Jump to content
BANGKOK

My Thai Life

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    1,175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by My Thai Life


  1. 17 hours ago, tebee said:

    realize not treating Ireland as a whipping boy is a difficult concept for some English people to get their heads around but Ireland is an EU member state.

    Your usual content free emotional assertions. Try some facts from the Irish Times:

     

    "WTO says its rules would not force EU or UK to erect hard Irish border."

     

    The EU claims a hard border is necessary in the event of FTA, including WTO. They are wrong. I'm guessing that they know they are wrong, and that it's part of their weaponising of the Irish border.

     

    One is forced to conclude that the EU's position is based on ignorance, incompetence or dishonesty, or a mixture thereof.

     

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/wto-says-its-rules-would-not-force-eu-or-uk-to-erect-hard-irish-border-1.3710136

     

    • Like 1
    • Confused 1

  2. 9 hours ago, tebee said:

    The average tariff on foods that have tariffs applied to them might be 20%, but 85% of food imports by volume are with 0% tariff because of existing trade agreements.

     

    It's only where foreign imports might impact EU(including UK)  producers that tariffs are used. 0% tariffs on everything might make UK production uneconomic. 

    Please give evidence for your first paragraph.

     

    Regarding your second paragraph, I never suggested 0% on everything.

     

     

    • Like 1

  3. 3 hours ago, tebee said:

    So wrong in so many ways I don't know where to start.

     

    Wto deals with tariffs - tariffs are at an all time low now, most of the barriers to trade are non-tariff barriers.

     

    No other country in the world relies on WTO rules for the entirety of it's trade 

     

    You can eliminate tariffs on imports, but you can't make them frictionless - how are you going to collect the VAT on them if there is no paperwork? What is to stop people importing sub-standard goods?

     

    You can eliminate your import tariffs, but that does not stop other people slamming taxes  and tariffs on your exports. 

     

    You're not going to get the 39 billion. 

     

    There is more bit I can't be bothered...

    Tariffs are at an all time low? The average EU import tariff on food is 20%, this is what the EU forces member states to pay for 3rd country food imports at present. And 80% of that tariff has to be sent to the EU. The highest tariff is obviously significantly more than the average. With WTO we can set our own import tariffs, and keep 100% of the tariff.

     

    In addition to which we have effectively been paying a tariff for EU food imports for decades - via the CAP subsidies. A subsidy may be thought of as a tariff at source. This of course disappears with WTO.

     

    By recognising EU standards the UK precludes related non tariff barriers on EU imports. And the UK's standards will be identical for a good while after 29 March 2019. Obviously UK exporters to the EU will maintain conformance to EU standards, so non tariff barriers will be precluded in that direction too.

     

    I never suggested that WTO will be the be-all-and-end-all. I said it's a starting point.

     

    Of course it's not possible to control tariffs applied by other countries. And I never suggested it was.

     

    VAT is already collected, so there will be no new process change there.

     

    The House of Lords has already ruled that the 39b doesn't need to be paid in the event of no deal.

     

    The great thing about WTO is that it actually delivers on the people's vote, unlike anything Teresa May has dreamt up since the Lancaster House speech.

     

    As a non-aligned observer in this debate it seems to me that the WTO is the cleanest exit, and the most consistent with the democratic process. The alternative is many years of expensive purgatory without self-determination, but with significant damage to democracy within the UK.

     

    Of course some people are scared of change, they always are.

    • Like 2

  4. 30 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

    ok.

    but showing off my lack of command of the English language, I need to ask;

    where does that leave NI and the border between Ireland and NI?

    Its the EU/Ireland that need to consider whether they need to alter their border processes for importing from the UK across the NI border. The UK doesnt need to change anything material for importing form Ireland as we will continue to recognise EU standards.

     

    Ive posted a few links in the past about how light customs processes could work. But whats been missing from the debate (and not just on this forum) is the question of who is responsible for making the changes, if indeed any are actually required.

     

    The EU has been saying that its the UKs responsibility, but the reality is that the UK wont need to change anything on our side of the border, and the UK has no sovereign authority on Irelands side of the border.

    • Like 1

  5. 31 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

    but to the title of this thread,

    seems to me it suggests that UK cannot unilaterally revoke Brexit,

    or more to the point - decide to go for a no deal Brexit

    Since the OP the ECJ has confirmed that A50 can be unilaterally revoked. And May's withdrawal agreement does agree that the UK cannot unilaterally scrap the Irish backstop (which is one of the main reasons that it will not be accepted in Parliament). The OP has no impact on no deal, but it does on a negotiated FTA, see below. But these things are peripheral to the question of how the border would actually work, which is what I'd really like to see more clarity on - I've read pretty widely about this topic, and I've posted a few of the most useful links here already, but no-one that I've read has really gone into the issue in a practical realistic way.

     

    The EU have said that a negotiated Free Trade agreement cannot introduce a hard border. But it is the EU which in theory needs the hard border - because over time UK standards will diverge from the EU's - though of course UK exporters to the EU will maintain conformance to EU standards, just as all other 3rd country exporters to the EU do. In practice, on Brexit day 1 standards will be completely harmonised anyway of course. Significant divergence will not happen overnight.

     

    So it's the EU that needs the checks, not the UK. Of course, numerous suggestions have been made as to how these checks can be managed without a hard border. But my point here is that this is the EU's problem, not the UK's. The UK, by recognising EU standards, does not need import inspection facilities over and above those that already exist.

     

    For the EU to say English/Welsh/Scottish goods destined for Northern Ireland must be cleared for EU standards is a clear over-reach of EU authority. It is meddling in UK sovereignty, which is the principal reason people voted to leave in the first place.

     

    The UK may as well say to the EU/Ireland "if you can't clear UK goods into Ireland adequately, then you'll have to put customs clearance points between Ireland and the EU".

     

     


  6. 2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

    And what was the percentage of Muslim in the UK population in 1997? And how does the percentage of UK Muslims in UK prisons correlate with income levels of of prisoners? I'm sure that the Gatestone Institute, being the fairminded organization that it is, just forgot to include those factors.

    You could check the figures for yourself easily enough.

     

    I've never heard of the Gatestone Institute, but the core data referenced in the link is mainly from the BBC and relevant British government departments.

    • Like 2

  7. 41 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

    Ireland already holds it's own ground in the EU they shield companies like Apple from the taxation nonsense.

    It does at the moment. But the next round of ever-closer union sees the EU attempting to force through tax reforms to prevent tax differentiation.

     

    This underscores the core problem of the EU: economic union without fiscal union cannot work in the long-term.

     

    Fiscal union means for example that the debts, of let's say Greece, must be shared across the EU - principally Germany of course. Germany is baulking at this.

     

    So we have a situation where the EU is being steered towards an end-goal the ramifications of which not even Germany accepts.

     

    This kind of analysis has been lost in the clamour. But this problem will not go away until there is a true United States of Europe, or substantial EU reform.

    • Confused 1

  8. 5 minutes ago, bomber said:

    1.12.1999 the ftse 100 finnished above 7000 this is what i stated,its currently under 7000 its been up to 7800 and down to 3800 after the crisis its still one of the worst performing.the other graph shows high youth unemployment but also shows its been dropping quite sharply in recent years plus all the companies leaving the UK should see the gap narrow in the coming years.

    The truth is you're comparing historical peaks against the current situtation: you are selecting unrepresentative point-in-time data to suit your political agenda.

     

    Someone from the opposite camp could equally take historical troughs and "prove" a completely opposite point of view, actually with more credibility, as you can see from the graph I posted.

     

    If you take a more professional metric, like a moving average, the FTSE is up.

     

    Re sterling rate - the big depreciation of sterling against the baht happened well before Brexit. The fluctuations since then have been within a standard trading range.

     

    People often misunderstand f-x; the US dollar traded at a "low" rate for decades, but the US was the strongest economy in the world, in part  because of the low dollar f-x rate. Most amateurs believe a low f-x rate means a weak economy - it doesn't.

     

    Your assertions about GDP growth within the Eurozone are also incorrect: the Eurozone has slowed GDP growth for most of its members since its inception - all googleable.

    • Thanks 1

  9. 1 hour ago, bomber said:

    lies and negativity you call it,a pound down 20%,FTSE 100 lower than 1999 level,GDP just say rising but well down since the vote and lower than the majority of other EU nations,jobs market steady but slowing,investment down,confidence down,the £ more likely to fall further than rise,Labour favourites to win next GE. Looks great😆 i await your usual reply of but youth unemployment in spain and Portugal is 30% so everything is fine.

    If you can find a long term FTSE graph all the way through to 2018, please do so. It wlll not support your case. So yes, I would say the poster was correct in describing your posts as lies and negativity.

    Brexit FTSE.jpg

    EU youth unemployment.jpg


  10. I just want to follow up on the posts I made yesterday about the WTO option, which some people call “no deal”.

     

    There has been a lot of scare-mongering about Dover. But it should be recognised that the recent press fest is based on a worst case scenario, not a forecast (just as the fear mongering attributed to Mr Carney was).

     

    The truth is that the UK would be able to set zero tariffs on selected sectors (let’s say car parts), and to recognise EU standards, thereby maintaining frictionless imports from the EU. Under the WTO, the EU could do the same for imports from the UK for an interim period if it chose to.

     

    More broadly on ports capacity, I’d like to quote from Tim Morris, Chief Executive Officer,
    United Kingdom Major Ports Group, from the Telegraph today.

     

    “SIR – The impact of Brexit at Dover would not be common to the UK ports sector as a whole.

    I write on behalf of the United Kingdom’s major port operators, responsible for handling 75 per cent of the country’s seaborne trade.

    Dover, handling around 6 per cent of UK port volumes, faces a unique combination of Brexit risk factors that are not faced by most major UK ports.

    These ports already have the capacity and infrastructure to handle large volumes of both EU and non-EU trade today without “logjam”.

    The UK’s port sector is resilient, adaptable and highly competitive. We will work through the challenges of Brexit as we have with huge changes through the centuries. Our island nation has always been dependent on sea trade and the ports that enable it.

    UK Major Ports Group members invest more than half a billion pounds of private-sector funds a year in the UK. They are ambitious to do more, whatever the eventual Brexit outcome. Making the planning system for ports more helpful to investment is key to unlocking their potential.”

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...