Brexit

Or we could call it National Socialism….and where have I heard that before…. LOL

 

Lol, new British passports are made by a Dutch company in Poland

 

Seems we are internationalist, rather than some narrow minded zenophobes !!!

 

Where are the benefits in Brexit?

There was a joke going the rounds that leavers knew so little about the actual issues of Brexit that many of them could only mumble ‘passports and fish’ in response to anything about the subject or why they wanted Brexit.

Well neither actually worked but let’s look at passports as they seem to be in the news at the moment mainly something about them been black not blue.

Really the colour doesn’t matter it would it gets you but as said many leavers its seems were nostalgic for the older blue passports the UK before 1988 when they became red, the thing is there is a myth that the EU forced the UK to turn the passports red but that is completely untrue it’s a myth (like so many reasons for Brexit) the burgundy colour is recommended, but not mandated, by EU rules so for example Croatia, has blue passports.

But the important thing about this move to blue/black passports is that we have lost so much because of it and gained nothing.

The UK/EU passport was part of our European citizenship it gave us many rights and privileges under EU laws depending on any deal these could all be lost, the right to live and work in any EU country is just one of things that is likely to be lost.

Another thing that is lost is British jobs the UK company that lost the contract to print the new blue UK passports had to cut I believe 170 jobs at its factory in Gateshead.

And as said above the ‘British’ passports are now made in Poland by as Franco-Dutch firm. The British tax payer is funding EU firms and workers to produce passports that are only been made because leavers didn’t want to be part of the EU. And they say irony is dead.

 

National Minimum wage
Poland € 610 a month
Germany € 1584 a month
UK € 1622 a month

Passports won't be the only thing the Polish will be making more of for the British in the future

All Britain has to do is trade more with poorer EU countries to undercut the rest of the EU and expand trade with Africa to take the EU out of the equation in relevant industries

At half the labour costs, a temporary bitch fight with tariffs will be irrelevant

 

VG

So are you suggesting the UK cuts the real term wages of British workers by over half so they can compete with the Poles?

How is that a Brexit benefit?

And how the fuck are we meant to do that? What are we going to trade that we don’t trade now and any trade deal we get will be with the EU27 not seperate states

Again what are you on about - what industries what are we suddenly going to find to trade that we don’t trade right now?

UK-Africa trade was worth £33.1bn in 2018 in the same year UK exports to the EU were £291 billion.

EU28 exports to Africa in 2018 were 152 billion euros (say £130bn)

Of course the UK should be seeking new trade but what seems to be happening is that the UK is replicating the African EPA’s (the Economic Partnership Agreements) that were set up by the EU, so basically we could have done this trade while in the EU.

“We are working hard to ensure continuity of trading arrangements as the UK leaves the EU, so that businesses will be able to continue to trade as they do currently,” said Emma Wade-Smith who was appointed Trade Commissioner for Africa in June 2018 – ‘as they do currently’ – with us in the EU.

As I’ve asked before where is the improvement of been out of the EU? Maybe the UK can improve on these deals but can they to the extent that it makes up for the economic hit we have already had and will continue to have from leaving, I think that unlikely.

So you do want to force UK workers to take a drastic pay cut? How do you do that and in what way is that a Brexit benefit?

And there was meant to be no tariffs remember, no bitch fights, weren’t we meant to hold all the cards?

 

And what happens when UK-Africa trade is £200 billion? There are 54 countries on that continent

In this utopian socialist lovefest that is the EU, why exactly is it that the Polish minimum wage is half what it is in Britain or Germany?

16 of those 27 countries have a GDP per capita under $US 30,000. Increase trade with them where labour costs are half, making short term tariffs irrelevant

UK does have the upper hand because besides the 10 wealthiest EU countries, there are another 185 countries in the world

 

"Google said in an FAQ that those unhappy with the change have a simple solution to deal with it: “If you don’t agree to the new terms, you should remove your content and stop using the services. You can also end your relationship with us at any time by deleting your Google Account.”

Google UK User Data to Be Shipped to the US, Instead of Dublin



Google Confirms Plans to Move Briton’s Data to US
INCREASE / DECREASE TEXT SIZE
ED TARGETTEDITOR21ST FEBRUARY 2020

Google has confirmed that its US business will be the controller of UK users’ data from next month, instead of Google Ireland Ltd.


Google cited Brexit uncertainty for the move, in a statement that was greeted with some confusion by the legal community.

The move will arguably mean the personal information of tens of millions of the UK’s Google users faces less robust privacy protections.

“Because the UK is leaving the EU, we’ve updated our Terms so that a United States based company, Google LLC, is now your service provider instead of Google Ireland Limited”, it said in updated terms today.



This is all really just to avoid the EU digital services tax

 

The General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) is a regulation in EU law on data protection and privacy in the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area (EEA). It also addresses the transfer of personal data outside the EU and EEA areas


"IT professionals expect that compliance with the GDPR will require additional investment overall: over 80 percent of those surveyed expected GDPR-related spending to be at least US$100,000.[49] The concerns were echoed in a report commissioned by the law firm Baker & McKenzie that found that "around 70 percent of respondents believe that organizations will need to invest additional budget/effort to comply with the consent, data mapping and cross-border data transfer requirements under the GDPR."[50] The total cost for EU companies is estimated at around €200 billion while for US companies the estimate is for $41.7 billion."



General Data Protection Regulation - Wikipedia

 

The Spanish Council of Ministers approved on Tuesday (18 February) a national digital services tax known as the “Google tax”, as well as financial transactions tax, EURACTIV’s partner EuroEFE reported.

The decision now puts Spain ahead in the international negotiations headed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) worldwide, with the view of putting in place a global “digital services tax”.

However, after pressure from the US, which has threatened several times in the past to impose new tariffs on the EU if such a tax is passed, the Spanish coalition executive decided to postpone the collection of an estimated €1.8 billion until December, EFE reported.

Spain delays collection of 'Google tax' amid US pressure

 

VG

Do you listen to yourself?

Again

UK-Africa trade was worth £33.1bn in 2018 in the same year UK exports to the EU were £291 billion.

EU28 exports to Africa in 2018 were 152 billion euros (say £130bn)

You are saying you believe that the UK is suddenly going to find loads new things to trade that we don’t trade right now and then sell more of it than the combined EU28 has ever done.

Have you a timescale for this miracle?

What the fuck are you going on about, honestly can you explain your thinking in any of this crap?

LOL hell man this is just meaningless blather

I think you are so wrapped up in fighting imaginary socialist dragons than you can't think straight

 

Leavers haven’t got a clue

Whenever a Brexit supporter makes a comment about the thing they are supposed to support they make it abundantly clear they haven’t a clue what they are talking about.

They didn’t have a clue about the issues in the run up to leaving and they don’t have a clue about what to do next.

They didn’t deal in reality then but they are going to have to face reality now and they obviously don’t know how to.

The questions, possibilities and probabilities that should have been worked out before stepping off the cliff are now having to be looked at while plummeting ever faster downward.

To me it seems a little late to be examining the problems associated with stepping off a cliff and trying to work out a plan to lessen the results of contact with the sharp rock below after taking the step rather than before but….

I wonder when these leavers are going to realise that all those Brexit people who told them they would be able to fly were lying to them.

 

Ok I asked VG to explain his gibberish but its no surprise he can’t but I can explain why it is gibberish

Well the EU is not a utopian socialist lovefest –as I’ve pointed out before critics on the left believe it is too neoliberal and those on the right think it too socialist.

People that supported Brexit seemed to go on and on about the EU controlling everything but the fact was it doesn’t really control much and that has been decided on by the membership, really individual state could do as they wish and so the difference in things like the levels of minimum wage in each country.

This really is gibberish, I mean for a start any trade deal with the EU covers all the EU members, the UK can’t make special deals with some states and not others.

Then there is the question I’ve asked before (for which VG has no answer) what are we going to sell wen outside of the EU that we could not have sold to countries when inside the EU?

After that I’m unsure what he means by short term tariffs, in an agreement tariffs and quotas are set even under WTO rules there are set tariffs, a country can set them lower (at the risk to their own industries) but not higher.

 

Now this bit of flimflam deserves its own post

This has been one of the simplistic and disingenuous arguments put out by leavers from the beginning that is now seeming a worn and tarnished.

It was always uttered by those like VG that had no knowledge or understanding of the subject.

I mean I remember Brexit people telling me over and over that trade deals were easy and that we would have loads in place by the time we relinquished our membership of the EU.

And all of them would be better than the ones we had as members of the EU it was going to be a great new world, of light and riches

Many leavers said that countries would be banging down our door wanting to have trade deals. That we would have so many deals and so superior to any of the deals we had as part of the EU that we would be able to make up for all the loss of the trade with the EU and could basically tell them to sod off.

But we have now stopped been a member of the EU and we have only a few trade deals and none of them are in any way better than what we had before I think all of them are cut and paste of what we had before through the EU and those only amount, I believe, to representing around 8% of total UK trade.

Many countries seem to be holding off from negotiations to see what happens with the UK/EU deal and others like the US and Australia seem to be prioritising deals with the EU before ones with the UK – there does not seem to be any banging down of doors but there does seem to be some polite knocking at a door but that door seems to be the EU’s, not Britain’s.

If you have ever lived in a country where there was haggling or even if you’ve been involved in a tendering process you will basically see the underlying principles of a trade deal.

It’s about getting what is best for you or your company at the expense of the other player.

And you have less power if you are in the weaker position.

In very simple terms if you are in the desert and running out of water then the lone water seller can charge you as much as they can and you either pay up or walk away…and die.

Most economic analysts think that the UK is going to be increasingly desperate for trade deals as the effects of Brexit hit.

As someone has pointed out the UK has basically voted for trade sanctions against itself.

Other nations have not just done damage to their economies but the UK has they could just be waiting to see how desperate the UK gets.

 

Where is the plan

We were meant to have published the plan my now – we begin negotiations next Monday and nothing – the Brexit camp have had literally years to think about this but still nothing

We just don’t seem to have even the semblance of a plan and the rumour is that is because the Johnson government don’t have one.

But that is not surprising because for the past 30 years of Euroscepticism and 4 years of heated Brexit debate no leaver has ever come up with a coherent and rational plan that fills the criteria of making us better off than we were as members of the EU.

 

The Brexit stance in a nutshell (because its nuts)

First up the Brexit government are reneging on what was decided and signed up to only a few months ago after three years of negotiations because leavers didn’t know what they were doing then and still don’t.

Just repeating Canada style over and over doesn’t help if it’s clear your really don’t know what it means – experts on the subject seem to think this is a rather difficult and complex deal to broker as it involves going through each economic sector and deciding in detail what would attracts tariffs and quotas and what not and to which degree. That is why such deals take years.

But this Brexit government say they want it basically tied up by June (in 4 months) or they will walk away.

And at the same time they still seem to be talking of having there cake and eating it – they seem to be suggesting that they want ‘free trade’ with the EU while not having to follow any EU rules on free trade or regulations or arbitration.

And to add extra complexity they wish to have separate agreements for fishing and the financial sector

Oh and everything the EU has suggested is unfair and unjustifiable

To me this doesn’t seem like serious negotiation it seems to be more about giving leavers the headlines they want.

 

If it wasn’t so serious I’d laugh

So it’s revealed the Brexit negotiating stance for the EU trade deal is to claim the EU is been unfair to us, and hope nobody blames them then the shit hits the fan.

Still no detailed proposals just moans and groans and chest thumping threats of walking away if they don’t get what they want.

But that seems to be it.

As said I’m not surprising by this because in the past 30 years of Euroscepticism and 4 years of heated Brexit debate no leaver has ever come up with any coherent and rational plan that fills the criteria of making us better off than we were as members of the EU.

We are getting closer to the crunch point where fantasy comes up against reality and the unicorn falls into the meat grinder

 

That post is exactly why I don't bother with you most of the time. You just don't understand some basic concepts, then act angry to cover that up

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/bilateral-agreements

"A bilateral agreement (or what is sometimes refered to as a "side deal") is a broad term used simply to cover agreements between two parties. For international treaties, they can range from legal obligations to non-binding agreements of principle (often used as a precursor to the former).

Most of the EU’s main trading partners who do not have a full free trade deal have various bilateral agreements with the EU. The EU has hundreds of these agreements with countries around the world.

In discussions around Brexit, these terms are used to describe agreements between the UK and the EU, or between the UK and an individual EU member state, which deal with some aspect of the relationship that is not covered in the main agreement."

 

VG

Oh my poor little VG even when you try to defend your gibberish you mess up.

Are bilateral agreements the same as trade deals?

LOL well that is actually answered in the very thing you quote

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/bilateral-agreements

And it says emphatically

NO

*

Are bilateral agreements the same as trade deals?

No. Trade deals focus on reducing or eliminating tariffs, import quotas, export restraints and other trade barriers between states. The rules for trade deals are set by the World Trade Organization (WTO), which states that they must cover “substantially” all trade between the two countries.

Bilateral agreements do not cover these issues and so are not bound by the WTO rules requiring them to be comprehensive. Instead they are often very specific, targeting an individual policy area. Due to their narrowness, a bilateral agreement could not replicate a trade deal that covers the majority of UK-EU trade in depth.

*

Come on man try and defend your gibberish again I love it when you try to be clever then fall flat on your face.

 

Europe's coronavirus outbreak is exposing -- and fueling -- its rifts
Analysis by Luke McGee, CNN


Updated 1157 GMT (1957 HKT) February 27, 2020

London (CNN)The dramatic outbreak of the novel coronavirus in northern Italy has forced European leaders to sharpen their thinking, as they attempt to contain a disease that has so far killed more than 2,800 people.

Europe is prepared for handling outbreaks like this. The European Union has no formal role in setting health policy among its member states, however it does issue advice and coordinate efforts to prevent the spread of disease. That coordination is especially important when you consider that while many European nations share open borders, their governments do not trust and are not inclined to work with one another. The EU has been able to provide a forum and fill gaps in information where this has been the case. And for now, it appears to be working.
No matter how well Europe is handling this current crisis, the outbreak is unintentionally fanning the flames of several live debates.


A virus that originated in China and spread to two of Italy's most active economic areas, home to Milan and Venice, creates a perfect storm. It tangentially touches on many of the EU's current priorities and has the potential to affect them negatively both in the short and long term.


First, there is the perennial question of how effective the bureaucratic body in charge of the bloc is at dealing with continent-wide challenges. In terms of health, the EU can only really act as an advisory body, as healthcare ultimately falls to national governments.
"While the EU does a good job of spreading knowledge and calming down public opinion, it has no real powers and member states can go off in their own direction," says Andrea Renda, a senior research fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies. He goes on to explain that what the EU needs is "coordination and trust."
The coronavirus outbreak has also exposed the ever-shaky levels of trust between EU member states. "There's a meaningful lack of trust," says Mujtaba Rahman of the Eurasia Group. "There is a feeling in Italy that the numbers are high because the government has been aggressive in its policy response. There is also a feeling that other member states have lower numbers because they haven't been aggressive." Italy has tested more potential coronavirus patients than some other EU countries.
In EU politics, trust matters. Smaller, poorer member states often argue that wealthier counterparts have greater influence in setting Europe's agenda. They say that has previously meant Greece having austerity measures imposed on it in exchange for financial bailouts or Malta being forced to take refugees fleeing wars in the Middle East.
In areas like these, smaller states often feel as though they are negotiating with a gun against their head. This creates a problem for the EU when it needs these states to agree on larger, longer-term policy objectives that require agreement across the union.
Which brings us to the next issue of what role the EU should be playing in an increasingly complicated, multi-polar world. The bloc is smarting from the near-total collapse of the Iran nuclear deal, which it previously hailed as a prime example of how it could exert its soft power to create a forum for real global change.
The European Commission, under its new President Ursula von der Leyen, is attempting to increase the EU's geopolitical footprint.
This outbreak has given the EU an opportunity to lay down a marker as a global leader. On Monday, the Commission announced $252 million in funding to prevent the spread.

Europe's coronavirus outbreak is exposing -- and fueling -- its rifts - CNN