alhlkh Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 At a price. At a price. I can already tell you that the price for maintaining financial passporting rights is freedom of movement. If the UK is lucky. A price that works both ways, if they charge use for selling into their market we will charge them for selling into our market, and they sell more to us than we to them. Free movement of people isn't a price the government can afford to pay. ---------- Post added 22-07-2016 at 12:27 ---------- No, you were confusing it, but you have now corrected yourself. Or, to be more precise I have corrected you. No, the confusion is yours, I have said the same thing in different ways to help you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 A price that works both ways, if they charge use for selling into their market we will charge them for selling into our market Sounds like a good formula for increasing inflation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 A price that works both ways, if they charge use for selling into their market we will charge them for selling into our market, and they sell more to us than we to them. Free movement of people isn't a price the government can afford to pay.How desperate do you think US, Australian, Chinese, Japanese, Swiss <etc.> financiers with EU-bound trade requirements would be, to want to pay extra for the privilege of routing those trades via an non-EU member state, relative to the lesser volume and value of UK-bound investments? Answer on a postage stamp if you wish I'm quite sure that both the UK and the EU27 all want this go down as smoothly and painlessly as possible for all parties....but I think you'll find the UK is not in any position to dictate terms, under any stretches of meaning. It'll all become clear by end of year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 A price that works both ways, if they charge use for selling into their market we will charge them for selling into our market, and they sell more to us than we to them. Free movement of people isn't a price the government can afford to pay. ---------- Post added 22-07-2016 at 12:27 ---------- No, the confusion is yours, I have said the same thing in different ways to help you. So what you are saying is that you didn't change the preposition from within to access to? Carry on. PS: don't you find it a bit amusing that a foreigner is having to correct your English? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alhlkh Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Sounds like a good formula for increasing inflation Buying milk or any other product from the EU won't inflate the price of milk or products produced in the UK, so UK farmers/producers will end up selling more milk/produce and we will end up buying less milk/produce from the EU, so good for UK producers unless they decide its in their interest to trade freely without tariffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Who were they? Practically every Brexiter on this forum and every other forum I looked at. There were also stories in the media about warnings of at least the Eurozone collapsing and comment pages on media sites were festooned with the argument. More risky to stay in we were told. Leadsom used the argument. And it also formed the core of articles in newspapers: Have you been hiding under a rock? I think I would have seen if people said that the EU would collapse, because that was exactly my view and reason for leaving (whether in or out). The only time I saw it in here was when I was discussing it with you* and Loob, andyborg and a couple of others. My argument was that when it collapses we'll fair better if we have a few years out first. If you look at the discussion, you just wanted evidence that it would collapse, and I couldn't give you that. How could I? I can/could only tell you how I saw things progressing. *page119, look at our discussion pre-vote. which started with me: Well I'm not answering for him or her, but I think things will be worse when the EU collapses and if we're still in it. At least when it collapses, if we vote out, we might have a few years to become independent first, and the inevitable crash which will affect all of us worldwide in the [western world], might be less brutal. Let me also make clear, the use of nobody was an exaggeration [...] So you exaggerated. Finally, that could have saved some time. So are some people worse off due to immigration? Skilled/semi-skilled workers who used to earn a decent wage but now are on NMW for example? So far, we haven't left the EU! No we haven't, yet this thread is thousands of doom mongering posts that we're finished, and the talks haven't even started yet (broadly speaking) No difference then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxy lady Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Buying milk or any other product from the EU won't inflate the price of milk or products produced in the UK, so UK farmers/producers will end up selling more milk/produce and we will end up buying less milk/produce from the EU, so good for UK producers unless they decide its in their interest to trade freely without tariffs. Yes I can't wait for Angela Merkel to explain to the Germans that they won't be able to sell the annual £89 billion of goods to the UK without paying tariffs, because they have imposed a tariff on the £30 billion we sell them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 So you exaggerated. Finally, that could have saved some time. So are some people worse off due to immigration? Skilled/semi-skilled workers who used to earn a decent wage but now are on NMW for example? Talk about going round in circles. No, people are not worse off due to immigration, they are worse off due to the crash of 2008. And it is increasingly beginning to look like they will be worse off due to the crash of 2016. Now let me ask, again, are you worse off due to immigration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alhlkh Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 So what you are saying is that you didn't change the preposition from within to access to? Carry on. PS: don't you find it a bit amusing that a foreigner is having to correct your English? Its not a change, its the same using different words. I find your superiority complex amusing. Just in case you didn't bother to follow the discussion, this is the point I corrected. Why would it be? Any access the the single market relies on the free movement of people from within the EU, unless as stated the EU caves on that, which looks unlikely. Other migration was already controllable. Access to the single market isn't dependant on the free movement of people, but it does appear for now that membership of the single market is dependant on the free movement of people, so we will be able to trade within it without being a member of it, just like most countries that trade within it without being members of it. And you didn't even know what median and average meant. ---------- Post added 22-07-2016 at 13:02 ---------- Talk about going round in circles. No, people are not worse off due to immigration, they are worse off due to the crash of 2008. And it is increasingly beginning to look like they will be worse off due to the crash of 2016. Now let me ask, again, are you worse off due to immigration? How do you account for the people that were worse off before the crash because of immigration. Prior to 2008 you can't blame the crash for something that was caused by flooding the market with low skilled cheap labour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Talk about going round in circles. No, people are not worse off due to immigration, they are worse off due to the crash of 2008. And it is increasingly beginning to look like they will be worse off due to the crash of 2016. Now let me ask, again, are you worse off due to immigration? Let me ask you again, for at least the fifth time, where did I write that I was worse off due to immigration? Refuting your claim that 'Nobody' is worse off, is not the same as saying I am worse off due to immigration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts