Planet Rugby Forum

Gospel wrote:

iarmhiman wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Anyone who doesn't understand that a trade deal with the US will be finalised inside 2 years must be really thick

Anyone who thinks that EU negotiated trade deals are the benchmark is a fucking lemon.

Let's see how how you get on with your fast trade deals then. I bet they won't be fast though. The Brits are not that stupid.

The Americans want it done in two though I'd expect it to take longer given this is our first time and everything.

Of course they do. They know you're desperate for a trade deal. Their very experienced negotiators would eat you for breakfast. Taking your time and getting the best deal for UK would be a good idea.

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

But we've been told experienced EU negotiators are mustard.

Rugby2023 wrote:

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

I don't know about liars or traps, but suffice to say, all three are Europhiles.

I would ask if you are aware of pro-Brexit trade experts* but we're back to square 1 where you say I'm being unreasonable/remoaning.

*Edit, or even neutral if you like.

bimboman wrote:

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

But we've been told experienced EU negotiators are mustard.

Sorry I'm not sure what that means.

shereblue wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Did you see how the Germans export 4 x what we do to the USA? Perhaps we are just a bit shit at hurdling EU barriers?

Also, hurrah for your oft quoted statistic. When you say UK citizens, that's not the same as UK doms or residents is it?

Export 4 x's the goods, much less in services. And they're shutting themselves on trumps Tarifs.

shereblue wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Did you see how the Germans export 4 x what we do to the USA? Perhaps we are just a bit shit at hurdling EU barriers?

Also, hurrah for your oft quoted statistic. When you say UK citizens, that's not the same as UK doms or residents is it?

For the UK greater access for services would be the biggest advantage. This would pave the way for the US, UK and Japan to cooperate on financial services etc.

Fox will be desperate for quick results. So will some of his acolytes on here given their predictions. I'd respect the predictions more if they had any detail beyond Trump blah blah, shit EU negotiators, 28 countries to satisfy etc. I thought the UK was - in its own right - a massif economy which would have many regions and sectors to satisfy. Al a bit my dad's bigger than your dad.

SamShark wrote:

bimboman wrote:

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

But we've been told experienced EU negotiators are mustard.

Sorry I'm not sure what that means.

David Henig was an EU negotiator..

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Did you see how the Germans export 4 x what we do to the USA? Perhaps we are just a bit shit at hurdling EU barriers?

Also, hurrah for your oft quoted statistic. When you say UK citizens, that's not the same as UK doms or residents is it?

For the UK greater access for services would be the biggest advantage. This would pave the way for the US, UK and Japan to cooperate on financial services etc.

That may be good.

Bigger and bigger multinational conglomerates.


Seem to have noticed this happening in the EU already. Do you like that?

shereblue wrote:Fox will be desperate for quick results. So will some of his acolytes on here given their predictions. I'd respect the predictions more if they had any detail beyond Trump blah blah, shit EU negotiators, 28 countries to satisfy etc. I thought the UK was - in its own right - a massif economy which would have many regions and sectors to satisfy. Al a bit my dad's bigger than your dad.

Why reduce it to that when it's not how trade deals are done around the world?

Canada got a deal with the EU. Where did they get screwed in the process? I know that the UK's desire for services to be included got dropped.

bimboman wrote:

SamShark wrote:

bimboman wrote:

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

But we've been told experienced EU negotiators are mustard.

Sorry I'm not sure what that means.

David Henig was an EU negotiator..

I don't know what mustard means in this context and haven't really praised or criticised EU negotiators.

My assumption is that he knows more than us, but of course this is Planet Rugby and anything goes.

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Fox will be desperate for quick results. So will some of his acolytes on here given their predictions. I'd respect the predictions more if they had any detail beyond Trump blah blah, shit EU negotiators, 28 countries to satisfy etc. I thought the UK was - in its own right - a massif economy which would have many regions and sectors to satisfy. Al a bit my dad's bigger than your dad.

Why reduce it to that when it's not how trade deals are done around the world?

Canada got a deal with the EU. Where did they get screwed in the process? I know that the UK's desire for services to be included got dropped.

List Swiss trade dealsif you want details of smaller countries and trade deals. They demonstrably better off in everyone to date.

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Source?

Because any measure I've seen of FDI in USA, be it by value invested, numbers employed, or numbers of companies foreign owned I believe had UK at something in the region of 16%.

redderneck wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Source?

Because any measure I've seen of FDI in USA, be it by value invested, numbers employed, or numbers of companies foreign owned I believe had UK at something in the region of 16%.

It was part of an article I read on UK / US relations though I forget the publication. They specifically mentioned "owned" so as to illustrate just how invested we are on both sides of the channel and why a trade deal should have been achieved decades earlier.

Our so-called Government has taken 2 years to find a consensus (don't read about JRM in today's Times) to put together (I am led to believe) a White Paper. Hopefully that nice Mr Trump (if still in power) will be patient and won't seek to rush us in any way. Tbf, Trump seems a kinda "fudge business" man himself, especially foreign business.

Gospel wrote:

redderneck wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Source?

Because any measure I've seen of FDI in USA, be it by value invested, numbers employed, or numbers of companies foreign owned I believe had UK at something in the region of 16%.

It was part of an article I read on UK / US relations though I forget the publication. They specifically mentioned "owned" so as to illustrate just how invested we are on both sides of the channel and why a trade deal should have been achieved decades earlier.

I think you meant Atlantic rather than Channel

We have an awesome trade deal both sides of the Channel already.

SamShark wrote:

Rugby2023 wrote:

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

I don't know about liars or traps, but suffice to say, all three are Europhiles.

I would ask if you are aware of pro-Brexit trade experts* but we're back to square 1 where you say I'm being unreasonable/remoaning.

*Edit, or even neutral if you like.

I don't recall ever being that directly rude to you I'm aware of pro-Brexit trade experts but not those who discuss the minutiae on twitter. But for anyone who doubts a quick deal can be achieved with the US:

Mr Downer, who served as Foreign Minister for Australia between 1996 and 2004, repeatedly hailed Britain's decision to withdraw from the European Union as an opportunity to strike a new trade agreement with Canberra.

Dismissing claims suggesting it would take years for the UK to negotiate new trade deals with non-EU countries, the conservative politician added: "We negotiated a free trade agreement with the United States – the world’s biggest economy – and it took us 15 months to negotiate.

"It can be done if you want free trade."

Armchair_Superstar wrote:

etherman wrote:

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:So the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent last week. Section 10 includes the following :

Continuation of North-South co-operation and the prevention of new border arrangements.

(1) In exercising any of the powers under this Act, a Minister of the Crown or devolved authority must—

(a) act in a way that is compatible with the terms of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, and
(b) have due regard to the joint report from the negotiators of the EU and the United Kingdom Government on progress during phase 1 of negotiations under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union.

(2) Nothing in section 8, 9 or 23(1) or (6) of this Act authorises regulations which—

(a) diminish any form of North-South cooperation provided for by the Belfast Agreement (as defined by section 98 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998), or
(b) create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.

That rather ties Mays hands with regard to the Irish border, does it not, and points to a customs border down the Irish Sea. May must be hoping that the DUP will be distracted by the 12th 'festivities'.

As has been explained to you a billion times now, we will not under any circumstances put up physical border stuff because we don't have to and are in charge of our owns customs arrangements. Technology and trusted traders for us.

Ireland may have to break the GFA under EU instructions.

Where will this technology be?

There is already some EU reporting required for selling across the border, there is no reason that couldn’t become more detailed.

Like anything else, one side will say it’s a piece of piss and the other will say it’s completely unworkable. The truth is in the middle somewhere.

You're correct.
There's also VAT and duty being reported and processed domestically.
The U.K. Post brexit have chosen to rely on extensions of the above rather than border posts.


There's not been one post to disagree or even expand upon the point. I assume the technology and no border argument is accepted now.

redderneck wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Source?

Because any measure I've seen of FDI in USA, be it by value invested, numbers employed, or numbers of companies foreign owned I believe had UK at something in the region of 16%.

Indeed Redder, US Dept of Commerce figures for 2016 for the T0p 10 Investor Countries by Ultimate Benificial Ownership are as follows :

Uk 16.1%
Canada 12.2%
Japan 11.4%
Germany 10%
Ireland 7.5%
France 7.2%
Switz 5.3%
Netherlands 5.2%
Singapore 2.0 %
Spain 1.8%
All Others 21.5%

https://www.commerce.gov/sites/commerce ... update.pdf

So whilst 16.1% US inward FDI may be UK owned, at least 31.7% is owned by EU 27 countries.

Whatever the fúck that actually means.

camroc1 wrote:

redderneck wrote:

Gospel wrote:

shereblue wrote:Oh no, UK and US are bessies. No worries there.

More US businesses are owned by UK citizens than the rest of the world put together. Maybe stop and think about that for a moment. We should have had a trade deal with the US years ago but EU protectionism prevents it.

Source?

Because any measure I've seen of FDI in USA, be it by value invested, numbers employed, or numbers of companies foreign owned I believe had UK at something in the region of 16%.

Indeed Redder, US Dept of Commerce figures for 2016 for the T0p 10 Investor Countries by Ultimate Benificial Ownership are as follows :

Uk 16.1%
Canada 12.2%
Japan 11.4%
Germany 10%
Ireland 7.5%
France 7.2%
Switz 5.3%
Netherlands 5.2%
Singapore 2.0 %
Spain 1.8%
All Others 21.5%

https://www.commerce.gov/sites/commerce ... update.pdf

So whilst 16.1% US inward FDI may be UK owned, at least 31.7% is owned by EU 27 countries.

Whatever the fúck that actually means.

It means the UK are well placed for and likely beneficiaries of a trade deal with the US.

Rugby2023 wrote:

SamShark wrote:

Rugby2023 wrote:

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

I don't know about liars or traps, but suffice to say, all three are Europhiles.

I would ask if you are aware of pro-Brexit trade experts* but we're back to square 1 where you say I'm being unreasonable/remoaning.

*Edit, or even neutral if you like.

I don't recall ever being that directly rude to you I'm aware of pro-Brexit trade experts but not those who discuss the minutiae on twitter. But for anyone who doubts a quick deal can be achieved with the US:

Mr Downer, who served as Foreign Minister for Australia between 1996 and 2004, repeatedly hailed Britain's decision to withdraw from the European Union as an opportunity to strike a new trade agreement with Canberra.

Dismissing claims suggesting it would take years for the UK to negotiate new trade deals with non-EU countries, the conservative politician added: "We negotiated a free trade agreement with the United States – the world’s biggest economy – and it took us 15 months to negotiate.

"It can be done if you want free trade."

I'm sorry Rugby but one quote from a self-serving former minister hardly proves your wish fantasy.

Yes the US Aus trade deal was done quickly but there are genuine misgiving over whether it has benefited Aus.

One Aus commentator from the Crawford School of Public Policy commented:

The critics were right. Ten years after the Australia–United States free trade agreement (AUSFTA) came into force, new analysis of the data shows that the agreement diverted trade away from the lowest cost sources. Australia and the United States have reduced their trade by US$53 billion with rest of the world and are worse off than they would have been without the agreement.

When the Howard government was putting the agreement in place, there were serious concerns about whether it would distort trade and impose costs on the Australian community rather than expand and lower the costs of trade. Even key officials who negotiated the deal had doubts about whether what they could negotiate in the time they had under political pressure would serve the national interest.

Deals that are struck in haste for primarily political reasons carry risk of substantial economic damage. The question then is whether the economic costs of such policies are worth whatever the political gain, and indeed, how the balance of properly calculated political gains and costs might look.

So there are different opinions and many of you are FANATICS incapable of rational debate. Just don't become swivel-eyed over this.

I don't know the answers myself but I'm sure not getting any enlightenment from some posters here.

shereblue wrote:I'm sorry Rugby but one quote from a self-serving former minister hardly proves your wish fantasy.

Yes the US Aus trade deal was done quickly but there are genuine misgiving over whether it has benefited Aus.

My point was simply that trade deals can be concluded quickly, others were asserting that they could not and would take years. Not getting into the specifics of their particular FTA as I don't know much about it, but I'm glad we agree on timeframe.

Rugby2023 wrote:

shereblue wrote:I'm sorry Rugby but one quote from a self-serving former minister hardly proves your wish fantasy.

Yes the US Aus trade deal was done quickly but there are genuine misgiving over whether it has benefited Aus.

My point was simply that trade deals can be concluded quickly, others were asserting that they could not and would take years. Not getting into the specifics of their particular FTA as I don't know much about it, but I'm glad we agree on timeframe.

What's the details on the misgivings, can we monitor chlorinated chicken n stuff ?

The critics were right. Ten years after the Australia–United States free trade agreement (AUSFTA) came into force, new analysis of the data shows that the agreement diverted trade away from the lowest cost sources. Australia and the United States have reduced their trade by US$53 billion with rest of the world and are worse off than they would have been without the agreemen

So it has increased US/Aus trade by 53 billion USD , it's the tarif they have with the "low cost" sources that's the issue not the successful trade deal.

Rugby2023 wrote:

SamShark wrote:

Rugby2023 wrote:

SamShark wrote:There are lots of trade experts on Twitter that can be followed for real experience of what trade deals are likely to involve.

I mentioned David Henig many weeks back, who recently left the Govt but was involved in negotiating TTIP. He did a fascinating Brexitcast podcast.

Allie Renison and Sam Lowe are also worth a follow.

In keeping with the even more extreme than usual last few pages, I suspect these people are liars and me naming them is some sort of arch-remainer trap.

I don't know about liars or traps, but suffice to say, all three are Europhiles.

I would ask if you are aware of pro-Brexit trade experts* but we're back to square 1 where you say I'm being unreasonable/remoaning.

*Edit, or even neutral if you like.

I don't recall ever being that directly rude to you I'm aware of pro-Brexit trade experts but not those who discuss the minutiae on twitter. But for anyone who doubts a quick deal can be achieved with the US:

Mr Downer, who served as Foreign Minister for Australia between 1996 and 2004, repeatedly hailed Britain's decision to withdraw from the European Union as an opportunity to strike a new trade agreement with Canberra.

Dismissing claims suggesting it would take years for the UK to negotiate new trade deals with non-EU countries, the conservative politician added: "We negotiated a free trade agreement with the United States – the world’s biggest economy – and it took us 15 months to negotiate.

"It can be done if you want free trade."

When was that? Before or after Trump sabotaged the deal?

He is perfectly correct in stating that Brexit is an opportunity for Canberra. If they aren't head of the long queue waiting to shaft the Brits on trade, then he's not doing his job.

If the UK has a hard brexit and relies upon WTO rules, but Trump takes the USA out of the WTO, with hjs FART act. Whats the impact to the UK?

Rugby2023 wrote:

shereblue wrote:I'm sorry Rugby but one quote from a self-serving former minister hardly proves your wish fantasy.

Yes the US Aus trade deal was done quickly but there are genuine misgiving over whether it has benefited Aus.

My point was simply that trade deals can be concluded quickly, others were asserting that they could not and would take years. Not getting into the specifics of their particular FTA as I don't know much about it, but I'm glad we agree on timeframe.

We do agree on timeframe in the case of the Aus/US FTA.

Trade with the US has been measured to have fallen in the 10 years following - and with the rest of the world fairly significantly.

A quick trade deal with a negative economic outcome.

The most effective trade deals are the EU's and, I believe, ASEAN - ie by bloc.

All I suggest to Brexitists is stop cheerleading at the expense of exercising your critical faculties. (Oh and Bimboman, you've misread my post but top smilies )

So, The Donald is running around sticking tariff wherever he likes and everyone is arguing it takes years to do a trade deal.

Despite the fact that technology is already used to track the movement of goods and services across the Irish border, it is laughable that this idea would be workable post-Brexit.

Everybody is agreed, that the EU should flat reject Theresa's latest plans next week, because the EU is playing hardball here. The Irish boredies feel particularly strongly about this despite a hard Brexit being just as problematic for Ireland as it is for the UK.

Tariffs imposed by a spiteful manchild against "Bad!" things are trade deals now? Or am I misreading because it's early and I haven't had any coffee yet?

The Man Without Fear wrote:Tariffs imposed by a spiteful manchild against "Bad!" things are trade deals now? Or am I misreading because it's early and I haven't had any coffee yet?

Well firstly you're being a bit snippy and condescending because this has all become a big emotive argument instead of people focussing on what will do the least possible damage to the economy.

You are missing the the fact that there is an entire industry of people being paid a lot of money to make these things seem as drawn out and over complicated as possible.

Take the taxation of all these giant internet businesses, the existing system for taxing them in completely useless, progress is absolutely glacial, in the meantime they are getting a ridiculous competitive advantage.

Donald and Vladimir must both find the whole thing absolutely hilarious because literally billions of man-hours are being wasted on tedious political posturing and running around in circles.

I see armchair is having a bimbo-style breakdown.

Gavin Duffy wrote:I see armchair is having a bimbo-style breakdown.

I honestly couldn't care either way about the whole ideological meltdown or what way we end up, as long as there is still peace in NI. I have said repeatedly I'm completely agnostic about a united Ireland as well.

At the same time I have trading businesses on both sides of the border, with actual people working in them. It would be nice to see some signs of a grown-up debate breaking out.

Armchair_Superstar wrote:So, The Donald is running around sticking tariff wherever he likes and everyone is arguing it takes years to do a trade deal.

Despite the fact that technology is already used to track the movement of goods and services across the Irish border, it is laughable that this idea would be workable post-Brexit.

Everybody is agreed, that the EU should flat reject Theresa's latest plans next week, because the EU is playing hardball here. The Irish boredies feel particularly strongly about this despite a hard Brexit being just as problematic for Ireland as it is for the UK.

Where is the data from this technology currently available? The fact is we haven´t a notion what is in those trucks. We rely on paperwork

sewa wrote:

Armchair_Superstar wrote:So, The Donald is running around sticking tariff wherever he likes and everyone is arguing it takes years to do a trade deal.

Despite the fact that technology is already used to track the movement of goods and services across the Irish border, it is laughable that this idea would be workable post-Brexit.

Everybody is agreed, that the EU should flat reject Theresa's latest plans next week, because the EU is playing hardball here. The Irish boredies feel particularly strongly about this despite a hard Brexit being just as problematic for Ireland as it is for the UK.

Where is the data from this technology currently available? The fact is we haven´t a notion what is in those trucks. We rely on paperwork

Yes sewage, the whole EU works that way.

Do you think they're cracking every container at the minute?

Armchair_Superstar wrote:

sewa wrote:

Armchair_Superstar wrote:So, The Donald is running around sticking tariff wherever he likes and everyone is arguing it takes years to do a trade deal.

Despite the fact that technology is already used to track the movement of goods and services across the Irish border, it is laughable that this idea would be workable post-Brexit.

Everybody is agreed, that the EU should flat reject Theresa's latest plans next week, because the EU is playing hardball here. The Irish boredies feel particularly strongly about this despite a hard Brexit being just as problematic for Ireland as it is for the UK.

Where is the data from this technology currently available? The fact is we haven´t a notion what is in those trucks. We rely on paperwork

Yes sewage, the whole EU works that way.

Do you think they're cracking every container at the minute?

Caught talking rubbish about technology so you get all aggressive. Tell us more about the technology? Where does it exist? Who operates it?

We open a much larger sample of trucks from non EU countries than we do from EU countries. You may have heard of this thing called free movement of goods and services. Its sort of key here.

Armchair_Superstar wrote:

Gavin Duffy wrote:I see armchair is having a bimbo-style breakdown.

I honestly couldn't care either way about the whole ideological meltdown or what way we end up, as long as there is still peace in NI. I have said repeatedly I'm completely agnostic about a united Ireland as well.

At the same time I have trading businesses on both sides of the border, with actual people working in them. It would be nice to see some signs of a grown-up debate breaking out.

You have it all wrong, you have to pick a side for people to get enraged about.

A former key aide to Barack Obama has confirmed David Cameron personally asked the US president to warn Britain would be "back of the queue" for a post-Brexit trade deal.

Ben Rhodes, an ex-White House adviser, admitted Mr Obama's dramatic intervention in the EU referendum campaign came at the personal request of the former prime minister.

Dave you naughty little tinker.

sewa wrote:

Armchair_Superstar wrote:

sewa wrote:

Armchair_Superstar wrote:So, The Donald is running around sticking tariff wherever he likes and everyone is arguing it takes years to do a trade deal.

Despite the fact that technology is already used to track the movement of goods and services across the Irish border, it is laughable that this idea would be workable post-Brexit.

Everybody is agreed, that the EU should flat reject Theresa's latest plans next week, because the EU is playing hardball here. The Irish boredies feel particularly strongly about this despite a hard Brexit being just as problematic for Ireland as it is for the UK.

Where is the data from this technology currently available? The fact is we haven´t a notion what is in those trucks. We rely on paperwork

Yes sewage, the whole EU works that way.

Do you think they're cracking every container at the minute?

Caught talking rubbish about technology so you get all aggressive. Tell us more about the technology? Where does it exist? Who operates it?

We open a much larger sample of trucks from non EU countries than we do from EU countries. You may have heard of this thing called free movement of goods and services. Its sort of key here.

Yes I was being hyper-aggressive there

There is a system already in place called Intrastat where businesses report on movement of goods.

Armchair_Superstar wrote:

sewa wrote:
Caught talking rubbish about technology so you get all aggressive. Tell us more about the technology? Where does it exist? Who operates it?

We open a much larger sample of trucks from non EU countries than we do from EU countries. You may have heard of this thing called free movement of goods and services. Its sort of key here.

Yes I was being hyper-aggressive there

There is a system already in place called Intrastat where businesses report on movement of goods.

You think Intrastat is technology monitoring every transaction on the Irish border Its paperwork self reporting filing system ffs. Its a system you are being kicked out of very shortly by the way as its only for EU members. Still no technology then, thought not

sewa wrote:

Armchair_Superstar wrote:

sewa wrote:
Caught talking rubbish about technology so you get all aggressive. Tell us more about the technology? Where does it exist? Who operates it?

We open a much larger sample of trucks from non EU countries than we do from EU countries. You may have heard of this thing called free movement of goods and services. Its sort of key here.

Yes I was being hyper-aggressive there

There is a system already in place called Intrastat where businesses report on movement of goods.

You think Intrastat is technology monitoring every transaction on the Irish border Its paperwork self reporting filing system ffs. Its a system you are being kicked out of very shortly by the way as its only for EU members. Still no technology then, thought not

With all due respect Sewa, the UK isn't being kicked out of anything. They have chosen to leave, and have not seriously engaged in any negotiations regarding life after Brexit, so the Article 50 deadline still holds.

It's the UK's decisions that have it in the current bind, nothing to do with the EU.