tzijlstra Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 I have bigger concerns than my own status and career progression. I have explained these at great length. There is a clear distinction between being the biggest trading partner and being the majority trading partner. This is not a huge correction and I don't disagree with the bulk of your previous post otherwise. It is both the biggest and the majority, 55%+ for EEA exports - 50%+ for EU exports, Over 60% for imports for both. Brexit is playing with fire for international trade, not just for the UK, but also for its biggest trading partners in the EU, the Dutch are the third biggest Export destination and 4th biggest Import source (only just after China). The US, which I presume you are referring to, are reliant on the UK being a gateway into Europe, particularly for high-tech manufacturing and pharmaceutical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 It is both the biggest and the majority, 55%+ for EEA exports - 50%+ for EU exports, Over 60% for imports for both. Brexit is playing with fire for international trade, not just for the UK, but also for its biggest trading partners in the EU, the Dutch are the third biggest Export destination and 4th biggest Import source (only just after China). The US, which I presume you are referring to, are reliant on the UK being a gateway into Europe, particularly for high-tech manufacturing and pharmaceutical. This is not my information, although it's not that far off so maybe it doesn't matter too much. https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/OverseasTradeStatistics/Pages/EU_and_Non-EU_Data.aspx Economics are important to be sure. But short term economic stability is not the only factor in political decision making. It should not be and it probably could not be. Disrupting a stagnating market often brings great benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 ...Disrupting a stagnating market often brings great benefits. Can you provide examples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 This is not my information, although it's not that far off so maybe it doesn't matter too much. https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/OverseasTradeStatistics/Pages/EU_and_Non-EU_Data.aspx Economics are important to be sure. But short term economic stability is not the only factor in political decision making. It should not be and it probably could not be. Disrupting a stagnating market often brings great benefits. It isn't short term, the project you are dismissing has been with us since the 1980s. That is well beyond the regular economic cycle. This will have a long term impact. Not to mention that the perceived benefits as on display in the previous threads are pipe-dreams, immigration will only come down if the economy does tank (more and more likely), 'sovereignty' is just going to lead to bigger political swings in this country and the perceived collapse of the EU is as far away now as it was before the financial crisis of 2008. (Dutch source re. faith in the European Project) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Disrupting a stagnating market often brings great benefits. What a curious phrase. Which market are we disrupting? How do you classify the disruption? Is it the single market? Are you suggesting trade will increase greatly with Europe ? You say often brings great benefits can you illustrate the often point from the examples you are relying on? Isnt there also the possibility that such disruption could make things worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Disrupting a stagnating market often brings great benefits. You are going to need to back that up in some way. What disruption do you envisage? And what do you think the benefits will be? Some real world examples would be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petminder Posted October 24, 2016 Share Posted October 24, 2016 It isn't short term, the project you are dismissing has been with us since the 1980s. That is well beyond the regular economic cycle. This will have a long term impact. Not to mention that the perceived benefits as on display in the previous threads are pipe-dreams, immigration will only come down if the economy does tank (more and more likely), 'sovereignty' is just going to lead to bigger political swings in this country and the perceived collapse of the EU is as far away now as it was before the financial crisis of 2008. (Dutch source re. faith in the European Project) Millions of people disagree with you or don't care and ignoring the wishes of millions of people will eventually lead to disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted October 24, 2016 Share Posted October 24, 2016 Millions of people disagree with you or don't care and ignoring the wishes of millions of people will eventually lead to disaster. Millions of people were not aware of all the facts or certainly did not understand what they were voting on - and even now fail to acknowledge what they voted on. What are you going to do when the economy crashes? Don't you think that will lead to disaster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted October 24, 2016 Author Share Posted October 24, 2016 Off the top of my head, since everybody seems so keen... The introduction of the internet was very disruptive to the communications market, and to the retail market and almost everything else. The introduction of the train, and later the bus, were very disruptive to the transport market. The EU is, I think, the worlds only declining trade bloc. Maybe it need shaking up a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petminder Posted October 24, 2016 Share Posted October 24, 2016 Millions of people were not aware of all the facts or certainly did not understand what they were voting on - and even now fail to acknowledge what they voted on. What are you going to do when the economy crashes? Don't you think that will lead to disaster? Your opinion on whether we knew what were voting for is unimportant, the consequences of ignoring the wishes of the people would be far worse than the consequences of implementing their wishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts