261–270 of 283 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to share the results of your quick search please?
The onus is on the person that makes the bold assertion to back it up, not on me to back up my challenge. But I'm getting used to the brigading now.
Lots of things are going to change. Things worked before the EU. I am sure things will continue to work after the exit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> EU member states will still want UK money. Those shiny Euros the UK is coining? Seriously, the banking services provided by the city will move to Paris and Frankfurt in no time. Outside the EU, London has zero structural advantage or lock-in.
Again, it'll take about ten seconds for those London Banks to spawn subsidiaries in a member state to take care of that. Meanwhile they get to drop the EU common external tariff. That alone will be a significant economic benefit to UK.
You are quite clearly misinformed what I actually takes in most European countries to get a banking license.
It's not quite the same thing as opening a corporate entity in, say, Delaware.
And as the EU made quite clear: Renting a mail box in Frankfurt and setting up a limited company won't quite do the trick.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The UK is the 5th biggest economy in the world. Switzerland is 20th and Norway 30th. The UK has traditionally punched well above its weight economically, it will be interesting to see if we become just another Switzerland or Norway after Brexit rather than the world economic power that we are today. Being the banking capital of the EU is a huge contributing factor to that position, btw.
+ Norway and Switzerland both have partly artificial economies, buoyed by Oil for the former and dirty money for the latter.
Traditionally money laundring was always much less of a problem in Switzerland than supporting tax evasion.
With the automatic exchange of information[2] this will pretty much be a non issue in the future.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Hyde_Park
[2] https://www.efd.admin.ch/efd/en/home/themen/wirtschaft--waeh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Do you actually work in the City or in the financial industry?" Well, sorry for the pun, but you obviously don't: "By the way, unlike what many in this thread seem to think, being in the EU is of limited value for business protection. France and Germany via their proxies have been trying to pull financial work out of London for years - the EU Commission already tried to illegally ban Eurozone countries from using th…
I do work in both. What sort of "benefit" does the EU's own civil service try to take away? There is no technical reason why euro clearing must happen physically inside the eurozone. And why do you think the Commission tried to pass a law that violates the treaties? It's because they know that the ECJ frequently ignores the treaties and laws, and does whatever is most advantageous to the EU's ideological goals regard…
Yes, there is. Overview concerns and the ability to intervene in times of a crisis. Or how "The Economist" said, in regards to Brexit and Euro Clearing. "Sometimes it is about getting back control" :-)
Another think that makes me skeptical about Brexit: The UK had comparably low debt compared with other countries. During the last financial crisis, the debt exploded, also due to the finance heavy economy. Another crisis may be overdue. If there is a no deal situation and the next financial crisis comes, good luck with that.
The UK was the "sick man of Europe". Then three things happened.
1. Reforms by Thatcher
2. Oil found in the Northern Sea
3. UK joined the EU (or the precursor of the EU)
The oil is running out. And now they are leaving one the the biggest markets. So two out of thee advantages may be gone. Nobody knows the future but call me skeptical about the chances of success.
I could give you a similar list of free trade partners.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that looking for ideological consistency is a dead end in any large group of people, including for those who campaigned to remain. Some supported the EU project for ideological reasons (it's an ideological, utopian project after all) and others had purely pragmatic concerns. Some who argued for one side have switched to the other in the years since. Third, you are deliberately misrepresenting the nature and s…
That's a very odd claim to make because the EU itself is extremely clear that you're wrong. I won’t quite the rest, but I think you have misunderstood the EU’s position on this. Yes, as I said there are different forms the relationship could take. I described some of them. What there isn’t - as various EU bods you quote point out – is any other deal available at this point . It’s done. If the UK had engaged in this p…
You very obviously don't read Mr. Johnson's Telegraph columns
I agree. The EU was always very clear where their read lines were and never deviated from that. The PM on the other hand made very clear what the UKs red lines are. And does are simply incompatible with what's acceptable for the EU.
An ex-member undermining the fundamental principles of the single market is just not on the table.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The UK is proposing to leave the single market (in the best case) No, May wants to stay in the single market, the EU is refusing that option. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/single-market... This stubbornness on behalf of the EU will damage both sides economically and thus be corrected at some point when the current EU administration is replaced by a more reasonable one.
> May wants to stay in the single market, the EU is refusing that option If you can't have your cake and eat it too, it's not the baker's fault...
The problem is that the baker expects payment and it seems that the UK is just not willing to cough up for the cake.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The UK could easily stay in the single market by officially canceling brexit. It’s even a unilateral decision. It’s just that you cannot pick the benefits of being a EU member while shedding the obligations. In that regard it’s no different from a good old fashioned British Club.
> It’s just that you cannot pick the benefits of being a EU member while shedding the obligations. Of course you can, it's a matter of negotiations. UK has/had plenty of exemptions as EU member and Switzerland for example is not part of Schengen but in the single market. It amazes me how people here think that the EU is somehow the entity that makes up all the rules. It's not, deals are bilateral.
Uhh, you have that exactly wrong. Switzerland is not part of the single market, but sure as hell part of the Schengen accord.[1]
Source? apart from the link provided my last trip to to Prague. I never needed to provide any id in either direction. And id checks, upon entering or exiting the Schengen area, are pretty damn strict.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, deals are bilateral. Good luck trying to get the EU to give up one of its core principles to a country that cannot even get its government to agree on a consistent negotiation position.
> Good luck trying to get the EU to give up one of its core principles to a country that cannot even get its government to agree on a consistent negotiation position. The UK government is far more consistent than the EU currently. Name one important issue where the EU has reached a satisfactory agreement and results. Migration? Social security? EU army? Nope. But just like the tone of your comment, the EU position on…
Free roaming within the EU
Standardization of chargers for phones
Free movement (including right to work and study) within most EU member states, plus I)celand, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein
Passenger rights for air travellers
75 years of peace
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These rules are subject to local legislation. Switzerland and Norway can renegotiate any time they want and occasionally do so. https://www.dw.com/en/switzerland-ignores-eu-deadline-for-tr... This is a much stronger position to be in and the UK is a much larger "adversary" in tough negotiations (and has always been even within the EU).
You clearly have little clue how Switzerland manages the relationship with EU. The Swiss are literally waiting for UK to leave EU, to see what they can demand. And they also want to restrict immigration... Guess who's going to find it harder to negotiate as a result? UK, for trying to get an ultra special deal...
Let me clarify that. The populace very narrowly said yes to a referendum, which was supposed to restrict immigration[1].
Parliament implented it in a way, which was pretty toothless towards EU citizens who want to move and work to Switzerland, letting the Swiss Popular Party (SVP) going balistic.
Herein lies the rub: The population accepted the bilaterals with ~60% yes (if I recall correctly, I could be slightly off), but the immigration initiative with just slightly > 50%.
The problem is that you can't have it both ways. In essence the country would have to cancel the bilateral contracts in order to restrict immigration to EU citizens.
The current tensions are derived from a couple issues :
The EU wants a frame agreement so that that not every piss squiek new regulation needs to be negotiated, which is understandable
One of the sticky issues, though, is the regulation on EU companies (mostly contractors), which need to pre-announce work done in Switzerland 8 days in advance. The reason for that is to avoid sallary dumping, which makes sense, since salaries can be significantly larger in Switzerland and their minimums are negotiated in binding contracts between unions and employers.
The EU thinks those requirements are too restrictive and the unions in Switzerland fight tooth and nail against softening those requirements. Befor yelling unions! I have to say their position is understandable. The risk of hit and run contractors working for 1/3rd of the negotiated sallaries is just too big.
My prediction is that middle ground will be found eventually after the EU plays some hardball.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Swiss_immigration_initiat...
edit : some clarifications and spellos