The Return of Brexit

[Bilich]

So what would these gun boats do? Shout stop it? Board the boats and arrest them? Or is this just pointless posturing to play to the populist core?

They aren't sending gunboats, they're sending offshore patrol vessels that are already used to inspect fishing vessels in the UK EEZ and the Navy is doing it because we don't have a civil coastguard.

Complete non-story

do they have guns?

[Derek Hardballs]

So what would these gun boats do? Shout stop it? Board the boats and arrest them? Or is this just pointless posturing to play to the populist core?

They aren't sending gunboats, they're sending offshore patrol vessels that are already used to inspect fishing vessels in the UK EEZ and the Navy is doing it because we don't have a civil coastguard.

Complete non-story

So pointless sabre rattling reporting by the usual newspapers then.

[CA Baggie]

Latest narrative on guaranteeing medical supplies to the Uk from Raab:

They’ll be shifts in the market (from where we buy it); and

We’ve apparently been stockpiling medicines etc.

That would be a “no” then.

Along with Marr quoting Boris that it would be absurd to think we won’t get a deal...

Yep you’ve guessed it “the EU are being absurd”. That and Marr was needing selective of the quotes.

Looks like 2020 could end with one big kick in the bollocks.

[Protheroe]

b) Unilateral free trade is flat-out stupid and the only reason to want it is if you personally stand to gain from the collapse of the UK's economy.

It's this sort of insulting and catastrophising response to a perfectly reasaonable position that serves to polarise positions.

The UK has a massive net trade deficit in goods with the EU. Tariff barriers are simply self harm.

In the event of zero tarifffs the economy will not "collapse" and it's ridiculous to suggest it would. We sell into major international markets (like the US) where we have no trade deal and US businesses & consumers face tariff barriers. We still manage to sell there. We will still sell into the EU, even if we face tariff barriers - let the EU punish its consumers.

There seems to be this ridiculous idea that if the EU puts a 30% tariff on a British carrot then British carrots will cost consumers 30% more in the EU. They won't. If the misunderstanding of tariffs is so great no wonder there are folk going round suggesting the economy will collapse. Of course it won't.

Let me be clear, I would prefer a 'thin' trade deal and I still think we'll get one. But suggesting that a policy of zero tariffs is flat-out stupid when the greatest beneficiaries will be consumers like you and me is.....flat out stupid.

No, Proth. Unilateral free trade is the absolute dumbest thing this country could do and the only people advocating it don't know what they are on about or stand to gain from destroying the domestic economy.

1. Food prices will go up domestically, not go down. Domestic producers won't be able to compete on exports due to them having a one-sided artificial barrier on trade and though tariffs on food from Africa and Europe won't increase they will be subject to non-tariff barriers which add cost that wasn't there due to the EU customs union and single market removing that red tape. Imports from the US and South America aren't cheaper when transport costs are factored in as they're barely cheaper than EU sourced produce as is and things like NZ lamb are already imported tariff free due to EU quotas so they won't be any cheaper, in fact they will also go up due to the aforementioned non-tariff barriers. The belief that consumables will be cheaper is based on absolute nonsense and misunderstanding on how we trade goods. The thing that is getting in the way of cheaper prices is standards which, I'm sure you agree, should not be diminished as they're based on welfare, health and environmental impact.

2. Manufacturing will be directly exposed to market dumping. This isn't a free market and is fundamentally illiberal, it also risks the viability of companies that are critical for national security. And if we counter-dump, we will be exposed to punitive measures which will be an even bigger barrier to export.

3. The UK won't be seen as a sensible place for modern supply chains as though imports won't be subject to new tariffs, exports will be and given how many big manufacturing plants rely on goods crossing the channel multiple times this will add costs to UK manufactured components, making domestic industry uncompetitive.

4. We are not a city state. The UK needs a diversified economy, we don't have the advantage of Hong Kong and Macau which are able to solely focus on a single service to prop up their economies as we don't have China next door to cover any issues.

5. We won't have any leverage for free trade agreements. Why would a company need a free trade agreement with the UK? Unless we're willing to make a customs union with them to remove non-tariff barriers but then that was already a huge point of contention so that's realistically not going to be on the table. So those issues won't be adressed.

6. Fewer jobs due to artificially uncompetitive industries collapsing needlessly, no decrease in cost of consumable items, how would things be better for consumers? Electronics might be cheaper but they'd also be scarcer due to red tape at ports and no forwarding available at EU ports and consumers would have less choice in the market with which where to buy them from.

And we need a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, not a thin one. Any other scenario puts us into a position of weakness whenever we're forced back to the table. The UK isn't just London and thinking we can be a client state to China like Hong Kong or Macau is daft, not even London is as reliant on a single service than those two countries are.

You've swallowed the conventional Protectionist's Charter hook, line and sinker. None of the arguments you make are in favour of free trade, all of them point to protectionism.

The bottom line is this. You cannot give me an example of a country that ever, in human history - made itself poorer by making itself more open to trade.

[JOK]

So what would these gun boats do? Shout stop it? Board the boats and arrest them? Or is this just pointless posturing to play to the populist core?

They aren't sending gunboats, they're sending offshore patrol vessels that are already used to inspect fishing vessels in the UK EEZ and the Navy is doing it because we don't have a civil coastguard.
Complete non-story

So pointless sabre rattling reporting by the usual newspapers then.

 
The Usual Newspapers?  Such as the Independent and Guardian ! Not so much Sabre rattling as Scare mongering. And your favourite “reputable” source, Reuters’ headline was.
‘Britain’s navy to protect fishing waters in case of no-deal’. Notice the use of  the word ‘Protect’ and no use of the evocative word 'Gunboat'.

But it’s a good job the EU protects the environment and international law isn’t it?
“European Super Trawlers in U.K. marine protected areas.”
“their supersized nets – up to a mile long – mean bycatch includes dolphins, porpoises and seals.”
“with supertrawler fishing time double what it was for the whole of 2019 in just the first six months of 2020.”
 
“Our Government cannot continue to allow supertrawlers to fish with ever increasing intensity in parts of our waters that are supposed to be protected.” (Greenpeace) {a reputable charity ! }
https://www.independent.co.uk/environmen...69086.html

[Jack Halford]

So what would these gun boats do? Shout stop it? Board the boats and arrest them? Or is this just pointless posturing to play to the populist core?

They aren't sending gunboats, they're sending offshore patrol vessels that are already used to inspect fishing vessels in the UK EEZ and the Navy is doing it because we don't have a civil coastguard.
Complete non-story

So pointless sabre rattling reporting by the usual newspapers then.

 
The Usual Newspapers?  Such as the Independent and Guardian ! Not so much Sabre rattling as Scare mongering. And your favourite “reputable” source, Reuters’ headline was.
‘Britain’s navy to protect fishing waters in case of no-deal’. Notice the use of  the word ‘Protect’.

But it’s a good job the EU protects the environment and international law isn’t it?
“European Super Trawlers in U.K. marine protected areas.”
“their supersized nets – up to a mile long – mean bycatch includes dolphins, porpoises and seals.”
“with supertrawler fishing time double what it was for the whole of 2019 in just the first six months of 2020.”
 
“Our Government cannot continue to allow supertrawlers to fish with ever increasing intensity in parts of our waters that are supposed to be protected.” (Greenpeace) {a reputable charity ! }
https://www.independent.co.uk/environmen...69086.html

As always one rule for us one rule for the EU.

In addition we are the 9th largest manufacturing nation in the world and our output will only increase.

We also have some great niche industries. In the gaming world we have Leamington Spa talked about in the same breath as Silicon Valley.

Will we survive a no deal, he’ll yes we will.

[Spandaubaggie]

So what would these gun boats do? Shout stop it? Board the boats and arrest them? Or is this just pointless posturing to play to the populist core?

They aren't sending gunboats, they're sending offshore patrol vessels that are already used to inspect fishing vessels in the UK EEZ and the Navy is doing it because we don't have a civil coastguard.
Complete non-story

So pointless sabre rattling reporting by the usual newspapers then.

 
The Usual Newspapers?  Such as the Independent and Guardian ! Not so much Sabre rattling as Scare mongering. And your favourite “reputable” source, Reuters’ headline was.
‘Britain’s navy to protect fishing waters in case of no-deal’. Notice the use of  the word ‘Protect’.

But it’s a good job the EU protects the environment and international law isn’t it?
“European Super Trawlers in U.K. marine protected areas.”
“their supersized nets – up to a mile long – mean bycatch includes dolphins, porpoises and seals.”
“with supertrawler fishing time double what it was for the whole of 2019 in just the first six months of 2020.”
 
“Our Government cannot continue to allow supertrawlers to fish with ever increasing intensity in parts of our waters that are supposed to be protected.” (Greenpeace) {a reputable charity ! }
https://www.independent.co.uk/environmen...69086.html

As always one rule for us one rule for the EU.

In addition we are the 9th largest manufacturing nation in the world and our output will only increase.

We also have some great niche industries. In the gaming world we have Leamington Spa talked about in the same breath as Silicon Valley.

Will we survive a no deal, he’ll yes we will.

Survive is one thing. Thrive is another. Brexit is a small minded insular move orchestrated on a total pack of lies that just about got over the line. 
All about the politics of blame and nationalistic twaddle of a greater Britain. 
It appealed to our version of Trump supporters.
Oh, and how many who voted out expected no deal? Very few and it was never on the table 4 years ago. 
It’s a disaster and utterly brainless. 
Well done Boris you mop headed plummy twat!

[Derek Hardballs]

So what would these gun boats do? Shout stop it? Board the boats and arrest them? Or is this just pointless posturing to play to the populist core?

They aren't sending gunboats, they're sending offshore patrol vessels that are already used to inspect fishing vessels in the UK EEZ and the Navy is doing it because we don't have a civil coastguard.
Complete non-story

So pointless sabre rattling reporting by the usual newspapers then.

 
The Usual Newspapers?  Such as the Independent and Guardian ! Not so much Sabre rattling as Scare mongering. And your favourite “reputable” source, Reuters’ headline was.
‘Britain’s navy to protect fishing waters in case of no-deal’. Notice the use of  the word ‘Protect’ and no use of the evocative word 'Gunboat'.

But it’s a good job the EU protects the environment and international law isn’t it?
“European Super Trawlers in U.K. marine protected areas.”
“their supersized nets – up to a mile long – mean bycatch includes dolphins, porpoises and seals.”
“with supertrawler fishing time double what it was for the whole of 2019 in just the first six months of 2020.”
 
“Our Government cannot continue to allow supertrawlers to fish with ever increasing intensity in parts of our waters that are supposed to be protected.” (Greenpeace) {a reputable charity ! }
https://www.independent.co.uk/environmen...69086.html

Who do you think briefed the press about using the Navy? 

From the Mail... Gunboats are being prepared for any 'punch-up' with 'stormy' French fishermen as last-minute negotiations with the EU rumble on. 

 ‘Gun boats’ 

Gun boats - Mail

Gun Boat 2 - Express 

Even as far back as 2018 Gun Boats 3 - Telegraph


Here’s what some others think...

But the navy threat has been slammed by other members of Mr Johnson's party, with Tobias Ellwood, Conservative chairman of the Commons Defence Committee, calling it 'irresponsible' while former European Commissioner Lord Patten accused the Prime Minister of behaving like an 'English nationalist'.

Lord Patten added that Mr Johnson was on a 'runaway train of English exceptionalism' in thinking no-deal would allow the nation to prosper. 

Daily Mail

[Borin' Baggie]

You've swallowed the conventional Protectionist's Charter hook, line and sinker. None of the arguments you make are in favour of free trade, all of them point to protectionism.

The bottom line is this. You cannot give me an example of a country that ever, in human history - made itself poorer by making itself more open to trade.

What I just listed are the problems with unilateral free trade and correcting the nonsense belief, alternatively the blatant lie, that it is better for the consumer. These do not apply to reciprocal free trade deals, which I wholeheartedly support. Even your arguments for unilateral free trade rely on conflating it with reciprocal free trade and hoping nobody notices. To call me protectionist by pointing out the stupidity and illogical nature of what you want is ridiculous, especially when I'm someone who's against tariffs and non-tariff barriers.

And aside from Somalia no country has been stupid enough to pursue unilateral free trade, stop conflating your stupid unilateral free trade idea with actual successful examples of free trade. They're nothing alike.

---

As always one rule for us one rule for the EU.

In addition we are the 9th largest manufacturing nation in the world and our output will only increase.

We also have some great niche industries. In the gaming world we have Leamington Spa talked about in the same breath as Silicon Valley.

Will we survive a no deal, he’ll yes we will.

Mate, a single Polish video gaming company is bigger than Codemasters and Playground Games. The biggest video gaming company outside of the US and Japan is French, not British. Leamington Spa is not talked about in the same breath as Silicon Valley.

[hudds]

You've swallowed the conventional Protectionist's Charter hook, line and sinker. None of the arguments you make are in favour of free trade, all of them point to protectionism.

The bottom line is this. You cannot give me an example of a country that ever, in human history - made itself poorer by making itself more open to trade.

What I just listed are the problems with unilateral free trade and correcting the nonsense belief, alternatively the blatant lie, that it is better for the consumer. These do not apply to reciprocal free trade deals, which I wholeheartedly support. Even your arguments for unilateral free trade rely on conflating it with reciprocal free trade and hoping nobody notices. To call me protectionist by pointing out the stupidity and illogical nature of what you want is ridiculous, especially when I'm someone who's against tariffs and non-tariff barriers.

And aside from Somalia no country has been stupid enough to pursue unilateral free trade, stop conflating your stupid unilateral free trade idea with actual successful examples of free trade. They're nothing alike.

Proth thinks it's OK to take a handshake to a gun fight.