For seven decades, most Germans idealised Britain much as many Brexiteers idealise Britain’s past

I have forgotten more than you will ever learn about geopolitics, jackass. It is easy to discern that you are an ignorant little punk from reading the nonsense you write.


Talk is cheap and yours isn't worth a solitary dime. ANYONE that believes that the E.U is a good idea for any country that values it's sovereignty is a blithering, card carrying idiot.....and you definitely display yours with pride.

Any European Union state that understands how 450 million people (without Britain) can negotiate with China, the U.S., Russia and India, compared to what a country of even 60 million, knows that the E.U. is not only a good idea, but necessary for survival. That's while the remaining 27 will integrate further without the British fifth column busting balls.


Support your premise that we, the US, refuse to negotiate in good faith with medium sized countries, such as the UK.

The U.S. doesn't negotiate in good faith with anyone, only U.S. interests are considered. What is more of interest to the U.S., a market of 450 million or a market of 60 million people?

But even if it were true, the U.S. receives about 50 billion in UK exports, the EU about 200 billion. Do you think suddenly the UK is going to find a 200 billion market for financial services and automobiles in the U.S.?

Why do you think countries like Switzerland aggregate themselves with the EU in trade deals with large economies?


1. Negotiating in good faith does not mean that you are not aggressively pursuing your interests.

2. The UK does not need to fill the entire EU niche. It merely needs to fill it's own niche. I think that the US, if the UK is more reasonable than the EU, will do just fine in it's trade with the US.

3. Switerland aggregates it's self into the EU because the EU is a trade bloc designed to protect it's internal markets against outsiders.

1. Bullshit. Negotiating in good faith means that if you have a market 4-5 times the market of the country you are negotiating with, you have the leverage.

2. Of course the UK has to fill what it was selling to within the EU. If it doesn't make and export cars to the EU it loses the business and it loses GDP. The only reason Japanese cars are made in the UK is because they could be shipped to another EU state as if it were a shipment within the same country. That will end.

3. Yes, the EU defends its interests and it can because it is a union of nearly half a billion people.

Are you really as naive as you appear to be?
 
Talk is cheap and yours isn't worth a solitary dime. ANYONE that believes that the E.U is a good idea for any country that values it's sovereignty is a blithering, card carrying idiot.....and you definitely display yours with pride.

Any European Union state that understands how 450 million people (without Britain) can negotiate with China, the U.S., Russia and India, compared to what a country of even 60 million, knows that the E.U. is not only a good idea, but necessary for survival. That's while the remaining 27 will integrate further without the British fifth column busting balls.


Support your premise that we, the US, refuse to negotiate in good faith with medium sized countries, such as the UK.

The U.S. doesn't negotiate in good faith with anyone, only U.S. interests are considered. What is more of interest to the U.S., a market of 450 million or a market of 60 million people?

But even if it were true, the U.S. receives about 50 billion in UK exports, the EU about 200 billion. Do you think suddenly the UK is going to find a 200 billion market for financial services and automobiles in the U.S.?

Why do you think countries like Switzerland aggregate themselves with the EU in trade deals with large economies?


1. Negotiating in good faith does not mean that you are not aggressively pursuing your interests.

2. The UK does not need to fill the entire EU niche. It merely needs to fill it's own niche. I think that the US, if the UK is more reasonable than the EU, will do just fine in it's trade with the US.

3. Switerland aggregates it's self into the EU because the EU is a trade bloc designed to protect it's internal markets against outsiders.

1. Bullshit. Negotiating in good faith means that if you have a market 4-5 times the market of the country you are negotiating with, you have the leverage.

2. Of course the UK has to fill what it was selling to within the EU. If it doesn't make and export cars to the EU it loses the business and it loses GDP. The only reason Japanese cars are made in the UK is because they could be shipped to another EU state as if it were a shipment within the same country. That will end.

3. Yes, the EU defends its interests and it can because it is a union of nearly half a billion people.

Are you really as naive as you appear to be?


1. Nope. Good Faith does not imply that you are not pursuing your own interests.

2. Oh, so you are claiming that the EU does not trade fairly with nations that are outside of the EU? Behavior that you attack the US for in #1 but defend the EU for doing.... Standard lefty double standard.

3. Agreed. THe EU is a trade bloc that practices predatory trade.
 
Oh, by the way, 17,000,000 people voted to leave (and some of those just voted against Cameron), out of a total of 45,766,000 people allowed to vote in the UK. Most didn't bother to vote one way or the other because of apathy or they thought it was a waste of time and a foregone conclusion that we wouldn't be so monumentaly stupid as to vote leave. They were wrong, and now the rest of us have to live with the consequences. I voted remain, by the way.

You are the one that is "monumentally stupid" for wanting to remain in an agreement that waters down if not outright dissolves the sovereignty of your country and places the power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats placed there as agents of the IMF and BIS. Do you enjoy the current debt slavery system?

Oh, do tell how our "sovereignty was being dissolved? Clearly you have either no idea, or an outdated idea on how the EU works.


I know exactly how it works, the purpose for it and the end game. You, on the other hand, don't.
Sooo...is it a secret then? Or are you just bloviating because you've got nothing to informative to say?


Why don't you do a little reading about it? The rules and regulations put in place by this alleged "fair trade" agreement did nothing but decimate small businesses while helping the big multi-national corporations. Want to start a business in the E.U? The red tapes that have to be cut and the costs for them totally discourages anyone from trying to open one. The "masters" of the E.U are nothing but a bunch of mafia bosses.
Economically one of the most important things is to protect the balance of EU. If everyone flew as fast as they can as far as they can with no regulations, the bloc would crash and EU wouldn't be the economical success it now is.

And economical success is not stuffing as much money in your pocket now as you can, but to make sure the money keeps flowing regularly through every place.

It is also a safety net for the unlucky. As well as to all when the world economy crashes.
 
Any European Union state that understands how 450 million people (without Britain) can negotiate with China, the U.S., Russia and India, compared to what a country of even 60 million, knows that the E.U. is not only a good idea, but necessary for survival. That's while the remaining 27 will integrate further without the British fifth column busting balls.


Support your premise that we, the US, refuse to negotiate in good faith with medium sized countries, such as the UK.

The U.S. doesn't negotiate in good faith with anyone, only U.S. interests are considered. What is more of interest to the U.S., a market of 450 million or a market of 60 million people?

But even if it were true, the U.S. receives about 50 billion in UK exports, the EU about 200 billion. Do you think suddenly the UK is going to find a 200 billion market for financial services and automobiles in the U.S.?

Why do you think countries like Switzerland aggregate themselves with the EU in trade deals with large economies?


1. Negotiating in good faith does not mean that you are not aggressively pursuing your interests.

2. The UK does not need to fill the entire EU niche. It merely needs to fill it's own niche. I think that the US, if the UK is more reasonable than the EU, will do just fine in it's trade with the US.

3. Switerland aggregates it's self into the EU because the EU is a trade bloc designed to protect it's internal markets against outsiders.

1. Bullshit. Negotiating in good faith means that if you have a market 4-5 times the market of the country you are negotiating with, you have the leverage.

2. Of course the UK has to fill what it was selling to within the EU. If it doesn't make and export cars to the EU it loses the business and it loses GDP. The only reason Japanese cars are made in the UK is because they could be shipped to another EU state as if it were a shipment within the same country. That will end.

3. Yes, the EU defends its interests and it can because it is a union of nearly half a billion people.

Are you really as naive as you appear to be?


1. Nope. Good Faith does not imply that you are not pursuing your own interests.

2. Oh, so you are claiming that the EU does not trade fairly with nations that are outside of the EU? Behavior that you attack the US for in #1 but defend the EU for doing.... Standard lefty double standard.

3. Agreed. THe EU is a trade bloc that practices predatory trade.
You are giving the impression that you don't understand any of this. It's not that complicated if you think about it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app
 
Oh, by the way, 17,000,000 people voted to leave (and some of those just voted against Cameron), out of a total of 45,766,000 people allowed to vote in the UK. Most didn't bother to vote one way or the other because of apathy or they thought it was a waste of time and a foregone conclusion that we wouldn't be so monumentaly stupid as to vote leave. They were wrong, and now the rest of us have to live with the consequences. I voted remain, by the way.

You are the one that is "monumentally stupid" for wanting to remain in an agreement that waters down if not outright dissolves the sovereignty of your country and places the power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats placed there as agents of the IMF and BIS. Do you enjoy the current debt slavery system?

Oh, do tell how our "sovereignty was being dissolved? Clearly you have either no idea, or an outdated idea on how the EU works.


I know exactly how it works, the purpose for it and the end game. You, on the other hand, don't.
Sooo...is it a secret then? Or are you just bloviating because you've got nothing to informative to say?


Why don't you do a little reading about it? The rules and regulations put in place by this alleged "fair trade" agreement did nothing but decimate small businesses while helping the big multi-national corporations. Want to start a business in the E.U? The red tapes that have to be cut and the costs for them totally discourages anyone from trying to open one. The "masters" of the E.U are nothing but a bunch of mafia bosses.

I don't need to, I own one. Small and Medium businesses (SMEs) have thrived in the U.K while we've been in the E.U. recording a 59% rise in numbers since 2000. In fact the biggest threat to the small and Medium sized business has been Brexit. The recent collapse in the value of the Pound compared with other currencies, means costs have rocketed for SMEs. "Red tape" is more of a burden to larger companies than small ones, who can normally adapt faster.
 
Support your premise that we, the US, refuse to negotiate in good faith with medium sized countries, such as the UK.

The U.S. doesn't negotiate in good faith with anyone, only U.S. interests are considered. What is more of interest to the U.S., a market of 450 million or a market of 60 million people?

But even if it were true, the U.S. receives about 50 billion in UK exports, the EU about 200 billion. Do you think suddenly the UK is going to find a 200 billion market for financial services and automobiles in the U.S.?

Why do you think countries like Switzerland aggregate themselves with the EU in trade deals with large economies?


1. Negotiating in good faith does not mean that you are not aggressively pursuing your interests.

2. The UK does not need to fill the entire EU niche. It merely needs to fill it's own niche. I think that the US, if the UK is more reasonable than the EU, will do just fine in it's trade with the US.

3. Switerland aggregates it's self into the EU because the EU is a trade bloc designed to protect it's internal markets against outsiders.

1. Bullshit. Negotiating in good faith means that if you have a market 4-5 times the market of the country you are negotiating with, you have the leverage.

2. Of course the UK has to fill what it was selling to within the EU. If it doesn't make and export cars to the EU it loses the business and it loses GDP. The only reason Japanese cars are made in the UK is because they could be shipped to another EU state as if it were a shipment within the same country. That will end.

3. Yes, the EU defends its interests and it can because it is a union of nearly half a billion people.

Are you really as naive as you appear to be?


1. Nope. Good Faith does not imply that you are not pursuing your own interests.

2. Oh, so you are claiming that the EU does not trade fairly with nations that are outside of the EU? Behavior that you attack the US for in #1 but defend the EU for doing.... Standard lefty double standard.

3. Agreed. THe EU is a trade bloc that practices predatory trade.
You are giving the impression that you don't understand any of this. It's not that complicated if you think about it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app



That would be the Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Ridicule. Your post is invalid and proof that YOU know that you can't refute anything I said honestly.

Yet, you hold to a position that you know is false.

What is your motive to support a position that you know is false?
 
I know that you are quick to take offence,......... but it really isn't that difficult. A trading block with 500m members has lots more pull than a country with 70m. They will be able to dictate the terms on all of it. That's it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app
 
Any European Union state that understands how 450 million people (without Britain) can negotiate with China, the U.S., Russia and India, compared to what a country of even 60 million, knows that the E.U. is not only a good idea, but necessary for survival. That's while the remaining 27 will integrate further without the British fifth column busting balls.


Support your premise that we, the US, refuse to negotiate in good faith with medium sized countries, such as the UK.

The U.S. doesn't negotiate in good faith with anyone, only U.S. interests are considered. What is more of interest to the U.S., a market of 450 million or a market of 60 million people?

But even if it were true, the U.S. receives about 50 billion in UK exports, the EU about 200 billion. Do you think suddenly the UK is going to find a 200 billion market for financial services and automobiles in the U.S.?

Why do you think countries like Switzerland aggregate themselves with the EU in trade deals with large economies?


1. Negotiating in good faith does not mean that you are not aggressively pursuing your interests.

2. The UK does not need to fill the entire EU niche. It merely needs to fill it's own niche. I think that the US, if the UK is more reasonable than the EU, will do just fine in it's trade with the US.

3. Switerland aggregates it's self into the EU because the EU is a trade bloc designed to protect it's internal markets against outsiders.

1. Bullshit. Negotiating in good faith means that if you have a market 4-5 times the market of the country you are negotiating with, you have the leverage.

2. Of course the UK has to fill what it was selling to within the EU. If it doesn't make and export cars to the EU it loses the business and it loses GDP. The only reason Japanese cars are made in the UK is because they could be shipped to another EU state as if it were a shipment within the same country. That will end.

3. Yes, the EU defends its interests and it can because it is a union of nearly half a billion people.

Are you really as naive as you appear to be?


1. Nope. Good Faith does not imply that you are not pursuing your own interests.

2. Oh, so you are claiming that the EU does not trade fairly with nations that are outside of the EU? Behavior that you attack the US for in #1 but defend the EU for doing.... Standard lefty double standard.

3. Agreed. THe EU is a trade bloc that practices predatory trade.

The EU tries to get the best deal possible for the EU, the best deal is by definition an unfair deal for the party that has a less powerful bargaining position.

The EU is a trading bloc that practices policies that are in the EU's interest. It certainly not to give a foreign country a better, or even equal, deal in terms of market access than it does among its member states. That could be called predatory. The U.S. does the same.

What is "lefty" about stating fact?
 
I know that you are quick to take offence,......... but it really isn't that difficult. A trading block with 500m members has lots more pull than a country with 70m. They will be able to dictate the terms on all of it. That's it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app


A trading bloc that is expecting Trump to be their bitch like that last 10 presidents is going to get very disappointed while an UK that is willing to do actual Mutually Beneficial Trade, will be welcomed with open arms.

The choice is yours.
 
Support your premise that we, the US, refuse to negotiate in good faith with medium sized countries, such as the UK.

The U.S. doesn't negotiate in good faith with anyone, only U.S. interests are considered. What is more of interest to the U.S., a market of 450 million or a market of 60 million people?

But even if it were true, the U.S. receives about 50 billion in UK exports, the EU about 200 billion. Do you think suddenly the UK is going to find a 200 billion market for financial services and automobiles in the U.S.?

Why do you think countries like Switzerland aggregate themselves with the EU in trade deals with large economies?


1. Negotiating in good faith does not mean that you are not aggressively pursuing your interests.

2. The UK does not need to fill the entire EU niche. It merely needs to fill it's own niche. I think that the US, if the UK is more reasonable than the EU, will do just fine in it's trade with the US.

3. Switerland aggregates it's self into the EU because the EU is a trade bloc designed to protect it's internal markets against outsiders.

1. Bullshit. Negotiating in good faith means that if you have a market 4-5 times the market of the country you are negotiating with, you have the leverage.

2. Of course the UK has to fill what it was selling to within the EU. If it doesn't make and export cars to the EU it loses the business and it loses GDP. The only reason Japanese cars are made in the UK is because they could be shipped to another EU state as if it were a shipment within the same country. That will end.

3. Yes, the EU defends its interests and it can because it is a union of nearly half a billion people.

Are you really as naive as you appear to be?


1. Nope. Good Faith does not imply that you are not pursuing your own interests.

2. Oh, so you are claiming that the EU does not trade fairly with nations that are outside of the EU? Behavior that you attack the US for in #1 but defend the EU for doing.... Standard lefty double standard.

3. Agreed. THe EU is a trade bloc that practices predatory trade.

The EU tries to get the best deal possible for the EU, the best deal is by definition an unfair deal for the party that has a less powerful bargaining position.

The EU is a trading bloc that practices policies that are in the EU's interest. It certainly not to give a foreign country a better, or even equal, deal in terms of market access than it does among its member states. That could be called predatory. The U.S. does the same.

What is "lefty" about stating fact?


1. So, you are attacking the US for supposedly pursuing it's interests while lauding the EU for doing the same.

2. The US has NOT been aggressively pursuing it's interests because of it's ideological and corrupt reasons for supporting "Free Trade". Also, residual Cold War policies.

3. If the goal of trade blocs like the EU are to benefit at the expense of others, ie give them "unfair" deals, then fuck them. Why trade with people that you know are out to fuck you?

4. If the UK is willing to negotiate in good faith with a goal of mutually beneficial trade, Trump and the US will be open to that, not looking to fuck them. At his point, with recent history as the norm, being fucked LESS would look good the to the US.
 
I know that you are quick to take offence,......... but it really isn't that difficult. A trading block with 500m members has lots more pull than a country with 70m. They will be able to dictate the terms on all of it. That's it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app


A trading bloc that is expecting Trump to be their bitch like that last 10 presidents is going to get very disappointed while an UK that is willing to do actual Mutually Beneficial Trade, will be welcomed with open arms.

The choice is yours.
There are two places here. The world as it is and the world that you are imagining.

Where does an "America First" policy make allowances for broken Britain ?

The desperation of this awful government is growing and we will get the shitty end of the stick with whoever we deal with.
 
I know that you are quick to take offence,......... but it really isn't that difficult. A trading block with 500m members has lots more pull than a country with 70m. They will be able to dictate the terms on all of it. That's it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app


A trading bloc that is expecting Trump to be their bitch like that last 10 presidents is going to get very disappointed while an UK that is willing to do actual Mutually Beneficial Trade, will be welcomed with open arms.

The choice is yours.
There are two places here. The world as it is and the world that you are imagining.

Where does an "America First" policy make allowances for broken Britain ?
...


Note the use of the word "First" instead of "ONly".

The US government, will, RIGHTFULLY, be representing AMERICAN interests in any trade deals it makes with the UK, as it should.


That does not mean that we will be predatory assholes like the EU has been.

Offer Mutually Beneficial Trade, and, especially contrasted to the last 50 years, it will look like a GIFT to even American First Americans.


Do you think your nation can do it? Can they be NOT assholes? Or even LESS of assholes?
 
I know that you are quick to take offence,......... but it really isn't that difficult. A trading block with 500m members has lots more pull than a country with 70m. They will be able to dictate the terms on all of it. That's it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app


A trading bloc that is expecting Trump to be their bitch like that last 10 presidents is going to get very disappointed while an UK that is willing to do actual Mutually Beneficial Trade, will be welcomed with open arms.

The choice is yours.
There are two places here. The world as it is and the world that you are imagining.

Where does an "America First" policy make allowances for broken Britain ?
...


Note the use of the word "First" instead of "ONly".

The US government, will, RIGHTFULLY, be representing AMERICAN interests in any trade deals it makes with the UK, as it should.


That does not mean that we will be predatory assholes like the EU has been.

Offer Mutually Beneficial Trade, and, especially contrasted to the last 50 years, it will look like a GIFT to even American First Americans.


Do you think your nation can do it? Can they be NOT assholes? Or even LESS of assholes?

How is the EU any more predatory than the U.S.

"the EU imports more from developing countries than the USA, Canada, Japan and China put together.."


  • The average applied tariff for goods imported into the EU is very low. More than 70% of imports enter the EU at zero or reduced tariffs."
EU position in world trade - Trade - European Commission
 

Forum List

Back
Top