Brexit - Deal or No Deal?

[Barn]

Right guys, people have asked me to back up my statements: This link shows among many things that 44% of exports in goods and services go to non EU countries, meaning we export 56% to the EU, and not 80%. 53% of imports are from the EU, not 80%. It also says that an estimated 2% of our exports to the EU aren't actual exports and they just pass through ports, making the exports to non EU coubtries 46%.

It's actually the other way around. 44% to the EU and 56% to non-EU countries.

The Stonger IN campaign frequently described the percentage as "around half", disguising the fact that EU exports had dropped ten points from mid 50s to mid 40s since 2000.

What all of these figures slightly neglect to point out is that a very large part of our economy is entirely domestic and unrelated to international trade at all.

 

[najaB]

Right guys, people have asked me to back up my statements...

Thanks. Now how about actual tables of figures rather than isolated, cherry-picked numbers in an opinion piece. For example, in your second link they quote a single year's figures "Indeed, the UK is now Germany’s largest export market and in 2012 had a trade deficit with Germany of over £23 billion" to support a point. It is always suspect when someone quotes five year old figures when much more recent figures are available.

 

[jon0844]

With regards to us exporting components to Germany to make cars (obviously there are other examples) my questions are:

Can Germany source parts from elsewhere if they need to?

If not, would such companies consider relocating or opening factories within the EU - meaning a loss of jobs here - because it makes more sense to be in the Eurozone. Especially as they'd need to comply with both UK and EU rules to sell in both locations.

So what power do we have? They can buy from another firm or wait for them to relocate. BMW isn't going to relocate, and knows we'll pay whatever the price is and don't exactly have loads of British owned/made cars we'd rather drive.

Of course we can then move on to aviation, rail and other heavy industry but I can't help but feel the EU are spending the next two years preparing to stop buying from us, while we're in a state of limbo.

 

[highspeed990]

Thanks. Now how about actual tables of figures rather than isolated, cherry-picked numbers in an opinion piece. For example, in your second link they quote a single year's figures "Indeed, the UK is now Germany’s largest export market and in 2012 had a trade deficit with Germany of over £23 billion" to support a point. It is always suspect when someone quotes five year old figures when much more recent figures are available.

It doesn't mean it is incorrect, that is a news letter so they're quoting figures that are relevant to the article.

 

[highspeed990]

Thanks. Now how about actual tables of figures rather than isolated, cherry-picked numbers in an opinion piece. For example, in your second link they quote a single year's figures "Indeed, the UK is now Germany’s largest export market and in 2012 had a trade deficit with Germany of over £23 billion" to support a point. It is always suspect when someone quotes five year old figures when much more recent figures are available.

Can you prove to me this is 5 years old, and can you also provide to me a more recent figure please?

 

[najaB]

Can you prove to me this is 5 years old...

2017 - 2012 = 5

It doesn't mean it is incorrect, that is a news letter so they're quoting figures that are relevant to the article.

It does make it suspect and it contradicts later official published figures: https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/Country/DEU/Year/2015/TradeFlow/Export

 

[DarloRich]

It is sad that you continually introduce such a mocking tone to the debate.
If I could be bothered, I would ask you to look at the list of 50 or so "countries" the EU has managed to negotiate free trade deals with in its existence.
If I could be bothered, I would suggest that an independent UK, negotiating on behalf of ONE country, would do much better.
But then, I can't be bothered.

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, suggested we trade with a country that doesn't exist. You think that doesn't invite mockery?

Perhaps the UK, negotiating alone, could do a better deal. The problem is we lack the machinery and expertise that the EU have developed to deliver those deals. Of course we can acquire that expertise, but at a cost, with a time delay, with a risk of low performance as the team of negotiators matures and with obvious duplication of effort.

I am not sure that one country would be able to out perform a vast trading block. However i acknowledge you may be right and the UK may power ahead of the EU in terms of economic performance once we are free of their constraining rules. We will find out soon.

I confess to finding it slightly strange when I frequently see people simultaneously making the points that we export hardly any goods to Europe but that any disruption to our goods exports to Europe would be absolutely calamitous to our economy.

I was taking the German point to answer a poster above. About 44% of UK exports in goods and services went to countries in the EU in 2016. To expose that level of business to potential blockers and barriers seems risky to me. The gamble is clearly that we can replace any lost EU exports with exports to non EU countries.

I accept that we as a country voted to leave ( wrong as I feel that is personally) and that we will/must now leave. I hope we are able to agree terms that continue friction less trade both to and from the EU.

 

[highspeed990]

It's actually the other way around. 44% to the EU and 56% to non-EU countries.

The Stonger IN campaign frequently described the percentage as "around half", disguising the fact that EU exports had dropped ten points from mid 50s to mid 40s since 2000.

What all of these figures slightly neglect to point out is that a very large part of our economy is entirely domestic and unrelated to international trade at all.

Well that's what the link says, I prefer not to say things different from links I can provide.

 

[DarloRich]

Ignore people like him. They're either overestimating their own intelligence, or letting off steam by speaking to people in a manner they wouldn't dare to in person. They usually slither away silently when facts are presented.

Facts based on betteroffout.org. Yeah not biased in any way. You reject biased government information yet accept biased pressure group information. It seems you only like facts that back up your own views!

BTW I am not sure you can even read the information you present. The link clearly states: About 44% of UK exports in goods and services went to countries in the EU in 2016.

 

[Barn]

Well that's what the link says

No it doesn't; read it again.

 

[highspeed990]

2017 - 2012 = 5
It does make it suspect and it contradicts later official published figures: https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/Country/DEU/Year/2015/TradeFlow/Export

You've misread the article. What it says is 'indeed, the UK is now Germany's largest export market' pause 'and in 2012 had a trade deficit...'

It is talking about a trade deficit back in 2012 and that is irrelevant to what I'm talking about currently.

I will now read the link you have provided.

 

[highspeed990]

No it doesn't; read it again.

Oh so it does, my mistake. So while DarloRich tried to take advantage of my mistake by trying to make me look stupid, he helped me further prove my point by correcting it. I will edit my post now.

 

[highspeed990]

I've corrected it, I hope it all checks out now.

 

[DarloRich]

Oh so it does, my mistake. So while DarloRich tried to take advantage of my mistake by trying to make me look stupid, he helped me further prove my point by correcting it. I will edit my post now.

I hope we can agree that 44% of our exports has a large £ sign next to it and that putting that at risk without an obvious mitigation plan is dangerous.

 

[highspeed990]

2017 - 2012 = 5
It does make it suspect and it contradicts later official published figures: https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/Country/DEU/Year/2015/TradeFlow/Export

This link checks out with the first link I provided, second in Europe and third in the world. The second pro brexit link I provided contradicts the first one, but I provided it so you can see what different sources say.

 

[highspeed990]

I hope we can agree that 44% of our exports has a large £ sign next to it and that putting that at risk without an obvious mitigation plan is dangerous.

There will be mitigation as the European countries that don't want to lose our trade, will make us a good deal.

 

[najaB]

This link checks out with the first link I provided, second in Europe and third in the world.

But you said earlier "[The] UK is definitely germany's 2 biggest export market".

 

[DarloRich]

There will be mitigation as the European countries that don't want to lose our trade, will make us a good deal.

OK. that is a great statement and one I hope turns out to be true. We need an actual plan leading to legally binding arrangements. Warm words and fluffy sentiments ( on either side) wont be enough.

 

[WelshBluebird]

All this talk about trade means we (us talking here, but also the media and probably the government too) are missing the actual important issues.

Things like replacing organisations like the EASA (or agreeing to a deal for us to remain part of them), continued co-operation regarding crime investigation like continuing the EAW scheme, etc. IMO those things are much more important than the trade negotiations (which can come later), and leaving the EU without any deal whatsoever would impact these issues much more than it would impact trade.

It is easy to think of the EU as one large single market trading block. But the reality is it is much much more than that, and much of our national interest is now tied up within various bodies of the EU. To be fair, that may actually be a decent argument about leaving, but also means that leaving MUST be done in a sensible manor with negotiations that are actually about getting agreements rather than ones that are done just to make good headlines at home.

 

[najaB]

Things like replacing organisations like the EASA (or agreeing to a deal for us to remain part of them), continued co-operation regarding crime investigation like continuing the EAW scheme, etc. IMO those things are much more important than the trade negotiations (which can come later)...

For example, cancer patients who can't get radiotherapy (EURATOM)?

 

[highspeed990]

OK. that is a great statement and one I hope turns out to be true. We need an actual plan leading to legally binding arrangements. Warm words and fluffy sentiments ( on either side) wont be enough.

No need to worry, it will be.

But you said earlier "[The] UK is definitely germany's 2 biggest export market".

My mistake, I was going by a source I read, however most other sources suggest it is 3rd in the world in 2nd in the EU, so this is mostly likely the correct one.

 

[highspeed990]

All this talk about trade means we (us talking here, but also the media and probably the government too) are missing the actual important issues.

Things like replacing organisations like the EASA (or agreeing to a deal for us to remain part of them), continued co-operation regarding crime investigation like continuing the EAW scheme, etc. IMO those things are much more important than the trade negotiations (which can come later), and leaving the EU without any deal whatsoever would impact these issues much more than it would impact trade.

It is easy to think of the EU as one large single market trading block. But the reality is it is much much more than that, and much of our national interest is now tied up within various bodies of the EU. To be fair, that may actually be a decent argument about leaving, but also means that leaving MUST be done in a sensible manor with negotiations that are actually about getting agreements rather than ones that are done just to make good headlines at home.

We have interpol and agreements with other countries for policing. All these things that you speak of were done slowly by the EU taking control of things little by little, it is a confederation of states and they will soon want to raise an EU army and control all members. And no this isn't daily mail tin foil hat nonsense .

 

[najaB]

My mistake, I was going by a source I read, however most other sources suggest it is 3rd in the world in 2nd in the EU, so this is mostly likely the correct one.

However, while we are their 3rd largest market, we only account for this much of their exports:View media item 25
Would they miss it if it all disappeared? Yes. Would it be the end of their world? No.

 

[highspeed990]

However, while we are their 3rd largest market, we only account for this much of their exports:View media item 25
Would they miss it if it all disappeared? Yes. Would it be the end of their world? No.

Doesn't mean it isn't very important and would account of a lot of job losses.

 

[WelshBluebird]

We have interpol and agreements with other countries for policing. All these things that you speak of were done slowly by the EU taking control of things little by little, it is a confederation of states and they will soon want to raise an EU army and control all members. And no this isn't daily mail tin foil hat nonsense .

But many those agreements fall under the EU banner. By leaving the EU we either have to do without, or we need to agree a deal (and if we agree a deal, then by definition it isn't a "no deal brexit"). You also still haven't replied to what I asked a few pages ago about the EASA - what benefits does leaving a international aviation safety organisation and having to spend the time, money and effort to set up our own give us exactly?

As for the EU taking control etc, you do realise that up until all of this, we had a massive amount of power in the EU? Even things that people are whinging about now, many of them have their foundation in the UK (Article 50 itself - written by a Brit). And even ignoring that, entering into these agreements was nothing to do with the EU "taking control". We are talking about decisions made by democratically elected governments, many of them made because greater cooperation with our neighbors is mutually beneficial. So sorry, the "Eu taking control" IS daily mail tin foil hat nonsense, especially as we actually have (well, I guess had now we are leaving) a veto on things like the "EU Army" that so often talked about.

 

[najaB]

Doesn't mean it isn't very important and would account of a lot of job losses.

Given the healthy state of the German economy and their declining population (they've taken in c. 1M refugees just to maintain basic services) I doubt that any job losses would be more than a temporary blip for them.

I'm not saying that our trade isn't important to them, but it isn't nearly as vital as your posts make it seem you think it is.

 

[DarloRich]

No need to worry, it will be.

I would like a little more than blind faith!

I am sure there will be a fudge deal that pleases no one coupled with an elongated transitional period.

 

[highspeed990]

But many those agreements fall under the EU banner. By leaving the EU we either have to do without, or we need to agree a deal (and if we agree a deal, then by definition it isn't a "no deal brexit"). You also still haven't replied to what I asked a few pages ago about the EASA - what benefits does leaving a international aviation safety organisation and having to spend the time, money and effort to set up our own give us exactly?

As for the EU taking control etc, you do realise that up until all of this, we had a massive amount of power in the EU? Even things that people are whinging about now, many of them have their foundation in the UK (Article 50 itself - written by a Brit). And even ignoring that, entering into these agreements was nothing to do with the EU "taking control". We are talking about decisions made by democratically elected governments, many of them made because greater cooperation with our neighbors is mutually beneficial. So sorry, the "Eu taking control" IS daily mail tin foil hat nonsense, especially as we actually have (well, I guess had now we are leaving) a veto on things like the "EU Army" that so often talked about.

Or we can just not to do what the EU tells us, we can make individual deals with countries if necessary, but the same thing applies, if they won't help us, we won't help them.

As for the safety organisation, I doubt this is a big issue, we could set ours up now, ready.

As for us having a say in the EU, the present is what matters, and we have no say, and the people making all the decisions are unelected.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Or we can just not to do what the EU tells us, we can make individual deals with countries if necessary, but the same thing applies, if they won't help us, we won't help them.

But they aren't "telling us what to do". We agreed what to do. There is a huge difference.

As for the safety organisation, I doubt this is a big issue, we could set ours up now, ready.

Seriously? Are you trolling here?

As for us having a say in the EU, the present is what matters, and we have no say, and the people making all the decisions are unelected.

But WE DO have a say. Because we vote for our MEP's and we vote for governments who deal with the EU on our behalf. Or are you telling me our government is unelected?

 

[najaB]

As for the safety organisation, I doubt this is a big issue, we could set ours up now, ready.

And you really expect people to take you seriously?