On 21/05/2017 23:06, dennis@home wrote:
On 21/05/2017 22:55, Tim Streater wrote:

I have no desire for it to fail either. I'm simply pointing out that
the undemocratic nature of the EU structures will cause it to fail. I
don't want this country to be part of that failure, which is why I
voted Leave. Everything else is secondary.


So as we had an opt out at any time why vote to leave before it fails?

What is the opt out you mention?


--
James Harris

On 22/05/2017 11:33, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.

No we don't. We are constrained by having to apply EU tariffs to
imports.

Ah - right. You think our way forward is to have cheaper imports?

Would help the cost of living, eh? Last time I looked we don't grow
bananas.


Try something else as we can get bananas at zero rate from lots of
countries.
It actually looks like the ones that pay a tariff do so because they put
a tariff on EU exports to them.
Maybe we could get them tariff free from more countries after brexit but
then we would probably have to pay a tariff on something we export to
them or to the EU.
Not really going to help much is it?

In article . com,
lid writes
On 21/05/2017 20:49, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , James Harris
wrote:

Note that the EU insists things must be worse not for economic reasons
but for political protectionism. It almost always focusses on politics
rather than economics. That's why it holds us back and why it is good
we are leaving.

And is why the EU will, in the long run, go down the drain.

Why do you hope this?

Why do you hope Brexit will fail?

Everyone hopes it will succeed, some of us don't think it will be as
good as not leaving.
However many brexiteers have voted to leave in the hope the EU will now
fail.
Thinking it will is not the same as hoping it will, after all they will
still be one of our major trading partners.
Remoaners do like to project their own fears onto leavers. Still only
26% of them left now.
--
bert

On 21/05/2017 18:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:

I keep on asking about all these large countries round the world who are
free to do a deal with the UK.

With you so far.

To replace the EU in terms of trade and
services income to the UK. If they are already in a trade deal with
another country or countries, that deal could well be in conflict with a
new deal to the UK.

I'm struggling to understand that lot. What are you talking about re
replacement and conflict?

If it helps, IMO there are these categories of potential trading
partners for the UK.

1. Countries we already have an EU agreement with.

You think? This will be part of cake and eat it, then?

Most, if not all, of them will want to keep trading with the UK. By
leaving the EU there's no need for us to stop trading with any of them.


2. Countries with no EU agreement who use WTO terms.

Anyone can trade under WTO terms. The idea of a deal is to better those.

Correct.


We would want to continue existing trade with Type 1 countries and
possibly improve such deals by making them tailored to us and them. Some
of them have already indicated their desire to do so.

They may well have to choose who they value more - trade with the EU *or*
the UK.

This is where I begin to struggle to understand your viewpoint. Why
might these countries need to choose between the UK and the EU27? Why
will they not continue to trade with both?


We would want to develop new trade deals with Type 2 countries. Some of
them are already in talks.

There will be plenty talking. Which will go on for years.

How do your concerns fit into that?

My 'concerns' is that those who lead us into this mess have absolutely no
clue at all about the aftermath. No plans - only hopes.

I agree there's no guarantee that the government has done the planning
it should. We can only hope. Our future is very much in their hands.


--
James Harris

In article . com,
lid writes
On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?
Since the UK can already trade with the rest of the world then you must
know something the rest of us don't.

Only within the constraints laid down by the EU.
Ah, maybe you mean we will break the sanctions on North Korea.


--
bert

In article . com,
lid writes
On 21/05/2017 23:03, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?
Are you a socialist or something? They believe in zero-sum too (that
is, they don't understand wealth creation).


Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.
We are restricted by the Eu's inability to quickly and easily strike
trade deals which increases the size of the cake many fold. The
protectionism of the EU stifles trade.
It appears to be a common trait amongst brexitters that the world
suddenly gets larger after brexit when it actually might get a lot
smaller as far as exports go.


That's the problem with remoaners - no vision.
--
bert

In article , James Harris
writes
On 21/05/2017 18:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:

I keep on asking about all these large countries round the world who are
free to do a deal with the UK.

With you so far.

To replace the EU in terms of trade and
services income to the UK. If they are already in a trade deal with
another country or countries, that deal could well be in conflict with a
new deal to the UK.

I'm struggling to understand that lot. What are you talking about re
replacement and conflict?

If it helps, IMO there are these categories of potential trading
partners for the UK.

1. Countries we already have an EU agreement with.
You think? This will be part of cake and eat it, then?

Most, if not all, of them will want to keep trading with the UK. By
leaving the EU there's no need for us to stop trading with any of them.

Because the thick plow**** thinks you cannot have concurrent trade
deals.

2. Countries with no EU agreement who use WTO terms.
Anyone can trade under WTO terms. The idea of a deal is to better
those.

Correct.


We would want to continue existing trade with Type 1 countries and
possibly improve such deals by making them tailored to us and them. Some
of them have already indicated their desire to do so.
They may well have to choose who they value more - trade with the EU
*or*
the UK.

This is where I begin to struggle to understand your viewpoint. Why
might these countries need to choose between the UK and the EU27? Why
will they not continue to trade with both?


We would want to develop new trade deals with Type 2 countries. Some
of
them are already in talks.
There will be plenty talking. Which will go on for years.

How do your concerns fit into that?
My 'concerns' is that those who lead us into this mess have
absolutely no
clue at all about the aftermath. No plans - only hopes.

I agree there's no guarantee that the government has done the planning
it should. We can only hope. Our future is very much in their hands.


Better our elected government than the ruling Brussels elite.
--
bert

On Monday, 22 May 2017 15:48:05 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/05/2017 09:50, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 21/05/2017 23:03, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?

Are you a socialist or something? They believe in zero-sum too (that
is, they don't understand wealth creation).

Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.

No we don't. We are constrained by having to apply EU tariffs to
imports.


Imports are a problem, you have to export stuff to pay for them.

Do you me we as a country or we as individuals ?

Because isnlt this true of every contry.

Leaving a free market and probably reducing your exports isn't going to
help pay for imports.

why would you reduce exports ?
whether you're importing or exporting is down to avaibility and price.


Which particular imports do you think we want more of outside the EU and
which extra exports are going to pay for them?

Bit of a weird question.
What makes you think the EU won't want to export to the UK ?
If we stopped importing (or added a 50% tarrif) German cars what would germany do stop importing British cars ?

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.

No we don't. We are constrained by having to apply EU tariffs to
imports.

Ah - right. You think our way forward is to have cheaper imports?

Would help the cost of living, eh? Last time I looked we don't grow
bananas.

But didn't you say earlier that the drop in the value of the pound after
the Brexit result was known was a good thing? Despite it putting up costs
of imported goods?

You seem incapable of holding more than one concept in your brain at any
one time. Is that because you only have one brain cell?
--
bert

In article om,
lid writes
On 22/05/2017 09:50, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 21/05/2017 23:03, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?

Are you a socialist or something? They believe in zero-sum too (that
is, they don't understand wealth creation).

Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.
No we don't. We are constrained by having to apply EU tariffs to
imports.


Imports are a problem, you have to export stuff to pay for them.
Leaving a free market and probably reducing your exports isn't going to
help pay for imports.

Which particular imports do you think we want more of outside the EU
and which extra exports are going to pay for them?
See today's reports on Jaguar Landrover for a start.

It appears to be a common trait amongst brexitters that the world
suddenly gets larger after brexit when it actually might get a lot
smaller as far as exports go.
I refer you to Steve Walker's response of 23:50 last night.



--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
On 21/05/2017 23:03, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?

Are you a socialist or something? They believe in zero-sum too (that
is, they don't understand wealth creation).


Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.
It appears to be a common trait amongst brexitters that the world
suddenly gets larger after brexit when it actually might get a lot
smaller as far as exports go.

Most seem to think we'll be able to negotiate a trade and services deal
with the EU after leaving. I think we will too - but we'll still end up
paying into the EU budget and abiding by all those regs so many apparently
hate. The idea that the EU would somehow give us a better deal than their
members have - or any other countries outside the EU have with it - is the
big gamble. Which sense says will be lost.

So how much is Canada paying into the EU budget. Only the little minnows
that could be bullied by the EUSSR actually pay into the budget.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/05/2017 22:56, dennis@home wrote:
On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?
Since the UK can already trade with the rest of the world then you must
know something the rest of us don't.

Whether Brexit means more or less trade remains to be seen, but
currently we cannot enter into our own agreements with much of the
world, instead having to stick to the EU's tariffs for outside trade.

Outside the EU, we can come to agreements with those countries on
reduced or no tariffs wherever it is mutually beneficial.

You think? If every other country outside the EU was not in any trade
agreement with others, that might be the case. But where such agreements
exist, it isn't going to be simple for the UK to muscle in.

Here we go again. Utter bull****.
Let me try and explain. The US and Canada have a free trade agreement. The
US grows oranges, Canada apples. So trade is beneficial. The UK grows both
apples and oranges and wants to trade with them. Neither country wants
their home industries wrecked by imports. The US would love our cheap
apples, Canada our cheap oranges. But neither want both.

Plow**** is like an old vinyl stuck in the grove. No amount of
explanation can save him now.
--
bert

On 22/05/2017 12:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.

No we don't. We are constrained by having to apply EU tariffs to
imports.

Ah - right. You think our way forward is to have cheaper imports?

Would help the cost of living, eh? Last time I looked we don't grow
bananas.

But didn't you say earlier that the drop in the value of the pound after
the Brexit result was known was a good thing? Despite it putting up costs
of imported goods?

I've not been following this subthread but if Tim did indeed say that
then I agree with him. The lower pound has been a boon to the economy,
boosting tourism, exports and jobs and increasing the tax take, and is a
great thing to help us get through the uncertainties and negative
pressures of the process of leaving the EU. The downside is an increase
in prices.

But once we are free of the EU and certainty returns the pound will
likely rise. Once out of the customs union we will be able to reduce
import tariffs to bring down the cost of imported goods - especially
those we don't produce here. That would reduce the cost of living that
the EU artificially inflates just now - and has done for decades. Its
protectionism hurts all of us as consumers.

--
James Harris

In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Handsome Jack wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" posted
In article ,
Handsome Jack wrote:
But I thought mass immigration was good for a country's economy,
bringing a vibrant and flexible new workforce that invariably
contributes more to the public finances than it takes out?

You plainly don't understand the difference between EU workers (and
others) coming here to work, and those fleeing oppression.

What is the difference (as far as benefitting the economy) between
an unskilled, penniless Romanian peasant and an unskilled, penniless
Syrian peasant?

Which type of UK peasant are you? Are you the sort that can take over the
work on farms etc currently done by EU workers? If so, join the non
existent queue.

I haven't followed the broader point you are both arguing, but it is
certainly the case that a Kent fruit farm I visited 3 or 4 years ago
needed migrant workers (Poles in this case, although their origin was
not important. These folk move to the UK for the fruit picking season
and then return home at the end of it, and there is decent on-site
living facilities while they are there.

The issue is that this type of manual work requires that you do it
regularly, even if fit. Otherwise your muscles can't take it over an
extended period, as a British couple, keen to make a go of it, found
out when they were hired on this farm for this work. They lasted a
week.

In fact these workers are not unskilled. You have to know how to pick
fruit which is the correct ripeness, and without damaging it then or
letting it get bruised in the basket later. And without dislodging
other fruit which may or may not be ready for picking.

These may not be earth-shattering skills but are nonetheless important.

And these people will still be available for seasonal work after Brexit.
We can control how long they stay here and whether we pay them in work
benefits which we can't at the moment. Thick remoaners like Denise and
Plow**** can't differentiate between Control and Closure.
--
bert

On 22/05/2017 15:58, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/05/2017 11:33, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that
cake without leaving the EU.

No we don't. We are constrained by having to apply EU tariffs to
imports.

Ah - right. You think our way forward is to have cheaper imports?

Would help the cost of living, eh? Last time I looked we don't grow
bananas.


Try something else as we can get bananas at zero rate from lots of
countries.

I don't know the rate for bananas but here's a good alternative. Per
IDS, last year the EU approximately trebled the tariff on oranges from
3% to 16% to protect Spanish producers. But that, of course, means that
we all have to pay more in the shops.

https://youtu.be/bRNq-BIFnbw?t=2m10s


--
James Harris

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
We would want to continue existing trade with Type 1 countries and
possibly improve such deals by making them tailored to us and them.
Some of them have already indicated their desire to do so.

They may well have to choose who they value more - trade with the EU *or*
the UK.

This is where I begin to struggle to understand your viewpoint. Why
might these countries need to choose between the UK and the EU27? Why
will they not continue to trade with both?

It depends on what conditions they trade under. If they have an existing
agreement with the EU, it could well be there will be clashes with goods
from the UK.

This is exactly why such negotiations take many many years - and even then
may fail.

You don't have to look far to see the problem. At the moment, there is an
open border between Eire and Ulster. When we leave the EU - assuming no
agreement - that will have to be closed to prevent smuggling. It's rather
obvious we can't have a free trade agreement with just Eire (or any other
EU country) because once goods from the UK arrive there they can move
freely within the EU. And vice versa.

--
*I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
But once we are free of the EU and certainty returns the pound will
likely rise. Once out of the customs union we will be able to reduce
import tariffs to bring down the cost of imported goods - especially
those we don't produce here. That would reduce the cost of living that
the EU artificially inflates just now - and has done for decades. Its
protectionism hurts all of us as consumers.

You *really* think any UK government would allow all imports tarrif free?
Then say goodbye to what little remains of UK industry.

--
*Welcome to **** Creek - sorry, we're out of paddles*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 22/05/2017 16:56, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
But once we are free of the EU and certainty returns the pound will
likely rise. Once out of the customs union we will be able to reduce
import tariffs to bring down the cost of imported goods - especially
those we don't produce here. That would reduce the cost of living that
the EU artificially inflates just now - and has done for decades. Its
protectionism hurts all of us as consumers.

You *really* think any UK government would allow all imports tarrif free?
Then say goodbye to what little remains of UK industry.

I didn't say _all_ tariffs would be reduced. We could reduce tariffs on
things we don't produce here. (We might or might not. That would be up
to the government to manage but they would have been given the choice
which they don't have now.)


--
James Harris

On 22/05/2017 16:53, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
We would want to continue existing trade with Type 1 countries and
possibly improve such deals by making them tailored to us and them.
Some of them have already indicated their desire to do so.

They may well have to choose who they value more - trade with the EU *or*
the UK.

This is where I begin to struggle to understand your viewpoint. Why
might these countries need to choose between the UK and the EU27? Why
will they not continue to trade with both?

It depends on what conditions they trade under. If they have an existing
agreement with the EU, it could well be there will be clashes with goods
from the UK.

I don't see what clash you mean. Could you give an example?


This is exactly why such negotiations take many many years - and even then
may fail.

You don't have to look far to see the problem. At the moment, there is an
open border between Eire and Ulster. When we leave the EU - assuming no
agreement - that will have to be closed to prevent smuggling. It's rather
obvious we can't have a free trade agreement with just Eire (or any other
EU country) because once goods from the UK arrive there they can move
freely within the EU. And vice versa.

Ireland is a special case because of the border's potential effect on
the peace process. David Davis has said the government may be willing to
accept some loss of customs revenue. The Irish government and the EU
have said it would be important to get a good arrangement. And there are
other suggestions of customs controls managed with a combination of
posts away from the border and with technology. So the Irish border will
be a challenge but not one the negotiators are unaware of.


--
James Harris

On 22/05/2017 16:04, bert wrote:

I agree there's no guarantee that the government has done the planning
it should. We can only hope. Our future is very much in their hands.


Better our elected government than the ruling Brussels elite.

I'd rather have the one that gets it right rather than going broke over
"freedom" which doesn't exist.

On 22/05/2017 16:14, bert wrote:

And these people will still be available for seasonal work after Brexit.
We can control how long they stay here and whether we pay them in work
benefits which we can't at the moment. Thick remoaners like Denise and
Plow**** can't differentiate between Control and Closure.

Who do you think is going to pay for all this extra control?
Will it be worth the effort of coming to the UK for a seasonal job or
will we just stop growing the crop because its cheaper to get it elsewhere?
Oh now you are going to suggest tariffs to protect our crops, or do you
have some real ideas?

On 22/05/2017 16:42, James Harris wrote:


I don't know the rate for bananas but here's a good alternative. Per
IDS, last year the EU approximately trebled the tariff on oranges from
3% to 16% to protect Spanish producers. But that, of course, means that
we all have to pay more in the shops.

https://youtu.be/bRNq-BIFnbw?t=2m10s



That's funny the governments tariff site says sweet oranges are 1.2% for
most countries. Some are zero.
Maybe its marmalade oranges?

Dave Plowman wrote:

James Harris wrote:

https://www.ft.com/content/85a95b60-...4-e0bdc13c3bef

A link to a subscription service isn't much use.

So search for google's cache of the article

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:sT216Br3BwYJ:https://www.ft.com/content/85a95b60-53ed-11e6-9664-e0bdc13c3bef+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

On 22/05/2017 16:04, whisky-dave wrote:

Leaving a free market and probably reducing your exports isn't going to
help pay for imports.

why would you reduce exports ?
whether you're importing or exporting is down to avaibility and price.

Are you saying the UK never exports anything to the EU other than as a
sole source of that product? Why would the EU buy from an outside source
if it can buy from inside the EU.



Which particular imports do you think we want more of outside the EU and
which extra exports are going to pay for them?

Bit of a weird question.
What makes you think the EU won't want to export to the UK ?
If we stopped importing (or added a 50% tarrif) German cars what would germany do stop importing British cars ?



Try reading what I said!

On 22/05/2017 16:07, bert wrote:

Which particular imports do you think we want more of outside the EU
and which extra exports are going to pay for them?
See today's reports on Jaguar Landrover for a start.

But that's down to the fall in the pound and we could export just as
many while in the EU, in fact we are still in the EU and are doing so.
Just proof that the EU doesn't stop us exporting stuff like some
brex****eers claim.

Now do you want to answer the questions?

On 22/05/2017 16:00, bert wrote:
In article . com,
lid writes
On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?
Since the UK can already trade with the rest of the world then you
must know something the rest of us don't.

Only within the constraints laid down by the EU.

The EU doesn't stop us exporting to elsewhere so where are all the extra
exports going to go to? The EU may well make it more difficult for us to
export to them but brex****eers claim they wont.

Ah, maybe you mean we will break the sanctions on North Korea.

On 22/05/2017 18:30, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/05/2017 16:42, James Harris wrote:


I don't know the rate for bananas but here's a good alternative. Per
IDS, last year the EU approximately trebled the tariff on oranges from
3% to 16% to protect Spanish producers. But that, of course, means
that we all have to pay more in the shops.

https://youtu.be/bRNq-BIFnbw?t=2m10s



That's funny the governments tariff site says sweet oranges are 1.2% for
most countries. Some are zero.
Maybe its marmalade oranges?

I don't know. Can you see what the rates were when IDS made his comment?

--
James Harris

On 22/05/2017 19:39, James Harris wrote:
On 22/05/2017 18:30, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/05/2017 16:42, James Harris wrote:


I don't know the rate for bananas but here's a good alternative. Per
IDS, last year the EU approximately trebled the tariff on oranges
from 3% to 16% to protect Spanish producers. But that, of course,
means that we all have to pay more in the shops.

https://youtu.be/bRNq-BIFnbw?t=2m10s



That's funny the governments tariff site says sweet oranges are 1.2%
for most countries. Some are zero.
Maybe its marmalade oranges?

I don't know. Can you see what the rates were when IDS made his comment?


Oh its IDS so we can safely ignore it.

All tariffs are available to view on the governments site.

On 22/05/2017 20:44, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/05/2017 19:39, James Harris wrote:
On 22/05/2017 18:30, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/05/2017 16:42, James Harris wrote:


I don't know the rate for bananas but here's a good alternative. Per
IDS, last year the EU approximately trebled the tariff on oranges
from 3% to 16% to protect Spanish producers. But that, of course,
means that we all have to pay more in the shops.

https://youtu.be/bRNq-BIFnbw?t=2m10s



That's funny the governments tariff site says sweet oranges are 1.2%
for most countries. Some are zero.
Maybe its marmalade oranges?

I don't know. Can you see what the rates were when IDS made his comment?


Oh its IDS so we can safely ignore it.

I did say it was from IDS. Besides, the same report appeared in a number
of papers so I don't think he was making it up.


All tariffs are available to view on the governments site.



--
James Harris

"Handsome Jack" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" posted
In article ,
Handsome Jack wrote:
But I thought mass immigration was good for a country's economy,
bringing a vibrant and flexible new workforce that invariably
contributes more to the public finances than it takes out?

You plainly don't understand the difference between EU workers (and
others) coming here to work, and those fleeing oppression.

What is the difference (as far as benefitting the economy) between an
unskilled, penniless Romanian peasant and an unskilled, penniless Syrian
peasant?

The difference is that when neither are needed for the economy,
some countrys do choose to allow those who are likely to end up
dead into the country, at least until where they are coming from
is safe for them to return to. That's essentially why there are so
many of them in Turkey even tho Turkey has no need for them.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
On 21/05/2017 23:03, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?

Are you a socialist or something? They believe in zero-sum too (that
is, they don't understand wealth creation).


Are you too stupid to understand we already have access to that cake
without leaving the EU.
It appears to be a common trait amongst brexitters that the world
suddenly gets larger after brexit when it actually might get a lot
smaller as far as exports go.

Most seem to think we'll be able to negotiate a trade
and services deal with the EU after leaving. I think we
will too - but we'll still end up paying into the EU budget

How odd that none of these do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe...ade_agreements

and abiding by all those regs so many apparently hate.

How odd that none of these do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe...ade_agreements

The idea that the EU would somehow give
us a better deal than their members have

Its only you flagrantly dishonest remoaners
that have said anything even remotely like that.

- or any other countries outside the EU have with it

Ditto.

- is the big gamble. Which sense says will be lost.

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
We would want to continue existing trade with Type 1 countries and
possibly improve such deals by making them tailored to us and them.
Some of them have already indicated their desire to do so.

They may well have to choose who they value more - trade with the EU *or*
the UK.

This is where I begin to struggle to understand your viewpoint. Why
might these countries need to choose between the UK and the EU27? Why
will they not continue to trade with both?

It depends on what conditions they trade under. If they have an existing
agreement with the EU, it could well be there will be clashes with goods
from the UK.

FFS stop talking such utter ********.
This is exactly why such negotiations take many many years - and even then
may fail.

They take many years when the EU are involved because of the way they
prepare for and conduct negotiations.
You don't have to look far to see the problem. At the moment, there is an
open border between Eire and Ulster. When we leave the EU - assuming no
agreement - that will have to be closed to prevent smuggling.
Why should we care about smuggling? That's the EU's problem.
It's rather
obvious we can't have a free trade agreement with just Eire (or any other
EU country) because once goods from the UK arrive there they can move
freely within the EU. And vice versa.

We can't have an individual trade agreement with member states because
it's all controlled by the EU you dimwit, something which Brexiteers
have always understood but not it seems remoaners.
--
bert

On 22/05/17 08:13, Handsome Jack wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" posted
In article ,
Handsome Jack wrote:
But I thought mass immigration was good for a country's economy,
bringing a vibrant and flexible new workforce that invariably
contributes more to the public finances than it takes out?

You plainly don't understand the difference between EU workers (and
others) coming here to work, and those fleeing oppression.

What is the difference (as far as benefitting the economy) between an
unskilled, penniless Romanian peasant and an unskilled, penniless Syrian
peasant?


Attitude mainly.

Its that word we dare not speak. Culture.





--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
But once we are free of the EU and certainty returns the pound will
likely rise. Once out of the customs union we will be able to reduce
import tariffs to bring down the cost of imported goods - especially
those we don't produce here. That would reduce the cost of living that
the EU artificially inflates just now - and has done for decades. Its
protectionism hurts all of us as consumers.

You *really* think any UK government would allow all imports tarrif free?
Then say goodbye to what little remains of UK industry.

Which bit of "those we don't produce here" do you not understand?
--
bert

In article . com,
lid writes
On 22/05/2017 16:00, bert wrote:
In article . com,
writes
On 21/05/2017 20:55, bert wrote:

Utter ********. We will have a share of a bigger expanding cake
outside the EU.

Where have you invented more of the world from?
Since the UK can already trade with the rest of the world then you
must know something the rest of us don't.

Only within the constraints laid down by the EU.

The EU doesn't stop us exporting to elsewhere so where are all the
extra exports going to go to? The EU may well make it more difficult
for us to export to them but brex****eers claim they wont.

They're called trade deals and they reduce tariffs which in turn
promotes trade. Is that simple enough for you Denise?
Ah, maybe you mean we will break the sanctions on North Korea.




--
bert

In article . com,
lid writes
On 22/05/2017 16:14, bert wrote:

And these people will still be available for seasonal work after
Brexit. We can control how long they stay here and whether we pay
them in work benefits which we can't at the moment. Thick remoaners
like Denise and Plow**** can't differentiate between Control and Closure.

Who do you think is going to pay for all this extra control?
The controls already exist for non-EU nationals
Will it be worth the effort of coming to the UK for a seasonal job or
will we just stop growing the crop because its cheaper to get it
elsewhere?
That applies now.
Oh now you are going to suggest tariffs to protect our crops, or do you
have some real ideas?

Am I? - you are about as intelligent as Plow****.
--
bert

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
Try something else as we can get bananas at zero rate from lots of
countries.

I don't know the rate for bananas but here's a good alternative. Per
IDS, last year the EU approximately trebled the tariff on oranges from
3% to 16% to protect Spanish producers. But that, of course, means that
we all have to pay more in the shops.

I don't quite get it. One moment, Brexiteers are complaining the EU took
no action to prevent China selling steel so as to undercut the UK makers.
But with oranges, it's ok. But of course we don't grow oranges.

--
*The modem is the message *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Interesting. The average UK born is now so unfit they can no longer do
the jobs their forbears did. That is very worrying.

Not so much that they are unfit. But the set of muscles involved is no
longer used in the same way.

Yes - the only muscles they have now are in their fingers for using their
phone.

*That* is the point. Perhaps you'd like to
try it and see how *you* get on.

Why would I want to take work as a fruit picker? I'm not the one
complaining immigrants are taking my work.

But if you're reasonably young and fit, your muscles will soon adapt to
any type of work.

--
*The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
On 22/05/2017 16:56, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
But once we are free of the EU and certainty returns the pound will
likely rise. Once out of the customs union we will be able to reduce
import tariffs to bring down the cost of imported goods - especially
those we don't produce here. That would reduce the cost of living that
the EU artificially inflates just now - and has done for decades. Its
protectionism hurts all of us as consumers.

You *really* think any UK government would allow all imports tarrif
free? Then say goodbye to what little remains of UK industry.

I didn't say _all_ tariffs would be reduced. We could reduce tariffs on
things we don't produce here. (We might or might not. That would be up
to the government to manage but they would have been given the choice
which they don't have now.)

And other countries put tariffs on the things they produce.
You really must understand the UK can't demand free access to its goods,
etc. Despite what many seem to think.

It's why such things are thrashed out in a trade agreement. And why they
take so long to agree.

--
*Always drink upstream from the herd *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
It was from last year and basically said that the US was again importing
UK beef after our beef had been declared free of mad cow disease, and
that it was a lucrative market for UK farmers.

Right. The articles I've read on it mention the *potential* for such sales.
Which is a rather different matter from achieving them. Especially with
Trump wanting to protect US jobs.

--
*The statement below is true.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.