The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[Hairyloon]

I imagine if farmers try to increase wages the customers would just switch to imported food if that was cheaper.

 

Is the imported food going to be cheaper under WTO tariffs?

 

The Conservative party have their own fair share of sore losers, who don't respect the democratic wishes of the people to leave the EU...

 

You've spelled "delusional" wrong. Who doesn't wish to have their cake and eat it?

 

---------- Post added 29-06-2017 at 00:38 ----------

 

Smart people don't have to rely on google to construct a viewpoint.

 

Yes, why let facts muddy the waters of pure ideology?

[I1L2T3]

Looking at Brexit in objective terms it has to be the most insane thing this country has ever done.

 

I'm struggling to see one single genuine benefit right now.

[Lord Rex]

It would appear the Third Reich have just realised their superstate project is going to be left with an annual black hole of EUR 20 Billion.

 

http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/28/the-eu-will-have-a-huge-financial-black-hole-when-britain-leaves-6741257/

That is the real reason the EU want a massive financial settlement. The EU still want the UK to be their meal ticket after we have left.

[L00b]

Is the imported food going to be cheaper under WTO tariffs?

Absolutely not.

 

And it wouldn't be due only to the devalued GBP and any WTO tariffs: scarcity of (imported) supply would be a non-trivial price influencer itself ('what is rare is expensive'), once the UK has finished working out its share of the WTO-sanctioned EU quota levels and non-EU exporters exploit the differential (because it's cheaper -i.e. more profitable- for them to try and sell the UK's "share" of local produce to the EU27, rather than maintain supply levels at parity (pro rata) to the Brexited UK and the EU27).

 

You can see this playing out in UK supermarkets already, to an extent, with a shrinking total offer (disappearing product lines and branded alternatives, combined with some more own brand).

 

---------- Post added 29-06-2017 at 09:22 ----------

 

That is the real reason the EU want a massive financial settlement. The EU still want the UK to be their meal ticket after we have left.

Not really.

 

The EU are asking the UK for what it has committed to.

 

Nothing more, nothing less.

 

If the UK should renege on it, international trading partners will draw the appropriate conclusions when the UK come a-knocking for an FTA, and tell May, Johnson and Davis to do one. Sideways.

 

€20bn is a drop in the ocean that is the EU budget. A biggish drop alright, but still only a drop. Here, try and educate yourself.

 

It's one of those "we'll miss it for a little while, and then forget about it". Far more so, relative to the multiple of that amount, which the UK will eventually settle with the EU for

Edited June 29, 2017 by L00b

[Hairyloon]

Is the imported food going to be cheaper under WTO tariffs?

Absolutely not...

 

I don't think you can say absolutely, because we don't know how much the price of home grown food is going to go up... though of course, once we've ditched all the employment and Human Rights legislation, we can reintroduce slavery to reduce the wage bill...

[L00b]

I don't think you can say absolutely, because we don't know how much the price of home grown food is going to go up... though of course, once we've ditched all the employment and Human Rights legislation, we can reintroduce slavery to reduce the wage bill...

Well, your post posited WTO tariffs (in a Brexited context), and they are at their highest for foodstuffs.

 

Currently, foodstuffs imported into the UK from outside the EU are already WTO tariffed, but at rates agreed by the EU on behalf of the EU28 (same WTO rate for e.g. NZ lamb, whether it ends up in London, Warsaw or Paris), wherein these rates are tiered (i.e. x% for first 100,000 NZ lambs into the EU, y% for next 100,000 NZ lambs into the EU <etc.>) and harmonized (so the EU knows how many NZ lambs go into UK, Poland, Paris and so when to apply x% or y%).

 

That's why working out the UK's share of EU WTO quotas has been one of the main (and most difficult) tasks of the Brexit dept in Whitehall for months.

 

Post-Brexit and under a WTO regime, the UK's stated plan is to replicate the current EU-level WTO tariffs to minimise disruption so, on paper, no pricing change (bar those attributable to fluctuating FOREX, and the loss of any volume-based discounts).

 

But, and this is the civil servant's failing (IMHO), that assumes exporters (e.g. NZ lamb farmers/coops) and UK importers maintaining trading levels to the UK post-Brexit with taking on all the added shipping costs and associated red tape that go hand-in-hand with standard import-export trade.

 

That red tape is unavoidable (anyone who's worked in non-EU import-export can confirm), and has a cost: a non-trivial one, once you don't (can't) rely on the centralised and harmonised EU systems anymore.

 

Because although that UK-bound NZ lamb could still be shipped to an EU harbour along with the EU27-bound NZ lamb, the UK one will need to be TIR-separated and then processed by UK customs (rather than customs-processed in the EU landing harbour and just road- or train-freighted to the UK as currently). In that context, and unsurprisingly, the smaller the quantities, the higher the premium.

 

In that overall context, I'd expect homegrown produce to end up being cheaper. But if you take a passing look at the state of farming in the UK, that cheaper foodstuff may be GM, not very diverse, and grown by one of only 3 or 4 conglomerates.

Edited June 29, 2017 by L00b

[Lord Rex]

 

The EU are asking the UK for what it has committed to.

 

Nothing more, nothing less.

 

If the UK should renege on it, international trading partners will draw the appropriate conclusions when the UK come a-knocking for an FTA, and tell May, Johnson and Davis to do one. Sideways.

 

€20bn is a drop in the ocean that is the EU budget. A biggish drop alright, but still only a drop. Here, try and educate yourself.

 

It's one of those "we'll miss it for a little while, and then forget about it". Far more so, relative to the multiple of that amount, which the UK will eventually settle with the EU for

The UK only made commitments to be honoured while they were members of the EU. It's unreasonable for the EU to want the UK to continue to finance for projects once we have left them, which was a decision made by the democratic people of the UK. The UK should not pay them a penny once we leave and if the EU parasites are unhappy, then tough.

 

I do not need to educate myself on what is right and wrong. It is wrong the UK should have signed our sovereignty away over the years. It was wrong past UK Governments signed treaties allowing the EU to increase to such an extent it has. It is wrong that people from Eastern European countries have been allowed to move here in the numbers they have done.

 

The fact you consider €20bn is a only drop in the ocean demonstrates what is wrong with EU and the mindset of those who support an organisation ruled by parasites.

[L00b]

The UK only made commitments to be honoured while they were members of the EU. It's unreasonable for the EU to want the UK to continue to finance for projects once we have left them, which was a decision made by the democratic people of the UK. The UK should not pay them a penny once we leave and if the EU parasites are unhappy, then tough.

Okayyy...

 

...so, reciprocally, it's only fair that the UK should repay all its EIB loans by Brexit day, and that the EIB cut all ongoing funding to projects as from that day, surely?

 

I'll let you look up the recipients, numbers and frequency

I do not need to educate myself on what is right and wrong. It is wrong the UK should have signed our sovereignty away over the years. It was wrong past UK Governments signed treaties allowing the EU to increase to such an extent it has. It is wrong that people from Eastern European countries have been allowed to move here in the numbers they have done.

That was a link to the EU budget and the UK's contribution to same. Facts. Nothing 'right' or 'wrong' about it: just numbers, against which to consider that €20bn figure for scale.

 

As for the rest, it looks like some home truths need restating yet again, for the n-time:

• the UK never signed sovereignty away (the clearest proof, if any was still needed in 'part 4' of the SF Brexit Megathread, being how it has invoked Article 50 to exit the EU),
  
• the UK (and Maggie particularly) pushed hardest at getting the EU to increase in size (to increase the trading scope and volume in the Single Market and Customs Union with the extra countries), and
  
• it is the democratically-elected UK government which decided not to put any brakes on immigration from Eastern European countries when they acceded to the EU (many other EU Members States did put such brakes on, e.g. France, Spain, the Netherlands <...>)

The fact you consider €20bn is a only drop in the ocean demonstrates what is wrong with EU and the mindset of those who support an organisation ruled by parasites.

The fact that you don't, demonstrates the extent of your lack of knowledge and understanding of EU and UK matters: total.

 

Deliberate ignorance, since you "don't need to educate yourself". Are you feeling proud?

 

EDIT: linked 'brexodus' article for sibon, in further reply to your earlier question. Sums up the situation perfectly.

Edited June 29, 2017 by L00b

[Hairyloon]

Oh dear L00b. Are you trying with the facts and reasoned argument again?

[L00b]

Oh dear L00b. Are you trying with the facts and reasoned argument again?

Fell into that one again, didn't I?

 

Especially when all is effectively said and done: the UK has triggered A50, so is out in 1 year and 9 months' time.

 

The EU are open to negotiations, but the British don't even have to show up, if they don't want to.

 

In that context, if Britain is determined to go for a hard Brexit, then there is little that the rest of the EU can do about it.

 

However, if Britain, in its negotiations for a softer Brexit, continues to be a thorn in the side of the other 27 countries (much as it has been throughout its membership) and promises to be a thorn in the future, then the EU might be minded to grasp the nettle and let Britain out without a deal, and be done with it.

Edited June 29, 2017 by L00b