ewerk 30256 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 And even with that he's probably overselling it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonatine 11307 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 As someone on Twitter said, at least Mad Max could afford to buy fuel for his motor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I'm not sure where these MPs get the arrogance to believe that the UK is negotiating as an equal partner. Would we negotiate with Nigeria as an equal? Because our GDP in relation to the EU is about the same as Nigeria's to ours. And the UK government has already committed to regulatory alignment in lieu of some amazing plan yet to be revealed. So they're basically telling the PM to renege on an agreement made just months ago. And can someone tell me where all these trade deals are going to come from and what exactly we're going to be trading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34831 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 That's the thing, even that's got absolutely no detail on what they want and how it can be achieved. A side and a half of A4 ffs CT will think it's a great step forward no doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I'd just like someone to tell me that we want to sell A, B and C to X, Y and Z but we can't because of EU barriers. This will make up for the shortfall in GDP growth after Brexit. But I haven't seen anyone in politics or the media able to do that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34831 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 5 minutes ago, ewerk said: I'd just like someone to tell me that we want to sell A, B and C to X, Y and Z but we can't because of EU barriers. This will make up for the shortfall in GDP growth after Brexit. But I haven't seen anyone in politics or the media able to do that. It'll all be great around about the time most of the people who voted have been dead for a decade or so. Maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Don't like the results? Just re-run it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayatollah Hermione 13794 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 “No, no, we have a secret model that shows it’ll be fine” ”Can we see it?” ”.....it’s secret” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34831 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 What absolute chancers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4718 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 4 minutes ago, Ayatollah Hermione said: “No, no, we have a secret model that shows it’ll be fine” ”Can we see it?” ”.....it’s secret” replace "aurora borealis" with "positive brexit report" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21286 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 36 minutes ago, ewerk said: I'd just like someone to tell me that we want to sell A, B and C to X, Y and Z but we can't because of EU barriers. This will make up for the shortfall in GDP growth after Brexit. But I haven't seen anyone in politics or the media able to do that. I was listening to Any Questions last week where Daniel Hannan made the claim that Scotland exports more salmon to Taiwan than any single EU country, and this was the reason we should cut our ties with the EU to we can trade globally. Two things about this. First, I looked up the data and it's a blatant lie. In fact, Scotland exports close to ten times the volume of salmon to France compared with Taiwan. Naturally, the claim was unchallenged though. But secondly, it didn't occur to any of the other guests to point out the fucking obvious that if we are already trading successfully in salmon with Taiwan in the EU, that is evidence that we don't need to be outside the EU to do it. I mean howay, this is elementary logic yet the media just let this shit go through without ever challenging the Brexit narrative. It is quite surreal. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21286 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 18 minutes ago, ewerk said: Don't like the results? Just re-run it. Classic muddying the waters to support there claims economic forecasts are pointless, knowing the CT's of this world will lap it up. Shameless cunts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) It's as if they believe that the EU doesn't want to trade with anyone but themselves. Of course they want to, on terms that are good for all of us. The idea that there is a vast amount of untapped trade out there that we can take advantage of seems to be a fallacy to me. Edited February 21, 2018 by ewerk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGingerQuiff 2412 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Secret model? I thought Henry Bolton said he'd ditched her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21286 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) I've never met a leaver who can clarify one thing the EU has done to them negatively or one tangible benefit of leaving. I mean, cards on table, I'm a europhile who actually believes in closer integration. But I accept mine is a minority view, and therefore it shouldn't come to pass. However, I'd have some sympathy for the Brexit cause if they could just articulate what they want, what the benefits are to normal people, and how this can be achieved. But nearly 2 yeas on, they can't do any of this. Edited February 21, 2018 by Renton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 56 minutes ago, Ayatollah Hermione said: “No, no, we have a secret model that shows it’ll be fine” ”Can we see it?” ”.....it’s secret” Looks like someone has seen the assumptions made in it. https://www.ft.com/content/9bddba54-16ea-11e8-9e9c-25c814761640 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4718 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 11 minutes ago, ewerk said: Looks like someone has seen the assumptions made in it. https://www.ft.com/content/9bddba54-16ea-11e8-9e9c-25c814761640 Need to be a subscriber to see that I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21286 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 12 minutes ago, ewerk said: Looks like someone has seen the assumptions made in it. https://www.ft.com/content/9bddba54-16ea-11e8-9e9c-25c814761640 Paywalled. I saw Patrick Minford was the lead author which tells you all you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Well just to help the likes of you know don't read the FT from cover to cover every morning. Quote An analysis by the pro-Brexit advocacy group Economists for Free Trade says the potential gains from the UK government’s favoured route to leaving the EU would provide a 2 to 4 per cent boost to national income in the long term. The results contrast with the unpublished internal Whitehall analysis suggesting a 2 to 8 per cent loss of national income from any plausible Brexit policy. While Economists for Free Trade say their analysis has “comprehensively debunked” the Whitehall results because it accurately models “the clear objectives of government policy as stated by the prime minister in her Lancaster House speech”, anyone interested in UK economic policy must wonder what to make of these differences. As far as we know, this time the divergent results do not stem from a fundamental difference in the type of economic modelling. In the new paper, obtained by the Financial Times, Economists for Free Trade praise Whitehall officials for adopting a type of trade model they favour. It bases its results on a published paper from the Canadian group Ciuriak Consulting, which specialises in trade modelling. Three questions arise. Has Economists for Free Trade chosen reasonable assumptions, which best describe Britain’s current position and the policy choices? Has it reflected the Ciuriak Consulting paper fairly? And why does it achieve its headline results? The answer to the first question on the assumptions used is an unequivocal “no”. Economists for Free Trade assume Brexit Britain has no tariffs on trade with the rest of the world, no non-tariff barriers with any country, and that border costs with the EU will be zero. The paper is clear on the last point. “We have assumed for the purposes of modelling that border costs are effectively zero,” it says. On tariffs, British government policy is not to drop all import tariffs unilaterally, but to “do trade deals”. Dropping all non-tariff barriers is an assumption not just that Britain would say yes to chlorine-washed chicken, but also to lead paint on toy imports and cars with no emission standards at all. It specifically contradicts David Davis’s assertion of government policy, made in the Brexit secretary’s speech this week, that Britain will not seek a deregulated “Mad Max-style world borrowed from dystopian fiction”. And assuming no border costs at Dover specifically ignores the EU’s insistence, recognised by Britain, on the importance of its own regulatory autonomy. The assumptions, therefore, are nothing like government policy. They are absurd. The second question also produces a negative assessment. Not content with the results of the unilateral free trade option in the Ciuriak paper, Economists for Free Trade decided simply to multiply the benefits of that policy by five. Because it is inconvenient, it also ignores the paper’s conclusion that “the present value of the benefits of continued participation in the borderless [EU] single market would likely dominate, since the additional trade costs imposed by a . . . border would continue to be incurred indefinitely”. The answer to the third question, then, is that Economists for Free Trade achieve their positive results simply because they assume leaving the EU has no trade costs and only potential benefits. There are also no costs associated with deregulation and only benefits. Put rubbish into a model and rubbish will spew out. This analysis should not be viewed as anything other than special pleading. If this is the sort of work that is influential among ministers and underpins policy, Britain’s economy is not in safe hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34831 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 That socialist, traitorous, scaremongering rag. Seriously though, where's the fucking rest of the media? It should be all all the lies being propogated by these nutters. They only care about trying to secure positions in the post-May government. Like Renton was saying, the way so much stuff regarding something which has huge repercussions is glossed over and goes relatively unchallenged is an absolute disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9733 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 9 hours ago, ewerk said: Don't like the results? Just re-run it. What a numpty. Looking at his tweets he promotos Brexif propaganda in one and participation in a EU funded exchange project (Erasmus+) in the next... Hypocisy at its very best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 24, 2018 Share Posted February 24, 2018 https://www.ft.com/content/a5f6feae-189f-11e8-9e9c-25c814761640 It's still incredible that they don’t get that this cannot happen. It’s the same bullshit they’ve been talking about for a year and has been repeatedly shot down by the EU. We basically want to align with them where it suits and diverge where it would benefit our economy over theirs. In what crazy world do they think that this is possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44359 Posted February 24, 2018 Share Posted February 24, 2018 Aye. And it's taken them til now and countless times of being told you can't have that, to make the big reveal of "ta-daaaa, we would REALLY like the stuff you've said we can't have." This isn't a negotiation. It's the EU trying to get sense out of a 5 year old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4685 Posted February 24, 2018 Author Share Posted February 24, 2018 Its quite something that both of your comments actually assume this IS NOT a negotiation and that we just have to take what were told BEFORE said negotiations actually begin. You're positions are totally defeatist. Setting up a new free trade agreement it is totally acceptable to say there are areas where we want to have the same rules / regulations and other areas where we don't. Bit like the TTIP deal. Some areas where acceptable, other were not. If a UK business wants to sell to an EU (or any other trading partner) then it has to meet that trading partners standards. That's a choice the business will make. Obviously for massive industries like cars it makes sense to stay aligned, for smaller businesses we can set our own rules. This all comes back to the basic arguments of German car manufacturers, French farmer etc. The idea that the EU is going start sticking big tariffs between us is ridiculous, Its not going to happen. Have a word with yourselves and stop being so defeatist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30256 Posted February 24, 2018 Share Posted February 24, 2018 How does any of that prevent a hard border in Ireland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.403f4a475ac3bb53997c2626c09ef800.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now