The Consequences of Brexit [Part 6] READ FIRST POST BEFORE COMMENTING

[L00b 441]

16 hours ago, woodview said:

True, but services will be encompassed in an fta too.

I think you know you are being naughty with that headline stat.  80% services is a very high proportion of haidressers, joiners, cafes, etc not great exporters.

The truth is we exported about £150bn in goods and £100bn in services. So, services are very important, but not 80% of export trade, more like 40% (as you probably knew)

Not the services we export, is the point. The bulk of which is, by and large, financial and legal.

 

And no, I wasn't naughty with the headline stat: where do you think the money ultimately comes from, to purchase proximity services like hair do's, kitchen fitting and lattes?

 

Private sector economic activity, directly for private sector workers competing in private sector markets, indirectly for everyone else, from teachers to nurses and State pensioners, and every other economic actor dependent on No.11's stipend one way or another after however many intermediaries (that includes e.g. private sector workers active in public sector markets).

 

I think hairdressers and baristas in Sunderland and Dagenham might want a word about your point, before long.

Edited February 15, 2019 by L00b

[L00b 441]

13 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

You've lost me. If I vote for what? Do you mean if there is a second referendum?

If you were voting to reconfirm Brexit, since you've claimed that you would do so even if there was a cost, and also claimed that your children (not of voting age) would agree with your vote (whence I asked you whether you would consult with them beforehand, and whether you would let their views influence your vote, given that you'd be saddling them with that cost).

[I1L2T3 10]

57 minutes ago, L00b said:

You're missing the "according to the UK's constitutional requirements" bit.

 

Pursuant to which, and the Gina Miller decision, Parliament has to do it.

 

MPs can't even agree on which day of the week it is, never mind what is an acceptable form of Brexit (as seen again last night, with their voting against what they supported 2 weeks ago!), so the chances of a majority of MPs voting to cancel Brexit within the next month are vanishingly slim.

Bare shelves in shops, forecourts out of fuel, brown outs. To begin with, from early April 2019. Then worse, as people vent their anger at their situation. In no particular order, at immigrants, anyone wealthier than them, figures and services of authority, governmental organisations.

Vehicle fuel is going to be one of the first things that increases in price in a no deal scenario. 

 

5 of the top 10 import origins for petroleum products are in the EU/EEA. Surprisingly (although not for those who know how this works) Netherlands is top.

Edited February 15, 2019 by I1L2T3

[woodview 10]

43 minutes ago, L00b said:

Not the services we export, is the point. The bulk of which is, by and large, financial and legal.

 

And no, I wasn't naughty with the headline stat: where do you think the money ultimately comes from, to purchase proximity services like hair do's, kitchen fitting and lattes?

 

 

Well, in my opinion, posting the 80% figure in the context you did was to give a skewed view of reality, for the sole aim of winning the argument by any means.

I'm honest enough to say service exports are hugely important and need addressing in agreements going forward.

It's a pity the last two years weren't spent more productively, rather than used up by people peddling agendas.

[L00b 441]

43 minutes ago, woodview said:

Well, in my opinion, posting the 80% figure in the context you did was to give a skewed view of reality, for the sole aim of winning the argument by any means.

I'm honest enough to say service exports are hugely important and need addressing in agreements going forward.

It's a pity the last two years weren't spent more productively, rather than used up by people peddling agendas.

The aim was absolutely not to 'win' an argument 'by any means' (because that's long been futile anyway), but to cast the point of debate in its proper context.

 

The UK is a modern, service-led knowledge economy, as highly interconnected within itself and globally as they come, with much of that modern interconnectedness brought about by the economico-legal framework of its EU membership, so much at home as across the EU+EEA under harmonised trade-related rules, and beyond under EU FTAs and assorted other bilateral agreements with third countries.

 

This is exactly why a no deal Brexit would have the (economically-)catastrophic consequences predicted by so many legal and industry experts the world over: your service-led economy is long-modelled on and by your decades of EU membership, it is absolutely not ready to transition to an alternative -any alternative- in a month's time, never mind one as fundamentally different and disconnected from the EU framework, as a third country.

 

Your honesty is very welcomed, and I try to be more civil myself, but for the sake of clarity: I've been past peddling a (remain) agenda since Theresa May triggerred Article 50 back in March'17, because that is precisely when the UK snookered itself into making Brexit (of any shape or form) a foregone conclusion.

 

Since before then, all I've consistently done on here, was to correct misunderstandings about the EU and the UK in it; counter Leave dog whistles, rethoric and misrepresentations; and generally, inform factually. With the odd bit of Schadenfreude since March'17, to be sure. Naturally, facts and logic have this habit of jarring cognitive dissonance a bit. Hey-ho.

 

The basic point was always, that believing into whatever better future the UK could make for itself post-Brexit, isn't going to fix what's wrong socio-economically in the UK, nor put food on UK tables, nor keep roofs over UK heads. You've got to have a plan to begin with, that you can follow and amend as needed on the go. Brexit shouldn't be the start of it, but only one of the later stages after achieving preparedness. 

 

The fact is, aside from opportunistic hit-and-run profiteering by Leave-pushing promoters (you might want to check out how Crispey has positioned himself lately), there never was a plan, and there still isn't.

 

And you're out in a month and a bit.

 

And through your politicians and media words and actions over the past 2 years, the EU27 are now completely out of ***** to give about what happens to you. They might re-stock, if your political class comes its senses. Now or after Brexit day, that's up to you as a nation. Waiting until after Brexit day is not advisable, note.

Edited February 15, 2019 by L00b

[hobinfoot 25]

I've said it before and will say it again why can't a trade deal be made that is mutually acceptable ? Die Welt have said that some German regions will be badly damaged by a no deal brexit has will we. When it comes to singing a trade deal do a tariff free one. No one wins by cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

[tinfoilhat 11]

8 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

I've said it before and will say it again why can't a trade deal be made that is mutually acceptable ? Die Welt have said that some German regions will be badly damaged by a no deal brexit has will we. When it comes to singing a trade deal do a tariff free one. No one wins by cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

Because what we want involves unicorns. The EU have a set if rules in place - we helped design them if you recall - the EU won't brake them just because we have decided we won't play anymore. Besides, it's the Irish backstop that is really our problem, not theirs. 

[L00b 441]

18 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

I've said it before and will say it again why can't a trade deal be made that is mutually acceptable ? Die Welt have said that some German regions will be badly damaged by a no deal brexit has will we. When it comes to singing a trade deal do a tariff free one. No one wins by cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

I've said it before and will say it again, you've got a trade deal that is mutually acceptable, it's the withdrawal agreement.

 

The potential to affect German regions is regrettable, and they won't be the only areas of the EU27 negatively impacted, but this is still small beer relative to the integrity of the Single Market, which a better deal for the UK (in view of Theresa's unchanged red lines) would jeopardise. 

 

The Germans, Ireland, France, the Dutch (etc.) have all understood this well (moreover said it loud and clear, consistently for the last 2 years), that's exactly why the Germans (car manufacturers and others) are not leaning on Barnier, Ireland nor the rest of Europe like Brexiteers believed they would. Bad miscalculation by Leavers, there, but unsurprising on the part of those who don't understand the EU.

 

And that hardship in some German regions (and in Ireland too, certainly) will be nothing compared to the hardship across the UK.

 

If you want a better deal that is still mutually acceptable, you've got to drop some of your red lines. The more you drop, the better the deal. Simples.

 

May, her ministers, and every last MP knows this well, and have known for a long time. But it's political kryptonite. So you'll end up leaving without a deal.

Edited February 15, 2019 by L00b

[I1L2T3 10]

19 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

I've said it before and will say it again why can't a trade deal be made that is mutually acceptable ? Die Welt have said that some German regions will be badly damaged by a no deal brexit has will we. When it comes to singing a trade deal do a tariff free one. No one wins by cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

It can be mutually beneficial to a degree, but you have to realise in a U.K.-EU trade deal we are the junior partner. 

 

The EU economy is 5 or 6 times bigger

 

It is always going to be this way for junior partners in trade deals. They get squeezed until the pips squeak

10 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Because what we want involves unicorns. The EU have a set if rules in place - we helped design them if you recall - the EU won't brake them just because we have decided we won't play anymore. Besides, it's the Irish backstop that is really our problem, not theirs. 

The reason the backstop is there is to prevent the U.K. creating a border situation that destabilises Ireland and therefore part of the EU. 

 

Weve seen that the ERG are willing to play fast and loose with the Irish border. The EU has to protect its members from their actions.

[Magilla 510]

29 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

I've said it before and will say it again why can't a trade deal be made that is mutually acceptable ?

For all the reasons that have already been clearly explained to you the last time you asked, and the time before that, and the time before that !

 

29 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

No one wins by cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

No-one wins, everyone loses. Brexit in a nutshell.

 

Brexit *is* the UK cutting off it's nose to spite it's face!

 

 

 

Edited February 15, 2019 by Magilla

[Delayed 461]

37 minutes ago, hobinfoot said:

I've said it before and will say it again why can't a trade deal be made that is mutually acceptable ? Die Welt have said that some German regions will be badly damaged by a no deal brexit has will we. When it comes to singing a trade deal do a tariff free one. No one wins by cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

We are being made an example of.  If we agree a deal, it will be a terrible one put together with the sole intention of putting off other countries from even thinking of leaving.

[hobinfoot 25]

4 minutes ago, Magilla said:

No-one wins, everyone loses. Brexit in a nutshell.

 

Brexit *is* the UK cutting off it's nose to spite it's face!

 

 

 

I agree with you about no one wins. But I think it's not unreasonable for us to trade without tariffs if we do it will reduce the damage.