Nick wrote:1) That the UK is a trading nation, and has been for centuries and would be very keen to enter such trade deals. Other countries have already expressed an interest, wishing to expand their economies too. Any why wouldn't they want to? Where is your evidence that they won't want to? (Touche!)
oh NIck, what a silly comment! Did you read the article which I attached? Your response is that I cannot prove that no countries are keen on a quick trade deal with Britain. Don't you realise that the onus is on you Brexiters to justify your optimistic claims? Just as the onus is always on the side which claims that something exists.
Not really, animist. Leaving aside the word "optimistic", I think there is plenty of evidence that other countries will enter into new trade agreements. You, ISTM, are making a counter-claim, that there will be a departure from the expected. Hence my interest in how you've arrived at that conclusion.
Look at it this way. Next time that you challenge a religious nut for any evidence for God's existence and s/he retorts "Well, you can't DISPROVE God" are you going to take this as a reasonable response? Of course not.
You expect me to allow you an analogy unchallenged?
I don't think it applies, for the reasons above. But I'd rather argue the toss over likely outcomes, rather than debating techniques.
Nick wrote:And to some extent, we can undertake some "trade deals" unilaterally- by cutting tariffs and removing unnecessary restrictions.
omigod you really are draining the barrel. A deal with only one side, right, makes perfect sense
And why not? If it benefits the UK, why not? We have no need to charge tariffs to defend an industry in which the UK does not participate, for example, nor need we apply restrictions (eg on GM, perhaps) which we don't believe in. So yes, it can make perfect sense.
Nick wrote:Ahem! Being in "a " customs union is not "a silly Tory idea" (though there are some of those!) it is Labour's only idea! Which as you agree, has already been ruled out by the EU. What then is their alternative? They don't have one!
I did not say that the EU had ruled out Labour's idea for a customs union which replicates the one we have. Maybe they have, but I am not aware of it
So you accept that "a" customs union was a Labour plan, not a Tory one...? I'm happy to accept, if you say so, that you haven't said that the EU had ruled it out, nor are you aware of it. I'll say it for you, thus making you aware.
And their (ie Labour's) alternative is what...?
Nick wrote:And I am somewhat amused that you think that the EU has any goodwill at all! Indeed you seemed rather proud of the fact that it didn't, reasoning it didn't need to, as it was the UK that was leaving the EU, not the other way round. As you seem to be in the mood for evidence, Can you share any to support your new supposition that the EU will be showing any goodwill to the UK any time soon? "Now" would be nice, but, you know, they'd rather made sarcastic references to ticking clocks.
I do not know whether the EU does have much goodwill now, if it ever did. As for the ticking clock, that is a fact which Britain has created
It arose out of the Treaty. The UK would like to ditch it. The EU would not. But at least we seem to be in agreement that goodwill from the EU is in short supply.
Nick wrote:Turkey was a candidate country (not sure it is now!) so maybe some enticement was deemed pragmatic. The deal Turkey has got is extremely limited, so not exactly a shining beacon of hope! And maybe even that was only because the EU wanted something from Turkey over the refugee crisis.
I do not mean that any deal over a customs union would be the same as Turkey's, since the two countries and situations are entirely different. I merely point out that it is probably possible to work something out.
"Working something out" is indeed possible. In all sorts of areas, not least the Irish border. Could you let your EU friends know?
Not least Mr Dunt!