Every time they are given they are shown to be what they are, not the same thing.
But it's happened now so the vision for the future is more important. How the UK get themselves out of the problems Boris has imposed on them. So far we have, the EU can't tell us what to do and they need us more than we need them. Next January isn't far away.
'Levelling up' seems to be the new mantra for a post Brexit Britain. One of the problems with the UK being in the EU is that for mainland Britain, even more business and commerce got dragged down to the South East, especially with the Channel Tunnel making it even easier to reach our neighbours and as a result the rest of the mainland with the exception of the larger cities became almost as a wasteland. Boris as he has already admitted in the GE he has only borrowed votes from the 'red wall', if he does not deliver then he's toast.
None of this has much to do with being in or out of the EU, but honouring the referendum result gave Boris and the Tories a free pass,...until it doesn't!
In the meantime we're still waiting for a reason why Brexit was voted for that isn't drivel nor connected to foreigners.
More importantly how will the UK export to any other country without following the regulations and standards of the country they are exporting to, how will they solve the border problem with Ireland, what will they do to help farmers who they convinced to vote for them and then cancelled their subsidies.
Looks like, now that the Tories have a large majority, they have regressed four years to the "we hold all the cards, they need us more than we need them, Ireland? where's that?" nonsense.
No one owes you any explanation on how or why that voted for anything. You need to get over yourself.
How will the UK export to other countries hmm, if only there was worldwide structures and bodies to facilitate this eh?
What you see as regression is and was the defacto position from day one. It is in the EU statute (article 50) that we are still following and adhering, this isn't a UK rule or law. May did (wrongly in my view) acquiesce on a lot of what actual leavers campaigned and voted for but like Turkeys voting for Christmas remainer's were not happy, and voted any compromise down.
We will get a FTA trade deal which Barnier originally wanted or we will trade on WTO while moving any imports or exports that have onerous tariffs to new markets as we open worldwide FTA's. It is an interesting test of Free markets versus protectionism, something I am really looking forward to seeing play out.
No one owes you any explanation on how or why that voted for anything. You need to get over yourself.
How will the UK export to other countries hmm, if only there was worldwide structures and bodies to facilitate this eh?
What you see as regression is and was the defacto position from day one. It is in the EU statute (article 50) that we are still following and adhering, this isn't a UK rule or law. May did (wrongly in my view) acquiesce on a lot of what actual leavers campaigned and voted for but like Turkeys voting for Christmas remainer's were not happy, and voted any compromise down.
We will get a FTA trade deal which Barnier originally wanted or we will trade on WTO while moving any imports or exports that have onerous tariffs to new markets as we open worldwide FTA's. It is an interesting test of Free markets versus protectionism, something I am really looking forward to seeing play out.
You don't owe me any explanation, just thought that someone would come up with a credible one.
You seemed to have forgotten that Johnson signed the WA and PD but now rolling back on it which means that the last four years have been a complete waste of time and gives a hint to the rest of the world how trustworthy the UK has become.
But you're either in or out not some halfway house , you're out, now deal with reality .
You still don't seemed to have grasped that the UK have to comply with the import regulations and standards of the countries the UK would export to, whether that's the EU, the USA, China, Ghana, Australia or wherever. You can't tell them all that the UK are independent and can do what they like. Tariffs are imposed by the importing country not the exporting country which will normally be passed onto the consumer.
The type of deal you get with the EU or any other country or blocs of countries will depend on the standards the UK have. If the UK stay closely aligned to the EU then there will be a deal if they don't there won't be, it is simple as that, it's not Barnier who decides or some mysterious unknown bureaucrat , it's the 27 EU states who decide what he negotiates.
As there are only ten months left, shouldn't the UK decide whether they want- free and open trade with everybody, FTAs or WTO rules and understand what each of them implies.
You don't owe me any explanation, just thought that someone would come up with a credible one.
You seemed to have forgotten that Johnson signed the WA and PD but now rolling back on it which means that the last four years have been a complete waste of time and gives a hint to the rest of the world how trustworthy the UK has become.
But you're either in or out not some halfway house , you're out, now deal with reality .
You still don't seemed to have grasped that the UK have to comply with the import regulations and standards of the countries the UK would export to, whether that's the EU, the USA, China, Ghana, Australia or wherever. You can't tell them all that the UK are independent and can do what they like. Tariffs are imposed by the importing country not the exporting country which will normally be passed onto the consumer.
The type of deal you get with the EU or any other country or blocs of countries will depend on the standards the UK have. If the UK stay closely aligned to the EU then there will be a deal if they don't there won't be, it is simple as that, it's not Barnier who decides or some mysterious unknown bureaucrat , it's the 27 EU states who decide what he negotiates.
As there are only ten months left, shouldn't the UK decide whether they want- free and open trade with everybody, FTAs or WTO rules and understand what each of them implies.
No, You are the one who fails to grasp how these things work. Companies exporting their product will not have any difficulties exporting to the EU or anywhere else.
Frameworks and tariffs are WTO/Government led. The EU cannot impose anything on us they do not impose on any other Country. These rules are there to facilitate trade.
I guess you will have to wait until newspapers tell you how it works but it is pretty straight forward. Read the WTO rules or wait for a FTA which for that you can look at ones like Canada has. These are the only options left and should be easy to understand.
I'm just going to leave this now as someone correctly mentioned above there is little point in this discussion with you i'm afraid.
No, You are the one who fails to grasp how these things work. Companies exporting their product will not have any difficulties exporting to the EU or anywhere else.
Frameworks and tariffs are WTO/Government led. The EU cannot impose anything on us they do not impose on any other Country. These rules are there to facilitate trade.
I guess you will have to wait until newspapers tell you how it works but it is pretty straight forward. Read the WTO rules or wait for a FTA which for that you can look at ones like Canada has. These are the only options left and should be easy to understand.
I'm just going to leave this now as someone correctly mentioned above there is little point in this discussion with you i'm afraid.
As I have spent over thirty years of my life dealing with international trade, I probably have a teeny weeny idea of how it works. But Brexiters won't listen to people who actually know what they're talking about. Wait until next year and then you will start to understand. By the way, IDS hasn't a clue what he's talking about.
As I have spent over thirty years of my life dealing with international trade, I probably have a teeny weeny idea of how it works. But Brexiters won't listen to people who actually know what they're talking about. Wait until next year and then you will start to understand. By the way, IDS hasn't a clue what he's talking about.
I think that the forum took a slide to the left the moment the mods decided not to allow posters to post pictures for every sentence they made. That scared away the likes who read the Daily mail
No one owes you any explanation on how or why that voted for anything. You need to get over yourself.
How will the UK export to other countries hmm, if only there was worldwide structures and bodies to facilitate this eh?
What you see as regression is and was the defacto position from day one. It is in the EU statute (article 50) that we are still following and adhering, this isn't a UK rule or law. May did (wrongly in my view) acquiesce on a lot of what actual leavers campaigned and voted for but like Turkeys voting for Christmas remainer's were not happy, and voted any compromise down.
We will get a FTA trade deal which Barnier originally wanted or we will trade on WTO while moving any imports or exports that have onerous tariffs to new markets as we open worldwide FTA's. It is an interesting test of Free markets versus protectionism, something I am really looking forward to seeing play out.
There's really nothing to look forward to that. I doubt there's 1 country in the world who deals with the very continent it's part of on purely WTO terms. That's something quite damaging especially to the UK whose supply lines are so integrated with those of the EU. Real time supply lines risk to be damaged, with the manufacturing industry going out of the window. Same thing can be said about the farming industry.
The EU is bigger, it has more trade deals and it afford the luxury of time at its side.
No, You are the one who fails to grasp how these things work. Companies exporting their product will not have any difficulties exporting to the EU or anywhere else.
Frameworks and tariffs are WTO/Government led. The EU cannot impose anything on us they do not impose on any other Country. These rules are there to facilitate trade.
I guess you will have to wait until newspapers tell you how it works but it is pretty straight forward. Read the WTO rules or wait for a FTA which for that you can look at ones like Canada has. These are the only options left and should be easy to understand.
I'm just going to leave this now as someone correctly mentioned above there is little point in this discussion with you i'm afraid.
"Moving to an EU free trade deal and striking new free trade agreements with the US, Australia and New Zealand has an estimated negative impact on the UK economy of 1.4% in the UKTPO results - equivalent to £28bn, or £1,000 per household." Source.
"No deal optimists continually argue that falling back on World Trade Organization (WTO) terms minimises the threat no deal poses to the UK... [These] points overestimate the constraints WTO rules would place on the EU and fail to take account of the EU’s laws in the event of no deal.
"Even if the UK did – eventually – get a ruling in its favour, the WTO would not be able to force the EU to give preference to the UK. The only remedy would be to allow the UK to apply punitive tariffs, adding to trade restrictions not removing them." Source.
There's really nothing to look forward to that. I doubt there's 1 country in the world who deals with the very continent it's part of on purely WTO terms. That's something quite damaging especially to the UK whose supply lines are so integrated with those of the EU. Real time supply lines risk to be damaged, with the manufacturing industry going out of the window. Same thing can be said about the farming industry.
The EU is bigger, it has more trade deals and it afford the luxury of time at its side.
I do so wish that posters of whatever persuasion would cease inferring that the continent of Europe begins and ends with the EU. Folks are getting sloppier and sloppier with their arguments whichever side of the fence they sit.
Google the headline, you can read it via clicking in SERPS. Key para:
"Classic trade negotiations are win-win games. The negotiations that start on Monday will be different. Both sides have framed their objectives in terms of regulation, not of trade. The UK seeks maximum regulatory independence. The EU wants to prevent it on grounds of competition. If you take the politics out, it is not hard to construct a technical compromise. But there is no deal imaginable that would allow both sides to declare victory in terms of their stated goals. They have turned it into a zero-sum game.
"Also consider another unusual aspect of this negotiation. The UK may be the smaller country, but it can secure its chief negotiating goal of regulatory independence unilaterally by walking out. The EU cannot do the same.
"British businesses are not going to stop Mr Johnson just as the German carmakers will not stop the EU."
After all, it doesn’t matter that Apple doesn’t manufacture its products in the US, it matters that it’s research, design and corporate teams are based there.
I do so wish that posters of whatever persuasion would cease inferring that the continent of Europe begins and ends with the EU. Folks are getting sloppier and sloppier with their arguments whichever side of the fence they sit.
Google the headline, you can read it via clicking in SERPS. Key para:
"Classic trade negotiations are win-win games. The negotiations that start on Monday will be different. Both sides have framed their objectives in terms of regulation, not of trade. The UK seeks maximum regulatory independence. The EU wants to prevent it on grounds of competition. If you take the politics out, it is not hard to construct a technical compromise. But there is no deal imaginable that would allow both sides to declare victory in terms of their stated goals. They have turned it into a zero-sum game.
"Also consider another unusual aspect of this negotiation. The UK may be the smaller country, but it can secure its chief negotiating goal of regulatory independence unilaterally by walking out. The EU cannot do the same.
"British businesses are not going to stop Mr Johnson just as the German carmakers will not stop the EU."
Politically it always has been heading for this, ever since the famous (or should it be infamous) "No deal is better than a bad deal" statement, the die had been cast!
I know a whole bunch of people that voted leave that didn’t do so based on Farage, Boris or Foreigners. Intelligent people. My company is probably 70% Leave. It’s a progressive, liberal conservative workplace that most would love to work for.
Upper Middle-Class folks and beyond will see their own existence enhanced by Brexit. Many care about themselves more than wider society.
I don’t like their politics but it’s not a vote from a point of stupidity or racism.
Nobody has said that a British citizen isn't someone who was born there or who has acquired citizenship. Nobody has said that EU nationals could vote in the referendum without reciprocal arrangements in EU countries.
The discussion was about Indian/Pakistani origin British citizens who voted to leave because .... not clear.... seemingly somebody gave some EU citizens jobs and UK citizens ahead of Pakistani/Indians who they knew were inferior in and couldn't speak proper English.
I must admit I've never worked in any field where you give a job to an inferior candidate especially when the pay is the same for everyone.
Jesus Christ Paul, you are genuinely infuriating to talk to on this topic and this is from someone who is technically on the same side as you.
How is it not quite getting into your head why some of those of Indian and Pakistani descent voted to leave? You don't have to agree with the reason but you are still banging on about it as if it hasn't been explained to you in excruciating detail.
Are you genuinely so desperate to try to prove your point that you cannot even comprehend that you're wrong on this?
You are talking from a position of extreme privilege on this. A white Brit who moved to another white European country under the auspices of the EU.
I can tell you as someone who isn't originally from these shores and whose wife is half Egyptian that my route to Europe and indeed her Egyptian side's route to Europe vs her Dutch side is infinitely different. You cannot seem to accept that. You cannot seem to accept that the opportunities for employment are completely different for non Europeans. That one of her nephews came to work in the UK in tech and had to go through an incredibly laborious process just to be allowed into the country, get his visa sponsored etc. None of his European colleagues had to do this. This was the same for his brother who works in Germany. None of his European colleagues had to do the same.
I am genuinely wondering how you cannot see this? Are you so enthralled by the EU that you cannot admit a single fault? Secretly don't care because 'they're not Europeans'? What is it?
It doesn't help that you're so often wrong and then refuse to even budge. I started writing a reply to your last message and then decided against it as I was wasting too much time discussing a topic with someone who is speaking with total authority despite not having all of the facts and still maintaining that they're right. Even when I give you a government link about the trade deals that are going to stick post the transition period (after you'd falsely claimed otherwise), you carried on, unrelenting and wrong.
Its extraordinary. And it is equally as annoying as the Brexit crowd with their bendy bananas, Turkish migrants and their various other BS about the EU and Europe.
And right on cue, non EU immigration rises to the highest level since they started recording it in the 70s. Driven mostly by increases in students, especially from India and China, who will be able to benefit from the reintroduction of a leeway period post graduation to find a job in the UK.
Perhaps those I spoke to of Indian origin knew what they were voting for then?
Unsurprising. We either sign a light deal which won't add much to the economy. Or we sign a full on, all encompassing deal, which opens up the NHS and other institutions and lowers our food and environmental standards.
Both are shit options which are worse than staying in the EU for me.
Jesus Christ Paul, you are genuinely infuriating to talk to on this topic and this is from someone who is technically on the same side as you.
How is it not quite getting into your head why some of those of Indian and Pakistani descent voted to leave? You don't have to agree with the reason but you are still banging on about it as if it hasn't been explained to you in excruciating detail.
Are you genuinely so desperate to try to prove your point that you cannot even comprehend that you're wrong on this?
You are talking from a position of extreme privilege on this. A white Brit who moved to another white European country under the auspices of the EU.
I can tell you as someone who isn't originally from these shores and whose wife is half Egyptian that my route to Europe and indeed her Egyptian side's route to Europe vs her Dutch side is infinitely different. You cannot seem to accept that. You cannot seem to accept that the opportunities for employment are completely different for non Europeans. That one of her nephews came to work in the UK in tech and had to go through an incredibly laborious process just to be allowed into the country, get his visa sponsored etc. None of his European colleagues had to do this. This was the same for his brother who works in Germany. None of his European colleagues had to do the same.
I am genuinely wondering how you cannot see this? Are you so enthralled by the EU that you cannot admit a single fault? Secretly don't care because 'they're not Europeans'? What is it?
It doesn't help that you're so often wrong and then refuse to even budge. I started writing a reply to your last message and then decided against it as I was wasting too much time discussing a topic with someone who is speaking with total authority despite not having all of the facts and still maintaining that they're right. Even when I give you a government link about the trade deals that are going to stick post the transition period (after you'd falsely claimed otherwise), you carried on, unrelenting and wrong.
Its extraordinary. And it is equally as annoying as the Brexit crowd with their bendy bananas, Turkish migrants and their various other BS about the EU and Europe.
And right on cue, non EU immigration rises to the highest level since they started recording it in the 70s. Driven mostly by increases in students, especially from India and China, who will be able to benefit from the reintroduction of a leeway period post graduation to find a job in the UK.
Perhaps those I spoke to of Indian origin knew what they were voting for then?
I am wrong on what - Indian and Pakistanis (I'm not talking about people in the UK on work visas and nor are you - people who have UK citizenship who voted against Europeans moving to the UK because their relation can't get a job in the Uk despite as you say non-EU immigration has been increasing relentlessly but at the same time the UK government have been trying to reduce overall immigration.
One minute there are too many immigrants taking up school and hospital places, living on benefits and the next minute they're taking all the jobs. Then it's supposed to be a fairer system and now non-Eu citizens are voting against EU citizens, sounds a bit like discrimination to me. You still don't get my point.
And yet again I will repeat that the list of agreements you listed are the agreements the EU have which have been extended by the UK till the end of the transition period where they could so they would not lapse when the UK left on 31 January 2020. The Uk have no agreements in place for the end of the transition period, why do you insist. For a start they couldn't legally do so.
So I am wrong about discrimination and wrong about the agreements - yet again , no I am not.
I know a whole bunch of people that voted leave that didn’t do so based on Farage, Boris or Foreigners. Intelligent people. My company is probably 70% Leave. It’s a progressive, liberal conservative workplace that most would love to work for.
Upper Middle-Class folks and beyond will see their own existence enhanced by Brexit. Many care about themselves more than wider society.
I don’t like their politics but it’s not a vote from a point of stupidity or racism.
Other than less than 5% of society who may benefit from Brexit, I'd be interested to know how exactly they think they would benefit - unless you work for a firm of hedge-funders.
Now that the pound has lost another couple of cents with the revelation of how marvelous a US FTA would (not) be if everything went to perfection.
I am wrong on what - Indian and Pakistanis (I'm not talking about people in the UK on work visas and nor are you - people who have UK citizenship who voted against Europeans moving to the UK because their relation can't get a job in the Uk despite as you say non-EU immigration has been increasing relentlessly but at the same time the UK government have been trying to reduce overall immigration.
One minute there are too many immigrants taking up school and hospital places, living on benefits and the next minute they're taking all the jobs. Then it's supposed to be a fairer system and now non-Eu citizens are voting against EU citizens, sounds a bit like discrimination to me. You still don't get my point.
And yet again I will repeat that the list of agreements you listed are the agreements the EU have which have been extended by the UK till the end of the transition period where they could so they would not lapse when the UK left on 31 January 2020. The Uk have no agreements in place for the end of the transition period, why do you insist. For a start they couldn't legally do so.
So I am wrong about discrimination and wrong about the agreements - yet again , no I am not.
Yes that is exactly who I am talking about. Those Indians and Pakistanis initially came here on work visas. They often have family that would like to come here as well. They have cultural ties to their countries where many of them want more to come. How is this so difficult?
You're literally reeling off silly talking point after another, jumping from one thing to the next. 'Oh they're taking all the jobs, oh they're all on benefits'. When have I referenced these arguments at all?
You can't seem to accept or understand that people may...bear with me with a minute here, may have voted for Brexit for different reasons? That yes, there are people who voted for it because they hate brown people and hate immigrants. And that those people may also be saying things about too many immigrants. Can you accept or understand that this isn't the argument put forward by those Indian/Pakistani origin people that I have been referencing?
It is genuinely hilarious to me that you can't even bring yourself to admit that an Indian or a Ghanian is not currently on an equal footing when it comes to applying for a job in Europe as an EU citizen.
Ah yes, discrimination against the poor, white European by the browns. Classic.
No. You're wrong. Again. You literally haven't even bothered to read the material I linked for you. Here's more:
The following deals are expected to take effect at the end of the transition period, according to the Department for International Trade:
Kosovo (£8m of trade in 2018)
Jordan (£448m in 2018)
Morocco (£2.5bn in 2018)
Georgia (£123m in 2018)
Southern African nations (£10.2bn in 2018)
Tunisia (£542m in 2018)
Lebanon (£762m in 2018)
South Korea (£14.8bn in 2018)
Central America (£1.1bn in 2018)
Andean countries (£3.4bn in 2018)
Caribbean countries (£3.7bn in 2018)
Pacific Islands (£163m in 2018)
Liechtenstein (£146m in 2018)
Israel (£4.2bn in 2018)
Palestinian Authority (£41m in 2018)
Switzerland (£32.4bn in 2018)
The Faroe Islands (£252m in 2018)
Eastern and Southern Africa (£2bn in 2018)
Chile (£2bn in 2018)
The government says it is still in negotiation with a further 16 countries, including Canada and Mexico.
Do you see how this fits in exactly with the link I sent you before? Where the government neatly divided it into deals which will take effect after the transition period and deals which are still being negotiated?
Trade agreements that have been signed
Agreements with the following countries and trading blocs are expected to take effect when existing EU trade agreements no longer apply to the UK, from 1 January 2021.
Trade agreements still in discussion
The following agreements are still under discussion with countries where there are existing EU trade agreements in place.
If an agreement is not reached by 31 December 2020, trade with other WTO members will take place on WTO terms.
Can you see how they're using different words here? And how they're specifically saying if we don't agree a deal, we will go to WTO terms for the latter group?
What is it you're struggling to differentiate here?
Also, I didn't say this? Why do you constantly invent straw men?
I linked you hard, statistical proof that this year, in our year of transition from the EU, non EU immigration is at the highest level since the 1970s, when they started recording it. I didn't say anything about a relentless increase, year on year.
Much of this rise has come from students, especially from China and India.
This has been concomitant with sharp drop in EU migration to the UK.
This is coupled with the government reintroducing a 2 year visa for international students who studied in the UK, stupidly taken away by May.
So more Indians are now studying here. They're going to be allowed to stay here for 2 years post graduation to find a job. Many international students develop a life in the country they study in, at least temporarily.
Yes that is exactly who I am talking about. Those Indians and Pakistanis initially came here on work visas. They often have family that would like to come here as well. They have cultural ties to their countries where many of them want more to come. How is this so difficult?
You're literally reeling off silly talking point after another, jumping from one thing to the next. 'Oh they're taking all the jobs, oh they're all on benefits'. When have I referenced these arguments at all?
You can't seem to accept or understand that people may...bear with me with a minute here, may have voted for Brexit for different reasons? That yes, there are people who voted for it because they hate brown people and hate immigrants. And that those people may also be saying things about too many immigrants. Can you accept or understand that this isn't the argument put forward by those Indian/Pakistani origin people that I have been referencing?
It is genuinely hilarious to me that you can't even bring yourself to admit that an Indian or a Ghanian is not currently on an equal footing when it comes to applying for a job in Europe as an EU citizen.
Ah yes, discrimination against the poor, white European by the browns. Classic.
No. You're wrong. Again. You literally haven't even bothered to read the material I linked for you. Here's more:
The following deals are expected to take effect at the end of the transition period, according to the Department for International Trade:
Kosovo (£8m of trade in 2018)
Jordan (£448m in 2018)
Morocco (£2.5bn in 2018)
Georgia (£123m in 2018)
Southern African nations (£10.2bn in 2018)
Tunisia (£542m in 2018)
Lebanon (£762m in 2018)
South Korea (£14.8bn in 2018)
Central America (£1.1bn in 2018)
Andean countries (£3.4bn in 2018)
Caribbean countries (£3.7bn in 2018)
Pacific Islands (£163m in 2018)
Liechtenstein (£146m in 2018)
Israel (£4.2bn in 2018)
Palestinian Authority (£41m in 2018)
Switzerland (£32.4bn in 2018)
The Faroe Islands (£252m in 2018)
Eastern and Southern Africa (£2bn in 2018)
Chile (£2bn in 2018)
The government says it is still in negotiation with a further 16 countries, including Canada and Mexico.
Do you see how this fits in exactly with the link I sent you before? Where the government neatly divided it into deals which will take effect after the transition period and deals which are still being negotiated?
Trade agreements that have been signed
Agreements with the following countries and trading blocs are expected to take effect when existing EU trade agreements no longer apply to the UK, from 1 January 2021.
Trade agreements still in discussion
The following agreements are still under discussion with countries where there are existing EU trade agreements in place.
If an agreement is not reached by 31 December 2020, trade with other WTO members will take place on WTO terms.
Can you see how they're using different words here? And how they're specifically saying if we don't agree a deal, we will go to WTO terms for the latter group?
What is it you're struggling to differentiate here?
I didn't say I didn't understand the reasons why they voted.. you still have not got my point .. tell me a reason why people voted for Brexit that didn't involve foreigners and yes all different coloured people can be discriminatry and so you're telling me that Indians and Pakistania or whatever voted to leave because of EU citizens may take their jobs , brilliant.
Yes I did read the article the first time and my point still stands, . Furthermore the UK could sign no new agreements until they left, ie as from the 1st February 2020
The Uk's own website continues to refer to the EU agreement and the following:
The Withdrawal Agreement sets out how the UK is able to continue to be covered by EU-third country trade agreements until 31 December 2020.
From 1 January 2021, it is expected an arrangement will be in place prior to the UK-Andean countries agreement taking effect.
Where's the UK's agreement?
Yes I know that the UK will revert to WTO terms for those they don't have a FTA with. So even if these agreements were signed they have voted to leave to have the same thing but worse.
So at the end of the day, why did people vote Brexit, that isn't discriminatory , that makes sense and will provide a benefit to the said person who voted for it. That's all I'm asking.
Remember that this isn't affecting me personally and is only from an interest point of view where I see it as one of the more crazy things any country could do.
Other than less than 5% of society who may benefit from Brexit, I'd be interested to know how exactly they think they would benefit - unless you work for a firm of hedge-funders.
Now that the pound has lost another couple of cents with the revelation of how marvelous a US FTA would (not) be if everything went to perfection.
I'm thinkng over short, medium and long term - which is why I said what is their vision of post-Brexit Britain that is going to be to their benefit ( hoping for something reasonably coherent here).
And yet again I will repeat that the list of agreements you listed are the agreements the EU have which have been extended by the UK till the end of the transition period where they could so they would not lapse when the UK left on 31 January 2020. The Uk have no agreements in place for the end of the transition period, why do you insist. For a start they couldn't legally do so.
Paul, you appear to have missed a few news cycles over the past few years or something, because this is just incorrect. The UK was given permission to negotiate and sign trade deals that would come into effect at the end of the transition, and it has done so.
When the agreement will take effect
The Withdrawal Agreement sets out how the UK is able to continue to be covered by EU-third country trade agreements until 31 December 2020.
The reason it says 'expected to' is because it leaves open the possibility for the transition period to be extended. If you read the actual text of the FTA, it literally says it takes effect when the EU FTA ceases to apply to the UK (i.e. at the end of the transition period).
From the FT at the time of the deal (21 August 2019):
The UK and South Korea will formally sign a continuity Free Trade Agreement on Thursday that will allow bilateral trade to continue in the event of a no-deal Brexit on October 31. In a boost for prime minister Boris Johnson’s no-deal planning, the agreement — which was approved by both states in June — will protect annual trade flows between the countries. They totalled £14.6bn in 2018.
Just to clarify, it was agreed that the UK could sign new trade deals ahead of departure back in Theresa May’s time as PM and it was incorporated into the Withdrawal Agreement (Article 129):
4. Notwithstanding paragraph 3, during the transition period, the United Kingdom may negotiate, sign and ratify international agreements entered into in its own capacity in the areas of exclusive competence of the Union, provided those agreements do not enter into force or apply during the transition period, unless so authorised by the Union.
Just to clarify, it was agreed that the UK could sign new trade deals ahead of departure back in Theresa May’s time as PM and it was incorporated into the Withdrawal Agreement (Article 129):
This is what I said, they can sign it from 1st February 2020 after the transition period starts - during the transition period, the United Kingdom may negotiate, sign and ratify international agreements
The Korean one seems to be the EU agreement modified slightly signed in August and ratified in October last year, which contradicts the above but I missed that and not clear how that was possible but seems to be the case.
Additionally the WA hadn't been agreed or ratified at the time and the Koreans don't or didn't know what standards or regulations the UK will apply - seems odd but if I'm wrong so be it
Paul, you appear to have missed a few news cycles over the past few years or something, because this is just incorrect. The UK was given permission to negotiate and sign trade deals that would come into effect at the end of the transition, and it has done so.
The reason it says 'expected to' is because it leaves open the possibility for the transition period to be extended. If you read the actual text of the FTA, it literally says it takes effect when the EU FTA ceases to apply to the UK (i.e. at the end of the transition period).
From the FT at the time of the deal (21 August 2019):
I didn't say I didn't understand the reasons why they voted.. you still have not got my point .. tell me a reason why people voted for Brexit that didn't involve foreigners and yes all different coloured people can be discriminatry and so you're telling me that Indians and Pakistania or whatever voted to leave because of EU citizens may take their jobs , brilliant.
Yes I did read the article the first time and my point still stands, . Furthermore the UK could sign no new agreements until they left, ie as from the 1st February 2020
The Uk's own website continues to refer to the EU agreement and the following:
The Withdrawal Agreement sets out how the UK is able to continue to be covered by EU-third country trade agreements until 31 December 2020.
From 1 January 2021, it is expected an arrangement will be in place prior to the UK-Andean countries agreement taking effect.
Where's the UK's agreement?
Yes I know that the UK will revert to WTO terms for those they don't have a FTA with. So even if these agreements were signed they have voted to leave to have the same thing but worse.
So at the end of the day, why did people vote Brexit, that isn't discriminatory , that makes sense and will provide a benefit to the said person who voted for it. That's all I'm asking.
Remember that this isn't affecting me personally and is only from an interest point of view where I see it as one of the more crazy things any country could do.
Sigh... I honestly... I can't even. This is reminiscent for me when I spent about an hour trying to convince a brexiteer that her voting to leave the EU didn't mean we'd be kicked out of the Euros. When I told her about some of the countries that compete in the Euros (some of whom aren't even physically in Europe, let alone in the EU), she refused to accept she could be wrong, despite the evidence in front of her.
This is what I feel now. By some distance the most strangely frustrating conversation I have ever had online and I have had some superb ones with Trump supporters, brexiters and Sisi supporters.
Firstly, I never said people of all colours can't be bigoted.
Secondly, what? When did I say they don't want Europeans taking their jobs? More strawmen.
I honestly don't know how many more ways I can say this. They already have their jobs. They just wanted future Indians to compete on an equal footing with Europeans. Which now they will be.
The UK' s agreement is within that very same page. And Mike has already pointed out one of those deals to you, which you would have seen had you bothered to read it further, as opposed to trying to score points as an 'impartial observor'.
You're asking me, a remainer, to explain the reasons for why people did something I fundamentally disagree with. Despite this, I gave a list of reasons, some of them related to immigration, some not. Pretty much all of them I personally disagree with (or at least don't think they're worth the price). But they're there.
Whether you choose to even bother accepting them or go down some weird rabbit hole where you spend days bending over backwards trying to prove Europeans and non Europeans are on an equal footing or not in the EU and making up silly straw men arguments is of course your prerogative.
This thread mostly goes round in circles, where you come in, bemoan how stupid the decision was (it is) in a totally un constructive way. Ask questions I don't believe you really want an answer to. Everyone talks about how the UK is about to become Somalia. And we repeat ad infinitum.
For the most part, I don't bother getting involved because I don't have the time and because I'm still partly distraught at what's happening. I foolishly answer a question in good faith and end up in a multi day discussion over whether Indians (or let's say... Syrians...) have the same opportunities to work in the EU as Europeans do or not.
