EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The EU needs reforming. Our exports to the EU is shrinking by %, and is somewhere between growing very slowly and stagnant in value once inflation is taken into consideration. Europes GDP per head is also shrinking.

Leaving that organisation will only see us on the outside looking in. Matters such as EU reform will therefore be something at Britain has no input to.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

UPDATE just reading the Guardian, now May has apparently changed her mind and there will be "no hard border" at all. OK, we have a position on that. Good.
Just means that the "control our borders" bit on Brexit has been thrown out the window. You won't have freedom of movement into the UK apart from the areas where you will have freedom of movement into the UK. Got it.

People aren't going to waste their time and money coming here if they get no benefits and/or face deportation.

 

[dosxuk]

People aren't going to waste their time and money coming here if they get no benefits and/or face deportation.

If this was in any way true, nobody would be trying to get here illegally.

 

[AlterEgo]

People aren't going to waste their time and money coming here if they get no benefits and/or face deportation.

Wait and see.

 

[Howardh]

People aren't going to waste their time and money coming here if they get no benefits and/or face deportation.

That was gonna be the situation if we had stayed in the EU.

 

[furnessvale]

Leaving that organisation will only see us on the outside looking in. Matters such as EU reform will therefore be something at Britain has no input to.

If we are outside, why do we want to be looking into the EU any more than we would be looking into any other countries such as the USA, Canada, China etc.?

They are important trading partners but so are the other countries I mentioned, and many others as well. Should we therefore consider becoming a United State so we can influence their decisions?

 

[EM2]

If we are outside, why do we want to be looking into the EU any more than we would be looking into any other countries such as the USA, Canada, China etc.?

Because if we are outside, and the EU reforms for the better, we get nothing out of it.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

If we are outside, why do we want to be looking into the EU any more than we would be looking into any other countries such as the USA, Canada, China etc.?

They are important trading partners but so are the other countries I mentioned, and many others as well. Should we therefore consider becoming a United State so we can influence their decisions?

I would guess it's because the EU as a trading block is a much larger part of exports. The US is 14.5% of our exports whereas Germany, France and Ireland constitute 21.5% alone (and the EU c.40% in total).

So we're still going to have to meet a lot of EU legislation etc but without our current ability to influence it.

 

[furnessvale]

I would guess it's because the EU as a trading block is a much larger part of exports. The US is 14.5% of our exports whereas Germany, France and Ireland constitute 21.5% alone (and the EU c.40% in total).

So we're still going to have to meet a lot of EU legislation etc but without our current ability to influence it.

On about 12% of our GDP. Therefore 88% of our GDP will only have to meet whatever rules the UK decides to set, plus of course whatever rules the importing country sets on our exports eg the USA.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Because if we are outside, and the EU reforms for the better, we get nothing out of it.

Now that is a triumph of wishful thinking.

We can always rejoin. I am sure they would be glad to get their hands on our money once again.

 

[TheKnightWho]

On about 12% of our GDP. Therefore 88% of our GDP will only have to meet whatever rules the UK decides to set, plus of course whatever rules the importing country sets on our exports eg the USA.

This post demonstrates a worrying lack of understanding of both our trade with the EU and how regulations work. Saying "12% of our GDP" is entirely misleading, because it has ramifications on everything else - hell, by that logic the EU only ever affected a small proportion of our GDP anyway!

 

[furnessvale]

This post demonstrates a worrying lack of understanding of both our trade with the EU and how regulations work. Saying "12% of our GDP" is entirely misleading, because it has ramifications on everything else - hell, by that logic the EU only ever affected a small proportion of our GDP anyway!

I think your post demonstrates the lack of understanding.

EU regulation affects 100% of our GDP. Exports to the EU account for 12% of our GDP.

Post Brexit, the EU will only be able to regulate 12% of our GDP. Any other regulations we apply will be our choice or, of course, dictated to us by other countries to which we export, as they do now.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I think your post demonstrates the lack of understanding.

EU regulation affects 100% of our GDP. Exports to the EU account for 12% of our GDP.

Post Brexit, the EU will only be able to regulate 12% of our GDP. Any other regulations we apply will be our choice or, of course, dictated to us by other countries to which we export, as they do now.

You can't pick and choose. That's called fudging statistics. A favourite of the Leave campaign, no? Which paper has been pushing that line? Because you're a fool if you take it at face value.

The EU has a much larger impact than 12%, because it has a much wider importance than the literal trade the we take part in. Even 12% isn't insignificant - do you know how much GDP we lost in the financial crash of 2008? Hint: not as much as 12%.

 

[furnessvale]

You can't pick and choose. That's called fudging statistics. A favourite of the Leave campaign, no? Which paper has been pushing that line? Because you're a fool if you take it at face value.

The EU has a much larger impact than 12%, because it has a much wider importance than the literal trade the we take part in. Even 12% isn't insignificant - do you know how much GDP we lost in the financial crash of 2008? Hint: not as much as 12%.

Very fond of calling anyone a fool who disagrees with you, aren't you.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Very fond of calling anyone a fool who disagrees with you, aren't you.

Fantastic argument - I'm thoroughly convinced. Why is it that Brexiters inevitably forget to make arguments but are very quick to get offended? I thought you all hated PC culture, or is offence ok so long as you're not the butt of it?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

On about 12% of our GDP. Therefore 88% of our GDP will only have to meet whatever rules the UK decides to set, plus of course whatever rules the importing country sets on our exports eg the USA.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Now that is a triumph of wishful thinking.

We can always rejoin. I am sure they would be glad to get their hands on our money once again.

Oh dear....

I think you may be struggling with the concept of GDP. That's the total worth of the country's economic activity that includes every single aspect from getting your hair cut to having your car cleaned. The vast majority of GDP is already solely controlled by our own UK rules and laws :roll:

Hmmm... we can always rejoin? Yeah, but on markedly worse terms than we currently enjoy and, for once, that £350m figure might actually be true (as opposed to a highly misleading soundbite)

 

[TheKnightWho]

Oh dear....

I think you may be struggling with the concept of GDP. That's the total worth of the country's economic activity that includes every single aspect from getting your hair cut to having your car cleaned. The vast majority of GDP is already solely controlled by our own UK rules and laws :roll:

Hmmm... we can always rejoin? Yeah, but on markedly worse terms than we currently enjoy and, for once, that £350m figure might actually be true (as opposed to a highly misleading soundbite)

Precisely. I also thought Brexiters hated all this academic fudging as well, and just wanted straight-talking politicians. Clearly not when it benefits them...

 

[furnessvale]

Fantastic argument - I'm thoroughly convinced. Why is it that Brexiters inevitably forget to make arguments but are very quick to get offended? I thought you all hated PC culture, or is offence ok so long as you're not the butt of it?

Once again you conflate my desire to leave the EU with being a right wing bigot.

I'm not offended by your left wing bigotry, just sad for you. What do they teach you these days in Oxford?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

On about 12% of our GDP. Therefore 88% of our GDP will only have to meet whatever rules the UK decides to set, plus of course whatever rules the importing country sets on our exports eg the USA.

But it doesn't work like that in practice. If I'm a business making something and 12% of the products I make have to meet certain additional regulations because they are going to the EU, then I'm probably not going to set up two separate production lines - one for the 12% and one for the 88% - because that would be so inefficient. More likely, I'll just keep one production line, which may well mean having to build everything to conform to those regulations. Because of that kind of problem, the proportion of the UK economy that ends up having out of practical necessity to conform to EU regulations will be much higher than what you'd think just by looking at the % of stuff hat gets exported to the EU.

We can always rejoin. I am sure they would be glad to get their hands on our money once again.

The problem with that argument is that we had a pretty good deal inside the UK - being allowed to be a member while retaining a lot of oft-outs - most obviously, the rebate on our contributions. It's not at all certain that we'd be able to negotiate the same benefits if we rejoined.

 

[furnessvale]

Oh dear....

I think you may be struggling with the concept of GDP. That's the total worth of the country's economic activity that includes every single aspect from getting your hair cut to having your car cleaned. The vast majority of GDP is already solely controlled by our own UK rules and laws :roll:

Hmmm... we can always rejoin? Yeah, but on markedly worse terms than we currently enjoy and, for once, that £350m figure might actually be true (as opposed to a highly misleading soundbite)

So a UK company with a turnover of £xmillions pa, which happens not to export to the EU, is not subject to any EU regulation or directives?

Tell that to hundreds of haulage companies up and down the UK who operate domestically, and that is but one example.

ps and a patronising eye roll only works when you are not making a fool of yourself.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Once again you conflate my desire to leave the EU with being a right wing bigot.

I'm not offended by your left wing bigotry, just sad for you. What do they teach you these days in Oxford?

Well I don't think I'm far wrong if you're using phrases like that... Yes, I'm sure you're a card carrying member of the SWP and think of yourself as a modern-day Marxist, but that doesn't make you socially left-wing, does it.

And they certainly taught us how GDP works, and how not to be total hypocrites over getting offended. :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So a UK company with a turnover of £xmillions pa, which happens not to export to the EU, is not subject to any EU regulation or directives?

Tell that to hundreds of haulage companies up and down the UK who operate domestically, and that is but one example.

ps and a patronising eye roll only works when you are not making a fool of yourself.

So a UK company that trades with the EU won't be despite them "only" accounting for 12% of our GDP?

You're using two totally different measures to get numbers that can't be compared. What measure is useful is entirely up for debate, but you can't just fudge it however you want and then say "12% is much smaller than 100%!" as though what you've said actually means anything. That's what people are taking issue with. Again I ask - which paper has been pushing this line?

EDIT: Ah, I found it. http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016...-12-of-british-economy-made-up-of-eu-exports/

Nigel Farage Why am I not surprised he's pushing yet more rubbish?

 

[furnessvale]

But it doesn't work like that in practice. If I'm a business making something and 12% of the products I make have to meet certain additional regulations because they are going to the EU, then I'm probably not going to set up two separate production lines - one for the 12% and one for the 88% - because that would be so inefficient. More likely, I'll just keep one production line, which may well mean having to build everything to conform to those regulations. Because of that kind of problem, the proportion of the UK economy that ends up having out of practical necessity to conform to EU regulations will be much higher than what you'd think just by looking at the % of stuff hat gets exported to the EU.



The problem with that argument is that we had a pretty good deal inside the UK - being allowed to be a member while retaining a lot of oft-outs - most obviously, the rebate on our contributions. It's not at all certain that we'd be able to negotiate the same benefits if we rejoined.

What about countries that currently do not export to the EU, or anywhere else, but still have to meet EU regs? What about companies that currently only export to the USA that currently have to meet EU regs AND then bolt on more regs to suit the USA?

People seem to be taking my throwaway comment seriously. Why on earth would we want to rejoin this corrupt organisation which is on the point of imploding anyway?

 

[TheKnightWho]

What about countries that currently do not export to the EU, or anywhere else, but still have to meet EU regs? What about companies that currently only export to the USA that currently have to meet EU regs AND then bolt on more regs to suit the USA?

People seem to be taking my throwaway comment seriously. Why on earth would we want to rejoin this corrupt organisation which is on the point of imploding anyway?

"throwaway comment"

Nice backtracking.

What evidence you do you have it's about to implode? Support has surged on the continent since Brexit because of the bad consequences it has had.

It must be fun living in fantasy land.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

So a UK company with a turnover of £xmillions pa, which happens not to export to the EU, is not subject to any EU regulation or directives?

Tell that to hundreds of haulage companies up and down the UK who operate domestically, and that is but one example.

That is NOT what I said and you're being disingenuous by suggesting I did. Looks like some sort of Antman release of chaff Back to what I did say.... The vast majority of GDP is internalised not exported as you seemed to suggest.

Now, if you want to talk about haulage companies, which particular areas do you wish to look at:

• The level of cabotage that is allowed under EU rules; it was always a misnomer and actually constitutes c.1%
• The impact of the working time directive on drivers - it's actually negligible as the UK negotiated an opt out on periods of availability
• The difference in fuel duty - that's actually a UK government issue
• The use of EU driving regs - well, if you want your LGV drivers to be able to drive for an extra hour in a stint with less rest......

Of course, the UK freight industry is reliant on EU drivers. The problem of attracting drivers has been a noted issue since I joined the industry in 1998 and we couldn't operate without them.

Apart from the dCPC, the issue of EU red tape isn't that much of a challenge. The main problems are the erosion of rates in the haulage industry and that has more to do with sharp witted procurement individuals contracting out business on lane rated basis to the lowest bidder.

And that, my friend, is the truth of why the road haulage industry has massive issues.

That worthy of an eye roll??

 

[furnessvale]

Well I don't think I'm far wrong if you're using phrases like that... Yes, I'm sure you're a card carrying member of the SWP and think of yourself as a modern-day Marxist, but that doesn't make you socially left-wing, does it.

And they certainly taught us how GDP works, and how not to be total hypocrites over getting offended. :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So a UK company that trades with the EU won't be despite them "only" accounting for 12% of our GDP?

You're using two totally different measures to get numbers that can't be compared. What measure is useful is entirely up for debate, but you can't just fudge it however you want and then say "12% is much smaller than 100%!" as though what you've said actually means anything. That's what people are taking issue with. Again I ask - which paper has been pushing this line?

EDIT: Ah, I found it. http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016...-12-of-british-economy-made-up-of-eu-exports/

Nigel Farage Why am I not surprised he's pushing yet more rubbish?

I don't think I can make things any simpler unless I start drawing pictures for you.

Post Brexit, only goods or services destined for the EU can be subject to EU regulation. Anything for domestic consumption or export elsewhere would not be subject to EU regulation.

Goods or services destined for the USA, which is even now our biggest single country export market, will be subject to their requirements as they are now.

I am quite happy to concede that a company whose major trade is with the EU may wish to maintain a single production line for efficiency, but that is entirely a matter for that company.

I have no idea if Farage made a comment as you suggest, having neither read the article to which you refer nor read Farage's other comments.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Goods or services destined for the USA, which is even now our biggest single country export market, will be subject to their requirements as they are now.

I see what you did there.....

Of course, the biggest single export market is the EU - nearly three times the size of the UK/US export market

 

[TheKnightWho]

I don't think I can make things any simpler unless I start drawing pictures for you.

Post Brexit, only goods or services destined for the EU can be subject to EU regulation. Anything for domestic consumption or export elsewhere would not be subject to EU regulation.

Goods or services destined for the USA, which is even now our biggest single country export market, will be subject to their requirements as they are now.

I am quite happy to concede that a company whose major trade is with the EU may wish to maintain a single production line for efficiency, but that is entirely a matter for that company.

I have no idea if Farage made a comment as you suggest, having neither read the article to which you refer nor read Farage's other comments.

So if I'm telling you you're oversimpliying and misunderstanding things, I must be stupid because you couldn't possibly be wrong?

What you are stating would only be true if companies only specialised in exporting to one country or trading bloc. This does not bear up to reality, despite your wishful thinking. Sorry.

 

[Gutfright]

Why is it that Brexiters inevitably forget to make arguments but are very quick to get offended?

It isn't and we aren't.

I thought you all hated PC culture, or is offence ok so long as you're not the butt of it?

I also thought Brexiters hated all this academic fudging as well, and just wanted straight-talking politicians. Clearly not when it benefits them...

Well done for making a number of idiotic assumptions about Brexiters. You must be proud.

What evidence you do you have it's about to implode? Support has surged on the continent since Brexit because of the bad consequences it has had.

We're still in the EU and the consequences of Brexit remain to be seen.

Apart from that, good.

 

[furnessvale]

I see what you did there.....

Of course, the biggest single export market is the EU - nearly three times the size of the UK/US export market

But the EU isn't a single country.........................YET!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Sorry.

Accepted

 

[meridian2]

Oh dear....

I think you may be struggling with the concept of GDP. That's the total worth of the country's economic activity that includes every single aspect from getting your hair cut to having your car cleaned. The vast majority of GDP is already solely controlled by our own UK rules and laws :roll:

Hmmm... we can always rejoin? Yeah, but on markedly worse terms than we currently enjoy and, for once, that £350m figure might actually be true (as opposed to a highly misleading soundbite)

But what is controlled by 'our own UK rules and laws' is piecemeal compared to European produce, manufactured here out our own expense. What accounts for our total GDP is mostly European, not British.
That may seem like petty jingoism to you but for the working class, that means adhering to practices set by overseas courts, not British curts.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

What about countries that currently do not export to the EU, or anywhere else, but still have to meet EU regs? What about companies that currently only export to the USA that currently have to meet EU regs AND then bolt on more regs to suit the USA?

(I assume you mean companies, not countries, in your first sentence). Yes, companies that don't currently export to the EU (and don't sell to companies that do export to the EU) would presumably be able to avoid EU regulations completely. That doesn't change my point that the proportion of the economy that would end up in practice having to follow EU regulations will be much higher than what you think just from the % of GDP that's exported to the EU.

Another relevant point is that people seem to be imagining that not having EU regulations would make a massive difference. This ignores that many - very likely most - EU regulations are actually good and beneficial, because they ensure safety, protect consumers, etc. - so in all probability would be retained by any sensible UK Government anyway. Occasionally you see examples of EU regulations that do appear to be irrelevant or unnecessarily burdomsome, but they tend to be isolated examples. If - which seems likely - leaving the EU means that in practice only a small proportion of regulations get dropped (because most of them are actually useful) then it won't make much difference to most people or most businesses anyway.

People seem to be taking my throwaway comment seriously. Why on earth would we want to rejoin this corrupt organisation which is on the point of imploding anyway?

The EU has many faults, but it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, significantly corrupt, and it does not remotely appear to be on the point of imploding. If you want to be taken seriously, posting clear falsehoods is probably not the way to do it.