O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[millmoormagic]

I'd say you are both at about the same level.

You're allowing your condescending demons to rise again, Kerr, you never did get back to me about your ascertian that i was rude and impolite did you?? Now, i'm many things, and may not be the best debater, but i'm as honest as the day's long, you however, are a liar, full blown two faced liar.

[WanChaiMiller]

Another issue that we don't seem to be facing is that we have a trade deficit with the EU of £80 billion per annum. We buy from them £80 billion more goods than they buy from us EVERY year. That means two things. One is that it is a substantial export of British jobs into the EU that our politicians should be seeking to reverse by bringing our trade with the EU back into balance.

The other one is one of simple arithmetic. Let's say you are a household and you chronically spend more than you earn every year. What happens? You have a deficit on your income account and it has to be made good from your capital account. First your savings go; then you borrow; then you sell your assets. It's just the same with countries. If you perpetually buy more from overseas than you sell you have to borrow money, then you have to sell assets to make up the cash flow. There are only so many Premier League football clubs, water companies, gas companies, electricity companies, London properties and so on. Eventually there will be nothing left. What next? Whatever next? The government MUST take back control of our trade policy and bring our EU exports back into line with our imports as indeed they are with the rest of the world.

This argument doesnt stack up. There is no evidence that leaving the EU will solve our balance of trade deficit - or an economic argument that balance of trade deficit is necessarily a bad thing.

The household analogy is too simplistic. 2 things. First, a country can cover off a deficit through gdp growth. Second, borrowing to cover a medium term deficit is no bad thing (if all other conditions are ok).

You'd advise a business totally differently to a fixed income household (yet, of course, youd advise a household to take a loan to buy property that will lead to increase in wealth - as long as they cover off the repayments). In the same way a business may take a loan to help growth. No different to a country.

68% of imports from EU are in component parts (intermediate goods and services). This will not change by simply leaving the EU.

The biggest risk to our economy is leaving the Single Market and jeopardising just in time supply of these componect parts that prop up our industrial base.

56% of exports are done outside the EU. We don't need to leave the Customs Union to trade with the rest of the world. Dyson and JCB, leading brexiters, prove this by trading with 140 different countries.

Why anyone would prefer to trade with, say, Australia and New Zealand (combined population 30m - 40 day container journey from the UK - 30 hours air travel time) than France (population 60m and 1 hour ferry over the channel - 40 mins with Ryan Air). It makes no sense.

I am also interested to know what a free trade deal with China or India will look like and how quick it can be achieved (brexiteers reckon it would be simplest thing ever). Are we really going to have free trade with China with no checks or balances?

Any free trade agreement will have with it a final court of arbitration to rule on trade disputes. Where will be? Im sure Brexiteers assume it will be London.

There is still no proper detailed outline of what no deal brexit will look like (except Rees Mogg saying we may not see any benefit for 50 years).

[WanChaiMiller]

How does that advance the debate when one of Labour's (wholly unrealistic and unattainable) tests for supporting a Brexit deal is that it must retain all the benefits of the single market and customs union?

My reply was to muchthemiller. I linked his text to give my comment context. Why not read it.

[WanChaiMiller]

That's not true, that was always the goal, long before them.

They were enthusiastic about expanding to Eastern Europe though because they wanted to undermine the German-French power axis.

Whats not true?

[KerrAvon]

@ Wanchai

I did read it and understood to what it related. I just don't understand how you think it helps, particularly when you are clearly a single market,/customs union supporter.

I can't wait to see Much's response to your assertion that a country can cover off a deficit through gdp growth.

[gm_gm]

This is why a deal will be reached, behind all the politics and hot air there are serious consequences for some EU countries.

[WanChaiMiller]

This is why a deal will be reached, behind all the politics and hot air there are serious consequences for some EU countries.

The old argument - they need us more than we need them.

[great_fire]

Whats not true?

That it was Thatcher and Major's idea.

It was the idea all along.

Heath famously hid the truth that the EEC was never supposed to be limited to a trading union.

[great_fire]

This is why a deal will be reached, behind all the politics and hot air there are serious consequences for some EU countries.

Germany's exports are already falling.

[animallittle3]

McVey now resigned as of 10 minutes a go .

I make that 22 minister's have now resigned since May became PM .