Strokes Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 4 minutes ago, Facecloth said: Take note @DANGEROUS TIGER that's how you respond. I might not agree with Strokes but at least at times he can put together a coherent argument. @Strokes our biggest destination for trade is the EU surely, as it's a trading block? And people worrying about the outcome of something and pointing out concerns of themselves and others isn't having no faith it's just being realistic about the situation we find ourselves in. Whether Brexit is good or bad it's been handled terribly. I don’t deny that facecloth, I’m trying to point out, you can trade effectively without a deal and it’s not the be all and end all.
Jimothy Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 4 minutes ago, Strokes said: I don’t deny that facecloth, I’m trying to point out, you can trade effectively without a deal and it’s not the be all and end all. But our trade figures with the US at the minute is lumped in with the eu. So we might not have a deal with them, because the eu doesn't, but if the US play hard ball, it the US trade with us, Germany, France, Spain, Italy etc etc that suffers. When we step away our trade figure are no longer part of that larger eu figure and we no longer look like a a trading partner they'd be bothered about pissing off. 1
Strokes Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 Just now, Facecloth said: But our trade figures with the US at the minute is lumped in with the eu. So we might not have a deal with them, because the eu doesn't, but if the US play hard ball, it the US trade with us, Germany, France, Spain, Italy etc etc that suffers. When we step away our trade figure are no longer part of that larger eu figure and we no longer look like a a trading partner they'd be bothered about pissing off. Again I’m not arguing with on that, they are fair points. It’s not my point though, my point is, you can still trade effectively without a deal. We are doing it with others outside the EU. Sure no friction is easier for businesses but it can easily be done. So to say there is no plan or fall back is false. Whether or not we pull a deal of with the US is neither here nor there, we shouldn’t accept anything that isn’t mutually beneficial but no trade deal with them is fine as it is.
Strokes Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 55 minutes ago, ealingfox said: Exactly. If @toddybad had just done as he was told and flown a Union Jack in his back garden since the day after the referendum, things would be so different. St. George’s Cross.
Izzy Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 All this deal or no deal stuff is confusing. If one country wants to buy something from another country who’s willingness to sell, why does it all have to be so complicated? 1
Strokes Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 3 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: All this deal or no deal stuff is confusing. If one country wants to buy something from another country who’s willingness to sell, why does it all have to be so complicated? Tariffs exist to protect native businesses but a free trade deal provides a bigger market, it’s about balance, I guess. Having a free trade agreement with China for example would mean we could buy their cheap tat, even cheaper but they won’t buy much from us, so is it worth it? A free trade deal should be mutually beneficial, fair and having an organisation overseeing it is no bad thing, so long as they respect the countries sovereignty I don’t see much issue with it. 1
ealingfox Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 23 minutes ago, Strokes said: St. George’s Cross. What about it?
Strokes Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 4 minutes ago, ealingfox said: What about it? It’s a flag, white background, Red Cross.
Sharpe's Fox Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 Whenever I think about the Conservative Party eurosceptics
ealingfox Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 3 minutes ago, Strokes said: It’s a flag, white background, Red Cross. I'd say you weren't thick enough to actually think that the referendum was only held in England, but I'm genuinely not sure. Can you confirm?
Strokes Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 6 minutes ago, ealingfox said: I'd say you weren't thick enough to actually think that the referendum was only held in England, but I'm genuinely not sure. Can you confirm? I don’t understand the question.
Guest Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 2 hours ago, breadandcheese said: No 1 is not true. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/22/uk-business-chief-warns-against-us-trade-deal I've seen more explicit warnings since also.
breadandcheese Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, toddybad said: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/22/uk-business-chief-warns-against-us-trade-deal I've seen more explicit warnings since also. That doesn't back up your point. You said most businesses don't want a free trade deal with America and that UK firms wouldn't be able to compete. This article primarily worries about the UK rushing into a trade deal where our govt negotiators are outmanoeuvred into a bad trade deal. Edited 7 July 2018 by breadandcheese 3
Guest Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 44 minutes ago, breadandcheese said: That doesn't back up your point. You said most businesses don't want a free trade deal with America and that UK firms wouldn't be able to compete. This article primarily worries about the UK rushing into a trade deal where our govt negotiators are outmanoeuvred into a bad trade deal. Let's be honest, I make far more effort to back up my points than most on here. I'm not wasting any more time tonight on an argument I don't really care about beyond trying to wind webbo up. If you want to believe that our businesses are really excited about going head to head with US firms in the UK market then believe what you want.
lifted*fox Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 DT throwing his weight about in here, still not dropped into that other thread and explained his 'poor little kiddie' remark. giving that a proper wide berth, eh. 1
Alf Bentley Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 2 hours ago, Strokes said: Tariffs exist to protect native businesses but a free trade deal provides a bigger market, it’s about balance, I guess. Having a free trade agreement with China for example would mean we could buy their cheap tat, even cheaper but they won’t buy much from us, so is it worth it? A free trade deal should be mutually beneficial, fair and having an organisation overseeing it is no bad thing, so long as they respect the countries sovereignty I don’t see much issue with it. Decent mini-summary re. UK-China trade here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42821084 Notably: "In terms of total trade in goods and services, China is the UK's fifth largest trading partner (in terms of countries) - and the second largest non-EU partner after the United States. In 2016, UK-China trade was worth £59.1bn. The UK ran a trade deficit of £25.4bn with China in 2016. [....] However, British exports to China have increased by 64% since 2010". Our big trade deficit with China might be deemed not to be "fair". But if Hard Brexit folk are determined to throw away a significant chunk of by far the UK's largest export market (the EU), then China has got to be one of the main targets for this new "global Britain" we keep hearing about (as a general idea, but with very few specifics). While trade with many developing countries could grow through new deals, very few of them are big enough, rich enough or growing fast enough to make up for much of our lost EU trade any time soon - and we have to focus on the present and immediate future, not the distant future. China does have that potential now, as do the USA (though Trump's protectionism is an obvious issue), maybe India & a few others. Some more interesting stats on UK exports by nation (showing the importance of EU nations - and of China, despite the trade deficit): http://www.worldstopexports.com/united-kingdoms-top-import-partners/ "Below is a list showcasing 15 of United Kingdom’s top trading partners in terms of export sales. That is, these are countries that imported the most UK shipments by dollar value during 2017. Also shown is each import country’s percentage of total UK exports. 1.United States: US$58.4 billion (13.1% of total UK exports) 2. Germany: $46.6 billion (10.5%) 3. France: $32.8 billion (7.4%) 4. Netherlands: $27.6 billion (6.2%) 5. Ireland: $25.2 billion (5.7%) 6. China: $21.2 billion (4.8%) 7. Switzerland: $20.1 billion (4.5%) 8. Belgium: $17.7 billion (4%) 9. Italy: $13.2 billion (3%) 10. Spain: $13.2 billion (3%) 11. Turkey: $9.6 billion (2.2%) 12. United Arab Emirates: $9.5 billion (2.1%) 13. Hong Kong: $9.3 billion (2.1%) 14. South Korea: $7.5 billion (1.7%) 15. Japan: $7.3 billion (1.6%) 1
breadandcheese Posted 7 July 2018 Posted 7 July 2018 55 minutes ago, toddybad said: Let's be honest, I make far more effort to back up my points than most on here. I'm not wasting any more time tonight on an argument I don't really care about beyond trying to wind webbo up. If you want to believe that our businesses are really excited about going head to head with US firms in the UK market then believe what you want. I don't get why you're upset. You made an assertion that is wrong, so I challenged you. That's all. It's not a big point of debate. UK businesses would of course rather keep existing rules and supplier/customer routes as these are stable and have been cultivates over many years (in some cases decades). But this does not mean British businesses are sitting here terrified of American firms. In many respects American businesses have been investing in the UK for decades so there is nothing new or frightening there. I don't disagree with your scepticism on leaving the EU. But your argument in this case isn't correct.
breadandcheese Posted 8 July 2018 Posted 8 July 2018 So what as I was saying yesterday about how religiously we follow EU regulations or interpret them, I then read this today: The Package Travel Regulations – designed to protect travellers who book flights and hotels online – will mean that B&Bs and hotels need extra insurance if they want to reserve guests a table at the hotel’s own restaurant or book them a taxi to a local pub, according to the Tourism Alliance, which represents more than 50 tourism industry bodies. The regulations, based on an EU directive, were intended to offer travellers the protection they would have if they booked through a travel agency. But the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy extended the rules to cover any service not part of the room rate – something no other EU country has done, according to Kurt Janson, director of the Tourism Alliance. “It means hotels will have to buy insolvency insurance, at £1,000 or £1,500 per business,” Janson said. “It’s very frustrating, and if you don’t do it, it’s a criminal offence.” https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jul/08/insurance-rules-punish-uk-hotels-holidays-staycation-heatwave If we behaved as France do towards rules they don't like, I reckon the country would have voted to remain.
Guest Posted 8 July 2018 Posted 8 July 2018 3 minutes ago, breadandcheese said: So what as I was saying yesterday about how religiously we follow EU regulations or interpret them, I then read this today: The Package Travel Regulations – designed to protect travellers who book flights and hotels online – will mean that B&Bs and hotels need extra insurance if they want to reserve guests a table at the hotel’s own restaurant or book them a taxi to a local pub, according to the Tourism Alliance, which represents more than 50 tourism industry bodies. The regulations, based on an EU directive, were intended to offer travellers the protection they would have if they booked through a travel agency. But the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy extended the rules to cover any service not part of the room rate – something no other EU country has done, according to Kurt Janson, director of the Tourism Alliance. “It means hotels will have to buy insolvency insurance, at £1,000 or £1,500 per business,” Janson said. “It’s very frustrating, and if you don’t do it, it’s a criminal offence.” https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jul/08/insurance-rules-punish-uk-hotels-holidays-staycation-heatwave If we behaved as France do towards rules they don't like, I reckon the country would have voted to remain. It could be that we wanted the rules to be more extensive?
breadandcheese Posted 8 July 2018 Posted 8 July 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, toddybad said: It could be that we wanted the rules to be more extensive? Maybe, but the response from inspectors and bureaucrats to businesess, when checking rules are being adhered to, is that it's a European wide directive that they have to follow (whether civil servants have made the rules rougher or not due to the basis for them being from the EU). So, if you're a business owner or an employee faced with having to deal with the extra work or cost of the new rules, you blame the EU sticking it's nose in. Edited 8 July 2018 by breadandcheese
Milo Posted 8 July 2018 Posted 8 July 2018 Interesting points about implementation of EU regs. A lot of my job involves advising businesses about EU rules and regulations, and how to apply them. It’s generally costly to the business. A common question I get asked is “If it’s an EU rule, why were they not following it in rural France when I was there on my holidays last year?” It’s a fair question. 1
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 8 July 2018 Posted 8 July 2018 20 hours ago, lifted*fox said: DT throwing his weight about in here, still not dropped into that other thread and explained his 'poor little kiddie' remark. giving that a proper wide berth, eh. Hello, hello, hello,'. Where have you just sprung from?
Jimothy Posted 8 July 2018 Posted 8 July 2018 Just now, DANGEROUS TIGER said: Hello, hello, hello,'. Where have you just sprung from? Still posting absolutely nothing of substance I see. 1
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 8 July 2018 Posted 8 July 2018 6 minutes ago, Facecloth said: Still posting absolutely nothing of substance I see.
Recommended Posts