Brexit!

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

How would we be lining the EUs pockets even more?

This confused me too

 

Any tariffs applied to imports are paid to our government 

 

our exports are likely to become become more expensive as Europeans have to pay duties on them 

 

btw, does this mean we still have a Queen’s speech? Surely there has to be a prorogation of some kind ahead of it - would be an awkward request ......

 

[Strokes]

4 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

This confused me too

 

Any tariffs applied to imports are paid to our government 

Thats how how I understand it too.

 

Quote

our exports are likely to become become more expensive as Europeans have to pay duties on them 

Yeah one positive of our currency tumbling would be that the tariffs would be absorbed somewhat.

Quote

 

btw, does this mean we still have a Queen’s speech? Surely there has to be a prorogation of some kind ahead of it - would be an awkward request ......

 

God knows, following the political soap opera is becoming confusing, I feel like I’ve missed a few late night specials or something.

[Dames]

7 minutes ago, Strokes said:

How would we be lining the EUs pockets even more?

Because we won't have a free trade agreement any more meaning we'd have to pay a premium to continue trading.

 

The UK may cut tariffs and charges etc but there is no guarantee the EU would do the same, arguably they wouldn't so they can make an example.

[Strokes]

Just now, Dames said:

Because we won't have a free trade agreement any more meaning we'd have to pay a premium to continue trading.

 

The UK may cut tariffs and charges etc but there is no guarantee the EU would do the same, arguably they wouldn't so they can make an example.

We don’t pay the tariffs to the EU. 

[Dames]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

This confused me too

 

Any tariffs applied to imports are paid to our government 

 

our exports are likely to become become more expensive as Europeans have to pay duties on them 

 

btw, does this mean we still have a Queen’s speech? Surely there has to be a prorogation of some kind ahead of it - would be an awkward request ......

 

Either way its money going into the Governments of EU countries - it has been stated many times that the UK will relax charges and tariffs in the event of no deal but the EU has not mentioned doing the same.

[Saxondale]

29 minutes ago, danfox76 said:

not good at business are you.. demand or not.. ban importing german cars.. the germans have a problem and will want to resolve.

 

23 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Or BMW open a factory in the UK to get easy access to our market

What you don't seem to understand it that the indivisibility of the four freedoms of the EU is more important to the Germans than flogging us a few motors. 

[Dames]

Just now, Strokes said:

We don’t pay the tariffs to the EU. 

Because we currently have a free trade agreement with them because we are part of the EU.

 

That all changes when we leave - what don't you get about that?

[Donk]

1 hour ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

They dont want a referendum because they won and also if remain had won there wouldn't be a second chance for leave to win so why the double standard?

If the leave side could demonstrate lots of evidence as to why the remain side was constantly lying, identifying all the positive benefits to brexit we would be missing out on by remaining im sure momentum would gather for the 2nd referendum if remain had won.

 

But they wouldnt, because there arent any benefits, that the reasons for leaving have been more or less exposed as twaddle, they only have emotive rhetoric, and everything a brexiteer says usually falls apart within about 2 mins until youre left with an angry person yelling we voted to leeeeeeeeeeeave

[RoboFox]

2 hours ago, danfox76 said:

Boris is actually trying to carry out the will of the people and follow though on the democratic vote.. which was to Brexit.. if he's right or wrong on how he does it is another matter.. anyone who's fighting Brexit is fighting against democracy, and the will of the people.

 

45 minutes ago, danfox76 said:

unfortunately for you.. not enough people shared that view.. democracy gotta love it

 

Alright, you've been going on and on, so I'm going to bite.

 

Today has reminded us some basic constitutional lessons on how British democracy works.

 

As Lady Hale said today "we live in a representative democracy." Since the referendum, both May and Johnson have tried to lay claim to a new source of political authority - the Brexit vote. As others have said on here - and rightly so - it was a mandate for the principle of leaving the EU, not for the manner in doing so, that decision required parliament. In proroguing, the government has tried to silence it. It was autocracy, not the "democracy" that you seem so keen on.

 

The Johnson government's decision - as stated by the rule of law - could not stand up to the UK's basic constitutional structure.

 

TL;DR - Today's ruling has brought out the true operating mechanics of liberal democracy, rather than riding roughshod over it as some claim.

 

[Strokes]

Just now, Dames said:

Because we currently have a free trade agreement with them because we are part of the EU.

 

That all changes when we leave - what don't you get about that?

I genuinely think it’s you that is not understanding, I stand to be corrected. The only tariffs payed by consumers is import duty, which is collected by the government. Our exports would have import duty applied by the land upon which it is imported by and will be paid by its consumers.

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Dames said:

Because we won't have a free trade agreement any more meaning we'd have to pay a premium to continue trading.

 

The UK may cut tariffs and charges etc but there is no guarantee the EU would do the same, arguably they wouldn't so they can make an example.

our exports would become more expensive - the importer pays tarrifs …………..but as was pointed out, the reduction in the exchange rate may compensate somewhat for that. I would expect that we would remove tarrifs on imports for a while which would help compensate a bit for the inflatory impacts of the currency drop. 

[Dames]

1 minute ago, Saxondale said:

 

What you don't seem to understand it that the indivisibility of the four freedoms of the EU is more important to the Germans than flogging us a few motors. 

Exactly this. They will toe the company line and close ranks to ensure no other country thinks about leaving because one more after us could cause an irreparable domino effect.

 

We will continue to trade with the EU but it will definitely be on their terms and not ours.

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I genuinely think it’s you that is not understanding, I stand to be corrected. The only tariffs payed by consumers is import duty, which is collected by the government. Our exports would have import duty applied by the land upon which it is imported by and will be paid by its consumers.

correct - I'm not sure what @dames is confused by.  

 

it makes our goods more expensive in Europe …. of course the purchaser could ask for a price reduction to compensate them.  we don't pay any tarrifs directly to the EU on export or import

 

EDIT: I am in no doubt that it would cause huge problems at the ports on both sides - just stating facts. i've generally been of the opinion that the Europeans will blink in the end to prevent no deal because of these 'huge problems'.  just a shame its dragged on so bloody long .,...…...

 

[The Guvnor]

Well I have just seen Boris being interviewed and he seemed unpeturbed about the ruling, doesn't look like a man who would be considering a resignation, or about to make a vote of no confidence on himself.

If Corbyn doesn't announce a VONC on recall to Parliament then isn't that a huge risk with Boris still adamant we will be leaving on the 31st.

Although I suspect the main agenda will now be to enable a civil servant to be able to request an extension should Boris refuse.

[Alf Bentley]

55 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

But I mean in the time frame promised, if Boris won the general election mid October he would most likely win it with a no deal Brexit mandate, meaning hed have every right to leave. All Corbyn has done as played party politics to hogtie the government and devoid it of all power. 

 

Neither Corbyn nor parliament is under any obligation to make good on Johnson's promises - or to agree to an election timed to suit his desire to win a majority.

 

Johnson opposed a motion to have him request an extension, but he lost. Not only Corbyn but almost all other opposition MPs plus a minority of Tories voted against him. That's democracy.

Like it or not, parliament - elected in 2017, so after the referendum - wants No Deal off the table. That's democracy, too.

 

Yet he's still repeatedly saying that we're going to leave on 31st October, regardless, sometimes implying that he might ignore the will of parliament & certainly excluding the idea of the extension he's been ordered to request.

If the opposition agreed to an election now, it would mean that our democracy was again suspended as the crisis came to a peak - and our politicians would be running around campaigning for election, when they should be sorting out the problem and being held to account by our elected representatives.

 

If an extension is requested, as parliament demanded, and if the EU agrees to it, then I'm sure we'll have an election within 2 months - at a time when we're not staring into an abyss that the current parliament doesn't want.

Johnson can still campaign in November for a 5-year majority based on a No Deal Brexit and his countless spending promises. I hope he doesn't win a majority. But if he does, that will be democracy, too.

 

Like it or not, part of the aim of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act - introduced by the Tory/LD coalition, let's not forget - was to give PMs less control over when elections happened, so that they couldn't abuse the system to suit their own tactical advantage. 

 

 

[danfox76]

12 minutes ago, Saxondale said:

 

What you don't seem to understand it that the indivisibility of the four freedoms of the EU is more important to the Germans than flogging us a few motors. 

its not just motors though is it.. its everything we import.. my point is we have bargaining chips.. the e.u. ain't holding all the cards when it comes to trade agreement.. and our gov could put up a firmer stance when bargaining.

if we stopped importing german cars for example.. that would hurt the german car market and their economy.. they'd want to negotiate.

[Dames]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

correct - I'm not sure what @dames is confused by.  

 

it makes our goods more expensive in Europe …. of course the purchaser could ask for a price reduction to compensate them.  we don't pay any tarrifs directly to the EU on export or import

 

EDIT: I am in no doubt that it would cause huge problems at the ports on both sides - just stating facts. i've generally been of the opinion that the Europeans will blink in the end to prevent no deal because of these 'huge problems'.  just a shame its dragged on so bloody long .,...…...

 

Yeah I got it wrong I'll hold my hands up to that.

 

I stand by my original point that life will still become more expensive for the every day person. And there is only so long a Tory Government will keep tariffs down before they realize they can make a decent amount of money off imported goods, especially cars.

[danfox76]

tbf i can't remember a time when things got cheaper.. always been on the up and up.

[Alf Bentley]

4 minutes ago, danfox76 said:

its not just motors though is it.. its everything we import.. my point is we have bargaining chips.. the e.u. ain't holding all the cards when it comes to trade agreement.. and our gov could put up a firmer stance when bargaining.

 

At the end of the season, when we're negotiating with Barcelona over Maddison, they won't hold all the cards.....but they'll hold more than us. 

 

https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

 

About 44% of UK exports in goods and services went to other countries in the EU in 2017

8% of EU exports go to the UK is one possible estimate (or 16%-18% if you exclude trade within the EU27, which would be odd)

 

[Saxondale]

12 minutes ago, danfox76 said:

its not just motors though is it.. its everything we import.. my point is we have bargaining chips.. the e.u. ain't holding all the cards when it comes to trade agreement.. and our gov could put up a firmer stance when bargaining.

if we stopped importing german cars for example.. that would hurt the german car market and their economy.. they'd want to negotiate.

We literally have no bargaining chips. By leaving the EU, all of our existing trade deals lapse. Therefore, we're negotiating from a position of absolute desperation. It's the equivalent of burning your whole wardrobe then going into a negotiation to buy a pair or trousers.

 

Yes, it will negatively impact the German economy a little bit by selling us less cars, but it'll hurt us a lot more.

[danfox76]

10 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

At the end of the season, when we're negotiating with Barcelona over Maddison, they won't hold all the cards.....but they'll hold more than us. 

 

https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

 

About 44% of UK exports in goods and services went to other countries in the EU in 2017

8% of EU exports go to the UK is one possible estimate (or 16%-18% if you exclude trade within the EU27, which would be odd)

 

but 8% is massive when you take into account the amount of countries, businesses, and population in the e.u. compared to the u.k... you're not really showing context with that.. and if its the possible estimate of 16%-18%.. HUGE.

 

EDIT: gotta love the source

[Milo]

27 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

 

 

Alright, you've been going on and on, so I'm going to bite.

 

Today has reminded us some basic constitutional lessons on how British democracy works.

 

As Lady Hale said today "we live in a representative democracy." Since the referendum, both May and Johnson have tried to lay claim to a new source of political authority - the Brexit vote. As others have said on here - and rightly so - it was a mandate for the principle of leaving the EU, not for the manner in doing so, that decision required parliament. In proroguing, the government has tried to silence it. It was autocracy, not the "democracy" that you seem so keen on.

 

The Johnson government's decision - as stated by the rule of law - could not stand up to the UK's basic constitutional structure.

 

TL;DR - Today's ruling has brought out the true operating mechanics of liberal democracy, rather than riding roughshod over it as some claim.

 

Bit selective.

 

Many many more remain MP’s in the House of Commons than Leave MP’s is also a factor. 

 

 

[yorkie1999]

53 minutes ago, Dames said:

Because we won't have a free trade agreement any more meaning we'd have to pay a premium to continue trading.

 

The UK may cut tariffs and charges etc but there is no guarantee the EU would do the same, arguably they wouldn't so they can make an example.

I thought the whole point of trading was basically  "you buy this of me and i'll buy that of you", if all of a sudden you decide to slap a tariff on my goods, well i'm not going to buy your goods and i'll get them from somewhere else.

[Captain...]

2 hours ago, AKCJ said:

So if the country votes 52/48 in favour to leave again you'll be happy with it?

 

I seriously doubt that.

I wouldn't be happy if they were asked the same question, Leave or remain. If the referendum sets out the options, any or all of the following: remain, Withdrawal Agreement, Corbyn's soft Brexit, EFTA, EEA and No deal, in either an elimination or transferrable vote referendum and No Deal wins then I'll accept it. But I will not accept No Deal on the back of a binary vote and that is ignoring the lying, politicking and questionable campaign funding on both sides. 

[Alf Bentley]

22 minutes ago, danfox76 said:

but 8% is massive when you take into account the amount of countries, businesses, and population in the e.u. compared to the u.k... you're not really showing context with that.. and if its the possible estimate of 16%-18%.. HUGE.

 

EDIT: gotta love the source

 

If 8%, 16% & 18% are massive and huge, just imagine how humungously enormous 44% is.... 

 

Re. Source: If you assume that the European Commission (in which the UK is represented) is fiddling the figures, who would you suggest as a reliable source on EU trade?

Donald Trump? A pimple on Farage's arse? The Namibian Society of Potholing & Potsmoking Ballerinas? The Martian Trade Observation Bureau?