Geopolitical impact of Brexit

[RandBlade]

There's also the fact that most trade occurs at the regional level, for a variety of logistical, political, and cultural reasons. You simply can't replace a rich neighbor (or a dozen of them) with some countries on the other side of the globe.

That used to be true yes. Most trade did once occur with the EU.

[Khendraja'aro]

Of course as Hazir and others have gleefully been arguing for years, as peripheral non-Eurozone members of the EU our influence over those rules was minimal at best anyway.

The fuck? Okay, another piece of evidence that Rand lost it. Here's a hint, Rand:*The*Euro is only peripherally related to the free market.

And you don't have a fucking clue as to what*loss of access to the free market will actually entail. Yes, you may be a "business man". Obviously not a very smart one, though. It's not about the documentation you have to keep.

It's about the additional documentation for certification you'll now have to obtain. That's a week-long process for. every. single. product.

And, again, what fucking trade do you have? Cookies? Tea? Those are certainly products the rest of the world is waiting for with bated breath.

[Khendraja'aro]

That used to be true yes. Most trade did once occur with the EU.

Well, if you think that 47% is negligible...

https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statisti...n-EU_Data.aspx

Oh, and don't make it sound as if it was "once, a long time ago". It was last month.

Non-EU Exports for October 2016 were £14.2 billion. This was an increase of £1.7 billion (14 per cent) on last month, and an increase of £1.2 billion (9.5 per cent) compared with October 2015.

EU Exports for October 2016 were £12.6 billion. This was a decrease of £0.4 billion (2.7 per cent) compared with last month, but an increase of £0.8 billion (6.8 per cent) compared with October 2015.

Oh, and by the way: You are also a net importer for Non-EU trade.

Yeah. You'll be juuuuust fine....

[RandBlade]

47% is not negligible it is also not "most" as Loki claimed. The last year that the EU took most of our exports was 2008 not last month. This despite the geographic proximity and the fact that currently we're EU members so our trade is distorted.

[Khendraja'aro]

You might want to use a calculator. Last month the EU*did indeed take most of your imports.

[RandBlade]

I said exports not imports.

Non-EU exports £14.2bn
EU exports £12.6bn

If you think £12.6bn is more than £14.2bn then I fear we can't go any further. Yes the EU exported (ie we imported) more to us than the rest of the world did but that just shows how well you do out of having a trade deal with what will be the EU's single largest export market and why you should agree to a further deal with us.

[Flixy]

Just as if we export to the US we will have to produce to US specs without having a say and proving we did so.
Just as if we export to China we will have to produce to US specs without having a say and proving we did so.
Just as if we export to Japan we will have to produce to US specs without having a say and proving we did so.
Just as if we export to India we will have to produce to US specs without having a say and proving we did so.

So be it. You're a minority of our exports so will have to be the same as the majority of our exports. No shit Sherlock.

Yes, and one of the major points of use negotiations is accepting each other's certification. Which means you don't have to apply (and get certification which is costly) for every single country you're exporting to.

Now I do work in a heavily regulated industry, but once we've got our CE mark we can immediately sell to the entire EU. Once we have FDA certification, we can sell to the USA. They are different processes, separate, and each lengthy and very expensive. Now through trade deals etc we can then also immediately get approval in other countries, for example, a lot of Asian countries will accept our product once we have CE mark. But for example in China, not an insignificant market, we'd have to get separate certification to get approval there. Again, lengthy and costly (plus you might have to change your product to conforn to local regulation, again, expensive ). Now, imagine that to sell to 47% of your customers, you'd have to apply again for all the licenses you had to get to be allowed to sell drinks and food. With slightly different requirements, and you're also going to have to change the way you keep documents now. Or those 47% of customers would accept all your local licenses and documentation, would that be easier?

And when you speak about replacing the EU with other trade partners I do feel you underestimate the advantage of a market that's nextdoor which still matters for a lot of goods and especially services.

[Khendraja'aro]

I said exports not imports.

Non-EU exports £14.2bn
EU exports £12.6bn

If you think £12.6bn is more than £14.2bn then I fear we can't go any further. Yes the EU exported (ie we imported) more to us than the rest of the world did but that just shows how well you do out of having a trade deal with what will be the EU's single largest export market and why you should agree to a further deal with us.

Calculator, Rand. Last month, Rand.

Non-EU Exports for October 2016 were £14.2 billion. This was an increase of £1.7 billion (14 per cent) on last month

September: 14.2b - 1.7b = 12.5b

EU Exports for October 2016 were £12.6 billion. This was a decrease of £0.4 billion (2.7 per cent) compared with last month

September: 12.6b + 0.4b = 13.0b

Last time I looked, 13.0b > 12.5b

[RandBlade]

The last year that the EU took most of our exports was 2008 not last month.

Yeah, khen. September is not a year, khen. There is too much volatility in month-by-month figures to be so meaningful which is why annual figures are much more meaningful.

[Hazir]

Is Khen's point that complicated? A vast majority of trade barriers today, including the most intrusive ones, are of the non-tariff (no, not non-tofu, spell check) variety. Trade based on WTO rules hardly touch those barriers. Without being part of the EU common market, your corporations will find it increasingly difficult and costly to sell to the EU. To add insult to injury, you'll have no input over the shape of those non-tariff barriers. Meanwhile, you're not going to join any other common market (unless you want to join the EEU, with Russia, Kazakhstan, and Armenia), which means you're paying a permanent cost in terms of trade.

What RandBlade doesn't understand is that after the UK is out it is the EU that defines what is the stilton cheese fit to be sold in the 27 countries of the EU. We could even decide the real stilton is made in Holland and the English variety should be marketed as blue cheese.

[Aimless]

I couldn't give a rat's arse if we did agree to that, though we won't. Though Turkey's deal doesn't include the words "free" and "migration". Is it only white nations that are required to agree to free migration?

I don't want a customs deal, I want a bespoke trade deal. As Turkey has, as Switzerland has etc - each different to the other.

Yes and you now have free movement with Turks as a condition of their being in a customs union with you.

Oh wait you don't. Funny that.

Just as if we trade with anyone else. Your point being?

You do realise that under WTO rules every country has "access to the free market" right? That Samsung or Apple or whatever mobile you have in your pocket (or in your hand maybe as you read this) wasn't made in the EU but still was accessed by consumers. That nations like Turkey or Canada that have trade deals with the EU don't have free movement?

So in other words you're talking total bullshit. I couldn't give the hairy crack of a money's behind if we end free migration or not, but the government's determined its a red line so it's going to end as it is. I suspect a fudge will be agreed as a compromise (ie with a job offer or sufficient funds to self-finance). But your claims that this is not negotiable is an outright lie as you've already negotiated with others you numpty.

You two seem to be speaking past each other. For full access to the Single Market, respecting the Four Freedoms--including freedom of movement of persons--does indeed seem to be a non-negotiable requirement. This is required even for the lower level of access and influence enjoyed by Switzerland, as was recently demonstrated. Restrictions on freedom of movement will come with restrictions on access to the market. The better your "bespoke trade deal", the closer it approximates "free trade", the higher the likelihood that it will require you to accept freedom of movement.

Switzerland doesn't have "a" deal, it has multiple bilateral agreements that have been painstakingly negotiated over a long time.

The agreement with Turkey was made with the understanding that it would be a first step on the road to Turkey's accession to the EU. Even so, it's not a particularly lucrative deal in comparison to full access to the single market. With respect to freedom of movement, in the relationship between the EU and Turkey, EU citizens have a better deal than do Turkish citizens, afaict.

The EU has an advantage over the UK in trade negotiations in that it won't have to have a deal in order to enjoy low-tariff or even tariff-free access to the UK market for most goods and services, whereas the UK's access to the Single Market--absent a preferential agreement--will come with higher tariffs, both due to rules prohibiting discrimination. At least, that would be the case if the UK were to pursue a strategy of extreme trade liberalization with swift (and possibly unilateral) removal or drastic reduction of tariffs in its trade with the rest of the world.

No it isn't complicated, just as it isn't original. We had this discussion back in May when the referendum debate was on-going. There was no secret then that if we left the EU it would mean that we lose the ability to shape the EU's rules.

Of course as Hazir and others have gleefully been arguing for years, as peripheral non-Eurozone members of the EU our influence over those rules was minimal at best anyway.

So we are sacrificing what minimal influence we had and in exchange regaining full influence over our own rules for domestic trade. We are also regaining the ability to agree trade deals with the EU and with the other 93% of the world that we had sacrificed while being confined within the EU.

This is kinda childish and borderline stupid. By all accounts, the UK has been an influential member of the EU. Its influence began to wane in recent years as it became an increasingly douchey partner, but, prior to this unnecessary development, the UK's representatives helped shape policy and representatives of other EU member states actively sought their support.

As a businessman that doesn't export I am required to keep documentation on a number of areas including where our product is sourced from and (at what temperature it was when we received it) and am required to produce that on demand. A business that exports may be required to keep documentation but then that already applied with most of our trade anyway considering most exports are to outside the EU already.

47% is not negligible it is also not "most" as Loki claimed. The last year that the EU took most of our exports was 2008 not last month. This despite the geographic proximity and the fact that currently we're EU members so our trade is distorted.

Loki's claim is true in the general case. It is less true in the UK's case because of the high value of trade that occurs between the UK and the US. Nevertheless, the value of UK exports to Germany nearly equals the value of exports to the far larger economy of the US, while the value of imports from Germany far exceeds the value of imports from the US.

Additionally, some of the trade with non-EU countries are facilitated by trade agreements those countries have with the EU.

[Aimless]

What RandBlade doesn't understand is that after the UK is out it is the EU that defines what is the stilton cheese fit to be sold in the 27 countries of the EU. We could even decide the real stilton is made in Holland and the English variety should be marketed as blue cheese.

I would vote to leave the EU in that case.

[Khendraja'aro]

I just realized another positive thing about the UK leaving: We'll finally get rid of all those inbred British*stag night*tourists. Those are really a blight.

[RandBlade]

You plan on closing your borders to tourists? That's an interesting proposal.

[Khendraja'aro]

If you have to obtain a Visa first being obnoxiously drunk in Europe will be a*much less attractive notion.

[Hazir]

If you have to obtain a Visa first being obnoxiously drunk in Europe will be a*much less attractive notion.

Bring it on.

[Timbuk2]

I just realized another positive thing about the UK leaving: We'll finally get rid of all those inbred British*stag night*tourists. Those are really a blight.

Yeh stag (and increasingly hen ...) parties are indeed a blight on many lovely European cities.

I went on a stag to Krakow 9 or 10 years ago, and was conscious of keeping the group as well-behaved as reasonably possible. Other groups we encountered were not so.

Went with my other half to Prague for the first time last year, and at the airport we counted no less than 3 groups of English hen parties boarding our flight from London, and we thought, oh here we go, Prague is gonna be overrun with drunken Brit stags and hens pissing and vomiting everywhere. However, we hardly saw any Brit parties during our stay, but we did see lots of drunk German stags instead, which made for a nice surprise. T'aint just the Brits it seems ...

[RandBlade]

If you have to obtain a Visa first being obnoxiously drunk in Europe will be a*much less attractive notion.

We don't need a visa to go to America, Canada, Australia etc first for tourism and pre-EEC never needed one to go to Europe for tourism either. The idea that a visa for tourism will be required is for the birds.

[Khendraja'aro]

We don't need a visa to go to America, Canada, Australia etc first for tourism and pre-EEC never needed one to go to Europe for tourism either. The idea that a visa for tourism will be required is for the birds.

Depends on how much*of a bunch of idiots your government actually is. Doesn't look very good at the moment.

[RandBlade]

Looks great at the moment.

[Hazir]

We don't need a visa to go to America, Canada, Australia etc first for tourism and pre-EEC never needed one to go to Europe for tourism either. The idea that a visa for tourism will be required is for the birds.

All irrelevant as there will be no standing rights. You'll politely have to ask if you can get visa excemption.

[RandBlade]

Which we will get as no nation would cut off their nose to British tourist's money.

British tourists spend over £31bn abroad each year (not counting domestic pre-tourism expenditure).

[Hazir]

Yeah. And you appeantly think you drink all Prosecco. You are not in the position to grant anything. And you are creating enough bad blood to not want to accommodate you.

[Loki]

Which we will get as no nation would cut off their nose to British tourist's money.

British tourists spend over £31bn abroad each year (not counting domestic pre-tourism expenditure).

It only takes one.

[RandBlade]

It only takes one.

Look at the nations that do and don't need a visa for tourism. The UK will clearly be a "don't" one: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/wh...visa-policy_en

[RandBlade]

Yeah. And you appeantly think you drink all Prosecco. You are not in the position to grant anything. And you are creating enough bad blood to not want to accommodate you.

Go suck a dummy.

[Loki]

Look at the nations that do and don't need a visa for tourism. The UK will clearly be a "don't" one: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/wh...visa-policy_en

Right, Rand. The Brits are universally loved.

[Hazir]

It only takes one.

Exactly. And it need not even be a related issue.

Brits are thinking in terms of retaining benefits where in reality they'll be trying to obtain privileges which will not be for free.

I can fully imagine that imposing visas would totally suit countries that want a chunk of the city.

[Loki]

Something the Brits would know if they were stacking their negotiating team with people who know other countries' negotiating positions, instead of those most loyal to the mob.

[Aimless]

Look at the nations that do and don't need a visa for tourism. The UK will clearly be a "don't" one: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/wh...visa-policy_en

It will be a matter for the negotiations to settle. Visa or no, British citizens may very well have to apply for travel authorization if the ETIAS is implemented.