Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 339 posts

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#161

Post by wrong_variable »

sievebrain wrote: post #144
billpg wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Can we be sure you're going to stick to this trade agreement?" "Why would you think we wouldn't?" "You're breaking your treaty with the EU."

When that treaty is merely "you cannot sign trade deals" I don't think people signing trade deals would care. That rule exists for the EU's benefit, not for the benefit of member states.

Thats not the point of deals - merely convincing your prospective trade partner that a deal is unfair to you at that time is a hard sell.

The UK signed the deal knowing the consequences of it, why would another country sign a trade deal with you knowing that you will not follow the terms due to your countries internal politics ?

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#162

Post by arethuza »

nicktelford wrote: post #105
misja111 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is a net payer to the EU. For instance in 2015 alone, UK's net payment to the EU was about 8.5 billion pounds. So after the Brexit there will be more than enough money to continue the research funding. But as you mention already, it is another question if the government will be wanting to pay it. But is this really such a bad thing? The difference will that instead of the EU, the UK itself will decide which of…

That's assuming tax revenue remains the same, which all economists agree will not be the case. Whether or not Brexit will boost public finances is entirely down to how much of an impact it'll have on the UK economy. No one knows what the impact will be, but almost everyone agrees that it will be negative... though no one agrees to what extent. So there's really two questions here: a) just how much more/less public mo…

"That's assuming tax revenue remains the same"

And it's assuming that a new government is inclined to take the money and give it to the kinds of projects that the EU used to give it to - I can think of a lot of reasons why that might not happen.

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#163

Post by tonyedgecombe »

mpweiher wrote: post #71
endeavour wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU money doesn't come out of thin air. It comes from taxpayers. The UK is a net contributor to the EU so the UK government could choose to fund all current commitments and still be better off.

Except for...revenues are not going to stay the same. For example, George Osborne has just proposed to slash the corp. tax rate from 20% to 15%, in order reduce (not eliminate) the almost certain reduction in UK investment. Last year, CT net receipts were £ 42 billion[1]. At the current 20% rate. At 15%, that would be £ 31.5 billion, for a reduction of £ 10.5 billion. Let's divide that by 52 weeks and you get £ 200 m…

They had already announced rates were going down to 17% so it's only another 2%. This is a tax that is very difficult to collect and becoming more so over time.

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#164

Post by sievebrain »

wrong_variable wrote: post #150
sievebrain wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU has done an extremely bad job of signing trade deals. Much smaller countries have managed to do a much better job. I wouldn't look at the EU and say "we need the same setup" because the EU deliberately makes it hard for itself to sign deals by insisting that they try to satisfy 28 different countries simultaneously, who don't use the same language and which all have their own random domestic priorities to hand…

Could you provide some examples of countries striking better trade deals. Its also two things negotiators and knowing your strengths. The world's best negotiators wont be able help you very much if you do not have much to offer. Also I am skeptical of your assertion that anyone could write trade deals. It requires a very deep understanding of economics, international finance, geopolitics and a bunch of other topics -…

Chile is a good example. More deals, better (more often including services) and earlier.

Like I said, I've read trade deals. One I actually read almost from start to finish (the recent WTO deal on upgrading customs rules, I forgot the specific name).

If Chile can sign trade deals with much bigger economic powers, much more quickly than the EU can, I see no reason why the UK would be unable to. Can you justify your assertion that trade negotiation is much harder than programming, or is that just a feeling?

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#165

Post by sievebrain »

wrong_variable wrote: post #161
sievebrain wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When that treaty is merely "you cannot sign trade deals" I don't think people signing trade deals would care. That rule exists for the EU's benefit, not for the benefit of member states.

Thats not the point of deals - merely convincing your prospective trade partner that a deal is unfair to you at that time is a hard sell. The UK signed the deal knowing the consequences of it, why would another country sign a trade deal with you knowing that you will not follow the terms due to your countries internal politics ?

Because that's always a risk with any deal. Look at how many international treaties the USA violates. People still sign deals with them.

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#166

Post by porker »

Chris2048 wrote: post #153
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the government believes it will take six years to renegotiate the deals - which means it's likely to take ten or more. This continues to be one of the most suicidal moves in British history.

WW2?

That wasn't a suicidal move; more of a "when you're cornered you have to fight or die" move.

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#167

Post by Ntrails »

billpg wrote: post #134
sievebrain wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK can negotiate deals before exit, just under EU law it can't sign them. However, why obey EU rules when you're about to leave? The only reason to do this would be to leave on good terms. But the EU sees Brexit as a betrayal that must be punished severely to try and scare other countries into not leaving. There are no "good terms" by their choice, not the UK's. So the UK should start immediately violating whatev…

"Can we be sure you're going to stick to this trade agreement?" "Why would you think we wouldn't?" "You're breaking your treaty with the EU."

This is absurd reasoning.

All the UK will be doing is following the treaties in place to end an existing agreement. That's not breaking a treaty - it is following it.

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#168

Post by [deleted] »

wrong_variable wrote: post #150
sievebrain wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU has done an extremely bad job of signing trade deals. Much smaller countries have managed to do a much better job. I wouldn't look at the EU and say "we need the same setup" because the EU deliberately makes it hard for itself to sign deals by insisting that they try to satisfy 28 different countries simultaneously, who don't use the same language and which all have their own random domestic priorities to hand…

Could you provide some examples of countries striking better trade deals. Its also two things negotiators and knowing your strengths. The world's best negotiators wont be able help you very much if you do not have much to offer. Also I am skeptical of your assertion that anyone could write trade deals. It requires a very deep understanding of economics, international finance, geopolitics and a bunch of other topics -…

[deleted]

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#169

Post by djlastword »

hardlianotion wrote: post #32
wrong_variable wrote: post #19

Large Multinationals like Unilever, even for incremental decisions - like changing the type of light bulb, takes years to execute. This is why a large change in their business is so difficult and you need a very good CEO ( ask Marissa Mayer ) The decision UK made to leave the EU is akin for Unilever to switch from selling shampoos to selling software - and we are not talking about a multinational with 100,000 employe…

I think that the reaction will be simply to adopt minimal changes in the short term in ways in which Euro treaties and laws are brought wholesale onto Westminster statute books. Significant change will only occur over time and limbo is to be avoided where possible - not just for the UK, but for everyone else as well. This is the only thing that would make sense even if everything was planned and orderly, which I thin…

I think you're underestimating the psychological aspect of Brexit. We Europeans feel betrayed and abandoned by the Brits. Especially since they always demanded and got special deals on everything EU-related anyway. Their arrogance will finally get to them. Plus we have access to another 27 countries so the loss will not be huge for us. No matter when official negotiations start, trade and other collaboration will start declining immediately. I mean, why would I go on vacation to a place where I'm not welcome? Why would I do business with a country where risks are high and benefit low? From an EU leadership perspective, in order to deter other potential exits the conditions will be harsh. After the exit UK will have to stand in the back of the line for new negotiations, lower priority than e.g. Turkey and Ukraine. Within 10 years or so things might have normalised but in the short term Britain will absolutely suffer because of this.

Re: UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears

#170

Post by justin66 »

flexie wrote: post #122
wrong_variable wrote: post #19

Large Multinationals like Unilever, even for incremental decisions - like changing the type of light bulb, takes years to execute. This is why a large change in their business is so difficult and you need a very good CEO ( ask Marissa Mayer ) The decision UK made to leave the EU is akin for Unilever to switch from selling shampoos to selling software - and we are not talking about a multinational with 100,000 employe…

I talked to a senior diplomat recently. He said that when talking to diplomats from China, Russia, the US in the beginning of his career some 30 years ago, nobody asked about the EU opinion on issues. In the last 10 years, however, he never heard "what does Britain or France or Germany think about XYZ" but only "What does the EU think". What some leavers don't realise is that the entire world had gotten used to deali…

Since the UK and France are permanent U.N. security council members, that sounds rather hyperbolic.
Post reply on HN