The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[Stevo985]

But a lot of the scaremongering is slowly coming true.

Even the main pro-Brexit politicians are slowly admitting to all of that.

They've gone from "Britain will be better off out of the EU", to "We can't promise we'll be better off out of the EU" to "We definitely won't be better off out of the EU but we will be in 40-50 years time" to "We PROBABLY won't run out of food and medicine, but better to stock up just in case"

Some of the scaremongering, if you want to call it that, is probably exaggerated and isn't coming true.

But you know what else isn't coming true, as far as I can see? Absolutely anything positive that was promised by the leave campaign.

[snowychap]

2 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

I said it as a hypothetical - there is no thing saying that Brussels cannot stop trade deals with a specific countries, and this might be outside of UK's control should we remain in.

Trade is not the same as a trade deal.

[blandy]

14 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

I said it as a hypothetical - there is no thing saying that Brussels cannot stop trade deals with a specific countries, and this might be outside of UK's control should we remain in.

I think I'm missing your point. The EU cannot stop Britain trading with anyone. What the members of the EU (including the UK) decided was that we'd all take away all the trade tariffs, customs charges, different rule sets and standards we all used to have, and have a zero tariff, common set of standards, free market between us all. It's been a massive success. Because we are all one big market, the EU countries, including the UK sensibly agreed that we, together would negotiate any deals with other nations or groups of nations - as a big powerful block of countries we have more clout and can get better terms for us all. The counter side to that is that no single country can negotiate a special deal between itself and any non-EU country. But we can trade with anyone else under standard WTO terms (which are not as good as EU terms).

From a trade perspective (whatever the other arguments about the EU) we're miles better off inside than outside. Humungously so. 

[StefanAVFC]

11 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

 about the world's 5th strongest Economy,

*6th, since Brexit

11 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

London

Fiercely pro-Remain London? Undermines the point a bit.

[Chindie]

Also worth noting that a significant part of the reason the UK's economy has done so well over the past 40 years is because we were in a trading bloc with our closest neighbours that made trading with them supremely easy.

[chrisp65]

@Mic09 there's nothing stopping us doing deals with any trading bloc, be that individual countries, or the EU.

What you have to work out, is can we do more trade by agreeing to some club rules and trading with that club, or by doing separate deals with lots of countries. Perhaps a good example is the recent trade visit across Africa. We visited 6 or 7 countries.

Kenya was one of the larger countries and larger economies we visited. We would need trade deals with 20 countries the size of Kenya to replace Spain. Nevermind finding replacements for Germany, France, Italy...

I'm not saying we won't trade with these countries any more. But right now we have conservative politicians openly and happily suggesting that not trading with europe would be no big deal.

I guess that's true. Providing we can quickly set up equivalent deals with 125 Kenyas. There are nearly 200 countries, so that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, chrisp65 said:

@Mic09 there's nothing stopping us doing deals with any trading bloc, be that individual countries, or the EU.

What you have to work out, is can we do more trade by agreeing to some club rules and trading with that club, or by doing separate deals with lots of countries. Perhaps a good example is the recent trade visit across Africa. We visited 6 or 7 countries.

Kenya was one of the larger countries and larger economies we visited. We would need trade deals with 20 countries the size of Kenya to replace Spain. Nevermind finding replacements for Germany, France, Italy...

I'm not saying we won't trade with these countries any more. But right now we have conservative politicians openly and happily suggesting that not trading with europe would be no big deal.

I guess that's true. Providing we can quickly set up equivalent deals with 125 Kenyas. There are nearly 200 countries, so that shouldn't be a problem.

 

Even if we could find 125 Kenya's, how many of those are within driving distance?

To coin @Chindie, Brexit. **** stupid.

[chrisp65]

Just now, StefanAVFC said:

Even if we could find 125 Kenya's, how many of those are within driving distance?

To coin @Chindie, Brexit. **** stupid.

Ah, we'll invent a technological solution. Something on the principles of wifi, but for jam and car parts. We've got until March ffs.

Stop being defeatist. 

[StefanAVFC]

I hate Brexit for multiple reasons (I've gone over them enough in this thread) but the biggest one is that we're 6 months away and I still don't know what my future in the EU27 looks like.

I have a life and job here and while ERG and the govt are fannying with the prospect of no deal, I could lose it all.

[Chindie]

It really is **** stupid.

We're binning off the foundation of international trade for... Nothing.

Even if you assume you can eat sovereignty, that argument is bunk anyway. Any deal involves a loss of sovereignty. And the very fact that this debate is even handling shows the UK remains sovereign, because we can choose to leave.

Brexit is nonsense.

And really **** stupid.

[Mic09]

18 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

@Mic09 there's nothing stopping us doing deals with any trading bloc, be that individual countries, or the EU.

What you have to work out, is can we do more trade by agreeing to some club rules and trading with that club, or by doing separate deals with lots of countries. Perhaps a good example is the recent trade visit across Africa. We visited 6 or 7 countries.

 Kenya was one of the larger countries and larger economies we visited. We would need trade deals with 20 countries the size of Kenya to replace Spain. Nevermind finding replacements for Germany, France, Italy...

 I'm not saying we won't trade with these countries any more. But right now we have conservative politicians openly and happily suggesting that not trading with europe would be no big deal.

I guess that's true. Providing we can quickly set up equivalent deals with 125 Kenyas. There are nearly 200 countries, so that shouldn't be a problem.

 

What I'm trying to work out, and if someone can answer this please do not go on a pro/anti EU rant while doing so is the following;

It is beneficial for UK to trade with Italy (I hope we can all agree here). So what stops UK from agreeing a similar (if not better) deal after Brexit? As far as I can see, there are two possible answers:

1) Nothing. So a deal will be made sooner rather than later to benefit both countries.

2) The EU gets in the way and stops Italians from agreeing anything with the UK.

If 1) is true - great, party on. If 2) is true, why wouldn't Italy want to leave the EU to be able to make agreements on it's own terms if it is beneficial for it to do so?



 

[StefanAVFC]

8 minutes ago, Chindie said:

It really is **** stupid.

We're binning off the foundation of international trade for... Nothing.

Even if you assume you can eat sovereignty, that argument is bunk anyway. Any deal involves a loss of sovereignty. And the very fact that this debate is even handling shows the UK remains sovereign, because we can choose to leave.

Brexit is nonsense.

And really **** stupid.

I stated before. 2 groups want Brexit. Those who benefit from it directly and ideologues who are willing to give up anything to achieve it.

There's a 3rd group, but I wouldn't say they 'want' it per se. They've been told they want it by groups 1 and 2.

[StefanAVFC]

2 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

What I'm trying to work out, and if someone can answer this please do not go on a pro/anti EU rant while doing so is the following;

It is beneficial for UK to trade with Italy (I hope we can all agree here). So what stops UK from agreeing a similar (if not better) deal after Brexit? As far as I can see, there are two possible answers:

1) Nothing. So a deal will be made sooner rather than later to benefit both countries.

2) The EU gets in the way and stops Italians from agreeing anything with the UK.

If 1) is true - great, party on. If 2) is true, why wouldn't Italy want to leave the EU to be able to make agreements on it's own terms if it is beneficial for it to do so?



 

Nothing stops them doing a deal, but they can't do a tariff free, bells and whistles deal. There's nothing stopping them dealing under WTO rules.

2) Because it's more beneficial for them to be part of the bloc with all of the access that entails.

[Mic09]

1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said:

Nothing stops them doing a deal, but they can't do a tariff free, bells and whistles deal. There's nothing stopping them dealing under WTO rules.

 2) Because it's more beneficial for them to be part of the bloc with all of the access that entails.

1) Ok, why can't they agree a bells and whistles deal? What (who) is stopping them?

2) We just agreed that a tariff free deal is the best deal - so it's better for Italy to restrict it's trade abilities to be a part of a political block of nations with similar restrictions?

[Mic09]

Just to clarify, I am not for or against in this debate.

But unless we ask these questions the debate is pointless.

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, Mic09 said:

1) Ok, why can't they agree a bells and whistles deal? What (who) is stopping them?

2) We just agreed that a tariff free deal is the best deal - so it's better for Italy to restrict it's trade abilities to be a part of a political block of nations with similar restrictions?

I really don't understand how you're so lost here.

1) Because they can't as members of the EU. Because then they'd forfeit all of that access they gain by being part of it.

When you're married, what's stopping you from sleeping with another woman? Nothing, but when you signed that marriage certificate you agreed to certain priviliges while giving up others.

Your line of thinking 'why would Italy want to stay in the EU if the EU stops them making their own deals?' is much the same as 'why would he stay married when his wife doesn't let him sleep around?'  Illogical.

2) See above. There are restrictions because of the huge benefits you get by being part of the EU.

[Mic09]

1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said:

I really don't understand how you're so lost here.

 1) Because they can't as members of the EU. Because then they'd forfeit all of that access they gain by being part of it.

When you're married, what's stopping you from sleeping with another woman? Nothing, but when you signed that marriage certificate you agreed to certain priviliges while giving up others.

Your line of thinking 'why would Italy want to stay in the EU if the EU stops them making their own deals?' is much the same as 'why would he stay married when his wife doesn't let him sleep around?'  Illogical.

2) See above. There are restrictions because of the huge benefits you get by being part of the EU.

 

Any husband any wife can agree to sleep with other people. There is nothing stopping them doing so. Ever heard of swingers?  

I don't think I am lost, but I cannot see the answer to my question.

What is stopping UK from agreeing a tariff free bells and whistles deal with Italy post Brexit?

And if it is the EU doing so as you suggest, why does Brussels restrict what is beneficial for an individual member state?

[StefanAVFC]

I've literally answered it.

By being part of the EU you give up your right to agree those same deals with individual countries. You can't both be in a club and not follow the rules. It's common sense.

The countries know this when they sign up, much like a married couple know they can't sleep around when they get married. (unless both parties agree to it)

That is the answer.

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

What is stopping UK from agreeing a tariff free bells and whistles deal with Italy post Brexit?

And if it is the EU doing so as you suggest, why does Brussels restrict what is beneficial for an individual member state?

The EU is stopping it, through the single market which the UK played a big part in setting up. Whether you or I like that or not is one thing, but from before the vote the UK knew we could not do individual deals like the one you mention, though David Davis lied about it and falsely said we could.

"We" decided to jump anyway. We could stay in the single market and have the trade and commerce benefits, still, and be like Norway (which is not in the EU) if the tories wanted, but they've taken it upon thermselves to decide not to do that, because ...idiocy/racism/whatever... 

Italy has decided to be and stay in the EU and benefit from the enhanced trading opportunities a collective trade negotiating position entails. If they wanted to do individual deals of the type you mention, then they could leave, too. But they don't want to, because they'd be worse off, and it wouldn't be "beneficial" for them as a member state.

No one, not even the Brexit campaigners are claiming, now, that trade wise the UK will be better off leaving, as was pointed out on the previous page..

[Stevo985]

10 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

And if it is the EU doing so as you suggest, why does Brussels restrict what is beneficial for an individual member state?

Surely because if all of the EU members were going around agreeing their own deals anyway then it would remove the benefit of being the EU as a whole.

They get these deals for ALL members because other countries want to trade with the EU as a whole. The main attraction of that may be to be able to trade with the bigger economies within the EU. But that allows the other members to get the same benefits.

If Britain and Italy and Germany etc were agreeing their own deals, then there would be no need for countries outside the EU to have a deal with the EU. Which would be fine for the few countries that could agree these deals on their own (if there were any that could get as good a deal as the EU), but it would leave the other members without these deals.

So the EU doesn't allow these bells and whistle deals to be undertaken by individual members because it would be to the detriment of the EU as a whole. Either you deal with all of us or none of us.