Brexit - shifting sands ?

[Alan Klein]

Now that's disrespectful. Why "help" when the problem is about trade, not some charity.

With the way the current US leaders conduct trade, it looks more like coercion and extortion than any sort of trade. If you don't come out on top, you throw sanctions.

Coming out on top is not what trade is supposed to be about: trade is supposed to be about mutual and fair exchanges of value. You can't ever achieve that when you prefer to use muscle over mutual exchanges of equal value. You create distortion by decree and sanctions, and not by the simple process of party A wanting to buy something from B, but party A being unable to produce anything much that B wants to buy from him in return. Hence, exchanges can be one-sided for all sorts of realistic and natural reasons. Dumping is something quite else.

The way existing agreements are being dismantled offers little sense of security any state may feel in striking a new agreement with the current version of US power.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful.  Brexit was a British decision, not American. 

Once out of the EU, you have to set up trade with all countries in the world including the US.  We want to help.  If you lower your tariffs to meet America's previous tariffs or we can make a deal to eliminate tariffs altogether between our two countries, you'll be more competitive than other European nations.  You'll export more of your stuff to us and other countries in the world.  We'll be able to export more to you as well.  Overall trade between our two countries will increase, a positive relationship.  That will help you be independent and successful after you leave the EU.

If you make a deal with the EU when you break off that prevents you from doing that, or decide to keep tariffs where they are now, Britain will just be hurting itself.  We'll keep our tariffs higher to match yours.  Of course the EU will try to squeeze you so you don;t lower your tariffs.  They'll tell you you can;t export to other European countries unless you keep your tariffs the same as theirs on American and other countries's products.  Of course, they want to sell their stuff to you as well.   But if you keep your tariffs on our products, America will keep our tariffs on British products.  It's your call.

Finally, we are not adding sanctions on you or others, only tariffs to match those that have been placed on America exports to you and others.   For you to argue it's Ok for Britain to keep tariffs and we can't do the same is more burdensome to America.  How is that "mutual and fair exchange" as you said we should have?

[Alan Goldhammer]

Once out of the EU, you have to set up trade with all countries in the world including the US.  We want to help.  If you lower your tariffs to meet America's previous tariffs or we can make a deal to eliminate tariffs altogether between our two countries, you'll be more competitive than other European nations.  You'll export more of your stuff to us and other countries in the world.  We'll be able to export more to you as well.  Overall trade between our two countries will increase, a positive relationship.  That will help you be independent and successful after you leave the EU.

What significant products does the US import from the UK vs what we import from the rest of the EU?  Jaguar cars, Scottish plaids, some artisan food stuff but what else?  UK has much more to lose in terms of screwing up their relationship with the EU than they do with setting up some kind of bilateral trade relationship with the US.  the multi-national Brit-based companies are the ones in trouble if they have significant UK based manufacturing.  I don't know whether Rolls Royce jet engines are made in the UK these days but if they are they might decide to shift manufacturing elsewhere.

[Rob C]

I'm not trying to be disrespectful.  Brexit was a British decision, not American. 

Once out of the EU, you have to set up trade with all countries in the world including the US.  We want to help.  If you lower your tariffs to meet America's previous tariffs or we can make a deal to eliminate tariffs altogether between our two countries, you'll be more competitive than other European nations.  You'll export more of your stuff to us and other countries in the world.  We'll be able to export more to you as well.  Overall trade between our two countries will increase, a positive relationship.  That will help you be independent and successful after you leave the EU.

If you make a deal with the EU when you break off that prevents you from doing that, or decide to keep tariffs where they are now, Britain will just be hurting itself.  We'll keep our tariffs higher to match yours.  Of course the EU will try to squeeze you so you don;t lower your tariffs.  They'll tell you you can;t export to other European countries unless you keep your tariffs the same as theirs on American and other countries's products.  Of course, they want to sell their stuff to you as well.   But if you keep your tariffs on our products, America will keep our tariffs on British products.  It's your call.

Finally, we are not adding sanctions on you or others, only tariffs to match those that have been placed on America exports to you and others.   For you to argue it's Ok for Britain to keep tariffs and we can't do the same is more burdensome to America.  How is that "mutual and fair exchange" as you said we should have?

Re. your last paragraph: Europe is currently hitting back at the US for its unilateral decision (via Trump) to hit with sanctions all nations that do not agree with its decision to quit the Iranian Nuclear Agreement, and wish to continue trading and safeguarding the billions those lands have invested in Iran since the signing of the deal. Is that because Mr T is angry he hadn't had as much luck there? Does he feel he is entitled to break any agreement he feels like, and compel the rest of us to join him in his hissy-fit?

Putting media pressure on the UK to pursue the suicidal Brexit action, on top of that, smacks not a lot of friendly interest. That is apart from being most undiplomatic, and apologising later does not change anything; he reveals his lack of diplomatic savoir faire all the time. If not that, then he is an unapologetic, undisguised bully. He can't poke his nose where he had no right to poke it, and then think that kissing something better fixes it, and makes his push for headlines acceptable behaviour. The guy is your liability, like that fact or not. Yesterday's results with Mr Putin, the remarks about the respective security services, comes pretty close to treason, in my book.

[Rob C]

What significant products does the US import from the UK vs what we import from the rest of the EU?  Jaguar cars, Scottish plaids, some artisan food stuff but what else?  UK has much more to lose in terms of screwing up their relationship with the EU than they do with setting up some kind of bilateral trade relationship with the US.  the multi-national Brit-based companies are the ones in trouble if they have significant UK based manufacturing.  I don't know whether Rolls Royce jet engines are made in the UK these days but if they are they might decide to shift manufacturing elsewhere.

More than fair comment!

Regarding the engines, they were when I served my time with them!

The car business, however, is something very else. Jaguar, I think, is still Indian-owned; Ford is US-owned and the major Japanese presence is there because of the straightforward customs freedoms we currently enjoy for those products, during and post-assembly, to travel. Remove those goodies and why remain, when most other European countries also share a heritage of auto-manufacturing expertise and possibly lower wages?

One strong incentive for maintaining a U.K. presence is the relative steadiness of its financial and legal regulations, relative distance between laws and government interference (RIP US Supreme Court! And in Turkey, too!) and the long-established access to worldwide finance through London.

Yet, the financial services industry is but another, vital one that is being hung out to dry by the Brexit nonsense.

[Alan Klein]

What significant products does the US import from the UK vs what we import from the rest of the EU?  Jaguar cars, Scottish plaids, some artisan food stuff but what else?  UK has much more to lose in terms of screwing up their relationship with the EU than they do with setting up some kind of bilateral trade relationship with the US.  the multi-national Brit-based companies are the ones in trouble if they have significant UK based manufacturing.  I don't know whether Rolls Royce jet engines are made in the UK these days but if they are they might decide to shift manufacturing elsewhere.

If Britain continues to impose tariffs on our products like the rest of Europe, then we will continue to impose tariffs on British as well as EU goods.  It Britain's call.  That's what Trump said in the end.  The quicker the EU decides to drop their tariffs, the quicker this whole issue will be behind us and overall trade will expand.

[Alan Klein]

Re. your last paragraph: Europe is currently hitting back at the US for its unilateral decision (via Trump) to hit with sanctions all nations that do not agree with its decision to quit the Iranian Nuclear Agreement, and wish to continue trading and safeguarding the billions those lands have invested in Iran since the signing of the deal. Is that because Mr T is angry he hadn't had as much luck there? Does he feel he is entitled to break any agreement he feels like, and compel the rest of us to join him in his hissy-fit?

Putting media pressure on the UK to pursue the suicidal Brexit action, on top of that, smacks not a lot of friendly interest. That is apart from being most undiplomatic, and apologising later does not change anything; he reveals his lack of diplomatic savoir faire all the time. If not that, then he is an unapologetic, undisguised bully. He can't poke his nose where he had no right to poke it, and then think that kissing something better fixes it, and makes his push for headlines acceptable behaviour. The guy is your liability, like that fact or not. Yesterday's results with Mr Putin, the remarks about the respective security services, comes pretty close to treason, in my book.

I agree Trump is boorish.  However, he's defending American interests, something past Presidents failed at doing much of the time.  If you look at the wars in Iraq and Vietnam, I don't think they were in American or the world's interest.  He's trying to make peace with NK and Russia.  That would be good for you as well as us.  Would you prefer war?  Also, I don't appreciate you calling our president "treasonous."  You talk about Trump being impolite and then use a term like that because you don't like Trump or his policies. 

Regarding Iran, Trump isn't having a hissy fit.  The people who voted him into office didn't like the Iran deal.  He ran on pulling out.  So he followed through with his campaign promise.  That's how democracy works. Elections have consequences.  It's like the people arguing that Brexit isn't right.  It's just sour grapes.  You lost. 

Obama never got  American consensus on the Iran deal.  He unilaterally did it without Senate approval which is required by our Constitution. Had the Senate approved it as a treaty, Trump could not unilaterally pull out of the deal.  All European companies care about is money.  They expected Hillary to win. She would have kept the Iran deal.   So they calculated wrong and now have to suffer the consequences.  They made bad business decisions.  But sanctions on Iran and companies that do business with them have nothing to do with tariffs.  It's a separate issue.

[kers]

If Britain continues to impose tariffs on our products like the rest of Europe, then we will continue to impose tariffs on British as well as EU goods.  It Britain's call.  That's what Trump said in the end.  The quicker the EU decides to drop their tariffs, the quicker this whole issue will be behind us and overall trade will expand.

I think you forget it is the US that started imposing tariffs , against the WTO rules, and the reactions of all the nations involved were just to impose the same amount back.

That's what Trump said in the end.

is there an end coming to this Trump nonsense ! great!

[Alan Klein]

I think you forget it is the US that started imposing tariffs , against the WTO rules, and the reactions of all the nations involved were just to impose the same amount back...

Excuse me.  You have the facts wrong.  The EU charges 10% on American cars while we charge a tariff of 2 1/2%.  That's only one example.  We are just raising our tariffs to meet yours.  Frankly, Trump doesn't want any tariffs at all.  All sides should just drop them.  Then we all can have free and fair trade.  Why are you against free and fair trade? 

[Chris Kern]

The EU charges 10% on American cars while we charge a tariff of 2 1/2%.

The United States imposes a 25 percent tariff on imports of light trucks.

[Alan Klein]

The United States imposes a 25 percent tariff on imports of light trucks.

Let's drop all tariffs including those and have complete fair and free trade.  Would you agree to that?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

What significant products does the US import from the UK ...some artisan food stuff...

There is any food stuff worth importing from the UK!? Now, that would be the utmost sacrifice, but anything for our friends

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

The United States imposes a 25 percent tariff on imports of light trucks.

And what is the European tariff on light trucks? And ratio of car trade vs. light truck trade?

[Alan Goldhammer]

If Britain continues to impose tariffs on our products like the rest of Europe, then we will continue to impose tariffs on British as well as EU goods.  It Britain's call.  That's what Trump said in the end.  The quicker the EU decides to drop their tariffs, the quicker this whole issue will be behind us and overall trade will expand.

The US continues to employ unfair trade practices that benefit certain US products.  Until we start dropping things such as sugar quotas that prop up an unprofitable industry we should not cast aspersions on other countries practices.

[Alan Klein]

There is any food stuff worth importing from the UK!? Now, that would be the utmost sacrifice, but anything for our friends

Thanks.  But I'll continue to eat American beef.

[Alan Klein]

The US continues to employ unfair trade practices that benefit certain US products.  Until we start dropping things such as sugar quotas that prop up an unprofitable industry we should not cast aspersions on other countries practices.

If our competitors feel that's an issue, OK.  Let's discuss those things in the tariff negotiations.  But foreign countries will not go to the table to discuss anything until our rising tariffs force them too.  Then we will make progress.  Trump's on the right path. 

[Manoli]

Brexit was a British decision, not American. 

True, but an outcome shamefully encouraged by a US President with a vested interest in breaking up an economic union out of nothing more than 'pique' .

India and China immediately rebuffed May and her entourage when, soon after the vote, they anxiously went searching for 'alternative' trading partners. The world had just got somewhat smaller, and the news today, that Japan has now signed a free-trade deal with the EU, following on from the Canadian one hasn't brightened British prospects and certainly hasn't dimmed European ones. Expect China to follow shortly.

[Manoli]

Let's drop all tariffs including those and have complete fair and free trade. 

Pretty much what was being discussed with Obama prior to the US election.
You tell me why your President nuked the negotiation.

[Alan Klein]

Pretty much what was being discussed with Obama prior to the US election.
You tell me why your President nuked the negotiation.

Obama wasn't getting any anywheres. Which reminds me of the joke:

It seems a farmer was complaining to a friend about the trouble he was having in getting his stubborn mule to move. After listening to the farmer's complaint, the friend said he knew just what to do.


"Get a two-by-four board and whack the mule across the head with all your might," advised the friend. The farmer was taken aback. "But how will that get him to move?" asked the farmer. "Well, you see," the friend said, "first you've got to get his attention!"

[Rob C]

I agree Trump is boorish.  However, he's defending American interests, something past Presidents failed at doing much of the time.  If you look at the wars in Iraq and Vietnam, I don't think they were in American or the world's interest.  He's trying to make peace with NK and Russia.  That would be good for you as well as us.  Would you prefer war? 1. Also, I don't appreciate you calling our president "treasonous."  You talk about Trump being impolite and then use a term like that because you don't like Trump or his policies. 

Regarding Iran, Trump isn't having a hissy fit.  The people who voted him into office didn't like the Iran deal.  He ran on pulling out.  So he followed through with his campaign promise.  That's how democracy works. Elections have consequences. 2.  It's like the people arguing that Brexit isn't right.  It's just sour grapes.  You lost. 

Obama never got  American consensus on the Iran deal.  He unilaterally did it without Senate approval which is required by our Constitution. Had the Senate approved it as a treaty, Trump could not unilaterally pull out of the deal.  All European companies care about is money.  They expected Hillary to win. She would have kept the Iran deal.   So they calculated wrong and now have to suffer the consequences.  They made bad business decisions.  But sanctions on Iran and companies that do business with them have nothing to do with tariffs.  It's a separate issue.

1.  If you go in front of the world and declare that you trust the other side's intelligence powers more than your own, can you think of another word for it than treason?

Of course, the great man is now telling the same public it was "just a slip of the tongue, and should have read..." then goes on to spout yet more gibberish during the "apology/correcton", of what he himself said on camera. And still you can't bring yourself to see him as your national liability!

2.  Brexit isn't right becaue it was never debated; it was simply lied about by the lunatic right which, I'm sure you know by now from domestic experience, does not live only in some far-away European countries. Those fibs were designed to make the innocent think their jobs would be safe, and that the health services would be immensely more rich and, thus, capable. The fact that such a lot of emphasis was put on the damage Brexit would do the finacial sector was but added grist to the envy factor, and the desire to see the rich "punished" for being smarter than the rest of us. That many British people also want the possibility of unencumbered job-seeking within Europe (it was never a one-directional flow) is also, if realised as even existing, easily put down as just another elitist perk at the expense of the poor old huddled masses.

So those "poor olds" now face losing much of what they thought was ringfenced by their belief in imaginary, uniquely British manufacturing skills! As mentioned elsewhere, those jobs were within Britain because being within the EU made them commercially viable, with the advantage or existing within a relatively safe fiscal/legal jurisdiction. Remove commercial vaibility and it all vanishes in a puff of smoke.

[Alan Klein]

1.  If you go in front of the world and declare that you trust the other side's intelligence powers more than your own, can you think of another word for it than treason?

Of course, the great man is now telling the same public it was "just a slip of the tongue, and should have read..." then goes on to spout yet more gibberish during the "apology/correcton", of what he himself said on camera. And still you can't bring yourself to see him as your national liability!

2.  Brexit isn't right becaue it was never debated; it was simply lied about by the lunatic right which, I'm sure you know by now from domestic experience, does not live only in some far-away European countries. Those fibs were designed to make the innocent think their jobs would be safe, and that the health services would be immensely more rich and, thus, capable. The fact that such a lot of emphasis was put on the damage Brexit would do the finacial sector was but added grist to the envy factor, and the desire to see the rich "punished" for being smarter than the rest of us. That many British people also want the possibility of unencumbered job-seeking within Europe (it was never a one-directional flow) is also, if realised as even existing, easily put down as just another elitist perk at the expense of the poor old huddled masses.

So those "poor olds" now face losing much of what they thought was ringfenced by their belief in imaginary, uniquely British manufacturing skills! As mentioned elsewhere, those jobs were within Britain because being within the EU made them commercially viable, with the advantage or existing within a relatively safe fiscal/legal jurisdiction. Remove commercial viability and it all vanishes in a puff of smoke.

1. Rob, it's just not right repeating the American left's tirade in calling our president a traitor.  You're not American, didn't vote here, and it's a fighting term, no business being used.  You're joining the crazy left and liberal press who want to get rid of Trump, something they couldn't do in the election.  Is Merkel a German traitor because she's becoming indebted to Russia for that pipeline?  How will Germany respond when Putin demands certain things or he'll shut off the switch to the pipe?  She's jeopardizing German independence against Russia.  Was Pres Nixon a traitor for opening up America to the Communist Chinese.  Is May a traitor because of Brexit?  Is Trump a traitor for hugging NK Communist dictator Kim who wants to bomb us with nuclear bombs?  Trump wants to make nice with the Russians for many legitimate reasons.  It's Ok for people to disagree with his policies.  But in America, we use to wait until the elections to change leadership or parties.  Resorting to impeachment is dangerous.  Calling the president traitor just to justify a phony impeachment is a dangerous escalation for political power.  It could mean that we'll devolve into changing leadership by fiat rather than the ballot box.  I see it happening.  If they get a majority in Congress, the democrats will "pack the Supreme Court" to get more liberal judges on it like Democrat Pres Roosevelt tried to do last century.  If the Dems gain the House of Representatives in the fall, they will impeach.  The election will be thrown away and 60 million Americans who voted for Trump will be disenfranchised. 

2. I could think of good and bad things for and against Brexit.  But the Brits have to decide where to go with it.  As far as "fake news" about the push for Brexit, yes the same thing happens here.  However, since 90% of the media is against Trump and has always been liberal and Democrat biased, it's always been difficult for conservative and Republican viewpoints. 

"Americans' perceptions of news media bias have increased significantly over the past generation. Thirty-two percent believe the news media are careful to separate fact from opinion, well below the 58% who held this view in 1984. Meanwhile, 66% currently agree that most news media do not do a good job of letting people know what is fact and what is opinion, up from 42%."
https://news.gallup.com/poll/225755/americans-news-bias-name-neutral-source.aspx