Meat Wad

Brexit, WTF

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

The #1 reason to remain in the EU is that it is a massive free trade zone.  If you set up a small factory in UK or launch your own online store, you have a market of 512 million people vs a market of 60 million. The economic benefits are staggeringly obvious, There is a reason why USA businesses are so successful- they start with a massive home market..

The reasons to leave the EU are:

#1 Bureaucracy.   A  truly common market, the so-called single European market, requires common standards so that businesses can compete on a level playing field. Just as the FDA in the US sets federal standards for the manufacture of medical drugs.....it would be unfair if a Turkish bucket shop could sell cheaply manufactured sub-standard drugs in the UK while the  British company incurs the costs of clean rooms and high standards etc.  European free trade required establishing European wide common standards,  required a European bureaucracy in Brussels ....and Brits hate bureaucrats!   To be fair to the Brits,  the bureaucrats are not subject to the same level of democratic control in the EU as they are elsewhere 

#2 Immigration. In addition to the free movement of goods, the EU adopted the free movement of labour. The UK was a HUGE beneficiary of this policy to the detriment of their neighbors because the brightest and best wanted to live in London. The EU led to a renaissance of London as a financial and commercial capital in the world.  The refugee issues then diminished the UK's enthusiasm for the free movement of labor.  Its a bloody silly reason to quit the free trade zone (other ways to fix the issue) but the "leavers" played on people's fears. 

The idea is great but in many cases it has meant that countries with high standards (prior to the EU) have had to lower theirs to be on par with EU standards in order to adhere to EU fair trade laws.

Nobody likes bureaucrats - especially when they cannot be booted by the voters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Christian said:

Nobody likes bureaucrats - especially when they cannot be booted by the voters.

The best bureaucrats are the one that can not be booted by politicians on a whim. But we are never going to like them, till you need them.

 

3 hours ago, Christian said:

The idea is great but in many cases it has meant that countries with high standards (prior to the EU) have had to lower theirs to be on par with EU standards in order to adhere to EU fair trade laws.

Many ? I would thought the EU standards are quit high, I would have thought most countries (even in the EU) had to step up the quality in order to trade.
So looked up if I got the definition of many wrong; nope; many, much, little, few, https://www.englisch-hilfen.de/en/grammar/much_many.htm
Can not find any examples in an hour, but found some nice articles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack;
2d referendum, looks possible, Deputy holds secret talks behind May’s back
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/theresa-mays-team-plots-new-eu-referendum-cl5xrwh52

So  there is either a 2ref and postponement, or a hard brexit.
Commons will not supports May's deal, can ask for 2 ref, May can refuse ref as it is a government decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, LeoV said:

The best bureaucrats are the one that can not be booted by politicians on a whim. 

The world's idea of the typical English civil servant was probably moulded by this satirical television series made between 1980 and 1988. This episode maybe even an insight into the public's view of the EU.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the UK system is the same as the EU, lots of power with bureaucrats you can not boot, I believe the Yanks to it differently, they replace after an election a bundle of bureaucrats, loosing potentially lot of expertise. But easier to change course of a department.

It comes too, do the bureaucracy works for the common good, or for the politicians. Your pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LeoV said:

Jack;
2d referendum, looks possible, Deputy holds secret talks behind May’s back
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/theresa-mays-team-plots-new-eu-referendum-cl5xrwh52

So  there is either a 2ref and postponement, or a hard brexit.
Commons will not supports May's deal, can ask for 2 ref, May can refuse ref as it is a government decision.

it will need to be the best of 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit will weaken the UK position towards maintaining control over the Rock. Spaniards in this new scenario will increase pressure within the UE to push for seriuos negotiations to finally get Gibraltar back away from the brits once and for all (UN resolutions backs the illegality of this OCUPATION).

I must admit I fail to see the benefits of this brexit nonsense, but well, If that is what the brits want, so be it...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

"We can buy cheap from anywhere in the world".....is straight out of the Rees Mogg Brexit Handbook of 9 words.

At its optimistic best that might apply to products that don't meet EU standards. However the UK would first have change its meat standards to accept things like hormone-treated beef and burnt goat heads.

However pounds to peanuts I bet the Govt Dept whose responsiblity this falls under has has already stated they will not lower food, animal welfare or environmental standards as part of any trade agreement with another nation.

The UK currently imports around 35 per cent of the beef it consumes or around 250,000 tonnes annually.

The dominant beef supplier to the UK has always been Ireland, with a market share of almost 70 per cent. No other country accounts for more than eight per cent of 
UK imports. The EU supplies over 90 per cent of imports, with no single non-EU country supplying more than three per cent of the total. Around three-quarters of imports are fresh/chilled the remaining 25% frozen noting meet has to be processed within 6 days of slaughter. This has the effect of reducing supply options. The graph below shows the source of EU beef imports and needs to be accounted for when considering World Trade Organisation and Tarriff impacts.

To put quantity into perspective Australia supplies over 220,00 tonnes or 25% of the US's beef imports. This 220,00 tonne is around 90% of the UK's total imports. The EU beef and veal imports totalled 204,000 tonnes, which is less than Australia's 220,000 tonne market in the US and around 80% of the UK's total imports. Note EU tarriffs are around 12% however of this 204,000 tonne to the EU around 118,000 tonne is of high quality done on a quota basis to access the EU market at reduced or zero tariff.

So essentialy without Ireland the UK would be stuffed overnight and as a replacement do you really think with the above in mind that say Australia would be falling over themselves to provide the UK with cheap beef under some free trade agreement? That is putting aside it has already said it will not enter into in isolation to the EU and the WTO tarriff structures.

As for cheaper pricing the British Beef Processors Ass has warned to the contry where for instance a No Brexit Deal could increase prices by 40%.

Also forgotten withbany attempt to lower tariffs and or attract lower price imports is the devastating effect that would have on British beef producers who will not be able to compete on price. Those producers supply 65% of the UK's beef consumption and where exports mainly to EU countries comprises only around 15% of production.

Sources

https://projectblue.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/Market Insight/BeefandLamb_bitesize (1).pdf

http://beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk/market-intelligence-news/eu-beef-imports/

https://www.globalmeatnews.com/Article/2018/08/17/Post-Brexit-price-rise-warning

IMG_20181216_155221.jpg

images (7).png

So youre saying ireland will charge 40% more for beef in a hard brexit? Or the UK with put tariffs on beef?

The Eu will ban Irelend from selling to the UK?

You havent explained why the price will go up.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LeoV said:

Jack;
2d referendum, looks possible, Deputy holds secret talks behind May’s back

Must be to keep her hands clean. No one could be that stupid to start running their own playbook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Repeating referenda are not fundamentally different from legislatures revisiting issues over time. Relevant facts change and opinions change and the electorate changes over time. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sailabout said:

it will need to be the best of 3

There have already been two, so this would be the tie breaker :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Mambo Kings said:

There have already been two, so this would be the tie breaker :mellow:

I must have missed voting in the second one :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mad said:

I must have missed voting in the second one :huh:

The second one was in 2016......you had to be hiding under a rock to miss it.

The UK joined the EU on January 1st 1973.

Then had its first wobble two years later, and the first referendum was held on June 5 1975 to decide whether to stay or leave. It was incidentally the first referendum in the history of the UK.  

17 million voted Yes to stay 8 million voted No to leave. 67% win for remain

The second referendum was on June 23 2016 .  51.9% voted to leave.

 

So after two referendums, it is one all and going into extra time :).

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some may have already seen this somewhere else but I thought it worth sharing again:

Quote

 

The thing is, the best way to understand Theresa May’s predicament is to imagine that 52 percent of Britain had voted that the government should build a submarine out of cheese.

Now, Theresa May was initially against building a submarine out of cheese, obviously. Because it’s a completely insane thing to do.

However, in order to become PM, she had to pretend that she thought building a submarine out of cheese was fine and could totally work. "Cheese means cheese," she told us all, madly. Then she actually built one.

It’s shit. Of course it is. For God’s sake, are you stupid? It’s a submarine built out of cheese.

So now, having built a shit cheese submarine, she has to put up with both Labour and Tory Brexiters insisting that a less shit cheese submarine could have been built.  They’re all lying, and they know it. So does everybody else. We've covered this already, I know, but it’s cheese and it’s a submarine. How good could it possibly be?

Only she can’t call them out on this. Because she has spent the past two years also lying, by pretending she really could build a decent submarine out of cheese.

So that’s where we are.

 

Reply:

Quote

Not strictly correct

If we had voted for a submarine and got one, there would be no problem.

I don't  think the british public voted for a cheese submarine at all, of that 52% that voted for a cheesy structure, some wanted an aeroplane, some thought a bus would be better, and the rest think that they voted for a ship.

The Government has gone to the EU and negotiated a Submarine, as a compromise, hence the problem. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mambo Kings said:

The second one was in 2016......you had to be hiding under a rock to miss it.

The UK joined the EU on January 1st 1973.

Then had its first wobble two years later, and the first referendum was held on June 5 1975 to decide whether to stay or leave. It was incidentally the first referendum in the history of the UK.  

17 million voted Yes to stay 8 million voted No to leave. 67% win for remain

The second referendum was on June 23 2016 .  51.9% voted to leave.

 

So after two referendums, it is one all and going into extra time :).

 

 

 

Good point. My apologies. I had forgotten  

But I’m too young to have been around and remembered for that one. I’ve only ever grown up as part of Europe. 

Maybe we should all just vote back in in 5 years time when it all turns to shit? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LeoV said:

The best bureaucrats are the one that can not be booted by politicians on a whim. But we are never going to like them, till you need them.

 

Many ? I would thought the EU standards are quit high, I would have thought most countries (even in the EU) had to step up the quality in order to trade.
So looked up if I got the definition of many wrong; nope; many, much, little, few, https://www.englisch-hilfen.de/en/grammar/much_many.htm
Can not find any examples in an hour, but found some nice articles.

If you really want to find a bunch of examples (sorry I'm not going to dig up the data for you) look at food safety, worker safety (especially tools, equipment, etc) from the Scandinavian countries that they had to lower to cater to much lesser standards - especially southern Europe guiding soem of the EU regulations on those issues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Christian said:

If you really want to find a bunch of examples (sorry I'm not going to dig up the data for you) look at food safety, worker safety (especially tools, equipment, etc) from the Scandinavian countries that they had to lower to cater to much lesser standards - especially southern Europe guiding soem of the EU regulations on those issues

How is it then that the UK health and safety laws getting to the point of completely ridiculous overkill?

I definitely haven’t heard much about the Scandinavians lowering theirs. Unless of course you mean the Norwegians sinking a frigate:lol:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at it most H&S legislation is eminently sensible.  It just gets blamed by jobsworths as a reason for inactivity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, mad said:

...

Maybe we should all just vote back in in 5 years time when it all turns to shit? 

While you can unilaterally revoke notice under article 50 up until the date the notice of withdrawal takes effect. After that you can’t simple hold a referendum to get back in. You have to apply / negotiate entry.

When the UK first joined it had to accept existing conditions / terms that some disagreed with (fisheries and CAP) but those where the terms of admission.

Since joining, the UK has generally been a moderating influence on activist government direction of the economy and bureaucratic overreach. Imagine what Brussels can cook up over the next five years without that moderating influence. That and more is what you’d have to accept in rejoining...which would probably still be better than going it alone.

As a concerned but relatively unaffected outsider it seems to me the UK is on the path to the worst options. Either a hard Brexit, WTO trade terms and much disruption. Or with an indeterminate backstop the UK is basically in the Norway camp (without Norway’s reasons), that is you get stuck with most of the EU rules and costs but have no say in determining them. If you don’t like EU rules while you had a role in shaping them you really won’t like them when you have no influence.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Christian said:

If you really want to find a bunch of examples (sorry I'm not going to dig up the data for you) look at food safety, worker safety (especially tools, equipment, etc) from the Scandinavian countries that they had to lower to cater to much lesser standards - especially southern Europe guiding soem of the EU regulations on those issues

Without any idea what you are talking about it is hard to find.
I did not know that EU rules define their standards with an upper limit, thought about it as a minimal requirement.
Or do you mean that they had to use less quality products due to being competitive priced ?

There are cases were parts of a machine you make can not be used as it has no EU approval, like fuses from China.
But that will not change after Brexit, as UK has to set up their own controls on lousy products, or copy the US or EU standards.
 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Whinging Pom said:

When you look at it most H&S legislation is eminently sensible.  It just gets blamed by jobsworths as a reason for inactivity. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ridiculous-health-and-safety-bans-challenged-2342895.html

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg455.htm

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Health and Safety in Sweden is a good example of how European standards are turned into regulation.

Each country has its own regulatory authority responsible for passing and implementing Health and Safety regulations  in their own nation.  Each national regulatory authority liaises closely with the European Agency for Safety and Health and Work (ASHW)which reports on the the Health and Safety standards in each country but does not implement any regulations in any EU member country.

Each country also has a representative on

(1) The Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH). This is a tripartite committee which assists the European Commission by preparing, implementing and evaluating all occupational health and safety activities.

(2) Senior Labour Inspectors’ Committee (SLIC), which advises the European Commission and comprises senior officials from the Member States’ occupational health and safety authorities or their equivalent.

Based on the input from these 2 committees, and reports from ASHW the Commission can recommend new Health and Safety regulations.

The recommendations then go the (1) The European Parliament  (democratically elected - kinda like house of representatives) and (2) The European Council (1 member per nation - kinda like the senate)   .

If both representative bodies approve the recommended regulation by a majority then the recommended regulations do not become law  but the terms of the treaty require that the nation states pass the necessary laws in their own countries to make them law unless their is a valid exception (and there are various loopholes for exceptions where a nation feels they are being unfairly treated...which might involve going to the council of ministers )  If they both reject the recommendation, it is declined. If one body approves and the other declines then the regulation is passed on to a "Conciliation Committee" . The Concilliation Committee is composed of the Council members plus an equal number of MEPs who seek to agree a common position. Once a position is agreed, it has to be approved by Parliament again by an absolute majority.

If this all sounds incredible bureaucratic and cumbersome; it is......and that is because the member states insist on all of these checks and balances ...in order to prevent regulations being imposed without both European and National review.

So back to Scandanavia:. The Swedish Work Environment Authority is the regulatory body in Sweden responsible for passing and implementing Health and safety Regulations in Sweden to comply with The Swedish Work Environment Act.

They are the contact point with European Agency for Safety and Health and Work and  represent the Swedish government on the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH). and the Senior Labour Inspectors’ Committee (SLIC),

What actually happens in practice is that where possible, the lagging nations are brought up to the standard of the leading nations. If it is impractical for the lagging nation to immediately reach the same standard, then they will be given some form of exemption, or the European standard may be set slightly lower than the std in , say Sweden , BUT Sweden will not be required to amend its laws to a lower standard. I am not aware of a single health and safety std in Sweden that has been lowered but perhaps someone can point to an example...there may be an example, but the Swedees themselves may have wanted to reduce some of their formerly overburdensome regulations.  Sweden in the 1980s was infamously difficult place to do business due to over regulation and have deliberately tried to be more business friendly in the last 20+ years. However Safety at work is something they still take incredibly seriously. Good thing too.

 

Hope this helps UK voters decide what to do with the cheese submarine!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think that leaving the EU is absolutely daft.

The UK did a brilliant deal by negotiating to keep their own currency which gives them a high degree of independance for economic policy. The UK has the freedom to set its own taxes, income tax, corporate tax and sales tax (aka VAT) thus complete control of fiscal policy. They have their own central bank (The Bank of England instead of the ECB) so can set their own monetary policy.

The primary issues of the voters seems to be immigration. So? Demand to sit down with the council of ministers and agree on a treaty revision to provide some additional immigratioon standards.   To ditch the EU free trade zone and paddle vainly out to sea hoping to be rescued by a cheese submarine because you dont like some of the effects of immigration seems really stupid to this observer (who happens to be British).

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the third vote is no more undemocratic than the second vote. And the fourth...

How many times did Liz Taylor marry and divorce...Richard Burton?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NaptimeAgain said:

So the third vote is no more undemocratic than the second vote. And the fourth...

How many times did Liz Taylor marry and divorce...Richard Burton?

After her on again off again marriage to Richard Burton, her last husband was a construction worker that she met at an alcohol rehab center.

Is that's what in store for the UK?   A free trade zone treaty with Mozambique having met at an IMF debt rehabilitation conference???

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2018 at 1:59 PM, LeoV said:

Because I did some research after your claims, and they turned up all to be different then you claim. So do not expect anything difference. https://www.ft.com/content/32cd1e87-c7d1-3026-86fc-bce5229711d1

You believe the EU will dissolve, the Euro will crash, and you want out. Fair enough.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/speech-141114.pdf

..the ECJ is a large and growing problem for the UK with its common law system. The Germans constitutional court has already made not so veiled threats at the ECJ.

 

What do you think about Juncker's common about budget deficits that France be pursued like Italy "because it is France"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeoV said:

Without any idea what you are talking about it is hard to find.
I did not know that EU rules define their standards with an upper limit, thought about it as a minimal requirement.
Or do you mean that they had to use less quality products due to being competitive priced ?

There are cases were parts of a machine you make can not be used as it has no EU approval, like fuses from China.
But that will not change after Brexit, as UK has to set up their own controls on lousy products, or copy the US or EU standards.
 

That is actually a concern voiced here already. They may just start to drop standards on a few things if it becomes a big border issue or longer term. 

Same has been said of pay and work conditions. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe any kind of brexit is going to be a problem but a crash out in March will be a catastrophe.

I think the UK is worried about crashing out the the EU is pretty blase about the consequences. The financial consequences of derivative  problems will be devastating if the EU does not recognize the continuity of contracts past the end of March. NASDAQ Clearing AB in Sweden almost failed in September - no EU-UK derivative continuity agreement threatens both LCH and Euroclear.

The EU traded goods surplus with the UK makes many companies (BMW? Mercedes?) especially vulnerable to trade problems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NaptimeAgain said:

So the third vote is no more undemocratic than the second vote. And the fourth...

How many times did Liz Taylor marry and divorce...Richard Burton?

Isn’t this exactly why we have elections?  It allows the public to change its mind when they see the government are fucking it up? 

Unfortunately, we seem stuck with these idiots until just after too late on this occasion, saying that, fucks knows who you’d vote for instead at the moment. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mambo Kings said:

After her on again off again marriage to Richard Burton, her last husband was a construction worker that she met at an alcohol rehab center.

Is that's what in store for the UK?   A free trade zone treaty with Mozambique having met at an IMF debt rehabilitation conference???

 

 

That’s fucking funny. :lol:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

..the ECJ is a large and growing problem for the UK with its common law system.

Without underwriting the EJC the UK can not participate in many EU institutions as the EURATOM,  one field the UK makes money on.

The  common law of the UK is not that different to the constitutional law. If you hate all things Europe you will hate the EJC. As if the EJC make barbaric rules.
https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2014/01/23/reflections-on-the-hs2-case-a-hierarchy-of-domestic-constitutional-norms-and-the-qualified-primacy-of-eu-law/

The United Kingdom has no written constitution, but we have a number of constitutional instruments. They include Magna Carta, the Petition of Right 1628, the Bill of Rights and (in Scotland) the Claim of Rights Act 1689, the Act of Settlement 1701 and the Act of Union 1707. The European Communities Act 1972, the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 may now be added to this list. The common law itself also recognises certain principles as fundamental to the rule of law. It is, putting the point at its lowest, certainly arguable (and it is for United Kingdom law and courts to determine) that there may be fundamental principles, whether contained in other constitutional instruments or recognised at common law, of which Parliament when it enacted the European Communities Act 1972 did not either contemplate or authorise the abrogation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mad said:

How is it then that the UK health and safety laws getting to the point of completely ridiculous overkill?

I definitely haven’t heard much about the Scandinavians lowering theirs. Unless of course you mean the Norwegians sinking a frigate:lol:  

It isn't Europe H&S laws are not as stringent in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

Personally I think that leaving the EU is absolutely daft.

The UK did a brilliant deal by negotiating to keep their own currency which gives them a high degree of independance for economic policy. The UK has the freedom to set its own taxes, income tax, corporate tax and sales tax (aka VAT) thus complete control of fiscal policy. They have their own central bank (The Bank of England instead of the ECB) so can set their own monetary policy.

The primary issues of the voters seems to be immigration. So? Demand to sit down with the council of ministers and agree on a treaty revision to provide some additional immigratioon standards.   To ditch the EU free trade zone and paddle vainly out to sea hoping to be rescued by a cheese submarine because you dont like some of the effects of immigration seems really stupid to this observer (who happens to be British).

 

Yes, seen for the continent it is mad. To some extent the UK was in a "cake and eat it situation" and they are just loosing their privileged situation because they decided to throw the toys out of the pram. Mind boggling....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

It isn't Europe H&S laws are not as stringent in France.

Exactly my point, it’s another excuse used by the pro Brexit campaign. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Ring these people, they probably have lots of patience.

https://www.globalmeatnews.com/Article/2018/08/17/Post-Brexit-price-rise-warning

BS news, if meat comes from Ireland today, why will it need to get a different form of checking after brexit?
All the fake news makes it sound like the UK will put tariffs on everything they import DOH, why cant it just be a tariff free zone like lots of countries?

If the Eu interfere maybe Australia will divert some of their million tons of exports over there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LeoV said:

Without any idea what you are talking about it is hard to find.
I did not know that EU rules define their standards with an upper limit, thought about it as a minimal requirement.
Or do you mean that they had to use less quality products due to being competitive priced ?

There are cases were parts of a machine you make can not be used as it has no EU approval, like fuses from China.
But that will not change after Brexit, as UK has to set up their own controls on lousy products, or copy the US or EU standards.
 

Bingo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

Personally I think that leaving the EU is absolutely daft.

The UK did a brilliant deal by negotiating to keep their own currency which gives them a high degree of independance for economic policy. The UK has the freedom to set its own taxes, income tax, corporate tax and sales tax (aka VAT) thus complete control of fiscal policy. They have their own central bank (The Bank of England instead of the ECB) so can set their own monetary policy.

The primary issues of the voters seems to be immigration. So? Demand to sit down with the council of ministers and agree on a treaty revision to provide some additional immigratioon standards.   To ditch the EU free trade zone and paddle vainly out to sea hoping to be rescued by a cheese submarine because you dont like some of the effects of immigration seems really stupid to this observer (who happens to be British).

 

immigration and the stupid EU courts overruling UK courts so when a terrorist arrives and need to go, their human rights are infringed so the UK tax payer sucks it up.

Be like Obama, he deported 2 million

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Expatriated said:

I believe any kind of brexit is going to be a problem but a crash out in March will be a catastrophe.

I think the UK is worried about crashing out the the EU is pretty blase about the consequences. The financial consequences of derivative  problems will be devastating if the EU does not recognize the continuity of contracts past the end of March. NASDAQ Clearing AB in Sweden almost failed in September - no EU-UK derivative continuity agreement threatens both LCH and Euroclear.

The EU traded goods surplus with the UK makes many companies (BMW? Mercedes?) especially vulnerable to trade problems. 

yes they after crashing out they have some negotiating power, lots more dodgy money might start pouring in. The rest of the world doesnt trust the rest of the EU with their money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

All the fake news makes it sound like the UK will put tariffs on everything they import DOH, why cant it just be a tariff free zone like lots of countries?

I'm now starting to see a connection.

images (90).jpeg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU such a successful model Trump is going to create a new Washington ( actually 2 so they move with the summer weather) and have rules that will govern Canada and Mexico, then they will have to pay to get free trade to run the organization who wont have a budget they can ever explain.

Then they will have one currency to help prevent any of them going bankrupt, or delay it...

I wonder if the EU will charge a license fee?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

I'm now starting to see a connection.

images (90).jpeg

Get yourself a subscription Jack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This gets entertaining at about 5:30 when he suggests Mexico might pay for a wall across Ireland.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whinging Pom said:

Well worth a read, transcript of a speech by Sir Ivan Rogers, UK's former representative in the EU.

https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speech-sir-ivan-rogers-on-brexit/

I'm now not even half way in this interesting summation and google dictionary is doing overtime :lol:

"They also had not the slightest fag packet plan on what they were going to try and do and in which order."  ...........   classic .... lol

"It was because these were always fantasies, produced by people who at the point they said this stuff, would not have known a “trade Treaty” if they had found one in their soup." :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whinging Pom said:

Well worth a read, transcript of a speech by Sir Ivan Rogers, UK's former representative in the EU.

https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speech-sir-ivan-rogers-on-brexit/

Man I just did that the last two hours, the single thing that hit me most, after a Brexit, we are competitors on the world market, do not expect favours one way or the other.
If you want out, you are out.

What I miss in his services story is how dependant the UK is on the EU market ? In trade that number get mentioned, but not in services.

Now was he a rep in the good old days when there was no talks about Brexit ? Will google.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this one;

I mean that leaving the EU is genuinely a major regime change, with massive political, legal, economic and social consequences.

Being just outside the EU outer perimeter fence – even if that is where we choose to be (which I rather doubt) – is not AT ALL similar to living just inside it. Which, as I have said before, is where David Cameron sought to entrench the U.K. – outside political, monetary, banking, fiscal Union, outside Schengen, and with a pick and choose approach to what used to be the third pillar of justice and home affairs. His was the last attempt to amplify and entrench British exceptionalism WITHIN the EU legal order.
It failed. A majority voted to leave altogether.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sir Mark Ivan Rogers KCMG (born March 1960) is a former senior British civil servant, who was the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the European Union from 4 November 2013 until his resignation on 3 January 2017.
SNIP
In December 2016, an internal memo Rogers had written suggesting difficulties for agreement was leaked.[8] According to this leaked memo, Sir Ivan privately held the view that a settlement between the UK and the European Union might not be reached for 10 years, if at all, which did not reflect the Government's view. Questions were raised in the press whether Downing Street could any longer have confidence in his advice.[9] He resigned on 3 January 2017,[1] nine months ahead of the nominal end of his posting in October 2017.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Rogers

So he was there from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The competitor piece;
Even now, UK politicians, including former Conservative leaders and Foreign Secretaries really seem to think – they even write it – that if we just asserted ourselves more aggressively in negotiations, a typical multi-day, multi-night Summit would deliver them some fundamentally different EU offer.

But the EU is negotiating with us, not as a member, but as a prospective soon-to-be third country. Those glorious, sweaty, fudge-filled Brussels denouements are gone. The Prime Minister is not in a room negotiating with the 27. That’s not how the exit game or the trade negotiation works, or was ever going to.

We need, urgently, on all sides of the spectrum, to start understanding how being a “third country” is different. And the most naïve of all on this remain the Brexiteers who fantasise about a style of negotiation which is only open to members of the club.

We are indeed, a soon-to-be third country and an opponent and rival, not just a partner, now. Again, that is what Brexit advocates argued for. It is time to accept the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LeoV said:

So he was there from the start.

Yes, but I remember that he resigned because his views and warnings were flatly dismissed by Westminster and deemed 'project fear' hence he drew his own conclusions.  If you do not get the backing of the government you are supposed to represent there's not much point, is there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah,

interesting guy, academic, worked in the financial sector , etc a free trader, a 'bit' in favour of the EU, though has worked in Brussels. So he knows where he talks about.
But I keep in mind he is an Europhile, though for this lecture it did not make a big difference, it was not about in or out, just the effects of getting out.
https://www.politico.eu/article/camerons-sherpa/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

The speech by Sir Ivan Rogers is great...

Second that.  

And even yesterday morning I listened to a Shadow Cabinet Member promising, with a straight face, that, even after a General Election, there would be time for Labour to negotiate a completely different deal – INCLUDING a full trade deal, which would replicate all the advantages of the Single Market and Customs Union. And all before March 30th. I assume they haven’t yet stopped laughing in Brussels.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/17/2018 at 9:26 AM, LeoV said:

Man I just did that the last two hours, the single thing that hit me most, after a Brexit, we are competitors on the world market, do not expect favours one way or the other.
If you want out, you are out.

What I miss in his services story is how dependant the UK is on the EU market ? In trade that number get mentioned, but not in services.

Now was he a rep in the good old days when there was no talks about Brexit ? Will google.

Sure the EU also kept talking about a special relationship that is really about EU cherry picking bits of defence and cementing the trade surplus in goods while excluding the UK from parts of the Galileo sat nav system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2018 at 7:14 PM, Sailabout said:

immigration and the stupid EU courts overruling UK courts so when a terrorist arrives and need to go, their human rights are infringed so the UK tax payer sucks it up.

Be like Obama, he deported 2 million

Sailabout - Are you confusing the EHCR Court and the ECJ? They overlap and, post the Lisbon Treaty, to some extent compete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

Sailabout - Are you confusing the EHCR Court and the ECJ? They overlap and, post the Lisbon Treaty, to some extent compete.

who cares they both have the word Europe in them and Lisbon caused the problem

all 3 will be gone after brexit as far as the UK is concerned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Swiss are feeling the pain of the EU too. :)
BRUSSELS, 17. Dec, 17:57

The EU Commission said on Monday (17 December) it would allow another six-month period for the Swiss stock exchange to maintain access to the EU market - but by then it wants Switzerland to endorse a new treaty with the bloc. The move extends until the end of June the existing "equivalence" regime, that permits Swiss financial firms to operate in the EU, after it expires by the end of 2018.
https://euobserver.com/economic/143739

Seems the mood in the EU is now, no more exceptions in a single area, get them in a treaty covering a wide area, and if you do not fulfil one segment, the whole treaty gets invalid.
The Swiss were good in this, making mini deals. Anything to do with Brexit ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sailabout said:

who cares they both have the word Europe in them and Lisbon caused the problem

all 3 will be gone after brexit as far as the UK is concerned

OMG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see much problem for large financial firms to operate in the EU after BREXIT. Set up a subsidiary in Luxembourg or Ireland and of you go. Smaller firms will have much more of a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an ex-pat Brit I'm watching this slow-speed trainwreck with absolute amazement.  How they got themselves into this pickle is entirely up to Cameron.  The initial Brexiteers have faded away to concentrate on their gardening, and have left everyone else between a rock and a very hard place.  Inconceivable.

I heard this one the other day.  

Just ask a cat.  He'll cry and yowl and scratch, demanding to be let out.  When the door is opened for him, he'll just sit down and stare at it, while the ice-cold outside air roars in and freezes your bones.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friend of me owns a mid sized manufacturing company, machines.Twenty % of its turnover is UK and dropping, 18% of is profits, and going down.
He went too a meeting about Brexit, for advise.
Came back with a few nuggets:
Watch what EU clients the UK firms in your field of expertise have, and steal them NOW, expect the UK to do the same.
If you use UK parts, find another parts in EU, if not possible, stockpile and let EU producers who could produce the same know what you need.
Small businesses, group together and start a Import/Export office. As export paperwork, work visa for mechanics etc can be a pain in the ass.
Expect to be a future UK to be very lax with rules, so become a multinational and buy up UK companies in your field of expertise IF they get into financial problems.

In short it will be a headache but an opportunity too, in a chaotic situation you can make money if your smart.

Oh, and the Sun says its fine; google the writer...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8002878/no-deal-brexit-better-britain/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot believe the utter incompetence of the the UK government. The damage from BREXIT could have been substantially mitigated and a better deal negotiated by making preparations before the Article 50 letter was submitted but now it is far too late. The EU may have refused to start negotiating before the letter but that just gave the UK the option of preparing properly for no-deal.

In the long run of the the Stay/Leave/May's deal options,  the worst choice is May's deal!

(I'm a British expat with a US passport living in NJ. Must get my Irish passport application submitted soon!)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exp. Above you talk about the EU cherry picking, and now your unicorn suggests again that a better deal could have been negotiated.

The EU did not decide to leave. The EU continues is largely together about Brexit and is surprised by UK fantasies. EU stance has been 100% transparent from day 1 the complete opposite of the Tory secret squirrel approach.

If the UK wants to maintain relations with the EU and to stay in various aspects of cooperation, it simply has to accept the existing rules. You don't change rules from outside the way you might from inside.

UK citizen, living in France for some years, with resident and tax status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the UK could have got a better deal by being better prepared - this is basic to any negotiation but we will never know now. The loopy brexiteers - Boris et al - kept demanding  the Article 50 letter instead of waiting for much longer for BREXIT to coincide with the end of the EU budget cycle.

The EU changes the rules all the time - just look at the French budget deficits vs Italian deficits to see the corrupt shit show in full flow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/17/2018 at 12:08 AM, Sailabout said:

BS news, if meat comes from Ireland today, why will it need to get a different form of checking after brexit?
All the fake news makes it sound like the UK will put tariffs on everything they import DOH, why cant it just be a tariff free zone like lots of countries?

If the Eu interfere maybe Australia will divert some of their million tons of exports over there?

 

Because the UK will be forced to lower its food hygiene standard and accept meat from further afield in for to access the WTO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching the news now and I'm nearly shouting at the telly.   All the talk is now about crashing out with a hard brexshit due to May's delay with the vote.  Regardless of the vote result, most probably negative,  reality is now setting in nationally that time has run out for any other scenarios.  And government is going on holiday the next fortnight.

Business, road & air transport, Port of Dover management and customs agents, some manufacturing and others that were interviewed are all using the words Armageddon, catastrophe, disaster, calamity, cataclysm, crisis and so on.   There are advanced plans to build vast lorry parks near Dover to cope with the 1000's of waiting trucks.  10 to 20.000 customs agent clerks have to be trained to cope with the paperwork.  (training takes 6 to 9 months) 

There is talk of stock piling food, medicine and other essentials and the Defense Secretary has pledged 3500 troops to be deployed in areas where the shit may possibly hit the fan.

Fook me, if I didn't know any better WW3 is about to break out here.

 

................ and still the Business Secretary calmly said, on record, .......... "that all will be all right .....we are a responsible government."

Oh, and the immigration bill will published tomorrow.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Expatriated said:

I cannot believe the utter incompetence of the the UK government. The damage from BREXIT could have been substantially mitigated and a better deal negotiated by making preparations before the Article 50 letter was submitted but now it is far too late. The EU may have refused to start negotiating before the letter but that just gave the UK the option of preparing properly for no-deal.

In the long run of the the Stay/Leave/May's deal options,  the worst choice is May's deal!

(I'm a British expat with a US passport living in NJ. Must get my Irish passport application submitted soon!)

 

What's your basis for applying for an Irish passport?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two Irish grandparents...one is enough! I started getting the paperwork together for this because it is much easier to get my American wife an Irish passport based on marriage than a British passport. Now it will be useful for me too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah grand. I guess you're assuming that double taxation of income won't kick in in March then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Laser1 said:

Business, road & air transport, Port of Dover management and customs agents, some manufacturing and others that were interviewed are all using the words Armageddon, catastrophe, disaster, calamity, cataclysm, crisis and so on.   There are advanced plans to build vast lorry parks near Dover to cope with the 1000's of waiting trucks.  10 to 20.000 customs agent clerks have to be trained to cope with the paperwork.  (training takes 6 to 9 months) 

 

Thank f*** for the MV Celine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where this "the EU changes the rules all the time" comes from factually? The Italian situation is complicated, not a simple "keep below 3%" scenario, when they are already so heavily in debt. A warning shot across French bows is just that. If France does not respond in an acceptable manner, things will escalate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theresa May’s smartest move now is to negotiate a no limit extension of time for UK’s exit and appoint Boris Johnson to negotiate it all........ 

That way it will never happen and all will be well in UK land. He hasn’t got the balls (or the support) to become Prime Minister and stand up in Parliament and formally announce a hard Brexit.

He is hoping to achieve it by default and blame everyone else. He will then want to be PM, so that he can be seen as the one as sorting out someone else’s mess, conveniently overlooking the fact  he was a major contributor to it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, P_Wop said:

As an ex-pat Brit I'm watching this slow-speed trainwreck with absolute amazement.  How they got themselves into this pickle is entirely up to Cameron.  The initial Brexiteers have faded away to concentrate on their gardening, and have left everyone else between a rock and a very hard place.  Inconceivable.

I heard this one the other day.  

Just ask a cat.  He'll cry and yowl and scratch, demanding to be let out.  When the door is opened for him, he'll just sit down and stare at it, while the ice-cold outside air roars in and freezes your bones.

Clearly you know our cat. I keep trying to return it to her real owner (our daughter.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Expatriated said:

Nope - importing from the EU will be very easy, exporting to the EU is where the problems really start!

Agree on the export, import will be not very easy,  for sure more expensive, and the WTO rules do not allow a special import tariff for EU only, so has to offer that to the whole WTO world. And the Rotterdam effect will play too, or you have to get the shipping to stop in the UK and off load. That will make it more expensive. So for many goods in the first years they will get exported from (as example) Ghana too Rotterdam, import tax have to be paid to the EU, then it get trucked to the UK, with no tariff :) . And the line of trucks going from Rotterdam to the UK is staggering. It will take a few years to change the direction of trade flow, and hte UK need to invest a lot of money to make it possible. And the problems with fresh meat, dairy, fruit and vegetables is that they will require tons of paperwork and controls on the UK side, or the UK will be lax with it and then its fraudsters heaven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Expatriated said:

I cannot believe the utter incompetence of the the UK government. The damage from BREXIT could have been substantially mitigated and a better deal negotiated by making preparations before the Article 50 letter was submitted but now it is far too late. The EU may have refused to start negotiating before the letter but that just gave the UK the option of preparing properly for no-deal.

In the long run of the the Stay/Leave/May's deal options,  the worst choice is May's deal!

(I'm a British expat with a US passport living in NJ. Must get my Irish passport application submitted soon!)

 

Funny since New Jersey locations are generally defined to the rest of the US by exit numbers on the NJ Turnpike. Ben Franklin called it a keg tapped at both ends (NYC and Philly)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, cms said:

The Italian situation is complicated, not a simple "keep below 3%" scenario, when they are already so heavily in debt.

And the UK was a big fan of the keep them under 3% rule, as were the Dutch and Germans, afraid of flowing money from North EU to the South. That did happen anyway.
So there is talk to stop this max %. Look at Japan, system is still working there ?  It is just one of the dead flogged horse points of anti Europeans. While there is a point in the argument the UK can see soon more then 3% problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Germany's efforts to relax EU regulations to suit there skilled worker shortage and allow skilled non EU workers into their country to compete for (er, fill) jobs count as a rule change?

https://www.ft.com/content/c1626f0c-a6f2-11e8-8ecf-a7ae1beff35b

So we have, on the one hand, an economy chugging along so healthily that it can easily meet all minimum debt/gdp %s, has virtually zero unemployment, got a head start as all other currencies where gradually folded into the Euro which was pegged to the D-mark....and on the other hand, a few deadbeat countries, some who have %30 youth unemployment(Spain), some can barely collect taxes(Italy), others can barely meet the debt/gdp % targets and will no doubt return to the trough shortly(Greece,Portugal). 

Why do you guys think that a healthy economy, the size of which is roughly 2.2ish trillion euros gdp, exiting the pact should be met with a shrug? 

I see it differently. The Bundesbank is the biggest debtor in this common currency arrangement and common target arrangement and they want to maintain every prospect of being paid back(w interest). I'm not sure you can compare debt arrangements between sovereign nations to federalist and state/province transfer arrangements within a sovereign nation. In a national or federal debt situation, there is incentive for the central government not only to prop up a failing economy, but also to build it through further investment in industry. I'm not sure this incentive exists between Euro countries to the same extent. In some ways, the Bundesbank may even benefit from this prolonged target and lending arrangement.

It is a thinly veiled economic imperialism over the lesser countries traced straight back to the Bundesbank. Only one problem. If one of the big partners leave(U.K./France), things begin to look a lot different. If that happens, the Germans are really only playing in a much smaller sandbox, with way less internal (non tariff/quota) purchasing power from the smaller countries for their German manufactured goods. 

I've not heard anyone call their bluff, or shrug, or indifference. All I've heard is hysteria bordering on Y2K levels about how the UK won't have any more dance partners after the sky falls.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rgeek said:

 

Because the UK will be forced to lower its food hygiene standard and accept meat from further afield in for to access the WTO.

you mean meat without BSE,   UK standards at work....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites