Scrutable

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:38 pm

veravista wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:19 pm

Oh for f.cks sake. One more time. To do trade deals we need something to trade. What goods are we going to do trade deals with?

The goods we trade outside the EU now. I don't understand why you refuse to accept that answer.

The UK already has very good trade deals for those, via the EU.

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:38 pm

Your whole contention that physical goods will be blocked by non-tariff barriers is a misunderstanding of WTO rules. Completely barmy.

It's nothing to do with WTO rules or tariffs.

It's to do with large-scale manufacturers needing guaranteed supply of goods to accepted and recognised quality levels.

It's the red tape that being in the EU removed

Indulge me and my ignorance Shelley. Couple of examples of goods we already trade outside the EU?

jimbob wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:48 pm

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:38 pm

Your whole contention that physical goods will be blocked by non-tariff barriers is a misunderstanding of WTO rules. Completely barmy.

It's nothing to do with WTO rules or tariffs.

It's to do with large-scale manufacturers needing guaranteed supply of goods to accepted and recognised quality levels.

It's the red tape that being in the EU removed

The UK quality levels won't change. You're muddling paperwork with reality.

veravista wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:04 am

Indulge me and my ignorance Shelley. Couple of examples of goods we already trade outside the EU?

Armaments. Pharmaceuticals. Booze. Nuclear reactor components. industrial chemicals...

Start here and look at our existing exports to the US
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kin ... ted-states

OK. So that's around 11% of our current exports, so not much cash really. 64Bn ish and dropping.

Nuclear is going to be problematical as we've decided to leave Euratom and have no other regulatory body in place.
Automotive is mainly completely assembled cars made by Honda (for now), Toyota, Nissan, BMW etc. Oops. Oh, and First Bus (Ooops again).
Aerospace is heavily regulated and no one in the world will accept non conforming parts from the UK on their aircraft*.
Not sure about how pharma will be affected, I'm sure someone will be along soon.

Not very reassuring is it.

* Since the near demise of the 737max, Airbus need to up the production of the A320 family to about 62 a month to satisfy existing and transferred orders. Most of the wings are made in Broughton. Given that Airbus already have production facilities in China and Spain, how long do you think the UK plant will last when it becomes more expensive to make them here than in China, especially as they've already said they'd pull out if we left the EU?

Since (a) we already have a trade surplus with the USA, and (b) the UK is a much smaller economy than the USA, is it remotely credible that the USA will sign off on a trade deal that maintains or increases that trade surplus?

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:20 am

jimbob wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:48 pm

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:38 pm

Your whole contention that physical goods will be blocked by non-tariff barriers is a misunderstanding of WTO rules. Completely barmy.

It's nothing to do with WTO rules or tariffs.

It's to do with large-scale manufacturers needing guaranteed supply of goods to accepted and recognised quality levels.

It's the red tape that being in the EU removed

The UK quality levels won't change. You're muddling paperwork with reality.

Are you the sort of engineer who has to design products that get sold to customers?

I said nothing about the quality levels dropping but when customers' customers mandate proven levels of quality, it's not enough just having a good product, you need to demonstrate that your product meets their quality requirements. It would be possible to get that sorted out, but it would be an additional cost, which will be carried by UK manufacturers.

If there are alternatives, not manufactured in the UK, they will become more attractive. So UK products are already being designed-out for non-UK alternatives. That's not a good route to prosperity.

And given that a lot of UK exports are services, problems with standards and paperwork etc are even worse.

But apart from secondary and tertiary industry - and primary industries*, a few things (money laundering, possibly) will be fine.


*Farming and fishing exports would be very difficult.

Maybe things would get clearer if Shelly expanded a bit on what he meant by "deregulation" making us more competitive. Maybe we're talking past each other. So how about an example?

It' not listening to you. It's only purpose in life is to get you to reply to it.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:41 pm

The UK already has very good trade deals for those, via the EU.

Another remain myth. The UK is party to agreements on things contraband inspection via the EU. It does not have FTAs with significant partners via it's EU membership, in particular not with the US.

RobS wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:05 am

Since (a) we already have a trade surplus with the USA, and (b) the UK is a much smaller economy than the USA, is it remotely credible that the USA will sign off on a trade deal that maintains or increases that trade surplus?

They will if it means their own producers can sell more to us in absolute terms.

veravista wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:33 am

OK. So that's around 11% of our current exports, so not much cash really. 64Bn ish and dropping.

No, the long term trend on trade with the US is growth.

Nuclear is going to be problematical as we've decided to leave Euratom and have no other regulatory body in place.

We declarde we were leaving Euratom some time ago. Hasn't affected trade with the US.

Automotive is mainly completely assembled cars made by Honda (for now), Toyota, Nissan, BMW etc. Oops. Oh, and First Bus (Ooops again).
Aerospace is heavily regulated and no one in the world will accept non conforming parts from the UK on their aircraft*.
Not sure about how pharma will be affected, I'm sure someone will be along soon.

The UK already sells goods in all of these sectors to countries that don't follow EU standards.

The UK already sells goods approved as EU standard to countries that don't follow EU standards.

It's not at all clear the UK can sell goods marked as "UK standard" to countries that don't follow EU standards.

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:53 am

I'm fairly sure most of you would actually prefer brexit to be a disaster rather than admitting you were wrong all these years.

If I'm going to be pushed off a cliff I would rather walk away unhurt*, that doesn't mean I'm going to welcome the shove without resisting.

*considering that the ongoing situation, not limited too but massively influenced by Brexit has already cost my wife her job and been part of a significant decline in income from one of mine, it's a bit late to hope for 'unhurt'.

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:17 am

RobS wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:05 am

Since (a) we already have a trade surplus with the USA, and (b) the UK is a much smaller economy than the USA, is it remotely credible that the USA will sign off on a trade deal that maintains or increases that trade surplus?

They will if it means their own producers can sell more to us in absolute terms.

I don't think there's any evidence that the US would sign a trade deal that merely upped their own exports to a value that, at best, was equivalent to that of the likely increased imports unless it was for products that they could not procure anywhere else but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:16 am

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:41 pm

The UK already has very good trade deals for those, via the EU.

It does not have FTAs with significant partners via it's EU membership, in particular not with the US.

Just Japan, Brazil, Israel, Norway, South Korea, Canada etc.


Still we’ve got the Faroe Islands sorted, although somehow the mighty Faroese managed to get the upper hand in those negotiations. I bet China and the US will be a doddle in comparison.

Sheldrake was wondering why the Remainers refuse to accept what a wonderful idea Leave is, it is almost like after 4 tedious years of the Tories psychodrama being inflicted on the rest of the country all we still get from the Leave apologists is vague aspirations which don’t stand up to a moments scrutiny.

The numbers speak for themselves 45% of our trade goes to the EU through supply chains and distribution networks 40 years in the making, another 15% goes via EU trade deals and despite all the promises by the Leavers and three years worth of effort only half have been rolled over, despite most of them requiring nothing more than access to a photocopier. Japan (2% of our trade) have already stated they do not want to roll their deal over as they want a new deal more favourable to them. The 20 continuity deals, the only real “success” story of Brexit, aren’t improved deals merely the same deals we already had, the same deals the Brexiteers were so desperate to leave.

Now we now need to negotiate a new deal with the EU from a position of weakness and, due to the idiocy of the Leave side we now have a clock ticking too. Even the most comprehensive trade deal with the EU will fail to match membership of the SM and CU, the Norway-plus deal we were promised by the Leave campaign was vapour the day after the referendum (so much for the Will of the People), and we aren’t being offered a comprehensive trade deal, Johnson’s moronic deadline means we have a choice between a bare-bones basic deal on terms of the EUs choosing or no-deal at all.

The remaining deals could be years or decades in the making while the EU will likely continue to expand the SM and sign further and better trade deals as to be expected by the worlds #1 trade bloc, meanwhile a UK economy, which has already dropped from 5th to 7th will continue to sink into insignificance, will be running to just stand still.

And the cherry on the cake, WTO. Even 3 months ago anybody expounding the benefits of falling back on the basic floor WTO tariffs was merely demonstrating they had no idea what they are talking about and then that orange-tinged sack of shite the Brexiteers idolise went and f.cked the WTO so even that option has gone.

I really don't know why you bother with this clueless c.nt.

https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/count ... dex_en.htm

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:45 pm

I really don't know why you bother with this clueless c.nt.

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:45 pm

I really don't know why you bother with this clueless c.nt.

https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/count ... dex_en.htm

Because he's also the most articulate proponent of Brexit I have come across

At least I can parse most of his arguments. They're still bobbins though.

As a fellow engineer, I'm also intrigued as to what field he's in that doesn't need to care about meeting the standards mandated by the customers.

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 6:03 pm

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:45 pm

I really don't know why you bother with this clueless c.nt.

https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/count ... dex_en.htm

Because he's also the most articulate proponent of Brexit I have come across

At least I can parse most of his arguments. They're still bobbins though.

As a fellow engineer, I'm also intrigued as to what field he's in that doesn't need to care about meeting the standards mandated by the customers.

I'm a software engineer. Most of our exports go to non-EU countries. Why do you believe that leaving the EU will stop us being able to export to countries that don't depend on EU standards ?

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:05 pm

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 6:03 pm

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:45 pm

I really don't know why you bother with this clueless c.nt.

https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/count ... dex_en.htm

Because he's also the most articulate proponent of Brexit I have come across

At least I can parse most of his arguments. They're still bobbins though.

As a fellow engineer, I'm also intrigued as to what field he's in that doesn't need to care about meeting the standards mandated by the customers.

I'm a software engineer. Most of our exports go to non-EU countries. Why do you believe that leaving the EU will stop us being able to export to countries that don't depend on EU standards ?

I presume you still need an audit trail.

With physical goods, you need an audit trail of certified components. If I'm making something to automotive-standard, then any critical components will need to be automotive-compliant. If the parts are mandated to be lead-free, then I need to be able to demonstrate that they meet the specification. That needs a paper trail. If my precursor parts have a shelf-life, I need to show that I am using them within the shelf life.

If you are using a certification lab to demonstrate this, then the certification lab needs to be recognised. If its recognition currently comes from the EU, via the BSI, then you need the BSI to be recognised itself. That is possible, but needs to actually be done. If you decide to use, say the DIN instead, you are adding additional costs to your product development. You are also adding delay whilst this is happening.

Whilst this is happening, you are getting designed out.

Meanwhile, you are also skipping over the problems that customs clearance delays would have on the supply line. And the fact that most of the UK's trade is with the EU. Geography says it will continue to be like this.

Most of the UK's trade isn't with the EU. Most of the UK's exports go to non-EU countries and that proportion has been growing for years.

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:38 pm

Your whole contention that physical goods will be blocked by non-tariff barriers is a misunderstanding of WTO rules. Completely barmy.

When do we get to elect the people who write and enforce the WTO rules?

sheldrake wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 10:12 pm

Most of the UK's trade isn't with the EU. Most of the UK's exports go to non-EU countries and that proportion has been growing for years.

Sorry, I meant to type that the UK's most important market is the rest of the EU.

Also the UK will have to make trade deals with these other countries from a standing start, when the UK currently has access due to its status as an EU member. And you also seem to underestimate the importance of compliance in the trade of physical goods. If there's a reciprocal agreement that EU standards are recognised, but no agreement that UK standards are recognised, then the goods need to meet EU standards, and that will take time and cost more.

Any type of Brexit is going to cause economic harm, and the harder the Brexit, the worse the harm.