270 comments posted · 243 followers · following 0
No. I think you've proved my point:
GDP per head
Singapore US$ 90,100 (3rd)
Hong Kong US$ 58,300 (10th)
Germany US$ 48,100 (18th)
UK U S$ 42,500 (24th)
If there was a legal justification, we would have seen one.
So the EU's bill is either a punishment or a crass, bullying negotiating tactic.
The mystery is .... why can't Remainers see the EU for what it is?
Why don't Remainers either:
a) be a bit patrotic and challenge the EU
b) produce some figures to back up their assertions that we "must" pay the EU
Do you only believe what the Remain commentariat tell you ?
£ /US$ March 2016 ~ 1.4350
£ / US$ Sep 2017 ~1.3550
- down ~9.5%
That is well within normal, historical fluctations.
When you add in 3 -4% for Carney's irresponsible and unnecessary interest rate cut last August, the fall isn't so bad (and exporters seems to approve)
No YOU "clearly don't understand the issue".
Do you seriously think that NOT charging tariffs would be "economic suicide"?
Perhaps you had better give Singapore and Hong Kong the wisdom of your deeper understanding of the impact of tariff-lite.
The simple average tariff across all products was 0.20 percent.
The trade weighted average tariff was 0.07
Hong Kong levies tariffs only on alcohol, tobacco and gasoline - with a special tax on new cars
If you believe that your description is an accurate way of how EU laws are made, then there seems little hope.
You missed out the fact that EU laws can only be formally proposed by the Commission.
It also reads like you believe in John Major's "influence" "at the heart of Europe" -
- that Qualified Majority Voting (i.e the ability of Foreign politicians to outvote the UK) is somehow compensated by this nebulous "influence".
He said that for Customs purposes a border is a Tax Point.
It need only be a check point for security.
.... and the UK has said that it wants to keep free trade.
In NI it has said "no checks on our side".
So if any (Customs) Borders go up, they will be of the EU's making.
Like many older Leavers, I campaigned to stay in the COMMON MARKET - then realised that Heath & Co had lied to us.
Many younger voters have no idea how the EU really works.
Many young Londoners have no grasp of basic economics - and the impact on house prices of too many people.
But as an optimist, I believe that, like the older generation, the young will learn from experience and eventually lose the scales from their idealistic eyes.
I don't think you "get" sovereignty. i.e. self-determination by a free people.
The EU is NOT merely:
"... the international debating chamber for European nations."
It makes laws that UK elected politicians cannot stop.
"We still want EU immigrants. "
Speak for yourself !
But if "we" do "want EU immigrants", surely we should be able to control the numbers - so that we can stop house prices rising - pr protect our green spaces?
"We will still want our legal system to be consistent with ECJ rulings."
No we do not.
Firstly the ECJ is a foreign Court and should not trump the UK's Supreme Court.
Secondly, Continental law has many principles thar conflict with Common Law.
Our legal system is consisten with other English-speaking countries - and is used by many foreigners as framework for fair arbitration.
Brexit would bring MANY "significant freedoms".
What is your definition of "ordinary people"?
I doubt it matches the hundreds of "ordinary" people canvassed during the Referendum.
In what negotiation do you concede things with nothing in return?
Agreeing to a "transition" without knowing what the destination is amounts not not leaving.
Assuming "implementation" would take 2 years ignores what David Davis said (correctly)
It post Brexit product standards are identical - then no "transition" is required.
Offering £billions just to carry on prevaricating ??
Next stop a Labour Government - followed by a UKIP resurgence.