Brexit: Boris' Big Belgian Bangers - The Bear and Badger

b0r1s

Any pointers?

b0r1s

Guess I deserved that

Kow

The results of the secret vote on whether you stay or go should be in soon. Fingers crossed.

b0r1s

In my defence, I have paid my taxes.

Kow

Radical conservatives like Ian will be a deciding factor. Are you black or Muslim or a vegetarian?

b0r1s

Yes

Kow

Ooh, well...

b0r1s

Shit

Blue Swirl

Probably been posted before, but bugger off am I going through 7 pages to find it.

116 reasons to vote to stay in the EU.

Number 35 is particularly interesting, given the frothing from the right-wing tabloids about immigrants and "regaining control of our borders".

The Schengen free-movement zone doesn’t actually apply to the UK and never has: this means that there are still border checks at the border. No need to “reclaim” our borders then.

On the other hand, I do now understand the Leave people who want to vote that way to get a better deal out of the EU. I always thought it was a stupid reason, as once we're out why would they offer us anything? Apparently, though, the rules for leaving the Union mean it can take up to two years to actually exit, and negotiations would happen in that time to try and keep the member state in.

Yossarian

I think that's a bit of a misreading of the border control argument, it's not about whether there are passport checks, it's about whether or not we can refuse entry to people from the rest of the EU.

GooberTheHat

I don't think the trade negotiations are ever going to be favourable for us. Something like 45% of our exports go to the rest of the EU, where as only 16% of EU trade goes to the UK.

Diluted Dante

Blue Swirl wrote:

On the other hand, I do now understand the Leave people who want to vote that way to get a better deal out of the EU. I always thought it was a stupid reason, as once we're out why would they offer us anything? Apparently, though, the rules for leaving the Union mean it can take up to two years to actually exit, and negotiations would happen in that time to try and keep the member state in.

That would involve another referendum, which has been ruled out. If we vote to leave, we're leaving.

Funkstain

GooberTheHat wrote:

I don't think the trade negotiations are ever going to be favourable for us. Something like 45% of our exports go to the rest of the EU, where as only 16% of EU trade goes to the UK.

It's not so much the quantity of trade (we'd still be an important trading partner) it's the fact that any agreement should (if EU negotiators so their job properly) favour EU member states over the uk, in the long term. So anything they get from us now, they should be looking for ways to get internally as they will save money and benefit member states that way. Why buy cars made in the uk with an import tariff (even if no tariff, why pay for Uk labour/jobs?) when you could set up a factory in c Europe and benefit a member state?

It's the long term view which is as usual lost with these emotional arguments.

So the main pro-leave argument - regain sovereignty whilst negotiating at least as good a deal as we have now - is short term viable, long term bust. Look at long term patterns of trade within the EU and the kinds of things they do to move imports to internal states.

Without the UK, there would have been an EU steel import duty for China to pay, protecting member state steel industries. i reckon EU is better off without us.

Kow

GooberTheHat wrote:

I don't think the trade negotiations are ever going to be favourable for us. Something like 45% of our exports go to the rest of the EU, where as only 16% of EU trade goes to the UK.

Why do you think that's unfavorable to the uk? How would any more imports from the EU be either possible or beneficial?

Funkstain

I think he means that because it's only 16% we're not an important enough importer for them to give us major trade concessions.

mistercrayon

Kow wrote:

GooberTheHat wrote:

I don't think the trade negotiations are ever going to be favourable for us. Something like 45% of our exports go to the rest of the EU, where as only 16% of EU trade goes to the UK.

Why do you think that's unfavorable to the uk? How would any more imports from the EU be either possible or beneficial?

It's a bit apples and pears. Like the Whole of the EU's 28 countries sends a nearly a fifth of their stuff to one country? Not good maths.

Kow

Britain and EU are not bilateral trading partners.

mistercrayon

If the EU receives 16 percent of its money from one country then losing that one country is fucking devastating for 27 countries.

[Deleted User]

Funkstain wrote:

GooberTheHat wrote:

I don't think the trade negotiations are ever going to be favourable for us. Something like 45% of our exports go to the rest of the EU, where as only 16% of EU trade goes to the UK.

It's not so much the quantity of trade (we'd still be an important trading partner) it's the fact that any agreement should (if EU negotiators so their job properly) favour EU member states over the uk, in the long term. So anything they get from us now, they should be looking for ways to get internally as they will save money and benefit member states that way. Why buy cars made in the uk with an import tariff (even if no tariff, why pay for Uk labour/jobs?) when you could set up a factory in c Europe and benefit a member state?

It's the long term view which is as usual lost with these emotional arguments.

So the main pro-leave argument - regain sovereignty whilst negotiating at least as good a deal as we have now - is short term viable, long term bust. Look at long term patterns of trade within the EU and the kinds of things they do to move imports to internal states.

Without the UK, there would have been an EU steel import duty for China to pay, protecting member state steel industries. i reckon EU is better off without us.

The whole point of the EU as a trade bloc is indeed to get a better deal outside.

GooberTheHat

Funkstain wrote:

I think he means that because it's only 16% we're not an important enough importer for them to give us major trade concessions.

More that they are more important to us, than we are to them, so they will hold the balance of power in any negotiations. We would be the ones that had to make the major/majority of concessions.

Kow

You make it sound like the EU is one trading entity against the UK. All the component countries are individuals who make their own trading decisions. France has traditionally been one the UK's biggest export markets regardless of the EU.

IanHamlett

I can't find good figures on this, because every cunt with an opinion piece on the EU apparently failed their maths GCSE before getting their job as a journalist, but it looks like the UK would be the largest market for the EU with about a 40% more cash going to the EU than to UK. About 30% of the UK economy is exports and about half of that is to EU.

If the UK buys more from EU that vice versa, doesn't that mean the UK is the one with sway?

Isn't "give me a good deal or I'll buy my olives elsewhere" a better position than "give me a good deal or you'll have to buy your olives elsewhere"?

Yossarian

Except that if the EU starts handing out favourable terms to a country that's just left, that could encourage other countries to leave.

GooberTheHat

Kow wrote:

You make it sound like the EU is one trading entity against the UK. All the component countries are individuals who make their own trading decisions. France has traditionally been one the UK's biggest export markets regardless of the EU.

It is when it comes to negotiating a trade agreement. That's one of the reasons it exists?

Kow

The trade agreements are to smooth things out - the members agree to them, they're not imposed by a independent EU. The EU has no power to force anybody to do anything. Some countries have more sway than others, it's true, but leaving means even less with the countries who will be your trading partners regardless. Whatever trade percentages you can show to demonstrate UK importance will be finished without participating in EU agreements.

GooberTheHat

IanHamlett wrote:

I can't find good figures on this, because every cunt with an opinion piece on the EU apparently failed their maths GCSE before getting their job as a journalist, but it looks like the UK would be the largest market for the EU with about a 40% more cash going to the EU than to UK. About 30% of the UK economy is exports and about half of that is to EU. If the UK buys more from EU that vice versa, doesn't that mean the UK is the one with sway? Isn't "give me a good deal or I'll buy my olives elsewhere" a better position than "give me a good deal or you'll have to buy your olives elsewhere"?

So you're saying that half of all UK exports go to the EU?

GooberTheHat wrote:

I don't think the trade negotiations are ever going to be favourable for us. Something like 45% of our exports go to the rest of the EU, where as only 16% of EU trade goes to the UK.

Like I said.

That makes the EU very important for the UK export market. The figures I saw said that only 16% of EU trade went to the UK, so to me that seems like a " We don't care if you buy your olives elsewhere, we only sell a few of them to you anyway." situation.

GooberTheHat

Kow wrote:

The trade agreements are to smooth things out - the members agree to them, they're not imposed by a independent EU.

The members have to agree to them, but they cannot negotiate their own individual deals. What incentive is there, from the trade block as a whole, to offer the UK a more beneficial deal outside of the EU than it experiences whilst in it?

Kow

I don't think there's any really. I think leaving the EU is an idiotic idea.

mistercrayon

Surely if half exports go to the EU there is something the UK sells that the countries in the EU want.

GooberTheHat

You're thinking about the maths wrong. 50% of exports doesnt equal 50% of imports.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories