Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:53 pm

One comparation can be Airbus government support vs Boeing government support. WTO considered Airbus support illegal and now Airbus adjusted its practices. It changes all government loans to market levels like they took the funding not from government aid.

Boeing coming up later this year as I understand it and viola, there is no WTO to take the case.

Then I have been thinking about why Airbus do this changes pretty fast. Can it be that it want to use this as one convenient reason to disconnect UK government aid? We can assume that A320 within a few years will have a new wing. A350 will as I understand it after WTO ruling and Airbus actions not be considered to have UK aid. Missing is then A330 that I believe will be terminated before 2030...
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sat Aug 01, 2020 7:53 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:


Ok, then your advice to the UK government should stop all trade talks immediately. The consensus is, except with die-hard Brexiteers, that GB is they negotiating from a position of weakness because they just gave up all their trade deals, with the EU27 and with all associated trade deal GB was part of because of the EU.

No that would not be my advice at all; but yes it’s a known fact that once we left the transition period that trade deals would have to be renegotiated, more work yes a position of weakness no not really


Ok I will play along, what is the incredible strength of the UK everyone seem to miss but you are the one that can see it. So enlighten us with your incredible inside.......................

Did I say we had incredible strength……..nope;
A trade agreement is between two independent sovereign equal nations. If you do not understand that is the basic fundamentals of a trade agreement. But each will obviously be looking to get the best deal it can get


Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:


Really? No correct interpretation, but what is actually being said. Alright. The EU is quite done with the UK and the aftermath of Brexit.

Correct interpretation?
Was the date incorrect?


:roll: Brexit is truly done when this period is over. Commen sense.

We are in what’s officially called the transition period.
If no agreement is reached by 1st January and we trade on WTO terms but the negotiations teams continue to talk is that still Brexit by your definition?

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Barnier's point of view - or better the EU's point of vier, Barnier is just a civil servant - remains the same. So yeah, they are talking, but really? Negotiation? Neh not really. The UK government still wants the impossible. So to put it in the language you understand: no deal is better than a bad deal.


Ok fine with me, just save everyone all the time and trouble let Barnier know to stop attending negotiation meetings

&
Dutchy wrote:
Fine with me as well. But now it is just a retiual dance. So if you say the Brittish side should stop, I will do the same with the EU side.


You make it sound like you and I have influence in the corridors of power :rotfl:


Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:


Consequences are not truly felt yet. So I was talking in the future tense, not what is happening now. So you misinterpreted it.

Oh ok Sorry I’m not a mind reader.


No you are definately not, we agree on that. You brought up the 'complaining', 'EU spin' and the 'media', never talked about that.

Well that has generally been the theme on the forum when talking about the negotiations, but just for future reference when you talk about Consequences ill know you are talking about the future


Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Yes, the key of a Rolls Royce cost around £100, good value, very flashy and yet classy at the same time, to show around. But I do not think anyone looking at the bigger picture of buying a Rolls Royce will say it is good value, now do you?

You would have to ask someone who bought a Rolls Royce that question


No, you say: look at my Rolls Royce key, it only was £100, good value, forgetting about the bulk of the costs. 4,4bn versus 200bn. So the "very good value" remark is quite redicioulous.


That still doesn’t make sense, where the estimate in the equation?

The £200 Billion in the discussion is an estimate, theoretical where as the Rolls in your analogy is real merchandise just like the £4.4 Billion
 
Klaus
Posts: 21573
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sat Aug 01, 2020 8:37 pm

A101 wrote:
Did I say we had incredible strength……..nope;
A trade agreement is between two independent sovereign equal nations. If you do not understand that is the basic fundamentals of a trade agreement. But each will obviously be looking to get the best deal it can get


Your "equal nations" is complete fiction in actual reality.

Among other things because the UK is now negotiationg as one nation with 27 other nations.

Also because those 27 other nations represent a united trade bloc multiple times as large as the UK (which largely determines who sets how much of the agenda and the outcome).

The consequences of a failure to reach an agreement are extremely asymmetric to the disadvantage of the UK, and at least the EU27 know it (so do at least some on the UK side).

The EU single market is an established and well-defended resource which the UK brexiter government both wants to exploit and also to unilaterally undermine (see the promises made to Tory backbenchers).

There is no equality in this, on effectively no level. That is just a facile fiction which has no actual reality.

The UK has effectively chosen to:

a) live mostly by EU rules to the exclusion of a more extensive US deal

b) live mostly by US rules to the exclusion of a more extensive EU deal

c) effectively go the North Korean route and have easy access to neither of these countries/blocs

That's pretty much it, and each one is a long way down from the influence the UK has had as an EU member.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sat Aug 01, 2020 8:50 pm

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Ok I will play along, what is the incredible strength of the UK everyone seem to miss but you are the one that can see it. So enlighten us with your incredible inside.......................

Did I say we had incredible strength……..nope;
A trade agreement is between two independent sovereign equal nations. If you do not understand that is the basic fundamentals of a trade agreement. But each will obviously be looking to get the best deal it can get


Set aside that the EU isn't a state, it just isn't equal and that is the fundamental mistake the Brexiteers make. Obviously is it sovereign and independent and obviously will be looking to get the best deal possible but that doesn't make it an equal. The UK is smaller than the EU and size does matter.................. The UK was large and now is a medium-sized nation on its own.

So what is the UK's strength at all? I think they are very weak at the moment, no trade deals make them very vulnerable indeed.

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
You would have to ask someone who bought a Rolls Royce that question


No, you say: look at my Rolls Royce key, it only was £100, good value, forgetting about the bulk of the costs. 4,4bn versus 200bn. So the "very good value" remark is quite redicioulous.


That still doesn’t make sense, where the estimate in the equation?

The £200 Billion in the discussion is an estimate, theoretical whereas the Rolls in your analogy is real merchandise just like the £4.4 Billion


Actually the exact amount is irrelevant. If it is £200 Billion, or £150 Billion or £250 Billion, it doesn't matter that much. What matters is you ignore it completely and only want to talk a bout £4,4 Billion. As long as you ignore the elephant in the room, anything you say about the cost of Brexit is complete and utter bull. You're ignoring at least 95% of the cost of Brexit, why? Is it the inconvinient truth for you?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sat Aug 01, 2020 9:14 pm

A101 wrote:
All imports to the EU are following EU law/regulations; tariffs and quotas do not infringe on the SM it only reduces trade barriers between nations. The Unites States currently has different national standards to the EU across many segments i do not see the EU stopping imports from the US, but there are trade barriers in place in the form tariffs and quotas


Not sure what you’re trying to say there, but US goods that do not meet EU standards are, in fact, stopped from entering the EU. Quotas and tariffs only apply to goods that also meet EU standards.

To illustrate the point: how much chlorinated chicken can the US export to the EU?
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:47 pm

Kluas wrote:

Your "equal nations" is complete fiction in actual reality.
Among other things because the UK is now negotiationg as one nation with 27 other nations.

Might be one block but you certainty are not a Federation a single entity.

That in itself can be a weak position as each have their own individual interests over the other as we have seen with the French and CFP.
The old adage of too many cooks…….


Kluas wrote:
Also because those 27 other nations represent a united trade bloc multiple times as large as the UK (which largely determines who sets how much of the agenda and the outcome).

But individually very reliant on the UK for trade, there is just as much risk to the EU membership as too the UK
Kluas wrote:
The consequences of a failure to reach an agreement are extremely asymmetric to the disadvantage of the UK, and at least the EU27 know it (so do at least some on the UK side).

And that also is the fundamental weakness of the EU, you might trade as a block but you are also not a federation either each nation is still responsible to its own economy, if one fails it reverberates across the EU as we saw with Greece
Kluas wrote:
The EU single market is an established and well-defended resource which the UK brexiter government both wants to exploit and also to unilaterally undermine (see the promises made to Tory backbenchers).

As is the UK despite the many pessimistic outlook viewed by many on here the UK economy continued to grow despite Brexit, and is expected to grow with or without a trade deal with the EU



Kluas wrote:
There is no equality in this, on effectively no level. That is just a facile fiction which has no actual reality.

The UK has effectively chosen to:

a) live mostly by EU rules to the exclusion of a more extensive US deal

b) live mostly by US rules to the exclusion of a more extensive EU deal


That's pretty much it, and each one is a long way down from the influence the UK has had as an EU member.

No, the UK has chosen to trade as an independent nation and will not be beholden to either the EU or US in respect to enshrining foreign law into domestic law
The EU/UK currently does not have an FTA with the US but we do have an MRA and trade will continue just as trade between the EU/US will continue under the same conditions

Kluas wrote:
c) effectively go the North Korean route and have easy access to neither of these countries/blocs

Wow will both the EU/US will drop its WTO membership?
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:58 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
A101 wrote:
All imports to the EU are following EU law/regulations; tariffs and quotas do not infringe on the SM it only reduces trade barriers between nations. The Unites States currently has different national standards to the EU across many segments i do not see the EU stopping imports from the US, but there are trade barriers in place in the form tariffs and quotas


Not sure what you’re trying to say there, but US goods that do not meet EU standards are, in fact, stopped from entering the EU. Quotas and tariffs only apply to goods that also meet EU standards.

To illustrate the point: how much chlorinated chicken can the US export to the EU?


I guess you missed the 1st line of my post;
“All imports to the EU are following EU law/regulations”

But without a trade deal and operating under WTO rules products will obviously meet EU national standards for the product themselves, but the exception is that the US do not need to comply with EU employment environmental or state aid rules etc

EU/US trade on rules governed by WTO and the US has in no way compromised its domestic laws/regulations & standards to meet EU standards in those sectors
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4218
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:02 am

Boeing has stopped using the tax subsidies in Washington State to comply with international rulings.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:13 am

Yes sadly or in my eyes Brexit is connected to a world that does not exist anymore.

Trump has destroyed both WTO and NATO. WTO does not work without USA and EU actively make it work.

Nato, france has never been very exited, and until now Germany and UK was the big supporters beside USA. But USA and Germany is on collision course. In the first time in the history France has got Germany to discuss a European / EU security model that does not include USA nor UK.

As mentioned now UK need to choice USA or EU. To go the USA path will mean to break with China as it seams.


I think personally both USA and EU makes a strategic error. Considering that 2050 it is estimated that china wll have 20% of world GDP, USA a bit more then 10% EU around 10% USA and EU should work together rather against each other or both loose.

But in this USA need to see EU as the partner not 27 different small countries. This problem is shared by UK. UK and USA does not like EU to become more federate. Both of the same reason and that is influence. It is easier to run 27 nations against each other then against one EU federation.
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:35 am

I think there is an EU before and after UK A50. After UK A50 and USA abandoning of WTO and NATO Germany has accepted the French view that a federate EU is needed.

UK Brexiteers did not realize by executing A50 it lost all control and Veto of EU both for keep EU in a way that EU was still a loose group of 27 nations and not a political, military and economically federation that I think is about to emerge.

Brexiteers was during a long time considering that replacing UK as a contributor to the EU budget was going to be impossible and a internal fight for the budget was about to start with UK laughing on the side.

Now a 1.82 billion € emerged. common debt. For better and worse something new in the history is happening and neither UK nor USA have any influence over it.

So whom will USA call after the next election in February 2021 when it calls Europe? Will it be London or Brussels? I think this is a very important question to ask.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21573
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 1:36 am

A101 wrote:
Kluas wrote:

The quoting function automatically inserts the correct name. It takes an active effort to mangle and misspell it like that, and to do that 6 times in a row at that.

I mean, really?

A101 wrote:
Might be one block but you certainty are not a Federation a single entity.

It doesn't matter at all to the UK (any more) what exact form it takes, but for the purpose of most kinds of international negotiations (notably including this one!), the European Union is one monolithic entity, exactly the same as if it was one single very large country. And one with a well thought through, clear and consistent position presented and defended by a highly capable negotiation team.

There are some who say the EU negotiation team is the best in the world, others put them on par with the americans, but there's nobody else on the same level.

At least in the past before sycophancy began to trump competence in the US government, and unfortunately for you the UK team looks a lot as if it's succumbed to the same disease.

That in itself can be a weak position as each have their own individual interests over the other as we have seen with the French and CFP.
The old adage of too many cooks…….

I know that that was one of the great hopes in the UK Brexit camp, that "divide and conquer" would work with the EU from the outside, but you should have realized a few years ago already that regarding Brexit the EU is fully united and all attempts to exploit any differences have just come to nothing.

That was one of the great shocks to the brexiters that the EU27 were completely united behind the sovereign interests of the Republic of Ireland (and of Spain, while we're at it), but that's the EU vs. a third country for you. You chose this, so better get used to it.

Kluas wrote:
Also because those 27 other nations represent a united trade bloc multiple times as large as the UK (which largely determines who sets how much of the agenda and the outcome).

But individually very reliant on the UK for trade, there is just as much risk to the EU membership as too the UK

There is not a single European country more reliant on the UK than on the EU single market (not even the Republic of Ireland!), and even the various national industrial lobby groups are consistently pushing for the prioritization of the single market over the UK if that's the choice.

So no, we don't need you more than you need us, and we're completely secure in our decision to rather accept no deal than a bad deal which would undermine the single market or any other foundations of our union.

Kluas wrote:
The consequences of a failure to reach an agreement are extremely asymmetric to the disadvantage of the UK, and at least the EU27 know it (so do at least some on the UK side).

And that also is the fundamental weakness of the EU, you might trade as a block but you are also not a federation either each nation is still responsible to its own economy, if one fails it reverberates across the EU as we saw with Greece

As you've seen with Greece, we may bitch and fight over things but we still stick together and do what's necessary. And in actual fact there was no real risk of the meltdown the brexiters had counted on with so much glee.

Same with Brexit: Our preparations for no deal regarding Brexit are suitably advanced already and if it comes to it, it will just come out in the wash with all the COVID-related special measures and extra programs. In the grand scheme of things, a no deal Brexit will be small fry by comparison and it will at best be a footnote for the accountants, but pretty much as it is now, almost nobody will even raise an eyebrow over what the UK has chosen to do to itself.

For the UK, on the other hand, COVID will look like the easy part in relation to the second (and fully deliberately chosen) hammer blow of a no deal Brexit with the subsequent depression, not least since the UK is still completely unprepared and has no chance of making up for lost ground even if the Johnson government got it into their heads to actually make the attempt (which they clearly don't so far).

The only explanation for this is that they will simply fold at the absolute last minute, concoct a wildly distorted story how they pulled off a "miracle" even though they'll just fold to the EU's requests as they did with the exit deal, and their followers will believe that again (just fewer and fewer every time).

Or alternatively, if they choose to complete the secret US negotiations instead (which they intend to keep secret from their own population even after signing them – who could ever suspect anything untoward under those circumstances!) they'll fold to the americans' demands, but not even accepting filthy, chlorine-washed chicken and offering the NHS to be pillaged by US pharma will nullify the US Congress insisting on the UK upholding the Good Friday Agreement on Northern Ireland, not even (and especially not!) if Biden wins.

(There is exactly zero chance of getting a US deal before the next presidential inauguration and if it's Biden there'd be months of new negotiations first.)

Kluas wrote:
The EU single market is an established and well-defended resource which the UK brexiter government both wants to exploit and also to unilaterally undermine (see the promises made to Tory backbenchers).

As is the UK despite the many pessimistic outlook viewed by many on here the UK economy continued to grow despite Brexit, and is expected to grow with or without a trade deal with the EU

It's only growing in your own devaluing currency any more (so not really). And given the state of a post-Brexit UK, you'll need to buy from Europe anyway, deal or no deal and regardless how difficult exporting to the EU may have become by then. Only the level of pain to UK consumers and businesses will be the main variable there.

Kluas wrote:
There is no equality in this, on effectively no level. That is just a facile fiction which has no actual reality.

The UK has effectively chosen to:

a) live mostly by EU rules to the exclusion of a more extensive US deal

b) live mostly by US rules to the exclusion of a more extensive EU deal

That's pretty much it, and each one is a long way down from the influence the UK has had as an EU member.

No, the UK has chosen to trade as an independent nation and will not be beholden to either the EU or US in respect to enshrining foreign law into domestic law

Your negotiators with the Trump team are already offering up the UK agriculture market, the NHS and more, all requiring legislation to allow the US to screw the UK over to their hearts' content.

And the Tories have already begun to obediently lower UK standards for that.

So yes, you'll dance to another large market's tune either way, the only thing you've got left to choose is which set of rules to just take and accept without having any kind of say on them (after throwing away your vote and veto you had in the EU).

The EU/UK currently does not have an FTA with the US but we do have an MRA and trade will continue just as trade between the EU/US will continue under the same conditions

The EU has multiple trade agreements with the US, notably without bowing to US demands due to the EU's sovereign weight in trade on the world stage.

No such luck for a much smaller and clearly desperate UK which needs an agreement after losing all of the ones it had through the EU.

Kluas wrote:
c) effectively go the North Korean route and have easy access to neither of these countries/blocs

Wow will both the EU/US will drop its WTO membership?

WTO is dead. It can't protect you from any abuse or misconduct any more. Your big idol Trump has seen to that.

And that has long been obvious to anybody with eyes to see.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21573
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 1:39 am

olle wrote:
So whom will USA call after the next election in February 2021 when it calls Europe? Will it be London or Brussels? I think this is a very important question to ask.

As before, it will be Berlin, Paris and then maybe Brussels (of course not under Trump).

London will just be told what to do.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21573
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 1:50 am

olle wrote:
Yes sadly or in my eyes Brexit is connected to a world that does not exist anymore.

Trump has destroyed both WTO and NATO. WTO does not work without USA and EU actively make it work.

Biden would still have a chance to revive both NATO and WTO, but if Trump should remain both will effectively be history. Trump will at least get a pat on the head from Putin for destroying NATO and the USA's influence in the world.

Nato, france has never been very exited, and until now Germany and UK was the big supporters beside USA. But USA and Germany is on collision course. In the first time in the history France has got Germany to discuss a European / EU security model that does not include USA nor UK.

Not out of enthusiasm for the idea but out of sheer necessity given that the Trump US is in a disorderly retreat from the world stage and the country is currently crumbling at home.

As mentioned now UK need to choice USA or EU. To go the USA path will mean to break with China as it seams.

Relations with China would be strained in any case right now, though.

I think personally both USA and EU makes a strategic error. Considering that 2050 it is estimated that china wll have 20% of world GDP, USA a bit more then 10% EU around 10% USA and EU should work together rather against each other or both loose.

There is no european part in that error. Trump is destroying the USA's place in the world faster than Europe could compensate in any case, and blindly following Trump the way Johnson is trying to would be out of the question.

But in this USA need to see EU as the partner not 27 different small countries. This problem is shared by UK. UK and USA does not like EU to become more federate. Both of the same reason and that is influence. It is easier to run 27 nations against each other then against one EU federation.

Which is one reason why the EU exists, and it mostly works pretty well (of course while still remaining under permanent reform and renovation).
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 7:31 am

A101 wrote:
But without a trade deal and operating under WTO rules products will obviously meet EU national standards for the product themselves, but the exception is that the US do not need to comply with EU employment environmental or state aid rules etc

EU/US trade on rules governed by WTO and the US has in no way compromised its domestic laws/regulations & standards to meet EU standards in those sectors


That is fine, small trade volume between EU and UK, forget about the car industry, that's whiped out as of January 1st and all other generic products. And not just the EU, but with all the other countries the UK doesn't have any trade deals with from than on. WTO trading, is trading at the most infaverable conditions. That is what WTO rules are. Britain can do whatever it want: give state aid, screw their enviourment snd stipp the help of all their rights. Sounds like going back to the Victorian age, without the state aid thing that is.

Oh, how much do you think that will cost the Birtish economy? Or is that all fictional in your eyes as well because you can't run the two scenario's parallel and measure the differenc (e.g. 130bn versus 4,4bn)?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 7:36 am

Klaus wrote:
olle wrote:
So whom will USA call after the next election in February 2021 when it calls Europe? Will it be London or Brussels? I think this is a very important question to ask.

As before, it will be Berlin, Paris and then maybe Brussels (of course not under Trump).

London will just be told what to do.


No! That can't be, February 2021, the UK will be a proud and independent country. Nobody will be able to tell London what they must do, London will have no commitments anymore and can do whatever they like. Just like the Brexiteers have lied to the UK public about.............
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Olddog
Topic Author
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 8:13 am

France was never excited about Nato for several reasons:
- De Gaulle personal history with the US that tried all they could to not let him lead France free resistance,
- we consider that Nato is mainly used as a tool to force US weapons sales on the EU against EU manufacturers,
- last but not least, the US dreams that next world war will be on EU territories rather then on the pacific side. China will be a tough nut to break.
Sentence from Belgian PM at press conference forbidden due to new rules
 
Olddog
Topic Author
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 8:44 am

noviorbis77 wrote:
Olddog wrote:
Are you for real ? Now that the UK has left you want us to learn english to make your life easier? What about you try to learn some basic sentences in the language of the country you want to go or visit ?


Who is suggesting that? It is nonsense for any English speakers demand others learn or speak English (outside of our nation).

I quite agree, it is respectful and good to engage in the language of the nation you are visiting.

That said the British are traditionally poor at learning second languages.

Our second language is Polish I believe, following the number of our Polish friends that have joined us in the UK.


By the way, a relevant article from today:
Brexit fuels brain drain as skilled Britons head to the EU

The report, a collaboration between the Oxford in BerlinResearch Partnership – a project made up of Oxford university and four Berlin institutions – and the WZB Berlin Social Science Center, also found a “seismic shift” in the number of UK citizens already living abroad who had decided to go a step further by obtaining EU member state passports since 2016, showing how Britain’s vote to leave the EU pushed many individuals into long-term decisions.

The study says that migration from the UK to EU countries has increased by about 30% compared to pre-Brexit numbers. Britons living in other EU countries who decided to obtain EU member state passports as well as their UK ones had increased by more than 500% overall, and by 2,000% in Germany.

Dr Daniel Auer, a co-author of the report, said: “These increases in numbers are of a magnitude that you would expect when a country is hit by a major economic or political crisis.”

Moreover, the study found that UK migrants are among the most educated and skilled of those from any nation, with one of the highest net average income rates, suggesting that Brexit has begun a steady drain of the most talented and productive people to the continent.

In Germany, UK migrants were among the highest earners, bringing in on average €2,812 a month in 2019, just behind those from Austria and the US.

There are now about 1.2 million British citizens living in the EU, between 120,000 and 150,000 of which are in Germany. In the four years since the Brexit referendum, 31,600 Brits have been granted dual British/German citizenship: 2019 saw 14,600 naturalisations compared to 622 in 2015.


It seems some brits thinks that learning a foreign language is not so hard and anyway their children will perfectly learn and become fluent in the foreign language as I can see with the foreigners that settle in my area.
Sentence from Belgian PM at press conference forbidden due to new rules
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:19 am

Klaus wrote:

The quoting function automatically inserts the correct name. It takes an active effort to mangle and misspell it like that, and to do that 6 times in a row at that.
I mean, really?

Not sure what happened there, I didn’t even notice the problem to you showed it

Klaus wrote:
A101 wrote:
Might be one block but you certainty are not a Federation a single entity.

It doesn't matter at all to the UK (any more) what exact form it takes, but for the purpose of most kinds of international negotiations (notably including this one!), the European Union is one monolithic entity, exactly the same as if it was one single very large country. And one with a well thought through, clear and consistent position presented and defended by a highly capable negotiation team.

Really tell that to the Canadians, I think CETA is still only provisionally applied

Klaus wrote:
There are some who say the EU negotiation team is the best in the world, others put them on par with the americans, but there's nobody else on the same level.
At least in the past before sycophancy began to trump competence in the US government, and unfortunately for you the UK team looks a lot as if it's succumbed to the same disease.


Talk about a grandiose sense of self-worth and arrogance, just confirms what I hear from people in the know from DFAT




Klaus wrote:
A101 wrote:
That in itself can be a weak position as each have their own individual interests over the other as we have seen with the French and CFP.
The old adage of too many cooks…….

I know that that was one of the great hopes in the UK Brexit camp, that "divide and conquer" would work with the EU from the outside, but you should have realized a few years ago already that regarding Brexit the EU is fully united and all attempts to exploit any differences have just come to nothing.

Different kettle of fish and different dynamics from the WA, whilst not exposed publicly, I have heard of internal division within the EU in regards to a trade deal with the UK.
As I point out before too many cooks


Klaus wrote:
That was one of the great shocks to the brexiters that the EU27 were completely united behind the sovereign interests of the Republic of Ireland (and of Spain, while we're at it), but that's the EU vs. a third country for you. You chose this, so better get used to it.

Wasn’t so much of a shock more of a disappointment that PM May was such an appeaser

Klaus wrote:
A101 wrote:
But individually very reliant on the UK for trade, there is just as much risk to the EU membership as too the UK

Also because those 27 other nations represent a united trade bloc multiple times as large as the UK (which largely determines who sets how much of the agenda and the outcome).

&
Klaus wrote:
There is not a single European country more reliant on the UK than on the EU single market (not even the Republic of Ireland!), and even the various national industrial lobby groups are consistently pushing for the prioritization of the single market over the UK if that's the choice.

So no, we don't need you more than you need us, and we're completely secure in our decision to rather accept no deal than a bad deal which would undermine the single market or any other foundations of our union.

Well good for you if you believe that trading on no deal wont have too much of a detrimental effect on the EU overall, but it will have an effect on individual nations some are more exposed than others

Klaus wrote:
A101 wrote:
As is the UK despite the many pessimistic outlook viewed by many on here the UK economy continued to grow despite Brexit, and is expected to grow with or without a trade deal with the EU

The EU single market is an established and well-defended resource which the UK brexiter government both wants to exploit and also to unilaterally undermine (see the promises made to Tory backbenchers).

&
Klaus wrote:
It's only growing in your own devaluing currency any more (so not really).

With the currency depreciating means its more attracting to buy from the UK, but that’s nothing unusual for the EU and certain eurozone users wanting to artificially undervalue the €

Klaus wrote:

And given the state of a post-Brexit UK, you'll need to buy from Europe anyway, deal or no deal and regardless how difficult exporting to the EU may have become by then. Only the level of pain to UK consumers and businesses will be the main variable there.

Well of course trade will continue to flow between the EU/UK, we can also reduce our reliance on the EU for a lot of our imports which can be replaced from other nations, which will be chomping at the bit to reduce EU market share




Klaus wrote:
A101 wrote:
No, the UK has chosen to trade as an independent nation and will not be beholden to either the EU or US in respect to enshrining foreign law into domestic law

There is no equality in this, on effectively no level. That is just a facile fiction which has no actual reality.
The UK has effectively chosen to:
a) live mostly by EU rules to the exclusion of a more extensive US deal
b) live mostly by US rules to the exclusion of a more extensive EU deal
That's pretty much it, and each one is a long way down from the influence the UK has had as an EU member.

&
Klaus wrote:
Your negotiators with the Trump team are already offering up the UK agriculture market, the NHS and more, all requiring legislation to allow the US to screw the UK over to their hearts' content.
And the Tories have already begun to obediently lower UK standards for that.
So yes, you'll dance to another large market's tune either way, the only thing you've got left to choose is which set of rules to just take and accept without having any kind of say on them (after throwing away your vote and veto you had in the EU).

Really what legislation has been brought to the House for that to occur to lower our current standards as they would have to make changes to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018
Klaus wrote:
A101 wrote:
The EU/UK currently does not have an FTA with the US but we do have an MRA and trade will continue just as trade between the EU/US will continue under the same conditions

The EU has multiple trade agreements with the US, notably without bowing to US demands due to the EU's sovereign weight in trade on the world stage.
No such luck for a much smaller and clearly desperate UK which needs an agreement after losing all of the ones it had through the EU.

Really there is a US/UK MRA signed on February 14, 2019 which comes into force at the end of the transition period
https://www.nist.gov/standardsgov/us-uk ... -agreement
Klaus wrote:
A101 wrote:
Wow will both the EU/US will drop its WTO membership?

c) effectively go the North Korean route and have easy access to neither of these countries/blocs

&
Klaus wrote:
WTO is dead. It can't protect you from any abuse or misconduct any more. Your big idol Trump has seen to that.

And that has long been obvious to anybody with eyes to see.

Well not in the eyes of the EU apparently, yes trump has put dispute resolution on life support but trump is not going to be around forever. The EU & Canada started an interim dispute resolution body.
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/ch ... 504-p54pkh
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:44 am

Olddog wrote:
noviorbis77 wrote:
Olddog wrote:
Are you for real ? Now that the UK has left you want us to learn english to make your life easier? What about you try to learn some basic sentences in the language of the country you want to go or visit ?


Who is suggesting that? It is nonsense for any English speakers demand others learn or speak English (outside of our nation).

I quite agree, it is respectful and good to engage in the language of the nation you are visiting.

That said the British are traditionally poor at learning second languages.

Our second language is Polish I believe, following the number of our Polish friends that have joined us in the UK.


By the way, a relevant article from today:
Brexit fuels brain drain as skilled Britons head to the EU

The report, a collaboration between the Oxford in BerlinResearch Partnership – a project made up of Oxford university and four Berlin institutions – and the WZB Berlin Social Science Center, also found a “seismic shift” in the number of UK citizens already living abroad who had decided to go a step further by obtaining EU member state passports since 2016, showing how Britain’s vote to leave the EU pushed many individuals into long-term decisions.

The study says that migration from the UK to EU countries has increased by about 30% compared to pre-Brexit numbers. Britons living in other EU countries who decided to obtain EU member state passports as well as their UK ones had increased by more than 500% overall, and by 2,000% in Germany.

Dr Daniel Auer, a co-author of the report, said: “These increases in numbers are of a magnitude that you would expect when a country is hit by a major economic or political crisis.”

Moreover, the study found that UK migrants are among the most educated and skilled of those from any nation, with one of the highest net average income rates, suggesting that Brexit has begun a steady drain of the most talented and productive people to the continent.

In Germany, UK migrants were among the highest earners, bringing in on average €2,812 a month in 2019, just behind those from Austria and the US.

There are now about 1.2 million British citizens living in the EU, between 120,000 and 150,000 of which are in Germany. In the four years since the Brexit referendum, 31,600 Brits have been granted dual British/German citizenship: 2019 saw 14,600 naturalisations compared to 622 in 2015.


It seems some brits thinks that learning a foreign language is not so hard and anyway their children will perfectly learn and become fluent in the foreign language as I can see with the foreigners that settle in my area.


I even think that without covid the immigration would have been even bigger.

With brexit and the extension until 2021 we still have not seen the complication for the individual to move. Free movement still rules. After 2020 the UK migrant or expert need to find first a job and one employerr happy enough to do the migration paperwork. This is a big disadvantage if the employer can choice between a EU EEA person that can start to work next day without sponsorship or a person from UK needing extra work. Extreme experts or intra organisation movement will still be ok, but someone testing to take a job in paris, berlin as a adventure will be complicated.

I persinally hax been working in different places and must say EU free movement is a fantastic thing.

I think many smart uk persons without right of ROI passport takes the chance before the end of 2020 to get EU passports. Even for an UK employer thos will be of value in the future.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:59 am

A101 wrote:
Well good for you if you believe that trading on no deal wont have too much of a detrimental effect on the EU overall, but it will have an effect on individual nations some are more exposed than others


Sure, including my country. But we all have to regonize the fact that GB is the one getting hit the hardest by far. The EU looses one market, GB looses the EU27 and all other trade deals the EU has, so what was it again, another 90plus countries? So actually no comparison at all.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 10:23 am

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Well good for you if you believe that trading on no deal won’t have too much of a detrimental effect on the EU overall, but it will have an effect on individual nations some are more exposed than others

Sure, including my country. But we all have to regonize the fact that GB is the one getting hit the hardest by far. The EU looses one market, GB looses the EU27 and all other trade deals the EU has, so what was it again, another 90plus countries? So actually no comparison at all.


And a market which was the third largest in the EU at the time.


Last time I checked and this is not up to date but I believe that the EU has around 42 trade deals covering 70 odd countries and the UK rolled over about 19 agreements covering around 50 countries
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 11:03 am

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Well good for you if you believe that trading on no deal won’t have too much of a detrimental effect on the EU overall, but it will have an effect on individual nations some are more exposed than others

Sure, including my country. But we all have to regonize the fact that GB is the one getting hit the hardest by far. The EU looses one market, GB looses the EU27 and all other trade deals the EU has, so what was it again, another 90plus countries? So actually no comparison at all.


And a market which was the third largest in the EU at the time.

Last time I checked and this is not up to date but I believe that the EU has around 42 trade deals covering 70 odd countries and the UK rolled over about 19 agreements covering around 50 countries


Could you provide the links with that, please.

Anyhow, it doesn't deminise my statement at all, it only soften it a bit, if true and if those rolled over agreements actually have some substance to it and doesn't cover the Bahama's and other countries which doesn't really do much for the UK economy.

The point was, it will hurt the UK far far more than any EU nation ever will, which is just common sense.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Grizzly410
Posts: 419
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:04 pm

A101 wrote:
ElPistolero wrote:
A101 wrote:
All imports to the EU are following EU law/regulations; tariffs and quotas do not infringe on the SM it only reduces trade barriers between nations. The Unites States currently has different national standards to the EU across many segments i do not see the EU stopping imports from the US, but there are trade barriers in place in the form tariffs and quotas


Not sure what you’re trying to say there, but US goods that do not meet EU standards are, in fact, stopped from entering the EU. Quotas and tariffs only apply to goods that also meet EU standards.

To illustrate the point: how much chlorinated chicken can the US export to the EU?


I guess you missed the 1st line of my post;
“All imports to the EU are following EU law/regulations”

I think you are confusing law/regulations and standards.

All foreign good sold in EU comply with EU standards.

A101 wrote:
But without a trade deal and operating under WTO rules products will obviously meet EU national standards for the product themselves, but the exception is that the US do not need to comply with EU employment environmental or state aid rules etc


No exception with US, they can sell product that meets EU standard, but not tariff/quota free.
In order to be old and wise, one must first be young and dumb.
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:12 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Sure, including my country. But we all have to regonize the fact that GB is the one getting hit the hardest by far. The EU looses one market, GB looses the EU27 and all other trade deals the EU has, so what was it again, another 90plus countries? So actually no comparison at all.


And a market which was the third largest in the EU at the time.

Last time I checked and this is not up to date but I believe that the EU has around 42 trade deals covering 70 odd countries and the UK rolled over about 19 agreements covering around 50 countries


Could you provide the links with that, please.

Anyhow, it doesn't deminise my statement at all, it only soften it a bit, if true and if those rolled over agreements actually have some substance to it and doesn't cover the Bahama's and other countries which doesn't really do much for the UK economy.

The point was, it will hurt the UK far far more than any EU nation ever will, which is just common sense.



Market size by population:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... population

Trade agreements by EU & UK;

https://fullfact.org/election-2019/ask- ... ade-deals/

I wasn’t far off using my memory
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 5:00 pm

Grizzly410 wrote:
A101 wrote:

But without a trade deal and operating under WTO rules products will obviously meet EU national standards for the product themselves, but the exception is that the US do not need to comply with EU employment environmental or state aid rules etc


No exception with US, they can sell product that meets EU standard, but not tariff/quota free.


Yep that correct, I knew that as tariffs are part of the CCT. I also vaguely remember reading that the EU granted the US a guarantee quota as part of the high grain beef imports to try and appease Trump from starting a trade war with the EU. From memory they had to get other permission to do so as part of WTO rules. Australia reluctantly agree to the request from the EU. I’d have to check the timeline but it was no long after thatvthe EU/AU started talking about a FTA between the two

I will see if I can find the article again later.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 5:40 pm

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:

And a market which was the third largest in the EU at the time.

Last time I checked and this is not up to date but I believe that the EU has around 42 trade deals covering 70 odd countries and the UK rolled over about 19 agreements covering around 50 countries


Could you provide the links with that, please.

Anyhow, it doesn't deminise my statement at all, it only soften it a bit, if true and if those rolled over agreements actually have some substance to it and doesn't cover the Bahama's and other countries which doesn't really do much for the UK economy.

The point was, it will hurt the UK far far more than any EU nation ever will, which is just common sense.



Market size by population:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... population

Trade agreements by EU & UK;

https://fullfact.org/election-2019/ask- ... ade-deals/

I wasn’t far off using my memory


The UK is currently seeking continuity for its existing EU trade agreements with a number of countries after Brexit, and trade with them made up about 11% of UK trade in goods and services in 2018


So those 50 countries covered only account for 11% of the trade. That's what I meant. Anyhow, those need to be negotiated anyhow in due time and. remember they can't get any better for the UK, the EU made sure there is an article in each and every trade agreement that the EU will always get the most favorable conditions, so the UK could get at most the same conditions and probably get less.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Olddog
Topic Author
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Sun Aug 02, 2020 5:45 pm

The bulk of un gdp is financial services that is usually not included in fta, or it is strictly limited
Sentence from Belgian PM at press conference forbidden due to new rules
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:12 am

My previous post must have hit a nerve with someone, it’s gone walkabout

Dutchy wrote:

So those 50 countries covered only account for 11% of the trade. That's what I meant



Well that’s very different to what you actually said;

Dutchy :coffee:
The EU looses one market, GB looses the EU27 and all other trade deals the EU has, so what was it again, another 90plus countries?



Dutchy wrote:
Anyhow, those need to be negotiated anyhow in due time


Yes and no, that all depends on how they were rolled over. We would have to read every MRA to see if that’s the case or not

Dutchy wrote:
remember they can't get any better for the UK, the EU made sure there is an article in each and every trade agreement that the EU will always get the most favorable conditions, so the UK could get at most the same conditions and probably get less.


That’s true for existing agreements, but there is scope for more extensive agreements to be made from nation who currently do not have an agreement with the EU
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Mon Aug 03, 2020 1:56 pm

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

So those 50 countries covered only account for 11% of the trade. That's what I meant



Well that’s very different to what you actually said;

Dutchy :coffee:
The EU looses one market, GB looses the EU27 and all other trade deals the EU has, so what was it again, another 90plus countries?


Come to think of it, actually no. If you want to catch me on words, which you seem to want to do, because you do not want to talk about the negative consequences of Brexit only the vague concept of UK indepentence.
The UK looses trade deals with 90plus countries (point). The 90plus contries consists of: the 72 you said - fine, I take that for granted now, don't feel like researching it - plus EU27 = 99 countries. Which is more than 90 so what I said was factually correct. The rolling over part is dealt with below:

[quote='A101']
Dutchy wrote:
Anyhow, those need to be negotiated anyhow in due time


Yes and no, that all depends on how they were rolled over. We would have to read every MRA to see if that’s the case or not


Until rolling over means it actually is a Trade Deal with EU crossed out and the UK put in her place, then yes. Until it is actually determined to be the case, it is still factually correct to say the UK does lose those deals, and all need to be negotiated.

So that said. Even if that were the case for all the "rolling over deals" even then the UK loses trade-deals with 89% of the trade volume, among which the most favorable trade deal it can ever have with the EU countries. The most important thing in the article: it only represents 11% of the trade.

In real terms, the UK business will lose big time and then we go back to the 200billion pounds mentioned before which you just waved away as projections. But that is the effect the Brexiteers voted for, fewer trade deals = fewer trade. It is a consequence of Brexit. So all Brexiteers should own that inconvenient truth as well and not disnounsing it. Brexit was never without consequences, never, that was the whole point of Brexit, wasn't it?

[quote='A101']
Dutchy wrote:
remember they can't get any better for the UK, the EU made sure there is an article in each and every trade agreement that the EU will always get the most favorable conditions, so the UK could get at most the same conditions and probably get less.


That’s true for existing agreements, but there is scope for more extensive agreements to be made from nation who currently do not have an agreement with the EU[/quote]

Sure, the UK can make any deal with countries the EU doesn't have a deal with. China and America are prime examples.
Remember, though, the EU tried to negotiate a deal with America, and it hasn't come to fruition yet, because America demanded certain things, which the EU can't agree to. Now, what do you think will happen when the UK wants a trade deal in their current unfavorable situation? Do you think it is more or less likely that the UK will get a better trade deal than the EU wanted to negotiate? I think we all know the answer to that one...........................
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Olddog
Topic Author
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Mon Aug 03, 2020 4:43 pm

The main problem the uk is that it needs to find countries large enough and willing to let an access to financial services. Good luck with that.
Sentence from Belgian PM at press conference forbidden due to new rules
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:32 pm

Olddog wrote:
The main problem the uk is that it needs to find countries large enough and willing to let an access to financial services. Good luck with that.



And import japanese uk built cars with a low uk content.

But yes financial services is the main export of uk. Even if not counted on trade balances it has been mainly exporting this to EU.

So actually yhe trade to be replaced is sctually mord then official noticed. Just like construction of houses to uk pensioners has bern a spanish unofficial export that also not has been counted.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Mon Aug 03, 2020 6:26 pm

Olddog wrote:
The main problem the uk is that it needs to find countries large enough and willing to let an access to financial services. Good luck with that.


yup, you are right of course. Personally, I have no sympathy for bankers and their losing their jobs because London will lose their financial hup position. I have more compassion for the autoworker losing their job because nobody within the EU will pay the tariff of 10%(?!) import on a generic vehicle.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Mon Aug 03, 2020 11:01 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Until rolling over means it actually is a Trade Deal with EU crossed out and the UK put in her place, then yes. Until it is actually determined to be the case, it is still factually correct to say the UK does lose those deals, and all need to be negotiated.



Looked into it a little further, those agreements are legally recognised trade agreements

Dutchy wrote:

So that said. Even if that were the case for all the "rolling over deals" even then the UK loses trade-deals with 89% of the trade volume, among which the most favorable trade deal it can ever have with the EU countries. The most important thing in the article: it only represents 11% of the trade


All that means is that those agreements we are still negotiating on trade still happens just on WTO rules just like dealing with the EU

Dutchy wrote:

In real terms, the UK business will lose big time and then we go back to the 200billion pounds mentioned before which you just waved away as projections. But that is the effect the Brexiteers voted for, fewer trade deals = fewer trade. It is a consequence of Brexit. So all Brexiteers should own that inconvenient truth as well and not disnounsing it. Brexit was never without consequences, never, that was the whole point of Brexit, wasn't it?



Nope those same nations will still want to trade with the UK just like the EU does with just a few more barriers in place, I think when the dust settles and irrespective if we reach a deal or not that DIT is going to be very busy next year, more so if no deal is the outcome with the EU as most others will see it will be an advantage over the EU market share trading under the same conditions as now.

Coronavirus has impacted world economy immensely, restoring trade between like minded nations is going to be very important for national recovery even with the rift with China.


Dutchy wrote:

Remember, though, the EU tried to negotiate a deal with America, and it hasn't come to fruition yet, because America demanded certain things, which the EU can't agree to.


Just because the EU couldn’t come to an acceptable agreement doesn’t mean the UK cant.

Dutchy wrote:
Now, what do you think will happen when the UK wants a trade deal in their current unfavorable situation? Do you think it is more or less likely that the UK will get a better trade deal than the EU wanted to negotiate? I think we all know the answer to that one...........................



The US is currently the UK’s single biggest trading partner and that is without a trade agreement.

The UK will do what is in its interests as I said before to lower food/employment standards or whatever means the EU withdrawal Act has to be repealed, so far I have seen no such bill to do so.

“At the end of the transition period, existing food safety, animal welfare, and environmental standards will be retained through the EU Withdrawal Act and form part of our domestic law. This includes existing import requirements.”
 
Olddog
Topic Author
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 5:43 am

Dutchy wrote:
Olddog wrote:
The main problem the uk is that it needs to find countries large enough and willing to let an access to financial services. Good luck with that.


yup, you are right of course. Personally, I have no sympathy for bankers and their losing their jobs because London will lose their financial hup position. I have more compassion for the autoworker losing their job because nobody within the EU will pay the tariff of 10%(?!) import on a generic vehicle.



What is rather fun is to see all the manifestations at sunderland because Nissan could close, albeit sunderland voted at more than 60% for brexit. Karma is a bitch :)
Sentence from Belgian PM at press conference forbidden due to new rules
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 7:16 am

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Until rolling over means it actually is a Trade Deal with EU crossed out and the UK put in her place, then yes. Until it is actually determined to be the case, it is still factually correct to say the UK does lose those deals, and all need to be negotiated.



Looked into it a little further, those agreements are legally recognised trade agreements

Dutchy wrote:

So that said. Even if that were the case for all the "rolling over deals" even then the UK loses trade-deals with 89% of the trade volume, among which the most favorable trade deal it can ever have with the EU countries. The most important thing in the article: it only represents 11% of the trade


All that means is that those agreements we are still negotiating on trade still happens just on WTO rules just like dealing with the EU

Dutchy wrote:

In real terms, the UK business will lose big time and then we go back to the 200billion pounds mentioned before which you just waved away as projections. But that is the effect the Brexiteers voted for, fewer trade deals = fewer trade. It is a consequence of Brexit. So all Brexiteers should own that inconvenient truth as well and not disnounsing it. Brexit was never without consequences, never, that was the whole point of Brexit, wasn't it?



Nope those same nations will still want to trade with the UK just like the EU does with just a few more barriers in place, I think when the dust settles and irrespective if we reach a deal or not that DIT is going to be very busy next year, more so if no deal is the outcome with the EU as most others will see it will be an advantage over the EU market share trading under the same conditions as now.

Coronavirus has impacted world economy immensely, restoring trade between like minded nations is going to be very important for national recovery even with the rift with China.


Dutchy wrote:

Remember, though, the EU tried to negotiate a deal with America, and it hasn't come to fruition yet, because America demanded certain things, which the EU can't agree to.


Just because the EU couldn’t come to an acceptable agreement doesn’t mean the UK cant.

Dutchy wrote:
Now, what do you think will happen when the UK wants a trade deal in their current unfavorable situation? Do you think it is more or less likely that the UK will get a better trade deal than the EU wanted to negotiate? I think we all know the answer to that one...........................



The US is currently the UK’s single biggest trading partner and that is without a trade agreement.

The UK will do what is in its interests as I said before to lower food/employment standards or whatever means the EU withdrawal Act has to be repealed, so far I have seen no such bill to do so.

“At the end of the transition period, existing food safety, animal welfare, and environmental standards will be retained through the EU Withdrawal Act and form part of our domestic law. This includes existing import requirements.”


Not going to react to each and every point anymore, I just say, your perspective is naief and more based on hope than anything else. Sure everything you say could happen, I could win the lottery as well, not very likely to say the least, but it could. No use to speculate on what could happen, we can see what does happen.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 7:22 am

Olddog wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Olddog wrote:
The main problem the uk is that it needs to find countries large enough and willing to let an access to financial services. Good luck with that.


yup, you are right of course. Personally, I have no sympathy for bankers and their losing their jobs because London will lose their financial hup position. I have more compassion for the autoworker losing their job because nobody within the EU will pay the tariff of 10%(?!) import on a generic vehicle.



What is rather fun is to see all the manifestations at sunderland because Nissan could close, albeit sunderland voted at more than 60% for brexit. Karma is a bitch :)


I understand you are just joking, but there is a serious note to that, the people in Sunderland (and elsewhere) were dopped into voting for Brexit. They actually believed that Brexit would better their lives, but irony - of course, everyone thinking logically could and should have known it at the time - is that they will pay for their decision and people supporting the Brexit campaign will escape the negative economic consequences and most probably will benefit from it. So yeah, Karma is a bitch, but I wish noone to be out. of a job because of their decission, without fully understanding the consequences for their personal lives. And. before some Brexiteers start, if they fully understood the consequences, than sure, I am fine with it and feel no compassion fo them.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 7:46 am

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Until rolling over means it actually is a Trade Deal with EU crossed out and the UK put in her place, then yes. Until it is actually determined to be the case, it is still factually correct to say the UK does lose those deals, and all need to be negotiated.



Looked into it a little further, those agreements are legally recognised trade agreements

Dutchy wrote:

So that said. Even if that were the case for all the "rolling over deals" even then the UK loses trade-deals with 89% of the trade volume, among which the most favorable trade deal it can ever have with the EU countries. The most important thing in the article: it only represents 11% of the trade


All that means is that those agreements we are still negotiating on trade still happens just on WTO rules just like dealing with the EU

Dutchy wrote:

In real terms, the UK business will lose big time and then we go back to the 200billion pounds mentioned before which you just waved away as projections. But that is the effect the Brexiteers voted for, fewer trade deals = fewer trade. It is a consequence of Brexit. So all Brexiteers should own that inconvenient truth as well and not disnounsing it. Brexit was never without consequences, never, that was the whole point of Brexit, wasn't it?



Nope those same nations will still want to trade with the UK just like the EU does with just a few more barriers in place, I think when the dust settles and irrespective if we reach a deal or not that DIT is going to be very busy next year, more so if no deal is the outcome with the EU as most others will see it will be an advantage over the EU market share trading under the same conditions as now.

Coronavirus has impacted world economy immensely, restoring trade between like minded nations is going to be very important for national recovery even with the rift with China.


Dutchy wrote:

Remember, though, the EU tried to negotiate a deal with America, and it hasn't come to fruition yet, because America demanded certain things, which the EU can't agree to.


Just because the EU couldn’t come to an acceptable agreement doesn’t mean the UK cant.

Dutchy wrote:
Now, what do you think will happen when the UK wants a trade deal in their current unfavorable situation? Do you think it is more or less likely that the UK will get a better trade deal than the EU wanted to negotiate? I think we all know the answer to that one...........................



The US is currently the UK’s single biggest trading partner and that is without a trade agreement.

The UK will do what is in its interests as I said before to lower food/employment standards or whatever means the EU withdrawal Act has to be repealed, so far I have seen no such bill to do so.

“At the end of the transition period, existing food safety, animal welfare, and environmental standards will be retained through the EU Withdrawal Act and form part of our domestic law. This includes existing import requirements.”


Not going to react to each and every point anymore, I just say, your perspective is naief and more based on hope than anything else. Sure everything you say could happen, I could win the lottery as well, not very likely to say the least, but it could. No use to speculate on what could happen, we can see what does happen.



I guess I’m not just a pessimistic person, but agree with the sentiment we have to wait and see what transpires in the future. It seems I’m more of an optimist than you :D
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 10:40 am

A101 wrote:
I guess I’m not just a pessimistic person, but agree with the sentiment we have to wait and see what transpires in the future. It seems I’m more of an optimist than you :D


Nope, you are not, sorry to break your bubble. I am very optimistic about the future of the EU and I am very optimistic that the UK will join the EU again in 5 - 10 years. And I am just a realist about the changes of the UK - with a hard Brexit - outside of the EU, just following logic and not believing in unicorn. If you perceive that as a pessimist than that is up to you.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 12:07 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
I guess I’m not just a pessimistic person, but agree with the sentiment we have to wait and see what transpires in the future. It seems I’m more of an optimist than you




Nope, you are not, sorry to break your bubble.



Each to their own I suppose

Dutchy wrote:
I am very optimistic about the future of the EU


Well I’m glad you feel that way, no sense walking around with an upside down smile





Dutchy wrote:

and I am very optimistic that the UK will join the EU again in 5 - 10 years.


Well one can say the upside of the current situation is if there are any pro-remain MP’s sitting in parliament they become pro-leave by default as in just as much of their own interests that the UK becomes more prosperous outside the EU as generally if they vote for amendments that fail to enhance the UK will most likely be voted out of office come the next GE


Dutchy wrote:

And I am just a realist about the changes of the UK - with a hard Brexit - outside of the EU, just following logic and not believing in unicorn. If you perceive that as a pessimist than that is up to you.


Least it won’t keep you up at night wondering what’s going to happen to the UK
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 12:07 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Olddog wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

yup, you are right of course. Personally, I have no sympathy for bankers and their losing their jobs because London will lose their financial hup position. I have more compassion for the autoworker losing their job because nobody within the EU will pay the tariff of 10%(?!) import on a generic vehicle.



What is rather fun is to see all the manifestations at sunderland because Nissan could close, albeit sunderland voted at more than 60% for brexit. Karma is a bitch :)


I understand you are just joking, but there is a serious note to that, the people in Sunderland (and elsewhere) were dopped into voting for Brexit. They actually believed that Brexit would better their lives, but irony - of course, everyone thinking logically could and should have known it at the time - is that they will pay for their decision and people supporting the Brexit campaign will escape the negative economic consequences and most probably will benefit from it. So yeah, Karma is a bitch, but I wish noone to be out. of a job because of their decission, without fully understanding the consequences for their personal lives. And. before some Brexiteers start, if they fully understood the consequences, than sure, I am fine with it and feel no compassion fo them.


MS Tatcher got the Japanese car manufacturing to UK on the basis that a lack of FTA Japan EU made it complicated for Japanese cars to be sold in EU or ECC that it was called during the period.

Now there is a 0 tariff 0 quota Japanese EU FTA in place. Of some reason this was agreed around 6 month after A50 was triggered and UK lost its veto over EU FTA negotiations. Does the worker and the unions in sunderland and other locations in UK understands the effect of this FTA?

Sunderland will not be closed directly but the death will come slowly. New investments is needed. A downturn in car sales etc. All this can trigger that the cars is shipped directly from Japan instead of UK to EU. Japanese car manufacturing in UK is by 90% bound for EU.
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 12:11 pm

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
I guess I’m not just a pessimistic person, but agree with the sentiment we have to wait and see what transpires in the future. It seems I’m more of an optimist than you




Nope, you are not, sorry to break your bubble.



Each to their own I suppose

Dutchy wrote:
I am very optimistic about the future of the EU


Well I’m glad you feel that way, no sense walking around with an upside down smile





Dutchy wrote:

and I am very optimistic that the UK will join the EU again in 5 - 10 years.


Well one can say the upside of the current situation is if there are any pro-remain MP’s sitting in parliament they become pro-leave by default as in just as much of their own interests that the UK becomes more prosperous outside the EU as generally if they vote for amendments that fail to enhance the UK will most likely be voted out of office come the next GE


Dutchy wrote:

And I am just a realist about the changes of the UK - with a hard Brexit - outside of the EU, just following logic and not believing in unicorn. If you perceive that as a pessimist than that is up to you.


Least it won’t keep you up at night wondering what’s going to happen to the UK



I personally consider that 5-10 years is a very short time. I consider rather 25-35 years. I think that special France and south Europe want to take the absence as a chance to make a more federal Europe. A UK as member will never accept a EU with common budget defense etc.

If EU becomes Nato member instead of Germany, France, Denmark etc etc suddenly there will be USA, EU and a few smaller defenses like UK, Canada and Norway.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4218
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:11 pm

Is that 160 billion actually due, or is it backing for loans that likely will be repaid? On my quick read it is the later.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
wingman
Posts: 3948
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 5:23 pm

$190B?? That's about 9 years worth of EU funds the UK was supposed to divert to the NHS each week. Someone really needs to bring back Spitting Image. Between Trump and Boris you don't even need to make the muppets, just insert live action footage and voila, comedic effect guaranteed every time. I don't know who this other guy Duncan Smith is but just the name alone makes him sound like a hrummppfer of first order.

Every day I wake up thinking Trump can't possibly be real, and then I turn on the BBC and realize the shit is apparently going around. Maybe there's an unknown jack-wagon disease afflicting English speakers.
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 5:30 pm

Probably some of the loans are even for projects in UK that EU as whole has signed up to. The question could be why shall sweden or germany sign up for debt in uk? The answer is that we did and we take responsibility for what we agree to until these credits expires. Some short in the future some perhaps 30 years in the future.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11776
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:10 pm

I don't know how it actually works, but wouldn't it be nice to have a vote and rule that all countries currently in a transition period are solely responsible to pay back the 750bn? All in favor say: Ai, all against say Neh. Ah, that is a shame, the UK doesn't have a vote anymore, they voted themselves out.......
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Tue Aug 04, 2020 7:08 pm

There is a number of examples of UK projects;

https://www.eib.org/en/stories/uk-medical-innovation

https://www.eib.org/en/podcasts/london-crossrail-trains

etc

The European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)
EFSI is the central pillar of the Investment Plan for Europe. It helps overcome the investment gap, boost jobs and GDP and improve the lives of people across Europe, including the UK. It finances strategic investments in key areas such as infrastructure, research and innovation, education, renewable energy and energy efficiency as well as providing risk finance to SMEs.

Brexit: The United Kingdom received EFSI financing during its membership of the European Union. Following its withdrawal from the EU, the United Kingdom does not receive any new support under EFSI.
 
Reinhardt
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:05 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Aug 06, 2020 11:04 am

A101 wrote:
The US is currently the UK’s single biggest trading partner and that is without a trade agreement.


You said it, largest SINGLE partner. EU is massively higher both imports and exports. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... ed_Kingdom

It doesn't have an official trade agreement that's correct, however it is currently very easy to do business with the US from the UK / EU. Yes there are costs involved however a lot of US electrical goods standards are effectively the same as EU, customs procedures between the two blocks are incredibly straight forward and therefore cheap, the level of transatlantic freight flights is huge. If you buy something from a US company and get it delivered to the UK as long as it isn't very big is cheap, fast and easy. The same the other way. I was directly involved in doing this for years.

Actually a trade agreement with the US only helps one side, the US. The UK makes nothing of worth that the US needs or will import in big quantities. Since the US is going for locally made, and trying to pull as much back from China as possible, it makes no sense they will do a favor for the UK to buy in goods.

It's all about services (buying out smaller UK companies..more and more of who will be struggling because of Covid and Brexit), food and insurance / NHS. It's asset stripping.


A101 wrote:
The UK will do what is in its interests as I said before to lower food/employment standards or whatever means the EU withdrawal Act has to be repealed, so far I have seen no such bill to do so.

“At the end of the transition period, existing food safety, animal welfare, and environmental standards will be retained through the EU Withdrawal Act and form part of our domestic law. This includes existing import requirements.”


Thay may be, but we know the US are demanding entry into the UK food sector and health as a requirement of a deal. So if the UK says no..what happens to the deal? Also please remember the US, especially Democrats said there should be no risk to the Good Friday Agreement and that security trumps any trade deal. Border posts are incredibly close to breaching the agreement and no matter what you say, there will be an effective border between Ireland and N Ireland. This won't be easy to negotiate at all, since both sides have massive red lines.

If the current UK govt does anything to cave to US demands on food or the NHS they will be unelectable for a generation. But certain Tories are already trying to get out of the EU Withdrawl Act..they want it rewritten as they didn't read it the first time.
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Aug 06, 2020 11:19 am

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Is that 160 billion actually due, or is it backing for loans that likely will be repaid? On my quick read it is the later.



With a big part of this for UK projects. Imagine the opposite, EU27 countries backing of UK projects when UK leaves?
 
A101
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Aug 06, 2020 10:52 pm

Reinhardt wrote:
A101 wrote:
The US is currently the UK’s single biggest trading partner and that is without a trade agreement.

You said it, largest SINGLE partner. EU is massively higher both imports and exports. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... ed_Kingdom

Not sure what you are actually saying here because the link you provide actually supports my statement that the US is the single largest trade partner for the UK, if you look at any number of trade statistics it no one treats the EU as a single entity for trade statistics.

Whilst the EU is a bureaucratic monolith when it comes to terms and conditions of trading with EU members nations trade is with the nation to nation not the bureaucratic behemoth in Brussels

Reinhardt wrote:
It doesn't have an official trade agreement that's correct, however it is currently very easy to do business with the US from the UK / EU. Yes there are costs involved however a lot of US electrical goods standards are effectively the same as EU, customs procedures between the two blocks are incredibly straight forward and therefore cheap, the level of transatlantic freight flights is huge. If you buy something from a US company and get it delivered to the UK as long as it isn't very big is cheap, fast and easy. The same the other way. I was directly involved in doing this for years.

How would that change between UK/US under WTO rules?


Reinhardt wrote:
Actually a trade agreement with the US only helps one side, the US. The UK makes nothing of worth that the US needs or will import in big quantities. Since the US is going for locally made, and trying to pull as much back from China as possible, it makes no sense they will do a favor for the UK to buy in goods.

That would imply those trade conditions would change for all nation doing business with the US not just the UK


Reinhardt wrote:
It's all about services (buying out smaller UK companies..more and more of who will be struggling because of Covid and Brexit), food and insurance / NHS. It's asset stripping.

That’s just not a phenomenon applicable to the UK, every nation is at risk of that and happens quite a bit in the private sector around the world and mostly influenced by globalization

Reinhardt wrote:
A101 wrote:
The UK will do what is in its interests as I said before to lower food/employment standards or whatever means the EU withdrawal Act has to be repealed, so far, I have seen no such bill to do so.
“At the end of the transition period, existing food safety, animal welfare, and environmental standards will be retained through the EU Withdrawal Act and form part of our domestic law. This includes existing import requirements.”

Thay may be, but we know the US are demanding entry into the UK food sector and health as a requirement of a deal. So if the UK says no..what happens to the deal?

Most likely the same thing that’s happening in the EU/UK trade talks, not much different from the EU demanding that the UK accept a LPF, jurisdiction of the ECJ and the status quo on fisheries etc for a trade deal
Reinhardt wrote:
Also please remember the US, especially Democrats said there should be no risk to the Good Friday Agreement and that security trumps any trade deal. Border posts are incredibly close to breaching the agreement and no matter what you say, there will be an effective border between Ireland and N Ireland. This won't be easy to negotiate at all, since both sides have massive red lines.

You lost me on this one, what’s to negotiate and why are you even bring up this again?

There has always been a border between ROI/NI during the Belfast Agreement, it’s just been electronic transactions for excise and VAT etc.

If there happened to be no WA any Customs border post on the frontier between ROI/NI would not have breeched the Belfast Agreement and on the NI side at least the UK would have respected the CTA between ROI/UK. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same thing the bureaucratic behemoth in Brussels



Reinhardt wrote:
If the current UK govt does anything to cave to US demands on food or the NHS they will be unelectable for a generation.

If the Johnson government did move on Food, I doubt very much that it will be a deal breaker to the electorate. It would actually give the market choice to decide for itself, as long as there are progressive labelling indicators. But at this stage I have seen no desire to repeal the EU withdrawal Act from a Johnson government

The NHS on the other hand that depends on what is agreed but a fair portion of NHS is already contracted out to the private sector. A trade deal would not have the power to stop the NHS from provide a free, universal service. I imagine a trade deal on the NHS would be more akin to opening more competition for services to the NHS from abroad now whether or not that is good or a bad thing for the NHS is open for debate

Australia has an FTA with the US and Medicare is seen as very robust and held in high regard across the world and even Trump has and the former US President Obama praised Australian style Medicare scheme


Reinhardt wrote:
But certain Tories are already trying to get out of the EU Withdrawl Act..they want it rewritten as they didn't read it the first time.

Yeah well what do you want me to do about that, I was in favour of kicking the whole Agreement into the gutter from the beginning.

It’s not much different to CETA which is provisionally in force but Cyprus just gave Brussels a massive headache by not ratifying the agreement, they want it changed as well
 
olle
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Aug 06, 2020 11:49 pm

It seems like EU was smart and made the CETA in such way so small changes like the cyprus case can be handled without a new negotiation... Even a elephant like EU can learn.


But UK should be aware that any FTA will go thru many national parliaments with a few like Spain has very strong views and sometimes mixed interests.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, FGITD, Tugger and 57 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos