The EU debate - Part III

How many EU counties actually export to the UK in any worth

 

Sorry Custard,
I don't really understand what you are asking. I can see if I can find a breakdown of the £290 billion if that helps

 

For example Germany 10%
France 7%
Poland 6%
Italy 1%

Only out of interest

 

Google it yourself, it's out there

 

I did not not finding anything of much use, any help would be appreciated

 

Www.uktradeinfo.com/statistics/OverseasTradeStatistics

 

The point is getting lost here.

The fact is that we have more to lose by getting into a tariff war with the EU than they do.

And, Lilley is talking out of his arse!...

 

He's grandstanding mate, same as Davis has been.

They know fine well that a tariff solution is a ****ing disaster for EU exports and our future economic status as we'd be left an insular island whilst the global investments flowed into the mainland

Anyone who genuinely thinks tariffs would be an acceptable outcome really shouldn't be discussing economic issues, as they've patently not got a Scooby

 

That's what worries me, with ignorant twats, like dickhead Davis, involved.

How can you even think the single market isn't currently vital to our economic future?...

 

He can't admit it though in fairness, otherwise he's got no negotiating position

He's got to go with the line that we'll take it if we have to, whilst they argue the toss over some from of compromise over free movement. The EU will see right through it and **** him clean off - then what's the plan? Errrrmmmmm

 

Fools nobody, Tobes. The oppo aren't stupid. They know they hold most of the cards.

He'd be far better off making conciliatory noise about how he's sure a compromise can be reached, instead of issuing implied threats that won't be taken seriously.

 

why do we have more to lose?

 

Too many still subscribe to the false belief that the single market is a priceless creation, naïve to the significant drawbacks membership entails, says John Redwood MP.

One of the worst jobs I was given in government was negotiating numerous Directives and Regulations to complete the so called single market. Seeing the construction of this complex web of law codes from the inside taught me that this was no ordinary market. This was a simple power grab by the EU authorities, using the cover of the markets as a means of taking over large areas of legislative authority from member states.

The job was unsatisfactory, as it entailed endless hours of discussions and debates trying to stop needless rules, or trying to amend badly drafted and over the top proposals to make them something business could live with. I soon concluded it was all based on a false premise, that you can legislate to create a market. Markets require willing buyers and willing sellers. They need some people to be good at defining services and designing products that others will value, and other people willing to shop around with an open mind. You do not need to amalgamate law codes or adopt common laws in order to buy from each other. China’s laws are very different from the UK, yet they manage to sell us a large amount of product.

It is true that there is a benefit in the single market legislative programme. If you have a product which is of marketable quality for country A within the single market, that same product will meet the legal and technical specification needed in country B if also within the single market. This of course is an advantage to countries trading with the EU from outside the zone, as much as it is to members inside the zone. It also brings the disadvantage to members of the zone that if the EU decides on unsatisfactory requirements and specifications you are lumbered with it, whatever world companies may be able to produce which is better outside the EU specification.

Too many still seem to think the single market is some priceless creation. I remember it being a series of compromises over very often badly drafted texts, where the main aim seemed to be to establish EU control or involvement in the particular area covered by the draft law. Nor is it true to say you cannot trade with member states if you no longer belong to the single market. The rest of the world trades daily with the EU without being members.

- See more at: http://commentcentral.co.uk/beware-the-snare-of-the-single-market/#sthash.DoTQ1SQO.dpuf

 

I and many others have been though this many times already!

We represent, in actuality, about 12-13% of trade for the EU. They represent some 44% currently, of ours.

We have far more to lose by trying to play hardball than they do!..

 

Redwood is an ultra right wing loon who nobody ( well almost nobody!) takes seriously. Not even his own party!..

 

We are meant to be operating under the bloc's Single Market mechanism as an EU member.

The EU describes it as "one territory without any internal borders or other regulatory obstacles to the free movement of goods and services." It is basically meant to stimulate competition and trade, improve efficiency, and help cut prices.

We are meant to operate as one. Basically, it works only if all countries are identical and work as a hive, like the Borg in "Star Trek." That sounds like a utopian ideal, and it has not worked at all.

Britain's performance has more in common with the economic recovery in the US than the eurozone. It does not really look as if we need the EU. It needs us.

Britain is sitting pretty, regardless of your political lens. Unemployment is just 5.1%, which is pretty much as close to "full employment" as we can get. The EU's data agency Eurostat has this lower at 4.9%. Inflation is low, real wages are solid, and more people are able to get on the housing ladder. We are also one of the key financial centres in the world.

Certain countries are propping up Europe's economic figures, while others are still stagnant or practically in recession.

German manufacturing is a booming behemoth, while almost every other nation bar Greece is at some sort of low.

Concerns over the Single Market being a whole load of poppycock are more relevant than ever, especially since the eurozone debt crisis of 2009.


First and foremost, even though we are meant to be part of one big unit, we have no fiscal union to address underperforming areas.

In Britain, for example, London may generate greater amounts of wealth than other parts of the country. If somewhere like Nottingham struggles, the money is redistributed to pay for welfare or prop up the local economy. Infrastructure, like new railway lines, could be installed to link cities and create greater connection for people working or looking to expand business.

In the EU, we don't have this. Just look at Greece and the sorry mess it is in. Sure, we lend money and force the country to gut itself, but a loan is not a redistribution of wealth. Countries that need to devalue their currency to spur exports cannot. The bloc is not a "single" anything.

The EU is not doing as well as it used to, and it is skewed economic reporting that suggests the eurozone is doing great. As demonstrated before, Germany is propping up manufacturing growth figures.

The EU's economy is "shrinking relative to other countries across the globe," and its population is ageing. In 2020, the ratio of working-age people to pensioners in the EU will be 3-to-1, while in 2050 it will be 2-to-1. This is according to a Business for Britain report published in June, which had Mark Littlewood of the Institute of Economic Affairs, John Mills of JML, and fund manager Helena Morrissey of Newton on its editorial board.

They added that tax payments to the EU, the level of bureaucracy, and the changing population are all contributing to greater cost for the nation.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-referendum-reasons-why-a-brexit-is-a-good-idea-2016-6

 

You keep saying that. What is this hardball you are suggesting we will play? What would we lose? The percentage is irrelevant. What is relevant is the actual amounts and the tariffs we could charge and pay.
"We have far more to lose" and "play hardball" is meaningless. Give an example of each.
We are also free to negotiate trade deals with the rest of the world.

 

You don't seem to be able to provide any critical analysis of what is said. All you seem to do is criticise people and newspapers rather than what they say.

 

Pete, that's rubbish. Worse, it's arrant rubbish!..

If we get into a trade war with the EU there will only be one winner.

It won't be us!!...

 

https://infacts.org/uk-needs-eu-more-than-it-needs-us/