Red Okktober wrote:Fucking hilarious.
Stooo, do you ever have a waking moment when your thoughts aren't occupied by either Brexit or Trump?
Red Okktober wrote:LoL - you are obsessed Stooo.
Do you have EU pyjamas and duvet cover, EU slippers and an EU mug, and posters of Jean-Claude Juncker all over your bedroom walls?
Let’s assume for a moment that it’s April 2019 and the UK has left the EU.
We are in the position that Brexiteers fantasise about and we have no trade agreements anywhere in the world and are trading around the world under WTO tariff regimes. Where would be the very first place we would go to in order to start discussions about a new trade agreement?
Three principles would guide our choice: gravity, comparative advantage, and the ‘dynamic’ gains from trade. Together, they suggest that, if we were developing a
trade strategy from scratch, Britain would be straight on the phone to Brussels.
In the 1960s, Dutch economist Jan Tinbergen discovered that there was a close analogy between Newtonian physics and trade flows. This is intuitive –
it costs less to ship goods between neighbouring countries, and the value of trade between big economies will always be higher than between small ones, simply because large economies suck in more imports.
For every percentage point increase in a country’s distance from Britain, Britain’s trade with that country fell by 0.6 per cent. And for every percentage point increase in a country’s GDP, Britain’s trade with that country grew by 2.5 per cent. If the EU buys just under half of British total exports, but its economy comprises just 18 per cent of world GDP, why does Britain trade so much with it? The answer lies in the proximity of EU member-states – on average, they are only 1,200 kilometres away from Britain.
Meanwhile, the OECD members that are not in the EU – the US, Japan, Australia and so forth – are far more distant, on average, which explains why Britain exports far less to them than to the EU.
Of course, other factors explain why Britain exports less to the ‘BRICS’ emerging economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), despite the fact that they make up more of the world economy than the rest of the OECD. Mainly, it is because their GDP per capita is lower – poorer countries are less likely to buy Britain’s expensive, high value-added exports than richer ones.
Brexiteers want us to tear up our trade agreements and start negotiating new ones. With the end result guaranteed to be worse than what we already have, what on earth is the point?
Stooo wrote:Red Okktober wrote:Fucking hilarious.
Stooo, do you ever have a waking moment when your thoughts aren't occupied by either Brexit or Trump?
Cannydc wrote:
One bloke giving a factual account, calmly and accurately - the other blustering, spouting half-arsed drivel.
Not hard to guess which side each one is on.....
Stooo wrote:Red Okktober wrote:LoL - you are obsessed Stooo.
Do you have EU pyjamas and duvet cover, EU slippers and an EU mug, and posters of Jean-Claude Juncker all over your bedroom walls?
No.
Stooo wrote:
One is also a former trade negotiator for Hong Kong. Jason Hunter is one of the '3 blokes in a pub' who actually have a clue about the shitshow that is awaiting us.
Cannydc wrote:
One bloke giving a factual account, calmly and accurately - the other blustering, spouting half-arsed drivel.
Not hard to guess which side each one is on.....
Ray of Sunshine wrote:Stooo wrote:
One is also a former trade negotiator for Hong Kong. Jason Hunter is one of the '3 blokes in a pub' who actually have a clue about the shitshow that is awaiting us.
Why are you worrying about things that haven't happened yet?
And how would it affect you in any case?
Ray of Sunshine wrote:Cannydc wrote:
One bloke giving a factual account, calmly and accurately - the other blustering, spouting half-arsed drivel.
Not hard to guess which side each one is on.....
The video only shows the opinion of the person who made and posted it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests