Continuation Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero

[Amazer]

Originally Posted by abaddon

I don't think it is actually a lie. Ceptimus really seems to believe that the UK will get better deals with everyone. Because the Empire.

I think Ceptimus just believes that the UK will get better deals... not because of empire but because it's a large economy and he seems to believe that the UK will be able to negotiate these better deals since it will no longer need to consider the requirements of the 27 other parties in the EU.

Sent from my SM-M305F using Tapatalk

[abaddon]

Originally Posted by Amazer

I think Ceptimus just believes that the UK will get better deals... not because of empire but because it's a large economy and he seems to believe that the UK will be able to negotiate these better deals since it will no longer need to consider the requirements of the 27 other parties in the EU.

Sent from my SM-M305F using Tapatalk

Perhaps. Still not an intentional lie, mere gullible swallowing of brexit rhetoric.

[Amazer]

Originally Posted by abaddon

Perhaps. Still not an intentional lie, mere gullible swallowing of brexit rhetoric.

I think the UK will rather quickly find out that life outside the herd can be rather challenging and that sometimes some hard, previously unthinkable, compromises have to made in order to get trade deals with the established and up and coming trading partners.

Sent from my SM-M305F using Tapatalk

[abaddon]

Originally Posted by Amazer

I think the UK will rather quickly find out that life outside the herd can be rather challenging and that sometimes some hard, previously unthinkable, compromises have to made in order to get trade deals with the established and up and coming trading partners.

Sent from my SM-M305F using Tapatalk

Quite likely. The first reality will be that no trade deal happens in 11 months.

[Mojo]

Originally Posted by Lothian

Pathetic. Remainers have constantly pointed out that any deal will be worse than we currently have and that no deal will leave us on damaging WTO terms. Brexiteers called this 'project fear' and told us Europe needs the UK more than we need the EU. This will be the easiest deal ever.

Yeah, that’s why we’ve made so much progress with it in the last three and a half years. The 11 month deadline will be a piece of cake.

[ceptimus]

Originally Posted by Amazer

I think the UK will rather quickly find out that life outside the herd can be rather challenging and that sometimes some hard, previously unthinkable, compromises have to made in order to get trade deals with the established and up and coming trading partners.

Of course there will be challenges and compromises. However, not such a big compromise as being an actual member of the EU - which involves giving up national sovereignty and handing over lots of money to buy "free" trade with them, and not being allowed to negotiate independent free trade deals with any other countries.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

If the deal on offer is a bad one, then the UK doesn't accept it, and trades instead under WTO rules. This applies to all countries (and protectionist trading blocs) that the UK negotiates with. This is very simple and obvious: only the petulant foot-stamping remainers seem unable to understand it.

How well will WTO rules get enforced when Trump is vetoing any appointment of WTO judges?

I see that the EU is agreeing a workaround with many countries - so I suppose that's another set of negotiations the UK can see about joining.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

Of course there will be challenges and compromises. However, not such a big compromise as being an actual member of the EU - which involves giving up national sovereignty and handing over lots of money to buy "free" trade with them, and not being allowed to negotiate independent free trade deals with any other countries.

Hmm

^^ Looking like a reasonable prediction there, Darat

Originally Posted by Darat

I think we will see a form of schizophrenia. Anything better than WTO will be be portrayed as a betrayal, as "brexit in name only" because of course it will mean we've agreed to something with the EU which by definition has to mean it is bad., rather than "it's a better deal than WTO".

Also this

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

When diplomats sitting alongside diplomats from EU countries is seen as a bad thing, any kind of deal at all with the EU will be seen as a betrayal.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

Of course there will be challenges and compromises. However, not such a big compromise as being an actual member of the EU - which involves giving up national sovereignty

Choosing to join with other countries in pursuing shared interests does not mean giving up sovereignty. The UK decided which activities should be decided at an EU level and it retained a veto.

Quote:

and handing over lots of money to buy "free" trade with them,

Idiotic. The UK was a member of the EU. It was not paying to trade with itself or the EU. The contribution was for our share of shared administration costs.

Quote:

and not being allowed to negotiate independent free trade deals with any other countries.

Incredible. 4 years and you still don't understand how a customs union works

[ceptimus]

Originally Posted by Lothian

Incredible. 4 years and you still don't understand how a customs union works

I do understand how it works, and I think it's better for the UK not to be in it.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

I do understand how it works,

Your posts and criticism suggests otherwise.

[ceptimus]

Originally Posted by Lothian

Your posts and criticism suggests otherwise.

You should check your bias. Someone being critical of something you think is a good thing doesn't mean that they don't understand it.

[ceptimus]

USA, Canada, India, China, Australia, Mexico, Japan, New Zealand, and many other countries all choose not to be members of customs unions. Now the UK is doing the same.

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

There are plenty of food poisoning cases due to chicken in EU countries, and the USA regardless of the regulations.

Regulations are only any good if they're adhered to - and the person preparing and cooking the chicken also needs to follow recommended handling and cooking precautions. In no country is it safe to eat badly prepared or undercooked chicken.

Sigh.
Even using USDA test data the rates of campylobacter, salmonella and E coli on samples are higher in the USA.
Chlorine washing is notorious in the industry for giving lower microbial counts in testing, but not actually killing the pathogens and hence leaving people vulnerable. Salmonella rates in the USA are about seven times those of the UK and eleven times those of the EU.

The stink of Brexiteer desperation is strong...

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Question: who or what has been excreting over the dead bodies of chickens?

Other chickens, mainly.

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

The alternative is to just agree to everything the other side wants.

The UK will have little choice.

[Lukraak_Sisser]

But Texas, Ohio, New England etc do.
So do Ontario, Quebec and some others.

Brexit is like one of those declaring itself independent and then continuing to expect to be treated like they are still part of the larger nation.

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

If the deal on offer is a bad one, then the UK doesn't accept it, and trades instead under WTO rules.

And accepts economic ruin.

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by Darat

Terrible way to negotiate something like a trade deal, it's a little kids view of business negotiations.

It's the same level of childish immaturity and ignorance of reality that Brexiteers have always displayed.

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by Lothian

Got any evidence or is this yet another Brexiteer lie?

Given the utter ignorance ceptimus has repeatedly disregarding the World Trade Organisation he may just not understand reality and be parroting the usual Brexiteer lies.

[Captain_Swoop]

Britain will "not be aligning with EU rules" in any post-Brexit trade deal, the foreign secretary has said.

Dominic Raab argued agreeing to stick strongly with EU regulations would "defeat the point of Brexit".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51345776

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

You should check your bias. Someone being critical of something you think is a good thing doesn't mean that they don't understand it.

Except your critism is that the EU did not allow a state of affairs that is currently either technologically impossible or would put a tremendous admin burden on countries and business.
A customs union needs consistent deals with 3rd states for frictionless internal trade. Your criticism that the EU doesn't allow member states to negotiate their own deals demonstrates this clearly.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

USA, Canada, India, China, Australia, Mexico, Japan, New Zealand, and many other countries all choose not to be members of customs unions. Now the UK is doing the same.

and...... ? How is that relevent to your argument that a customs union should let the members negotiate their own independent free trade deals?

[abaddon]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

USA, Canada, India, China, Australia, Mexico, Japan, New Zealand, and many other countries all choose not to be members of customs unions. Now the UK is doing the same.

Amusing.

USA - Negotiations commenced April 2019.
Canada - Agreement reached after 10 years of negotiations.
India - Negotiations ongoing since 2007.
China - Negotiations ongoing since 2013.
Australia/New Zealand - Negotiations ongoing since 2018.
Mexico - Negotiations ongoing since 2016.
Japan - EPA in force since Feb, 2019.

But somehow, you think the UK will get it all done in under 11 months despite having no negotiators nor anything to negotiate with.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Britain will "not be aligning with EU rules" in any post-Brexit trade deal, the foreign secretary has said.

Dominic Raab argued agreeing to stick strongly with EU regulations would "defeat the point of Brexit".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51345776

There is a point to Brexit

[quadraginta]

Originally Posted by jimbob

I have for a long time thought this is the Johnson's attempted negotiating approach:
In case you are unfamiliar with this scene - the language is NSFW.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

ETA: The link works when I preview the post but not when I read my post:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_JOGmXpe5I

Umm.

...

...

...

Never mind.

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by Darat

No. The alternative is to sit down, understand what both you and the "other side" want, understand what is most important for each side, understand where each side can compromise if necessary, and then work with the other side to come up with an agreement that both of you are satisfied can live with. Now in trade talks it is slightly different in that you start with an agreed deal and are then trying to improve on that deal for both sides.

Satisfaction might be too high a goal.

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by Mojo

Yeah, that’s why we’ve made so much progress with it in the last three and a half years. The 11 month deadline will be a piece of cake.

From afar that deadline looks as firm as mush. Isn't the most likely future to be one of endless sliding deadlines, that it will become one of just muddle along while we work something out.

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

CE certification is mostly done by the manufacturer, not by any recognized body. The only thing that changes in those cases is the manufacturer will have to transfer the Technical File for the product to somebody within the EU, but there is no additional certification needed. During the transition period, UK certifying bodies will still be valid, we shall see what happens after that. I doubt prior certifications will expire, since I see no provision in the rules for certification expiring if the certifying body simply goes out of business.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Britain will "not be aligning with EU rules" in any post-Brexit trade deal, the foreign secretary has said.

Dominic Raab argued agreeing to stick strongly with EU regulations would "defeat the point of Brexit".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51345776

If I were in the EU and read that the UK will "not be aligning with EU rules" then re-certification would become a necessity.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by SezMe

If I were in the EU and read that the UK will "not be aligning with EU rules" then re-certification would become a necessity.

That makes no sense. If the product hasn’t changed, why recertify? CE products from non EU states only have to certify once, why would the UK be different? And new or altered products need to be certified regardless as well. All that the non-alignment means is that NEW products for the UK market would be able to use different standards, that makes no difference to existing products.

[Mojo]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That makes no sense. If the product hasn’t changed, why recertify? CE products from non EU states only have to certify once, why would the UK be different? And new or altered products need to be certified regardless as well. All that the non-alignment means is that NEW products for the UK market would be able to use different standards, that makes no difference to existing products.

How will they know whether or not the products have changed?

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That makes no sense. If the product hasn’t changed, why recertify? CE products from non EU states only have to certify once, why would the UK be different? And new or altered products need to be certified regardless as well. All that the non-alignment means is that NEW products for the UK market would be able to use different standards, that makes no difference to existing products.

If the UK say's they aren't going to follow the rules why wouldn't you want to make sure they haven't changed anything?

[Captain_Swoop]

Boris Johnson says there is "no need" for the UK to follow Brussels' rules.

Quote:

The prime minister will use a speech in London later to call for a Canada-style free trade agreement - and threaten to walk away if one cannot be struck.

"There is no need for a free trade agreement to involve accepting EU rules," he will say.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51351914

[erlando]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

The alternative is to just agree to everything the other side wants.

Trade negotiations are not a zero sum game.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Boris Johnson says there is "no need" for the UK to follow Brussels' rules.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51351914

In one sense he's absolutely correct - there's no absolute need for the UK to follow EU rules in order to secure some kind of free trade deal.

Presumably this would mean that the UK would negotiate a bespoke deal from scratch because no "off the peg" deal would come close to meeting our requirements. As has been pointed out repeatedly, negotiating trade deals takes years, sometimes decades. A UK bespoke deal is likely to take considerably longer than the 10-and-a-lot months that the UK has left until the end of the transition period.

As I've been saying for nearly 3 years, there are only two outcomes I could see, "no Brexit" and "no deal". Now there is only one, "no deal", which IMO is what the architects of Brexit had in mind all along . WTO terms suit them well enough and they stand to gain from the turmoil.

[KDLarsen]

Originally Posted by The Don

In one sense he's absolutely correct - there's no absolute need for the UK to follow EU rules in order to secure some kind of free trade deal.

Presumably this would mean that the UK would negotiate a bespoke deal from scratch because no "off the peg" deal would come close to meeting our requirements. As has been pointed out repeatedly, negotiating trade deals takes years, sometimes decades. A UK bespoke deal is likely to take considerably longer than the 10-and-a-lot months that the UK has left until the end of the transition period.

As I've been saying for nearly 3 years, there are only two outcomes I could see, "no Brexit" and "no deal". Now there is only one, "no deal", which IMO is what the architects of Brexit had in mind all along . WTO terms suit them well enough and they stand to gain from the turmoil.

And just in case the useful idiots, who voted them into power, cons on to the fact that trading WTO terms isn't exactly some shining beacon of prosperity, the cabinet has apparently decided to rephrase it as "Australian-style deal".

At least Barnier is fairly straight-to-the-point about what this means:

Quote:

Barnier says exporters must prepare now for border checks
Barnier says there will be no mutual recognition of rules.

That means there will be no passporting in the banking sector.

Goods entering the EU will be subject to regulatory checks, he says.

He says these are the automatic and mechanical consequences of the UK’s choices.

Business must adapt now to these conditions, he says.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Lothian

There is a point to Brexit

Yes. To get Johnson in as PM.

[timhau]

Originally Posted by erlando

Trade negotiations are not a zero sum game.

No, with a little effort and a lot of pig-headed stupidity you can make them into a negative-sum game.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Boris Johnson says there is "no need" for the UK to follow Brussels' rules.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51351914

A Canada style deal would mean abandoning N Ireland or reinstatement of the hard border.

[ceptimus]

What reasons, other than 'because we say so', does the EU give for wanting an alignment treaty for the UK to have a Canada-style deal, when the actual deal with Canada is subject to no such treaty?