Geopolitical impact of Brexit

[RandBlade]

Not sure everyone agrees that labour moves too little. As for your idea that the migration benefits issue was homespun as it was non-contributory, I'd prefer a contributory system anyway but there is a public opinion that citizens who need the benefits should be able to get them regardless of contributions. It should be possible to reform the system so that is for either citizens or people who've lived in the country for a certain period rather than granting the entire continent non-contributory benefits. Though migration isn't the only issue.

[Khendraja'aro]

I already have substantiated it. If you want to trawl through civil service records to find the minutiae then more power to you.

You just said that I have to look for that myself. Thus you have not substantiated anything by your own admission. I'm deeply impressed by your ability to forget what you yourself said inside one posting.

[RandBlade]

I've substantiated that there were plans. If you want to know the level of detail of those plans then be my guest, I've no interest in those moved goalposts.

[RandBlade]

Yes, you would. But what is the logic of wanting to negotiate trade agreements with countries that you already have trade agreements with as EU member? That in the case of Canada you will actually be removing yourself from on of the most comprehensive trade deals that country has ever struck for the pleasure of giving the negotiations a once over? The Walloon vote will not stop CETA, for the simple reason that the core of it is not a shared competence.

By the way, you realise that in 2 years time all your precious opt-out have gone for good?

According to the Canadian trade minister CETA is currently dead. How sad and ridiculous . Sooner we take responsibility for our own trade the better.

[Aimless]

I'd prefer a contributory system anyway but there is a public opinion that citizens who need the benefits should be able to get them regardless of contributions. It should be possible to reform the system so that is for either citizens or people who've lived in the country for a certain period rather than granting the entire continent non-contributory benefits.

It would have been a piece of cake except possibly where children are involved. But Brits love their benefits and they hate foreigners.

[Aimless]

According to the Canadian trade minister CETA is currently dead. How sad and ridiculous . Sooner we take responsibility for our own trade the better.

“if we can’t make (a deal) with Canada, I’m not sure we can make (one) with the UK.”

-- Malmström

[RandBlade]

“if we can’t make (a deal) with Canada, I’m not sure we can make (one) with the UK.”

-- Malmström

Possibly, would be a shame if we need to sacrifice a deal with your 7% of the world to unlock the ability to sign one with the remaining 93% of it.

"We are so incompetent you must stay with us" is not a convincing argument though.

[Aimless]

Possibly, would be a shame if we need to sacrifice a deal with your 7% of the world to unlock the ability to sign one with the remaining 93% of it.

"We are so incompetent you must stay with us" is not a convincing argument though.

I'm saying that if CETA really is dead (which isn't exactly certain) you may need to revise your beliefs about the likelihood of success of your plans for a future free trade agreement with the EU.

[RandBlade]

Yes we need to be prepared to face WTO rules if necessary.

[Hazir]

Not sure everyone agrees that labour moves too little. As for your idea that the migration benefits issue was homespun as it was non-contributory, I'd prefer a contributory system anyway but there is a public opinion that citizens who need the benefits should be able to get them regardless of contributions. It should be possible to reform the system so that is for either citizens or people who've lived in the country for a certain period rather than granting the entire continent non-contributory benefits. Though migration isn't the only issue.

i realise you didn't understand your own rants against the euro. Of course Europeans being too homebound is negative for the economy of the entire continent. One of the positive side effects of that bloody financial crises is that finally Geeks got off their backsides and are looking for jobs in the north.

[RandBlade]

A braindrain from East to West taking the most economically productive people out of those nations has not been positive for them, as much as cheap labour is good for us.

[Hazir]

Poland is both sending millions of its citizens over the Union and being economically successful. The two are obviously not mutually exclusive.

[RandBlade]

Are they being economically successful?

Poland is a developing nation that has left communism and joined the west, as well as getting plenty of development funding from the west. It should be growing fast and from 1993 to 2007 it was with GDP per capita growth between 5-7% typically (2001-3 downturn excluded) but since then it has completely slowed down. While in USD GDP per capita is even worse with rapid growth until 2008 that has been completely halted since then.

Polish GDP per capita in 2015 is significantly below that of 7 years prior - Poles are poorer now than they were seven years ago, not what you should expect for a developing westernising nation that has significant development funds pouring into it. Draining their best and brightest out of the nation may help short term as they send some funds back but is not productive for the nation left behind.

[Hazir]

Fact is, they are growing fast and millions of Poles live and work elsewhere in Europe.

[Khendraja'aro]

I've substantiated that there were plans. If you want to know the level of detail of those plans then be my guest, I've no interest in those moved goalposts.

No, that you also still haven't proven. We only have your word for that. And again, "We need to trade more!" is not a plan.

[Aimless]

Are they being economically successful?

Poland is a developing nation that has left communism and joined the west, as well as getting plenty of development funding from the west. It should be growing fast and from 1993 to 2007 it was with GDP per capita growth between 5-7% typically (2001-3 downturn excluded) but since then it has completely slowed down. While in USD GDP per capita is even worse with rapid growth until 2008 that has been completely halted since then.

Polish GDP per capita in 2015 is significantly below that of 7 years prior - Poles are poorer now than they were seven years ago, not what you should expect for a developing westernising nation that has significant development funds pouring into it. Draining their best and brightest out of the nation may help short term as they send some funds back but is not productive for the nation left behind.

PPP-adjusted GDP per capita in current international $: https://www.google.se/publicdata/exp...l=en&ind=false

GDP per capita growth: https://www.google.se/publicdata/exp...l=en&ind=false

GDP growth-rate: https://www.google.se/publicdata/exp...l=en&ind=false

This in spite of global financial crises, political instability both at home and in the EU and a reasonable expectation of plateauing/slowing growth as the economy develops.

So I call shenanigans. Shenanigans on you.

[Khendraja'aro]

Chocolate currency now stronger than the Pound:

[Hazir]

Brexiteers are calling the news that banks are getting ready to move businesses starting early 2017 empty threats they've heard before. Seems Brexiteers can not understand what their own choice actually means. They take the UK out of the EU but fail to understand that that means businesses have to operate as if the UK no longer is in the EU.

[Hazir]

Yes we need to be prepared to face WTO rules if necessary.

If you are allowed to be in the WTO. You Brexiteer lot should have checked reality before voting on the basis that you could not imagine anything positive about the EU.

Even as a fta the EU beats all your alternatives hands down. The world is not waiting for a Britain open for business. The world actually is laughing at your fantasies of grandeur.

[Aimless]

If you are allowed to be in the WTO. You Brexiteer lot should have checked reality before voting on the basis that you could not imagine anything positive about the EU.

It's a little surprising and worrying that so many Brexiteers see the "WTO option" as the simple no-fuss option. I don't think there's any doubt the UK will eventually gain its own seat in the WTO but it's likely to be a long and painful process that will interact in unpleasant ways with both EU- and global trade-negotiations.

[Hazir]

It's a little surprising and worrying that so many Brexiteers see the "WTO option" as the simple no-fuss option. I don't think there's any doubt the UK will eventually gain its own seat in the WTO but it's likely to be a long and painful process that will interact in unpleasant ways with both EU- and global trade-negotiations.

Indeed. We're supposed to be desperate to sell our cars wines and cheese to them and even we're not going to give them a sweet deal. Yet all these other countries are going to bend over backwards to please them?

Brexit loons have a logic like Donald Trump when he promises Mexico will pay for the Wall.

[Unheard Of]

Seems Brexiteers can not understand what their own choice actually means.

It's OK, we will corner the market in tea, scones and twee nostalgia scented bullshit.

[RandBlade]

If you are allowed to be in the WTO. You Brexiteer lot should have checked reality before voting on the basis that you could not imagine anything positive about the EU.

Even as a fta the EU beats all your alternatives hands down. The world is not waiting for a Britain open for business. The world actually is laughing at your fantasies of grandeur.

We are already members of the WTO in our own independent right. We need our own schedule of tariffs.

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e..._kingdom_e.htm

[Hazir]

We are already members of the WTO in our own independent right. We need our own schedule of tariffs.

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e..._kingdom_e.htm

Which means exactly nothing untill you have untangled that membership from the EU agreementes in the WTO.

[RandBlade]

What it means is legally unclear and unprecedented. It's something to sort out during A50 window.

[Unheard Of]

What it means is legally unclear and unprecedented. It's something to sort out during A50 window.

This uncertainty is not at all off-putting. This is an excellent time to invest in Britain.

[Aimless]

What it means is legally unclear and unprecedented. It's something to sort out during A50 window.

Out of curiosity, how easy/difficult do you think these WTO negotiations will be? How long time do you believe they will take?

[Hazir]

What it means is legally unclear and unprecedented. It's something to sort out during A50 window.

The A50 window you can claim is 2 years, chances you will sort out the WTO inside those 2 years are on a par with a snowflake's chances in hell. For an extension of the A50 window you depend on the goodwill of people you have pissed of for the better part of the last 3 decades and are pissing off just that little bit extra over the last 3 months.

[Aimless]

What remains to be seen is if divvying up the obligations ends up taking much less time than starting from square 1. I've mostly seen arguments against that rosy scenario.

[Hazir]

What remains to be seen is if divvying up the obligations ends up taking much less time than starting from square 1. I've mostly seen arguments against that rosy scenario.

Exactly, it's probably easier for them to re-boot the whole WTO membership by starting as observers.