Britain tells the EU: we shall not sell out our fishermen

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Logosone said:

 

Corbyn really did balls it up, a very poor politician. But perhaps labour will get a more politically savvy leader who is not afraid to commit at some point. Maybe they can get back to centrist policies as opposed to the quasi socialist nuttery they've been espousing which scared some people off. If they do and play the pro-Euro card, that could be their ticket back in.

 

Maybe not the full economic implications, but economic implications are certainly become clearer now. Ernst & Young have done a study which shows that 1.7 trillion GBP of assets and thousands of jobs have left the city. The UK is begging Europe for a speedy deliverance of equivalency, things will only get worse. That much is clear. The dreams of super-favourable economic conditions for new trade deals have been just that Disney Fantasy land. The substitution of over 50% of export market is easily done with the mouth, but not so easily in practice. More likely British firms will just continue to trade with Europe, but simply pay the premium in tariffs. Good for Europe, bad for the UK.

 

And when the British realise that they're now paying the same amount in tariffs, as they did in EU membership they will most likely curse Brexit every time they pay for Nutella, Tomatos, Mozarella or Bacon, spinach or chillies.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/aug/13/how-a-no-deal-brexit-threatens-your-weekly-food-shop

One perhaps, two maybes and one-way tariffs. Why don't you link this EY "study" instead of more Guardian floss?

[Logosone]

58 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Sorry as far as I am concerned the UK was a net contributor to the EU since day 1 trying to data manipulation or add items that aren't added to other countries doesn't cut any ice with me.

A few points that you have forgotten are

EU Posted workers don't pay UK tax or National Insurance their tax and National Insurance is paid to their home country.

Does the UK taxpayer pay Child benefit  to children not living in the UK Yes it does

The Caring and sharing face of the EU

Unemployed told to leave Ireland in desperate move to slash welfare costs

Ireland is asking its citizens to leave the country if they can't find a job in a desperate bid to slash welfare costs.

The Irish government has sent letters to approximately 6,000 unemployed people suggesting they should take jobs in other European countries in an effort to reduce unemployment benefits, the Financial Times has reported

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/unemployed-told-to-leave-ireland-in-desperate-move-to-slash-welfare-costs-9002720.html

So your figures for the EU immigrants that are working in the UK and paying Uk taxes and insurance don't include the cost savings that their host country is saving by not having to pay them unemployment benefit and other benefits that are payable in their host countries.

tourism and travel took place before freedom of movement and will take place long after both within the EU and outside the EU. In the past I lived and worked in Germany, before the euro, before freedom of movement and I sure people will visit and work in the EU once the UK has left the UK.

As far as Honda is concern yes they are leaving the UK but no they are not moving to the EU they are going to continue their operation from Japan and I suspect in the next 5 years all Japanese companies will shutdown any EU facilities and transfer back to Japan since their is no longer any requirement now that their a EU-Japan trade deal in place

The UK was only a net contributor if you look at money explicity paid to the UK by the EU and viceversa. However, if you look at the full, true, picture you would have to consider such things as 1) EU passporting rights enabled UK and international city services providers to sell financial services which would not have been the case without EU law 2) taxes paid by EU workers who relocated to London 3) tourists who travelled to the UK and spent money 4) Taxes from goods sold in an open market for goods which would not have been sold without the EU legal framework....

 

You can close your eyes to this reality, and practice the ostrich pose, but this does not change the fact that this was the reality. The UK derived revenue from membership in the EU that is not in the official 'paid by EU' figures which UKIP tell you.

 

Yes, the UK taxpayer paid child benefits to unemployed Romanian gypsies, but this was a deficiency of the UK system. I think this has been discontinued EU wide now.

 

I certainly remember paying National Insurance in the UK, many other EU workers paid National Insurance.

 

As you rightly point out the overall net cost/benefit calculation can be made quite difficult if one looks at the full picture.

 

Of course there was tourism before the EU, but do you really think London would have become the world's most visited city without the EU visitors? Most of whom came because of the ease of visa free travel? Undoubtedly tourism to the UK will decline now. Some may still visit. Some may even still come to work. But do you really think given the tremendous bureaucratic headache EU workers will have going to the UK to work in the future just AS MANY will choose to do that? Very, very unlikely.

 

It's not just Honda that is leaving, BMW, Siemens, many many big players will leave the UK. Investment in the UK will continue to go down. How do you think that will affect the UK economy?

 

Brexit is a losing game for the UK. Why do you want it?

 

 

Edited March 7, 2020 by Logosone

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Logosone said:

Lol, you can't even control your own currency. What kind of control do you call telling Romanians and Poles 'Oh do come in lads, no visa needed, open doors'...

 

Yeah, you really got control of borders back. In your head maybe.

 

Not in reality.

 

The UK does not have the tools and muscle to control anything really. Not its own immigration, not its own currency and not even its own economy as a whole. Outproduced by Italy. Outproduced by India.

 

You don't even control your welfare state which you can only finance by going to the capital markets to borrow from Germany, Japan and the US.

 

You control nothing.

Looks like an out of control post. ????

[Logosone]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

One perhaps, two maybes and one-way tariffs. Why don't you link this EY "study" instead of more Guardian floss?

Here you go:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-city-of-london-jobs-financial-services-banking-impact-a8975711.html

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

A vote for the nasty party was certainly seen as a vote for Brexit - but they only got 43% of the vote. Which other party's votes are you counting?

Subject was remain support - the "virtual" arf - now about a fird. Nasty party? Do you mean SNP?

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Logosone said:

 

They did seem surprised that EU law had primacy and certainly to the extent that that was the case. Don't forget there were years of case law that actually established how far this went. It was one thing to read this in principle, but another for British courts to confirm that indeed EU law took precedence in certain areas.

 

Obviously there was no deception whatsoever, though, because if law professors could not anticipate the extent of primacy of EU law certainly Ted Heath would not have been able to. To explain the finer constitutional law points of EU law vs UK law would have gone right over the British electorate's head anyway. They would never have understood it. So no deception at all.

 

Why would the EU and Europeans be 'absolutely bricking it' though? Didn't you understand that the tariffs on UK goods would mean that the EU will take in almost exactly the same amount from the British which the British paid in while a member? Except this time there'll be no millions for infrastructure products in Wales to pay, no loss of business to British products which are now more expensive.

 

The EU is not in a weaker state without Britain. Quite the contrary. I actually hope more countries leave. If the really useless mouths to feed, like Greece, would leave would be even better. Romania and Poland can go too. Door is wide open.

Case law has nothing to do with the origin and primacy of pre-existing EU treaty law and subsequent directives and regulation. What law professors could or could not anticipate is nothing to do with this.

 

You attack the intelligence of the British electorate again. They would never have understood it. 

 

You really think that if tariffs are applied that they will only affect British exports and not EU exports to the UK?

 

Same old line. Same old nonsense. 

 

 

[vogie]

11 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Looks like an out of control post. ????

From a Smoggie.

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

You would have to be more specific on your reference to "flout".

If you are referring to the migrants from Turkey then you do not know if international law is being broken. Refugees can only cross one border, not transit. Only Turkish refugees would be allowed to cross into Greece so do you have proof that Turkish refugees are being refused access under international law, if not you should refrain from unjustified accusations.

First mention I have ever seen of there being any Turkish refugees. Do you have proof? Can you be more specific? 

Edited March 7, 2020 by nauseus

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Logosone said:

Lol, you can't even control your own currency. What kind of control do you call telling Romanians and Poles 'Oh do come in lads, no visa needed, open doors'...

 

Yeah, you really got control of borders back. In your head maybe.

 

Not in reality.

 

The UK does not have the tools and muscle to control anything really. Not its own immigration, not its own currency and not even its own economy as a whole. Outproduced by Italy. Outproduced by India.

 

You don't even control your welfare state which you can only finance by going to the capital markets to borrow from Germany, Japan and the US.

 

You control nothing.

That fact that we still have our own currency is enough to show who has the most control. The US and Japan are also broke and Germany is heading that way now too.

[Logosone]

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Case law has nothing to do with the origin and primacy of pre-existing EU treaty law and subsequent directives and regulation. What law professors could or could not anticipate is nothing to do with this.

 

You attack the intelligence of the British electorate again. They would never have understood it. 

 

You really think that if tariffs are applied that they will only affect British exports and not EU exports to the UK?

 

Same old line. Same old nonsense. 

 

 

 

Obviously you are wrong. Out of ignorance. Case law had a lot to do with determining to what extent EU law took primacy over UK law, and time and time again British courts found that EU law should take precedence.

 

The intelligence of the British electorate is obviously insufficient to understand simple economics, such as that Brexit damages the UK economically. What hope that they would understand the finer points of EU law vs UK law? Even law professors had to argue that one.

 

Look, regarding tariffs, think of Ghengis Khan. He explained to his disjoined tribes by holding one arrow. It was easily broken. Then he held a large number of arrows. They were not easily broken. In the same way tariffs borne by the UK exclusively, but in the case of the EU spread over many EU countries will obviously hurt the UK far more. I mean the EU is a VASTLY more powerful, richer and diverse economic edifice. The disadvantages of Brexit will hurt the UK significantly more than the EU.

 

Especially in foreign investment.

 

Foreign direct investment into the U.K. has fallen by almost 20 percent since the EU referendum.

Published Thursday, the report by the University of Sussex’s U.K. Trade Policy Observatory showed that overseas investment has continuously declined since its peak in 2015. It has been the longest continuous decline for the U.K. since foreign direct investment (FDI) records began in 2003, it said. FDI is defined as overseas investments into new or existing projects, where the foreign investor secures a majority-ownership.

 

While the world economy remained resilient last year, the U.K. lost an estimated $1.5 billion in foreign capital investment, the report said. In 2017, the U.K. saw a 10 percent reduction in FDI projects.

In 2017, the U.K. received almost 1,000 greenfield investment projects worth more than $33 billion — but it was overtaken as the top recipient by Germany, with France also gaining ground.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/01/brexit-could-cause-serious-damage-for-foreign-investment-into-the-uk-new-study-says.html

 

Edited March 7, 2020 by Logosone

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

Garbage, in more ways that one. Only the delusional could think that trade with the EU will follow the same historical pattern.

Tariffs are based on product classification and at the end of the day a lot depends on how far companies are prepared to distort the classification.

If you pack a bicycle with the wheels off, are you selling a bicycle or bicycle spares. Some of us remember the tariff days, not the easiest way to do business.

Those Mercs might lose their appeal when they arrive with no wheels, lights and windows! The EU will not avoid reciprocal UK tariffs on goods imported into the UK, if the EU decides to do the same to the UK. Either way, the UK trade balance and domestic industrial output will improve.

[Logosone]

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

That fact that we still have our own currency is enough to show who has the most control. The US and Japan are also broke and Germany is heading that way now too.

 

Well, at least you can make people laugh.

 

Sure you have a currency that you can not control, that is falling like a rock. What control do you have over the Pound? Exactly zero. None whatsoever.

 

By comparison Germany has out of nothing created the Euro with European partners, which is by now the second most held reserve currency in the world. It has created a common market that has bestowed uncountable benefits on the German economy. Benefits that would have never been enjoyed if it taken an insular little Englander approach and stuck to the Deutschmark alone.

[Logosone]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Those Mercs might lose their appeal when they arrive with no wheels, lights and windows! The EU will not avoid reciprocal UK tariffs on goods imported into the UK, if the EU decides to do the same to the UK. Either way, the UK trade balance and domestic industrial output will improve.

Mercedes Benz cars will always have appeal. That is why they are desired and bought the world over. Not only will they arrive with wheels, light and windows, but with innovations UK carmakers can only dream of.

 

You should try making such quality products that people actually want to buy. Maybe you wouldn't have such a gaping trade deficit then.

 

Instead of being servants only. Financial services from the UK will be at the mercy of EU authorities soon. Better learn how to make things again.

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

You seem to be confused as to who actually pays for the tariffs. Its the customer NOT the government.

So things like fruit and veg which we can not grow here are going to be more expensive. The UK government will of course love this because it means they get more revenue from VAT. The EU gets a percentage of all tariffs from goods from outside the EU. Think its 10% but would need to check that.

Now if you are a European and there are two trays of tomatoes in the shop but one is from the UK and one is from Spain you are going to buy the Spanish ones because they are cheaper. The same applies to UK customers who will buy the British tomatoes rather than the Spanish ones.

However if you fancy some grapes as a European then you just buy grapes at the same price they always were.

If you are British then you are going to pay a lot more for grapes because we dont have a domestic option.

 

So expect a lot of inflation. Coupled with an economy which is shrinking. 

Inflation driven by The Great Grape Rape of 2021! What a story! With climate change there will be vineyards as far north as Silverstone soon anyway.

 

The EU economy is shrinking faster and when you do your checking, you will find that the EU also gets a percentage of all VAT revenue within the EU. Of course after this year they don't get any more of those VAT pie slices from the UK either. 

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Logosone said:

 

Sorry, but that's a lie, the UK was never a 'net contributor'. The UK got far more out of the EU than it ever put in. When you take into account the amount of tax revenue the UK makes from EU immigrants working in the UK (a sum that far outweighs any benefits they receive from the UK government), plus the tax on the profits of free trade within the common market, tourism and travel that wouldn’t have happened without the EU’s free movement policy you begin to understand that the UK received far more than it ever put in.

 

Of course it is not so easy to quantify the real extent to which the UK benefitted from the EU economically. For example, if a French tourist visits London and spends a thousand pounds, how do we know whether or not they would have done so if they’d not benefitted from free travel which the EU faciliated at the time?

 

To quantify these things is not easy, much easier to say 'Aaaah but da Brittish, we's paid in dat amount and we waz a net contributtor'.

 

But you weren't. And if you could have built those gigantic infrastructure projects in Wales et al you wouldn't have applied for EU funds and held your hand, would you?

 

And yes, the fact that the EU is debating increasing its budget tells you that the British contribution will not be missed, especially when we'll take in exactly the same amount from tariffs on UK products.

You begin to understand that the UK received far more than it ever put in. ????

 

You have to be from a different planet. Friends with ET on Facebook?

 

 

 

 

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

We want, we want and we want.

Clowns like that guy lying straight to a camera is why we ended up in this mess.

Yep, Barmier always was a bit of a clot.

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

Exactly, but it is like seeds on stoney ground.

In the last 30 or so years, UK exporters have enjoyed a level of trade with the EU that would never have come about had it not been for the single market.

Many small exporters will not be able to stand the "friction" that will be introduced and a large proportion may well downsize or close the operation. An unquantifiable EU based contribution to the economy that will disappear.

A level of trade with the EU at close to negative 100B balance. Superb!

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, Logosone said:

 

That's not the case, the UK was not a net contributor. If you look at only part of the picture, what the UK actually was paid by the EU you would think so. However, of course that figure leaves out:

 

1. Financial services business the UK was able to sell because it received passporting rights within the EU

2. tourism and travel that wouldn’t happen without the EU’s free movement policy

3. tax revenue the UK makes from EU immigrants working in the UK (a sum that far outweighs any benefits they receive from the UK government)

4. tax on the profits of free trade within the common market

 

For example if an international bank sets up an investment banking operation in the UK, rather than in Paris, in the 1980s, would they have done so without the passporting rights in the EU? How much did their employees contribute in taxes?

 

These things are basically impossible to quantify, but we KNOW it happened, and we know that revenue from the above would push UK receipts beyond UK contributions.

 

The vast majority of City institutions are foreign owned. Their contribution to the UK economy would not have happened without the EU legal framework. And indeed we are seeing already a mass exodus, with 1.7 trillion GBP in assets leaving the city, 7000 jobs. But that's just the beginning because that's just the deposit taking banks who won't be covered by Equivalency anyway. Once the other financial services providers see the real picture the international players will leave. Just like Siemens, Honda and many others have announced.

 

 

Another crockabile.

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, Logosone said:

My apologies, even the Euro trading operations are leaving already. The second phase of the exodus has begun:

 

JPMorgan Chase buys second Paris office as post-Brexit plan accelerates

Bank to shift more staff out of London after purchasing seven-storey building

 

JPMorgan Chase has bought a second building in Paris that can house up to 450 employees, as it steps up the shift of its euro-related trading operations out of London due to Brexit.

 

Paris is emerging as a winner from the dislocation, particularly as a hub for investment bank sales and trading. It has attracted institutions such as Bank of America, which has opened a new trading floor with room for 1,000 staff. HSBC is also moving as many as 1,000 jobs to France from Canary Wharf. Meanwhile, the world’s largest asset manager, BlackRock, has made Paris, not London, its new base to provide “alternative” investment services across Europe and Asia after a charm offensive led by French president Emmanuel Macron.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/1189ae1e-3b71-11ea-a01a-bae547046735

Charm offensive by Macron = tax break. Singapore-sur-Seine?

[Logosone]

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

A level of trade with the EU at close to negative 100B balance. Superb!

It's hardly the fault of the EU if you don't make things anyone wants to buy.

 

It's hardly the fault of the EU if you don't buy the fish caught by your own fishermen.

 

So Germany makes better cars, machines, sports equipment, dishwashers, washing machines, fridges, power tools.

 

The French make better cars, cosmetics, luxury products, clothes, wines, etc...The Spanish make better clothes, cars, etc

 

The Italians make better chocolate spread, cars, clothes etc...

 

This is not the fault of the EU, it's your failure to produce things people want to buy. After all you had a LEVEL, fair playing field.

 

It does not change the fact that EU membership helped the UK tremendously. Without EU passporting rights you can be certain all those shiny international banks and services providers would not have set up in the city and it would not have made the money it would have made. Money which of course does not show up in the 'paid by EU' figure UKIP tells you.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Charm offensive by Macron = tax break. Singapore-sur-Seine?

France is, BY FAR, the country which taxes its people and companies the heaviest.

 

By a long distance.

 

So what this tells you is that Blackrock would RATHER go to a super highly taxed country like France, than head its new operations out of London.

 

Even with small tax incentives, Blackrock has to pay a huge tax bill in France.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

Okay, you are deluding yourself.

 

The internationally recognised Global Financial Centres Index makes clear that NY is number one.

 

You are only looking at assets, but when you mention control you forget to clarify that in London those are INTERNATIONAL assets, if Deutsche Bank holds assets in the City those are not London owned assets, however, NY assets ARE domestic US assets.

 

So you are disingenously touting international, including EU assets, held by EU institutions in London as assets 'controlled' by an English city. That is of course not the case. Most of the City is foreign owned.

 

 

And where is the highest EU location then? Oh, and I can't see Paris anywhere. ????

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

Here you go:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-city-of-london-jobs-financial-services-banking-impact-a8975711.html

This is not the EY report. 

[nauseus]

58 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

Obviously you are wrong. Out of ignorance. Case law had a lot to do with determining to what extent EU law took primacy over UK law, and time and time again British courts found that EU law should take precedence.

 

The intelligence of the British electorate is obviously insufficient to understand simple economics, such as that Brexit damages the UK economically. What hope that they would understand the finer points of EU law vs UK law? Even law professors had to argue that one.

 

Look, regarding tariffs, think of Ghengis Khan. He explained to his disjoined tribes by holding one arrow. It was easily broken. Then he held a large number of arrows. They were not easily broken. In the same way tariffs borne by the UK exclusively, but in the case of the EU spread over many EU countries will obviously hurt the UK far more. I mean the EU is a VASTLY more powerful, richer and diverse economic edifice. The disadvantages of Brexit will hurt the UK significantly more than the EU.

 

Especially in foreign investment.

 

Foreign direct investment into the U.K. has fallen by almost 20 percent since the EU referendum.

Published Thursday, the report by the University of Sussex’s U.K. Trade Policy Observatory showed that overseas investment has continuously declined since its peak in 2015. It has been the longest continuous decline for the U.K. since foreign direct investment (FDI) records began in 2003, it said. FDI is defined as overseas investments into new or existing projects, where the foreign investor secures a majority-ownership.

 

While the world economy remained resilient last year, the U.K. lost an estimated $1.5 billion in foreign capital investment, the report said. In 2017, the U.K. saw a 10 percent reduction in FDI projects.

In 2017, the U.K. received almost 1,000 greenfield investment projects worth more than $33 billion — but it was overtaken as the top recipient by Germany, with France also gaining ground.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/01/brexit-could-cause-serious-damage-for-foreign-investment-into-the-uk-new-study-says.html

 

British courts have no choice than to defer to EU Law because EU Law has primacy over any conflicting national laws of any member states.

 

Obviously twice, a Gengis Khan and a resilient world economy!? You show all the ignorance and simple-mindedness that you accuse me and others of owning.

 

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

 

Well, at least you can make people laugh.

 

Sure you have a currency that you can not control, that is falling like a rock. What control do you have over the Pound? Exactly zero. None whatsoever.

 

By comparison Germany has out of nothing created the Euro with European partners, which is by now the second most held reserve currency in the world. It has created a common market that has bestowed uncountable benefits on the German economy. Benefits that would have never been enjoyed if it taken an insular little Englander approach and stuck to the Deutschmark alone.

Well I think your'e funny too. But yes, the Euro has benefited the Germans enormously, shame about the PIIGS though - and I thought the Germans were so keen on pork? 

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

Mercedes Benz cars will always have appeal. That is why they are desired and bought the world over. Not only will they arrive with wheels, light and windows, but with innovations UK carmakers can only dream of.

 

You should try making such quality products that people actually want to buy. Maybe you wouldn't have such a gaping trade deficit then.

 

Instead of being servants only. Financial services from the UK will be at the mercy of EU authorities soon. Better learn how to make things again.

I actually agree! We should try making quality products of all types again.

[Laughing Gravy]

4 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Your explanation appears to be that Alf Garnett was 'plain humour', representative of a simpler time.

That's the trouble with you besides the S issue you, is that appear to assume far to much.

 

No mention of the swingers. I guess you continually to selective choose what you reply too.

[Logosone]

23 minutes ago, nauseus said:

And where is the highest EU location then? Oh, and I can't see Paris anywhere. ????

 

Actually Europe as a whole has financial centres with more assets than London, if combined. The thing is that in Europe the financial centres are fragmented. But the UK only has the seventh largest financial sector in the OECD by GDP. The EU has the largest one, Luxembourg.

 

If you combine Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt, Dublin, Zurich, their clout is actually bigger than London's in financial services.

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

Actually Europe as a whole has financial centres with more assets than London, if combined. The thing is that in Europe the financial centres are fragmented. But the UK only has the seventh largest financial sector in the OECD by GDP. The EU has the largest one, Luxembourg.

 

If you combine Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt, Dublin, Zurich, their clout is actually bigger than London's in financial services.

And if you combine red and green you end up with brown. ????

[transam]

Just now, Logosone said:

 

Actually Europe as a whole has financial centres with more assets than London, if combined. The thing is that in Europe the financial centres are fragmented. But the UK only has the seventh largest financial sector in the OECD by GDP. The EU has the largest one, Luxembourg.

 

If you combine Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt, Dublin, Zurich, their clout is actually bigger than London's in financial services.

That reads like you're struggling for something to post..........