SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
What if they are reading GG?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
What if they are reading GG?
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
I asked previously, but am curious as to where EU law says goods exported to non-eu have to conform to eu standards. Not sure what the logic of that is, if its so.
Baleforce
Ron Henry
As members of the EU, we must apply all EU law.
As not members we have to apply EU law to goods and services traded with the EU, coz they is protectionist.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
Where does it say in EU law that goods for export have to confirm to EU regulation?
If it was that easy, she could have done that 2 years ago. "Nothing has changed" in that regard, the huge majority of Labour MPs are either pro Soft Brexit or pro remain (via 2nd ref.) But the other factor is that all of the firm leave vote amongst the electorate is with the Tory Party and UKIP is in a coma. Going along with Labour moderates to soft-Brexit or 2nd ref. is fine with me and I'll be happy with it, but the leave-means-leave crowd who have been happy to vote Tory may peal off to UKIP. Only needs to bring UKIP a little bit back to life at the expense of Tory votes and The Tories are out of power. So here's hoping!
I don't think so, I saw this article today. It's from a couple of months back but is till valid and explains some of the the voting complexities Labour would face.
https://statsforlefties.blogspot.com/2018/11/do-i-stay-or-do-i-go-labours-brexit.html
That's a good article, thanks for posting it.
Also, I think there is an important comment underneath it, I'll quote it:
YouGov's MRP analysis suggests that many more Labour & target constituencies now line up for Remain than they did in 2016. In fact, all Labour constituencies, including the ones that voted leave, would now support a "final say" referendum. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...abour-seats-back-second-referendum-study-says
What happens to your per-constituency analysis when you use that instead of the estimated 2016 constituency breakdown?
__________________
I would also add that the last real wobble in the polling for the Tories was around the time of Chequers (iirc). This is where a small "betrayal" narrative kicked in and there was a downswing in the Tory Vote and an upswing in the UKIP vote. If May is PM and delivers soft brexit/2nd ref., I expect this to be repeated. In any case, we're still going to have to wait and see what happens with Brexit to get some proper poll movement.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
Is it a shame Corbyn carries such baggage? What would the right and @Scara do without it? The media and powers that be will not let Corbyn's past go. Regardless of what he plans to do - probably not as socialist or extreme as the right fearmonger - the portrayal of him will undermine his work. I've not bothered to go into the details of his manifesto because, like an idolised potential Spurs signing, it probably will never happen.
I don't want to tinkle on anyone strawberies, I would like to see a socialist try some fresh ideas in this country. I have two concerns tho: the ideas are not really as fresh as they should be, his 'revolutionary' side is dated possibly even lacking innovation, and more importantly, the establisment will not let Corbyn succeed. I will back him. I believe in shaking things up, and I don't believe he would wreck the economy. His only chance, imo, is to embrace some Blairite traits, reach out to business, make sure the establishment know they are safe, that socialism doesn't mean productivity or an appreciation for commerce is lost. If he could develop that side to his stance - and more importantly image - then he could succeed. He couldn't be worse than May and a divided, stuck, Tory mess.
I don't want to tinkle on anyone strawberies, I would like to see a socialist try some fresh ideas in this country. I have two concerns tho: the ideas are not really as fresh as they should be, his 'revolutionary' side is dated possibly even lacking innovation, and more importantly, the establisment will not let Corbyn succeed. I will back him. I believe in shaking things up, and I don't believe he would wreck the economy. His only chance, imo, is to embrace some Blairite traits, reach out to business, make sure the establishment know they are safe, that socialism doesn't mean productivity or an appreciation for commerce is lost. If he could develop that side to his stance - and more importantly image - then he could succeed. He couldn't be worse than May and a divided, stuck, Tory mess.
It doesn't, it says that all EU members must obey EU law.
It then separately says that trade with other countries must be done within the trade deals made by the EU as a whole.
Then they will gain a miniscule amount of my respect.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
Clearly this is complex. And judging by your lack of straight answer (when posed before) maybe we’re learning, I certainly am.
What you’re saying doesn’t make sense. If it were true we couldn’t trade with the US. The EU doesn’t have a trade deal with them (or a number of other nations) yet we trade with those nations - with no trade deal.
The original point was, does the EU stop you exporting goods for markets outside the EU? Can you make medical goods for sale outside the EU?
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
It's not at all complex, it's very simple.
- All EU members must apply all EU law all the time.
- Those outside the EU selling outside the EU can completely ignore EU law.
- Anyone selling into the EU will have to follow EU law with regard to those products and services
- unless they already have a trade deal with the EU that negates that
So yes, one could sell medical products outside the EU from the UK, but as the UK is a part of the EU the trade would be covered by 1.
Last edited:
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
It’s a contradictory answer. When you said the EU stopped you selling medical equipment outside the EU it was a mistruth because “one could sell medical products outside the EU from the UK”
OR
You can’t, because of EU law. If so what is that law? Remember you told me this wasn’t complex. It’s simple.
This is the problem with Brexit, sweeping claims are made that don’t stack up. Brexit sadly = snake oil.
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Last edited:
I've never claimed the EU stops me selling anything outside the EU. Not sure where you get that idea from.
Are you getting confused with me claiming that EU membership makes my company unable to compete internationally with those who are not required to apply EU law? That's something I have claimed.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
Yes I believe you said leaving the EU would be a benefit to your business, as you could export more to non-EU nations.
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
I Googled Swiss and EU and it seems they need to impose EU rules on production and in practice they are rule takers is this not the case
Edit site went a bit mad.. Or the whiskey...
https://infacts.org/briefings/swiss-option/
doesn’t have to adopt the social legislation. But in general it does have to adopt the same or equivalent product regulations – and it gets no vote on what those rules are. There is also no dispute mechanism so, if it gets into a fight with the EU over whether its companies have been fairly treated, there’s nothing it can do. The Swiss government has commented that it is “generally necessary to adopt developments of relevant EU law” to keep regulation equivalent. Switzerland also finds itself reacting to EU law in sectors where there are no agreements so as to keep its firms competitive.
What’s more, Switzerland maintains its access to EU markets only insofar as it keeps up with EU regulation. When Brussels changes its rules, Switzerland loses access – until it changes its laws too. That means its companies often suffer a delay in exporting when EU rules change.
.... I take this to say they follow EU as its impossible to not and import to the EU
Absolutely. There's a huge competitive disadvantage to being in the EU - not least their reluctance to trade freely outside the group.
Imports are more expensive, exports are equally hit with tariffs, processing costs are higher. Even hidden costs like lobbying DEFRA and MPs to make them use a sensible level of resistance to arbitrary rules coming from the Borg. My time sat in endless breakfasts and lunches with MPs to convince them that keeping my staff employed should be a priority of theirs, etc.
The cost of being a business in the EU is massive. One that, in my experience, is not even nearly outweighed by the market that membership opens up.
Last edited:
This twitter page may interest some of you, all things EFTA from a left-wing perspective.
https://twitter.com/L_EFTA
https://twitter.com/L_EFTA
The upside is rich(ish) trading partners which is frictionless and from a macro view more sway and less cost on outside trading .. Do you benefit from this ?... If you don't there is a good chance its good overall
I think much of the product/service stuff is more down to their border situation and having to be more closely entwined into a customs union than we would.
If we were to go for EFTA/EEA we would need cross party support to get the bill through, that would mean we wouldn't need DUP votes, which would mean we wouldn't need to be in the customs union.