• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Now What?

Status
Not open for further replies.
CapelDodger said:
The best terms for the EU are those which benefit it most. The state of the UK economy and the ease of trade are necessarily part of the calculation. This isn't a zero-sum game, after all.
Click to expand...

I am not sure how many of the Leave group accept that trade isn't a zero sum game.

I have no idea whether it is in wider use, but in one story, Charles Stross referred to the zero-sum view of trade as a "mercantile view".
 
CapelDodger said:
The best terms for the EU are those which benefit it most. The state of the UK economy and the ease of trade are necessarily part of the calculation. This isn't a zero-sum game, after all.
Click to expand...

The EU is also a collection of individual states with their own interests though so while it might be an overall benefit to the EU to say continue free trade in say motor cars that might have zero benefit for say two-thirds of the members.

So you can't look at it purely as benefit to both entities on average but also need to consider whether the agreement floats all (or at least a majority of) boats.
 
jimbob said:
I am not sure how many of the Leave group accept that trade isn't a zero sum game.

I have no idea whether it is in wider use, but in one story, Charles Stross referred to the zero-sum view of trade as a "mercantile view".
Click to expand...
Are you sure he didn't use the expression mercantilist rather than merely "mercantile"? Mercantilism was indeed an economic policy based on "zero sum" assumptions about international trade.
 
Craig B said:
jimbob said:
I am not sure how many of the Leave group accept that trade isn't a zero sum game.

I have no idea whether it is in wider use, but in one story, Charles Stross referred to the zero-sum view of trade as a "mercantile view".
Click to expand...

Are you sure he didn't use the expression mercantilist rather than merely "mercantile"? Mercantilism was indeed an economic policy based on "zero sum" assumptions about international trade.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction and further background - no I wasn't sure, it was a library book that I borrowed about ten years ago... You've answered the implicit question in my post too.


I think that the mercantilist view is common amongst many people and some of the leavers who I know have expressed similar views.

I think it goes wider into the whole approach to foreign policy, including in some governments. With some it is justified.
 
theprestige said:
Best terms in what context and over what time frame, though? Strip mining and clearcutting are extremely profitable, if all you're interested in are short-term gains.
Click to expand...

There is no reason to see any long term gain with the UK, as volatile is the economy today.

Anyway quid pro quo : by your own measure it is also in the interrest of the UK to have a stable europe. So it is in the interrest of the Uk to see the long term financial economical and political stability of europe, and thus to give in to EU demand.

See what i did there ? Well same as you did.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
The EU is also a collection of individual states with their own interests though so while it might be an overall benefit to the EU to say continue free trade in say motor cars that might have zero benefit for say two-thirds of the members.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure special pleading will go down well in the EU; that's supposed to have gone out with the Brits. :cool:

So you can't look at it purely as benefit to both entities on average but also need to consider whether the agreement floats all (or at least a majority of) boats.
Click to expand...
You fail to appreciate how undemocratic, powerful and dictatorial the EU is. :)
 
jimbob said:
I think that the mercantilist view is common amongst many people and some of the leavers who I know have expressed similar views.
Click to expand...
It's one of the views which distinguished Tories from Whigs, back when such terms were current. Whigs were for free trade, of course, and would be pro-EU in principle. Tories would be Leavers.

I think it goes wider into the whole approach to foreign policy, including in some governments. With some it is justified.
Click to expand...
Being something of a Whig myself I'd say it's never justified, but more primitive minds often think differently.
 
CapelDodger said:
It's one of the views which distinguished Tories from Whigs, back when such terms were current. Whigs were for free trade, of course, and would be pro-EU in principle. Tories would be Leavers.

Being something of a Whig myself I'd say it's never justified, but more primitive minds often think differently.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that if you are dealing with a regime that believes that, then it is true that all dealings with them will become zero sum games. What is good for the DPRK regime is bad for most of the rest of the world.
 
jimbob said:
I was thinking that if you are dealing with a regime that believes that, then it is true that all dealings with them will become zero sum games. What is good for the DPRK regime is bad for most of the rest of the world.
Click to expand...
When dealing with unreasonable people, of course, special measures are necessary.
 
Norway may block UK return to European Free Trade Association
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-uk-return-to-european-free-trade-association

Norway could block any UK attempt to rejoin the European Free Trade Association, the small club of nations that has access to the European single market without being part of the EU.

Senior Norwegian government members are to hold talks with David Davis, the Brexit minister, in the next few weeks.

Some Brexit supporters have suggested that Efta would be one way of retaining access to the single market while honouring the referendum mandate to leave the EU.

Norway is not a member of the EU, but it has access to the single market from its membership of the European Economic Area (EEA), which groups all EU members and three of the four Efta members: Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, but not Switzerland.

Norway’s European affairs minister, Elisabeth Vik Aspaker, reflecting a growing debate in the country following the Brexit vote in the UK, told the Aftenposten newspaper: “It’s not certain that it would be a good idea to let a big country into this organisation. It would shift the balance, which is not necessarily in Norway’s interests.”

She also confirmed that the UK could only join if there were unanimous agreement, thereby providing Norway with a veto.
Click to expand...

Bonus points for anyone who saw that coming.

Aspaker said she did not know the UK’s plans.
Click to expand...
It's not just us then.
 
The Don said:
China is flexing its muscles over Hinkley Point:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37016120

China is notorious for picking fights (they're currently angry at South Korea and Australia) but once the UK has left the EU we won't have the support of the rest of our international team.
Click to expand...
Taking umbrage is always their first ploy, even if it has to be about the shape of the table. Day One's always over before coffee and biscuits, and often before everyone's sat down.

May seems to have disdain for foreign matters, which I think is all for the good after Blair and Cameron's strutting about on the Big Stage. She may well be prepared, nay, happy to watch the Chinese stalk off.

The Chinese for their part might be intending to bail on the now marginalised UK anyway and are just establishing a fake grievance for future use.
 
Apologies if this has been posted, but the IFS has a study which points out that:
The IFS report argued that the special advantage of being an EU member was that its single market reduced or eliminated barriers to trading in services, such as the need for licences or other regulations.

The IFS said that the absence of trade barriers for services was far more important than removing tariffs on the trade in goods between EU members, such as customs checks and import taxes.

It said that while leaving the EU would free the UK from having to make a budgetary contribution of £8bn, loss of trade could depress tax receipts by a larger amount.

It found new trade deals would be unlikely to make up for lost EU trade, which accounts for 44% of British exports and 39% of service exports.
Click to expand...


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37023488

Full report here:
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8411
 
wobs said:
Apologies if this has been posted, but the IFS has a study which points out that:
Click to expand...

The IFS are experts. Thus as far as they pertain to anything Brexit - they can reliably be ignored - at least that's what the Leave campaigners would have us believe.
 
More "good" news post-Brexit:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37034337

The Ministry of Defence is facing extra costs of up to £700m a year following the UK's Brexit vote, experts warn.

The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) says this is due to the fall in sterling where military equipment purchases have been made in US dollars.

After the referendum, the pound fell to its lowest level against the dollar in more than 30 years, making imports from the US more expensive.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom