Agreed.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Cheers. I guess it depends what one views as "wholly UK company". To me BMW financial is foreign owned, dependent and lead (but that's just semantics and not really worth arguing over). There appear to be a number of BMW financial companies (one for each major market as far as I can tell) and the (GB) one doesn't seem to be part of BMW Bank. (I wasn't aware of this when I first posted).
I'm not so sure it will be that easy. Either BMW Financial will need to work within the UK financial markets, in which case repatriating profits will need a framework, or it will finance itself in the European market, which again would need some sort of framework. Personally I don't think it's likely they'll start making BMW's in a market of 60 million with high wages and sketchy export chances, but stranger things have happened I guess.
Just about all these points and more have been debunked over the last few years which tends to leave the impression that leavers either didn't know what they voted for or had an alternative reason.
The EU/EEC has never been just a trade block, people who expect less red tape are in for a shock, especially those who import or export, Pakistanis and Indians and other commonwealth citizens had the privilege of being invaded and granted permission to help rebuild Britain after WW2 until they were no longer needed are a few examples.
A really sensible, genuine, intelligent reason from them would have helped. Still waiting.
That fear apply to goods and some services. If let's say there's a loophole in the single market then the UK could bring products from china, repackage then and sell then in the EU while pocketing the difference. However I cannot see close proximity being an advantage in terms of R&D. I worked in similar industries, we had offices across 3 continents and no one noticed the difference.
Regarding brexiteers you have to admit that a big chunk of them are working class people who are resentful about how globalisation stripped them from their jobs while the London elites kept making outrageous money. If the UK becomes some Patrick minford utopia with the farming, manufacturing and fishing industry melting away in exchange of a tax heaven UK ran on a small government, no social services and poor working conditions then these people won't be happy
https://assets.publishing.service.g...68874/The_Future_Relationship_with_the_EU.pdf
Time for a quick read on the UK government negotiating strategy.
Time for a quick read on the UK government negotiating strategy.
Not all of those points have been debunked at all. I think it is quite clear that the EU is moving closer to a political union than it was in the 70s. For me, I not only don't mind that but I actively like the idea. Other people don't. It doesn't mean that there will imminently be a USE as some nutters think but I think it is not accurate to say that there isn't closer political union.
I'm talking about less red tape within the UK itself, not in trade with the EU.
I don't really understand your point about Pakistanis and Indians and what relevance that has to the fact they had to jump through a lot more hoops to come here previously than an EU citizen. I mean, I know you don't really criticise the EU but this is surely just fact? You can argue as to whether it is justified or not...but its fact. It is also very likely that we will probably see even more people from those kinds of countries in the future in the UK. Again, whether that is good or bad is another matter.
I think the fundamental issue for many (and I made this point but the opposite way to a brexiteer on here a couple of days ago) is that you seeing something as valid and genuine is not the same as it being valid and genuine to others.
As I've said many times, not only did I want us to stay, I also actually no real issue with the idea of a federalised USE at some point in the future if the states agreed to it. However, I can understand the frustration of those who feel that is the long term direction of the EU or those from the subcontinent who feel they are treated differently from EU citizens. Many remainers cannot bring themselves to see through the eyes of others. Just as Vidic seemingly can't bring themselves to see that many young people in the UK feel attached to the EU, its values and to compatriots across the continent.
No need to read further than PG 9 really.
On page 3:
On page 9:
The EU will agree to one or the other, but never to both of these (they'd be irresponsible to agree to it). This is a non starter.
I am not having a go at you, sorry if it sounds like it.
The EU will only move closer politically if all the member states wish it to, which previously included the UK.
The impression I get from the UK, is that everyone in the EU lives in the EU first and in Italy, France or Germany second. My view is that people live in France or wherever and live in the EU second.
Commonwealth citizens were granted British passports , EU citizens aren't and if the said EU citizens cannot support themselves, like other foreign citizens then they have no right to stay in the country. Which hoops are you referring to.
The red tape I don't just mean with trade with the EU, the UK will have no agreements with anyone next year. If they deviate from EU standards the whole world will have to change their documentation with the UK, then there's VAT , duties , customs declarations, list is very long.
Zigzaging across four lanes of the M25 seems like a stupid thing to do, I am open to listening to a good reason why this is a good idea.
The European Communities(now EU) started as a political union and the preamble of the Treaty of Rome not only stipulates it but it also literally says that the goal is be ever closer. It also explicitly says that the goal is to ensure economic and social progress of the countries.
Anyone who though that it was just a trading block missed the first page of the first treaty. It has always been a political union and will always be.
The fishing water sovereignty argument is ridiculous. Yes we have the right to make a judgement independently but thats what forming a trade deal is, an independent decision on those resources!
It seems we want a trade deal that has absolutely no constraints. So in other words no deal.
It seems we want a trade deal that has absolutely no constraints. So in other words no deal.
We also have the right to say that we will grant access to fisheries and determine catch quotas on an ongoing annual basis unilaterally - much as the EU is insisting on doing with its determination of market access for financial services and determinations of 'equivalency' of financial regulation.
That said, I'm pretty sure fisheries is one of the areas the UK will compromise on to get concessions from the EU.
Closer political union appears to be an absolute certainty - even though prior to the referendum in the UK this was denied along with denial of a future EU ' Defense Force '
Which millions of us throughout the EU don't really want. We just want an open Free Trade Area.
But If left to the knobs like Young Adolph, you'll no doubt your wish.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
That's ok, I don't think you're having a go at me at all.
Yes I do think some people in the UK have that impression of the EU and European countries for sure.
Commonwealth citizens are of course not granted passports anymore. I am referring to working normally.
Currently (or last year I guess) an Italian, Spaniard , Frenchman or Greek wanting to work in the UK simply has to turn up to the UK, without organising a visa. They can search for jobs in the UK (or can search for the job while in their home country) and immediately turn up and start work. Of course, this also applies the other way too, for British citizens.
This is of course not how it is for citizens of other countries. They must find a job. That employer must be able to sponsor them for a visa. Sometimes they will have to take the IELTs as well. They often have to register with the home office/ police when they arrive. My wife's nephews and nieces (from the Egyptian side of the family) have it infinitely harder to come to the UK to work (or even visit) compared to her Dutch side of the family. I assume this is the same for all countries in the EU by the way.
It is also what I had to do when working in Australia last year. The process was long and laborious.
That isn't strictly true. The UK has already signed deals with 20 of the 40 deals they're automatically part of being a member of the EU, including (for instance) Morocco, Israel, Chile, South Korea, Norway and Iceland, Switzerland, blocks of countries in Southern Africa, Eastern Africa and the Andes, as well as the Caribbean. Approximately 10% of the UK's total trade.
It is of course very possible to cut massively red tape within your own country and reduce worker's rights for instance (as is the case in Singapore or USA) without having FTAs allowing freedom of movement with neighbours. That is what these businessmen were hoping for.
Potentially I'm being an idiot here and admittedly I skim read but I can't see the word political there.
An ever closer union between the nations of Europe can refer to seamless trade and movement for example (economic) without a closer political union for instance.
Unfortunately, I won't get my wish. I'm a doctor and my grasp of other European languages is not quite of the fluidity to work in Europe.
So I'm either stuck on this probably more inward looking island, with a bunch of people I increasingly struggle to relate to or I move to Australia or NZ and at least have a much better quality of life while living on an inward looking island.
Much more sadly, my kids, who aren't doctors, will not have the same opportunities for exchange and work their peers would have had 10 years ago.
I guarantee that;Look at these smug fecks with their blue passports, it's like their holding up an iPhone 2 in 2020 after deciding to give up the iPhone 10. I suppose it won't matter for them, pay a few extra quid in the future to use the fast lane.
- UK airports will have a UK nationals lane for arrivals. Absolutely sensible of course.
- When travelling to many EU Airports we may end up in an ‘All other passports lane’
- Brexiteers will blame the EU for the fact they’re queuing with all the brown people for an hour.
The Daily Mail will weaponise this of course.
Right, I've read through both the EU and UK's negotiating position documents - both make perfect sense as opening positions based on their competing economic and political interests.
Let's see if any compromise can be found. My guess is we're heading to no deal at the end of the year, but I've been wrong about that before.
Let's see if any compromise can be found. My guess is we're heading to no deal at the end of the year, but I've been wrong about that before.
I would say that you are not reading what is said, you don't need to read the word political, you just need to think about what political means. The preamble tells that the goal is to preserve peace and liberty, to ensure economic and social progress, to improve working and living conditions. The preamble describes political goals beyond economy.
I don't understand what you mean.
To me, all of those things can be achieved (or it can be argued) through a closer economic union. Countries which have significant trade rarely go to war. You can ensure economic progress by free/ fair trade and, in doing so, creating a better social safety net for your countries.
It is o course very easy to say that those are political goals fundamentally but I do not read that pre-amble and see something being explict about a closer political union in the future.
Most of the mentions in that pre-amble are about something economic and they explicitly use the word economic multiple times. If it was that clear regarding their wish to develop an ever closer political union, there are certainly ways they could have been more explicit about it.
You're actually correct on this one. The Treaty of Rome was expressly an economic partnership after the proposed European Political Community was vetoed by the French in 1954 because of its impact on national sovereignty.
I don’t get what you’re saying here. Can you explain?
There was a period though when all Commonwealth citizens were entitled to a British passport. They had an advantage then and yes of course there is an advantage for EU citizens until now but it is reciprocated as you say.All new arrangements will also be mirrored.
Each EU country have their own arrangements/regulations with regard to immigrants of non-EU countries.
The deals the UK signed were to continue the deals in existence after the UK left the EU, ie during the transition period until they completely leave otherwise those deals would have stopped last month.
It’s an attempted coup. Don’t worry about it.
But what do you mean by political union because here they tell you that it's an union with economic and social goals, which is what politics is about, social and economic decisions? The council, the commission and court of justice were also created at the time, so to what makes it so different that you now call it a political union but wouldn't in 1957?
Right but it isn't the case anymore. I just didn't get why you were even bothering to dispute that point. Again, you can say it is a good thing but it is objectively harder for an Indian to get a job in the UK than it is for an Italian or a German. That i something some people from the subcontinent were not very happy about and one of the reasons they themselves gave for voting leave.
All new arrangements will be mirrored but I think the UK government will have little interest in signing reciprocal free movement deals, there isn't an appetite for it here and, as I said, I had to go through the rigamarole to work in Australia (as I would in the USA, Canada, NZ etc). Though I appreciate it is different for doctors generally as we have to be registered and have a certain grasp of the language.
That isn't true. Currently ALL EU agreements for trade apply to the UK until 31 December 2020. As of right, 20 of those will stop working when we leave. 20 will carry on, as the UK has signed identical agreements with those countries:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-trade-agreements-with-non-eu-countries
Some of these deals are insignificant (Kosovo, Palestine). Some of those are large (Korea, Chile, Switzerland). Overall, it makes up approximately 8% of the UK's total trade as of now and 50 of the 70 countries total the EU has signed trade deals with.
The big ones for the UK going forward will be the EU, USA, Australia, Canada and East Asia.
To give some reference for the deals the UK will be trying to replicate from the EU, scroll further down that link above. Big hitters are:
Canada, East African community, Egypt? (biased there
), Mexico and Singapore. For customs union, Turkey.I have to say, that isn't actually as bad as I'd thought in my head.
I understand that they used to have an advantage but that changed to EU citizens, now the UK doesn't want them either but how does the UK leaving the EU help non-EU immigrants - the rules have become harder for everyone and if the Indians and Pakistanis can vote it means they already have the right to be in the UK . EU citizens couldn't vote.Right but it isn't the case anymore. I just didn't get why you were even bothering to dispute that point. Again, you can say it is a good thing but it is objectively harder for an Indian to get a job in the UK than it is for an Italian or a German. That i something some people from the subcontinent were not very happy about and one of the reasons they themselves gave for voting leave.
All new arrangements will be mirrored but I think the UK government will have little interest in signing reciprocal free movement deals, there isn't an appetite for it here and, as I said, I had to go through the rigamarole to work in Australia (as I would in the USA, Canada, NZ etc). Though I appreciate it is different for doctors generally as we have to be registered and have a certain grasp of the language.
That isn't true. Currently ALL EU agreements for trade apply to the UK until 31 December 2020. As of right, 20 of those will stop working when we leave. 20 will carry on, as the UK has signed identical agreements with those countries:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-trade-agreements-with-non-eu-countries
Some of these deals are insignificant (Kosovo, Palestine). Some of those are large (Korea, Chile, Switzerland). Overall, it makes up approximately 8% of the UK's total trade as of now and 50 of the 70 countries total the EU has signed trade deals with.
The big ones for the UK going forward will be the EU, USA, Australia, Canada and East Asia.
To give some reference for the deals the UK will be trying to replicate from the EU, scroll further down that link above. Big hitters are:
Canada, East African community, Egypt? (biased there
I have to say, that isn't actually as bad as I'd thought in my head.
If you click on the links they refer to transition and current EU FTA s and some have been taken down - the UK couldn't sign FTAs when in the EU. Also what will also affect all future UK FTA's is the UK's relationship with the EU, which at the moment is unknown and what the standards etc the UK will have. If Boris sticks to what he has been saying then the EU deal will be very limited.
Which brings us to the really big problem which everybody still hardly mentions and only talks about FTA's and tariffs - EU customs border which will be the killer.
See, you are learning, well done for spotting it!
It helps them by putting them on a level playing field to the Europeans. That is what they wanted. Not to be automatically disadvantaged when applying for a job in the UK compared to a European.
Their thinking is that currently, if they want a job in the UK, they have to compete (at a disadvantage) compared to British and European applicants. Now they are on a level field with the Europeans.
No, they could vote if they'd taken up British citizenship. Same as if a Pole or Austrian had taken up British citizenship.
I'm really struggling to see what you're trying to argue with here.
It is harder for an Indian or Ghanaian to get a job in the UK (or anywhere in Europe) than it is for an EU citizen. You might agree with that but it is a fact. You can throw in irrelevant comments about Britain's colonial past or Windrush in there but it doesn't change it.
I think with respect, you've not actually read the article if that's what you've taken from it.
Trade agreements from 1 January 2021
After 31 December 2020, EU trade agreements will not apply to the UK.
The UK is seeking to reproduce the effects of existing EU agreements for when they no longer apply to the UK.
This will ensure continuity of trading arrangements for UK businesses.
If we do not reproduce the effects of an existing EU agreement, trade with other World Trade Organization (WTO) members will take place on WTO terms when EU trade agreements cease to apply to the UK.
Find out more about trading under WTO terms.
Trade agreements that have been signed
Agreements with the following countries and trading blocs are expected to take effect when existing EU trade agreements no longer apply to the UK, from 1 January 2021.
After 31 December 2020, EU trade agreements will not apply to the UK.
The UK is seeking to reproduce the effects of existing EU agreements for when they no longer apply to the UK.
This will ensure continuity of trading arrangements for UK businesses.
If we do not reproduce the effects of an existing EU agreement, trade with other World Trade Organization (WTO) members will take place on WTO terms when EU trade agreements cease to apply to the UK.
Find out more about trading under WTO terms.
Trade agreements that have been signed
Agreements with the following countries and trading blocs are expected to take effect when existing EU trade agreements no longer apply to the UK, from 1 January 2021.
Trade agreements still in discussion
The following agreements are still under discussion with countries where there are existing EU trade agreements in place.
If an agreement is not reached by 31 December 2020, trade with other WTO members will take place on WTO terms
The following agreements are still under discussion with countries where there are existing EU trade agreements in place.
If an agreement is not reached by 31 December 2020, trade with other WTO members will take place on WTO terms
Trade agreement discussions with countries in Customs Unions with the EU
Andorra, San Marino and Turkey are part of Customs Unions with the EU. The UK’s future trading relationship with these countries will be influenced by the agreement the UK reaches with the EU.
Andorra, San Marino and Turkey are part of Customs Unions with the EU. The UK’s future trading relationship with these countries will be influenced by the agreement the UK reaches with the EU.
Mutual recognition agreements
A mutual recognition agreement (MRA) is one in which countries recognise the results of one another’s conformity assessments.
A mutual recognition agreement (MRA) is one in which countries recognise the results of one another’s conformity assessments.
See how all of the sections are clearly demarcated as to differing statuses as of 2021 and what will happen in the event of a no deal.
There is nothing there that isn't concordant with what I said earlier. The UK has already signed agreements which will come into play in 2021 with 50 of the 70 countries the EU has an agreement with currently. Which is different to what you claimed (that those agreements were just for the transition period. Actually, all agreements are still in place for the transition period).
Good post. stereotypical comments aimed at a particular group are the norm here so it's a refreshing and accurate change.
One of the reasons they could never get around a table and figure a consensus brexit has led to what is odds on to be a hard/WTO brexit now as I argued in here months before the election. A lot thought the lib dems and their leader was going to save the day! Not living in the real world i'm afraid.
@africanspur There is something that I don't understand, aren't the people you are talking about british? Or did none british citizens voted too?
I don't understand your question? You mean regarding the Indian/Pakistani point?
I gave a whole long list of 'typical Brexiteers' above, of which one group was (surprisingly for me) people from the subcontinent, who gave the reasons articulated above. Paul then seemingly disagreed that it is harder from people outside of the EU to get a job in the UK than it is for Europeans, which I took exception to.
If you look at the original point, I mentioned a huge range of people who fall under the 'typical Brexiteer' tag. It is mostly that point which seems to have carried on though.
It was only British citizens who voted, of many different colours and religions.
Edit: Ah I think I see what you meant, non British citizens?
No, only British citizens voted. But a large number of Indians/ Pakistanis/ Bangladeshis who came to the UK in the /60s/70s/80s especially have now got British citizenship. It is mostly this group I am referring to in the above examples, though it partly applies to their British born kids as well.
I know quite a few colleagues like this. Indian doctors, very competent, who had to jump through so many hoops (language and otherwise) to work here and saw (at times less competent, also without necessarily having better English) colleagues from Europe who had found it much easier to land an equivalent job.
Also apologies, I am posting all this when I am actually supposed to be catching up on various work. I will try to get back to your other point later.
In hindsight, Labour probably should have agreed to May's deal, which is better than Boris' imo. I think I thought so at the time actually.
Ah well, can't go back in time now.
I think you've missed my point regarding the Indian-Pakistani point.
Most of them came to the UK after the war 50s 60s 70s while they had UK citizenship and them their children and grandchildren. Now whether they did or not , they have now British citizenship and therefore were able to vote in the referendum.
Thus why would they vote to leave in the referendum when they already have what they wanted.
Re agreements, yes I clicked on individual agreements which is why I said what I said, the UK is no longer part of the EU and Iceland, Switzerland, Norway are not and thus EU agreements would stop on 31 January 2020 which is why they extended the until the transition period ends, at the moment 31 December 2020 or longer if it is extended mutually.
If the UK change their regulations they will have to start from scratch, for example although Iceland etc are not in the EU they are in the EEA.
The customs arrangements are special for micro-states, which we all hope the Uk won't become and Turkey has a customs border with the EU despite being in a special form of customs union with the EU, originally designed for them to eventually become members of the EU but looks a many decades away. Having the same relationship with the EU that Iceland and Switzerland have still involves a customs border.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It's what happens when you have a strong majority you get to make the rules. Funny though a bet this guy didn't say the same when Labour ripped upped their manifesto pledges last time around. I bet he also agreed with the mantra politicians are elected to make the decisions and should not be beholden to the referendum when it suited either. Funny how we bend our own values to get what we want be can't abide by 'other' people doing it.
Personally I am well aware there will be endless reprecussions from Brexit however I can't see them having much effect on huge corporates like BMW with the structures they have in place globally. For them I do see it as simple as slap the tariffs on top and away we go. The supply chain may face delays but ultimately they'll just increase the costs and its business as usual. People won't stop buying premium cars because they're a bit more expensive.
1) you can't expect to rip up your mandate simply because you got a majority, since you got your majority based on that mandate.
2) just because there's kids starving in Africa doesn't mean I shouldn't eat when I'm hungry
3) lost interest in responding now because I'm eating a sandwich
Thier best selling cars are not premium, though. At most, they are mid range. So a price hike could be problematic, especially if there is a Brexit-led downturn in general. New car sales are one of the earliest casualties of an economic downturn.
Even their mid range, competition is mainly between Mercedes, BMW, Audi as far as premium car manufacturers goes. Maybe throw VW in there to an extent but they're German too. Who are you thinking would be their possible tariff free or lower tariff competitors for that market? That's the whole point I'm making everyone is going to be pretty much in the same boat. Ultimate sufferers are the consumers.
Last edited:
They can and they are. Tell me how you or anyone without a majority is going to stop them again? Also take a look at how they EU have changed their stance too. This was inevitable. The only chance of an amicable solution was if everybody got behind democracy and put a united stance together after the vote. Now trust has broken down between all sides. I'm not even sure how anyone thinks things have changed that much the Tories have said for years that no deal is better than a bad deal so they have always refused to remove it. Boris said he would not align before the GE. The Eu want something completely unnecessary as a protectionist move, we want to more towards a more free market approach
Things will get worse before they get better unless the EU agree to the FTA agreement Barnier said we could have when discussions first began. I'm not sure they will now as they know the UK will make a success of that scenario leaving the whole project in jeopardy. The problem for the EU is the UK can make some big deals with the US, India, China and Australia and it will still prove to have made a success while EU exporters will be replaced as each deal is agreed.