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

[RJRB 688]

18 minutes ago, retep said:

Both the EU and the USA have problems with animal welfare standards, just to make it simple for simpletons.

You have grasped a basic truth ,but failed miserably in addressing the issue being debated.

I don’t think that you are a simpleton.You just choose to adopt the school playground method of argument by trying to tilt the subject when you have nothing useful or relevant to say.

[Magilla 510]

36 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

I thought that would be the case. I saw the headline figure and thought "That sounds good" but when it gets broken down it's next to bugger all.

In reality it's much much worse than it seems at first.

 

Those areas will lose far more than that 1.6bn in economic loss from leaving, so it's actually a double whammy. Less for the local economies, less for regeneration.

 

Most agree that even Mays withdrawal deal will shrink the economy by 3->4%, that's a loss of £1.6bn every 10 days!

 

They should put that on the side of a bus!

 

 

24 minutes ago, L00b said:

Again, it's very useful to cast that £1.6bn in its proper (alternative) context:

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/CllrNickSmall/status/1102476445966917633

Indeed, it's so small it's not even an insult... just more smokescreen.

 

For a more local comparison:

https://www.myeu.uk/

 

The money they'll be getting after Brexit.... zilch I'll wager.

 

By any measurable metric, Brexit is an absolute disaster!

Edited March 4, 2019 by Magilla

[retep 68]

56 minutes ago, L00b said:

I find it useful to look at actual, measurable consequences of differences in standards, whether about food production or another topic.

 

Because it allows even simpletons to understand why these differences matter, and why people should privilege provenance, of e.g. food here, from one area over another.

Again, it's very useful to cast that £1.6bn in its proper (alternative) context:

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/CllrNickSmall/status/1102476445966917633

Unfortunately your link doesn't give causation so can be ignored as to import/export standards, if it is then we should stop importing food from the EU.

 

Campylobacter is a bacterium that can cause an illness called campylobacteriosis in humans. With over 190,000 human cases annually, this disease is the most frequently reported food-borne illness in the European Union (EU). However, the actual number of cases is believed to be around nine million each year. The cost of campylobacteriosis to public health systems and to lost productivity in the EU is estimated by EFSA to be around EUR 2.4 billion a year.

https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/campylobacter

 

 

Edited March 4, 2019 by retep

[L00b 441]

37 minutes ago, retep said:

Unfortunately your link doesn't give causation so can be ignored as to import/export standards, if it is then we should stop importing food from the EU.

 

Campylobacter is a bacterium that can cause an illness called campylobacteriosis in humans. With over 190,000 human cases annually, this disease is the most frequently reported food-borne illness in the European Union (EU). However, the actual number of cases is believed to be around nine million each year. The cost of campylobacteriosis to public health systems and to lost productivity in the EU is estimated by EFSA to be around EUR 2.4 billion a year.

https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/campylobacter

 

 

You claim that my link should be ignored, because it doesn't give causation (in food illness statistics? really?)...

 

...yet you proceed to try and counter it with your own, which  then validates my point:

 

Campylobacter infection rate in US: 6% and reported rising.

 

Campylobacter infection rate in UK (therefore incl. imported EU food): 0.01% and reported falling.

 

<sigh>

 

None so blind than those who refuse to see. Plus ça change.

Edited March 4, 2019 by L00b

[retep 68]

3 minutes ago, L00b said:

You claim that my link should be ignored, because it doesn't give causation (in food illness statistics? really?)...

 

...yet you proceed to try and counter it with your own, which  then validates my point:

 

Campylobacter infection rate in US: 6% and reported rising.

 

Campylobacter infection rate in UK (therefore incl. imported EU food): 0.01% and reported falling.

 

<sigh>

 

None so blind than those who refuse to see. Plus ça change.

It doesn't give causation as to food Imported,

"Fresh analysis by Sustain published today flags food safety fears for future UK trade deals.Figures suggest that the percentage of people who fall ill with food poisoning annually is ten times higher in the US than the UK"

Perhaps the USA should stop importing food from the EU according to your thinking.

[RJRB 688]

Retep.

Should you ever finish up in the dock on a trumped up charge I would advise that you invest in a competent brief.

Any attempt to conduct your own defence could have dire consequences.

[L00b 441]

2 hours ago, retep said:

It doesn't give causation as to food Imported,

"Fresh analysis by Sustain published today flags food safety fears for future UK trade deals.Figures suggest that the percentage of people who fall ill with food poisoning annually is ten times higher in the US than the UK"

Perhaps the USA should stop importing food from the EU according to your thinking.

Well, the premise at hand is the UK importing food from the US rather than, or in addition to, from the EU. I really did not think that needed restating, considering the past 5 pages or so of the thread.

 

And your thinking is quite clearly wrong, given those comparative stats: it's very much in the health interests of US consumers to start importing food from the EU rather than eat their own (or, well, at any rate to pressure the US government and agrifood sector to adopt more EU-like farming standards).

 

But then, that was never going to happen under any of the past umpteen US presidents, and never less so than now under Trump: a 2 minutes Googling will tell you how the US agrifood sector has maintained a tariffing stranglehold on US food imports for decades and longer. Same with steel, cars, etc.

 

They're looking to make more of, and sell, their sub-EU standards stuff to you, as a 'new' market freshly liberated from the SM standards (the US already enjoys tariff-free access to the EU for some of its  non-hormone beef, i.e. SM standards-compliant beef). Not to deal on a reciprocal basis.

Edited March 4, 2019 by L00b

[Magilla 510]

1 hour ago, L00b said:

You claim that my link should be ignored, because it doesn't give causation (in food illness statistics? really?)...

 

...yet you proceed to try and counter it with your own, which  then validates my point:

Does seem to happen a lot to retep and leavers in general

 

1 hour ago, RJRB said:

Should you ever finish up in the dock on a trumped up charge I would advise that you invest in a competent brief.

Any attempt to conduct your own defence could have dire consequences.

LOL, so true!

Edited March 4, 2019 by Magilla

[retep 68]

4 hours ago, L00b said:

Well, the premise at hand is the UK importing food from the US rather than, or in addition to, from the EU. I really did not think that needed restating, considering the past 5 pages or so of the thread.

 

And your thinking is quite clearly wrong, given those comparative stats: it's very much in the health interests of US consumers to start importing food from the EU rather than eat their own (or, well, at any rate to pressure the US government and agrifood sector to adopt more EU-like farming standards).

 

But then, that was never going to happen under any of the past umpteen US presidents, and never less so than now under Trump: a 2 minutes Googling will tell you how the US agrifood sector has maintained a tariffing stranglehold on US food imports for decades and longer. Same with steel, cars, etc.

 

They're looking to make more of, and sell, their sub-EU standards stuff to you, as a 'new' market freshly liberated from the SM standards (the US already enjoys tariff-free access to the EU for some of its  non-hormone beef, i.e. SM standards-compliant beef). Not to deal on a reciprocal basis.

Looking at the food from the EU, the UK wouldn't be worse off importing from the US.

[melthebell 863]

Interesting video about farming and Ireland

 

[Magilla 510]

9 minutes ago, retep said:

Looking at the food from the EU, the UK wouldn't be worse off importing from the US.

Self evidently nonsense.

[I1L2T3 10]

23 minutes ago, retep said:

Looking at the food from the EU, the UK wouldn't be worse off importing from the US.

You have got to be kidding?