• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

Two questions for discussion if you please:

1) How does Switzerland deal with it's borders, seeing as it's outside both the EU and Eurozone?

2) are there any people calling for the "People's Vote" that are NOT remainers who want to reverse/cancel Brexit? If so, what proportion would they be estimated as?
 
Gutter Boy said:
May winning the 2016 leadership election and May calling the 2017 election are the two things that sunk what could have been a good deal.

The way it should have been done was to quickly sign up to TPP and NAFTA in summer 2016, then begun to negotiate with the EU on an FTA as confident third country. The whole withdrawal agreement thing has been a completely unnecessary humiliation.
Click to expand...

The greatest strength of Leave is the possibility... What might be. What we could do. And when ideas are socialised they are exciting and plausable: "We could join NAFTA...." "We could be like Singapore..." "We could give the NHS the EU Money"

Before you look into it, its a plausable possibility. But like many things fired off by those excited by leaving the EU, the ideas don't tend to deliver under scrunity. Hence UKIP were happy to socialise the Norway model, before taking a look at it in detail and seeing that it was worse than remaining in the EU. Singapore was flavor of the month half a year ago, before people realised that Singapore's location, cheap labour and minimil civil rights mean their model wouldn't fit the UK reality. The promised NHS 350m a week has long been shown up to be a falsehood.

NAFTA and TPP are probably the same. Interesting, exciting, as an off the cuff idea, but when you look closer will they stack up as viable or benificial?
 
Last edited:
The big problem is that Brexit it was organised like the tombola stand at the local fete.
The barmy army knew it and counted on it and took full advantage.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Two questions for discussion if you please:

1) How does Switzerland deal with it's borders, seeing as it's outside both the EU and Eurozone?

2) are there any people calling for the "People's Vote" that are NOT remainers who want to reverse/cancel Brexit? If so, what proportion would they be estimated as?
Click to expand...

On 1), to quote the FT:


When you land at Geneva Airport with the intention of driving onwards, you have a choice. You can pass through Swiss immigration and head straight for the car hire desks. Alternatively, you can go up an escalator, along a corridor and cross into the French sector where the same multinational car hire companies will offer you a different deal. Swiss regulations insist that hire cars have winter tyres fitted between the autumn and spring and they will also have a “vignette”, paying the annual SFR 40 ($40) road tax allowing the car to drive on Switzerland’s motorways. Cars hired from the French side have neither and often differ in specifications, but are generally much cheaper. From the same rental company, it is currently possible to hire a family car for the February half-term holiday for roughly half the price if you are willing to pick it up and return it to the French sector of the airport. Even though car hire is a competitive business with essentially the same product on offer, the national border separates markets and allows price variations far in excess of the product quality differences on offer. It is bad news for Switzerland, where consumers have to pay more even though the regulatory differences are minimal.

Border frictions have separated markets either side of the border to the detriment of consumers If you choose to save the money, and accept you cannot drive on Swiss motorways without a further charge, you will soon notice other ways in which borders matter. As you come to the end of the airport approach road and hang a right, aiming to drive through Geneva city centre and then back into France, you are immediately stopped by heavy border infrastructure. Three beige buildings with French and Swiss customs confront you, along with offices for both tax authorities. Europeans, accustomed to crossing other internal land borders within the EU, find this quite odd. Switzerland is part of the EU’s Schengen area, so there are no passport checks required for entry. For food and almost all tradeable industrial and agricultural goods, Switzerland’s regulations are also fully aligned with those of the EU. Both sides accept the others’ regulations. In reality, the Swiss copy and paste Brussels regulations into their domestic laws, allowing the landlocked state effectively to be a member of the EU single market for goods. Border infrastructure and customs declarations are necessary, however, because Switzerland is not part of the EU’s customs union or value added tax regime, which are separate from the single market. This difference requires both sides to build and staff a hard border with sometimes significant delays.

The French worry that someone might, for example, buy a frighteningly expensive Swiss watch, receive a Swiss tax refund since the watch is for export, and then not declare it for French VAT. The Swiss rigorously check that people have not spent more than €300 each on goods from France, depriving its exchequer of sales taxes. For trading companies, each load requires a customs declaration, multiple forms and stamps by the tax authorities to ensure that the formalities are closed on each side before goods cross the tax border. Within the Union none of this applies because complete regulatory alignment is married to an EU VAT regime, all within the customs union. This VAT system has its problems, but ensures that goods can flow across borders with no formalities. The Swiss-French border is efficient. There are no applicable tariffs. Regulations for goods are fully aligned. There is a common travel area between the two countries without the need for passport checks. But the border requires hard infrastructure because Switzerland is not in the EU VAT regime nor its customs union. Border frictions have separated markets either side of the border to the detriment of consumers.

On 2), probably not. People's Vote is continuity remain. Various Leavers suggested, pre-2016, that further referendums would be required to establish the terms on which we'd leave. They all went quiet on that after their victory, and defined their own versions of what they believed the vote meant as the WOTP.
 
Gutter Boy said:
The authorities in Brussels have the right to reject a budget and demand new proposals - and to impose fines - if its requests are ignored.
Click to expand...

I know signing up to the EU is signing up to their terms, similarly the EURO (which thankfully we avoided), but statements like this just put a shiver down my spine.

A population elected a government to effect the change/policies THEY want THEIR country to run by, and get told they cant by a supranatural organisation.

Yes, I know, you want to be in the club there are rules etc - but this really, really makes me uneasy.

People laugh down the idea of a United States of Europe, but when the only independence a country is allowed is that which the EUs governing rules dictate, is it really that far from the truth?
 
Are we all confusing the eurozone with the EU again? Signing up to a common currency means you have rather greater obligations concerning inflation, debt, QE etc - which affect the budget of any country running a deficit.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I know signing up to the EU is signing up to their terms, similarly the EURO (which thankfully we avoided), but statements like this just put a shiver down my spine.

A population elected a government to effect the change/policies THEY want THEIR country to run by, and get told they cant by a supranatural organisation.

Yes, I know, you want to be in the club there are rules etc - but this really, really makes me uneasy.

People laugh down the idea of a United States of Europe, but when the only independence a country is allowed is that which the EUs governing rules dictate, is it really that far from the truth?
Click to expand...

A United States of Europe is the ultimate vision/goal. It can only come about by One-Size-Fits all Political and Economic policies which are doomed to failure if self-determination/democracy in the constituent countries are still held dear. We need to get out before the end game of the riots when the diverse spread of the populations of Europe realise they are under a command-and-control quasi-dictatorship that means their votes in national elections are meaningless..
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
Are we all confusing the eurozone with the EU again? Signing up to a common currency means you have rather greater obligations concerning inflation, debt, QE etc - which affect the budget of any country running a deficit.
Click to expand...

The Eurozone is one of the key building blocks towards a United States of Europe whereby political and fiscal policy across ALL member states are one. "Ever Closer Union"
 
glorygloryeze said:
The Eurozone is one of the key building blocks towards a United States of Europe whereby political and fiscal policy across ALL member states are one. "Ever Closer Union"
Click to expand...

Nice that we had a guaranteed opt-out from the eurozone and from "ever closer union", then, isn't it? After all, no-one would be fudgewitted enough to jeopardise a deal like that.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I know signing up to the EU is signing up to their terms, similarly the EURO (which thankfully we avoided), but statements like this just put a shiver down my spine.

A population elected a government to effect the change/policies THEY want THEIR country to run by, and get told they cant by a supranatural organisation.

Yes, I know, you want to be in the club there are rules etc - but this really, really makes me uneasy.

People laugh down the idea of a United States of Europe, but when the only independence a country is allowed is that which the EUs governing rules dictate, is it really that far from the truth?
Click to expand...

Don't forget the EU already meddled in the formation of the government too - they barred Paolo Savona from becoming Finance Minister, because he was too anti-EU

For me this overruling of democracy is akin to say the Queen not giving royal assent to bits of legislation she found too socialist/capitalist.
 
Gutter Boy said:
Don't forget the EU already meddled in the formation of the government too - they barred Paolo Savona from becoming Finance Minister, because he was too anti-EU

For me this overruling of democracy is akin to say the Queen not giving royal assent to bits of legislation she found too socialist/capitalist.
Click to expand...

Things like that are simply wrong, to my mind.

If officials are elected, they represent the people - THAT is exactly what democracy is about. The EU has no business meddling in those things.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I know signing up to the EU is signing up to their terms, similarly the EURO (which thankfully we avoided), but statements like this just put a shiver down my spine.

A population elected a government to effect the change/policies THEY want THEIR country to run by, and get told they cant by a supranatural organisation.

Yes, I know, you want to be in the club there are rules etc - but this really, really makes me uneasy.

People laugh down the idea of a United States of Europe, but when the only independence a country is allowed is that which the EUs governing rules dictate, is it really that far from the truth?
Click to expand...
Italy aer a founding memeber of the EU and they not only signed up but also helped create the rules, all governments are bound by decisions and treaties made by those before them, also this:
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...aly-face-off-over-populist-governments-budget
Italy was allocated €44.7bn between 2014 and 2020 as part of the EU’s stability and growth pact to support the competitiveness of its small and medium businesses, on the proviso that it lived up to fiscal commitments designed to avoid a repeat of the 2007 financial crash.
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
Nice that we had a guaranteed opt-out from the eurozone and from "ever closer union", then, isn't it? After all, no-one would be fudgewitted enough to jeopardise a deal like that.
Click to expand...

Not something I have an answer for, but what use are the opt outs if the rest of the union proceeds along that path and kind of pulls us along anyway?

Will there not be points at which we are involved/integrated just as much in all but name?
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Not something I have an answer for, but what use are the opt outs if the rest of the union proceeds along that path and kind of pulls us along anyway?

Will there not be points at which we are involved/integrated just as much in all but name?
Click to expand...

The single market and the eurozone are separated by more than the UK's singular status. EFTA and the EEA have a loud voice ensuring this as well. Admittedly, the UK's withdrawal makes life tougher for EFTA members on that front.
 
Gutter Boy said:
Don't forget the EU already meddled in the formation of the government too - they barred Paolo Savona from becoming Finance Minister, because he was too anti-EU

For me this overruling of democracy is akin to say the Queen not giving royal assent to bits of legislation she found too socialist/capitalist.
Click to expand...
they do not have the power to bar him - are you imposing the countries actions on the EU? IT was the Italian president who refused him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back