EU Referendum – are you in or out?

Kelvin – are you deliberately missing the fact that the whole debate currently is on what form of access to the single market we will end up with?

May’s red lines merely rule out one of the existing options (EEA) and makes another more challenging (CU). She is currently pitching her opening gambit between the CU and FTA. We shall see where it ends.

Its is factually incorrect to suggest that her red lines make access dead in the water.

You are correct that her red lines (currently) make the Norway option difficult/impossible.

Please try to read up on this – leave going round in circles to HM Opposition.

edit for edit – you can keep on repeating as much as you like. Until you understand the difference between access to and membership of, you will get nowhere. Its not difficult.

Italy perhaps. Greece unlikely. Greek creditors will ultimately take a hit but we know who they are.

May’s red lines rule out being in the Single Market.
Look what the EFTA countries in the EEA have to do in terms of courts and FoM.
Her red lines are ECJ and FoM.
Although not actually ECJ, a similar court exists for countries in the Single Market that are not in the EU.
She has anything like ruled this out.
How can you be in the Single Market without a court of arbitration for disputes?
FoM has been done to death… she has been clear what her position is, and it rules out being in the Single Market.

Until you understand the difference between being in and membership of, you will get nowhere.

There are countries in the Single Market, that are part of the Single Market, that are not members.

“Access to” has become a meaningless phrase, that applies to everyone from South Korea to South Africa, it has long since stopped meaning anything like “being in” or “trading within” or any kind of “in” at all.

May’s red lines rule out being in the Single Market.

Repeat 100 times…

…Its still not true. There’s a shock!

“Access to” has become a meaningless phrase,

As above

May’s red lines rule out being in the Single Market.

Repeat 100 times…

…Its still not true. There’s a shock!

She has said so herself.

May’s red lines merely limit our options for access to the single market

From the outset, it is important that the Government, Parliament and the public are clear about the distinction between ‘access to’ and ‘membership of’ the Single Market. Many countries have ‘access to’ the EU’s Single Market, either through agreed tariffs at the WTO or via a FTA. However, the only countries which have full membership of the Single Market—which entails the liberalised movement of goods, services, people and capital (the ‘Four Freedoms’), secured through common rules interpreted by the European Court of Justice (CJEU)— are EU Member States.

28 of them – soon to be 27

Thank yo for patronising us so nicely again Jamba.

Cameron did not “give” us anything. He agreed to the referendum as May will have to as well – why because if she does not agree then we hold one without her agreement and her refusing will immediately put several points on the yes vote making a yes vote almost certain. It will be harder to hold one without Westminster agreement but not impossible and the rest of the world would accept the result in line with previous cases and international law.

Your attitude to scotland is so patronising its hard to believe that you really think like that.

Cameron understood this. May is not stupid.

However, the only countries which have full membership of the Single Market

…are EU states, yes, yes, but there are countries in the Single Market that do not fit that description.
They are part of the Single Market and are not full members. A weaker position to be in, but in the SM none the less.

Its not as patronising as the attitude of the EU or the Supreme Court!

Or as patronising as telling the Scottish people that their “best interests” are served by giving up monetary, fiscal and political sovereignty to Frankfurt, Berlin Brussels…. so that the narcissists can claim a false victory. That is the biggest folly of all! To suggest it, implies that the people of Scotland are economically and politically illiterate. which they have already shown the be untrue.

Scots are not stupid

Opinion poll out tonight

Polling Matters / @OpiniumResearch
Brexit decision: Right or wrong?
Definitely right 40%
Probably right 13%
Probably wrong 16%
Definitely wrong 23%
DK 9%

The debt mountain quickly crushes you as rates rise.

That’s Britain in two years time. Inflation is rising, rates will follow.

UK inflation.

That’s Britain in two years time. Inflation is rising, rates will follow.

Don’t worry, apparently that’ll just be a bump in the road on our way to a new dawn of the Great British Empire 😆

Definitely right 40%

Yup, people have bought into the idea that nothing “project fear” predicted will happen to them (rather than it being delayed because May wisely bought us 6 months) and so debt fuelled consumer spending is very strong. Confidence is high.

The debt mountain quickly crushes you as rates rise.

Ah, yes…

And with May and Trump together, what could go wrong?
Maybe a wall between Ireland and the UK?

Look on the bright side, risinginflation will help to reduce our own debt mountain or at least offset our latest fix

Confidence may be misplaced. We have just had a massive loosing of policy via a 20% devaluation and a cut in rates (same effect) combined with futther stealing off savers in order to give the debt junkies their final hit. Going cold turkey after this will not be pleasant nor good for confidence!

Can I agree with Jamba on something?

Much as I’d love the euro to succeed (in principle taking the money changers out of the loop is great) it probably won’t.

I think it only works with political union and that isn’t going to happen. Just as cars need differentials to turn corners without the wheels falling off, countries need exchange rates to allow them to pursue slightly different courses. The differential or exchange rate dissipates the stresses in the system.

That said I think that is known and understood and post Brexit the EU will sooner or later revise the euro or even replace it.

Where I differ with Jamba is that I think the EU will survive, adapt, evolve and probably grow. It always has so far.

Igm, its more than just “I think”. It has to fail by design, the EZ does not qualify as an optimal currency area and its construct is missing a core element as you say – fiscal and political union. It’s is only a matter of when not if. History is merely repeating itself. In the meantime we have extensive collateral damage – solidarity comrades!

Oh and the comedy act of wee nippy pretending that being replacement 28a will be in the interests of those she is meant to be representing. Dark humour indeed. T2a.

The dollar is used in all 50 US states and as a hard currency in countries all over the world.

Sales tax varies from zero to 7% depending on state

State taxes state by state.[/url]

I’m in favour of eurobonds and a limit to the fiscal dumping carried out by Luxembourg, Ireland, NL and the UK. If the US can do it, so can Europe.

Compare the Euro to the basket of currencies it replaced, when looking at its success and resilience.
Changes required, for sure, but I wouldn’t bet against it surviving.

Or as patronising as telling the Scottish people that their “best interests” are served by giving up monetary, fiscal and political sovereignty to Frankfurt, Berlin Brussels

Except no one actually ever did that.

Where I differ with Jamba is that I think the EU will survive, adapt, evolve and probably grow. I

Indeed, the hard on that the bitterest little englanders have for the EU collapsing is quite sad

Of course not Gordi. If they told the truth they would be laughed out of the room straight away. Hence the deceit.

Did you miss the Indy referendum – the paradigm shift in post truth politics?

Everyone with a conscience should be wishing an end for the euro. It has wrought havoc in wages and employment levels across Europe. Far more damaging than the scapegoat that is immigration. Only economic and social vandals would want it to survive.

How so, THM? It’s replaced an exchange rate mechanism and before that Europe was plagued with the uncertainties of currency instability and a series of competitive devaluations from some countries.

The Euro has allowed employers to plan ahead without those currency risks. Look at the fortunes of Jaguar over six decades. Each time the pound had gone down US sales have boomed and each time the pound has gone up it’s been lay-offs and near financial disaster. In the end the answer has been American ownership and sourcing a lot of components from more stable currency zones. Stable currency rates favour long term investment and prosperity. Would you really rather have the kind of volatility seen in Latin America?

teamhurtmore – Member
Of course not Gordi. If they told the truth they would be laughed out of the room straight away. Hence the deceit.

Did you miss the Indy referendum – the paradigm shift in post truth politics?

Everyone with a conscience should be wishing an end for the euro. It…

Ummm, wtf? Let’s say for a second you are correct for arguments sake.

It would be easily demonstrable by the leave campaign, so why all the lies and manipulation of the 52%? If the leavers could put forward a compelling argument I’d be all ears but that hasn’t been and still isn’t the case.

Where’s the honesty and transparency if it’s that simple?

THM still going on about the scottish referendum? A subject where his hatred of scotland and its people shine thru? Where he keeps banging on about lies without being able to see the beam in his own eye? and is this not the euro referendum thread?

Aren’t Jaguar Indian owned Edukator? Tata? Who own steel works in the UK as well as Tetley tea and JLR?

1. FX rates should be free to adjust to economic factors
2. Badly designed exchange rate mechanisms always fail – it is only a matter of time that differentiates them
3. In the meantime, they create economic and social havoc

Imagine a central heating systems that has increased pressure but no release valve. What happens.

Tackle the cures of FX volatility, don’t hide them away.

Oh a negative and factually incorrect contribution from TJ. Groundhog day.

Only those who truly hate Scotland would wish what the desperate SNP are proposing. Scotphiles in contact understand what is in their best interests.

You’re probably right, igm, I haven’t followed recently. What I’m certain of is that currency fluctuations were a major headache for Jaguar which made them a take-over target each time sales dipped. They were taken over and have been someone else’ pawn since – along with the workers.

THM you’re as quick to accuse others of deceit as you are to resort to deceit

I agree maty, the leavers did not put forward a coherent or honest case. But they won. in return we got to see what kind of country we really live in rather than the one we hoped we lived in. It’s not a pleasant sight is it?

You are correct Edukator – I have published research on Jaguar. For many years back in the 80s they were a one product/one market company that was highly exposed to the £/$ exchange rate. There were lots of other problems that Egan had to deal with at the time of the big restructuring of the time.

But yes, if you are reliant on one market you will be naturally exposed to FX fluctuations which is not a good thing. That’s is why givernments should tackle to causes not the symptoms. Companies can minimise the risk via hedging too or by diversifying.

Compare the the “economic and social havoc” in the Eurozone countries before and after the establishment of the Euro (and the FX fixing mechanisms that prepared for it). The Euro has problems, and as you point out all FX fixing creates problems, but painting the alternative as having fewer, or less serious, problems is an assertion many would question.

Indeed kelvin, the root problem (among many) was uncompetitive labour markets. But that requires joined up thinking to address. Devaluation is not a panacea either as it has other consequences – that’s the beauty of economics there is no such thing as a free lunch whatever politicians pretend. But I disagree, since a fixed exchange rate does lead to worse scenarios and amplifies economic cycles. That is a proven.

But and its a very big BUT, if you chose to fix your exchange rate then there can only be two outcomes to this situation – wage deflation and/or unemployment. We have witnessed both on a catastrophic scale. Why would you wish that on anyone?

EUR:USD volatility has been just as high as GBP:USD vol so no help to Jaguar there. The British economy has learnt alot from foreign ownership, benefits outweigh downsides.

Indeed, Tata own Jaguar now. The Tetley acquisition was the first foreign acquisition by an Indian company.

EUR:USD volatility has been just as high as GBP:USD vol so no help to Jaguar there. The Britsh econmomy has learnt alot from foreign ownership, benefits outweigh downsides.

+1 esp the second bit.

Xenophobia is bad for Britain

uncompetitive labour markets

I’m really happy that French labour market can’t compete with the latest low-cost impoverished developing-world country. Or even with social-dumping Britain. This is one positive I see in Brexit with my French hat on. It’s also something I agree with Trump on, a nation or trading zone that doesn’t protect its national/trading zone workers’ jobs/working conditions with tarifs and trade restrictions will soon become a production desert or as dreadful a place to work as the developing nation.

As for maintaining jobs through technological lead and excellence, we’ve behind! The Chinese can do most everything we do better. In 1978 they built a whole new technological city in the desert that now has a population of 12 million and French hi-tech entrepreneurs are flocking there rather than Silicon Valley because Silicon valley is slower, more expensive and lagging behind technologically.

Ok, but how could NOT have financial implications?

Comment at 1235

Financial implications of the Bill
22 The Bill is not expected to have any financial implications.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/jan/26/brexit-article-5-bill-david-davis-theresa-may-accused-of-grovelling-after-praising-trump-for-renewing-america-politics-live

Why is fast-tracking necessary?

11 The judgment of 24 January 2017 required the Government to complete an additional (and unexpected) step before the formal process of leaving the European Union can commence. Completing this step through the normal Bill timetable would cause considerable delay to commencing the formal exit process, making it impossible to do so before the end of March 2017. This would further generate uncertainty as to the timetable for our exit from the European Union.

Or because we really don’t want any of those awkward questions. Which is why we tried to get round having to do this and now that we wasted all that time we are going to miss our own timeline (which is all of the plan really) unless we just skip past the formalities….
All in given the complete debacle so far and the lack of any comprehensive (or even vague) strategy why would you not just sign a blank cheque to this lot…