More lies from the Resigners

[JohnD]

we have a trade defecit with the EU, proving we have the stronger hand.

No, a trade deficit does not mean you have a stronger hand.

If I earn £200 a week, and my neighbour pulls in £1,884,615 a week (she is married to Philip Green), I might mow her lawns every weekend and earn £100 for doing it. But I might spend £180 at her shops. So I have a trade deficit with her.

If we fall out, and I stop doing her lawn, and shop at the dockyard market in future, her business is £180 down (0.0096%), and I am £100 down (50%).

With she care, or even notice? No, because it is a small proportion of her income.

Will I notice that my income has halved? Yes, I will be living in very straightened circumstances.

The 54% you quote from the article is not 54% of the EU's trade. It is 54% of ours.

 

[Doggit]

Sorry John, I think you're partially right to the figure, but even if we export 47%, and import 54%, then they're selling more to us than we are to them, and that's what a trade deficit is about.

And the way you've "constructed" you're figures, just proves how things are being twisted to try and get the best impression across. But you don't know what your neighbors commitments are, and losing £180 might tip her over the edge. And if you lose £100, then you'll look for work elsewhere. I could build another set of figures just as easily, but they wouldn't have anything to do with the situation we're in.

A trade deficit says that we buy more from the EU than we sell to them, so if they start setting import tariffs on what they buy from us, we just do the same to them, and it's nothing to do with percentages, if people stop buying from you, it hurts their economy, and as their sales are split across numerous countries, it'll affect each of them in different ways. Some WILL shrug it off, but others could suffer very badly.

I will try and find the original source of the figures, but most of the articles are more current.

 

[Gerrydelasel]

Don't forget that it is in the EU's interests to formulate a new trade deal with us not just to keep their exports flowing, but to claw back some of the £248M-per-week membership fee they'd have just lost.

 

[JohnD]

if people stop buying from you, it hurts their economy

yes, and there is no doubt that, by tearing up existing treaties and flouncing out of the worlds largest trade group, a country that resigned from the EU would lose trade and prosperity.

 

[Foxtrot Oscar]

Boris Johnson, and Foxtrot Ice, says we’ll get a good trade deal with the European Union because Germany wants to sell us BMWs.

What he doesn’t say is that our exports to the EU are 13% of our economy, while their exports to us are only 3% of their economy.

So, we’d be the big losers from a trade war.

We need them more than they need us.

Boris also doesn’t tell you that many foreign firms, like Nissan, set up shop in Britain because we are a gateway to sell stuff to the whole EU. If we quit, Germany and France might try to grab our jobs by luring companies away from the UK.

Britain holds all the aces post Brexit.

wrong.

Nissan is owned by the French so if they were going to grab the jobs, then they would have done long ago..

 

[Gerrydelasel]

yes, and there is no doubt that, by tearing up existing treaties and flouncing out of the worlds largest trade group, a country that resigned from the EU would lose trade and prosperity...

...temporarily.

 

[JohnD]

Nissan is owned by the French so if they were going to grab the jobs, then. ..

Nissan is not "owned by the French" so your post is complete nonsense.

 

[wobs]

Nissan owned by Renault according to this:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/image/view/-/2272690/highRes/722881/-/maxw/600/-/b1aqlcz/-/cars001px.gif

Renault own about 44% of Nissan.

It has long been a position in the car industry that if we left the EU, it would put the UK's car industry in danger. Even back in the 90s, this was said.

The car industry today is far more globalised, owned by a few big players, and more dynamic. If they wanted to pull out of the UK, they could quite easily, and this is a very real risk.

That isn't just a risk to UK jobs. Its a risk to high paying quality UK jobs.

See also many other manufacturing jobs in the UK. Anyone who thinks we don't produce much in the UK anymore is deluded.

 

[JohnD]

 

[JohnD]

Some people will tell you that a vote for Brexit is a vote against the establishment.

"So, to people getting ready for the mother of all revolts on Thursday, I want to point out the crucial difference between a real revolt and a fake one. The elite does not usually lead the real ones. In a real revolt, the rich and powerful usually head for the hills, terrified. Nor are the Sun and the Daily Mail usually to be found egging on a real insurrection."

"Take a look at the people leading the Brexit movement. Nigel Farage, Neil Hamilton, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove. They have fought all their lives for one objective: to give more power to employers and less to workers. Many leading Brexiters are on record as wanting to privatise the NHS. They revelled in the destruction of the working-class communities and cultures capable of staging real revolt. Sir James Dyson moved his factory to Malaysia, so much did he love the British workforce. They talk about defying the “elite”. But they are the elite."

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-eu-working-class-culture-hijacked-help-elite

 

[Gerrydelasel]

Not sure what point you're making there. All politicians are 'the establishment', as are most of the NGOs you so happily trust. 'The estabilshment' are on both sides. But better a British establishment ruling over us plebs, than a 27/28 majority foreign establishment.

 

[JohnD]

"We listen to the Brexit lot talk about the trade deals they’re going to make with Europe after we leave, and the blithe insouciance that what they’re offering instead of EU membership is a divorce where you can still have sex with your ex. They reckon they can get out of the marriage, keep the house, not pay alimony, take the kids out of school, stop the in-laws going to the doctor, get strict with the visiting rights, but, you know, still get a shag at the weekend and, obviously, see other people on the side.

Really, that’s their best offer? That’s the plan? To swagger into Brussels with Union Jack pants on and say: “ ’Ello luv, you’re looking nice today. Would you like some?”

When the rest of us ask how that’s really going to work, leavers reply, with Terry-Thomas smirks, that “they’re going to still really fancy us, honest, they’re gagging for us. Possibly not Merkel, but the bosses of Mercedes and those French vintners and cheesemakers, they can’t get enough of old John Bull. Of course they’re going to want to go on making the free market with two backs after we’ve got the decree nisi. Makes sense, doesn’t it?”

Have no doubt, this is a divorce. It’s not just business, it’s not going to be all reason and goodwill. Like all divorces, leaving Europe would be ugly and mean and hurtful, and it would lead to a great deal of poisonous xenophobia and racism, all the niggling personal prejudice that dumped, betrayed and thwarted people are prey to. And the racism and prejudice are, of course, weak points for us. The tortuous renegotiation with lawyers and courts will be bitter and vengeful, because divorces always are and, just in passing, this sovereignty thing we’re supposed to want back so badly, like Frodo’s ring, has nothing to do with you or me. We won’t notice it coming back, because we didn’t notice not having it in the first place.

You won’t wake up on June 24 and think: “Oh my word, my arthritis has gone! My teeth are suddenly whiter! Magically, I seem to know how to make a soufflé and I’m buff with the power of sovereignty.” This is something only politicians care about; it makes not a jot of difference to you or me if the Supreme Court is a bunch of strangely out-of-touch old gits in wigs in Westminster or a load of strangely out-of-touch old gits without wigs in Luxembourg. What matters is that we have as many judges as possible on the side of personal freedom. "

http://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/376668/3260348/

 

[Gerrydelasel]

Can't think or speak for yourself eh, John? Reduced to quoting whole diatribes verbatim to keep you posts bouyant.

 

[wobs]

Regarding deregulation:
"It is also worth noting that achieving this level of deregulation is not possible from inside the EEA – ultimately Norway still adopts 93 of the top 100 costliest EU
regulations, taking on 94% of the cost. This suggests a looser relationship with the EU would be needed to achieve these gains."
(page 45)
http://2ihmoy1d3v7630ar9h2rsglp.wpe...liberal-free-market-guide-to-Brexit-FINAL.pdf

Would be interesting how we would be able to trade with the EU, and not conform to EU standards, when Norway currently conforms.

I've been to sites in Norway, and they all conform to EU standards, their government pays an annual fee to trade with the EU, and they have no say in the regs.

This is a country with far more income per head of population from fossil fuels, so is a wealthy nation, and yet still feel the need to trade with the EU.

 

[Doggit]

Why are we still bothering with this. Everyone's made up their mind, and no one's going to change theirs.

Let's give it break, and start the recriminations etc on Friday.