4 ms·

There are winners and losers of any trade deal as mentioned in this thread. Some UK sectors will probably carry on with the EU business as usual, others will ab

There are winners and losers of any trade deal as mentioned in this thread. Some UK sectors will probably carry on with the EU business as usual, others will abandon the EU and search for better arrangements with other parties. The question you posed assumes that the EU will continue to be involved with half of the UK's trading activity, which I don't buy.

notahacker 6y ago
> The question you posed assumes that the EU will continue to be involved with half of the UK's trading activity, which I don't buy. The difficult bit to buy, hard as Brexiters have been selling it, is that the reduction in the proportion of trading activity with the EU will be compensated for by an increase in trading activity with countries which are further away, more protectionist and/or poorer, as opposed to just a reduction in trade overall.
- Retric 6y ago
  It’s more than just exports. Regulations, imports from the EU, taxes paid to the EU, and tourists to and from the EU are also part of the equation. So the UK might be better off outside the EU when you ignore trade. Having said that, offsetting some of the drop in EU exports with and increase in non EU exports seems likely and could allow for a net benefit even assuming a net drop in total exports.
  - notahacker 6y ago
    "When you ignore trade" is a pretty spectacular caveat for assessing the claimed economic benefits from not participating in a trade agreement. We've had several years to hear a concrete argument for what regulations need removing and what the benefits would be, and the best we got was Patrick Minford's ambitious "it's likely we would eliminate manufacturing" growth projections based on the assumption the UK removed all barriers to importing anything. Ironically the EU has made more progress in securing FTAs with our list of putative alternative trade partners...
    - Retric 6y ago
      I wasn’t ignoring trading, I am simply saying that looking at trade in isolation isn’t the full story. People suggesting that an increase in non EU trade must be equivalent to the decrease in EU trade may be ignoring what the other side is saying. It’s possible for the increase to exist, it to be less than the loss, and for the UK to be better off. As such some people talking about the likely increase may not be implying it’s a 1:1 replacement for the drop.
      - notahacker 6y ago
        Sure, but the burden of the extraordinary claim that a particular set of reforms impossible under the EU could be more valuable than trade with the EU falls on those making it.
        Retric 6y ago
        Sure, EU trade isn’t going to zero. So I think that comes down to a case by case argument. Generally being part of a larger market is the best option, but individual executions are clearly going to be argued about endlessly.
dagaci 6y ago
> Some UK sectors will probably carry on with the EU business as usual, others will abandon the EU and search for better arrangements with other parties Those sectors could always have chosen to abandon trading with the EU to find better arrangements.

notahacker 6y ago

> The question you posed assumes that the EU will continue to be involved with half of the UK's trading activity, which I don't buy. The difficult bit to buy, hard as Brexiters have been selling it, is that the reduction in the proportion of trading activity with the EU will be compensated for by an increase in trading activity with countries which are further away, more protectionist and/or poorer, as opposed to just a reduction in trade overall.

Retric 6y ago
It’s more than just exports. Regulations, imports from the EU, taxes paid to the EU, and tourists to and from the EU are also part of the equation. So the UK might be better off outside the EU when you ignore trade. Having said that, offsetting some of the drop in EU exports with and increase in non EU exports seems likely and could allow for a net benefit even assuming a net drop in total exports.
- notahacker 6y ago
  "When you ignore trade" is a pretty spectacular caveat for assessing the claimed economic benefits from not participating in a trade agreement. We've had several years to hear a concrete argument for what regulations need removing and what the benefits would be, and the best we got was Patrick Minford's ambitious "it's likely we would eliminate manufacturing" growth projections based on the assumption the UK removed all barriers to importing anything. Ironically the EU has made more progress in securing FTAs with our list of putative alternative trade partners...
  - Retric 6y ago
    I wasn’t ignoring trading, I am simply saying that looking at trade in isolation isn’t the full story. People suggesting that an increase in non EU trade must be equivalent to the decrease in EU trade may be ignoring what the other side is saying. It’s possible for the increase to exist, it to be less than the loss, and for the UK to be better off. As such some people talking about the likely increase may not be implying it’s a 1:1 replacement for the drop.
    - notahacker 6y ago
      Sure, but the burden of the extraordinary claim that a particular set of reforms impossible under the EU could be more valuable than trade with the EU falls on those making it.
      - Retric 6y ago
        Sure, EU trade isn’t going to zero. So I think that comes down to a case by case argument. Generally being part of a larger market is the best option, but individual executions are clearly going to be argued about endlessly.

dagaci 6y ago

> Some UK sectors will probably carry on with the EU business as usual, others will abandon the EU and search for better arrangements with other parties Those sectors could always have chosen to abandon trading with the EU to find better arrangements.