NightlyPoe said:
As noted many times, the border will not close if the backstop is removed. |
Not automatically but there is a good chance that the border will be closed. I don't understand, why do you think the backstop is not necessary?
| Dark_Lord_2008 said: I am pro-Brexit. Britain will be way better off without the EU. Brexit is freedom! Britons can make their own decisions and they do not need to be dictated to by Brussels. |
I'm not surprised mister cat lord :D
| Bofferbrauer2 said: The UK lowering their trade barriers would: a) kill the UK economy (that's the ugly truth; it would just be cheaper to import everything that produce anything in the UK anymore) and millions of jobs that way b) would need to be instated first, which will take time, time where there at least theoretically would need to be a hard border (I say theoretically since if that would get voted early on after leaving, that would be faster than building up walls) Lowering the barriers would allow the UK to import tons of goods at no cost for the countries exporting to the UK, but the exports of the UK are still subject to the tariffs of every single country that they want to export to - and by removing the import tariffs, they would also remove any incentive on their side to remove their tariffs. After all, they would already have the best deal then, selling cheap to the UK but buying nothing that they produce themselves, as they are protected by their own tariffs. |
a) That doesn't matter, the UK has a trade deficit regardless. If the UK is going to rack up a deficit of over 150 billion dollars they may as well just get more value for their money. While some industries may get hurt in the process it would vastly increase the consumers buying power ...
b) "selling cheap to the UK but buying nothing that they produce themselves"
That's not true. The UK has some desirable industries to invest in such as biotechnology and healthcare which the Americans are eyeing at ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
@underlined: Certainly so, though in most cases it will be cheaper to just move to another country, especially if, like you said above, UK would ditch their tariffs. Producing cheap elsewhere in a third world country and shipping it to the UK tax-free would be much more advantageous to those companies than stay on the island. |
No, it's unrealistic to completely rely on other countries to meet the needs of the UK's supply chain. There's way too much protection around the energy sector in the world so the UK must keep extracting hydrocarbons from the North Sea and start fracking as well. Also if an industry is highly automated, there's no reason to not keep them in the UK as well. Healthcare is not something that could be outsourced either. In other words there are many political and logistical roadblocks with your proposal ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
@bolded: If you think so. But I wouldn't buy any of those unless forced upon. |
It's just based on irrational fear. The world cannot afford to keep feeding itself with humane animal husbandry practices, non-hormone treated beef, and non-GMO foods ...
It's a miracle that the EU's self imposed measures of austerity been kept up for as long as it has ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
@italic: It doesn't make deep learning at all illegal. What it makes illegal is collecting tons of data without knowledge of the users they collect them from, give them a right to opt out, have their data deleted if they ask to, and see in detail all the data the companies collected of an individual in the EU. It doesn't disallow to collect data at all, it's just that they now must ask first if and what data they are allowed to collect. The tech hub may be an advantage for the UK. Seriously, I hope it does, as Brexit should not be coming on the back of the common people. |
It pretty much does since since these algorithms that makes these decisions regarding the user requires a "right to explanation" and there's no way to explain how an algorithm came to a specific decision when one is training the network by feeding it some data. The most powerful form of deep learning is effectively banned so there's no way to include data from Europeans in training a deep neural network unless the business wants to get fined ...
Here's the even more damning assessment about GDPR from Brookings Institute, "Regulations prohibit any automated decision that ‘significantly affects’ EU citizens. This includes techniques that evaluates a person’s ‘performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behavior, location, or movements." AI can't have any material impact on EU citizens ...
As for your last line, it goes against democratic ideals that the common people should not experience the decision they've made ... (the common people bear all of the responsibility for brexit)
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
Case in point about your argument you were using in previous posts about the expensive EU food products and that the UK would undercut them: I'm in the Philippines right now. But apart from some sweets, the only UK product I could find was Spam (Filipino seem to love that at least, considering the plethora of variations available). From other EU countries, I found Juices (all cheaper than US variants btw and on par to South African juices), Chocolate butter, Milk, Powdered Milk, tons of sweets (especially chocolates and waffles), Honey, Tomato sauce, Olive oil, even some fruits and vegetables... and in almost all cases, the European products are at least competitive to Chinese, Korean, Australian or American products. |
Well that's exactly what brexit is supposed to solve. It let's the UK become more competitive by stripping away crippling EU regulations. The price of chicken and beef are respectively 20% and 40% cheaper in America compared to Britain. Less restrictions on GMOs would also be very helpful as well ...
As for the other countries, European agriculture products being competitive to Korea or Australia really isn't saying much. Korea just straight imports most of their food products from China and the same applies to Japan, Russia, Taiwan as well. Australia has some of the most extreme labour protection laws on this planet so the price of many common commodities including agriculture skyrockets. For China, despite decimating everyone in terms of production output they're still politically shunned upon around the world even after having the world make them accept harsher conditions for joining the WTO ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
Yes, the CAP was set up to protect European farmers from competition from outside the EU. But Macron already announced last year (or 2017, not entirely sure about the date) that they are willing to kill the CAP. Even just thinking that is a sign that the European farmers don't need the protection anymore, as they are increasingly exporting their goods on the world market, and with success as you can see from the above. And yet, apart from Spam and some sweets, I don't see anything British here. It may be a reason of taste, but I guess it's more because UK products are not as competitively priced as with other European products |
Macron effectively reversed his stance on CAP just to score some political points to get the violent protests from the yellow vests off his neck ...
We're talking about a leader here who is more despised than either May or Trump by their own people and when he faces a new election (whether he continues to participate or not) after no deal brexit happens, thoughts are going to be popping up by French citizens about EU membership as their farmers safety nets are going to get smaller ... (it's going to turn into an ugly shitstorm)
France is one of the more Eurosceptic nations after Britain and they'll be wondering who's going to fill the hole for the CAP budget ...
Last edited by fatslob-:O - on 24 March 2019
| fatslob-:O said: These past few posts just goes to show anyone how much respect my generation has for democracy which is none ... My generation does not deserve to be graced with democracy and I sincerely hope that China takes over this world in the future to strip nearly everyone of their options just to prove how bitter it is to have the so called 'experts' always choosing for you ... The Scottish nationalists had better be damn well prepared if brexit doesn't come to pass then the UK has 'precedent' to ignore their pleas for independence as well no matter how much they vote for it, HAHAHA ... |
Possibly the only way to stop the madness.
NightlyPoe said:
Can you provide a link for why you believe not having a backstop violates international law. Because I'm not following the logic. I think I've answered the question several times. Remove the parts that are incompatible with UK sovereignty and vote on that. It's not that they won't want trade, it's that they'll hold far more power over us during negotiations as they'll be in trading blocks whilst we're a single Country. The EU negotiations have been proving this for the past 3 years let alone Liam Fox's sham of a department. They'll also still have all their own trade agreements already in place whilst the UK will have erected trade barriers with our closest partners at best and have close to 0 deals at worst. How desperate will the UK look at that point? Let's be honest, the snafus with the EU are almost entirely political. If it were simply a matter of trade, the issues are manageable. Yeah, there's a crap ton to negotiate, but nothing that can't be ironed out. So that's a bad example. The process would probably be different depending on which country. As long as Trump's in office, we know a favorable deal with America is available at the very least. How much actual sovereignty are you willing to give up for new trade deals? Huh? |
I didn't say the backstop, I said May's red lines were not compatible with the GFA. At present the only way to honour the GFA is to stay in the customs union and the single market. May's red lines mean we can't do either and no one has come up with a realistic alternative so far. She invented the backstop as the only legal method to ensure we don't end up in a situation where we renege on our commitments to the GFA. Once you take out the bits that you consider "protecting our sovereignty", we leave ourselves with 2 options: stay in the customs union and single market or renege on our legal commitments. Any potential alternatives won't exist in a short-medium time frame and would probably require R&D before a genuine technological solution can be found. This is why I place the blame at May and her government.
Remember that May is the one that created the backstop so trying to remove it is already an international humiliation.
So, what is your alternative? Because so far it just sounds like you're happy to renege on the GFA in 0-2 years time.
NightlyPoe said:
That doesn't make the backstop legally mandated. You've only reiterated the issue again. I'm asking for a source that actually says that it's legally mandated for the backstop to be a part of this agreement. Oh yeah, the deal will be favorable... but only for the US! Trump already said what the UK needs to do: Allow chlorinated chicken to be imported and privatize the NHS. Also, they could veto any other trade agreement, with China for example. Does that look like a fair deal to you? And what did you expect with America first? That's certainly sensationalized. In any case, I don't want to get into American politics, but Trump sees Brexit and his election as somewhat linked. America first sometimes takes a backseat to Trump's interests first and Trump has an interest in portraying himself as assisting. |
This is partly what I meant by 'how much sovereignty are you willing to give up?' Are you willing to lower food safety standards or to increase the level of privatization in our health service for a trade deal with the US. Or to give the US the opportunity to veto future trade deals?
Larger trading blocks and larger Countries are going to be demanding a lot of concessions before they are willing to deal and they're going to be bigger whilst still having all their current trade deals intact. They're going to be negotiating from a position of strength as we'll look isolated. India for instance have already said that any future trade deal would require the UK opening more space for Indians to migrate to the UK.
In any negotiation there will be give and take. We will have to give up something which is why your sovereignty claims when dealing with the Irish border situation are going to come up in other areas when we try to strike trade deals outside the EU.
And what evidence do you have that these claims are sensationalised? Also, how long do you think trade deals take to strike on average?
| LurkerJ said: Possibly the only way to stop the madness. |
Oh believe me, I want it as much as you do just show what their paradise actually looks like when their ruled by a bunch of despotic technocratic elites with no way to remove them out of power ...
NightlyPoe said:
Well, for one, because there's a better than good chance there will be a border specifically because of the insistence on a backstop in the next few weeks. Further, it puts the UK in an intolerable situation where the default is that they lose control over Northern Ireland's trade policy. Not only does that sacrifice UK's sovereignty, but it gives the EU all the leverage in the world in the next round of negotiations. |
Yeah, these are valid points of criticism but I think it's still better than the alternatives I heard so far.
Also let's not forget, upholding the Good Friday Agreement always means that the UK has to give up some sovereignty in Northern Ireland.
most people that voted leave did do because of thier prejudices against foreign looking people, then you have another camp that genuinly feel life will be better without EU. if final decism isnt made then it has to be put to a final vote on what type of deal the withdrawal will mean and or remain in EU
knuckle draggers dont realise that leaving the EU and so called going it alone they will have to trade upto the commenwealth countries and upcoming global powers which in turn them countries will demand rights for workers to settle in the uk etc
i can imagine many swaths of pakistani, indian, chineese and jamaican workers traveling to the uk en masse
...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...
PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk
really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...
Is Brexit what you calm the shit after breakfast?
I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.
| Skeeuk said: most people that voted leave did do because of thier prejudices against foreign looking people, then you have another camp that genuinly feel life will be better without EU. if final decism isnt made then it has to be put to a final vote on what type of deal the withdrawal will mean and or remain in EU knuckle draggers dont realise that leaving the EU and so called going it alone they will have to trade upto the commenwealth countries and upcoming global powers which in turn them countries will demand rights for workers to settle in the uk etc i can imagine many swaths of pakistani, indian, chineese and jamaican workers traveling to the uk en masse |
The country (and Europe in general) are going back to the dark ages, and in my opinion, it's almost too late to turn back the wheel. It's tragically funny watching the left clashing with the people they welcome so much:
Last edited by LurkerJ - on 26 March 2019
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
