6 ms·

Practically speaking, the UK is completely screwed when it gets to choose who to trade with post-brexit. The deal the US will make with the UK will effectively

by morrbo 8y ago

Practically speaking, the UK is completely screwed when it gets to choose who to trade with post-brexit. The deal the US will make with the UK will effectively be too good for the US (US hold all the cards) for the UK to have any form of negotiating power. The US won't "not accept the deal" or "not make a trade deal with the UK" because UK trades with Iran, itt'l be too good for them to pass up. Itt'l be the only thing going that the UK can accept, no matter how bad it is, in an attempt to save face as they can't be seen to go back to trading with the EU especially on worse terms. This is devolving into a Brexit rant, but I can guarantee you that the US doesnt give two shits if the UK trades with Iran, they're rubbing their hands in anticipation of what is to come. UK knows this so is scrambling to do deals with whoever it can as soon as possible. This is my line of thinking anyway.

rusk 8y ago
In terms of trade, how is it exactly they can complement each other? The geography is a bit of an issue for actual physical goods, and I'm not sure what the UK produces that the US needs. Luxury cars maybe, but IIRC most of these marques aren't even owned by the UK any more, except for perhaps the high end. Cheap Bentley's for American oligarchs? Services, maybe - but again most of the core banking will move away from the UK post Brexit and even then there's a lot of overlap in competencies between the UK and USA. There's a lot of smart people in the UK for sure, but there's a lot of smart people in the US. I can't help but think the whole idea of a US/UK trade alliance is borne more of anglophone ideology than any kind of practicalities.
- arethuza 8y ago
  Top exports from the UK to the US, in order, appear to be: cars, pharmaceuticals and mechanical power generators, works of art and refined oil: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44802666 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44802666 Interestingly, the UK exports rather a lot more to the US than it imports from there. Edit: What is worrying is that investment in UK car building has drammetically reduced https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/uk-car-manufacturing-falls-9-investment-plummets https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/uk-car-manufactu...
  - rusk 8y ago
    > mechanical power generators Well I never ... I wouldn't have thought that would be something the US would need to import ... > works of art Doesn't this refer to a lot of the branding work done by the likes of Starbucks, Amazon etc. which then get written off against tax or something (hence value is quite inflated).
    - arethuza 8y ago
      I don't think the UK would be exporting Starbucks or Amazon branding?
      - rusk 8y ago
        They totally would. It's a tax thing. IP transfer happens between national operating units all the time for just this reason.
        arethuza 8y ago
        Yes, transfer pricing - but that's how the parent companies would move profits from the UK to elsewhere by licensing their IP to their legal entities in the UK. Of course, it might be UK brands licensing their IP?
- morrbo 8y ago
  You've misunderstood. Practically speaking, the UK needs to buy shit, the US needs to sell shit. UK has effectively blocked out 1/3 of the world (Europe) from a trade deal because we'd never get one as good as the current free trade agreement with the EU. Our politicians won't be stupid enough to say "we've left the EU, but have made a worse deal with Europe than we had before". Similarly EU won't make a deal with the UK which disallows freedom of movement and other "core" EU values, so any deal made would either require circumstances similar to pre-brexit EU to happen, or would just flat out be a worse deal. Distance really isn't much of an issue at scale, when your cheap stuff comes from China - - edit - to clarify, the point i'm trying to make is that it really doesn't cost much to ship stuff halfway around the world, especially en masse. -, or meat from New Zealand, this isn't much of an argument. This would be a purely US beneficial deal, the UK wouldn't really be bringing anything into the US, other than maybe finance services, specialist products or (i guess) softer products like educational visas? There's quite a big controversy over here at the moment about the possibility of a US trade deal. We are being told that for it to happen we would have to accept terms like chlorinated chicken/steroid injected beef, and then agree to other things like labeling the origin of the product (so you would never really know if you were eating US or UK products). There's a whole other host of subtleties which would degrade the UK whilst being beneficial to the US, just do a bit of googling about the proposed deals.
  - rusk 8y ago
    > when your cheap stuff comes from China Yeah except neither party to this deal is producing "cheap stuff". Both consider themselves to be very much "top tier". > edit - to clarify, the point i'm trying to make is that it really doesn't cost much to ship stuff halfway around the world, especially en masse Yeah, if the stuff is "cheap". Like dramatically cheaper than what you can produce at home.
    - morrbo 8y ago
      lol mate you're really not getting it. You said "the geography is a bit of an issue for physical goods". I'm saying, when you can order a sheep from new zealand, or a USB stick from China, and have it show up a few days or a week later, this isn't really a good argument.
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  There's a few obvious areas. Don't really see it as an opportunity to save face myself. More an opportunity for those who were the driving force behind Brexit (who entirely coincidentally have significant offshore business interests) to create UK buying opportunities. Opportunities that will arise as our livestock farmers compete against terrible US welfare standards. Despite UK population having shown for decades they want better welfare than even EU standards. We'd probably lose CE or BSI marks, environmental protections, EU regional food protections, and the price and generic restrictions within the NHS most likely. I'm not sure even the Tories would dare open us up to US healthcare companies, yet. They'll move as far as they think they can get away with. Then there'll be all the industries that will benefit from harmonisation of UK and US regulatory differences. ie, The US majors will benefit from the GB garage sale of newly failing businesses as Theresa May's fine negotiating team ask for nothing in return except a paper hat. Edit: ps, Bentley are Volkswagen owned.
- pintxo 8y ago
  Sorry, seems there is not much left under UK control Bentley -> Volkswagen Rolls Royce, Mini -> BMW Aston Martin -> Seems to be independent again McLaren -> Half the company is owned by Bahrain Lotus -> Geely (China) Jaguar/Land Rover -> Tata (India)
yukonbound 8y ago
The UK has always had a lot going for it, and the City of London has been the banking capital of the world long before the EU. With them leaving the EU they will become more competitive even if only by having to compete a bit more. The Germans and the French cannot provide the same regulatory framework as is provided by the city. I’m surprised their isn’t more discussion about the German domination of the EU. The current structure is not sustainable, and Britain leaving will make that more evident quickly. I would not be surprised if the Dutch are waiting to see where Britain leeds before jumping ship themselves.
- gpvos 8y ago
  The Netherlands will always stick with Germany. We're a trading nation, and Germany is our main trading partner. Also, Rotterdam is Germany's largest sea port. We may lean a bit more towards the Anglo-Saxon model than other European countries, but we're still continental first and foremost.
tivert 8y ago
> itt'l be too good for them to pass up. Itt'l be the only thing going that the UK can accept Do you mean "it'll"?
growlist 8y ago
> Practically speaking, the UK is completely screwed when it gets to choose who to trade with post-brexit Despite the best efforts of whoever to run the country down the UK is and will remain a rich, advanced country, a world leader in many areas, still blessed with ample natural resources, one of the world's most attractive countries for inward investment, a significant tourist destination, and with a population that loves to spend its money making it an attractive marketplace. None of these things are going to change just because France has got it's knickers in a twist about no longer being able to bleed the UK dry to fund the stupid common agricultural policy.

by morrbo 8y ago

rusk 8y ago

In terms of trade, how is it exactly they can complement each other? The geography is a bit of an issue for actual physical goods, and I'm not sure what the UK produces that the US needs. Luxury cars maybe, but IIRC most of these marques aren't even owned by the UK any more, except for perhaps the high end. Cheap Bentley's for American oligarchs? Services, maybe - but again most of the core banking will move away from the UK post Brexit and even then there's a lot of overlap in competencies between the UK and USA. There's a lot of smart people in the UK for sure, but there's a lot of smart people in the US. I can't help but think the whole idea of a US/UK trade alliance is borne more of anglophone ideology than any kind of practicalities.

arethuza 8y ago
Top exports from the UK to the US, in order, appear to be: cars, pharmaceuticals and mechanical power generators, works of art and refined oil: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44802666 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44802666 Interestingly, the UK exports rather a lot more to the US than it imports from there. Edit: What is worrying is that investment in UK car building has drammetically reduced https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/uk-car-manufacturing-falls-9-investment-plummets https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/uk-car-manufactu...
- rusk 8y ago
  > mechanical power generators Well I never ... I wouldn't have thought that would be something the US would need to import ... > works of art Doesn't this refer to a lot of the branding work done by the likes of Starbucks, Amazon etc. which then get written off against tax or something (hence value is quite inflated).
  - arethuza 8y ago
    I don't think the UK would be exporting Starbucks or Amazon branding?
    - rusk 8y ago
      They totally would. It's a tax thing. IP transfer happens between national operating units all the time for just this reason.
      - arethuza 8y ago
        Yes, transfer pricing - but that's how the parent companies would move profits from the UK to elsewhere by licensing their IP to their legal entities in the UK. Of course, it might be UK brands licensing their IP?
morrbo 8y ago
You've misunderstood. Practically speaking, the UK needs to buy shit, the US needs to sell shit. UK has effectively blocked out 1/3 of the world (Europe) from a trade deal because we'd never get one as good as the current free trade agreement with the EU. Our politicians won't be stupid enough to say "we've left the EU, but have made a worse deal with Europe than we had before". Similarly EU won't make a deal with the UK which disallows freedom of movement and other "core" EU values, so any deal made would either require circumstances similar to pre-brexit EU to happen, or would just flat out be a worse deal. Distance really isn't much of an issue at scale, when your cheap stuff comes from China - - edit - to clarify, the point i'm trying to make is that it really doesn't cost much to ship stuff halfway around the world, especially en masse. -, or meat from New Zealand, this isn't much of an argument. This would be a purely US beneficial deal, the UK wouldn't really be bringing anything into the US, other than maybe finance services, specialist products or (i guess) softer products like educational visas? There's quite a big controversy over here at the moment about the possibility of a US trade deal. We are being told that for it to happen we would have to accept terms like chlorinated chicken/steroid injected beef, and then agree to other things like labeling the origin of the product (so you would never really know if you were eating US or UK products). There's a whole other host of subtleties which would degrade the UK whilst being beneficial to the US, just do a bit of googling about the proposed deals.
- rusk 8y ago
  > when your cheap stuff comes from China Yeah except neither party to this deal is producing "cheap stuff". Both consider themselves to be very much "top tier". > edit - to clarify, the point i'm trying to make is that it really doesn't cost much to ship stuff halfway around the world, especially en masse Yeah, if the stuff is "cheap". Like dramatically cheaper than what you can produce at home.
  - morrbo 8y ago
    lol mate you're really not getting it. You said "the geography is a bit of an issue for physical goods". I'm saying, when you can order a sheep from new zealand, or a USB stick from China, and have it show up a few days or a week later, this isn't really a good argument.
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
There's a few obvious areas. Don't really see it as an opportunity to save face myself. More an opportunity for those who were the driving force behind Brexit (who entirely coincidentally have significant offshore business interests) to create UK buying opportunities. Opportunities that will arise as our livestock farmers compete against terrible US welfare standards. Despite UK population having shown for decades they want better welfare than even EU standards. We'd probably lose CE or BSI marks, environmental protections, EU regional food protections, and the price and generic restrictions within the NHS most likely. I'm not sure even the Tories would dare open us up to US healthcare companies, yet. They'll move as far as they think they can get away with. Then there'll be all the industries that will benefit from harmonisation of UK and US regulatory differences. ie, The US majors will benefit from the GB garage sale of newly failing businesses as Theresa May's fine negotiating team ask for nothing in return except a paper hat. Edit: ps, Bentley are Volkswagen owned.
pintxo 8y ago
Sorry, seems there is not much left under UK control Bentley -> Volkswagen Rolls Royce, Mini -> BMW Aston Martin -> Seems to be independent again McLaren -> Half the company is owned by Bahrain Lotus -> Geely (China) Jaguar/Land Rover -> Tata (India)

yukonbound 8y ago

The UK has always had a lot going for it, and the City of London has been the banking capital of the world long before the EU. With them leaving the EU they will become more competitive even if only by having to compete a bit more. The Germans and the French cannot provide the same regulatory framework as is provided by the city. I’m surprised their isn’t more discussion about the German domination of the EU. The current structure is not sustainable, and Britain leaving will make that more evident quickly. I would not be surprised if the Dutch are waiting to see where Britain leeds before jumping ship themselves.

gpvos 8y ago
The Netherlands will always stick with Germany. We're a trading nation, and Germany is our main trading partner. Also, Rotterdam is Germany's largest sea port. We may lean a bit more towards the Anglo-Saxon model than other European countries, but we're still continental first and foremost.

tivert 8y ago

> itt'l be too good for them to pass up. Itt'l be the only thing going that the UK can accept Do you mean "it'll"?

growlist 8y ago

> Practically speaking, the UK is completely screwed when it gets to choose who to trade with post-brexit Despite the best efforts of whoever to run the country down the UK is and will remain a rich, advanced country, a world leader in many areas, still blessed with ample natural resources, one of the world's most attractive countries for inward investment, a significant tourist destination, and with a population that loves to spend its money making it an attractive marketplace. None of these things are going to change just because France has got it's knickers in a twist about no longer being able to bleed the UK dry to fund the stupid common agricultural policy.