matters to you. I don't consider that I am risking any freedom that I consider to be important (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom to own property, freedom of contract) by voting Leave.
Fair enough. I also treasure freedom of movement. I don't see my freedom of speech at risk by being an EU member state. I do see my freedom of movement being at risk if we pull out.
That also fair enough. WRT freedom of movement, my own view is that a foreign country ought to be entitled to impose the same immigration controls on me, as it would on any non-EU national. I'm not a supporter of free migration into this country, and I would certainly never claim any rights in relation to a foreign country that I would deny to their nationals.
I don't see why Freedom of Movement would be significantly threatened.
I don't need a Visa now to go to Argentina or Japan. Why on earth would Denmark or Belgium demand one, unless it was EU officialdom being petulant?
You don't need a visa to live or work in Japan? May want to double check that.
The Leavers seems to be arguing that trade with the EU will continue unchanged during the transition because they trade so much with us, and that the EU will be under pressure to conclude a deal rapidly because they trade so much with us.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
We import more from the EU than export - you'd have to be dim or unpatriotic not to see we have a better hand.
No we don't. We import 10% of their exports, we export 45% of our exports.
I don't see why percentage share is more important than the absolute value. Especially when you consider there'd be a fair degree of import substitution.
Percentages are always more important, especially when you're dealing with a blockquote that has nearly nine times our population. If you tell two families they will lose 10% of their income or 45% of their income respectively then who hurts more? The reality is that our 10% of imports from the EU is much smaller individually.
The other way of looking at it is looking nation by nation but remember that all our exports to the EU are involved but only their exports to us are. So let's take Germany, you want to compare German exports to the UK with the UK's exports to the rest of the EU. Rinse and repeat for all nations.
I still think we should Leave and would get a deal swiftly but be realistic here.
It's probably more like 35% of exports, but the point is that the nations with which we have huge trade deficits are also the nations which are best able to set the EU agenda.
I think 10 years ago when 60% of our exports went to the EU the idea of leaving would have been untenable, even to me and I'm strongly in favour of Leave. Today our reliance on EU trade is much smaller, the rest of the world is growing at a faster rate, the ability to set our own terms of trade is very attractive to me and we would be able to withstand any hit of losing single market access for a while.
So the European Court of Justice has ruled refugees can move to any EU state?? Does that include UK even though we are outside EU immigration policy?? Also, don't this ruin the quota policy as any migrants assigned to Slovakia can move straight back to Germany??
No it absolutely hasn't. It's ruled they can move within the EU state unless there are special circumstances. Eg a refugee with right to remain in Germany can move between Berlin and Frankfurt. Not that they can move to London.
Since there are no borders in Schengen, and since governments are now not allowed to restrict the movement of refugees within their country, what stops those refugees just walking into the next country.
Its not about disputing his "facts", its about relentless thread headers point out the idiocy of one side, and giving the other a complete pass for its equally vapid and tendentious assertions.
I've written pieces on how and why Leave can/will win.
This is like the BBC's approach to impartiality. Have 50 leftie opinions and then 1 from the right wing. Oh look someone wrote a pro LEAVE article on political betting 9 effing months ago..........
So the EU really is the Hotel California. We can check out any time we like (article 50) but we can never leave.
Let's just think this through for a moment. The EU is developing in a way not necessarily to our advantage. The EZ is going to integrate and our votes and opinions are going to become increasingly irrelevant. It is highly likely the rules of the club will evolve in ways that damage our interests.
To quote another song (Lord, I am turning into TSE) if not now, when? Do we wait for it to get worse or do we go now? If it were done t'were well to be done quickly. (That's enough quotes. Ed)
I see Mr Meeks is continuing to specialize in provocative click bait articles rather than any form of deep analysis.
The trade deals he highlights were negotiated from scratch to create new trading rules and terms. Most of the deals required post-Brexit will be a reformulation of existing rules and terms simply to acknowledge the UK's new status outside the EU.
So the European Court of Justice has ruled refugees can move to any EU state?? Does that include UK even though we are outside EU immigration policy?? Also, don't this ruin the quota policy as any migrants assigned to Slovakia can move straight back to Germany??
No it absolutely hasn't. It's ruled they can move within the EU state unless there are special circumstances. Eg a refugee with right to remain in Germany can move between Berlin and Frankfurt. Not that they can move to London.
Since there are no borders in Schengen, and since governments are now not allowed to restrict the movement of refugees within their country, what stops those refugees just walking into the next country.
The fact that we are not in Schengen and that borders are being put up within Schengen.
Also the fact that if a refugee is given right to remain and work in Germany and a refugee visa etc, then they will not have the right to remain and work in any other country and would be an illegal immigrant as far as any other countries companies are concerned.
If you want Political Union, that is fine, you can vote for it and know you will get what you want. Otherwise, caveat emptor.
Interesting theory from Hugo Rifkind @hugorifkind: I wonder how much British Euroscepticism springs from our timeless, heroic nostalgia for WW2. @hugorifkind: As in, most of the EU regards that period as the worst period there ever was. Whereas, in our culture, it's sort of the best. @hugorifkind: So, no wonder we place less value on an institution designed to prevent it ever happening again.
Were we the only EU country to come out of WW2 with any credit whilst the rest had various forms of shame?
Comments
===================
For variants such as entry to EFTA/EEA, see Richard Tyndall for further details. For renegotiating every treaty from scratch with everyone, see schizoid personality disorder.
(You can't look at gross percentages, because the impact will be concentrated. Absolute numbers are more useful - and don't forget that because they will be marginal production they will have a disproportionate impact on profit)
It also has Dan Hannan and Michael Gove.
Remain has those intellectual giants Corbyn and McDonnell
Maybe we can cut the childish pointing at names and laughing routine now and get back to the issues.
I think I detect a slight flaw in this logic!
I'm fully booked for article writing until at least January 2016, but I'm a bit short thereafter. If you're willing to guarantee anonymity, I'll send you my CV later in the year
The future of Cameron would need to be decided, and a new PM/lead negotiator would most likely need to be appointed.
The vote would bring the european risks more clearly into focus for each of the european leaders, in line with eurozone debacle precedents where bond auctions failed, or Greek debt repayments were missed.
There is a reasonable chance that the EU27 will find it difficult to agree among themselves, as that seems to be their default reaction to everything.
The EU 27 are not twenty seven like minded countries with equal amounts to win or lose from making or breaking a new deal.
My guess is that the big countries will end up stomping on the little ones and the johnny-came-latelies, because that is where the form points.
The PM would be able to play his/her Article 50 card at the time they deemed most suitable.
We already have the same rules as the Single Market by definition. So it should be a lot quicker for us to sign a new agreement. Plus you may find we are a higher priority than the likes of San Marino.
The club you want us to stay a member of??
This is what is becoming known as the 'Hague fallacy'. The EU is cr8p and nasty. Let's stay in!!
Huh...?
https://twitter.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/705031295408218112
"Forty years of integration cannot be undone instantly. Brexit would be a staged process, not an event. Like most newly-independent nations we would retain the body of law and avoid unravelling treaties in order to minimise disruption. "
"We would, however, see a change of mood in our country. Domestic politics would slowly emerge from parochialism and mediocrity as our politicians are made responsible for the serious affairs of governance and prestige is restored to Parliament. "
If the country votes leave, we leave.
Why are the leavers so unhappy about that?
You are educated and, I believe, a high earner. So you would be an attractive candidate if you wanted to settle abroad. In addition, we'd pretty quickly get a visa waiver programme in place.
Firstly I don't want to stay a member, I'd be delighted if a plausible and better alternative was developed.
Secondly, who said anything about being nasty? We are talking about the length of time it will take to finalise an agreement. I've negotiated with big US companies and sometimes it takes years. No-one is being nasty, that's just what it takes.
Frau Merkel is going to put the freedom of movement of Latvians above the freedom to trade goods for Germans according to some.
I think the whole fear element is massively overdone. Even if say France wanted to be an arse, it doesn't mean it would be Europe wide. Spain has a massive property glut. Does it want to tell UK passport holders to sod off? What possible benefit is there? The Remainers have made no case beyond irrational fear.
However, it's not the Eurocrats who get to decide.
https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/705032439211663360
One should not rush a negotiation, 10 years seems like a reasonable enough time frame for something so fundamental.
But they did. They told bare-face lies while laughing behind their hands at us mugs. We are now much older and wiser. The oldies are usually risk averse and keen on the status quo, unwilling to see much change. But as the saying goes ...
"Fool me once, shame on you,
Fool me twice, shame on me."
We remember. Why should we believe a word from proven liars? If you want Political Union, that is fine, you can vote for it and know you will get what you want. Otherwise, caveat emptor.
Shark jumping post..
The logic seems to be "we can't leave because it is too complicated and too difficult". That is also a reason to cut the Knot of Gordian sooner rather than later.
The CFP caused waste of millions of tons of fish - never mind the liquidation of the fishing industries - and was known to be a problem in the 1980s. It has taken a generation to get any movement towards a solution.
It has also taken a generation to move the CAP moved a little in the right - market oriented - direction.
We have the Zombie Parliament Building at Strasbourg for nearly 2 decades years now, and others before it, for the sake of 4 days per month, currently costing iirc about 100m Euro a year.
Our trade with the EU is significantly reduced in importance over a short period of years, despite 13 new countries added since 2000.
Do we really want to spend the next century in this unreformable bureaucratic death grip?
The question surely answers itself - Better Off Out.
Maybe Zac. Just.
Boris the worst.
Some questions to answer I feel...
@hugorifkind: I wonder how much British Euroscepticism springs from our timeless, heroic nostalgia for WW2.
@hugorifkind: As in, most of the EU regards that period as the worst period there ever was. Whereas, in our culture, it's sort of the best.
@hugorifkind: So, no wonder we place less value on an institution designed to prevent it ever happening again.
The other way of looking at it is looking nation by nation but remember that all our exports to the EU are involved but only their exports to us are. So let's take Germany, you want to compare German exports to the UK with the UK's exports to the rest of the EU. Rinse and repeat for all nations.
I still think we should Leave and would get a deal swiftly but be realistic here.
The way the EU is going right now, it is more likely to cause the next conflict, not stop it.
"Interesting theory from Hugo Rifkind."
Did NATO die in vain?
The point in anycase is valid. Most estimates even from Remain are suggesting an economic cost of 1.5-2% of GDP per year, in one year of Brown we lost almost four times that, and yet here we are with a nicely growing economy only a few years later. The doom and gloom is completely overblown and just sounds like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness
I don't need a Visa now to go to Argentina or Japan. Why on earth would Denmark or Belgium demand one, unless it was EU officialdom being petulant?
Tessa Jowell is probably better than those two at 120 / 490, you've got a tiny actuarial chance on that one.
Still there...
I think 10 years ago when 60% of our exports went to the EU the idea of leaving would have been untenable, even to me and I'm strongly in favour of Leave. Today our reliance on EU trade is much smaller, the rest of the world is growing at a faster rate, the ability to set our own terms of trade is very attractive to me and we would be able to withstand any hit of losing single market access for a while.
Let's just think this through for a moment. The EU is developing in a way not necessarily to our advantage. The EZ is going to integrate and our votes and opinions are going to become increasingly irrelevant. It is highly likely the rules of the club will evolve in ways that damage our interests.
To quote another song (Lord, I am turning into TSE) if not now, when? Do we wait for it to get worse or do we go now? If it were done t'were well to be done quickly. (That's enough quotes. Ed)
The trade deals he highlights were negotiated from scratch to create new trading rules and terms. Most of the deals required post-Brexit will be a reformulation of existing rules and terms simply to acknowledge the UK's new status outside the EU.
Also the fact that if a refugee is given right to remain and work in Germany and a refugee visa etc, then they will not have the right to remain and work in any other country and would be an illegal immigrant as far as any other countries companies are concerned.
So far Cruz has won >50% in just one, as has Rubio. Trump has lots of second places, and hence a delegate in almost every CD.