Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Yeh. So he wants the made up option where he gets Free Trade and No Freedom of Movement... which no other country has
    Algeria
    Chile
    Egypt
    Israel
    Jordan
    Mexico
    Morocco
    South Africa
    South Korea
    Tunisia
    Turkey

    Applied pending final agreement:

    Burundi
    Colombia
    Comoros
    Costa Rica
    El Salvador
    Georgia
    Guatemala
    Honduras
    Iraq(!)
    Madagascar
    Mauritius
    Moldova
    Mozambique
    Panama
    Peru
    Ukraine
    Seychelles
    Vietnam
    Zambia
    Zimbabwe(!)

    Agreed in principle, not yet applied:

    Botswana
    Burundi
    Canada
    Ecuador
    Ivory Coast
    Kenya
    Namibia
    Rwanda
    Singapore
    Swaziland
    Tanzania
    Uganda
    Vietnam

    So, there are more countries with this status than EU members. I guess Swaziland just had a lot of influence, providing more clout to negotiations than we could be able to.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    Algeria
    Chile
    Egypt
    Israel
    Jordan
    Mexico
    Morocco
    South Africa
    South Korea
    Tunisia
    Turkey

    Applied pending final agreement:

    Burundi
    Colombia
    Comoros
    Costa Rica
    El Salvador
    Georgia
    Guatemala
    Honduras
    Iraq(!)
    Madagascar
    Mauritius
    Moldova
    Mozambique
    Panama
    Peru
    Ukraine
    Seychelles
    Vietnam
    Zambia
    Zimbabwe(!)

    Agreed in principle, not yet applied:

    Botswana
    Burundi
    Canada
    Ecuador
    Ivory Coast
    Kenya
    Namibia
    Rwanda
    Singapore
    Swaziland
    Tanzania
    Uganda
    Vietnam

    So, there are more countries with this status than EU members. I guess Swaziland just had a lot of influence, providing more clout to negotiations than we could be able to.
    I gave up on them let them vote whichever way they want it's the media that will decide the result anyway


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Guys, you need to distinguish between free trade, which is attainable (many countries have that), and access to the Single Market, which is not possible without at least sacrificing sovereignty within the EEA.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    BBC is left-wing pro-establishment propaganda.


    Wish the government would sell it off.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    Algeria
    Chile
    Egypt able to.


    None of those have full FTAs like we do currently.

    Only a liar would try to compare the FTA with Non European countries to the one that the UK has.

    The concept that the EU is going to let a country leave and let them have a full FTA without freedom of movement is laughable. It undermines the point of the trade union.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    I gave up on them let them vote whichever way they want it's the media that will decide the result anyway


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You gave up when you realized that the EU isn't going to give a "FULL" FTA without Freedom of Movement.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    None of those have full FTAs like we do currently.

    Only a liar would try to compare the FTA with Non European countries to the one that the UK has.
    If that is so, please explain the differences.

    The concept that the EU is going to let a country leave and let them have a full FTA without freedom of movement is laughable. It undermines the point of the trade union.
    Clearly you think so. You said you thought so because you believe no country has that status at present. But in fact over thirty countries have that status.

    What looks strange to you is that the EU would give a reward (free trade) without demanding a penalty (free movement, federal government). This is a parochially British viewpoint. The continent generally views free movement and federal government as the rewards and free trade as the penalty.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    If that is so, please explain the differences.
    They don't have access to the Single Market. In other words, they cannot sell all of their goods without restriction.

    Did you think Mexico had unrestricted access to the Full Market like the UK does?

    (Original post by Observatory)
    Clearly you think so. You said you thought so because you believe no country has that status at present. But in fact over thirty countries have that status.
    No country has unrestricted access like the UK does without FOM. Wrong again.


    (Original post by Observatory)
    If you look carefully at the list you'll also see that apparent influence is if anything inversely correlated with the probability of getting this kind of deal, e.g. Comoros is on the list but not the USA. I suggest this is because larger, more closed economies are more protectionist, because protectionism causes less harm to them than to smaller countries. Which, if you oppose protectionism, is an argument for not being in the EU!
    Nothing to do with what I said.

    The EU isn't going to let a country leave and then give them unrestricted access without FOM. It undermines the point of the EU.

    FOM = Freedom of Movement.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    All this *****ing from Outers just make me more convinced the Outers know they are going to lose and getting in their excuses early.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    They don't have access to the Single Market. In other words, they cannot sell all of their goods without restriction.

    Did you think Mexico had unrestricted access to the Full Market like the UK does?
    Apparently you don't - why not?

    Frankly I think you're just trying to ******** your way out of a hopeless position.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    Apparently you don't - why not?
    Why are you asking me why? You are the one stupid enough to write that they had an FTA comparable to the UK.

    (Original post by Observatory)
    Frankly I think you're just trying to ******** your way out of a hopeless position.
    Sounds like you cannot answer the basic point.

    IF a Major European country leaves tomorrow, they can get Free Trade + No freedom of movement. Therefore there is no point go the trade union. This is what the EU will agree to!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I agree because the BBC reiceves funding and subsidies from the EU. Obviously it has to appear unbiased or people would call it out, but really it wants to remain.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Why are you asking me why? You are the one stupid enough to write that they had an FTA comparable to the UK.
    You said that no country in the world had free trade with the EU but not free movement.

    This is simply false.

    You are now attempting to create some nebulous and undefined distinction between a free trade agreement and a True Free Trade Agreement. I don't have to respond to this; it's up to you to prove that such a distinction exists and falls as you claim.

    Sounds like you cannot answer the basic point.

    IF a Major European country leaves tomorrow, they can get Free Trade + No freedom of movement. Therefore there is no point go the trade union. This is what the EU will agree to!
    Again, this is how a Little Englander thinks. The continent wants free movement and, most of all, common government. It does not like free trade but is willing to pay that price to get free movement and common government.

    The EU may well want to try to punish Britain to avoid setting a precedent but it has absolutely no pragmatic problem signing free trade agreements with basically anyone who happens to come along, as I have proved with my list, while jealously guarding free movement and participation in the parliament and the commission.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    You said that no country in the world had free trade with the EU but not free movement.
    This is why you don't interupt in a conversation that has nothing to do with you. We were clearly referencing the trade agreement that the UK has with the EU.

    Not random trade agreements that the EU has with Mexico.

    (Original post by Observatory)

    The EU may well want to try to punish Britain to avoid setting a precedent but it has absolutely no pragmatic problem signing free trade agreements with basically anyone who happens to come along, as I have proved with my list, while jealously guarding free movement and participation in the parliament and the commission.
    It has nothing to do with punishment.

    The EU isn't going to give a country full access to the single market without FOM because it undermines the point of the Union. It isn't hard to understand.

    The UK is simply punishing itself if it fails to agree.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    This is why you don't interupt in a conversation that has nothing to do with you. We were clearly referencing the trade agreement that the UK has with the EU.
    How strictly you can define it, the argument is still false because Turkey is actually part of the EU customs union. There is no difference between Turkey's trade relationship with the EU and Britain's; Turkey has implemented exactly the same treaty provisions on trade but does not have free movement or participation in the governmental institutions.

    Not random trade agreements that the EU has with Mexico.
    The significant difference between Mexico's agreement and the UK's agreement is that the EU binds the UK's trade arrangement with third (non-EU) countries; Mexico's doesn't. Most Britons would regard Mexico's deal as better than ours,

    It has nothing to do with punishment.

    The EU isn't going to give a country full access to the single market without FOM because it undermines the point of the Union. It isn't hard to understand.

    The UK is simply punishing itself if it fails to agree.
    The EU gives over thirty countries such access right now. Your point isn't hard to understand, it's just wrong, like 1+1=3.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    How strictly you can define it, the argument is still false because Turkey is actually part of the EU customs union. There is no difference between Turkey's trade relationship with the EU and Britain's; Turkey has implemented exactly the same treaty provisions on trade but does not have free movement or participation in the governmental institutions.

    Oh yes. Turkey left the Union and that came back in? Fail





    (Original post by Observatory)
    The significant difference between Mexico's agreement and the UK's agreement is that the EU binds the UK's trade arrangement with third (non-EU) countries; Mexico's doesn't. Most Britons would regard Mexico's deal as better than ours,.
    The difference is that Mexico doesn't have full access to the market.

    (Original post by Observatory)
    The EU gives over thirty countries such access right now. Your point isn't hard to understand, it's just wrong, like 1+1=3.
    Full Access. No. Another fail.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Ah yes, inconvenient, aren't they, facts?

    Unless it can be demonstrated that EU funding has led directly to 'bias' in the BBC, this is just shrill churlishness.
    Not necessarily.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Oh yes. Turkey left the Union and that came back in? Fail
    If you meant to type, "A hypothetical future hasn't happened somewhere else in the past." instead of "No country has free trade with the EU but not free movement." then your point would be more reasonable but I do not believe you missed that many keys in that particular order.

    The difference is that Mexico doesn't have full access to the market.

    Full Access. No. Another fail.[
    So you say. But since you weren't aware Mexico (or any of those other countries) had an FTA with the EU and you have repeatedly refused to explain how their access falls short, I see no reason to believe you. Again, more likely you are trying to bull**** out of a hopeless position.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Ah yes, inconvenient, aren't they, facts?

    Unless it can be demonstrated that EU funding has led directly to 'bias' in the BBC, this is just shrill churlishness.
    How could that possibly be proved?

    While I haven't noticed the BBC to be especially biased on this issue so far, it's not unreasonable to see the EU funding our state broadcaster as a conflict of interest.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    If you meant to type, "A hypothetical future hasn't happened somewhere else in the past." instead of "No country has free trade with the EU but not free movement." then your point would be more reasonable but I do not believe you missed that many keys in that particular order.
    Turkey does not have a full access to the Union anyway.

    Making your point a fail.



    (Original post by Observatory)
    So you say. But since you weren't aware Mexico (or any of those other countries) had an FTA with the EU and you have repeatedly refused to explain how their access falls short, I see no reason to believe you. Again, more likely you are trying to bull**** out of a hopeless position.
    Wrong again. Read post #118

    Another fail.

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...9#post63022199

    (Original post by DorianGrayism)

    I should also point out that the figure of 44.6% does not include exports that have come as a result EU negotiated agreements with Non EU countries such as South Korea.

    Tbh, he is just grasping at straws. 50 vs 45% is irrelevant. The point is that we are far more dependent on EU exports than Vice versa.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.