@Spinflight
Right here we go. I'm gonna be polite.
You haven't backed this up with reference to Article 50. In fact other than daft analogies such a divorces or phonebills there has been nothing but vacuous statements and vile nonsense.
*The UK has made commitments to projects and has pension commitments it must pay. We are not crooks and should stand by those commitments irrespective of what A 50 says.
Even if legally there is a case to be made there is no way this holds up politically so this argument is a red herring. The reality is we need the EU badly for a lot of things. Euratom: our power plants and hospitals ... We will pay. Whatever the EU says.
We even need the EU's acquiescence to trade under WTO. A little matter called TRQs and subsidy shares ... Look it up.More on this below.*
WTO rules are clearly to the greater detriment of continental businesses than our own. Our exchequer would receive £12.7 billion a year from continental businesses and the EU about £5 billion from ours.
*Source please.
I'm very curious to read this exercise in economic alchemy: how a massive economy like the EU27 with 8% of trade with the UK gets hurt more by WTO rules than the UK with 50% of trade with the EU.*
We currently trade with the USA on WTO rules, as they trade with us on WTO rules.
*This is a falsehood spouted by the likes of Redwood, Rees-Mogg etc.
The EU has dozens of trade agreements with the US. Look them up in the EU Treaty database here:
ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/searchByType.do?id=1
No one trades on WTO, not even Mauritania which some thought did.
So the UK would be unique. Gee,wonder why NO ONE trades under WTO rules. What do you think? 'Cause maybe they suck?*
WTO rules are in fact the default position, without other trade deals to supercede them they are the norm, the accepted minimums and the legally enforceable floor.
*Is that what you want for the UK? The minimum?
Anyway: falsehood again. Where do you get your facts? Refer to the EU treaty database ...
Do you know what a Non-Tariff Barrier is? The list of these is massive and - guess what - slows trade down massively. Look them up. We don't have these with the EU.
And the US has removed many of these NTBs via the dozens of agreements it has with the EU. We won't have these ... I can just picture the US trade negotiators with Liam Fox et al in a room ...
It is in fact the NTBs not the tariffs that are the problem. Quality standards, provenance, regulatory equivalence, compliance, list is long.*
That people should get so clearly angry and irrational over the fine details of international trade that won't affect them is curious. At most a reversion to WTO rules would see changes to the rate of change of certain imports and exports. Plying fears of catastrophe is both illogical and unfounded.
- This is unadulaterated bollocks.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for WTO rules not to wreak havoc on this economy. Read this from the LEAVE HQ camp in respect of WTO: leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128
Yes, these are Leavers saying WTO option is a disaster, to wit: One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected.
30% of our GDP relies on imports and exports of goods and services, all of which today is NOT on WTO rules.
So think about our food ... Supposed to wait 3 weeks in Dover all of a sudden? It's great that John Redwood is going to raise hogs in his backyard and all, but that will not make the UK self sufficient in foodstuffs which we haven't been for 200 years ...
Most importantly, we will lose frictionless access to the largest GDP area on the planet, for over 50% of our exports in goods.
We become a 3rd country, with NTBs at best like Canada under CETA .... which we maybe get to implement in 10 years.
Finally with no deal, what about Euratom, Open Skies? And we're gonna get the EU to agree to continued access to these ... by walking away from our debts which you would flippantly like to repudiate?
Strikes me as a unicorn. Or perhaps you think we are in a strong position?
Maybe I did not stress this enough:
a) we need the EU to play ball in order to even trade under WTO - we must have a schedule to do this. We are a WTO member but do not have a schedule as we trade under the EU umbrella ...
b) we need other countries to accept the rejiggling of import AND export TRQs and subsidies - they are already raising a stink*
There are large multinationals which will be affected, within which where are people hired to provide insights as to global trends and changing local conditions. Within this group of double porsche owning comfortable professionals there are optimists and pessimists.
I don't even know what this drivel means.
Frankly however even if the sky were due to fall do you actually think that screaming abuse is an effective way of furthering your or your employer's political objectives?
*This is not political. It's about survival, not a belief system.
You are intent on unwittingly destroying great country for an objective that I frankly do not understand because it is based on falsehoods /misunderstandings about the EU and emotion, not fact and practicalities.*