Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

sondagefaux

RobMc59 wrote: »

Pointing out that Britain put the interests of NATO who were essentially fighting a cold war with eastern bloc countries before their own isn't a good example of Britain regarding its fishing sector as expendable.

Whatevs, I think it's a perfect example.

sondagefaux

serfboard wrote: »

If the pool was always full, there would be no vacancies


It has been standard practice for years, to boot some no longer useful, but still potentially dangerous politician into Ireland's Commissioner role. We've had:

Some of them have gone on to have successful careers as a result of their commissionership - Peter Sutherland and Ray McSharry specifically come to mind.

Paddy Hillery did well too - being becoming President of Ireland without a vote, in 1976, a position he held until he was again appointed, without a vote, in 1983. He held the job for fourteen years, without having ever being elected to it.

Regarding the other jobs, there is

1. The European Court of Auditors, which Barry Desmond and Maire Geoghegan-Quinn served in:

So in relation to your comment that "they are positions that require relevant skills and experience", Maire Geoghegan-Quinn had relevant skills in having qualified as a teacher :rolleyes:

The ECA also served as a nice dumping ground for Kevin Cardiff, the man "who was responsible for financial supervision at the time of the collapse of the Irish banks". And his reward for failure was truly staggering.

2. European Union Ambassador to the United States, which John Bruton did from 2004 to 2009. He tried to pivot from that gig to being President of the European Council, but was unsuccessful.

3. European Union Special Representative - another nice number if you can get it. Which Eamonn Gilmore did, becoming the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights in March 2019, and which he will do until March of 2021.

So there are a few (admittedly not that many) nice little jobeens that one can get, after one has "decided" to hang up ones boots.

Nominated commissioners must be approved by a majority vote of MEPs in the European Parliament.

As I said, it's not in the gift of the Irish government to simply appoint a member of the Commission.

I'm pretty sure the Irish presidency isn't an EU position...

As I acknowledged, there are a small number of EU positions that a person can be appointed to.

sondagefaux

brickster69 wrote: »

This EU budget should be fun to watch.

Macron wants 10% more added

Kurtz is threatening a Veto

https://www.dw.com/en/austria-sebastian-kurz-threatens-to-veto-eu-post-brexit-budget/a-52225576?maca=en-rss-en-eu-2092-rdf

And 15 of the 17 "Friends of Cohesion" want things as they are

http://www.aeidl.eu/en/news/latest-news/5273-15-cohesion-countries-call-for-stronger-eu-budget.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

OMG! The EU members are haggling over the budget.

Like they do every time it's up for discussion.

moon2

brickster69 wrote: »

This EU budget should be fun to watch.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: yes! It will be fun to watch these negotiations occurring. It will be a welcome change of pace to watch them result in a mutually agreeable compromise.

SantaCruz

RobMc59 wrote: »

I would say I'm pro EU but I'm alarmed by the apparent rhetoric coming out of Brussels in regards to what the EU wants from negotiations. I believe it fuels jingoism and anti EU sentiment which is manna from heaven to right wing UK politicians and the hawkish US who along with Russia, want the EU to implode.
Regarding the fishing rights,it's not just about selling fish its also about people's livelihoods,ie:the fishermen of many nations who rely on fishing in UK- it's a major bargaining chip imo.

Why would this be of concern to the EU? There's crazy stuff going on in lots of non-member countries.

SantaCruz

roots2branches wrote: »

I find this attitude odd in Ireland. Let's suck it to the Brits, how dare they leave!
Bad attitude to take to our biggest trading partner. Leo talks the hard talk but we all know when he gets booted out of office he'll be heading to the EU gravy train leaving Ireland in a worse position.

Greetings, recently registered poster. I look forward to hearing lots of novel opinions and keen insights on the EU from you.

serfboard

sondagefaux wrote: »

Nominated commissioners must be approved by a majority vote of MEPs in the European Parliament.

As I said, it's not in the gift of the Irish government to simply appoint a member of the Commission.

Sure, but you can be sure that they lobbied like hell to get their chosen candidate approved.

sondagefaux wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the Irish presidency isn't an EU position...

Never said that it was, but I don't think that it can be pointed out too often what a disgrace it was that the former Commissioner got to be President for 14 years without ever having been elected.

brickster69

sondagefaux wrote: »

OMG! The EU members are haggling over the budget.

Like they do every time it's up for discussion.

True, but this time someone has to plug a 14 billion / year hole in it.

Akrasia

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You can see him doing it already. Swinging cuts in all government departments just weeks after announcing that austerity is over, but Brexit! Bad EU! Rule Britannia!

And when growth falters and factories close and the pound drops and inflation starts biting - bulldog spirit! Blitz 2.0! EU so bad that freedom is worth the price!

And all of this is, and was, so depressingly predictable

SantaCruz

brickster69 wrote: »

True, but this time someone has to plug a 14 billion / year hole in it.

Which is peanuts in the greater scheme of things. The price of a 7 cups of coffee a year per citizen, or thereabouts.

KildareP

brickster69 wrote: »

True, but this time someone has to plug a 14 billion / year hole in it.

Only about £9bn really (net contribution), well below €20 per person per year.

And yet despite having an extra £9bn to play with, we get this:

Financial Times calculations suggest that the lower rates of sustainable economic growth forecast by the BoE would leave the chancellor with a £12bn deficit by 2022-23, instead of the £5bn surplus laid out in the Conservative’s election manifesto.

{...}

With the government finances now looking tight, Mr Javid has written to other ministers seeking suggestions for 5 per cent savings from their budgets so the government can prioritise public spending in the autumn spending review.

https://www.ft.com/content/27b81994-4690-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

brickster69

KildareP wrote: »

Only about £9bn really (net contribution), well below €20 per person per year.

And yet despite having an extra £9bn to play with, we get this:

https://www.ft.com/content/27b81994-4690-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

And the 5 billion tariff money sent to the eu each year, which the UK will keep ?

brickster69

UK average tariffs = 4.4 % / export

UK contribution to EU = 7.5 % / export

Irish Praetorian

brickster69 wrote: »

And the 5 billion tariff money sent to the eu each year, which the UK will keep ?

Does that include the tariffs which are levied on goods being shipped to the UK to go further on into the EU market and thus are not likely to be directed to the UK in future, or the potential income to be levied from tariffs on UK produce which may or may not fall under the remit of a free trade agreement between the UK and the EU?

SantaCruz

brickster69 wrote: »

And the 5 billion tariff money sent to the eu each year, which the UK will keep ?

You do understand who pays tariffs, right?

brickster69

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Does that include the tariffs which are levied on goods being shipped to the UK to go further on into the EU market and thus are not likely to be directed to the UK in future, or the potential income to be levied from tariffs on UK produce which may or may not fall under the remit of a free trade agreement between the UK and the EU?

2nd part. A bit like saying are UK export goods to Rotterdam counted as EU exports when they are forwarded on to non EU countries. Probably evens out give or take a bit.

brickster69

SantaCruz wrote: »

You do understand who pays tariffs, right?

Yes, the importer. Why who pays it in Ireland ?

listermint

brickster69 wrote: »

Yes, the importer

The customer.


The end.

SantaCruz

brickster69 wrote: »

Yes, the importer. Why who pays it in Ireland ?

The customer, same as everywhere else.

brickster69

listermint wrote: »

The customer.


The end.

Incorrect. The importer pays the tariffs initially.

SantaCruz

brickster69 wrote: »

Incorrect. The importer pays the tariffs initially.

I genuinely laughed out loud.

Right, the importer pays tariffs. It comes out of their pockets. Gotcha.

brickster69

SantaCruz wrote: »

I genuinely laughed out loud.

Right, the importer pays tariffs. It comes out of their pockets. Gotcha.

Of course it comes out of the importers pocket. How do you think it gets into the country. Think about it !

Bit cynical

SantaCruz wrote: »

I genuinely laughed out loud.

Right, the importer pays tariffs. It comes out of their pockets. Gotcha.

Brickster is correct, I'm afraid. The importer pays the tariffs to the importing country. However the importer is free to pass on costs to the consumer.

listermint

brickster69 wrote: »

Of course it comes out of the importers pocket. How do you think it gets into the country. Think about it !

Ah yes I forgot the importer holds on to the goods and doesn't sell them with the tariff cost on top recouping the cost at their consumers.


How silly of me.

brickster69

Bit cynical wrote: »

Brickster is correct, I'm afraid. The importer pays the tariffs to the importing country. However the importer is free to pass on costs to the consumer.

Why are you afraid ?

sondagefaux

brickster69 wrote: »

Yes, the importer.

Not necessarily.

It depends on whether the Incoterms are Delivered Duty Paid (DDP) or not.

Either Lidl or Aldi require all their suppliers to deliver on DDP Incoterms to them.

https://iccwbo.org/resources-for-business/incoterms-rules/incoterms-2020/

DDP – Delivered Duty Paid (named place of destination) Edit
Seller is responsible for delivering the goods to the named place in the country of the buyer, and pays all costs in bringing the goods to the destination including import duties and taxes. The seller is not responsible for unloading. This term is often used in place of the non-Incoterm "Free In Store (FIS)". This term places the maximum obligations on the seller and minimum obligations on the buyer. No risk or responsibility is transferred to the buyer until delivery of the goods at the named place of destination.[16]

The most important consideration for DDP terms is that the seller is responsible for clearing the goods through customs in the buyer's country, including both paying the duties and taxes, and obtaining the necessary authorizations and registrations from the authorities in that country. Unless the rules and regulations in the buyer's country are very well understood, DDP terms can be a very big risk both in terms of delays and in unforeseen extra costs, and should be used with caution.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incoterms

A Dub in Glasgo

Talk that the importer absorbs any tariffs is way off the mark

SantaCruz

Bit cynical wrote: »

Brickster is correct, I'm afraid. The importer pays the tariffs to the importing country. However the importer is free to pass on costs to the consumer.

Not even technically correct.

Come on, what's the point of discussing stuff if you're going to be so disingenuous?

brickster69

sondagefaux wrote: »

Not necessarily.

It depends on whether the Incoterms are Delivered Duty Paid (DDP) or not.

Either Lidl or Aldi require all their suppliers to deliver on DDP Incoterms to them.

https://iccwbo.org/resources-for-business/incoterms-rules/incoterms-2020/




https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incoterms

DDP means what ? Duty has already been paid. Who paid it, the seller ?

Bit cynical

listermint wrote: »

Ah yes I forgot the importer holds on to the goods and doesn't sell them with the tariff cost on top recouping the cost at their consumers.


How silly of me.

However they may not get to pass on the costs in full. If the only source of the product is from imports at a given tariff then the full costs can be passed on. However if the importer is competing with domestic producers or imports from low or non-tariff countries then it is possible that only part of the tariff can be recouped thus lowering profit.