The consequence thread (Brexit)

[L00b]

We want to be able to do businesses efficiently with the EU. That means they have to refrain from putting tariffs or any other kind of barriers in our way.

That doesn't mean that we have to let them regulate business activity in the UK not related to trade with the EU.

All very one-sided as usual.

 

What happens when the price for "not putting tariffs or any other kind of barriers in the UK's way" is the "regulation of business activity in the UK" (typically targeting manufacturing and employment, with some more on the side as they relate to economic activity that can be exported to the EU)?

 

You either take the regulation, or you take the tariffs and barriers, or -if possible- you negotiate to a position of mutual agreement somewhere between.

[truman]

It merely points out that there are a seemingly never ending stream of people entering Europe's porous outer borders and that already squeezed infrastructure is going to have to absorb them. Just because they have brown skin apparently makes that concern "racist". Have you ever considered that its not only white people that are concerned about this?

 

It's not only white people that can be racist... how many of these people have actually ended up in the uk?

[L00b]

Do you have a source for this?

I expect you've posted it before, but I must not have read it at the time.

Seen this linked on here in t'other thread or this one, metric with countries marked as dots against a scale.

[unbeliever]

All very one-sided as usual.

 

What happens when the price for "not putting tariffs or any other kind of barriers in the UK's way" is the "regulation of business activity in the UK" (typically targeting manufacturing and employment, with some more on the side as they relate to economic activity that can be exported to the EU)?

 

You either take the regulation, or you take the tariffs and barriers, or -if possible- you negotiate to a position of mutual agreement somewhere between.

 

I am arguing on one side of this debate. I rely on you and tzijlstra to balance me out.

As to the reality, I don't think any of us really know. Your "somewhere in-between" sounds more like it, but the devil is in the detail. Well have to wait and see.

[kidley]

We want to be able to do businesses efficiently with the EU. That means they have to refrain from putting tariffs or any other kind of barriers in our way.

That doesn't mean that we have to let them regulate business activity in the UK not related to trade with the EU. Nor does it mean we have to let them determine our energy policy. I'm not at all convinced we need to listen to a word that the ECJ have to say. The list of things we don't need to do, just to be able to trade freely with the EU, is so long you could roll it up and use it beat a whale to death.

 

Yes there was alot of talk about not wanting to have decisions made for us by the e.u. but, i think its fair to say that the biggest thing is free movement, if we have to agree with that to trade with the e.u whats the point of coming out?

[truman]

Norway have more sovereignty than us. Switzerland have more than Norway.

 

But they both have to accept free movement of people..I thought that was one of "Leave's" important selling points?

[tzijlstra]

Oh okay. Then I'll try again.

We don't have to join the EEA. Switzerland are not in the EEA, but they trade freely with the EU.

Norway are in the EEA but not the EU.

Both pay about a tenth of what we do in contributions (as a fraction of GDP).

They both accept free movement (well the Swiss are trying to get out of it without much success). That's going to be the big sticking point.

They implement some, but not all, EU regulations. I can't figure out exactly how much.

Switzerland is free to negotiate it's own free trade arrangements with other nations.

 

Norway have more sovereignty than us. Switzerland have more than Norway. Both pay an awful lot less into the EU.

I think we can do even better, as we're much bigger and far less dependent on trade with the EU, but it remains to be seen.

Like I said, I know that is what you want. It doesn't seem to match the noise coming from the Tory candidates for PM.

Do you have a source for this?

I expect you've posted it before, but I must not have read it at the time.

 

I will look it up again, I remember reading about it in the FT, but the search function on that site isn't playing nice for me. Similarly I'll have a look and see if I can find what Hunt and co are saying about what they will stand for, I read that in the Telegraph yesterday night.

[Guest]

 

You either take the regulation, or you take the tariffs and barriers, or -if possible- you negotiate to a position of mutual agreement somewhere between.

 

I'd take the tariffs and barriers and see how long it takes before German and French business's and people pressure their governments to radically reform the EU.

Edited June 28, 2016 by Guest

[unbeliever]

Yes there was alot of talk about not wanting to have decisions made for us by the e.u. but, i think its fair to say that the biggest thing is free movement, if we have to agree with that to trade with the e.u whats the point of coming out?

 

For people voting on free movement, there was no point. For me, there's a lot more at stake.

 

---------- Post added 28-06-2016 at 13:29 ----------

 

I will look it up again, I remember reading about it in the FT, but the search function on that site isn't playing nice for me. Similarly I'll have a look and see if I can find what Hunt and co are saying about what they will stand for, I read that in the Telegraph yesterday night.

 

I think Hunt is a long-shot for the leadership, but sure. Let's take a look.

[Guest]

It's not only white people that can be racist... how many of these people have actually ended up in the uk?

 

My concern isn't just for the UK.