Of course the present agreements dissolve, that’s the f’ing point. But to lose the trade is a choice.

Trade is between two parties. Governments want to control it and take a cut. People use political positions to get their beak wet. A mafia controls who may and who may not do business in the territory it controls.…

Countries don’t trade, people trade. Businesses trade. Governments step in demanding a cut. People use influence on government to get an advantage. Free trade is two parties trading. It goes on every day where people can trade without a government watching them.

I sure do enjoy watching conspiracy theory become…

Every country’s government behaves like a mafia? Of course I know that. Government is fundamentally organized crime. Most people consider that to be a paranoid conspiracy theorist’s view of things, which is why I let others describe it first. Make the argument for it.Then I just agree with it.

I didn’t argue the existing treaty would remain, that’s absurd. To not come to an agreement is still a choice. If they chose to lose the trade they have, it’s because they chose to lose it. There is nothing that forces any particular outcome. Treaties come and go. If they lose the trade they have it is by choice.

You…

Bailing out european banks? Why are you changing the subject? The fact of the matter is membership is not required for trade with the EU. My statement is factually correct. China is but one example. If the Chinese central bank helped out with the ECB bailing out the european banks that is also independent of…

So you’re saying it’s likely they will be punished by the EU. Also that it’s not really free trade, but a deal, some sort of trade management. Which is back to where I started. Free trade is simple, managed trade is a deal.

Of course I fully expect the EU to behave in a mafia like manner as you describe. That’s its nature. But that[’s a choice, not a requirement. The EU has become the sort of thing “conspiracy nutjobs” warned us it would.

100% incorrect? no. Just intentionally incomplete and misleading.

Once again for the simple minded, the diktats of the EU when a member go beyond product requirements. Anyway now your argument morphs to the usual “the big corporations will move away”. So fine, lets keep marching to one of those Dr. Who future dystopias where the large corporations own and run everything. Where we…

It’s amazing the mental gymnastics some people will go through to defend being socially engineered by bunch of powerful white people. Immigration since you’re hung up on the subject is a tool of the ruling class to well, rule more effectively and gain power.

There’s always one of you in the bunch. It doesn’t matter who they are for my point. The point of the matter is China isn’t being forced into being managed by the EU to trade with the EU. Pick any other subject you want.

You seem to be unaware that the rules the EU imposes on the UK go beyond that of product compliance.

If you have to take a statement where I illustrate an argument by creating a story out of context you automatically lose. As to your asinine retort the EU of today hasn’t existed for 43 years. You’re also playing the same dishonest game with your tariff retort, I’m not for tariffs I am pointing out that the rules of…

I didn’t “think” any such thing mr. subject changer. I made no argument about bargaining power. The simple fact is you are incorrect. membership is not required for trade.

Ooh namecalling. Yes, they’ll take away the tariffs but make it impossible for anyone but large corporations to bare the costs of complying with the rules. That’s not free trade. It’s just shifting the protectionism around to a new model.

My comment was relevant to the article. I called it out for what it is. Gawker’s continual anti-brexit BS.

How many syrians is the EU forcing China to take in order to trade with them? Oh China’s not a member of the EU and they can’t do that? I guess you can’t buy stuff made in China in the EU then? Of course you can.

None of the costs? What costs does free trade have? Free trade doesn’t have costs, hence the term free trade. So we’re not dealing with free trade here. We’re dealing with something that has costs. That for the UK to have trade with the EU member states they will have to pay certain costs like obeying the EU on every…

People made them very clear. You can go learn about it if you want. I’m not in the mood for searching them out in reference material for you. start with the UKIP and Nigel Farage

Gee, if there were only some way of teaching you that the diktats (thank you for the spelling flame) are about things like immigration, health and safety, and countless other topics.

None of the benefits of trade require EU membership. The member states of the EU trade with people all over the planet. The benefits of…