Options
It looks as though Johnson will fail to get a US trade deal – politicalbetting.com
It looks as though Johnson will fail to get a US trade deal – politicalbetting.com
Several of tomorrow’s papers are reporting the challenges facing BoJo in his question to get a post-Brexit trade deal with the US.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Rubbish headline from The Telegraph.
Leave voters divide primarily into two groups. Those who cared about democracy and sovereignty (eg me). For us, Brexit is done, and good, but its benefits will take years to emerge (if they do, it was always a wager). For others, it was about immigration and controlling the borders. I don't know how they feel, you will have to ask them
About 1% of 1% thought it was about "immediately getting better trade deals". Sure, free trade deals are good, but whether they are done in 2023 or 2026 is of no great concern to anyone
This will not shift public opinion one iota
Yeah the successor state method would be easy but that's obviously not how they'd want to do it. It would be the ultimate federalising step, the EU becomes a country. Anyway, it's not on the cards. The Telegraph just has a crap headline based on a quote from one Italian MEP/non-entity.
Makes sense
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1440434381886160910?s=19
The Italian MEP is entirely right. If France wants total support from the EU for an EU army and navy, and if France wants complete EU support in its diplomatic spazz-out against the Anglosphere, then France must show willing to the EU: and give up its UNSC seat to the EU, as the EU is then the primary actor in foreign and military policy - Germany, Italy, Spain and Poland (and others) surely deserve equal input into UN decisions if their young people are to be sent to die in EU military adventures alongside the French
The Italian MEP exposes French arrogance, posturing and hypocrisy. The French want EU help and they want an EU army (that the French lead) but the French will never give up the UNSC seat because it is French and La Gloire and croissants and etc etc etc
It would be madness, absolute madness to do so and very good that Boris refused to do so.
For those very short of memory: No deal is better than a bad deal. That applies to the USA every bit as much as the EU, if not more so.
We should take our time and get this done right. Ideally within the CPTPP platform and not bilateral. If that can be done by 2024 then great. If it takes until 2028 then so be it. If it never happens, that's fine too. Better than committing to something then finding the only thing that can be achieved due to that commitment is a terrible deal and we've already folded our cards by giving a guarantee before the talks concluded.
To have benefits of being in any Trade club we will have to use some sovereignty as currency to buy benefits we need in return?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-yellen-trade-idUSKBN29Q2RZ
Asked about a possible trade deal with Taiwan, Yellen said: “President Biden has been clear that he will not sign any new free trade agreements before the U.S. makes major investments in American workers and our infrastructure. Our economic recovery at home must be our top priority.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/02/uk-hopes-of-early-us-trade-deal-dashed-by-biden-warning
“I’m not going to enter any new trade agreement with anybody until we have made major investments here at home and in our workers and in education,” he said.
If you were wondering if your 18 year old Worcester will get through another winter or two, what would you do right now?
A few geeky Leavers/Remainers may have argued about the "timing of subsequent trade deals", but vanishingly few voters actually cared so much it swayed their decision in the Brexit voting booth
When Obama said "Britain will be at the back of the queue for a trade deal" this genuinely got people angry - but not because we cared about our position in the queue, but because - quite rightly - the fact he merely made a statement (obviously at the behest of Cameron) was seen as unwise, immoral and counter-productive interference, by a foreign politician, in a very British politician decision
It quite possibly shunted 200,000 votes to Leave
The UN Charter names the Permanent Members. Changes to the Charter require a supermajority AND a positive vote from the P5. However, the UN Rules of Procedure only require a majority of the UNGA voting to be changed. Maybe that is the route to removing a permanent member against their own wishes, if there is one.
It has been done before. In 1986, the 25th International Conference of the Red Cross - which is the ICRC, the Member States to the Geneva Conventions, and all the Red Cross and Red Crescent national societies (and the Red Lion and Sun of Iran) could not remove the South African state delegation, as an issue of substance required a supermajority, which was not there. So they changed the rules of procedure, which did not require a supermajority.
The headline is amusing but it does betray a real issue. Why should the other states accede to a French demand for an EU military (primarily motivated it seems to feed France's military industrial complex) if France isn't prepared to transfer the seat over to the EU? If France are prepared to, then that's major, but if they're not then any sceptical nations have a very easy way to say no to the whole thing.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1440433075511390213?s=20
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1440433522867462144?s=20
Legitimate trade clubs as opposed to nascent federal states have agreed rules that the nations agreed to and stick to them. They may evolve a bit due to court cases etc but until the nations involved change the rules that's it.
The EU was completely different to every other trade club on the planet because the EU had the power to change its own rules. It has its own Parliament, its own initiative, its own executive. Does NAFTA the USMCA have that?
The reason is that a successful deal requires the consent of the legislatures to negotiate a finished package for a single up-and-down vote. In Britian, bizarrely, Government don't even need a vote, they can just sign it. But in the US, with its mass of special interest lobbies, Congress will nickel-and-dime every clause of any deal to death. That means that negotiations are a waste of time - whatever you come up with, Congress with tinker with it.
The problem is well-known,and there's a solution: popular presidents with compliant Congress majorities can get authority to do a finished package. But that isn't currently the case. So Biden's only way to get it would be
(a) win over lots of Republicans (good luck with that) or
(b) win a sweeping victory in the midterms (ditto)
So Johnson is absolutely right to knock the whole idea on the head - pretending he might get a deal would just set him up to fail.
I wasn’t actually having a go at you Big G, I was dismantling Leon’s brexiteer drivel. He doesn’t understand, yet, you have to use sovereignty as currency to buy everything lost from exiting the EU trade membership.
A US UK trade deal, Trump kept implying was oven ready once we finally divorced Europe, will be an economic blow to UK if it’s still five years off, and, on topic, Mike is right in the header, it’s politically damaging to this Brexit government.
The Express, predictably, talks up the chaff put out to disguise the bad news: UK gate crashing Canada-Mexico-US as a given, but I am far from convinced that is any quick win either. As I implied in the first sentence, the devil will be found in the detail.
Am I wrong on any of these points?
Maybe wait and see and hear from Liz Truss
Because this is it. Either France ploughs its own furrow, with the odd bit of support from the EU - here and there- and then sighs and semi-attaches to Aukus and the the US-led alliance - OR France actively bites the bullet and says Yes, we are merging our sovereignty at the UNSC with our EU brothers and allies, from now on the French seat at the UN is the EU seat, and foreign policy will be decided in Brussels
It would be an incredibly brave step by a French prez, and they should probably do it. They are so dominant in the EU along with Berlin they would still have control, in essence, and then, wow, the EU is a global player (with massive French influence behind the scenes).
Then the West has two potent alliances, Aukus/Five Eyes and the EU, and they can act in concert without feeling inferior to each other, and that's a proper bulwark against China.
This really is the moment for Macron to step up and show imagination. But I fear his inner Gaullist will prevail
but it has wokeded as an effective weapon to decrees the chance of ever getting a deal, so victary to those who oppose the trade.
Where the COVID cases are coming from:
Age-sex pyramid today (left) compared to 4 weeks ago (right)
https://twitter.com/kallmemeg/status/1440415496042528772?s=20
Predominantly young and therefore at much lower risk of hospitalisation/death.
And then you all accuse former Remainers of double standards.
Will this be put to a referendum?
I don't wish to tolerate any dilution of my sovereignty without my express consent.
Option 1 - close association with Aukus once the election is done and the political heat goes away. That's the logical route that doesn't encumber French ambition with German appeasement.
Essentially at any income X, with a UBI of Y, a tax rate of R, then your tax T follows the simple formula: T = X.R - Y
So for the example given £24001 * 0.4 - £24000 = - £14,399.60 so you'd 'pay' negative £14,399.60 in tax. So total net income received would be £38,399.60
As I said, the numbers were just round number picked from the air, you'd need to tweak it to make it actually work.
And it is the Times reporting the switch to the existing US - Canada - Mexico deal as well as the Express
I genuinely look forward to Liz Truss's comments
We don't need a trade deal, just drop all tariffs and as many NTB as possible right away to all good from anywhere.
We will get almost all the benefits, that's how trade works, IAW Adam Smith, David Ricardo and the 'theory of comparative advantage'
Its worked every time its been tried including in the UK in the 1840s with the abolition of the corn lows, Hon Kong in the 1940s, Singapore in the 60s and New Zealand in the 1980s.
I would strongly recommend Political Economy by Ricardo, and if anybody is even slightly intested, message me and I will buy it for you.
Maybe a trade deal can have some added advantages over simple free trade, I'm not totally convinced but maybe, if so it should be seen as the cherry on the icing on a cake, we shouldn't be turning way cake because it dose not have a cherry on top of it.
@vonderleyen
Congratulations dear @JustinTrudeau!
Your re-election gives us the opportunity to strengthen further our unique Flag of European Union Flag of Canada partnership.
We share the same values & the view that multilateralism is crucial to address today’s global challenges.
You’ll always have friends in Brussels.
https://twitter.com/vonderleyen/status/1440355049335447557?s=20
@JustinTrudeau
10m
Officiel du gouvernement - Canada
Replying to
@vonderleyen
With shared values and goals, I know we'll be able to address today's global challenges together. Thanks for your message, Ursula.'
https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau/status/1440441801450557445?s=20
Boris did send a congratulatory tweet earlier and got a reply but not quite the same love in as between Ursula and Justin
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1440385068464160768?s=20
https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau/status/1440440170814193675?s=20
The idea that the UK would join Canada , the USA and Mexico is risible given that would need a whole new negotiation for all the countries and would take years .
Some of the UK press wouldn’t look out of place in North Korea given the hero worship of their Dear Leaders!
However, you still need to concede two points. Sovereignty does work like currency, and is pooled in all agreements, including those that aren’t economic or trade, such as security, like NATO security or IMF.
Secondly, the actual possibilities for a trade arrangement with the United states of Europe was not simply what was offered from Cameron’s renegotiation, or what we currently have with Boris Brexit deal (that the Brexit government who negotiated and signed it wouldn’t do again tomorrow.). It was only framed as in or out to try and force a remain win.
Anything I have said in this reply not factual or fair?
https://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/1440445276804681729
Does trading 20-30s for kids make much difference to hospitalisations, given both groups have pretty low rates?
https://twitter.com/kallmemeg
The EU is pooled sovereignty because the rules can be dynamically changed without our agreeing to it - as far as I'm aware that's the only major international organisation for which that is true. Its true for most other countries as far as the UNSC is concerned too, but since we have our UNSC veto it isn't true for us there either. Since the UNGA is advisory and not rule setting our lack of a veto for that is irrelevant.
Of course there's a myriad of possible agreements we can form with the EU but only if we're out. While we're in we need to follow EU rules, so if you wish to have a different 'flavour' of arrangement then you need to be out and elect a government that can get that agreed with the EU.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/09/21/why-sane-republicans-are-self-deporting-themselves-513445
It seems pretty well over for the Republican party as an ordinary conservative party. Those who oppose Trump are giving up fighting for it, as they see it as beyond redemption.
You really are poor with interpretation of words
surely you mean
"their young people are to be sent to die in EU military adventures alongside French sourced military equipment"
But for at least some MPs, if not the public, Brexit was about trade deals.
We have some fawning press, but surely a key point of North Korean press is that it is uniform in output, and ours certainly ain't that. Fawning can be overlooked when the opposite gets plenty of attention too.
Or spoil the fantasy we are well rid of any proper relationship with an EU that’s lost it’s marbles?
Met with terrible jolly fat French fellow. Very amiable. I may have slept through some of his longer jokes.
Good night folks
And expect more.
I don't think any MPs expected trade deals on a preset clock. That's not how negotiations work.
Anything else beyond that now will be bonus.
The only other reason for raising this, put out some chaff to distract from the bad news.
CPTPP + USA joining it is better.
Well worth a read - surprised to be impressed by one leading Labour politician who seemed to “get it” - Angela Rayner. Labour have quite a mountain to climb, and not just in terms of electoral arithmetic.
https://twitter.com/mgoldenmsp/status/1440345880368857104?s=21
Perhaps sex pyramids should be used to answer a lot of other great questions of the day.
Despite many great things you have added to this forum, that is the weakest thing you have ever said.
Flagship phones sold in Europe by China's smartphone giant Xiaomi Corp (1810.HK) have a built-in ability to detect and censor terms such as "Free Tibet", "Long live Taiwan independence" or "democracy movement", Lithuania's state-run cybersecurity body said on Tuesday.
The capability in Xiaomi's Mi 10T 5G phone software had been turned off for the "European Union region", but can be turned on remotely at any time, the Defence Ministry's National Cyber Security Centre said in the report.
https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/lithuania-says-throw-away-chinese-phones-due-censorship-concerns-2021-09-21/
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1440454547214725125?s=20
It’s also true though, on no US trade deal news day, the press have bought into the government’s bit of chaff chucked out there.
We get a free trade agreement with zero tariffs and zero quotas but without any of the political entanglement, without any membership fees, without being subject to their jurisdiction or rules, and without them having exclusivity to determine what other deals we can sign.
Simply having no fees at all to pay alone makes it a better deal than what we had.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/
It's basically posts from FB and Twitter from people disbelieving Covid and vaccines, and then dying from Covid.
It's disturbing in a number of ways: from the extent to which people believe bullshit, to people crowing over the deaths of others.
Price cap for households would need to rise to £1,834 to cover the full costs of buying surging gas prices, EnAppSys revealed
https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.ft.com/content/a33e38bb-1593-4d01-bd06-8fc66442068a
So rather than fucked, A huge range of UK commerce and trade hardly harmed at all, from fishing through to… well, everything has been hit by the added admin and other hidden costs away from headline zero tariffs you mentioned?
Club Membership fee from government (that was barely 0.6% of GDP) versus the hidden costs on little business to whole industries like fishing? This way is better all round?
Your wrong on this one Phil.
* This is a suspicion based on the fact that Xiaomi doesn't have that much software capability, and it'd be by far the easiest way to add censorship.
Good & interesting meeting with @ScottMorrisonMP today! Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have worked together closely with #Australia & held several videoconferences to exchange best practices.
We will further deepen our bilateral cooperation through a Strategic Partnership Arrangement in areas such as research, youth exchange and the economy.
https://twitter.com/sebastiankurz/status/1440414000366297092
"Admin burden" 0.01% of GDP if you're lucky.
Having Parliamentary Sovereignty we can vote for: Priceless.
Yes this way is far better all round.
Between 1945 and 1991 the Byelorussian and Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republics were members of the UN in their own right and in 1991 Belarus and Ukraine just carried on those memberships. The Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR) did not have its own UN membership (or even its own local communist party until very late) and so the Russian Federation took up the UN membership and permanent Security Council seat from the USSR as the successor state. The independence of the Baltic states had already been conceded by the USSR and they had joined the UN prior to the final collapse. The remaining republics all joined after the collapse (fun fact: although Russia is the designated successor state, the last member of the USSR to secede was Kazakhstan!)
The separate membership for Belarus and Ukraine was of course to give the USSR slightly more clout and was dressed up as a “reward” for the suffering they’d experienced in the war. Stalin, however, had originally demanded UN membership for all 16 soviet republics (including the Karelo-Finnish SSR which was downgraded to the Karelian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of the RSFSR in 1956). Truman responded with demanding all forty-eight US states getting UN membership too, so Stalin backed down.
Interestingly, when we rehabilitated our house here in Sleepy Hollow some years back, we found an old newspaper under the lino with an article describing the Byelorussian and Ukrainian SSRs setting up their own “independent” ministries of defence and armed forces to “prove” they were really sovereign. US states also have the right to maintain their own armed forces, separate from the National Guard and not subject to federalization, and a few, even including New York, do.
It does raise several questions. It’s a given gas bills are cheaper than electric at this sort of thing? Are you installing new gas combi this autumn rather than electric, because saving the planet and human race comes down those bad countries screwing it up with emissions, ie China, you paying higher heating bathing bills a mere drop in mighty planet saving ocean in comparison?
Or, have you actually calculated through life running costs of new gas boiler? Will the bills always remain cheaper than electric combi? At what point in the boilers life might you find cost flip over? What does no new gas boilers after 2025 do to running costs?
Is it really that straightforward a decision now?
I think some women are worried that the vaccine could affect fertility and/or periods. That's a worry men don't have to worry about and could be especially affecting that age group.