The Political Thread

[IndigoPrime]

Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

How, specifically, would eradicating the EU make things smoother for the UK economy, UK businesses and overseas business investing in the UK in those regards?

[TordelBack]

I suspect TLS is thinking big - the end of EU trade regulations as prelude to the end of ALL trade regulations. Again, it's an I retesting idea in the abstract, but I want nothing to do with the reality of such a transition, especially on a unilateral basis.

[Steven Denton]

Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

You have literally no idea what you're talking about.

I can't see what could possibly go wrong with removing all regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

[The Legendary Shark]

I.P., Removal of barriers, delays and excess costs.

T.B., More or less. In the interim, though, sovereign nations would probably return to their own rules. Due to the well known excesses of corporatism, the general public does not yet understand what pure capitalism is and believes that all business is inherantlly evil and must be kept in check by "government." This is not true. The vast majority of private businesses want to make money - and they can't do that by gouging, conning or harming their customers. Only "government" protected businesses (such as water companies, for example) can do those things with relative impunity. Again, the transition cannot, indeed must not, happen overnight. The first step is in understanding the differences between capitalism and corporatism. Capitalism is good for the majority and bad for the elite minority (as evidenced by the MSM's demonisation of certain protesters by calling them anti-capitalists when, in reality, a more apt label would be anti-corporatists, which you never hear) whilst corporatism is bad for the majority and good for the elite minority. There is nothing done by corporatism that cannot be done cheaper, more efficiently and more fairly by basic capitalism.

[The Legendary Shark]

I can't see what could possibly go wrong with removing all regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

Then you're not looking hard enough. A lot could go wrong. These things cannot and must not be eradicated overnight. First must come study, education, reflection and planning. Then a gradual phasing out over a reasonable period of time. You seem to think (correct me if I'm wrong) that I want pull a big switch marked "Instant Revolution" and just change everything immediately. That's the last thing I want. The only revolution worth a damn is a revolution of the mind, a revolution of attitude. Only from that kind of revolution will true and universally beneficial change emerge.

[Steven Denton]

I can't see what could possibly go wrong with removing all regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

Then you're not looking hard enough. A lot could go wrong. These things cannot and must not be eradicated overnight. First must come study, education, reflection and planning. Then a gradual phasing out over a reasonable period of time. You seem to think (correct me if I'm wrong) that I want pull a big switch marked "Instant Revolution" and just change everything immediately. That's the last thing I want. The only revolution worth a damn is a revolution of the mind, a revolution of attitude. Only from that kind of revolution will true and universally beneficial change emerge.

You are wrong. If you remove the section where you decide to tell me what I'm thinking your post contains the same content minus the irrelevant assumption and personalisation. As a rule of thumb you shouldn't be trying to tell me, or any one else, what I think or why I think it, but what you think and why you think it.

[IndigoPrime]

I.P., Removal of barriers, delays and excess costs.

Given that our leaving the EU (or at least the EEA and also the customs union) will increase all of those things, nope.

[The Legendary Shark]

Which is what I generally do, unlike others who try to tell me what they think I'm thinking. I specifically and overtly speculated as to what you might be thinking and invited you to correct this speculation.

All you've done here is pull me up for guessing at what I thought was the thinking behind your initial sarcastic comment, which added nothing to the debate. I therefore tried to address your comment by explaining what I think and, as you have not revealed your thinking yet, attempted to guess what your thinking might have been based on my experience of the thinking behind similar previous comments, which I think is fair. I did not, after all, assert that you definitely thought what I thought you might be thinking and invited you to clarify your thoughts.

I am well aware that I might have misinterpreted what I thought you were thinking and be wrong in thinking that what I read was not what you thought.

I think...

[The Legendary Shark]

Given that our leaving the EU (or at least the EEA and also the customs union) will increase all of those things, nope.

Which leads me back to the assertion that the EU, by throwing up these barriers for no good reason other than to assert its power, is an anti-free trade and pro-protectionist body.

[Steven Denton]

Which is what I generally do, unlike others who try to tell me what they think I'm thinking. I specifically and overtly speculated as to what you might be thinking and invited you to correct this speculation.

All you've done here is pull me up for guessing at what I thought was the thinking behind your initial sarcastic comment, which added nothing to the debate. I therefore tried to address your comment by explaining what I think and, as you have not revealed your thinking yet, attempted to guess what your thinking might have been based on my experience of the thinking behind similar previous comments, which I think is fair. I did not, after all, assert that you definitely thought what I thought you might be thinking and invited you to clarify your thoughts.

I am well aware that I might have misinterpreted what I thought you were thinking and be wrong in thinking that what I read was not what you thought.

I think...

Actually I pointed out that if you remove your assertion about what I was thinking you answer my assumed position but without claiming any insight to my thoughts.

My original comment may seem to you to add nothing but that's because it was not an invitation to debate it was an expression of support for the opposing view point. That in itself is not without value as it helps the participants to gauge support and audience engagement.

[IndigoPrime]

Which leads me back to the assertion that the EU, by throwing up these barriers for no good reason other than to assert its power, is an anti-free trade and pro-protectionist body.

To summarise, then:

Me: Leaving the EU would seriously hit the UK's economy.
You: "remove the EU from the equation and it would run a lot smoother"
Me: How?
You: Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.
Me: How, specifically?
You: Removal of barriers, delays and excess costs.
Me: The opposite of that is true.
You: AHA! EU is an anti-free trade and pro-protectionist body!

Look, I get that you have your ideal of the future, but there's a world of difference between that and today's reality. Moreover, there's a disconnect between what you're stating in the above in terms of said reality and the ideal you have in your head.

Perhaps in an amazing future world where there's no protectionism or borders, this idea of fully free trade can exist. But we don't live in that world. My point, throughout, has been that leaving the EU is dangerous for the UK economy. You stated things would run smoother without the EU, but that's demonstrably false. And your counterpoint then becomes to note one of the negative things about the EU in your eyes but that doesn't actually answer the key points:

- How will removing ourselves from the EU benefit British businesses and foreign businesses based in the UK?
- How would eradicating the EU overnight also benefit said businesses in terms of all the things you mention?

[The Legendary Shark]

S.D. Well, pardon me all over the place.

May I enquire as to the thinking behind your support of the opposing viewpoint?

I.P. 'Without the EU' and 'outside the EU' are not the same thing. To be without the EU (i.e., if it did not exist) would make things easier both for countries currently under its control and other countries wishing to trade with them. To be outside the EU, whilst it still exists, does indeed pose problems - problems devised, created, executed and maintained by the EU.

One of the main arguments for wishing to return to the EU seems to be access to the free market, but the EU is not a free market. If it was, there would be no requirement to join it in order to gain access.

"How will removing ourselves from the EU benefit British businesses and foreign businesses based in the UK?"

In the short run, it won't. Sanctions and tariffs imposed by the EU will make trading with its members more difficult as this faux free trade body punishes us to protect itself. In the medium term, solutions will be found to mitigate some of these problems and in the long term, hopefully, other countries will see the EU for what it is and dismantle it. By this time, all former EU countries will benefit from real free trade.

"How would eradicating the EU overnight also
benefit said businesses in terms of all the
things you mention?"

It wouldn't. To eradicate the EU overnight would be next to impossible and extremely dangerous. It would leave a vacuum into which something even worse could potentially step. As I already said, the best way is to first understand the EU for what it is and then dismantle it piece by piece and/or devolve it back to what it was originally intended to be - a loose alliance of trading partners, each of which is free to trade either with the bloc, apart from it or a combination of the two depending upon local requirements.

[Steven Denton]

S.D. Well, pardon me all over the place.

May I enquire as to the thinking behind your support of the opposing viewpoint?

Sure, I find  IndigoPrime's argument more convincing.

relating more specifically to the reason I picked the method of expression is did and knocked tariffs and taxes off the list before making my 'sarcastic' comment, (not because I don't believe they are necessarily a bad thing) was because I think that regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation are different to tariffs, taxes although tariffs, taxes are often used as a method of imposing regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation. I don't think that requiring things to meet certain ethical, ecological and practical requirements is a bad thing. The content of the regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines and requirements is always up for debate but as concepts they have been developed to answer many needs. (like not selling snake oil as a cure for cancer or passing off painted led as gold, or importing cheep products produced by slave labour.) I believe them to fundamentally be useful administrative tools.   

[The Legendary Shark]

Thanks, Stephen. I too find the rationale behind these things to be generally sound. However, they do not need to be imposed by authoritarian bodies.

Businesses are perfectly capable of deciding these things for themselves. For example, there may be a regulation somewhere forbidding the sale of diseased or contaminated fruit - but removal of that regulation would have little to no effect as no greengrocer or supermarket would want to trade in such items and if they did they'd soon find themselves out of business or in court. The free market is largely self-regulating, especially in a modern world full of word of mouth, newspapers, radio, television and the internet.

It's a lot harder these days for small companies to get away with shady behaviour but, conversely, a lot easier for large, government protected corporations to get away with the same things due to lobbying for exemptions, protective and monopolistic legislation and just plain bribery.

Doing away with regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation does not automatically do away with the rationale behind them, nor does it do away with the rationale's impact on business. What it does do away with is the opportunity for "government" to wet its beak by charging money for these things or to engage in coercion, theft and violence against those lacking the correct piece of paper.

[The Legendary Shark]

I mean Steven, sorry. My 'phone browser won't allow me to correct my posts. Apologies for the mis-spelling.