The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[Lockdoctor]

Make them then - presenting evidence to justify why they are "good" rather than just claiming they are.

Already have done.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2017 at 16:42 ----------

 

Whatever is agreed will be criticised by both politicians, who voted to leave and people who voted to remain. I think Tim Martin would do a better job by having a no deal with the EU and no transition period. A no deal would mean the UK would be free to have zero tariffs on food imported from anywhere in the World. Everyone benefits from cheaper food.

Cheaper food.

[andyofborg]

There are good arguments that the UK would be better off with a no deal with the EU.

 

which ones?

 

i would have thought that the evidence of the last week would have shown that leaving with a no deal would result in a hard border between the republic of ireland and northern ireland

or between the who island of ireland and the mainland uk.

 

no deal means one of those two choices with all the consequences for peace in ireland and the unity of the united kingdom.

 

it also would mean that goods and services flowing between the uk and eu would be subject to the same paperwork requirements as goods and services from other non-eu countries.

 

here's an article about what really happens at the EU/Turkey border

 

https://www.ft.com/content/b4458652-f42d-11e6-8758-6876151821a6

 

not what goes on in the fantasies of brexiters, with no deal this sort of chaos will be visited on our borders. the cross eu supply chains we are part of will collapse with all the consequences.

 

trade deals with other places are a red herring, the quid pro quo for making it easier for us to export to some place is that it's equally as easy for them to export to us. the best we can hope is that every job lost through easier imports is balanced by the jobs created by easier exports.

 

there are specific problems, india wants free movement in exchange for a deal, america is becoming more protectionist and trump will want a deal which favours America.

[I1L2T3]

Already have done.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2017 at 16:42 ----------

 

Cheaper food.

 

Where is the cheaper food going to come from?

[altus]

Already have done

 

 

Cheaper food.

That's one specific thing - and the net benefit of that is debatable. The majority of people in this country don't want chlorine washed chicken, hormone fed beef and other lower food standards to make it cheaper food.

 

Give your evidence why you think the UK would be better off overall with no deal. Cherry picking individual things is a cop out.

[Lockdoctor]

That's one specific thing - and the net benefit of that is debatable. The majority of people in this country don't want chlorine washed chicken, hormone fed beef and other lower food standards to make it cheaper food.

 

Give your evidence why you think the UK would be better off overall with no deal. Cherry picking individual things is a cop out.

I never said the UK would be better off without a deal, but only stated there are good arguments that the UK might be better off without a EU deal. When successful businessmen like Tim Martin think the UK will be better off then it shouldn't be ruled out that a no deal would be bad for the UK. You have no evidence about the wishes of the majority of people have regarding GM produced food. Any GM produced food, would be clearly labelled and the consumer would have a choice like they do now regarding organic food.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2017 at 17:45 ----------

 

Where is the cheaper food going to come from?

The food could come from any where in the World. The Common Agriculture Policy encourages farmers to grow crops or produce the food which gains them the most subsidies, while in other areas in the World farmers produce food which there is a demand for. A no deal would mean the UK could have zero tariffs on food from anywhere in the World.

[I1L2T3]

I never said the UK would be better off without a deal, but only stated there are good arguments that the UK might be better off without a EU deal. When successful businessmen like Tim Martin think the UK will be better off then it shouldn't be ruled out that a no deal would be bad for the UK. You have no evidence about the wishes of the majority of people have regarding GM produced food. Any GM produced food, would be clearly labelled and the consumer would have a choice like they do now regarding organic food.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2017 at 17:45 ----------

 

The food could come from any where in the World. The Common Agriculture Policy encourages farmers to grow crops or produce the food which gains them the most subsidies, while in other areas in the World farmers produce food which there is a demand for. A no deal would mean the UK could have zero tariffs on food from anywhere in the World.

 

But then you have to consider where food would be diverted from and the impact from pollution. Already pointed this out, and others have pointed out the damage to British farms. Not very patriotic are you?

[Guest]

But then you have to consider where food would be diverted from and the impact from pollution. Already pointed this out, and others have pointed out the damage to British farms. Not very patriotic are you?

 

Its laughable that you're on here making a positive case for Common Agricultural policy, which is generally regarded as being an unmitigated disaster. You're like the comical Ali of this thread.

[Car Boot]

There are good arguments that the UK would be better off with a no deal with the EU.

 

The UK should just walk away and not give the greedy unaccountable EU Commissioner's a penny of our money. Money that could be used to fund the NHS. Nothing the EU has done since its creation has been as important and worthwhile as the British NHS. Not one thing.

 

The British government has absolutely NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to pay either a Brexit bill as demanded by the European commission or even to honour payments into the EU budget.

 

In depth analysis by the House of Lords EU financial affairs sub-committee has confirmed this. Only weak politicians who wish to keep us in the EU want to give away our NHS money to the EU bankers.

[apelike]

What were you saying about ifs?

 

Oh yeah..

[I1L2T3]

Its laughable that you're on here making a positive case for Common Agricultural policy, which is generally regarded as being an unmitigated disaster. You're like the comical Ali of this thread.

 

No I’m making a positive case for British farmers. We won’t be in the CAP anyway. Yes they will have to change and adapt over time but flooding the U.K. with cheap food is going to damage farmers, the countryside and rural communities.