Alastair Campbell wants May to cancel Brexit...

[RingoMcCartney]

Jesus you’re seriously hard work. The point I was making is that lots of parts of the world already don’t have free movement and some do better than the UK on traffickers and lots do worse.

WHEN we leave the EU. And WHEN end free movement of people.

A period of time will pass. If AFTER that time, there is evidence that ending free movement of people has HAD no effect on the levels of people trafficking and exploitation.

You will be able to come back to me and say, " Mr McCartney , you're belief that leaving the EU and ending free movement of people of people would help stop exploitation and people trafficking, was wrong. And my belief that it wouldn't, was right. Here's the evidence"

And I'll agree Martin.

Till then I'm afraid it's gonna be a frustrating 5 years for you.

[martin_p]

WHEN we leave the EU. And WHEN end free movement of people.

A period of time will pass. If AFTER that time, there is evidence that ending free movement of people has HAD no effect on the levels of people trafficking and exploitation.

You will be able to come back to me and say, " Mr McCartney , you're belief that leaving the EU and ending free movement of people of people would help stop exploitation and people trafficking, was wrong. And my belief that it wouldn't, was right. Here's the evidence"

And I'll agree Martin.

Till then I'm afraid it's gonna be a frustrating 5 years for you.

I think I’d be far more frustrated if I was unable to form opinions about things based on evidence and experience and just left everything to belief. How do you even know when to cross the road?

Anyway I’m off to bed. Don’t have nightmares about the sun not coming up, all the evidence suggests it will even though it hasn’t happened yet.

[Damo]

Damo, I've read your opinion and taken it on board - I like to know why people voted leave as much as I like to champion the remain cause.

The interesting thing is, there are three camps in all of this. Two camps - one for remain and one for leave - both of which contain people like you and like me - i.e. people who have done their own research, made up their own minds and who will stay in their own camp no matter what the other side says. The immovable ones. I will never be a leaver and you will never be a remainer. Fair enough.

The third camp though is the one that matters. The flexible camp. The ones whose vote wasn't decided on knowledge or experience or research. The ones who voted without knowing what it really meant. And the saddest part is that they voted based on what they read in the papers and what they saw on TV. They followed the big personalities (Farage and Boris) and they swallowed the big soundbites - ask anyone what is the one promise they remember from the debates and I can guarantee it will be £350 million - all of which will go back to the NHS. The same promise Farage reneged on, the day after the result. Theirs was a protest vote against years of Tory austerity. Or the "my life is **** anyway, so I may as well vote to leave - what is there to lose" school of thought.

I wasn't lied to because I understand (most) of the issues. The cruel thing is that the people who will lose out when inflation rises and the cost of food and general living increases, will most likely be those 'flexible voters' who craved some sort of change to their crap lives anyway.

Ok, I'll start with apologising for my opening post towards you. It was rude and unfairly dismissive.
Your clearly in the thick of all of this, and I understand your passion for the subject but I think your wrong when it comes to people voting leave as a protest vote.
I think the people with the crappy lives see this as far more than 2 fingers to the establishment.
They see it as a chance to get back to producing again instead of being forced into unemployment by the national minimum wage and low Labour costs in the eastern bloc

[RingoMcCartney]

I think I’d be far more frustrated if I was unable to form opinions about things based on evidence and experience and just left everything to belief. How do you even know when to cross the road?

Anyway I’m off to bed. Don’t have nightmares about the sun not coming up, all the evidence suggests it will even though it hasn’t happened yet.

The sun came up Martin. Just like it HAS 1000s of time before!

We've HAVEN'T left the EU before, and we HAVEN'T ended free movement of people. So Neither of us know if it will have an effect on stopping people trafficking and exploitation.

As I say, till then, we BOTH only have a view or opinion.

Your analogy using the sun rising, was perhaps the very worst you could have used!

The sun will have to rise around 2500 times before you ( or I ) have any evidence.!!!

[Lancasterclaret]

I now know what it would be like to argue with the Taliban.

[mikeS]

The Tories are torn to bits over Brexit in the cabinet and on the back benches. To even consider leaving without a deal will not do the UK any favours. A high percentage of our income and trade is with the EU and if theres no deal or arrangement in place when we quit - what then?
My guess is there will be a compromise in the end. A compromise much in favour of the 27 remaining EU countries where we'll pay to access the single market, like paying an annual sub. It will come down to a figure of how much the EU will want on a per annum basis. We will all bear that cost, like it or not.

[bennitor]

Ok, I'll start with apologising for my opening post towards you. It was rude and unfairly dismissive.
Your clearly in the thick of all of this, and I understand your passion for the subject but I think your wrong when it comes to people voting leave as a protest vote.
I think the people with the crappy lives see this as far more than 2 fingers to the establishment.
They see it as a chance to get back to producing again instead of being forced into unemployment by the national minimum wage and low Labour costs in the eastern bloc

Damo - no worries. I'm not in the thick of it any longer as I've moved roles but the passion remains.

In my own personal and professional circles, most of the people I know are remainers which is why it is genuinely interesting to hear why people voted to leave. However of those that I've chatted with who did (the occasional taxi driver, friend of a friend etc.) their reasons always seem to be very basic. They haven't considered the economic implications of no deal because they don't understand it. They haven't thought about the single market and free movement of people and whether we can have our cake and eat it because that's too complicated. Instead when you ask why they voted to leave you hear things like "because I want a blue passport instead of a red one" or because "there's a Polish guy I work with and I don't like him" or "because Farage seems like a decent bloke telling all of Europe where to go". There's no depth to their desire to leave - the only thing of substance is a desire for some sort of change.

I don't expect to have a vote opened up to me on the inner workings of tax credits in the UK. I have elected representatives to take care of that for me because I don't understand the ins and outs and ramifications of any changes. And by that logic, that's why the EU referendum should never have gone to the British public in the first place.

[martin_p]

The sun came up Martin. Just like it HAS 1000s of time before!

We've HAVEN'T left the EU before, and we HAVEN'T ended free movement of people. So Neither of us know if it will have an effect on stopping people trafficking and exploitation.

As I say, till then, we BOTH only have a view or opinion.

Your analogy using the sun rising, was perhaps the very worst you could have used!

The sun will have to rise around 2500 times before you ( or I ) have any evidence.!!!

Ok, one last go at explaining!!

You’ve never got up on Thursday 19th October 2017 before, so how can you be sure the sun will come up? The answer is that it’s not the act of getting up on 19th October that’s important but the fact that when you do it will be the morning and we have evidence of what the sun does in the morning. Similarly, it’s not the fact that we’re ending free movement that is important but the fact that after ending it we won’t have free movement. There are plenty of countries that don’t have free movement already so we can use them as evidence of what impact not having free movement will have on trafficking.

[RingoMcCartney]

Ok, one last go at explaining!!

You’ve never got up on Thursday 19th October 2017 before, so how can you be sure the sun will come up? The answer is that it’s not the act of getting up on 19th October that’s important but the fact that when you do it will be the morning and we have evidence of what the sun does in the morning. Similarly, it’s not the fact that we’re ending free movement that is important but the fact that after ending it we won’t have free movement. There are plenty of countries that don’t have free movement already so we can use them as evidence of what impact not having free movement will have on trafficking.

One last go for you Martin.

Give me specific evidence that leaving the EU and ending free movement of people, wont help stop exploitation and people trafficking. On the UK, cos that's what the Mail article was about. Not anywhere else.

Give me time periods on when this evidence was based. From and until. What patterns have emerged since we left. Which areas need improving since we stopped free movement. And which areas our border services have done well in. Since we left the EU and ending free movement of people.

Give it me now.

[dsr]

The Tories are torn to bits over Brexit in the cabinet and on the back benches. To even consider leaving without a deal will not do the UK any favours. A high percentage of our income and trade is with the EU and if theres no deal or arrangement in place when we quit - what then?
My guess is there will be a compromise in the end. A compromise much in favour of the 27 remaining EU countries where we'll pay to access the single market, like paying an annual sub. It will come down to a figure of how much the EU will want on a per annum basis. We will all bear that cost, like it or not.

I'm not sure that even Tory MPs understand that it's not just paying a fee so that we can get access to the EU market. It's also giving the EU access to our free market, which is something more valuable than our access to their market because it's bigger, but which apparently is worth less than nothing.

As far as the trade deal, the current position is that the EU won't talk about it. This makes it impossible to negotiate - all we can do at present is to accept what they give us, or have no deal at all. If (and only if) they agree to talk can we start talking about a practical trade deal.

[UpTheBeehole]

Phil Hogan, the Irish commissioner for agriculture at the EU, warned on Wednesday of the malign influence of the Brexiters within the Conservative party.

“What becomes more obvious day-by-day is that the Brexiteers are hooked on brinkmanship – and have been since the beginning. Unfortunately, their only approach is the tough-guy approach. The hardliners cannot get out of their head the idea that if they bully their way towards the wire, the ‘Union’s nerve will crack’,” he said.

“I fear that in the UK debate, common sense left the building a long time ago. Unfortunately, facts and details are derided by the Brexiteers.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rade-talks

[JohnMcGreal]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rade-talks

Don't worry, they'll all be bending over backwards to do a deal with us any day now. They need us more than we need them, apparently.

[Greenmile]

I'm not sure that even Tory MPs understand that it's not just paying a fee so that we can get access to the EU market. It's also giving the EU access to our free market, which is something more valuable than our access to their market because it's bigger, but which apparently is worth less than nothing.

As far as the trade deal, the current position is that the EU won't talk about it. This makes it impossible to negotiate - all we can do at present is to accept what they give us, or have no deal at all. If (and only if) they agree to talk can we start talking about a practical trade deal.

Here is someone who is "essentially a statistician" who thinks that a market of c60m consumers is bigger than one of c500m.

Who needs experts, eh?

[dsr]

UK exports to the EU = £240bn, EU exports to the UK = £310bn. That's what's bigger.

[Greenmile]

UK exports to the EU = £240bn, EU exports to the UK = £310bn. That's what's bigger.

You need to divide that second number by 27 to make a fair comparison, though. You should really know that as a statistician.

[nil_desperandum]

UK exports to the EU = £240bn, EU exports to the UK = £310bn. That's what's bigger.

We've had this argument so many times, and I believe you're an accountant.
240 divided by 1 = ?
310 divided by 27 = ?
Edit: As greenmile just posted!!!

[Imploding Turtle]

UK exports to the EU = £240bn, EU exports to the UK = £310bn. That's what's bigger.

Can there be a more concise demonstration of your intellectual dishonesty than this?

[UpTheBeehole]

I keep saying it, but just imagine having dsr as your accountant. He's so disingenuous, you'd end up in jail in no time.

[Imploding Turtle]

We've had this argument so many times, and I believe you're an accountant.
240 divided by 1 = ?
310 divided by 27 = ?
Edit: As greenmile just posted!!!

It's even worse when you account for the fact that the EU makes up a far greater proportion of our exports than we do for the EU.
44% of our exported goods and services go to the EU, but only 8% of EU exports go to the UK.

But dsr knows this. It has been spelled out to him numerous times. He just doesn't care because facts don't matter to him. To him all that matters is the lie.

[UpTheBeehole]

It's even worse when you account for the fact that the EU makes up a far greater proportion of our exports than we do for the EU.
44% of our exported goods and services go to the EU, but only 8% of EU exports go to the UK.

But dsr knows this. It has been spelled out to him numerous times. He just doesn't care because facts don't matter to him. To him all that matters is the lie.

To quote Phil Hogan, above,

“I fear that in the UK debate, common sense left the building a long time ago. Unfortunately, facts and details are derided by the Brexiteers.”

[dsr]

You need to divide that second number by 27 to make a fair comparison, though. You should really know that as a statistician.

Britain's imports from the EU are more than Britain's exports to the EU. The fact that there are 27 countries in the EU doesn't make that false. But if you want to divide both figures by 27 to get Britain's average exports to each EU country compared with Britain's average imports from each EU country, I suppose it would be fairt enough, though a bit pointless.

If it was on WTO tariffs, the EU would pay several billion more tariffs on their exports to us than we would pay on our exports to them.

[Greenmile]

Britain's imports from the EU are less than Britain's exports to the EU. The fact that there are 27 countries in the EU doesn't make that false. But if you want to divide both figures by 27 to get Britain's average exports to each EU country compared with Britain's average imports from each EU country, I suppose it would be fairt enough, though a bit pointless.

If it was on WTO tariffs, the EU would pay several billion more tariffs on their exports to us than we would pay on our exports to them.

Each individual EU state wouldn't though, would they? You have to compare like with like.

I'm beginning to believe IT's point that you actually know all this and you're just being totally dishonest.

If they do, in fact "need us more than we need them", why aren't they as desperate as we clearly are to move the negotiations onto trade?

[Imploding Turtle]

Britain's imports from the EU are less than Britain's exports to the EU. The fact that there are 27 countries in the EU doesn't make that false. But if you want to divide both figures by 27 to get Britain's average exports to each EU country compared with Britain's average imports from each EU country, I suppose it would be fairt enough, though a bit pointless.

If it was on WTO tariffs, the EU would pay several billion more tariffs on their exports to us than we would pay on our exports to them.

You're still lying. Stop. You said that access to our market is more important for the EU than access to the EU market is for us. You weren't talking about the EU's trade deficit with us. You were talking about the relative importance.

I'm not sure that even Tory MPs understand that it's not just paying a fee so that we can get access to the EU market. It's also giving the EU access to our free market, which is something more valuable than our access to their market because it's bigger, but which apparently is worth less than nothing.

As far as the trade deal, the current position is that the EU won't talk about it. This makes it impossible to negotiate - all we can do at present is to accept what they give us, or have no deal at all. If (and only if) they agree to talk can we start talking about a practical trade deal.

This is false. It's not even subjectively false. The evidence is simple, pure mathematics. And you know this, yet you continue to peddle this lie. Why?

[dsr]

The EU countries, combined, are exporting £310bn per year tariff-free to the UK. The UK is exporting £240bn per year tariff-free to the EU. Therefore the trade value of the sales from the UK to the EU is less than the trade value of the sales from the EU to the UK. I don't think I can make it any simpler.

[Imploding Turtle]

The EU countries, combined, are exporting £310bn per year tariff-free to the UK. The UK is exporting £240bn per year tariff-free to the EU. Therefore the trade value of the sales from the UK to the EU is less than the trade value of the sales from the EU to the UK. I don't think I can make it any simpler.

And that £240bn per year is far more valuable to us than the £310bn per year is to the EU, because that £240bn represents 44% of our exports whereas the £310bn only represents 8% of their exports. I don't think i can make it any simpler.

[UpTheBeehole]

If the penny ever dropped with dsr he'd become a Remainer overnight.

[dsr]

And that £240bn per year is far more valuable to us than the £310bn per year is to the EU, because that £240bn represents 44% of our exports whereas the £310bn only represents 8% of their exports. I don't think i can make it any simpler.

Or any less relevant. When we're talking about the effect of trade deals or lack of trade deals for Britain and the effect on Britain's economy, it makes no difference how many underlying countries we're dealing with.

[Imploding Turtle]

Or any less relevant. When we're talking about the effect of trade deals or lack of trade deals for Britain and the effect on Britain's economy, it makes no difference how many underlying countries we're dealing with.

I didn't mention underlying countries. You said we're more important to the EU than it is to us. This has been proven false. Yet you continue to "believe" it. And now you're trying to deflect by criticising an argument i've not made, because your lie is becoming too blatant to continue in this thread. I've no doubt you'll pick it up again in a future thread, though.

[Greenmile]

Or any less relevant. When we're talking about the effect of trade deals or lack of trade deals for Britain and the effect on Britain's economy, it makes no difference how many underlying countries we're dealing with.

That's not what we were talking about.

[ClaretEngineer]

I don’t quite get what so hard to understand. Yes 310bn is a bigger number than 240bn. But that 240bn is one members export to the other 27. Where as 27 members total export to the UK is 310bn (average 11bn each). We are far greater loss to the EU than the EU are to us.

But that’s only one country’s import export account. It would interesting to see the other 27 accounts. It would also be interesting to see which market sectors we are currently in deficit in, because I’m sure we could reinvest in our own homegrown production to make a sizeable dent in that deficit.

[Imploding Turtle]

I don’t quite get what so hard to understand. Yes 310bn is a bigger number than 240bn. But that 240bn is one members export to the other 27. Where as 27 members total export to the UK is 310bn (average 11bn each). We are far greater loss to the EU than the EU are to us.

But that’s only one country’s import export account. It would interesting to see the other 27 accounts. It would also be interesting to see which market sectors we are currently in deficit in, because I’m sure we could reinvest in our own homegrown production to make a sizeable dent in that deficit.

For crying out loud.

44% is bigger than 8%

Our exports to the EU are 44% of our total exports. EU exports to the UK are 8% of the total EU exports. Therefore trade with the EU is far more important to us than trade with the UK is to them.
The lie is that in terms of trade we're more important to the EU than the EU is to us. How the hell can that be true when they account for 44% of our exports compared to us accounting for only 8% of theirs?

How is this difficult?

[ClaretEngineer]

Yes. My bad.

I had it the wrong way round.

My sincerest apologies.

[dsr]

For crying out loud.

44% is bigger than 8%

Our exports to the EU are 44% of our total exports. EU exports to the UK are 8% of the total EU exports. Therefore trade with the EU is far more important to us than trade with the UK is to them.
The lie is that in terms of trade we're more important to the EU than the EU is to us. How the hell can that be true when they account for 44% of our exports compared to us accounting for only 8% of theirs?

How is this difficult?

This isn't difficult, turtle. What is difficult is getting you to understand what "value" means. This is your approach to value, fair enough, but what's not appropriate is that you think of all other definitions of value as being lies. You haven't grasped that words in English have different nuances of meaning.

What is the value of EU exports to the UK? £310bn. What is the value of UK exports to the EU? £240bn. I know you call that a lie, but it isn't.

And when it comes to working out tariffs, they base the calculation on the actual value of the deal, not the value per head of population. And when they work out how much UK business will be lost and how much of our imports will instead be made in the UK or imported from elsewhere, the size of population of the EU isn't relevant.

[nil_desperandum]

So to simplify (dsr). How many individual EU countries would take a hit of £240 billion or more?

[Imploding Turtle]

This isn't difficult, turtle. What is difficult is getting you to understand what "value" means. This is your approach to value, fair enough, but what's not appropriate is that you think of all other definitions of value as being lies. You haven't grasped that words in English have different nuances of meaning.

What is the value of EU exports to the UK? £310bn. What is the value of UK exports to the EU? £240bn. I know you call that a lie, but it isn't.

And when it comes to working out tariffs, they base the calculation on the actual value of the deal, not the value per head of population. And when they work out how much UK business will be lost and how much of our imports will instead be made in the UK or imported from elsewhere, the size of population of the EU isn't relevant.

I'm not talking about the size of the EU population. Why do you keep pretending that I am? I am literally talking about the value of our trade.

You said that the trade with UK is more important to the EU than the reverse. That. Is. Not. True. 44% vrs 8% proves it's not true.
So when tariffs are applied those tariffs will affect 44% of our exports but only 8% of the EU's exports.

I find it hard to believe that someone who claims to be an accountant can't grasp such a fundamental a truth as this. Trade with the EU is more valuable to the UK than trade with the UK is to the EU. How is this value measured? It's measured by comparing the relative size of those exports to their total exports. And on top of that fact, when tariffs are applied it will affect us far more than them, because of how much more important they are to us than we are to them.

Maybe you just don't understand the difference between price and value. Price being the same for everyone, value being relative.
£1 in exports to the EU is more valuable to us than £1 in exports to the UK is to them. And that's because they're a much more important export to us than we are to them.

None of this is about population size.

[Rileybobs]

Reading this thread is like watching people repeatedly banging their heads against brick walls. Really dense brick walls.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Reading this thread is like watching people repeatedly banging their heads against brick walls. Really dense brick walls.

And then claiming the brick wall is heading them and it’s a good thing.

[dsr]

I'm not talking about the size of the EU population. Why do you keep pretending that I am? I am literally talking about the value of our trade.

You said that the trade with UK is more important to the EU than the reverse. That. Is. Not. True. 44% vrs 8% proves it's not true.
So when tariffs are applied those tariffs will affect 44% of our exports but only 8% of the EU's exports.

I find it hard to believe that someone who claims to be an accountant can't grasp such a fundamental a truth as this. Trade with the EU is more valuable to the UK than trade with the UK is to the EU. How is this value measured? It's measured by comparing the relative size of those exports to their total exports. And on top of that fact, when tariffs are applied it will affect us far more than them, because of how much more important they are to us than we are to them.

Maybe you just don't understand the difference between price and value. Price being the same for everyone, value being relative.
£1 in exports to the EU is more valuable to us than £1 in exports to the UK is to them. And that's because they're a much more important export to us than we are to them.

None of this is about population size.

Even for you, that's nitpicking. The reason the EU economy is bigger than the UK's is because of population size.

I'm not even trying to tell you that your way of looking at it is wrong. I'm trying to get you to see there are other ways of looking at it.

What's the UK balance of payments deficit with the EU? It's £70bn. You can't turn it into a surplus by dividing the imports by 27 countries - it's a deficit. Balance of payments deficits are usually seen as bad things.

[Caballo]

I'm trying to get you to see there are other ways of looking at it.

And therein lies the problem, it's a continuation of the binary vote. Most people wedded to either remain or leave are incapable of balance or reasoned debate, instead immediately resorting to name calling and mud slinging.

[Bacchus]

I'm torn between whether dsr thinks he's intelligent enough to pull this lie off or whether he genuinely lacks the ability to view the numbers without his Brexit goggles on. A simple analogy:

I owe my 3 year old £1. That £1 represents all her money in the world.
My 3 year old owes me £2. That represents me going out to buy a coffee.

My 3 year old and I then have an argument and decide that neither of us is giving the other one any more money. By dsr logic my three year old has the upper hand in any negotiations, because £2 is worth way more to me than than the £1 is worth to my 3 year old because it's a bigger number. Of course the reality is that the three year old has a tantrum and I just get a beer from the fridge instead.

[dsr]

I'm torn between whether dsr thinks he's intelligent enough to pull this lie off or whether he genuinely lacks the ability to view the numbers without his Brexit goggles on. A simple analogy:

I owe my 3 year old £1. That £1 represents all her money in the world.
My 3 year old owes me £2. That represents me going out to buy a coffee.

My 3 year old and I then have an argument and decide that neither of us is giving the other one any more money. By dsr logic my three year old has the upper hand in any negotiations, because £2 is worth way more to me than than the £1 is worth to my 3 year old because it's a bigger number. Of course the reality is that the three year old has a tantrum and I just get a beer from the fridge instead.

The UK has a balance of payments deficit with the EU. That's it, end of story. It is not a lie. It may be a stat that isn't relevant to your particular agenda, but that's not the same as being untrue.

Using your argument, you can argue that £1 has more value than £2 (because it means more to its owner) or you could argue that £2 is worth more than £1 (because it buys more). I do not see any logic in arguing that either of those points is untrue.

[Imploding Turtle]

Even for you, that's nitpicking. The reason the EU economy is bigger than the UK's is because of population size.

I'm not even trying to tell you that your way of looking at it is wrong. I'm trying to get you to see there are other ways of looking at it.

What's the UK balance of payments deficit with the EU? It's £70bn. You can't turn it into a surplus by dividing the imports by 27 countries - it's a deficit. Balance of payments deficits are usually seen as bad things.

So now population size is relevant? Make your ******* mind up.

No one's turning anything into a surplus. Why are you arguing against something i'm not saying? Oh, yeah. I forgot. You're not interested in accepting the facts. You're just desperately clawing at anything that can be made to look like an argument because contrary to what you claim, you know that we need the EU much more than the EU needs us.

Liars and deceivers like you are destroying this country far more effectively than any immigrant.

[Imploding Turtle]

And therein lies the problem, it's a continuation of the binary vote. Most people wedded to either remain or leave are incapable of balance or reasoned debate, instead immediately resorting to name calling and mud slinging.

There's nothing immediate about my calling dsr dishonest. He has demonstrated it for many years, on two different forums now. It's only since we've been using this board that i've called him out on his blatant dishonesty.

It's not about whether i agree with him politically. It's about his dishonest debate tactics. Just look at how many times he's replied to me pointing out that it's "not about population size", despite first my point having nothing to do with population size, and then he still points out that it's not about population size AFTER i've told him i'm not talking about population size. It's as if he just wants each individual post to look like he's right, in isolation, and that's he's caught someone in an error, even when he hasn't.

Either that or he's just a ******* retard. But when i say that i get into trouble from morons who resort to the "everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot" lie about me. I'm sure you've resorted to that a few times.

[Bacchus]

The UK has a balance of payments deficit with the EU. That's it, end of story. It is not a lie. It may be a stat that isn't relevant to your particular agenda, but that's not the same as being untrue.

Using your argument, you can argue that £1 has more value than £2 (because it means more to its owner) or you could argue that £2 is worth more than £1 (because it buys more). I do not see any logic in arguing that either of those points is untrue.

Yeah, £2 is worth more than £1. Nobody disputes that. It doesn't necessarily follow that the £2 carries more weight in the subsequent negotiation though which is the utterly disingenuous argument that you are trying to make.

If I lost the £2 I'd barely notice. If my 3 year old lost her £1 she'd be potless. The balance of power is clearly not where you are trying to claim it is.

[dsr]

So now population size is relevant? Make your ******* mind up.

If you were that stupid, you wouldn't be able to write proper sentences.

But just in case you are that stupid: Population size is a relevant statistic, but it's not the only relevant statistic, and it's not relevant all the time.

[dsr]

Yeah, £2 is worth more than £1. Nobody disputes that. It doesn't necessarily follow that the £2 carries more weight in the subsequent negotiation though which is the utterly disingenuous argument that you are trying to make.

If I lost the £2 I'd barely notice. If my 3 year old lost her £1 she'd be potless. The balance of power is clearly not where you are trying to claim it is.

I wasn't talking about the negotiations, I was talking about the UK's position after the split. I don't see how the size of the EU is relevant to that.

[Bacchus]

I wasn't talking about the negotiations, I was talking about the UK's position after the split. I don't see how the size of the EU is relevant to that.

You were clearly presenting the numbers to support the they need us more than we need them narrative. The problem is that they don't. Not by % of total exports, not by population. The numbers you presented, in the form that you presented them, in the context of this debate, are meaningless.

[lucs86]

Is dsr saying that if everyone has to start paying 10% (for example) tariff on existing trade then the UK's tariff bill (£24bn) is less than the EU's tariff bill (£31bn), therefore we're at an advantage because 31 is bigger than 24?

[Imploding Turtle]

If you were that stupid, you wouldn't be able to write proper sentences.

But just in case you are that stupid: Population size is a relevant statistic, but it's not the only relevant statistic, and it's not relevant all the time.

Population size might be relevent in answering the question of why the EU is a bigger economy, but it's not irrelevant when determining whose trade is most valuable to whom.

44% of our exports go to the UK. It doesn't matter if we're a population of 70 million or 700 million. That still makes our exports to the EU more valuable to us than the EU's 8% to us is to them.

If you had £100 and had to pay £44 for a train ticket, that ticket would have more value to you than it would to me if I had £1000 and had to pay £80 for the same ticket. Even though my 8% train ticket has a higher price than your 44%, it has less value to me because the price is a much lower percentage of my budget.
Still not convinced? Now imagine you and I both lose our train tickets. Whose situation would you rather be in when you have to buy a new one?
Or who gets hit harder when the price goes up 10% next week because of tariffs? The guy with £920 spare who has to pay an extra £8, or the guy with £56 spare who has to pay an extra £4.40?

[Bacchus]

I think that's about the top and bottom of it, lucs