In article ,
Norman Wells wrote:
You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or
anyone) imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing
so to theirs.

but we are

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman
probably knows where it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the
tariffs are much lower than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published

Note the word 'temporary'.

--
*I didn't like my beard at first. Then it grew on me.*

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

On 09/09/2019 13:56, Pancho wrote:
On 09/09/2019 13:03, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

How would you stop it 'from inside'?


The question is the same for Brussels or Westminster.


But the answer is different.


In what way is it different?

I am not sure if you are trolling or you sincerely failed to understand
that the EU cannot be changed 'from the inside' because its officials
and employess are not elected and are immune from prosecution.

If anything the EU is more robust with regard to multinationals and more
resistant to their influence. Look at recent rules with respect to Google.

So why not give a specific? Rather than abstract comments, because I
don't have a clue what you are talking about.

That is why we are leaving


We are leaving? When did that happen?

three years ago dear.

--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."

- Stephen Vizinczey

On 9 Sep 2019, Pancho wrote
(in article ):

On 09/09/2019 13:03, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

How would you stop it 'from inside'?

The question is the same for Brussels or Westminster.
But the answer is different.

In what way is it different?

If anything the EU is more robust with regard to multinationals and more
resistant to their influence. Look at recent rules with respect to Google.

So why not give a specific? Rather than abstract comments, because I
don't have a clue what you are talking about.

That is why we are leaving

We are leaving? When did that happen?

When a large majority in the HoC voted to allow Theresa May to implement A50.

On 09/09/2019 13:58, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Norman Wells wrote:
You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or
anyone) imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing
so to theirs.

but we are

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman
probably knows where it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the
tariffs are much lower than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published

Note the word 'temporary'.

If that one offends thine eyes, you're welcom to look at this one instead:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...March_2019.pdf

In article ,
michael adams wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
michael adams wrote:
The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration.

Really? Many seemed to want to stop EU workers coming here legally.

You do understand the meaning of the word "many", I take it ?

"Many" means more than "a few", and less than "a majority",
"most", or "all".

Is that any help ?


Why would any rational person think leaving the EU would make any
difference to illegal immigration? Did being in the EU make it somehow
legal?

But perhaps you did mean to make excuses for them.

--
*Hang in there, retirement is only thirty years away! *

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

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
Not everything no. It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished goods
(to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff free
components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we are
not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no need to
discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there won't be
minimum standards of production enforced.


really?
it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the imports
are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them and why should we.

I'm sure a Tory government will be delighted to subsidise farmers to make
up for their lost sales. Just as they have done with all other branches of
UK industry.

--
*Organized Crime Is Alive And Well; It's Called Auto Insurance. *

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

In article ,
Norman Wells wrote:
But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our
exports which may render them uncompeteive. Don't you worry your
pretty little heads about those - or look them up if you can find out
where to look.

Exporters have to at the moment for exports to anywhere outside the EU.
One assumes they're big enough and ugly enough to do it, and don't need
their hands holding all the time. They're supposed to be businessmen
for goodness sake. It goes with the territory.

I'm sure New Zealand will be delighted to buy all the Range Rovers we can
no longer sell profitably to the EU.

--
*24 hours in a day ... 24 beers in a case ... coincidence? *

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

On Mon, 09 Sep 2019 13:13:42 +0100, charles wrote:

In article , tim...

wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article , Fredxx
wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Brian Reay
wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and
cause a problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out,
you want the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree
an alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs
after a no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free?
While other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no. It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished
goods (to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff
free components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that
there won't be minimum standards of production enforced.


really? it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when
the imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

apparently 90% of our imported food comes from the EU already

so there will be no change there

and even if you do think that tariff free imports from some dirt poor
African county with zero production costs are somehow going to decimate
our farmers

our orange growers will feel the impact

Then, as I have already show, the tariffs on imports from these
countries are of the order of 3-5%. Do you really think that taking it
dowe to zero makes any difference?

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them

we already do that.

Except that it's the EU giving them our money

and why should we.


because having some semblance of food security is strategically
important

tim



We will just have to plant more spaghetti trees.

In article ,
tim... wrote:
But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our
exports which may render them uncompeteive.

because for the most part, they don't render oue exports uncompetitive

Tariffs are almost all of an order of magnitude lower than the amount
that our currency has depreciated

That's good then. With a nice low pound we'll be able to export all our
Jaguars, but be no longer able to afford a VW. And lamb will be cheaper
than bananas. But at least we'll be able to buy nice bent ones.

--
*Some people are only alive because it is illegal to kill.

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

On 09/09/2019 12:54, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Norman Wells
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 11:53, michael adams wrote:

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" - hurrah
we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is going to be
cheaper

No, what it's said is that there won't be tariffs applied to 83% of
all the goods we import.

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our
exports
which may render them uncompeteive.Â* Don't you worry your pretty little
heads about those - or look them up if you can find out where to look.

Exporters have to at the moment for exports to anywhere outside the
EU. One assumes they're big enough and ugly enough to do it, and don't
need their hands holding all the time.Â* They're supposed to be
businessmen for goodness sake.Â* It goes with the territory.

Adams is a dimwit, eh? Only a thickie like him would be unable to
comprehend that such tariffs are already being imposed on goods sold to
RoW. What's so hard about that, eh? Answer, it isn't. So one must
assume he has another agenda. Gosh, I wonder what that could be.


Shame the EU has trade deals with 50 counties and is negotiating with 72
more that the UK won't be a part of. So we aren't currently putting
tariffs on the RoW, just some of it.

I believe brexiteers fall into two types, those stupid enough to believe
what they are told and those who will lie and manipulate the other
brexiteers to get what they want.

which are you? stupid or a liar?

On 09/09/2019 11:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there
won't be minimum standards of production enforced.

really?

it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the
imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them and why should we.

Farmers are already subsidised and paid to do other things than grow
food. If you want to close all that down, feel free, but expect all
farmland to revert to scrub or forest in short order.


That sounds like a good idea.

On 09/09/2019 12:52, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Â* Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â*Â* Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you
want
the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free?
While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no.Â* It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished
goods (to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff
free components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there
won't be minimum standards of production enforced.


really?
it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the
imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

apparently 90% of our imported food comes from the EU already

so there will be no change there

and even if you do think that tariff free imports from some dirt poor
African county with zero production costs are somehow going to decimate
our farmers

Then, as I have already show, the tariffs on imports from these
countries are of the order of 3-5%.Â* Do you really think that taking it
dowe to zero makes any difference?

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them

we already do that.

Except that it's the EU giving them our money

and why should we.


because having some semblance of food security is strategically important

tim



Yet when we import 90% from the EU you want us to leave and have no say.
That's really clever!

On 09/09/2019 13:02, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce
the downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles?
Expensive safety systems that make only a little difference to
safety, but render vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight
damage?

Probably not as it will be uneconomicto produce many variants and get
them through the approvals with fundementally differen designs. Its
one thing swapping an engine or a few body panels, its something else
to build a new car from the ground up.

but it does mean that we can say "a not working thingamajig is no longer
an MOT failure"

I just had to scrap a car because some functionally unnecessary, but
mandatory, additional thingy broke and cost more to replace than the car
was worth.

Want to say what it was?


To reduce or raise import tariffs on certain goods?

Probably, but it depends. Others can raise disputes if they think we
are abussing the WTO system.

That would be charging differential tariffs (which are legal, but have
to be justified)

simply setting a high tariff for all, is not an abuse of the system


At what level VAT should be set?

The UK government has set the VAT rates on everything.
The EU just has a rule that says you can't put VAT on something and
then take it off willynilly.


Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

The UK government negotiated what we were putting VAT on.

No we didn't

Of course we did, why don't we have VAT on childrens cloths when the
rest of the EU does?
Why didn't we have VAT on energy until the UK government decided that a
carbon tax was a good idea and used VAT to collect it?
You really do talk cock.


the rules were already in place when we joined.

It was the UK government that put VAT on electricity and gas not the EU.

but the rules says that once we put it on (a new category) we cannot
take it off again

So, we still put it on not the EU.


To control immigration?

We might be able to, we can now for immigrants but don't and they are
about 60% of the net migration into the UK.

Non-EU immigration all fits into the category of:

Highly skilled workers (with a job offer) or joining family members to
be supported by the family already here

Almost none of the ROW immigration comes here to take up minimum wage
work and scrounge on the welfare state.

yet elderly parents are allowed in and get OAP and benefits.


That's the problem with EU immigration - that it's possible for them to
do that, not that they all do.

And the list goes on.

And like all brexiteers you have chosen a set that are not implimented
by the EU but by the UK government, its almost as though brexiteers
don't have a clue.

and your misunderstanding of ROW immigration show that you don't have a
clue either

you don't appear to understand row immigration, a lot of them do get
benefits.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 12:54, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Norman Wells
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 11:53, michael adams wrote:

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" - hurrah
we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is going to be
cheaper

No, what it's said is that there won't be tariffs applied to 83% of
all the goods we import.

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our
exports
which may render them uncompeteive. Don't you worry your pretty little
heads about those - or look them up if you can find out where to look.

Exporters have to at the moment for exports to anywhere outside the
EU. One assumes they're big enough and ugly enough to do it, and don't
need their hands holding all the time. They're supposed to be
businessmen for goodness sake. It goes with the territory.

Adams is a dimwit, eh? Only a thickie like him would be unable to
comprehend that such tariffs are already being imposed on goods sold to
RoW. What's so hard about that, eh? Answer, it isn't. So one must
assume he has another agenda. Gosh, I wonder what that could be.

Shame the EU has trade deals with 50 counties and is negotiating with 72
more that the UK won't be a part of. So we aren't currently putting
tariffs on the RoW, just some of it.

We're not talking about inbound tariffs, Den, we're talking about
outbound ones. Do keep up.

There aren't any outbound tariffs, but there could be inbound tariffs put
on at the destination country.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Shame the EU has trade deals with 50 counties and is negotiating with
72 more that the UK won't be a part of. So we aren't currently putting
tariffs on the RoW, just some of it.

We're not talking about inbound tariffs, Den, we're talking about
outbound ones. Do keep up.

You think tariffs are outbound? Applied on exports?

No wonder some say only the intelligent should be allowed the vote.

--
*WHY IS THERE AN EXPIRATION DATE ON SOUR CREAM?

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

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I just had to scrap a car because some functionally unnecessary, but
mandatory, additional thingy broke and cost more to replace than the
car was worth.

Want to say what it was?

And what the car was worth.

--
*I know a guy who's addicted to brake fluid. He says he can stop any time.*

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

In article ,
charles wrote:
Shame the EU has trade deals with 50 counties and is negotiating with 72
more that the UK won't be a part of. So we aren't currently putting
tariffs on the RoW, just some of it.

We're not talking about inbound tariffs, Den, we're talking about
outbound ones. Do keep up.

There aren't any outbound tariffs, but there could be inbound tariffs put
on at the destination country.

Remember Tim's a Tory party member, Charles. They don't bother themselves
over minor details.

--
*WHY ARE HEMORRHOIDS CALLED "HEMORRHOIDS" INSTEAD OF "ASTEROIDS"?

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

On 08/09/2019 23:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
And, as I have said to you many times, they arrive in the UK as
visitors, without the correct paperwork to gain employment, claim
benefits, use the NHS, rent a home, etc.

You really think you need paperwork to get a job or a room in the UK? Or
for emergency medical treatment?

Yes. I, having being born and brought up in the UK of English parents
and having a clearly English name am asked to prove my eligibility to
work in the UK each time I start in a new position - and as I work
contract, typically 16 to 22 months, that is fairly often.

In my last position, the guy sitting next to me (who I have worked with
elsewhere before) and who is a landlord with a small number of
properties is required to check new tenents eligibility.

Of course there will always be some that work around the system, but
they can come here as visitors any time and just not leave unless they
are caught and that will remain the same in or out of the EU - except
that fewer will be eligible in the first place if we leave.

SteveW

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 12:54, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Norman Wells
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 11:53, michael adams wrote:

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" -
hurrah
we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is going to be
cheaper

No, what it's said is that there won't be tariffs applied to 83% of all
the goods we import.

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our
exports
which may render them uncompeteive. Don't you worry your pretty little
heads about those - or look them up if you can find out where to look.

Exporters have to at the moment for exports to anywhere outside the EU.
One assumes they're big enough and ugly enough to do it, and don't need
their hands holding all the time. They're supposed to be businessmen
for goodness sake. It goes with the territory.

Adams is a dimwit, eh? Only a thickie like him would be unable to
comprehend that such tariffs are already being imposed on goods sold to
RoW. What's so hard about that, eh? Answer, it isn't. So one must
assume he has another agenda. Gosh, I wonder what that could be.


Shame the EU has trade deals with 50 counties and is negotiating with 72

with 72 more

you got to be kidding

The USA can't manage to do more than one at a time, how come the EU can
manage 72?

tim

On 09/09/2019 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 08/09/2019 22:53, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Brian Reay wrote:
The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.


OK then. EU workers have free movement to Eire. With no border controls,
they can take a bus to Ulster, and onwards to the UK. Unless we have
controls between Ulster and the mainland. Unacceptable to the DUP.

And, as I have said to you many times, they arrive in the UK as
visitors, without the correct paperwork to gain employment, claim
benefits, use the NHS, rent a home, etc.

If they are EU citizens they have those rights so it can't be the EU
that is causing you the problems.
Maybe you confuse illegal immigrants with legal immigrants, migrants and
refuges?


I don't care if the whole world visits the UK, just that only those
that we permit remain here.

That's OK then, no need to stop any EU citizen as they have the right to
do so.

For God's sake. One of the big arguments fo leaving is that immigration
is too high and housing, roads, schools and other services are being
overloaded. After leaving, EU citizens (not already established here)
will no longer have the automatic right to settle here. Any doing so
without permission *will be* illegal immigrants.

SteveW

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 12:52, tim... wrote:






Yet when we import 90% from the EU

90% of our imported food
not 90% of all our food

you want us to leave and have no say.

Why do we need say in the EU politics, in order to decide to buy their
Oranges -

instead of South African ones, we don't get a say in South African politics,
but still buy their Oranges

tim

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 13:02, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles?
Expensive safety systems that make only a little difference to safety,
but render vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight damage?

Probably not as it will be uneconomicto produce many variants and get
them through the approvals with fundementally differen designs. Its one
thing swapping an engine or a few body panels, its something else to
build a new car from the ground up.

but it does mean that we can say "a not working thingamajig is no longer
an MOT failure"

I just had to scrap a car because some functionally unnecessary, but
mandatory, additional thingy broke and cost more to replace than the car
was worth.

Want to say what it was?

some emission sensor or other

the actual emissions were fine, it was just the sensor that was buggerd

To reduce or raise import tariffs on certain goods?

Probably, but it depends. Others can raise disputes if they think we are
abussing the WTO system.

That would be charging differential tariffs (which are legal, but have to
be justified)

simply setting a high tariff for all, is not an abuse of the system


At what level VAT should be set?

The UK government has set the VAT rates on everything.
The EU just has a rule that says you can't put VAT on something and then
take it off willynilly.


Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

The UK government negotiated what we were putting VAT on.

No we didn't

Of course we did, why don't we have VAT on childrens cloths when the rest
of the EU does?

because the rule don't mandate that we put VAT on these items

just that we may, and that once we have doen so we can't take it off

Why didn't we have VAT on energy until the UK government decided that a
carbon tax was a good idea and used VAT to collect it?

because we didn't have to put VAT on fuel until HMG needed the extra income

You really do talk cock.

So says the class clown



the rules were already in place when we joined.

It was the UK government that put VAT on electricity and gas not the EU.

but the rules says that once we put it on (a new category) we cannot take
it off again

So, we still put it on not the EU.

voluntarily, not because they told us to

To control immigration?

We might be able to, we can now for immigrants but don't and they are
about 60% of the net migration into the UK.

Non-EU immigration all fits into the category of:

Highly skilled workers (with a job offer) or joining family members to be
supported by the family already here

Almost none of the ROW immigration comes here to take up minimum wage
work and scrounge on the welfare state.

yet elderly parents are allowed in and get OAP and benefits.

no they aren't, because they wont have paid enough in to get a pension

tim

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I just had to scrap a car because some functionally unnecessary, but
mandatory, additional thingy broke and cost more to replace than the
car was worth.

Want to say what it was?

And what the car was worth.

about 800 quid

minus the 200 I got from the scrappy

600 quid value

but it ran perfectly, it didn't need scrapping for mechanical reasons

On 08/09/2019 23:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 08/09/2019 15:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the
UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.



David is a Remainer, you can't expect him to read things let alone
understand even the most basic concepts.

You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

The EU are surrently setting tariffs on our *imports* from the rest of
the world and preventing us doing trade deals with other countries that
would lower tariffs for both our imports and exports.

But perhaps it means you now think trading under WTO terms isn't quite the
answer so many said it would be.

But temporarily necessary, as the EU forbids us from negotiating trade
deals while we are still a member and they won't even discuss a trade
deal with us until the WA is agreed or we have left! The WA that ties us
into the EU in all sorts of ways, while they have managed to agree a FTA
with Japan, giving 0% tariffs on 97% of goods, with no tie-ins to EU
institutions, no free movement (other than temporary re-location of
professionals within a company), no single market, no customs union.

SteveW

On Friday, 6 September 2019 17:15:28 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

every month or so I get someone rushing on the the central line tube and asks me
if this is going to X or Y I usally have no idea as I'm only concerned with the two
stops of my journey where it goes after I get off I don't care

In which case they have no need to ask as they can get on any train
read the destination on the onboard display and get off at the next stop
if necessary.

So why are they rushing to get on the train and then ask me hoping that I'll tell them before the door closes ?
They could have looked at the notice board before boarding but didn't because it would take them too long and they are in a hurry it seems.

I only get annoyed when they get annoyed with me when I say I don;t know where the train is going. I can usually tell them whether the train is east or westbound but that's about it.



My stop which is largely out of doors serves Heathrow Airport.
Terminals 1,2,3, 4 Terminal 4 only, maybe Terminal 5 as well.
The next stop down the line is mainly undercover as are all the
stations after Hounslow Central. If they are locals going to the
Airport then they should know better.If they are tourists then
they'll have already passed these covered stations on their
inward journey,

This doesn't however stop large numbers of them patiently waiting
in the rain until the "right" train comes along.


michael adams

...

On 09/09/2019 14:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 09/09/2019 12:54, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Norman Wells
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 11:53, michael adams wrote:

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" -
hurrah
we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is going to be
cheaper

No, what it's said is that there won't be tariffs applied to 83% of
all the goods we import.

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our
exports
which may render them uncompeteive.Â* Don't you worry your pretty little
heads about those - or look them up if you can find out where to look.

Exporters have to at the moment for exports to anywhere outside the
EU. One assumes they're big enough and ugly enough to do it, and
don't need their hands holding all the time.Â* They're supposed to be
businessmen for goodness sake.Â* It goes with the territory.

Adams is a dimwit, eh? Only a thickie like him would be unable to
comprehend that such tariffs are already being imposed on goods sold to
RoW. What's so hard about that, eh? Answer, it isn't. So one must
assume he has another agenda. Gosh, I wonder what that could be.


Shame the EU has trade deals with 50 counties and is negotiating with 72
more that the UK won't be a part of. So we aren't currently putting
tariffs on the RoW, just some of it.

The EU had 40 deals, covering 70 countries in August. At that stage we
had agreed roll over deals to continue the same agreements with 38
countries (it was only 4 or five deals a few months ago). More may have
been done since then. Many won't spend the time and money agreeing a
roll-over until we have left, as it involves replacing references to EU
laws and institutions and they cannot be certain that we will actually
leave or when.

There will be disruption and cost, but mostly over a short period while
there is a flurry of roll-overs and the agreement of deals with the RoW
(including the EU) can commence.

SteveW

On 09/09/2019 12:52, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Â* Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â*Â* Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you
want
the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free?
While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no.Â* It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished
goods (to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff
free components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there
won't be minimum standards of production enforced.


really?
it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the
imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

apparently 90% of our imported food comes from the EU already

30%.

Plus 11% from countries that the EU has a trade agreement with, but I
don't know how much of that 11% has already been covered with roll-over
agreements.

SteveW

On 09/09/2019 14:59, dennis@home wrote:
On 09/09/2019 12:52, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Â* Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â*Â* Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out,
you want
the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs
after a
no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free?
While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no.Â* It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished
goods (to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff
free components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that
there won't be minimum standards of production enforced.


really?
it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the
imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

apparently 90% of our imported food comes from the EU already

so there will be no change there

and even if you do think that tariff free imports from some dirt poor
African county with zero production costs are somehow going to
decimate our farmers

Then, as I have already show, the tariffs on imports from these
countries are of the order of 3-5%.Â* Do you really think that taking
it dowe to zero makes any difference?

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them

we already do that.

Except that it's the EU giving them our money

and why should we.


because having some semblance of food security is strategically important

tim



Yet when we import 90% from the EU you want us to leave and have no say.
That's really clever!

a) it is 30%, not 90%.
b) there is nothing to stop us continuing, but there will be the tariffs
(that we set) on those imports.
c) we already import from all over the world and they will happily take
up any slack - particularly at lower tariffs than now.
d) while there may (mainly due to shipping difficulties) be short term
disruption to some foodstuffs, we are not going to go short - just have
a slightly reduced choice at worst.

SteveW

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 23:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
And, as I have said to you many times, they arrive in the UK as
visitors, without the correct paperwork to gain employment, claim
benefits, use the NHS, rent a home, etc.

You really think you need paperwork to get a job or a room in the UK? Or
for emergency medical treatment?

Yes. I, having being born and brought up in the UK of English parents
and having a clearly English name am asked to prove my eligibility to
work in the UK each time I start in a new position - and as I work
contract, typically 16 to 22 months, that is fairly often.

Can I ask what sort of work you do?

Is it fruit picking or working on a small building site? Self employed
delivery driver? Car wash? Serving in a bar? Or any of the myriad jobs UK
born don't want to do.

In my last position, the guy sitting next to me (who I have worked with
elsewhere before) and who is a landlord with a small number of
properties is required to check new tenents eligibility.

Oddly, I've never been asked when having guests.

Of course there will always be some that work around the system, but
they can come here as visitors any time and just not leave unless they
are caught and that will remain the same in or out of the EU - except
that fewer will be eligible in the first place if we leave.

SteveW

--
*IF ONE SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMER DROWNS, DO THE REST DROWN TOO?

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

In article ,
tim... wrote:
Want to say what it was?

some emission sensor or other

the actual emissions were fine, it was just the sensor that was buggerd

Pattern ones are about £30.

--
*Why is the word abbreviation so long?

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

On 09/09/2019 13:30, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or
anyone) imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so
to theirs.

Where did I suggest that?

However, read YOUR post again. It is significant YOU acknowledged the EU
would be the first to initiate the imposition of tariffs. Clearly even
you acknowledge the EU are the problem here.

Thanks for confirming you see it as some form of game. Where goals being
scored are important. That it makes a whit of difference who applies
tariffs first. As they are inevitable.

Oh dear, now you are being childish.

There is nothing inevitable about tariffs, if there was, free trade
agreements and zones wouldn't exist.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or
anyone) imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so
to theirs.

The EU are surrently setting tariffs on our *imports* from the rest of
the world and preventing us doing trade deals with other countries that
would lower tariffs for both our imports and exports.

The EU set tarrifs on imports to it. Not to 'us' only.

It doesn't prevent us exporting anything to anywhere. Those countries we
want to export to may well apply a tarrif to our goods.

And of course it prevents us doing unilateral deals with other countries.
How could it not? But is perfectly willing to negotiate deals between
other countries and the EU.

--
*Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.*

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

On 08/09/2019 23:54, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting to
introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being held up as a
number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.

Scotland introduced a minimum price per unit of alcohol ages ago. That's
why illegal drug use has increased there.

2018 actually.

Although there were objections from the Scottish Whisky Association and
court cases, there were also objections from Spain, Italy, Portugal,
France and Bulgaria - which meant that the European Compaints Commission
proceedings were extended by at least another year - ie EU countries
were allowed to use EU law to object to what should be a country's
purely internal laws.

Even the cases heard in the UK were bounced to and from the ECJ and
centred on EU law. That all added years of delay.

SteveW

On 09/09/2019 13:58, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/09/2019 10:01, Pancho wrote:
I see the benefit of living in a community with shared standards and
rules.

But sadly, none of the downsides.

Or indeed the fact that nothing prevents a sovereign UK from sharing
European standards, and indeed rules.

Indeed. And will still be forced to, once out of the EU. For things we
wish to export there. Same as with other countries. Rather than isolate,
it would make more sense to have international standards where possible.
Not your way of just wanting your own rules.

Of course anything sent to the EU must meet EU standards, but equally,
after leaving, anything received from the EU must meet our standards.

Once out, we can agree to continue that, but *also* to accept standards
of other countries that have high enough ones and so not have them leap
through the hoops of EU certification, when they already have their own.

We could even decide to have our own standards for some things, which
may be more stringent that EU ones in some areas and less in others.
Obviously goods made to those standards could not be exported to the EU
and equally, if made in the EU for here, could not be sold there - just
as is the case with goods to/from other non-EU countries.

Many non-EU countries manage to produce EU CE marked goods, without
tying their own markets into the same standards and rules.

SteveW

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .

Adams is a dimwit, eh?

More rude names I see. Things still not going well ?

Only a thickie like him would be unable to
comprehend that such tariffs are already being
imposed on goods sold to RoW. What's so hard
about that, eh? Answer, it isn't.

Dear me.

At present specific tariffs apply on UK exports to
countries in the RoW which currently enjoy FTA's with
the EU. But that will obviously no longer apply once the UK
leaves the EU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe...ade_agreements

Did nobody explain that to you ?

And why should anyone automatically assume that any tarriffs
which are going to be imposed on our exports are going to be
lower than they are at present, on goods and services which
directly compete with those of the importing country ?

Is that what Donald promised you ?

So one must assume he has another agenda. Gosh, I wonder what that could be.

Amusement at your folly ?

More especially given your decision, made at my own suggestion
no less, that you pin that "kick me" sign on your back. By keeping
up the pretence of having killfiled me.

Oh and how's the old "ultra vires" business coming along ? At least
you do get the odd latin phrase thrown in, when you splash out 25K
I suppose. Have you been billed for any refreshers yet ?


michael adams

....

On 09/09/2019 12:14, dennis@home wrote:
On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles?
Expensive safety systems that make only a little difference to safety,
but render vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight damage?

Probably not as it will be uneconomicto produce many variants and get
them through the approvals with fundementally differen designs. Its one
thing swapping an engine or a few body panels, its something else to
build a new car from the ground up.

To reduce or raise import tariffs on certain goods?

Probably, but it depends. Others can raise disputes if they think we are
abussing the WTO system.

At what level VAT should be set?

The UK government has set the VAT rates on everything.
The EU just has a rule that says you can't put VAT on something and then
take it off willynilly.


Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

The UK government negotiated what we were putting VAT on.
It was the UK government that put VAT on electricity and gas not the EU.

"Under EU rules, countries must apply a minimum standard VAT rate of
15%. They have an option of applying one or two reduced rates, no lower
than 5%, to certain specified goods on a pre-approved list.
Further reduction of the VAT rate, including to 0%, is also allowed but
only for the goods which were taxed at that rate before 1991 and since then.
Changes to the VAT rules require unanimous agreement of all 28 EU
countries."

So we cannot decide what we want to do.

We can ask, but it takes time and needs unanimous approval - how long
has it been since the fuss about sanitary products ... and although we
have managed to reduce it to 5%, we still cannot zero rate it.

To control immigration?

We might be able to, we can now for immigrants but don't and they are
about 60% of the net migration into the UK.

If we tighten non-EU immigration, EU immigration goes up to compensate.
Once we can control immigration from the EU, we can have a proper system
- including tax incentives to train UK citizens rather than importing
workers. We can also then peoperly hold governments to account, as ALL
immigration will be under their control.

And the list goes on.

And like all brexiteers you have chosen a set that are not implimented
by the EU but by the UK government, its almost as though brexiteers
don't have a clue.

Yes VAT was put on goods by UK governments, but it is the EU rules that
form a ratchet mechanism where once anything has VAT added, you can
never remove it. With VAT under our control, we could decide to zero
rate certain items - without outside interference.

Yes we can make our own laws - but only if they don't contradict EU
laws or no EU country feels that that law affects their companies more
than others. Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales
wanting to introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being
held up as a number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.


Yes just look at it.. Scotland do have a minimum price for alcohol so
thats another brexiteer talking cock.

And it took years of going through the courts first, both in the UK and
the ECJ - but in both, it was EU law that was being used to try and stop it.

SteveW

On 09/09/2019 15:11, dennis@home wrote:
On 09/09/2019 13:02, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce
the downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles?
Expensive safety systems that make only a little difference to
safety, but render vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight
damage?

Probably not as it will be uneconomicto produce many variants and get
them through the approvals with fundementally differen designs. Its
one thing swapping an engine or a few body panels, its something else
to build a new car from the ground up.

but it does mean that we can say "a not working thingamajig is no
longer an MOT failure"

I just had to scrap a car because some functionally unnecessary, but
mandatory, additional thingy broke and cost more to replace than the
car was worth.

Want to say what it was?


To reduce or raise import tariffs on certain goods?

Probably, but it depends. Others can raise disputes if they think we
are abussing the WTO system.

That would be charging differential tariffs (which are legal, but have
to be justified)

simply setting a high tariff for all, is not an abuse of the system


At what level VAT should be set?

The UK government has set the VAT rates on everything.
The EU just has a rule that says you can't put VAT on something and
then take it off willynilly.


Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

The UK government negotiated what we were putting VAT on.

No we didn't

Of course we did, why don't we have VAT on childrens cloths when the
rest of the EU does?
Why didn't we have VAT on energy until the UK government decided that a
carbon tax was a good idea and used VAT to collect it?
You really do talk cock.


the rules were already in place when we joined.

It was the UK government that put VAT on electricity and gas not the EU.

but the rules says that once we put it on (a new category) we cannot
take it off again

So, we still put it on not the EU.

What does that matter, the simple fact that we cannot choose to take it
off show that it is under EU and not UK control.

To control immigration?

We might be able to, we can now for immigrants but don't and they are
about 60% of the net migration into the UK.

Non-EU immigration all fits into the category of:

Highly skilled workers (with a job offer) or joining family members to
be supported by the family already here

Almost none of the ROW immigration comes here to take up minimum wage
work and scrounge on the welfare state.

yet elderly parents are allowed in and get OAP and benefits.

You can't even bring spouses in from RoW without showing that you can
support them!

SteveW

On 08/09/2019 23:24, Brian Reay wrote:
Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 23:00, Norman Wells wrote:
On 08/09/2019 22:50, Steve Walker wrote:

The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to
"hide" the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation
of "some" suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination
than in the EU.

That used to be the explanation for curry too, didn't it?

I don't recall there was any foundation for that either.

From the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health:

"US chicken has been banned in the EU since 1997 because of this
chlorine washing process. While the chlorine isnt toxic at the levels
being used, US processing plants rely solely on it because their other
hygiene standards are so poor. EU rules dictate that food manufacturers
should focus on overall hygiene to eliminate microorganisms, instead of
using a single chemical decontamination step."

"Recent studies have proved this process to be entirely ineffective in
reducing the presence or virulence of bacteria ... This might account
for why the rate of food poisoning in the US is approximately 10 times
higher than in the UK."

SteveW


Oh dear, you will upset someone by quoting facts.

No reason to. I am a leaver, but don't want poor animal welfare
standards or contaminated food.

SteveW

On 08/09/2019 23:57, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU. I am more concerned about about the welfare (I am a confirmed meat
eater, but see no reason to treat animals worse than is necessary) and
the fact that chlorination not only doesn't kill all the contamination,
but also prevents it being accurately checked. Figures clearly show that
the US rate of food poisoning is many times that in the UK.

That won't go down well with the average right wing Brexiteer here. The
only animals they likely care about the welfare of - including humans -
being dogs and horses.

As you'll have seen from my other posts, I am a leaver. I see no reason
why that should prevent concern for animal welfare standards or food
cleanliness standards.

SteveW

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

Why would any rational person think leaving the EU would make any
difference

rest snipped

Indeed.

Quite why you're so interested in a detailed examination
of the thought processes of clearly irrational people
somewhat escapes me, I must admit.



michael adams

....