if Turkey and Iceland have free trade deals with the EU, why wouldn't we?

we're the 5th richest country in the world, too. how is the claim that the UK wouldn't remain to trade freely with the EU if we leave anything more than a scare tactic, or fear mongering?! surely the EU would be telling turkey and iceland "we're not having a free trade agreement with you unless you join us politically/federally"? I understand that we need the EU countries more than they need us (seeing as there is less of us and more of them), but is that *really* going to convince the EU that it is a good idea to not freely trade with the 5th richest country in the world just because, for very logical reasons, we left their political mechanisms?!

if the EU doesn't respect us enough to trade freely simply because we decided to self-determine in our own rational national interest, why on earth should we respect them enough to remain in?! this makes no sense! all this talk of jobs being connected to our membership is totally baseless! if the EU really did block free trade with the UK for the reason of politics, *surely* this would be absolutely terrible for the EU's international reputation? it would be pure imperialism and aggression to do that to a liberal democracy like the UK - it's the message that the UK doesn't deserve both its democracy *and* its free trade with the EU

edit 14.3.16: canada and mexico have free trade deals too*

(edited 8 years ago)

Heil Merkel.

Original post by sleepysnooze

we're the 5th richest country in the world, too. how is the claim that the UK wouldn't remain to trade freely with the EU if we leave anything more than a scare tactic, or fear mongering?! surely the EU would be telling turkey and iceland "we're not having a free trade agreement with you unless you join us politically/federally"? I understand that we need the EU countries more than they need us (seeing as there is less of us and more of them), but is that *really* going to convince the EU that it is a good idea to not freely trade with the 5th richest country in the world just because, for very logical reasons, we left their political mechanisms?!

if the EU doesn't respect us enough to trade freely simply because we decided to self-determine in our own rational national interest, why on earth should we respect them enough to remain in?! this makes no sense! all this talk of jobs being connected to our membership is totally baseless! if the EU really did block free trade with the UK for the reason of politics, *surely* this would be absolutely terrible for the EU's international reputation? it would be pure imperialism and aggression to do that to a liberal democracy like the UK - it's the message that the UK doesn't deserve both its democracy *and* its free trade with the EU

The US and China are the first and second richest countries in the world and they don't have FTAs. The EU provides absolutely no economic benefit if everyone gets a FTA when they throw the toys out the pram and start crying about "sovereignty", it just doesn't work, there'd be no point in having the EU if they gave us a FTA. There are a few small exceptions, mostly countries that they want to bring into the EU.

it would be pure imperialism and aggression to do that to a liberal democracy like the UK

..............No......... it would be maintaining their free market........... I don't get why this is so hard to understand.

There's no benefit whatsoever to the EU from giving us an FTA, and in fact it would damage them economically.

Reply 3

username1530463

6

Original post by sleepysnooze

we're the 5th richest country in the world, too. how is the claim that the UK wouldn't remain to trade freely with the EU if we leave anything more than a scare tactic, or fear mongering?! surely the EU would be telling turkey and iceland "we're not having a free trade agreement with you unless you join us politically/federally"? I understand that we need the EU countries more than they need us (seeing as there is less of us and more of them), but is that *really* going to convince the EU that it is a good idea to not freely trade with the 5th richest country in the world just because, for very logical reasons, we left their political mechanisms?!

if the EU doesn't respect us enough to trade freely simply because we decided to self-determine in our own rational national interest, why on earth should we respect them enough to remain in?! this makes no sense! all this talk of jobs being connected to our membership is totally baseless! if the EU really did block free trade with the UK for the reason of politics, *surely* this would be absolutely terrible for the EU's international reputation? it would be pure imperialism and aggression to do that to a liberal democracy like the UK - it's the message that the UK doesn't deserve both its democracy *and* its free trade with the EU

Iceland has to give free migration to EU members, and Turkey would, if it wasn't so poor. But as they get poorer and the Northern EU countries get richer off global warming, Turkey probably won't have these FTA deals any more.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 4

username1530463

6

Original post by IESY

Heil Merkel.

The Germans have learnt their lesson, please stop. Most neo-Nazis live in the US and the UK, which fought the Nazis, ironically.

Reply 5

sleepysnooze

OP

3

Original post by JordanL_

The US and China are the first and second richest countries in the world and they don't have FTAs. The EU provides absolutely no economic benefit if everyone gets a FTA when they throw the toys out the pram and start crying about "sovereignty", it just doesn't work, there'd be no point in having the EU if they gave us a FTA. There are a few small exceptions, mostly countries that they want to bring into the EU.

so why do turkey and iceland have free trade agreements while being outside of the political institutions? you never answered that. why would they make these arbitrary exceptions? what is their rationale for iceland that wouldn't work for the UK *after* the UK left? the political deterrent argument only works *before* they left, as a threat factor.

.............No......... it would be maintaining their free market........... I don't get why this is so hard to understand.
There's no benefit whatsoever to the EU from giving us an FTA, and in fact it would damage them economically.

how is it maintaining their free market to *not* have a free trade agreement after the UK leaves? and how would it damage them economically? again, you're making claims without making any reference to their validity. economics suggests that all countries, in the long term, benefit from free trade, both the large and the small. that's capitalism - helps the rich and the poor.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 6

sleepysnooze

OP

3

Original post by asmuse123

The Germans have learnt their lesson, please stop. Most neo-Nazis live in the US and the UK, which fought the Nazis, ironically.

if they're prepared to make political threats to liberal democracies via sanctions against their preference for political autonomy, it doesn't seem like they have, actually. but I'm actually the one who's giving them to benefit of the doubt and assuming that they would give us the same treatment as turkey and iceland

Reply 7

sleepysnooze

OP

3

Original post by asmuse123

Iceland has to give free migration to EU members, and Turkey would, if it wasn't so poor. But as they get poorer and the Northern EU countries get richer off global warming, Turkey probably won't have these FTA deals any more.

no they don't - they entered schengan voluntarily. schengan =/= the EU, or else we would also have had to enter schengan.

Reply 8

username1204031

14

Original post by sleepysnooze

so why do turkey and iceland have free trade agreements while being outside of the political institutions? you never answered that. why would they make these arbitrary exceptions? what is their rationale for iceland that wouldn't work for the UK *after* the UK left? the political deterrent argument only works *before* they left, as a threat factor.

I did answer that. Both are/were in accession negotiations to join the EU. Unless you want to leave and then begin negotiations to rejoin, that's why it wouldn't work.

As for a political deterrent, I disagree. If we leave, we'll inevitably suffer for it, and when people see that it'll dissuade other countries from leaving. We'd be the first to go into the unknown and prove how stupid it is. If we leave and they give us free trade, that opens the door for everyone to start leaving.

how is it maintaining their free market to *not* have a free trade agreement after the UK leaves? and how would it damage them economically? again, you're making claims without making any reference to their validity. economics suggests that all countries, in the long term, benefit from free trade, both the large and the small. that's capitalism - helps the rich and the poor.

Do you understand how the EU market works?

Reply 9

sleepysnooze

OP

3

Original post by JordanL_

I did answer that. Both are/were in accession negotiations to join the EU. Unless you want to leave and then begin negotiations to rejoin, that's why it wouldn't work.

so you're saying they only got a free trade agreement because "they're in negotiations to join the EU"? :lol:

worked out well for them, because there's nothing showing that they're about to join.

As for a political deterrent, I disagree. If we leave, we'll inevitably suffer for it, and when people see that it'll dissuade other countries from leaving. We'd be the first to go into the unknown and prove how stupid it is. If we leave and they give us free trade, that opens the door for everyone to start leaving.

you *really* think that all the other countries would leave if we did? what indicators are you looking at? give me some evidence - are other countries eurosceptic like the UK is? (no they're not, by the way) also, you're basically suggesting that the political arrangements in the EU aren't for any real benefit to the countries that are a part of this organisation - so why have them in the first place? I don't understand? who does this institution serve if you're suggesting that everybody doesn't like them! if countries don't like the political arrangements then the EU commission out to sort out its ****! if it's options are "never change and never have a FTA with the UK" or "stop the things that nobody likes" then why are they favouring the former option when it aids nobody?

Do you understand how the EU market works?

yes? the EU is a free trade area which also features free trade with other markets. (here comes the nitpick!)

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 10

Rakas21

21

Both nations have pending applications for EU membership and will likely join in the future.

That said, we would get a free trade deal if we left anyway. The German Finance Minister laid out the fact that we'd have to be in EFTA so single market but free movement and a contribution.

Reply 11

sleepysnooze

OP

3

Original post by Rakas21

The German Finance Minister laid out the fact that we'd have to be in EFTA so single market but free movement and a contribution.

link?

Reply 12

Mahmoud X

2

Original post by asmuse123

Iceland has to give free migration to EU members, and Turkey would, if it wasn't so poor. But as they get poorer and the Northern EU countries get richer off global warming, Turkey probably won't have these FTA deals any more.

I've always wondered about this. As global warming occurs, surely land prices in cooler areas, Siberia especially will shoot up. The Arabic countries will probably go totally broke, especially if electric cars push the price of oil to below $20 per barrel.

Would be hilarious to watch.

Reply 13

KimKallstrom

14

Iceland and Turkey: if there were ever two countries more comparable to the UK I'm yet to hear of them...........

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 14

Alfissti

20

Strange thing, how come no one mentioned Iceland like Norway while not in the EU are both members of the EEA and Schengen agreement. Essentially both these countries pay huge amounts of money for the benefit of access to the EEA and they get little to no say on any EU directives or regulations that they need to be in compliance.

The reality of it, either you're in or you're out, if you're out then deal with it and that means dancing to their tune. There isn't an option to be out but get the same benefit as being in.

Can't wait for the day UK is out of the EU.

Reply 15

mojojojo101

17

This assumption that the EU will allow the UK to gain all the benefits of the free market with none of the cost after Brexit is just ludicrous.

Reply 16

gladders

16

Why is it that people are too thick to know the difference between an easily-obtainable free trade agreement and an impossible-to-attain access to the Single Market?