Trump Triumphs

[Sharpe's Fox]

8 minutes ago, MattP said:

No, if the deal is worse than TTIP. I don't think we'll be signing it.

 

What do you think will make it worse than that?

A mixture of Trump and his teams Reagan-like ideology of small state at all costs, Dr Liam Fox and some of the Tory party's almost crazed obsession of making Britain the 51st state in all but name and as I alluded to the governments desperation to demonstrate they are signing free-trade deals.

[Webbo]

26 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

A mixture of Trump and his teams Reagan-like ideology of small state at all costs, Dr Liam Fox and some of the Tory party's almost crazed obsession of making Britain the 51st state in all but name and as I alluded to the governments desperation to demonstrate they are signing free-trade deals.

Sounds good to me.

[Guest MattP]

12 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

A mixture of Trump and his teams Reagan-like ideology of small state at all costs, Dr Liam Fox and some of the Tory party's almost crazed obsession of making Britain the 51st state in all but name and as I alluded to the governments desperation to demonstrate they are signing free-trade deals.

Hyperbole, but I'd still have voted for that ahead of remain, free travel and the opportunity for us all to work in the USA?

 

America is our biggest trading partner as of now, Germany is second, we also run a surplus with them, we are in a strong position to negotiate a trade deal, Trump clearly can't stand the European Union and wouldn't mind showing it up, he's already criticising Merkel before she has took office, he's also going to need to show people he isn't opposed to some sort of free trade if he's going to be so protectionist, we are the perfect opportunity for that being such a large economy, close allies and now one that can actually deal on it's own rather than told it has to do it along with 27 other countries.

 

We don't know for sure what will happen, but no reason at all not to be optimistic on this until you want to be deliberately, for so many reasons this works for both of us.

[Barky]

12 hours ago, Webbo said:

Sounds good to me.

So after all this about sovereignty you'd give it all up in a heartbeat to be the 51st state being dictated to by Donald Trump? Are you mad?

[leicsmac]

51 minutes ago, MattP said:

Hyperbole, but I'd still have voted for that ahead of remain, free travel and the opportunity for us all to work in the USA?

 

America is our biggest trading partner as of now, Germany is second, we also run a surplus with them, we are in a strong position to negotiate a trade deal, Trump clearly can't stand the European Union and wouldn't mind showing it up, he's already criticising Merkel before she has took office, he's also going to need to show people he isn't opposed to some sort of free trade if he's going to be so protectionist, we are the perfect opportunity for that being such a large economy, close allies and now one that can actually deal on it's own rather than told it has to do it along with 27 other countries.

 

We don't know for sure what will happen, but no reason at all not to be optimistic on this until you want to be deliberately, for so many reasons this works for both of us.

Ummm...perhaps the economic arguments are all well and good, but do we really want our largest trading partner to be one who is about to take a yugeeeeee step backwards in terms of both human rights (for most, anyway) and environmental protection? Not that either of those things are particularly important right now, huh?

 

Though of course we trade heavily with both the Chinese and Saudis, who do more poorly on either of those things than the US could ever dream of doing, so I guess it's good company.

 

Barkys argument above holds weight too. All this talk of not being subject of the will of a superstate, guarding our own sovereignty, and then the same people advocating that now advocate getting into bed to be dictated to by a different superstate? Sounds a mite hypocritical to me.

[Innovindil]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Ummm...perhaps the economic arguments are all well and good, but do we really want our largest trading partner to be one who is about to take a yugeeeeee step backwards in terms of both human rights (for most, anyway) and environmental protection? Not that either of those things are particularly important right now, huh?

 

Though of course we trade heavily with both the Chinese and Saudis, who do more poorly on either of those things than the US could ever dream of doing, so I guess it's good company.

 

Barkys argument above holds weight too. All this talk of not being subject of the will of a superstate, guarding our own sovereignty, and then the same people advocating that now advocate getting into bed to be dictated to by a different superstate? Sounds a mite hypocritical to me.

I don't understand how you have gone from "trade agreement" to "dictated to by a different superstate". 

 

I must be missing a few steps. 

[bovril]

10 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I don't understand how you have gone from "trade agreement" to "dictated to by a different superstate".

Irony overload.

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I don't understand how you have gone from "trade agreement" to "dictated to by a different superstate". 

 

I must be missing a few steps. 

If you think Trump and the team he assigns are going to be in any way conciliatory when it comes to those agreements I've got a bridge to sell you.

 

He and his administration can't afford to be - they won based on the idea that they were going to make the US the biggest, meanest boyo in the playground again, and they have to deliver or they'll lose their core support.

 

There may be a lot of bluster about "biggest ally" and all in the press, but realpolitik applies here as it does everywhere else.

[Sharpe's Fox]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Hyperbole, but I'd still have voted for that ahead of remain, free travel and the opportunity for us all to work in the USA?

 

America is our biggest trading partner as of now, Germany is second, we also run a surplus with them, we are in a strong position to negotiate a trade deal, Trump clearly can't stand the European Union and wouldn't mind showing it up, he's already criticising Merkel before she has took office, he's also going to need to show people he isn't opposed to some sort of free trade if he's going to be so protectionist, we are the perfect opportunity for that being such a large economy, close allies and now one that can actually deal on it's own rather than told it has to do it along with 27 other countries.

 

We don't know for sure what will happen, but no reason at all not to be optimistic on this until you want to be deliberately, for so many reasons this works for both of us.

My issue isn't with getting a trade deal per se it is with getting an awful one thrashed out over a few months. There are many sticking points that would have to be addressed. The protection of the NHS from US Corporation lawyers is probably the high profile one but there are many less sexy issues that will have to be ironed out. Approach to animal welfare, the quality of arable crops,  environmental protection, the animal products trade, pharmaceutical prices, the quality of plastics and fabrics were all sticking points in the TTIP negotiations among many others. My concerns is that the Tories would disregard such "trivial" issues in an attempt to attain the holy grail of trade deals for political capital before the next election, and US corporations would be happy to oblige.

[Innovindil]

59 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

If you think Trump and the team he assigns are going to be in any way conciliatory when it comes to those agreements I've got a bridge to sell you.

 

He and his administration can't afford to be - they won based on the idea that they were going to make the US the biggest, meanest boyo in the playground again, and they have to deliver or they'll lose their core support.

 

There may be a lot of bluster about "biggest ally" and all in the press, but realpolitik applies here as it does everywhere else.

Or in alternate reality where people are optimists, trump and his administration could play hard ball to those deserving of their ire, like China who are "taking ze jobs" and Mexico who he wants to make pay for a ridiculous wall and those of nato who aren't paying their "fair share" and try and get further supporters from outside his core by being more open minded with trade deals with countries who aren't necessarily in direct competition with his (like us). 

 

Not a trump fan, but considering the number of things he's already backed down on, I'll choose to remain optimistic of our prospects. 

 

There's always the chance the Tory negotiating party (knowing they have an insane lead in any general election) might turn out to be ballers. 

 

1 hour ago, bovril said:

Irony overload.

Thank you for your contribution, your lightning fast wit is awe inspiring. 

 

[bovril]

18 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

 

Thank you for your contribution, your lightning fast wit is awe inspiring. 

 

I hadn't read all the posts and seen you were responding to that assumption from leicsmac. 

It's Monday, my wit slowly grows over the week until it hits lightning fast around Friday tea time.

[Innovindil]

30 minutes ago, bovril said:

I hadn't read all the posts and seen you were responding to that assumption from leicsmac. 

It's Monday, my wit slowly grows over the week until it hits lightning fast around Friday tea time.

I look forward to it. 

[leicsmac]

53 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Or in alternate reality where people are optimists, trump and his administration could play hard ball to those deserving of their ire, like China who are "taking ze jobs" and Mexico who he wants to make pay for a ridiculous wall and those of nato who aren't paying their "fair share" and try and get further supporters from outside his core by being more open minded with trade deals with countries who aren't necessarily in direct competition with his (like us). 

 

Not a trump fan, but considering the number of things he's already backed down on, I'll choose to remain optimistic of our prospects. 

 

There's always the chance the Tory negotiating party (knowing they have an insane lead in any general election) might turn out to be ballers. 

 

 

Lots of Trumps core voter base think everyone who isn't American (and a narrow band of Americans at that) is deserving of their ire, or at least of their patronising condescention - and the last thing he can do is piss them off by offering favourable trade deals that will screw them over economically. That is rather the point I was making.

 

I'd like to see the UK make a good deal as much as the next punter and if there is somehow a way to come to an agreement that is favourable for the UK that the US will actually go along with would be great, but I still find it amusing that folks think that making such deals with the EU is going to be somehow more difficult than doing it with the US. Sharpe makes some good points about particulars above.

[Innovindil]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Lots of Trumps core voter base think everyone who isn't American (and a narrow band of Americans at that) is deserving of their ire, or at least of their patronising condescention - and the last thing he can do is piss them off by offering favourable trade deals that will screw them over economically. That is rather the point I was making.

 

I'd like to see the UK make a good deal as much as the next punter and if there is somehow a way to come to an agreement that is favourable for the UK that the US will actually go along with would be great, but I still find it amusing that folks think that making such deals with the EU is going to be somehow more difficult than doing it with the US. Sharpe makes some good points about particulars above.

Well I think the main reason people think a deal with the US would be easier than the EU is that when negotiating them with the US you are dealing with one country and when dealing with the EU there are many. 

 

Although I do agree that neither will be "easy", there is plenty to be worked out. 

[Guest MattP]

42 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Lots of Trumps core voter base think everyone who isn't American (and a narrow band of Americans at that) is deserving of their ire, or at least of their patronising condescention - and the last thing he can do is piss them off by offering favourable trade deals that will screw them over economically. That is rather the point I was making.

 

I'd like to see the UK make a good deal as much as the next punter and if there is somehow a way to come to an agreement that is favourable for the UK that the US will actually go along with would be great, but I still find it amusing that folks think that making such deals with the EU is going to be somehow more difficult than doing it with the US. Sharpe makes some good points about particulars above.

Amusing? 

 

Is there anyone that has found it easier to do a trade deal with the EEA rather than the states? Australia did a trade deal with the US in 18 months and we are in a stronger position than them and are negotiating with an administration that like us led by Trump rather than one who didn't like us led by the long legged mack daddy.

 

We are dealing with one country that wants to do a deal rather than twenty seven many of whom want to punish us. 

 

I really do get the feeling some people are so annoyed by Brexit and Trump they want both to fail just so they can be proved right.

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, MattP said:

Amusing? 

 

Is there anyone that has found it easier to do a trade deal with the EEA rather than the states? Australia did a trade deal with the US in 18 months and we are in a stronger position than them and are negotiating with an administration that like us led by Trump rather than one who didn't like us led by the long legged mack daddy.

 

We are dealing with one country that wants to do a deal rather than twenty seven many of whom want to punish us. 

 

I really do get the feeling some people are so annoyed by Brexit and Trump they want both to fail just so they can be proved right.

As I said above, this administration may have said that they like us but do you really think for a minute that they're going to throw their own voter base under the bus for the sake of a decent trade deal with us based on that feeling? The US may be one entity, but it is made up with almost as many disparate cultures as the EU (think the last election proved that rather well), all of which are motivated by self-interest in the same way that the member nations of the EU are. They have no reason to be friendly negotiators apart from maintaining the friendly public facade. Realpolitik doesn't suddenly no longer apply because of some remarks to the press.

 

They're going to be looking out for number one, they are a far bigger mover and shaker economically and politically than the UK is, and we need to keep that in mind.

 

Regarding your last sentence, I'm hopeful about negotiation for Brexit that would be favourable for the UK, but based on environmental policy alone (to say nothing of the social policies his party has lined up) I want to see Trump out of there with as little damage caused as possible.

[Guest MattP]

Do you really think Trump's voter base care about a trade deal with the UK? It's probably not in their top 100 list of concerns, they want less Wall St, less Muslims, less Mexicans and more jobs. None of that is going to be effected, his supporters loved Farage and appeared to be just as repulsed at Obama talking down to us as the leavers here were.

 

We are under no obligation to sign the deal if we don't want to and as I say, Trump could do with showing he's not against free trade before he starts to get tough on countries like China and the North America Trade Alliance. 

 

It's a perfect opportunity for us and them, it's all fell into line perfectly over the last few months since the leave vote and if anyone secretly does yearn for us at the back of Obama's queue there is something wrong with them.

[Webbo]

5 hours ago, Barky said:

So after all this about sovereignty you'd give it all up in a heartbeat to be the 51st state being dictated to by Donald Trump? Are you mad?

We're not going to be the 51st state as you well know.

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, Webbo said:

We're not going to be the 51st state as you well know.

I can't believe how many people thought you were being serious

[leicsmac]

32 minutes ago, MattP said:

Do you really think Trump's voter base care about a trade deal with the UK? It's probably not in their top 100 list of concerns, they want less Wall St, less Muslims, less Mexicans and more jobs. None of that is going to be effected, his supporters loved Farage and appeared to be just as repulsed at Obama talking down to us as the leavers here were.

 

We are under no obligation to sign the deal if we don't want to and as I say, Trump could do with showing he's not against free trade before he starts to get tough on countries like China and the North America Trade Alliance. 

 

It's a perfect opportunity for us and them, it's all fell into line perfectly over the last few months since the leave vote and if anyone secretly does yearn for us at the back of Obama's queue there is something wrong with them.

No, I think they do care however about any trade deal that would disadvantage them personally. Ones with the UK not excepted. Again, the spirit of brotherly fraternity that they showed to Farage et al won't mean jack if they then arrange something that continues to hit them in their wallets. You are convinced that what we have to offer won't hurt them in that way while still benefiting us - I'm not so sure. I think it's naive to expect the US to be looking out for anyone other than themselves as a result of this deal and given the balance of power between our two countries to expect the UK to agree anything the US doesn't like or want to do.

 

I guess we'll find out.

 

 

[Webbo]

Just now, leicsmac said:

No, I think they do care however about any trade deal that would disadvantage them personally. Ones with the UK not excepted. Again, the spirit of brotherly fraternity that they showed to Farage et al won't mean jack if they then arrange something that continues to hit them in their wallets. You are convinced that what we have to offer won't hurt them in that way while still benefiting us - I'm not so sure. I think it's naive to expect the US to be looking out for anyone other than themselves as a result of this deal and given the balance of power between our two countries to expect the UK to agree anything the US doesn't like or want to do.

 

I guess we'll find out.

 

 

Trade deals work both ways you know. They'll be able to sell stuff to us easier as well. Could well be in their interest.

[Guest MattP]

29 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

No, I think they do care however about any trade deal that would disadvantage them personally. Ones with the UK not excepted. Again, the spirit of brotherly fraternity that they showed to Farage et al won't mean jack if they then arrange something that continues to hit them in their wallets. You are convinced that what we have to offer won't hurt them in that way while still benefiting us - I'm not so sure. I think it's naive to expect the US to be looking out for anyone other than themselves as a result of this deal and given the balance of power between our two countries to expect the UK to agree anything the US doesn't like or want to do.

 

I guess we'll find out.

 

 

Hence why we'll try to find a deal that helps both of us, these can exist you know. 

 

I'm baffled as to why you are moving to the country if you really think they are as selfish, negative and nasty as you portray them.

[leicsmac]

57 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Trade deals work both ways you know. They'll be able to sell stuff to us easier as well. Could well be in their interest.

Of course they do. I'm just urging caution regarding expecting any kind of sweetheart deal or the expectation that they'll treat us nice just because we have  common language and (sort of) culture. If we get one, then so much the better.

 

28 minutes ago, MattP said:

Hence why we'll try to find a deal that helps both of us, these can exist you know. 

 

I'm baffled as to why you are moving to the country if you really think they are as selfish, negative and nasty as you portray them.

Because I'm a self-hating masochist who enjoys a good argument - hence why I spend so much time on here?

 

But in all seriousness, the majority of Americans aren't selfish, negative or nasty - same with people everywhere. All the folks (even the immi official who questioned me when I arrived) have been friendly, nice and genuinely warm to me since the moment I got off the plane.

 

It just so happens that a minority that do display some of those traits are the ones currently in charge of setting policy - trade and otherwise - right now, put there by another minority that back their views. As they are currently the ones in charge I thought those should be the ones focused on.

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

Of course they do. I'm just urging caution regarding expecting any kind of sweetheart deal or the expectation that they'll treat us nice just because we have  common language and (sort of) culture. If we get one, then so much the better.

 

 

I don't expect anyone to do us any favours. Self interest is always the most reliable motive.

[leicsmac]

Well, there's a little ray of sunshine:

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-38640413

 

Perhaps this administration can be convinced not to go totally self-destructive in this regard, then. Wonder what the rank and file will think though...

 

Now all we need is an improved NASA budget.