Yorkshire multi-millionaire businessman backs UKIP

[angos]

I can't see how you got to those conclusions, I can only assume you're mentally challenged.

 

That would be the imagination running away with itself in an attempt to construct an argument to support their stance.

[BoroB]

How is that an argument to leave the EU? If all EU states trade with non-EU states and none want to leave the EU then you can argue that non-EU trade and EU-trade go hand in hand. All those countries you mention are on different continents and so trading with them isn't as easy as it is with the near continent. And they can all trade with the EU on the same terms and conditions. If we left the EU we'd have to negotiate new ones.

 

So lets negotiate terms and conditions that favour the UK, not terms and conditions that have to be compromised in order to meet the agendas of other EU countries.

[LeMaquis]

So lets negotiate terms and conditions that favour the UK, not terms and conditions that have to be compromised in order to meet the agendas of other EU countries.

 

Life must be so simple in your little world. If we left the EU and put ourselves in a position where we had to negotiate new agreements, wouldn't that put us in a position of weakness? Every other country would know we had to negotiate ourselves something rather quickly or suffer economically meaning they would be in a much stronger position and could dictate terms. We would have walked away from one set of traders and would need someone else pretty quickly.

 

Present EU terms and conditions do favour the UK as they allow us to be part of the largest single market in the world with which 50% of our trade is conducted.

 

Can you suggest how we could better that with China, India, Brazil, et al.

 

---------- Post added 22-11-2013 at 08:47 ----------

 

That would be the imagination running away with itself in an attempt to construct an argument to support their stance.

 

A bit like your arguments in favour of adults having sex with children.

[BoroB]

Life must be so simple in your little world. If we left the EU and put ourselves in a position where we had to negotiate new agreements, wouldn't that put us in a position of weakness? Every other country would know we had to negotiate ourselves something rather quickly or suffer economically meaning they would be in a much stronger position and could dictate terms. We would have walked away from one set of traders and would need someone else pretty quickly.

 

Present EU terms and conditions do favour the UK as they allow us to be part of the largest single market in the world with which 50% of our trade is conducted.

 

Can you suggest how we could better that with China, India, Brazil, et al.

 

---------- Post added 22-11-2013 at 08:47 ----------

 

 

A bit like your arguments in favour of adults having sex with children.

 

As opposed to so complicated and corrupt in continent EU? Tell me, when was the last time the EU's accounts got a clean bill of health from its auditors?

 

As I believe EU budgets are set for seven years and you are committed for the term, its not as if we would leave overnight. Plenty of time to negotiate favourable terms and conditions. Don't forget the EU trades more with the UK than vice versa so who has more to lose?

[crazybaby]

How much outside investment does Britain attract? Don't we have a tariff imposed on us for trading outside the EU, Why have EU accounts never been signed off? It's a pretty incompetent & power hungry bureaucracy, plus we have a trade deficit with the EU they need us.

[L00b]

Levy's and tariffs are a two way street and open to negotiation between countries. If countries wish to impose levy's on UK made goods after a UK withdrawal there is nothing to stop the UK government reciprocating.

Your frequent resorting to the "two-way street" line is symptomatic of your deliberate glossing over the relative sizes of the UK economy and the EU economy: the point is that the EU can survive without the UK, and most EU businesses who buy 'stuff' from the UK can very easily switch their supply base if and when the UK 'stuff' should become uncompetitive through direct (levies and such) and indirect (administrative/red tape) consequences of its exit.

 

And when I say if and when, that's not in relation to levies and such (because these will happen - see below), but more in relation to the margin of manoeuvre the UK and UK businesses will have at the time to keep their offer competitive (e.g. £ devaluation, slashing profit margins (to the detriment of corporation tax icnome), etc.).

 

UK people will still buy German cars and French wine just the same. Oh well, more (import-) taxes to the Exchequer I suppose.

Your scaremongering would have us believe that a UK exit from the EU would lead to factories in which overseas companies have invested billions being abandoned overnight.

As posted and linked, it's not scaremongering at all. The 10% levy (9.2% to be precise) on UK-made cars is a factual (because legal/statutory) consequence of exiting, and lessening its level/impact is entirely subject to establishing a new (EFTA-like) agreement. The level of investment preceding the exit is entirely irrelevant.

UK in = no levy. As it is now.

UK out = levy. By operation of existing EU laws, rules and regs.

Eventual negotiated EFTA-like agreement = hopefully reduced levy, maybe even none. We don't know, let's pray for best.

 

You seem articulate enough, it should be a simple enough principle to understand.

 

That's just one example, but can I encourage to read the linked pdf as regards services, which in this day and age constitute the core of the UK economy.

Your basically saying that the UK electorate should have no say in whether we stop in the EU because a lot of overseas companies would not like our withdrawal? Its for the people of the UK to decide on EU membership and no one else.

Absolutely not, and please stop putting words in my mouth/posts. I'm quite happy for the UK electorate to have its say, provided the debate (i) takes place and (ii) is factual (unbiased) and fully informed. So far, the main parties have been fudging, and UKIP is leaning on its intellectually-feeble populist rethoric (which is what I'm mostly posting against in here). Let's inform and elevate the debate a bit, is what I'm basically saying.

 

I've never hidden my feelings that much of the UK<>EU relationship needs grabbing by the scruff of the neck and 'sorting'. But that's entirely different from an outright exit, which certain people seem to hold as the "scorched earth" panacea.

The UK electorate are asked to contribute to the club but have no say over whether they want to be a member. Sounds a lot like the Falkirk Labour Party with people being signed up without their agreement.

Not really, since no legislative processes have been distorted or meddled with when the UK acceded to the EU (and need I remind you that most Member States have acceded without any form of popular vote). Unlike Falkirk, wherein established member vetting procedures were completely bypassed on the orders of the senior Labour party execs in a political manoeuvre.

[angos]

Life must be so simple in your little world. If we left the EU and put ourselves in a position where we had to negotiate new agreements, wouldn't that put us in a position of weakness? Every other country would know we had to negotiate ourselves something rather quickly or suffer economically meaning they would be in a much stronger position and could dictate terms. We would have walked away from one set of traders and would need someone else pretty quickly.

 

Present EU terms and conditions do favour the UK as they allow us to be part of the largest single market in the world with which 50% of our trade is conducted.

 

Can you suggest how we could better that with China, India, Brazil, et al.

 

---------- Post added 22-11-2013 at 08:47 ----------

 

 

A bit like your arguments in favour of adults having sex with children.

 

No, that was based on evidence, whilst your ideas here are based on supposition.

[SportsTrophy]

I trade more with America, Australia, Africa and Asia. Europe might as well be on the moon as far as my dealings with it go. The UK is going through some really tough times and needs to take stock.

[Zamo]

The most annoying aspect of this is that it is non-trade issues that push us ever closer to a EU exit e.g. immigration control, human rights and interference by the European Court of Justice.

 

Power hungry federalists are effectively blackmailing us to cede power to them in return for trade rights. But I think there must be something about the British that means we do not respond well to bullying because I find myself more and more wanting to tell the EU they can shove it!

 

We know there will be a price to pay if we pull out of the EU but there is a price for staying in too. I'm not sure we will be that much worse of financially but I think we will be a lot better of socially. I've shifted position over the years from being a europhile to being a eurosceptic, who is really fed up, and probably going to vote UKIP.

[boyfriday]

How much outside investment does Britain attract?

 

A huge amount.

 

According to a recent report by the Office of National Statistics, foreign investors own more than half of the stocks in the UK's £1.8 trillion stock markets. International investors currently hold 53.2 percent of the stocks, a significant increase over the 43.4 percent held by international investors three years ago.

 

http://shareprices.com/news/foreign-investors-rushing-to-the-ftse-100-249