|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Nov 11, 2022 8:22:04 GMT
They want to slow everything down to punish us for leaving. I think it's just more proof we were right to leave. What obstacles have the EU put in the way of the UK trading with it that don't apply to other third-country states? Will you please list them? Is it your contention that the EU is punishing the UK by treating it as a third-country? No. The problem is that the EU is "working to rule" when dealing with UK imports. They're looking for problems and turning back any lorries that they deem to have got their documentation wrong - like the example I gave. There was an article in the Times a few months ago which listed a whole load of trivial reasons that had been used to stop imports. Another example is the "border" between N. Ireland and Britain. Our exports to NI constitute 0.5% of imports into the Single Market. Yet the EU evotes 20% of its checks to this border alone. The EU is determined to make everything as difficult as possible for the UK. If you don't understand this you're an idiot. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 11, 2022 8:49:00 GMT
I think you're confusing neo-colonialism with being saintly. I think you're a typical populist - you are entirely cynical and you don't believe there are any politicians who are capable of doing any deed unless it profits themselves. Fine. But it's a fact that the EU does not impose tariffs on developing African countries. That is philanthropy, not neo-colonialism. So, the African who wrote that article I linked to is also cynical? He and others like him should believe what the EU are doing to them is philanthropy because you say the EU have the best interests of Africans at heart? You believe the UK will rejoin the CU and SM soon, and you believe the EU adopt a philanthropic policy towards Africa for their raw materials. You think I am a populist, I think you are deluded. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 9:09:57 GMT
Erm, the EU standardises laws because irregular laws and standards are an obstacle to trade. You and Nigel objected to this, seeing standardised laws as an attack on sovereignty. Everyone else saw these laws as the removal of obstacles standing in the way of increased national wealth. You don't understand about trade. As Pacifico says it's completely normal for an exporting company to make sure its products conform to the standards of the destination country. What's NOT normal is for the exporting country to make sure that ALL its products comply with the destination country's standards. That's what the EU demands of member countries. How often do you have to be told this. And it even applies to British companies that don't trade with the EU - and 90% of British companies do NOT trade with the EU. There was an example on the Farming program (IIRC) a few days ago. The head of a small company that sells tinned smoked salmon was complaining that, due to EU rules, he has had to disrupt its operation to change the tins. The problem? They've had to put a warning on the tins "this product contains fish". That's a fact believe it or not. And still we haven't torn up the EU rules, so they're still hitting all our companies with stupid nonsensical red tape. This company doesn't even sell its salmon to the EU. Well, unless the rules apply to everyone, there will have to be checks at the border. This is a non-tariff barrier. I can't say I'm very sympathetic to the smoked salmon seller. It's not unusual to have warnings, etc., on food products - couldn't he have found out what was required before he actually had them made? Or does he have a warehouse full of cans that were made 5 years ago before these regulations were introduced? If so, what sort of weird business model is that? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 9:15:52 GMT
I think you're a typical populist - you are entirely cynical and you don't believe there are any politicians who are capable of doing any deed unless it profits themselves. Fine. But it's a fact that the EU does not impose tariffs on developing African countries. That is philanthropy, not neo-colonialism. So, the African who wrote that article I linked to is also cynical? He and others like him should believe what the EU are doing to them is philanthropy because you say the EU have the best interests of Africans at heart? You believe the UK will rejoin the CU and SM soon, and you believe the EU adopt a philanthropic policy towards Africa for their raw materials. You think I am a populist, I think you are deluded. Yes, the journalist should believe that the EU is doing them a favour because the EU is actually doing them a favour. The EU has removed tariffs on goods from developing African countries, to help their economies. How cynical do you have to be to call that neo-colonialism? I have assumed you are a populist because populists see corruption everywhere. The vast majority of politicians are not corrupt. There are even some decent Tories. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 9:19:09 GMT
What obstacles have the EU put in the way of the UK trading with it that don't apply to other third-country states? Will you please list them? Is it your contention that the EU is punishing the UK by treating it as a third-country? No. The problem is that the EU is "working to rule" when dealing with UK imports. They're looking for problems and turning back any lorries that they deem to have got their documentation wrong - like the example I gave. There was an article in the Times a few months ago which listed a whole load of trivial reasons that had been used to stop imports. Another example is the "border" between N. Ireland and Britain. Our exports to NI constitute 0.5% of imports into the Single Market. Yet the EU evotes 20% of its checks to this border alone. The EU is determined to make everything as difficult as possible for the UK. If you don't understand this you're an idiot. Okay, present some statistics. If, as you claim, the UK is being singled out, you must have statistics to show that imports from third countries other than Britain are not being turned back for the reasons British imports into the EU are. Let's see them. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 11, 2022 9:55:46 GMT
So, the African who wrote that article I linked to is also cynical? He and others like him should believe what the EU are doing to them is philanthropy because you say the EU have the best interests of Africans at heart? You believe the UK will rejoin the CU and SM soon, and you believe the EU adopt a philanthropic policy towards Africa for their raw materials. You think I am a populist, I think you are deluded. Yes, the journalist should believe that the EU is doing them a favour because the EU is actually doing them a favour. The EU has removed tariffs on goods from developing African countries, to help their economies. How cynical do you have to be to call that neo-colonialism? I have assumed you are a populist because populists see corruption everywhere. The vast majority of politicians are not corrupt. There are even some decent Tories. Ask the Africans who believe European neo-colonialism lives on in the guise of trade. I don't think you read links I gave you. Explain how this is philanthropy: The most prominent offender in this regard is of course the most powerful trading bloc in the world: the European Union (EU). There are too many examples to list, but one of the most egregious that illustrates the issue is coffee. The EU slaps Africa with punishing tariff charges on processed, roasted coffee, but not unroasted, raw green beans. Naturally, this deters our coffee producers from investing in the technology to process the commodity while bullying them into exporting it raw.To add insult to injury European countries can then process and re-export for great profit – and at great expense to poor African farmers. In 2019 Uganda earned just $470m from over 250,000 tonnes of coffee exports; Switzerland earned some $2.2bn from processing and re-exporting just 80,000 tonnes. Indeed, all Africa earned just $1.5bn from the crop in 2014. Yet Germany, a leading processor, earned nearly double that from re-exports.Africans are fed-up with the EU's neo-colonial attitude and have turned towards China and the Middle-East instead! The last sentence in the second paragraph describes why the EU can no longer strike trade deals anymore, because they endeavour to define the terms of engagement as they did with Switzerland, UK and Mercosur. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 10:05:12 GMT
Yes, the journalist should believe that the EU is doing them a favour because the EU is actually doing them a favour. The EU has removed tariffs on goods from developing African countries, to help their economies. How cynical do you have to be to call that neo-colonialism? I have assumed you are a populist because populists see corruption everywhere. The vast majority of politicians are not corrupt. There are even some decent Tories. Ask the Africans who believe European neo-colonialism lives on in the guise of trade. Well, your position is going to take some explaining. The EU has given developing African nations privileged access to its market. On the face of it, that is a good thing. It is one of the many positive things the EU is doing in Africa ( Its work in addressing slavery in Africa is another example). Start by telling us what neo-colonialism is, and then tell us why you believe the EU is being neo-colonialist. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 11, 2022 10:11:42 GMT
Ask the Africans who believe European neo-colonialism lives on in the guise of trade. Well, your position is going to take some explaining. The EU has given developing African nations privileged access to its market. On the face of it, that is a good thing. It is one of the many positive things the EU is doing in Africa ( It's work in addressing slavery in Africa is another example). Start by telling us what neo-colonialism is, and then tell us why you believe the EU is being neo-colonialist. That's the problem with Europhiles. Everything is on the 'face of it' they never look at the devil who hides within the detail. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 10:17:38 GMT
Well, your position is going to take some explaining. The EU has given developing African nations privileged access to its market. On the face of it, that is a good thing. It is one of the many positive things the EU is doing in Africa ( It's work in addressing slavery in Africa is another example). Start by telling us what neo-colonialism is, and then tell us why you believe the EU is being neo-colonialist. That's the problem with Europhiles. Everything is on the 'face of it' they never look at the devil who hides within the detail. I'm inviting you to shed light on the 'devil who hides within the detail'. Tell us what neo-colonialism is, and then explain why you believe the EU is neo-colonialist. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 11, 2022 10:19:48 GMT
That's the problem with Europhiles. Everything is on the 'face of it' they never look at the devil who hides within the detail. I'm inviting you to shed light on the 'devil who hides within the detail'. Tell us what neo-colonialism is, and then explain why you believe the EU is neo-colonialist. I'm inviting you to read this article and stand-by what you said about the EU's "saintly" and "philanthropic" position regarding Africa. www.cgdev.org/blog/decolonising-eu-africa-relations-pre-condition-true-partnership-equals |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 10:28:57 GMT
I suggest you choose your articles with more care. This one isn't very convincing. I stopped reading at the first complaint against the EU. The first complaint is that the EU makes its funding to African nations dependent on their recognition of human rights. Your article says that is 'patriarchal'. What does the author want? Does s/he want the EU to fund African despots? Is that what you support? |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 11, 2022 11:16:17 GMT
I suggest you choose your articles with more care. This one isn't very convincing. I stopped reading at the first complaint against the EU. The first complaint is that the EU makes its funding to African nations dependent on their recognition of human rights. Your article says that is 'patriarchal'. What does the author want? Does s/he want the EU to fund African despots? Is that what you support? So, you managed to get past the continents colonial past then, you weren't able to get past Britain's on the old site. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 11:21:35 GMT
I suggest you choose your articles with more care. This one isn't very convincing. I stopped reading at the first complaint against the EU. The first complaint is that the EU makes its funding to African nations dependent on their recognition of human rights. Your article says that is 'patriarchal'. What does the author want? Does s/he want the EU to fund African despots? Is that what you support? So, you managed to get past the continents colonial past then, you weren't able to get past Britain's on the old site. On the old site, I wasn't able to get past the fact that the Right thought the Empire was a good thing for the vast majority of British people and the colonised peoples. Your article shows former colonialists apologising for crimes committed in Africa (The Belgian King apologising for his predecessor's atrocities in Congo, for example). There is no denial of what happened (as there was on the old site). Who were you on the old site? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 11, 2022 11:23:34 GMT
And you still haven't explained why the EU's making aid to African governments conditional on their respect for the human rights of their citizens is a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Nov 11, 2022 13:40:59 GMT
No. The problem is that the EU is "working to rule" when dealing with UK imports. They're looking for problems and turning back any lorries that they deem to have got their documentation wrong - like the example I gave. There was an article in the Times a few months ago which listed a whole load of trivial reasons that had been used to stop imports. Another example is the "border" between N. Ireland and Britain. Our exports to NI constitute 0.5% of imports into the Single Market. Yet the EU evotes 20% of its checks to this border alone. The EU is determined to make everything as difficult as possible for the UK. If you don't understand this you're an idiot. Okay, present some statistics. If, as you claim, the UK is being singled out, you must have statistics to show that imports from third countries other than Britain are not being turned back for the reasons British imports into the EU are. Let's see them. I've given you one you fucking ignorant time waster. I've highlighted it above. Posting on a forum does involve some work on your part. If you don't know that the EU are deliberately punishing the UK for leaving then I suggest your either very, very stupid or a troll. You can't expect people to educate you. You're as bad as gnome who's also an ignorant time waster. It's a new forum so we're all getting to know who the time wasters are. You're one. |
|
