Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Maticmaker]

@Maticmaker

Do you not think that impacting trade with by far our closest neighbour and biggest trading partner (as well as a bloc that is likely to remain one of the 3 biggest markets in the world for the foreseeable future, regardless of what else happens) for the only theoretical potential upsides of trade deals with countries which are far away and more difficult ultimately to import and export from, seems like a decision which is taking a huge risk for an only very theoretical (and long long term) gain?

Especially as, with time going on, the EU is itself in negotiations with more and more trade blocs itself anyway (ie Mercosur)?

I did originally, but now I don't.
I was never a 'full blown' Brexiteer, my objections to the EU was the political side not the trade issues. The final straw (so to speak) was when we didn't become part of the euro-zone, hence if and when the EU did move closer to a federal situation as United States of Europe, we would have been forced to ditch the £ and accept the Euro, under pressure, which is never a good place to be when changing your currency, or alternatively take a back seat in division 2 of the EU.

We have always been, in political terms, an 'awkward squad' member of the EU, whether this 'un-ease' within the EU stemmed from our colonial past, or as it now seems to be presented as 'white privilege' I don't know, or whether maybe playing second fiddle to Germany after two wars in the last century was a factor, I honestly don't know. As Paul (the Wolf) points out the UK was grateful to join the EEC, but it was always a 'bad fit'. Contrary to what many people (in the Caf) think, we in the UK don't think everybody loves us, just the opposite, we know at least half the of the world (practically) hates us as 'the British', and when it comes to hating Englishness, then within the UK a lot of Irish, Scots and Welsh people don't like us either.

As I've mentioned previously we will not enjoy the same status with EU as when we were a member and for that reason I always did believe we either stayed, or left immediately without a deal, because in truth as we have been told endlessly by the EU they could not negotiate with us whilst we were still a member. Theresa May made a complete hash of it, because in reality she didn't want to leave, but felt she had to follow the 'will of the people'. Her famous (or should it be infamous) statement about "No deal being better than a bad deal" just made it worse,.

I was always sceptical that we would not suffer in trade terms initially on leaving the EU, but optimistic it would come right in the end. What has change my view is that in the post Covid world and the growing importance (realisation) of the impact of climate change (ref recent Met Office report) means there has to be a new norm, and the EU moves far too slowly in such situations, its not built for speed or transient movements, only for steady state operations, it will flounder. We will be lighter and more flexible and can respond better on our own to many issues that directly affect us. Preventing climate change is not an option now, surviving it is now what matters, and as an island we have different needs to a large land mass.

Hence in my opinion Brexit was not done for the right reasons, but it may well turn out to be for the best!

 

[4bars]

I did originally, but now I don't.
I was never a 'full blown' Brexiteer, my objections to the EU was the political side not the trade issues. The final straw (so to speak) was when we didn't become part of the euro-zone, hence if and when the EU did move closer to a federal situation as United States of Europe, we would have been forced to ditch the £ and accept the Euro, under pressure, which is never a good place to be when changing your currency, or alternatively take a back seat in division 2 of the EU.

We have always been, in political terms, an 'awkward squad' member of the EU, whether this 'un-ease' within the EU stemmed from our colonial past, or as it now seems to be presented as 'white privilege' I don't know, or whether maybe playing second fiddle to Germany after two wars in the last century was a factor, I honestly don't know. As Paul (the Wolf) points out the UK was grateful to join the EEC, but it was always a 'bad fit'. Contrary to what many people (in the Caf) think, we in the UK don't think everybody loves us, just the opposite, we know at least half the of the world (practically) hates us as 'the British', and when it comes to hating Englishness, then within the UK a lot of Irish, Scots and Welsh people don't like us either.

As I've mentioned previously we will not enjoy the same status with EU as when we were a member and for that reason I always did believe we either stayed, or left immediately without a deal, because in truth as we have been told endlessly by the EU they could not negotiate with us whilst we were still a member. Theresa May made a complete hash of it, because in reality she didn't want to leave, but felt she had to follow the 'will of the people'. Her famous (or should it be infamous) statement about "No deal being better than a bad deal" just made it worse,.

I was always sceptical that we would not suffer in trade terms initially on leaving the EU, but optimistic it would come right in the end. What has change my view is that in the post Covid world and the growing importance (realisation) of the impact of climate change (ref recent Met Office report) means there has to be a new norm, and the EU moves far too slowly in such situations, its not built for speed or transient movements, only for steady state operations, it will flounder. We will be lighter and more flexible and can respond better on our own to many issues that directly affect us. Preventing climate change is not an option now, surviving it is now what matters, and as an island we have different needs to a large land mass.

Hence in my opinion Brexit was not done for the right reasons, but it may well turn out to be for the best!

Flexibility in taking decision is probably a good reason for brexit, but flexibility on climate change? is not that Brittain has its own climate change and europe has its own climate change and US has its own climate change. Is not that whatever Brittain do will only affect Brittain and doesn't need to worry about what the EU will do in climate change. Isn't better to get a unified response as a global block the biggest possible the better? It wasn't better for Brittain to have voice and influence (and it had a lot) in a bigger party (and not only in climate change), than being subedited to what EU does anyway because of the so called Brussels Effect without that voice and influence being heard?

 

[Maticmaker]

Flexibility in taking decision is probably a good reason for brexit, but flexibility on climate change? is not that Brittain has its own climate change and europe has its own climate change and US has its own climate change. Is not that whatever Brittain do will only affect Brittain and doesn't need to worry about what the EU will do in climate change. Isn't better to get a unified response as a global block the biggest possible the better? It wasn't better for Brittain to have voice and influence (and it had a lot) in a bigger party (and not only in climate change), than being subedited to what EU does anyway because of the so called Brussels Effect without that voice and influence being heard?

I am referring to how we deal with the effects of climate change, not stopping it, its too late for that and as we've seen already the world is unable to respond in concert.

We will have to deal, on our own, as an island, with many specific aspects effecting the British Isles; flooding issues, run-off channels, protection from contamination, with soil erosion concerns, windspeed factors, crop failure, water conservation and distribution, tidal surges, peak-bog fires, use of existing waterways, reopen or build new ones, management of genetic crops, use of pesticides, building in natural fire breaks to protect valuable arable land, manage the water table changes in specific areas. Dredging waterways, creating dams were necessary to produce a national water grid (similar to the electrical power grid) and lots of other things we haven't yet thought about

There are numerous defensive/protective changes to be made, requiring life changing decisions to be made, those that can only be made by the people who inhabit these islands, not by a committee in Brussels.

 

[NinjaFletch]

I am referring to to how we deal with the effects of climate change, not stopping it, its too late for that and as we've seen already the world is unable to respond in concert.

We will have to deal, on our own, as an island, with many specific aspects effecting the British Isles; flooding issues, run-off channels, protection from contamination, with soil erosion concerns, windspeed factors, crop failure, water conservation and distribution, tidal surges, peak-bog fires, use of existing waterways, reopen or build new ones, management of genetic crops, use of pesticides, building in natural fire breaks to protect valuable arable land, manage the water table changes in specific areas. Dredging waterways, creating dams were necessary to produce a national water grid (similar to the electrical power grid) and lots of other things we haven't yet thought about

There are numerous defensive/protective changes to be made, requiring life changing decisions to be made, those that can only be made by the people who inhabit these islands, not by a committee in Brussels.

Do you actually believe this?

I mean, sure, that sounds great in theory. But how can you honestly place your faith in the right wing goons who have cheerled Brexit to actually bring in better environmental protections and laws rather than use it as an excuse to have a bonfire of the laws they've spent the best part of a decade moaning about?

 

[Klopper76]

What's the general opinion on CANZUK? Is it doable? Trade wise it doesn't seem like it'd help the UK much but it'd benefit a lot of people in Canada, Australia, New Zealand & the UK with regards to freedom of movement.

 

[Berbasbullet]

Do you actually believe this?

I mean, sure, that sounds great in theory. But how can you honestly place your faith in the right wing goons who have cheerled Brexit to actually bring in better environmental protections and laws rather than use it as an excuse to have a bonfire of the laws they've spent the best part of a decade moaning about?

Aren’t most EU laws regarding these things floors rather than ceilings? Like the laws regarding cleaning beaches, etc. Or am I thinking of something different?

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Australia and NZ is a pretty weird example too. I mean, they're right beside each other, and completely isolated from most other countries. Obviously they'll strike favourable trade deals. They're also probably one of the closest examples in the world to the Uk and Ireland relationship (minus the land border) and instead of trying to completely bollock that up in recent years, Australia have tried to integrate it even further (e.g. both countries closing borders except to each other during COVID-19).

It's almost as if... the best trade deals to make... are with the countries closest to you. How quaint.

The best trade deals to make are the ones you gain/ net most money from. Market scale is important but the west's trade with China shows that in the end what matters is net value of goods and services.

EU market accounts for 15% of UK GDP but we lose 65-70 billion on that trade. So we have a few billion to sweeten the pot with our new trade partners. After close to 50 years inside the EU it might be we have to leave to change that equation as I don't see anyway of changing it from within. Its a massive risk I wasn't willing to vote to take the chance but now its happened we have to make the best of it.

Isn't Ireland is fecked with no deal anyway?

 

[NinjaFletch]

Aren’t most EU laws regarding these things floors rather than ceilings? Like the laws regarding cleaning beaches, etc. Or am I thinking of something different?

Yes, but you have to ask yourself why you'd think a government hell bent on ripping out the floor would build a new ceiling

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Aren’t most EU laws regarding these things floors rather than ceilings? Like the laws regarding cleaning beaches, etc. Or am I thinking of something different?

The EU run the Uk apparently, whereas all the other 27 countries have their own governments. I think I would cry if I still lived in the UK.

 

[JPRouve]

Do people actually believe the Ricardian theories about balance of trade? Disclaimer, it's a fallacy and to make it simple since countries have specialized their productions you will have a multitude of surplusses and deficits, you want the overall to be balanced but you will rarely have a balance of trades between each countries/markets.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Do people actually believe the Ricardian theories about balance of trade? Disclaimer, it's a fallacy and to make it simple since countries have specialized their productions you will have a multitude of surplusses and deficits, you want the overall to be balanced but you will rarely have a balance of trades between each countries/markets.

Depends what degree of brainwashing you have been subjected to.

 

[Massive Spanner]

EU market accounts for 15% of UK GDP but we lose 65-70 billion on that trade. So we have a few billion to sweeten the pot with our new trade partners.

Where are you getting those figures from?

 

[JPRouve]

Depends what degree of brainwashing you have been subjected to.

Not necessarily, if you mainly studied economy in highschool, I guess that it's possible. I don't remember what I was taught then, I remember studying classical economics but I don't remember if I was given the explanation about why their theories were partially wrong or imperfect. In College it's a different story, you will study them with more depth.

 

[africanspur]

What's the general opinion on CANZUK? Is it doable? Trade wise it doesn't seem like it'd help the UK much but it'd benefit a lot of people in Canada, Australia, New Zealand & the UK with regards to freedom of movement.

As just a normal trade deal, I can see that those 3 countries would be amongst the priorities to get deals done with for the British government (though I appreciate it is not the same the other way round but I'd imagine free movement would always be off the table.

I'm pretty sure the Aussies have already said that they'd be opposed as it might lead to an influx of lower skilled workers from the UK to Australia (how the tables would have turned!) and a bit of a brain drain of some higher paid workers to the UK.

 

[africanspur]

@Maticmaker

Fair enough. I can't say I agree with your point of view or hold your optimism for what the future will hold (or for that matter, understand why the UK wouldn't be able to enact UK specific defences against climate change and, even if we think that the EU's laws aren't going far enough wrt climate change, any reason why we can't go above and beyond them ourselves) but I hope your optimism is well placed.

 

[4bars]

I am referring to how we deal with the effects of climate change, not stopping it, its too late for that and as we've seen already the world is unable to respond in concert.

We will have to deal, on our own, as an island, with many specific aspects effecting the British Isles; flooding issues, run-off channels, protection from contamination, with soil erosion concerns, windspeed factors, crop failure, water conservation and distribution, tidal surges, peak-bog fires, use of existing waterways, reopen or build new ones, management of genetic crops, use of pesticides, building in natural fire breaks to protect valuable arable land, manage the water table changes in specific areas. Dredging waterways, creating dams were necessary to produce a national water grid (similar to the electrical power grid) and lots of other things we haven't yet thought about

There are numerous defensive/protective changes to be made, requiring life changing decisions to be made, those that can only be made by the people who inhabit these islands, not by a committee in Brussels.

Those preparation would not never been decided in Brussels as it is not decided in Washington on behalf of California. Is the same as immigration, was never decided in Brussels how UK should act on long term EU immigration (and of course non EU immigration)

 

[JPRouve]

I am referring to how we deal with the effects of climate change, not stopping it, its too late for that and as we've seen already the world is unable to respond in concert.

We will have to deal, on our own, as an island, with many specific aspects effecting the British Isles; flooding issues, run-off channels, protection from contamination, with soil erosion concerns, windspeed factors, crop failure, water conservation and distribution, tidal surges, peak-bog fires, use of existing waterways, reopen or build new ones, management of genetic crops, use of pesticides, building in natural fire breaks to protect valuable arable land, manage the water table changes in specific areas. Dredging waterways, creating dams were necessary to produce a national water grid (similar to the electrical power grid) and lots of other things we haven't yet thought about

There are numerous defensive/protective changes to be made, requiring life changing decisions to be made, those that can only be made by the people who inhabit these islands, not by a committee in Brussels.

The committee in Brussels has never made those decisions for the UK. The UK have been free to create and implement all these laws and rules.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Export Opportunities by Relatedness
#permalink to section
The top export opportunities for United Kingdom according to the relatedness index, are Tin Foil (0.36), Medical Instruments (0.35), Special Pharmaceuticals (0.35), Leather Used in Machinery (0.35), and Planes, Helicopters, and/or Spacecraft (0.35). Relatedness measures the distance between a country's current exports and each product. The barchart show only products that United Kingdom is not specialized in.

From the latest OEC data - the top export opportunity for the UK is Tin Foil, why does this not surprise me.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Where are you getting those figures from?

ONS, EU and the BBC News site during the referendum. Its been posted several times and isn't really disputed although they are pre Covid.

Would it make a difference to you if they prove to be true?

What did you think the trade deficit Britain runs with the EU was/is ?

Germany runs a 200 billion Euro surplus from EU trade Britain runs at least a 65 billion deficit and both paid ball park similar contributions.

There are no reasons for voting Brexit though, right?

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

The committee in Brussels has never made those decisions for the UK. The UK have been free to create and implement all these laws and rules.

Are you sure because I thought the GM debate was shite and we ended up tied to a protectionist anti GM food policy even if the facts about GM in the end prove it to be useful?

 

[JPRouve]

Are you sure because I thought the GM debate was shite and we ended up tied to a protectionist anti GM food policy even if the facts about GM in the end prove it to be useful?

That's an interesting topic because the commission is favorable to it but many member states are against them and banned them, France being one of them. The reason there is a limited amount of authorized GMOs is because member states and in particular large ones don't want them.

 

[nimic]

Germany runs a 200 billion Euro surplus from EU trade Britain runs at least a 65 billion deficit and both paid ball park similar contributions.

Why are you so concerned with trade deficits? It's not inherently negative or inherently positive, it just means that they have stuff you want. If you're not going to buy it from them, you're going to buy it from someone else, or not buy it at all.

 

[Wibble]

As just a normal trade deal, I can see that those 3 countries would be amongst the priorities to get deals done with for the British government (though I appreciate it is not the same the other way round but I'd imagine free movement would always be off the table.

I'm pretty sure the Aussies have already said that they'd be opposed as it might lead to an influx of lower skilled workers from the UK to Australia (how the tables would have turned!) and a bit of a brain drain of some higher paid workers to the UK.

Neither side of politics in Australia has any interest in a full CANZUK deal. Trade deal yes but free movement not a chance. It is a few Australian Anglophiles' wet dream but nothing more.

 

[Wibble]

Why are you so concerned with trade deficits? It's not inherently negative or inherently positive, it just means that they have stuff you want. If you're not going to buy it from them, you're going to buy it from someone else, or not buy it at all.

And who else are people in the UK going to buy BMW's from?

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

That's an interesting topic because the commission is favorable to it but many member states are against them and banned them, France being one of them. The reason there is a limited amount of authorized GMOs is because member states and in particular large ones don't want them.

Oh well I must be right then and some how I missed the EU directive extolling its virtues and demanding the dropping of opposition to trade deals on the false grounds GM is dangerous.

No, I didn't miss any such thing because as you know your post is pretty much the EU response ducking the issue and then pontificating about how its an outward looking free trade area. While actually being systematically protectionist.

The EU is the tool by which nation states within it protect their markets from competition from outside. Some times that is unfair competition and that is understandable but some times its not and when advances in tech disrupt existing systems and beggar sunk investment the EU stands in its way on behalf of very rich capitalists. If the EU isn't the body to decide on these matters based on science then what is it doing and who does it serve. Not the people that is for sure.

Stupid people who want to talk about Frankenstein food and scare story Monsanto bullshit and push to ban them were useful idiots. I'd bet every thing I own that if the boot was on the other foot the EU would be extolling the advances in GM farming and all the presidents of all the EU .... Presidencies would be pictured eating GM corn and welcoming in the new 21st century food that will save the world.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Why are you so concerned with trade deficits? It's not inherently negative or inherently positive, it just means that they have stuff you want. If you're not going to buy it from them, you're going to buy it from someone else, or not buy it at all.

Mmm,

This is one of those questions which take you so far back in a line of logic that for a moment you don't know how to answer it.

I guess if you don't mind being dirt poor and ignorant it doesn't matter. Since most people, governments and any one with common sense understand it is really important then you would be the exception in countering the current concept of world trade and mercantilism.

Think about it for a minute, why is the EU/ UK post Brexit trade deal so controversial if it doesn't matter who benefits in terms of net trade it wouldn't..

If you are super rich and can live anywhere then I apologies for bring real lives and how real people live into your life.

 

[nimic]

Mmm,

This is one of those questions which take you so far back in a line of logic that for a moment you don't know how to answer it.

I guess if you don't mind being dirt poor and ignorant it doesn't matter. Since most people, governments and any one with common sense understand it is really important then you would be the exception in countering the current concept of world trade and mercantilism.

Think about it for a minute, why is the EU/ UK post Brexit trade deal so controversial if it doesn't matter who benefits in terms of net trade it wouldn't..

If you are super rich and can live anywhere then I apologies for bring real lives and how real people live into your life.

I count about five 'veiled' fedora-donning insults in that post, but no actual answer.

I mean for feck's sake, how far up your own ass do you have to be type this in all seriousness?

This is one of those questions which take you so far back in a line of logic that for a moment you don't know how to answer it.

 

[Abizzz]

Good to see how brexiteers arguments have evolved in the four years since It's the perfect conspiracy only somehow one conspirator felt left out.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

I count about five 'veiled' fedora-donning insults in that post, but no actual answer.

I mean for feck's sake, how far up your own ass do you have to be type this in all seriousness?

Ha ha! True.

I'm happy to criticise the EU. But I've seen conversations like this before. Any "answer" will be various regurgitations of inaccurate rhetoric. So in that respect you've got off lightly.

 

[JPRouve]

Oh well I must be right then and some how I missed the EU directive extolling its virtues and demanding the dropping of opposition to trade deals on the false grounds GM is dangerous.

No, I didn't miss any such thing because as you know your post is pretty much the EU response ducking the issue and then pontificating about how its an outward looking free trade area. While actually being systematically protectionist.

The EU is the tool by which nation states within it protect their markets from competition from outside. Some times that is unfair competition and that is understandable but some times its not and when advances in tech disrupt existing systems and beggar sunk investment the EU stands in its way on behalf of very rich capitalists. If the EU isn't the body to decide on these matters based on science then what is it doing and who does it serve. Not the people that is for sure.

Stupid people who want to talk about Frankenstein food and scare story Monsanto bullshit and push to ban them were useful idiots. I'd bet every thing I own that if the boot was on the other foot the EU would be extolling the advances in GM farming and all the presidents of all the EU .... Presidencies would be pictured eating GM corn and welcoming in the new 21st century food that will save the world.

What are you on about? The EU has never told you that it wasn't protectionist, all trade markets are protectionists that's the point of their existence allow barriers for entry within WTO rules, you are dreaming about theories that only you imagined. And once again it's some member states that don't want GMOs, you should tag team with the commission and try to convince the likes of France or Germany to allow GMOs because you are both on the same side.

And to make it clear EU directives authorizes GMOs but ultimately it's a case by case process that is the responsibility of each member states.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

EU market accounts for 15% of UK GDP but we lose 65-70 billion on that trade. So we have a few billion to sweeten the pot with our new trade partners. After close to 50 years inside the EU it might be we have to leave to change that equation as I don't see anyway of changing it from within. Its a massive risk I wasn't willing to vote to take the chance but now its happened we have to make the best of it.

Presume you do realise that the UK runs a trade deficit with the rest of the world of about $200bn , about $40bn with China for example. Whether you're in the EU, out of the EU or shaking it all about you're going to have a trade deficit with someone purely because the UK imports more than it exports. Of course when the UK leaves the transition period overall the deficit will increase having brought additional costs by tearing up all the trade deals and customs union deal.
Question is with which countries would the UK rather have a trade deficit.

 

[Maticmaker]

Do you actually believe this?

I mean, sure, that sounds great in theory. But how can you honestly place your faith in the right wing goons who have cheerled Brexit to actually bring in better environmental protections and laws rather than use it as an excuse to have a bonfire of the laws they've spent the best part of a decade moaning about?

Yes I do, the combined effects of living in a post Covid virus world and the need to deal specifically, in the UK, with the actual/real effects of climate change rather than keep pretending we can do something about it, means we need to be able to move quickly and flexibly. Its not about environmental protection anymore its about survival.

Monolithic organizations such as the EU are unable to deal with the transient impact caused by these massive changes in the 'norm'. Remember the EU is supposedly a trading block, but its real aim is to build a United States of Europe. The fact the respective economies of the northern and southern states are so different reflects the countries landscapes, traditions, population issues, etc. its one thing trying to manage economies, its another managing storms, flood, water shortages, crop failures, considerable reduction in tourism, massive refugee movements, etc..

I am not saying all this will happen next week, next year or even the next decade, so current governments have no real bearing except to try to figure out how hard and how often and in what areas are the post effects of Covid and changes in climate going to affect us. China has been able to make great strides in the last century because the stability of its government (right or wrong) gets things done and plans in 50 year cycles, we don't work like that, at least not for the present!

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Presume you do realise that the UK runs a trade deficit with the rest of the world of about $200bn , about $40bn with China for example. Whether you're in the EU, out of the EU or shaking it all about you're going to have a trade deficit with someone purely because the UK imports more than it exports. Of course when the UK leaves the transition period overall the deficit will increase having brought additional costs by tearing up all the trade deals and customs union deal.
Question is with which countries would the UK rather have a trade deficit.

Ok, so lets get the figures right as a starting point. I will highlight the points you have wrong.


In 2019, the UK’s exports of goods and services totalled £700 billion and imports totalled £724 billion. The EU accounted for 43% of UK exports of goods and services and 51% of imports in 2019.

Overall, the UK imports more than it exports meaning that it runs a trade deficit. A deficit of £129 billion on trade in goods was partially offset by a surplus of £106 billion on trade in services in 2019. The overall trade deficit was £24 billion in 2019.

The UK had a trade deficit with the EU of £72 billion in 2019 and a trade surplus of £48 billion with non-EU countries.


At what point would being wrong on matters of fact embarrass you enough to shut up spouting nonsense in this thread Paul?

I know its never going to happen but I just wondered.

Why oh why would anyone think the trade deal we have with the EU is shite for the UK. ( sarcasm)

Then again we have people on the thread who don't understand why its important to try to run a surplus on trade, so is there any point in continuing the debate as the pile on from no nothing ass hats will continue unabated.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Ok, so lets get the figures right as a starting point. I will highlight the points you have wrong.


In 2019, the UK’s exports of goods and services totalled £700 billion and imports totalled £724 billion. The EU accounted for 43% of UK exports of goods and services and 51% of imports in 2019.

Overall, the UK imports more than it exports meaning that it runs a trade deficit. A deficit of £129 billion on trade in goods was partially offset by a surplus of £106 billion on trade in services in 2019. The overall trade deficit was £24 billion in 2019.

The UK had a trade deficit with the EU of £72 billion in 2019 and a trade surplus of £48 billion with non-EU countries.


At what point would being wrong on matters of fact embarrass you enough to shut up spouting nonsense in this thread Paul?

I know its never going to happen but I just wondered.

Why oh why would anyone think the trade deal we have with the EU is shite for the UK. ( sarcasm)

Then again we have people on the thread who don't understand why its important to try to run a surplus on trade, so is there any point in continuing the debate as the pile on from no nothing ass hats will continue unabated.

Unsurprisingly you've missed the point entirely.

The figures I quoted were for goods but it doesn't really matter.

So, you change the destinations and origins of all the products you export and import but you still end up with the same overall deficit plus the additional cost of transport, duties, delays; hassle, time and so on.

Let me know this time next year how shite the trade deal was with the EU.

 

[golden_blunder]

I am referring to how we deal with the effects of climate change, not stopping it, its too late for that and as we've seen already the world is unable to respond in concert.

We will have to deal, on our own, as an island, with many specific aspects effecting the British Isles; flooding issues, run-off channels, protection from contamination, with soil erosion concerns, windspeed factors, crop failure, water conservation and distribution, tidal surges, peak-bog fires, use of existing waterways, reopen or build new ones, management of genetic crops, use of pesticides, building in natural fire breaks to protect valuable arable land, manage the water table changes in specific areas. Dredging waterways, creating dams were necessary to produce a national water grid (similar to the electrical power grid) and lots of other things we haven't yet thought about

There are numerous defensive/protective changes to be made, requiring life changing decisions to be made, those that can only be made by the people who inhabit these islands, not by a committee in Brussels.

Good luck. They can’t even wear a simple face mask

 

[Maticmaker]

Good luck. They can’t even wear a simple face mask

you mean when entering a bank?

 

[golden_blunder]

you mean when entering a bank?

The people currently running the country

 

[Paul the Wolf]

The people currently running the country

The EU? Oh sorry, see what you mean.

 

[TheGame]

 

[do.ob]

Yes I do, the combined effects of living in a post Covid virus world and the need to deal specifically, in the UK, with the actual/real effects of climate change rather than keep pretending we can do something about it, means we need to be able to move quickly and flexibly. Its not about environmental protection anymore its about survival.

Monolithic organizations such as the EU are unable to deal with the transient impact caused by these massive changes in the 'norm'. Remember the EU is supposedly a trading block, but its real aim is to build a United States of Europe. The fact the respective economies of the northern and southern states are so different reflects the countries landscapes, traditions, population issues, etc. its one thing trying to manage economies, its another managing storms, flood, water shortages, crop failures, considerable reduction in tourism, massive refugee movements, etc..

I am not saying all this will happen next week, next year or even the next decade, so current governments have no real bearing except to try to figure out how hard and how often and in what areas are the post effects of Covid and changes in climate going to affect us. China has been able to make great strides in the last century because the stability of its government (right or wrong) gets things done and plans in 50 year cycles, we don't work like that, at least not for the present!

How does the EU prevent Britain from protecting its own soil against the effects of climate change? And why do you think it's better to have to deal with catastrophes on your own rather than with the help of over 20 other countries, however imperfect that help might be?