"Wolfgang Schwanke" wrote in message
...
"tim..."
wrote in :

in Schengen or otherwise, EU rules forbid us from excluding entry for
another EU citizen except in very exceptional circumstances.

There are exceptions. After the eastern countries joined the EU, there
were agreements that the right of their citizens to settle down in
certain western countries was limited for a number of years.

That period has long gone

It is now an irrelevance

They could
freely come as tourists, but not as workers. As far as I know the UK
did not take part in that agreement, so for example Poles had full
rights to settle down in the UK from the start, but not for example in
Germany. That is a decision the UK made.

Agreed, but it is not the current problem

It is a dead parrot of an argument (5 minutes or the full hour)

tim

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:35:32 +0100, "JohnD" wrote:

"Optimist" wrote in message
.. .

Leaving the EU will save £10 billion a year net so lack of money need not
be an issue.

How does that work then? On the assumption that joining eg EFTA will not
require a considerable annual contribution from the UK? Seriously?

This, in a nutshell, is the outright lie that too many gullible would-be
Brexiteers have been sold. If the UK were to have a Norway-style
relationship to the EU then the likely annual contribution (on an equivalent
per capita basis) would be ca £8B, even assuming that the UK wasn't required
to pay some punitive rate. (Plus accepting most, if not all, of the 4
freedoms.)

Forgetting about EFTA altogether and regressing to plain WTO arrangements
really isn't a viable option either, for anyone with enough patience and
interest see eg:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...sury-committee

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...sury-committee


Why a Norway-style arrangement? Much better is we get tariff-free access to EU market in return for
tariff-free access to UK market. No freedom of movement, no subsidies to EU.

If EU does not agree, WTO tariffs apply. German industrialists and French farmers would be up in
arms, so EU will cave in. If not, tough, EU dole queues get longer.

Meanwhile UK negotiates trade deals with rest of world (there have been approaches already).

UK wins.

"Optimist" wrote in message
...

Why a Norway-style arrangement? Much better is we get tariff-free access to
EU market in return for
tariff-free access to UK market. No freedom of movement, no subsidies to
EU.

If EU does not agree, WTO tariffs apply. German industrialists and French
farmers would be up in
arms, so EU will cave in. If not, tough, EU dole queues get longer.

Meanwhile UK negotiates trade deals with rest of world (there have been
approaches already).

UK wins.
=========

Dream on - hope you enjoy your make-believe world.

Optimist wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:35:32 +0100, "JohnD" wrote:

"Optimist" wrote in message
...

Leaving the EU will save £10 billion a year net so lack of money need not
be an issue.

How does that work then? On the assumption that joining eg EFTA will not
require a considerable annual contribution from the UK? Seriously?

This, in a nutshell, is the outright lie that too many gullible would-be
Brexiteers have been sold. If the UK were to have a Norway-style
relationship to the EU then the likely annual contribution (on an equivalent
per capita basis) would be ca £8B, even assuming that the UK wasn't required
to pay some punitive rate. (Plus accepting most, if not all, of the 4
freedoms.)

Forgetting about EFTA altogether and regressing to plain WTO arrangements
really isn't a viable option either, for anyone with enough patience and
interest see eg:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...sury-committee

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...sury-committee

Why a Norway-style arrangement? Much better is we get tariff-free access
to EU market in return for
tariff-free access to UK market. No freedom of movement, no subsidies to EU.

Almost certainly the rEU won't go for that.

If EU does not agree, WTO tariffs apply. German industrialists and
French farmers would be up in
arms, so EU will cave in. If not, tough, EU dole queues get longer.

Meanwhile UK negotiates trade deals with rest of world (there have been
approaches already).

When was the last time the UK negotiated a trade deal? The various
countries of the world are queueing up to screw over a desperate Britain
that needs trade deals fast and has no experience at how to negotiate them.

Robin

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message

al-september.org...
Optimist wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:46:28 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Optimist wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:29:11 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:11:32 on Fri, 15
Jul 2016, Graham Murray remarked:

irrespective of the vote the UK will remain a member of the EU for
at least 2 years and until we actually leave we will continue to
enjoy the benefits, and endure the downsides, of EU membership.

I don't think we'll continue to have the benefit of influencing any
future EU legislation, including those which will affect us for
ever in a "Norway solution".

Yes, from now and till the end of 2018 we will continue to bear all
the costs of EU membership, but the benefits will dwindle. For
example, our participation in new EU funded research projects has
already fizzled out, where we were previously disproportionately
represented.

Then the shortfall should be paid by the UK treasury, and deducted
from the amount paid to Brussels.

It's not so simple. Countries are not rewarded with research
participation based on their EU contributions. They are included
because their universities are appropriate participants. We have the
best EU universities and so were included disproportionately; now,
knowing we will soon be gone, our universities are not considered for
inclusion in new EU-funded projects, as their work may not be funded
after 2018.

Same answer - fund our OWN universities from the amount we pay in EU
contributions.

Which will cost us more, and exclude us from multi-national EU research
projects.

You've already said (correctly) that the UK has the best (by a very
long way) universities in the EU

do you really think that, in the long term, they are going to be
excluded from cross country research projects because of some
political argy bargy?

Yes. You just don't understand what the lack of free movement means in terms
of the hassle involved in getting people from abroad involved, do you?
Instead of just working with the best people in the field you have to jump
through so many hoops that most people won't bother. Look at the situation
40 years ago.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 10:19:40 on Fri, 15 Jul
2016, tim... remarked:
If, as I fear, Mrs. May is willing to accept free movement
in exchange for free access,

ISTM that the team she has put in place will not accept this.

The EU really has its head in the sand over this. It really does seem
to think that we will roll over and ask to have our tummy tickled. The
sooner it gets to understand that we wont, the better it will be for
everyone (UK/EU/ROW). It really does need to offer sensible concessions
on FoM or I think that our negotiators really will walk away.

In which case it's "hello WTO". Is that what you want?

as per my earlier post:

The threat of that solution should make the EU see some sense, as
they have as much to lose from that solution as we do.

This mantra that they cry "free trade requires free movement" is
patent nonsense as they have agreed a free trade agreement with
Canada that doesn't have free movement. They are not intrinsically
linked in any way at all except in the minds of a few ideological
nutcases.

The situation has become intolerable for a large percentage of the
population.

What situation?

Influx of immigrants.

I can see you missed your vocation in an earlier age to be a colonial
administrator.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (bob) wrote:

Optimist wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:35:32 +0100, "JohnD"
wrote:

"Optimist" wrote in message
...

Leaving the EU will save £10 billion a year net so lack of money need
not be an issue.

How does that work then? On the assumption that joining eg EFTA will
not require a considerable annual contribution from the UK? Seriously?

This, in a nutshell, is the outright lie that too many gullible
would-be Brexiteers have been sold. If the UK were to have a
Norway-style relationship to the EU then the likely annual contribution
(on an equivalent per capita basis) would be ca £8B, even assuming that
the UK wasn't required to pay some punitive rate. (Plus accepting most,
if not all, of the 4 freedoms.)

Forgetting about EFTA altogether and regressing to plain WTO
arrangements really isn't a viable option either, for anyone with
enough patience and interest see eg:


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...-treasury-comm
ittee


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...-treasury-comm
ittee
Why a Norway-style arrangement? Much better is we get tariff-free
access to EU market in return for tariff-free access to UK market. No
freedom of movement, no subsidies to EU.

Almost certainly the rEU won't go for that.

If EU does not agree, WTO tariffs apply. German industrialists and
French farmers would be up in arms, so EU will cave in. If not, tough,
EU dole queues get longer.

Meanwhile UK negotiates trade deals with rest of world (there have been
approaches already).

When was the last time the UK negotiated a trade deal? The various
countries of the world are queueing up to screw over a desperate Britain
that needs trade deals fast and has no experience at how to negotiate
them.

And all the savings from EU budget contributions and more will be spent to
compensate for the costs of being outside the single market. Delusional!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 17:15:12 -0500
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:31:24 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:12:20 on Fri, 15 Jul
2016, tim... remarked:
A recent opinion poll showed about 2 supporting remaining in the
single market

so why did they vote to leave then?

what have they gained if we just sign straight back up to the single
market paying in 250 million pounds per week (and getting no subsidies
back)

Nothing. That's the tragedy.

Hopefully they'll forget all about the free trade area, we'll pay tarifs
and be done with it. I don't want any ties to that corrupt beaurocracy.

See you in the dole queue, then. It's TRADE that pays our wages and
pensions. The more the better.

You do realise we already trade with countries outside the EU?

If the UK loses bank passporting then half the London banking business will
go and with it the taxes that pay for our services.

We'll see.

--
Spud

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 08:43:27 +0200
Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
wrote in :

Not to mention the dire warnings about the collapse of the pound.

No-one has warned that. If anything, the Euro is in danger of collapse,
as it depends on the functioning of the EU institutions. Any exit puts
those potentially in peril.

Also ironically Osborne only last year was suggesting that
perhaps it would be good if the pound did drop to aid exports.

It's not as simple, there are winners and losers. A drop of your local
currency is good for companies who sell abroad, but bad for conumsers.

Its about time a brake was put on consumer society. People by way too much
crap they don't need, most of which eventually ends up in landfill.

--
Spud

"JohnD" wrote in message
...
"Optimist" wrote in message
...

Why a Norway-style arrangement? Much better is we get tariff-free access
to EU market in return for
tariff-free access to UK market. No freedom of movement, no subsidies to
EU.

If EU does not agree, WTO tariffs apply. German industrialists and French
farmers would be up in
arms, so EU will cave in. If not, tough, EU dole queues get longer.

Meanwhile UK negotiates trade deals with rest of world (there have been
approaches already).

UK wins.
=========

Dream on - hope you enjoy your make-believe world.

You can dis it as much as you like, you have to live in it too now.

If you don't engage with the process you will get the worst of all worlds

tim