SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - UK Politics Thread

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - UK Politics Thread (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=220113)

No apology needed my friend but clarity is essential when discussing topics that are potentially of a contentious nature.

I have been known to refer to Boris as a 'bumbling buffoon' on more than one occasion in the past but as things currently stand he is the only politician living up to what he promised.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2712307)

I doubt the EU are sincere about much these days, especially a level playing field when you consider the deal agreed with Canada and no I don't think geographical locations are that important.

It's a bit odd to ask for sincerity with the British currently passing a bill that breaks international laws and infringes almost everything that was agreed on before. It seems the UK thinks it is still in the former cherrypicking position, it isn't. We are sitting at opposite sides of the table now. Each side tries to benefit as much as possible.

Quote:

We look at the friction within the EU growing with every passing day and believe you me, it will get worse between Macron and Merkel, not only at a personal level but also on each of their home fronts.

The real friction is not between Germany and France. It's between almost all members and Poland/Hungary. We shall see how this develops. When push comes to shove France and Germany will be on the same side.

Quote:

It's a shame it has come to this but if the original goals of the EEC had been adhered to I honestly believe a trading partnership deal of a meaningful and transparent nature could have been achieved.

If the original goals of the EEC were still valid, the economic strength of Germany and the Deutsche Mark would have torn the continent apart again. Just take a look at countries like Portugal, Greece, Ireland before the Euro was introduced.

Quote:

Now it is increasingly looking like a race to the bottom regarding tariffs and taxes, hurting all parties in the process.

True. Can this be called an outcome of the Brexit referendum? Yes, of course.

Quote:

Ask Macron if he is going to make up the financial shortfalls or is Merkel prepared to further ruin the next German generations future financial stability to keep the ship on an even keel?

It doesn't really matter, because a mechanism of shared European debt has been established. And while a lot of people without any fiscal knowledge whine about this, it is the next logical step for a federation with a common currency.

Today the British national debt amounts to 86% of the BIP (EU 80.5%). Let's wait 5 years and compare again.

@Jim Honestly, i do not understand what you say, or want to say in the last post further north.
The EU not sincere? Well we have seen what happened in the last four years in England. So you are happy that Germany has to pay more after the UK left? Well yes, what can i say.
Predict its downfall, or the EU's? I don't think so.

France and Germany are the two economical powerhouses at the moment, but i do not see much animosity, they are also very different. When things get worse they will still support and try to save as much as possible for their own and other citizens of the EU. Whether the current governments will be the same in a few years is of course doubtful, support of the people, voters and all that.

And the deal with Canada led to an even playing field (towards the EU - how so?), this one?
"The UK and Canada have agreed a deal to continue trading under the same terms as the current EU agreement after the Brexit transition period ends."
and
"Welcoming the continuity deal, Mr Trudeau suggested a new comprehensive trade agreement with the UK would take several years to negotiate."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55031443
Same terms and continuity means same standards as before? Congratulations. What was it all for then? :k_confused:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catfish (Post 2712365)

France always has seen the EU as a vehicle to drive its own ambition - dominating a francophile continental Europe, first in the southern region, then continentally. Germany is expeted to pay for that - not to quesition the claim by Paris . That one cannot sustain one's claim by one's own economy and indeed is now one of the candidates for Euro collapse one has to worry most over, has always itched and irked Paris.

Thats why Pris wants the socialisaiton of nation'S debts. So that Germanay carries more of France's burdens.

And why do you expect London to act in the Germans' interest...? Not even Berlin acts in the Germans interest, but sells them out...

Oh, and Canada is not part of the EU, but the Commonwealth. ;) Also, Canada does not patronise the UK like the Eu wants to do. They have a solution for the time their negotiations will last. How they go, is their concern, not ours.

I could imagine that deals with other Commonwealth natiosn folow next. It was not called for no reason the British Commonwealth, once. One shares history. Ine knows each other.

With the Irish solution of today, if it is that (I have no idea), apparently being agreed on by both sides, the UK can expect to find it easier to also get a trade deal with Biden and the US. The deal with Japan, much to the displeasure of Brussels, they already got. Chances to get others as well have increased again now that the breaking of the Brexit treaty - as threatened by Johnson - seems to be off the table again.

And you always complain about the British not doing as you define it to be in their interest. But why do you think your way of thinking of it must be their paradigm? I suggest you try a bit harder to see it through their eyes, under the premsise of what they want by themselves, not what you think they should want. They are grown up kids. They can decide on their intentions all by themselves. It must not be similiar to our intentions, they are not us.

"The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (unofficially, Canada-Europe Trade Agreement) is a free-trade agreement between Canada and the European Union. It has been provisionally applied, thus removing 98% of the preexisting tariffs between the two parts. The negotiations were concluded in August 2014."

I fail to see where the advantage for the UK might be. Remove the rest 2 percent? Ok. How much percent does or did the UK export to Europe?
It does not make sense, from the numbers to sovereignty to take back control of borders they never lost, sorry :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catfish (Post 2712389)

UK and CAN deal with each other >AS IF< the UK would still be a member. But it isn't, and the EU has no say in this new relation. It uses the EU trade agreement with Canada and the UK's former role in that only as a temporary model, maybe also took over the numbers. No loss for the UK there, things continue as before - but the UK got the EU out of the UK's relation with Canada. No bad solution, if you ask me. Oh, and the queen still is head of state in Canada, maybe these historical ties had something to do with the willingness of the Canadians to do it this way. ;)

They signed this temporary treaty short after the one with Japan.

"The main reason for brexit was immigration, that went well didn't it."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 2712399)

UK and CAN deal with each other >AS IF< the UK would still be a member. But it isn't ...

Uh, makes a lot of sense?

Quote:

... and the EU has no say in this new relation. It uses the EU trade agreement with Canada and the UK's former role in that only as a temporary model, maybe also took over the numbers. No loss for the UK there, things continue as before

Yeah, makes much sense?

Quote:

- but the UK got the EU out of the UK's relation with Canada. No bad solution, if you ask me.

But I don't ask. The UK was one of the partaking partners (back then in the EU) who helped shape the CETA deal with Canada, anyone remembers? And then signed it. So this now makes a lot of sense?

Quote:

Oh, and the queen still is head of state in Canada, maybe these historical ties had something to do with the willingness of the Canadians to do it this way. ;)

It is probably the historical ties of some three hundred years ago that is still present in the minds of some like Gove, or Farage, or Rees-Mogg.

But "The willingness", why do you think anoyne should not do trade with the UK? The willingness is generally everywhere. But maybe it is the brexiters who do not want to buy or sell anything to or from anyone.

So why should Canada or any other country not sign trade treaties with the UK now, as it and lots of others did with the EU or other trade partners? And the UK (read: England) will now have different treaties for all 79 or how much was it exterior trade partners, and yes it certainly can do that. It now has to. But again, where is the advantage? Less leverage? Less influence?

But even back then trade was not only about trade and numbers as you wrote somewhere. The EU is not only a trade organisation, and the UK saw to that!
Also the WTO does indeed have a lot of paragraphs that deal with trade and human rights, and they are a bit more demanding than what the EU wrote down in its principles. Which were never really used unfortunately, afaik.

"There is more to trade than simply exchanging goods and services. International trade today involves all aspects of human life and, as a result, EU treaties include clauses that ensure various human rights protections.
But, as the UK goes about making its own post-Brexit treaties, it looks like human rights are being abandoned as a result of its weaker bargaining power.
As part of the EU, the UK is party to 40 trade deals, which cover more than 70 countries and make up about 11% of total UK trade. This allows the UK to trade with these countries on preferential terms. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK would lose tariff-free access to these markets and would have to trade under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules.
To avoid this, the UK has been negotiating new deals with a number of countries that will take effect in the event of a no-deal Brexit. It has signed 15 agreements, covering 46 countries.

But most of these fail to cover human rights. Not only are human rights clauses embedded in the EU’s trade deals, they are something the UK government has insisted it attaches a high value to."

https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/...l-negotiations

Good book "b.t.w.":
"Forced to Be Good: Why Trade Agreements Boost Human Rights"
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt7zdx1

You know when i read those brexit comments of how the "unelected EU bureaucrats" are cheating the common man and send terrorists to the UK, overriding british law and order, how they steal their fish and which laws and bananas are bent so that "the EU" (of which Britain was a member) gets more advantage and so on..

And the EU is keeping calm all the time and tries to convince and negotiate, and then reading the Sun or the Express or those brexiters' answers not only in the video above - this is so unbelievably DUMB.
So Farages's friend Frisby makes a song called 17 million f' offs, and this is the intended message to the EU, and the latter is so thankful :haha:
No one outside of Britain should be sorry for brexit, i take it a bit more anger would be in order, and more honest :03:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKBN28J0OA

Last chance? But there are stlll three weeks ... :03:

No Deal would be painful – but in the long term regaining control will suit Britain

Quote:

Try to see it from the perspective of the Europeans: for decades the UK has been an unwilling but productive partner in the Grand Projet. While the Brits have pontificated about the dangers of the Brussels regulatariat, we are as responsible as anyone for codifying, writing and setting up the enforcement mechanisms necessary to regulate Europe. And now we want to do it all for ourselves? That is genuinely scary for many European nations, who recognise the dangers to their own economies from the potential of a less regulated, more productive and more competitive UK.

Britain is a potential threat to Europe across the whole economic sphere. From labour legislation to the regulation of goods and services we could backdoor into Europe if we are given the chance. If we can’t agree to a special trade deal, then WTO rules it should be, unless we can agree something better. A ‘no deal’ will be massively sub-optimal in the short term for the UK. But Europe, which fears competition from the UK exposing their own lack of competitiveness, has just as much to be worried about.

The immediate effect of a ‘no deal’ will be yet another tumble in perceptions of the UK. On the back of Covid damage, political ineptitude and the threats of break-up, the UK is screaming ‘sell’ signals to the global market.

But I wonder if the Eurocracy actually understand better than our own government what the UK has achieved by Brexit. The reason they are so nervous is because they see the prospects for the UK looking better and better:

The UK has re-established its grip on monetary sovereignty, (we never actually lost it), meaning we can print as much money as we require to reflate and reconfigure our economy without any threat from Europe.
We have fiscal sovereignty meaning we can spend that money however we wish to – on regional and industrial policy and stimulus.
By exiting Europe, we regain national sovereignty, which boils down to the right to determine exactly how we succeed or fail as a nation. The UK has re-established mastery of its own economic destiny. Brussels has no say.

Aside from the competitive threat of a new UK, the obvious threat to Europe is that exit might start to look attractive to nations struggling within the monetary and fiscal restrictions of the Euro.

https://capx.co/no-deal-would-be-pai...-suit-britain/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catfish (Post 2712471)

Uh, makes a lot of sense?
Yeah, makes much sense?

It does, its a terms&conditions settings to keep on trading to mutual benefit with another partner added to their list of trade partners. They lose nothing there, but have the eU out of the equation. As something valid for the time until they have negotiated a final and new dela with canda, this makes a lot of sense. Its called pragmatism, and mounts no additional costs or losses.

Alright, we'll see in a year. Or ten. :)

We will see when Canada and the UK have signed their new, to-be-negotiated trade agreement, which probably still is some years away. Or not. The UK stunned us with the announcement today they signed deals with Iceland and Norway.

---------------------------------

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-55248502

Quote:

The clash of ideologies, clear from the start, is still very much present.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 2712514)

Hey! Look five posts up :/\\k:

This is my own belief

If UK leave with no deal on Dec 31. Some of other EU member states will make directly deal with UK. I could very well imagine Denmark bypassed The EU and made a fishing deal with UK and the same when it comes to France.

Markus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2712536)

Hey! Look five posts up :/\\k:

Yes, your posted video made me first aware of the deals with Norway and Iceland. Do I miss something?