Confused about borders and importing because of Brexit

[jm90914]

All the talk of imports, exports and borders because of Brexit has got me confused.

I understand that, as far as importing goes, borders and controls exist to vet the quality of goods coming into the country. What I don’t understand is why (in the worst case scenario) Brexit will cause shortages.

Surely our government sets the regulations around border checks, so why can’t they just say that, from our end, there will still be no checks on goods coming from the EU even though we’ve left? Presumably that’s how things work now?

If the EU wants to check goods we export their way, then that’s their right, but why can’t we just accept medicines and stuff that we know are coming from the EU without any checks and chaos?

I was thinking it might be because imports now need to be taxed? But then I was again questioning why. Could the government not also just say we’re not charging any tariffs on goods from the EU?

I voted remain, and I’d do so a million times over, but I’m trying to understand why the border chaos everyone is talking about is going to happen.

I’ve got relatives and friends that rely on medication, so I’ve been trying to understand the implications and it just got me thinking.

We're definitely being subjected to mansplaining (which by definition is stuff we already know almost always more than the man )

Apart from that, there is not a scintilla of explanation as to why we will be better off out of the EU or any vision as to what it is that he expects to achieve and why it isn't possible within the EU. No clichés or sound bites allowed.

It would really help my ds who has been given an exercise to provide 3 (supportable) reasons why leaving would be good for the UK and 3 reasons why it would be good for the EU.

(I've come up with one for each - but maybe not ones the Brexiters would like )

prettybird - I doubt that I could give you a single reason that you wouldn't dismiss out of hand.

I suggest that you ask your ds to read widely and develop an understanding that many sources of information have a bias and to work on improving his critical thinking to enable him to spot untruths and lies by omission. Ask him to watch the so-called BBC as their 'news' output and current affairs programmes are excellent for displaying such dishonesty. Be careful though, when he has schooled himself you may find he disagrees with your opinions with uncomfortable frequency.

What patronising claptrap. I suspect prettybird's son already knows ten times as much as you ever learnt.

Prettybird
I'm rather chuffed that my standard test has been turned into a real world one
what three things will be better in your life after Brexit

I wonder if Outside is brave enough to answer ?

Outside
If outside could give any upsides to leaving, rather than denigrating the legitimate concerns of known problem areas of leaving, it would be useful. Rather than what would be less worse, what would actually be much better, apart from the nice fluffy feeling in outsides tummy? People who know (I.e. in the transport and logistics industry) say moving things will be bloody awful with no deal. This leads to many of the problems being discussed and will impact directly on people. So why will it all be better when we leave?
Any particular reason why you ignored my post from yesterday? Too tricky for your handlers to come up with anything?

Outside prettybird - I doubt that I could give you a single reason that you wouldn't dismiss

Because it wouldn't stand up to scrutiny.

I’d still like to hear why our proposed WTO schedules are replicating the current EU tariffs rather than boldly slashing them, as Rees-Mogg was advocating.

I’m not holding my breath though.

Bloody MN - wrote a long reply on my phone and MN ate it

Pleased to see that most people have already made the points I was going to make

It's actually quite delightful to see such a prime example of mansplaining They must be rattled if that is the best they can come up with.

{Bloody MN - wrote a long reply on my phone and MN ate it}
It's a conspiracy!!
The USA had 'reds under the bed' and we have 'Westminster in the cess pit'.

Prettybird, yea. If I comment on anything on the Internet I use a Desktop. I tried once commenting using my tablet and it was an exercise in freaking, bloody torture given autocorrect and the smallish keys.

It's not hard to understand why Twitter has become so popular.

I’ve had that happen a few times (usually because my phone drops WiFi at the wrong moment). Have learnt it’s often best to copy to the clipboard before trying to post.

Buteo - I know and that's why I'm particularly annoyed because I forgot to do it this time.

I’d still like to hear why our proposed WTO schedules are replicating the current EU tariffs rather than boldly slashing them, as Rees-Mogg was advocating.

That would be something to do with JRM not being member of govt, not a minister, not even a junior one. He's toxic to a lot of voters.

Wouldn't it be hugely destabilising to domestic industries to just drop the tariffs overnight? I suspect so.

It appears that ERGOutside has just popped out to another part of his estate to see if his third generation migrant labourers are still there

Of course it would - a mix of decimating UK industry and agriculture and making it impossible for poorer countries to export to the UK as they couldn’t compete with the big boys. But it is JRM’s wet dream.

A cynical person might also think that replicating the EU tariffs in the submissions back in July might suggest that alignment with the CU was planned as the end state (as well as minimising objections from WTO members).

The other issue with reducing tariffs from our side is that it disincentiveses the other party from wanting to sign a trade deal. Why would you if you can export plenty into another country with low tariffs, whilst protecting your domestic industries with the WTO higher tariff?

It might make imports cheaper but in the long run its not going to do much for us as an exporter.