EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[EM2]

Fair enough. Perhaps one of your remainer friends will explain your lack of logic to you, I can't be bothered.

There is no logic to be explained.
They are big. We are little.
UK exports to the EU27 - £274bn in 2017 (or 12%-15% of the UK economy)
EU27 exports to the UK - £341bn in 2017 (or 3%-4% of the EU27 economy)
Each party pays a contribution for (inter alia) free movement of goods and services.
Even Estonia sells more to us than we sell to them. In fact, the only EU members that buy more from us than we sell to them are Ireland, Sweden, Denmark and Luxembourg.

 

[furnessvale]

There is no logic to be explained.
They are big. We are little.
UK exports to the EU27 - £274bn in 2017 (or 12%-15% of the UK economy)
EU27 exports to the UK - £341bn in 2017 (or 3%-4% of the EU27 economy)
Each party pays a contribution for (inter alia) free movement of goods and services.
Even Estonia sells more to us than we sell to them. In fact, the only EU members that buy more from us than we sell to them are Ireland, Sweden, Denmark and Luxembourg.

Logic?

 

[EM2]

Logic?

Do you say that's not the case, then?

 

[furnessvale]

Do you say that's not the case, then?

This is what you said,

"They sell more to us than we sell to them...because...there are a lot more of them than there are of us?"

Both halves of this statement are factually correct. It is the "because" in the middle that is illogical.

Yes, they sell more to us than we sell to them for many reasons BUT not for your stated reason.

 

[Puffing Devil]

The EU "sells" more to the UK because we want to buy their goods. We are not compelled by EU membership to buy those goods, we choose to buy them.

If we had more to sell that the EU member states wanted to buy then the balance of payments may be different.

If we hadn't neglected our own manufacturing base, sold off our state-owned industries for short-term gain and invested more in future industries we may be in a position to "sell" more. As it is, we're a cheap manufacturing base for foreign-owned multinationals, where workers cling on to their low paid jobs mainly thanks to the protections provided by EU law.

Our position will not improve outside of the EU. We'll be looking to sell our crap goods to smaller markets without a trade deal and facing WTO tariffs, we will no longer be exporting easily to the one close market we had, car manufacturing and Airbus will become unviable. Workers rights will be further eroded as costs are driven down and EU protections are removed. Disaster capitalists are circling like vultures already. If you thought Thatcherism in the 80s was brutal, you ain't seen nothing yet.

 

[HH]

Our position will not improve outside of the EU.

Exactly; things can only get worse. We still will want/need to buy the same stuff as now; it will just cost more. Of course we may gradually start to manufacture some things for ourselves, but we will still have to import the raw materials and the only way we will be able to compete is with low wages...

Meanwhile our services, our biggest export by far, will now be less competitive and some will move elsewhere. That's OK, of course, "They're all in London, and who cares about them?", which conveniently ignores that in all the UK, only London pays more into the exchequer than it takes out. Taxes will have to rise, and it won't be enough just to increase the top rate (which never works anyway).

Lower wages and higher taxes. It's a Brave New World out there... But at least property prices should take a battering.

 

[Jonny]

It may well be that as it stands we choose to buy EU goods as things stand, but once un-necessary and protectionist rules are rolled back then this will change.

Also, quoting proportions of import/export is misleading because British

Also, Mr Varadkar (Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of Eire) had better not play too hard since, as Priti Patel rightly points out, the Republic of Ireland is particularly vulnerable in the event of a no-deal Brexit since many of its supply chains cross the UK. It is just one of many points where it will hurt the EU27 more than us.

 

[HH]

It may well be that as it stands we choose to buy EU goods as things stand, but once un-necessary and protectionist rules are rolled back then this will change.

Also, quoting proportions of import/export is misleading because British

Also, Mr Varadkar (Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of Eire) had better not play too hard since, as Priti Patel rightly points out, the Republic of Ireland is particularly vulnerable in the event of a no-deal Brexit since many of its supply chains cross the UK. It is just one of many points where it will hurt the EU27 more than us.

Yep, we'll be able to buy all the chlorinated chicken we want. Maybe.

Because British. Hmm, that's a very persuasive argument.

Eire is irrelevant. There are not even 5m people in Eire. There are over 500m in EU.

 

[AlterEgo]

Brexit won’t be happening anyway; the wheels came off that bus last week.

 

[AM9]

Brexit won’t be happening anyway; the wheels came off that bus last week.

So the yellow bus message is now a realistic way ahead.

 

[EM2]

Yes, they sell more to us than we sell to them for many reasons BUT not for your stated reason.

I didn't say that it was the only reason.

 

[nidave]

It may well be that as it stands we choose to buy EU goods as things stand, but once un-necessary and protectionist rules are rolled back then this will change.

Also, quoting proportions of import/export is misleading because British

Also, Mr Varadkar (Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of Eire) had better not play too hard since, as Priti Patel rightly points out, the Republic of Ireland is particularly vulnerable in the event of a no-deal Brexit since many of its supply chains cross the UK. It is just one of many points where it will hurt the EU27 more than us.

Are you being sarcastic. Or are you basically standing up for that excuse of a human who thinks Ireland should starve as "that will show them"

Let's roll back standards like food safety and health and safety. Let's roll back employment rights all for what... To keep brown people out (as said to me the other day) or to stop eu workers from making a contribution.

I think the phrase I was given was "we need to stop this country stinking of curry" when I pointed out that Pakistan and India etc was not in the eu. I was blocked on Facebook.

 

[furnessvale]

I didn't say that it was the only reason.

HaHa! Backpedal by all means, but it is not even ANY reason.

 

[furnessvale]

The EU "sells" more to the UK because we want to buy their goods. We are not compelled by EU membership to buy those goods, we choose to buy them.

If we had more to sell that the EU member states wanted to buy then the balance of payments may be different.

If we hadn't neglected our own manufacturing base, sold off our state-owned industries for short-term gain and invested more in future industries we may be in a position to "sell" more. As it is, we're a cheap manufacturing base for foreign-owned multinationals, where workers cling on to their low paid jobs mainly thanks to the protections provided by EU law.

Our position will not improve outside of the EU. We'll be looking to sell our crap goods to smaller markets without a trade deal and facing WTO tariffs, we will no longer be exporting easily to the one close market we had, car manufacturing and Airbus will become unviable. Workers rights will be further eroded as costs are driven down and EU protections are removed. Disaster capitalists are circling like vultures already. If you thought Thatcherism in the 80s was brutal, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Thanks for the lecture which is not relevant to my discussions with EM2.

 

[EM2]

HaHa! Backpedal by all means, but it is not even ANY reason.

Let's, for the sake of argument, say that it's not a reason then. Why do we buy more from the EU27 than they do from us?

 

[Puffing Devil]

I think there are 11 advocates General and in 27% of cases the court does NOT follow their guidance.

Evidence?

Still waiting for an answer to this - unless you can't support it?

Thanks for the lecture which is not relevant to my discussions with EM2.

This is a public debate - it's relevant to the discussion and undermines your position - unless you'd care to debate it?

 

[furnessvale]

Let's, for the sake of argument, say that it's not a reason then. Why do we buy more from the EU27 than they do from us?

There are many reasons, some laid out by puffing devil above but that is not the point. The bland statement that they are bigger than us is the (or a) reason they sell more to us than we do to them is nonsense as demonstrated by little Estonia selling more to us than we do to them.

I do not BLAME the EU for this position which is of our own making, I simply question what mathematics means we still pay them huge chunks of cash for the privilege.

 

[Puffing Devil]

It may well be that as it stands we choose to buy EU goods as things stand, but once un-necessary and protectionist rules are rolled back then this will change.

Which rules specifically? What will change? How will this affect our own exports?

Also, quoting proportions of import/export is misleading because British

Great argument. Feel free to drop in and finish it off sometime, unless it was complete in your mind?

Also, Mr Varadkar (Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of Eire) had better not play too hard since, as Priti Patel rightly points out, the Republic of Ireland is particularly vulnerable in the event of a no-deal Brexit since many of its supply chains cross the UK. It is just one of many points where it will hurt the EU27 more than us.

And now we're really at the heart of the matter - bullying smaller countries, taking your lead from the odious Priti Patel who was rightly condemned for her "morally reprehensible" suggestion. Britain is not the global power it once was - other countries are bigger, stronger and better connected. Threatening Eire will have little impact on the country as it is self-sufficient in food production, unlike the UK. There's also the small matter of the import/export balance between the countries: Britain accounts for 29.1 per cent of Irish imports and 13.1 per cent of exports. Who will lose the most if that link is cut?

Finally, Eire remains one of a group of 27 nations in an alliance. Do you really want to pick a fight with our greatest trading partner?

I won't even mention the border and the potential torpedoing of the GFA.

 

[furnessvale]

Still waiting for an answer to this - unless you can't support it?



This is a public debate - it's relevant to the discussion and undermines your position - unless you'd care to debate it?

Regarding Advocates General, there is plenty of evidence on the internet but I have no desire to further your education.

My position is that the size of the EU compared to the UK is not the REASON they sell more to us than we do to them. We are smaller than the USA........

 

[EM2]

I simply question what mathematics means we still pay them huge chunks of cash for the privilege.

We 'pay them huge chunks of cash' for a multitude of benefits. They do the same.

As an aside, I got my Tax Summary in the post this morning. The amount of my tax in 2017-18 that was spent as part of the UK contribution to the EU budget?
Fifty-six pounds.
Three times that was spent on Government administration.
Nearly TEN times that was spent on national debt interest.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Regarding Advocates General, there is plenty of evidence on the internet but I have no desire to further your education.

If you rely on a point, you provide the evidence to support it. If you can't or won't it's disregarded.

 

[furnessvale]

We 'pay them huge chunks of cash' for a multitude of benefits. They do the same.

As an aside, I got my Tax Summary in the post this morning. The amount of my tax in 2017-18 that was spent as part of the UK contribution to the EU budget?
Fifty-six pounds.
Three times that was spent on Government administration.
Nearly TEN times that was spent on national debt interest.

And you believe those figures? How quaint!

As an aside, Ii believe, but have no proof because it is obviously disguised, that a chunk of government admin is spent on EU matters. On top of that, does the £56 just cover our contribution or do we have to add on to cover MEPs etc?

 

[furnessvale]

If you rely on a point, you provide the evidence to support it. If you can't or won't it's disregarded.

Disregard away! I don't think your disregarding it will change brexit one way or the other. Equally, your disregarding it doesn't alter the inconvenient truth of the matter.

I know for myself, if a point is made against me which I don't like but the other refuses to "prove" to my satisfaction, I have a sneaky look on internet so I don't make an a*** of myself by sticking at it!

 

[HH]

As an aside, Ii believe, but have no proof because it is obviously disguised, that a chunk of government admin is spent on EU matters. On top of that, does the £56 just cover our contribution or do we have to add on to cover MEPs etc?

All irrelevant, because all that matters is whether the total costs will go down or up post-Brexit. I'm pretty sure they'll go up, as our government will have to pay solely for things that currently 30+ countries pay for. Just another of those benefits our contributions pay for...

 

[bnm]

and in 27% of cases the court does NOT follow their guidance

Please help me. I'm a simpleton and can't find the evidence online to back up this statement. A simple link is all I require.

 

[Puffing Devil]

All irrelevant, because all that matters is whether the total costs will go down or up post-Brexit. I'm pretty sure they'll go up, as our government will have to pay solely for things that currently 30+ countries pay for. Just another of those benefits our contributions pay for...

For a start our own independent Galileo (Navigation Satellite System) - a multi-billion pound investment for one country rather than a 1/27th share of the costs. Great value for money

 

[EM2]

And you believe those figures? How quaint!

Are you suggesting that HMRC is lying to me?

As an aside, Ii believe, but have no proof because it is obviously disguised, that a chunk of government admin is spent on EU matters.

It is clearly your prerogative to believe whatever you wish.

On top of that, does the £56 just cover our contribution or do we have to add on to cover MEPs etc?

As far as I know, 'MEPs etc.' are paid for out of the EU's budget. How would they be paid for otherwise?

 

[Howardh]

For a start our own independent Galileo (Navigation Satellite System) - a multi-billion pound investment for one country rather than a 1/27th share of the costs. Great value for money

It won't be 1/27ths of the costs - eg Luxembourg could hardly find 1/27th of the whole, it would bankrupt them! It's probably on a pro-rata basis. Someone will confirm I'm sure.
Sorry, I'm defending Brexit there...what's come all over me....nurse...NURSE....

 

[Puffing Devil]

It won't be 1/27ths of the costs - eg Luxembourg could hardly find 1/27th of the whole, it would bankrupt them! It's probably on a pro-rata basis. Someone will confirm I'm sure.
Sorry, I'm defending Brexit there...what's come all over me....nurse...NURSE....

Fair point. The current estimate is ca. € 10bn, even assuming we pay 1/4 of that, it's still a pretty poor deal. Given that we're already paid a chunk of our share, we'll be paying another €10bn for our own system.

 

[nidave]

And you believe those figures? How quaint!

As an aside, Ii believe, but have no proof because it is obviously disguised, that a chunk of government admin is spent on EU matters. On top of that, does the £56 just cover our contribution or do we have to add on to cover MEPs etc?

So you don't belive our government figures.. So why is the eu nasty again. Is there anything you take as fact?