Surely out in 11 month's....maybe sooner out of everything ....allone in this big world as it seems complete stalemate negotiations in the making ! 

Any numbers make no different as it goes about each ones own prioritys ....as some find 1000000 voters are big ...what about 450 000 000 million E U citizens LOl !? Or 27 country's.....

This shall have no outcome as Boris expect ...WTO 

.YES ????

.

Boris Johnson is about to find out just how weak the UK is after Brexit

.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/03/boris-johnson-weak-brexit-uk

Edited February 3, 20206 yr by david555

32 minutes ago, david555 said:

Surely out in 11 month's....maybe sooner out of everything ....allone in this big world as it seems complete stalemate negotiations in the making ! 

Any numbers make no different as it goes about each ones own prioritys ....as some find 1000000 voters are big ...what about 450 000 000 million E U citizens LOl !? Or 27 country's.....

This shall have no outcome as Boris expect ...WTO 

.YES ????

.

Boris Johnson is about to find out just how weak the UK is after Brexit

.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/03/boris-johnson-weak-brexit-uk

 The lion has become a mouse, a mouse trying to roar.????

I like the way Boris is approaching this. What a difference to Theresa May.

 

We absolutely must not have regulatory alignment. Get those shackles off. Divergence is key to the project and opposing it is just the latest Remainer trick to create BRINO. It will fail like all their previous attempts.

What he doing is the only way (and correct way) to start a negotiation. Go into the negotiation with your worst possible case for the opposition and negotiate from there. 

They want access to UK market, they want fisheries access, what will they trade it for.

 

Best of luck to him and lets hope he gets good deal rather than gets trampled on like poor Mrs May, who had her middle of the road approach thrown back in her face.

On 2/2/2020 at 11:06 AM, GalaxyMan said:

With the EU having a population of approximately 500 million and the UK only 66 million, I'd say that the UK doesn't have a very strong hand. Brexit is going to cost every single person in the UK more; can't say the same for the EU, which doesn't need the UK market nearly as much as the UK needs the EU market.

Saw this in The Guardian this morning.

 

The pound fell on Monday after Boris Johnson warned that Britain would not accept alignment with EU rules in any Brexit trade deal, while Brussels threatened to put tariffs on UK goods unless he complies.  Johnson said the UK wanted a free trade deal by the end of 2020 without agreeing to match EU rules. However, Brussels warned this would result in reduced access to the EU market for British companies. The EU is the largest source of UK food imports and largest destination for UK food exports in the world.

On 2/2/2020 at 9:16 PM, bannork said:

45% of UK exports go to the EU.

6.6% of German exports go to the UK.

 

Nice chart.

 

Tabe back Airbus production to the Continent..  The UK will have to be nice to Trump

Edited February 4, 20206 yr by Opl

On 2/3/2020 at 1:57 PM, david555 said:

(Would it be not more practicable to stop whole this transition thing...., as it is not going to work ...the water in the Channel is much to deep between boht party's ,and  another lost year for both avoiding  so ? ) ????

 

 

https://news.sky.com/story/pm-threatens-to-collapse-trade-talks-with-eu-11925290
Monday 3 February 2020 04:26, UK 

Boris Johnson threatens to collapse trade talks with EU 

Boris Johnson will say there is no need for a free trade agreement with the European Union to involve accepting EU rules.When Ottawa signed the agreement with the EU, it abolished 98% of duties and opened investment opportunities in transport and finance for European firms.

Ahead of trade talks in March, Mr Johnson will say: "We want a free trade agreement, similar to Canada's but, in the very unlikely event that we do not succeed, then our trade will have to be based on our existing Withdrawal Agreement with the EU. "The choice is emphatically not 'deal or no deal'. The question is whether we agree a trading relationship with the EU comparable to Canada's - or more like Australia's. In either case, I have no doubt that Britain will prosper."An Australia-style situation would see Britain trading on World Trade Organisation terms, but with extra deals to cover areas such as aviation.

Liberal Democrats leader Sir Ed Davey called it "no deal in all but name".EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier is expected demand that Britain agrees to Brussels standards because of its "geographic proximity and economic interdependence", as well as the threat of "unfair competition by undercutting", according to the Telegraph.Europe is likely to want access to UK fishing waters.The bloc could also back Spain's claim on Gibraltar by giving Spain the power to exclude the overseas territory from a trade deal.

 

more...

 

more...

 

no less, please, much less.

 

BTW the Channel is relatively shallow. Especially at the eastern end, near France, Belgium and Holland.

 

23 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Twice? Maths obviously isn't your strong point!

 

As said, last December 52.4% voted for parties who promised, at least, a referendum on whether to accept the withdrawal agreement or cancel Brexit.

 

52.4% is greater than 50% and therefore the majority.

 

It is also greater than the 51.9% who voted leave in 2016.

 

But, as also said, the way our first past the post system works means that despite increasing their share of the vote by a mere 1.2% (42.4% to 43.6%), the Tories have increased their seats by 10.9% and now have a majority in the House. Which means Cummings can now do as he pleases with no regard to what we, the people, actually want.

 

His pigeons will doubtless come home to roost in 2024; but by then it will be too late.

 

 

As said....

23 hours ago, spinner2020 said:

British carmakers? There aren't any. (Morgan produces fewer than 900 cars/year. Name another British company.......)

Honda and Nissan are disinvesting. BMW may well close its plants in UK. As for "British companies supplying the carmakers", which I suspect is what the piece meant, nearly all have facilities in Europe to supply plants in the EU (that's JIT). They will simply transfer more if not all output to those plants.

Looks like Nissan are about to change their minds.

11 hours ago, david555 said:

 The lion has become a mouse, a mouse trying to roar.????

Elephants in the room....beware!

17 minutes ago, Opl said:

he UK will have to be nice to Trump

 

17 minutes ago, Opl said:

 

Tabe back Airbus production to the Continent..  The UK will have to be nice to Trump

I think they changed their minds already too.

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I think they changed their minds already too.

I think they should not take this option off the table since it will be hard to negociate with confidence, they should secure Airbus future

Edited February 4, 20206 yr by Opl

27 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I think they changed their minds already too.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46984229

 

The planemaker's chief executive, Tom Enders:

"And make no mistake, there are plenty of countries out there who would love to build the wings for Airbus aircraft," he added.

"Brexit is threatening to destroy a century of development based on education, research and human capital."

 

From the risk paper:

Every week of unrecoverable delay would entail material working capital impact, re-allocation cost, cost for inefficient work, penalty payments to customers and up to € 1 Billion weekly loss of turnover. 

 

A no deal Brexit would force Airbus to reconsider its footprint in the country, 
its investments in the UK and at large its dependency on the UK (with many potential undesirable 
consequences such as repatriating competencies, patents, revisit Research and Development 
footprint, reduce UK’s weight in the supply chain etc.

 

Since the order books are full + the Boeing 737 max disaster, Airbus will not be able to relocate production in the short term. But capacities will be shifted in the medium to long term.

 

 

Brexit-Risk-Assessment-21-Jun-FINAL.pdf

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Nice chart.

I guess if I was presented with overwhelming evidence that showed the weakness of the Brexiters claim that the loss of free trade with hurt both sides equally or even that it would hurt the EU worse, I might be tempted to respond with a quip, too. The fact remains that balance of trade argument of most Brexiters in this form is ludicrously weak and betrays a lack of familiarity with even pretty basic arithmetic.

10 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I guess if I was presented with overwhelming evidence that showed the weakness of the Brexiters claim that the loss of free trade with hurt both sides equally or even that it would hurt the EU worse, I might be tempted to respond with a quip, too. The fact remains that balance of trade argument of most Brexiters in this form is ludicrously weak and betrays a lack of familiarity with even pretty basic arithmetic.

Brexit is a faith. You don't need evidence or facts just belief. 

And the rabid gammons even have the nerve to complain that anyone who does not believe as they do are actually harming the country.

2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

I guess if I was presented with overwhelming evidence that showed the weakness of the Brexiters claim that the loss of free trade with hurt both sides equally or even that it would hurt the EU worse, I might be tempted to respond with a quip, too. The fact remains that balance of trade argument of most Brexiters in this form is ludicrously weak and betrays a lack of familiarity with even pretty basic arithmetic.

The chart is "overwhelming evidence" that certain EU countries will be in deep trouble if there is no trade agreement.  

2 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Brexit is a faith. You don't need evidence or facts just belief. 

And the rabid gammons even have the nerve to complain that anyone who does not believe as they do are actually harming the country.

Rabid is a word already reserved for rookie remainers.

36 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Rabid is a word already reserved for rookie remainers.

OK from now on I will use the word "stupid" instead of rabid.

3 hours ago, nauseus said:

The chart is "overwhelming evidence" that certain EU countries will be in deep trouble if there is no trade agreement.  

I guess you can assert whatever you like. But since the biggest exporters to the UK are Belgium and the Netherlands with a little over 7% and little under 7% in respect to their total exports, whereas  for the UK's exports to the EU amount to 45%, what you're claiming makes no sense at all.

Edited February 4, 20206 yr by bristolboy

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

I guess you can assert whatever you like. But since the biggest exporters to the UK are Belgium and the Netherlands with a little over 7% and little under 7% in respect to their total exports, whereas  for the UK's exports to the EU amount to 45%, what you're claiming makes no sense at all.

Well you can assert whatever you like too. OK?

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Well you can assert whatever you like too. OK?

The difference is that I back it up my assertions with data. You back up yours with nothing. 

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The difference is that I back it up my assertions with data. You back up yours with nothing. 

The main difference is that you either miss or ignore the point completely, which is that, in the event of no trade deal, the combined damage to the EU will be ultimately greater than that to the UK. While the hit to EU member states like Holland will be less, individually and initially, the UK will still be able to continue to buy what it needs (WTO), while securing new trade agreements elsewhere. Over time, the UK will buy less and less from the EU and find new export markets for itself. The UK will recover well but the EU ends up with the longer-term problem of permanently lost trade with the UK, which will be difficult to replace.

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

The main difference is that you either miss or ignore the point completely, which is that, in the event of no trade deal, the combined damage to the EU will be ultimately greater than that to the UK. While the hit to EU member states like Holland will be less, individually and initially, the UK will still be able to continue to buy what it needs (WTO), while securing new trade agreements elsewhere. Over time, the UK will buy less and less from the EU and find new export markets for itself. The UK will recover well but the EU ends up with the longer-term problem of permanently lost trade with the UK, which will be difficult to replace.

You make it sound as if we were prevented from trading with anyone else while part of the EU. The fact is if these mystical markets existed we would already be trading with them.

11 hours ago, nauseus said:

The main difference is that you either miss or ignore the point completely, which is that, in the event of no trade deal, the combined damage to the EU will be ultimately greater than that to the UK. While the hit to EU member states like Holland will be less, individually and initially, the UK will still be able to continue to buy what it needs (WTO), while securing new trade agreements elsewhere. Over time, the UK will buy less and less from the EU and find new export markets for itself. The UK will recover well but the EU ends up with the longer-term problem of permanently lost trade with the UK, which will be difficult to replace.

Thank you visitor from the future where apparently the universally observed phenomenon of economic gravity will no longer apply. And not only will economic gravity no longer apply to the UK but neither will Isaac Newton's. Because the UK is an exceptional nation and can shake itself free of the shackles of whatever laws or economics or nature that it likes...

Or, it could be, that not having any data to support you, you instead resort to the fantasyland called The Future to justify your arguments. That's the great thing about the Future...it can be whatever you want it to be. What it can't be though, is factual. 

Edited February 5, 20206 yr by bristolboy

6 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

You make it sound as if we were prevented from trading with anyone else while part of the EU. The fact is if these mystical markets existed we would already be trading with them.

Not what I said.

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Thank you visitor from the future where apparently the universally observed phenomenon of economic gravity will no longer apply. And not only will economic gravity no longer apply to the UK but neither will Isaac Newton's. Because the UK is an exceptional nation and can shake itself free of the shackles of whatever laws or economics or nature that it likes...

Or, it could be, that not having any data to support you, you instead resort to the fantasyland called The Future to justify your arguments. That's the great thing about the Future...it can be whatever you want it to be. What it can't be though, is factual. 

 

Not an argument..an opinion. No data required. 

17 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

OK from now on I will use the word "stupid" instead of rabid.

Thought you might. Originality really is a rare asset.

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Thought you might. Originality really is a rare asset.

You thought?

Wow we really are talking about originality here.

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Not an argument..an opinion. No data required. 

.

No data required when your opinion runs contrary to a universally observed phenomenon of economics? In what significant way does your opinion differ from fiction?