Brexit - the next steps

[Jack Knave]

Who says the 500 million citizens in the EU have no money?

The facts of life says so!!! Well, nothing to talk about.

[Jack Knave]

Rubbish.

It's not. What I said is true.

Many British people are not likely to be buying high end goods

And how many is many? More than some of the poorer regions of the EU.

France has its own problems not caused by the EU.

It's in the Euro!....? ...........say no more!!!!

However, if unemployment across the EU was 50% there would still be 250 million people to sell to.

You mean work pays?      ......you are laugh and a joke Jeremy.

You mean like in Britain where some people who have what is called work have to use foodbanks.....?

[ProfessorDavey]

And how many is many? More than some of the poorer regions of the EU.

And less than the richer regions of the EU - what's your point?

[jeremyp]

You mean like in Britain where some people who have what is called work have to use foodbanks.....?

so you claimed that the EU is not a great market because some people in it have no money. Now you are admitting the same situation pertains to the UK.

You really are completely clueless. Didn't it occur to you while you were writing those words out that you were setting yourself up?

[Jack Knave]

And less than the richer regions of the EU - what's your point?

We are one of the richer regions, in fact the second one. As I said with regards to high end goods many (a good affair chunk) of the EU regions wouldn't have the spare cash for these goods.

[Jack Knave]

so you claimed that the EU is not a great market because some people in it have no money. Now you are admitting the same situation pertains to the UK.

You really are completely clueless. Didn't it occur to you while you were writing those words out that you were setting yourself up?

I was making a point, using a homeland issue, which is not prevalent here, to say that even if people have jobs (in the EU member states) they can't indulge in the goods that we sell here.

[jeremyp]

I was making a point,

The point being that you hold an incoherent position. It was well made.

[Jack Knave]

The point being that you hold an incoherent position. It was well made.

No it was not incoherent. All societies have their relative poor, we just have a lower level than others. But I was using them as an example of such types to make my point.

[Ricky Spanish]

This made me smile:

United Ireland plan to be included in Brexit talk guidelines.

European leaders are to acknowledge the potential for a united Ireland in a move that will allow the province back into the EU automatically if reunification occurs.

The recognition of a special status for Northern Ireland will be based on the situation which followed the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1990.

Sources say the guarantee of membership will be tied in with an acknowledgement that the terms of the Good Friday Agreement must be factored into any Brexit deal.

Wording on the commitment is still being finalised but it is expected to be in documents accompanying the formal EU negotiating guidelines tomorrow.....

..... However, the idea of Irish unity remains very sensitive for Westminster, which is also facing the prospect of a second referendum on Scottish independence.

Under the terms of the 1998 Agreement, Northern Ireland can join the Republic if such a move is supported in a vote both north and south of the border.

European leaders will discuss the parameters of the forthcoming Brexit negotiations with the UK tomorrow. The formal guidelines will acknowledge the "unique circumstances on the island of Ireland" and the fact "flexible and imaginative solutions will be required" around the Border.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/brexit/united-ireland-plan-to-be-included-in-brexit-talk-guidelines-35661446.html

[jeremyp]

No it was not incoherent. All societies have their relative poor, we just have a lower level than others.

You were saying that even employed people need to use food banks. That doesn't sound like low levels to me. 

So there are poor people in the EU and poor people in the UK. The only difference is that there are500 million of EIU citizens and only 60 millions of us.

Sounds like we are the ones in trouble, not the EU.

[Jack Knave]

You were saying that even employed people need to use food banks. That doesn't sound like low levels to me. 

So there are poor people in the EU and poor people in the UK. The only difference is that there are500 million of EIU citizens and only 60 millions of us.

Sounds like we are the ones in trouble, not the EU.

It's relative. We have % wise less poor. And the fact is we buy more from the rich members of the EU than they do from us so they will lose out. Trade with the poorer EU lot is negligible.

[jeremyp]

It's relative. We have % wise less poor.

What? Than Germany?

And the fact is we buy more from the rich members of the EU than they do from us so they will lose out. Trade with the poorer EU lot is negligible.

No, we lose out because our fancy German goods will cost us more. Yes, the Germans also lose a little bit but they have 500 million other people they can sell their stuff to. The EU would have to be 90% abject poverty before they had fewer people to sell to.

Meanwhile I guess more of us can use the food banks.

[ProfessorDavey]

We are one of the richer regions, in fact the second one.

No we aren't.

We are actually 9th of EU countries in terms of GDP per person.

And when we look at our Northern European country neighbours (whether in the EU or not) we are pretty well bottom of the list.

So we are less rich than:
Luxembourg
Norway
Ireland
Switzerland
Netherlands
Sweden
Iceland
Germany
Austria
Denmark and
Belgium

And we are pretty well identical to France (sometimes they are above on GDP per person, sometime we are).

So making the most sensible comparisons - with countries most like us in Europe, we are pretty well the poorest.

[ProfessorDavey]

What? Than Germany?

Or

Luxembourg
Norway
Ireland
Switzerland
Netherlands
Sweden
Iceland
Austria
Denmark and
Belgium

All of whom are richer than us on a per person basis.

[Jack Knave]

What? Than Germany?

Now you're just being stupid. Read what I write. I was referring to many of the EU member states.

No, we lose out because our fancy German goods will cost us more. Yes, the Germans also lose a little bit but they have 500 million other people they can sell their stuff to. The EU would have to be 90% abject poverty before they had fewer people to sell to.

Read what I say. Many of those are too poor to be contenders in the high goods market purchasers. So it is a straight comparison between the rich nations.

[Jack Knave]

No we aren't.

We are actually 9th of EU countries in terms of GDP per person.

And when we look at our Northern European country neighbours (whether in the EU or not) we are pretty well bottom of the list.

So we are less rich than:
Luxembourg
Norway
Ireland
Switzerland
Netherlands
Sweden
Iceland
Germany
Austria
Denmark and
Belgium

And we are pretty well identical to France (sometimes they are above on GDP per person, sometime we are).

So making the most sensible comparisons - with countries most like us in Europe, we are pretty well the poorest.

Oh Davey you are so sad!!! We are the 5th or 6th richest nation in the world. And the second in the EU because we pay the second most highest membership contribution.

[ProfessorDavey]

Oh Davey you are so sad!!! We are the 5th or 6th richest nation in the world. And the second in the EU because we pay the second most highest membership contribution.

You are confusing biggest with richest - they aren't the same thing.

The way you assess richest is per person. Otherwise you might conclude that Sudan is somehow richer than Luxembourg.

We are the 9th richest in the EU, and pretty well bottom of the list of comparable northern european countries.

[jeremyp]

Oh Davey you are so sad!!! We are the 5th or 6th richest nation in the world. And the second in the EU because we pay the second most highest membership contribution.

When you are selling stuff to people what matters is how rich those people are. GDP per head is a reasonable measure of that.

PD's post is absolutely fine in that context. You lose. As usual.

[wigginhall]

Strange how the Turkish customs union with the EU is being ignored in the media.  I suppose for the headbangers it's too close to the EU, since some EU regulations are incorporated into Turkish law.  Also, Mme May has to fake a hard Brexit, so as to keep the nutters quiet?  Or maybe she is not faking.  Well, we can't complain about being overloaded with information. 

[Ricky Spanish]

Hilarious. What the powerhouse of the EU really thinks about Mayhem:

EU Commission fears failure of negotiations.

In Brussels, a failure of the talks is more likely to be a success. The British PM May, at a meeting with Commissioner Juncker, expressed completely exaggerated demands from the EU perspective.

The EU Commission is very sceptical about the successful conclusion of the Brexit negotiations with the United Kingdom. The reason for this is the meeting between Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and British Prime Minister Theresa May last Wednesday in London.

As reported by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, Juncker, after two hours of talk, said, "I leave Downing Street ten times more sceptical than I was before." After the presentation in Commission circles, May had made no compromise at the meeting and unrealistic ideas about The course of the negotiations, the FAS writes. The probability of a failure of the negotiations was estimated in the circles to "over fifty percent".

May should, therefore, have insisted that from the beginning a free trade agreement is discussed - the EU is only ready for it when the separation modalities are clarified. The Prime Minister also expressed the view that, according to the European treaties, she did not owe any money to the other states, which, on the other hand, accounted for between 60 and 65 billion euro. She reiterated her view that the Brexit should be a success, but the conviction in Brussels is that this is not possible because Britain as a third country will be worse off than it is now.

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/brexit/eu-kommission-skeptisch-vor-brexit-verhandlungen-14993673.html

The Indy summarise the meeting quite succinctly in an article titled "Show this to anyone who thinks Theresa May's offering 'strong and stable leadership' on Brexit" Well worth a read: https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-theresa-may-eu-referendun-juncker-dinner-shambles-trade-faz-report-7711161

This stood out head and shoulders above the rest for me:

"— Jeremy Cliffe (@JeremyCliffe) April 30, 201713)
13) She cited her own JHA opt-out negotiations as home sec as a model: a mutually useful agreement meaning lots on paper, little in reality.

— Jeremy Cliffe (@JeremyCliffe) April 30, 2017
14) May's reference to the JHA (justice and home affairs) opt-outs set off alarm signals for the EU side. This was what they had feared.

— Jeremy Cliffe (@JeremyCliffe) April 30, 2017
15) ie as home sec May opted out of EU measures (playing to UK audience) then opted back in, and wrongly thinks she can do same with Brexit"

[wigginhall]

I can't decide if May is cleverly faking a hard Brexit, in order to keep the Ultras quiet, but she will accept a kind of modified customs union, with 'frictionless' trade across EU borders.  Or alternatively, she really believes that she can cherry-pick various goodies, and not pay anything back.    Probably the second one, and no doubt, the Tories will be ready to blame everybody - the EU, Germany, France, Corbyn, if it goes pear-shaped.  But the pear will be strong and stable.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I can't decide if May is cleverly faking a hard Brexit, in order to keep the Ultras quiet, but she will accept a kind of modified customs union, with 'frictionless' trade across EU borders.  Or alternatively, she really believes that she can cherry-pick various goodies, and not pay anything back.    Probably the second one, and no doubt, the Tories will be ready to blame everybody - the EU, Germany, France, Corbyn, if it goes pear-shaped.  But the pear will be strong and stable.

Given the goals of the Conservative party are an army of unemployed and cheap labour... to achieve that in one fell swoop i.e. an inevitably shit Brexit must be mouthwatering.

[wigginhall]

Given the goals of the Conservative party are an army of unemployed and cheap labour... to achieve that in one fell swoop i.e. an inevitably shit Brexit must be mouthwatering.

Possibly, but then a hard Brexit could be catastrophic for the City and other financial firms.   However, a friend just said to me, have you considered that May isn't very bright, and isn't very competent.   Well, there is that possibility.   I am sure that being dim is very important in the grand scheme of things.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Possibly, but then a hard Brexit could be catastrophic for the City and other financial firms.   However, a friend just said to me, have you considered that May isn't very bright, and isn't very competent.   Well, there is that possibility.   I am sure that being dim is very important in the grand scheme of things.

But it's May's threat of sucking assets back on shore by cheap labour and deregulation that is the giveaway.

[wigginhall]

But it's May's threat of sucking assets back on shore by cheap labour and deregulation that is the giveaway.

Yes, but she realizes also that walking away will negate our ability to trade with the EU.   Every truckload will have to be documented and checked at frontiers, I think it's 12, 000 trucks a day go through Dover.   They'd better cone off the M3 as a permanent lorry park.