UK Politics Thread VIII—Can't Let EU Go

[Fartsniffage]

If the standards are poor, you should be able to demonstrate the poor standards are causing a higher risk of food borne disease. I am talking about showing a higher risk of bacterial diseases regardless of the cleaning process.

The fact that you wash cheap poultry in something more than water is the demonstration that standards are poor. Meat producers don't increase their cost for no reason. Plus there were links about it in the article I gave you about why the ban was put in place.

[Novus America]

No, I have no investment.
It is just if you want the chicken ban, we want something in return.

We have been screwed over in way to many trade deals, we are now playing hard ball, as we should.

I simply will oppose any trade deal that is not beneficial to the US.
And you have every right to oppose one not beneficial to the UK.

And if the chicken thing is such a big deal I am sure we will give it to you if you give us something return.

Just do not expect the US to go easy in trade negotiations any more. It is no longer the 70s.

https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/euro ... ed-kingdom

The US has a trade surplus with the UK. We already put more money into your economy than you put into ours, you're already at an advantage. How many other countries do you have a surplus with? Do you really think the US should risk that over chicken?

A fair point.
Now this is a legitimate point to raise in negotiations.

A good argument with data to back it up. I like this.

However we get that (small) surplus under current WTO rules.

Why not just continue with that then?
A separate agreement would have to demonstrate some improvement over the current one.

Actually our trade deficit is largely the fault of one country, China.
To a (MUCH) lesser degree Germany and Japan.

But the UK is not on our shit list, which is a fair argument as to why we should go easier on you.

Still a separate agreement has to offer some improvement.

We are not threatening an embargo over the chickens or anything.

That is just one point we raised in negotiations.
I am sure there is a compromise that could be worked out on that.

And since you are on our good list I am okay with going easier on you guys than we would on Germany.

One good thing about Brexit is you can deal with us independently of Germany (who is at the top of our trade shit list).

[Novus America]

If the standards are poor, you should be able to demonstrate the poor standards are causing a higher risk of food borne disease. I am talking about showing a higher risk of bacterial diseases regardless of the cleaning process.

The fact that you wash cheap poultry in something more than water is the demonstration that standards are poor. Meat producers don't increase their cost for no reason. Plus there were links about it in the article I gave you about why the ban was put in place.

But your article does also states there is no evidence our “lower” standards have actually increased the actual danger of anything.

And we do not HAVE to wash it. Some here do, some do not.
If the washing fixes any other issues what is the problem?

But sure, I am sure if the washing of chickens are such a big deal something could be worked out on that.
That is what negotiations are for.

I do not think anyone claimed that was a red line non negotiable demand.

[Fartsniffage]

https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/euro ... ed-kingdom

The US has a trade surplus with the UK. We already put more money into your economy than you put into ours, you're already at an advantage. How many other countries do you have a surplus with? Do you really think the US should risk that over chicken?

A fair point.
Now this is a legitimate point to raise in negotiations.

A good argument with data to back it up. I like this.

However we get that (small) surplus under current WTO rules.

Why not just continue with that then?
A separate agreement would have to demonstrate some improvement over the current one.

Actually our trade deficit is pretty much entirely the fault of one country, China.
To a (much) leader degree Germany and Japan.

But the UK is not on our shit list, which is a fair argument as to why we should go easier on you.

Still a separate agreement has to offer some improvement.

We are not threatening an embargo over the chickens or anything.

That is just one point we raised in negotiations.
I am sure there is a compromise that could be worked out on that.

If we have a free trade agreement with another country and not with the US then the stuff we used to buy from you we will start buying from them as it would be cheaper than paying WTO tariffs. Much like the US would with what they buy from the UK. But we buy more from you than you buy from us so it would be the US shooting themself in the foot.

The status quo is already in favour of the US and I don't think Trump would be happy at losing about 650,000 jobs under his watch. The UK is already prepared to get fucked at this point and our leaders have demonstrated they don't give a shit. The US would be playing chicken with people already resigned to dying, not a good move.

[Fartsniffage]

The fact that you wash cheap poultry in something more than water is the demonstration that standards are poor. Meat producers don't increase their cost for no reason. Plus there were links about it in the article I gave you about why the ban was put in place.

But your article does also states there is no evidence our “lower” standards have actually increased the actual danger of anything.

And we do not HAVE to wash it. Some here do, some do not.
If the washing fixes any other issues what is the problem?

But sure, I am sure if the washing of chickens are such a big deal something could be worked out on that.
That is what negotiations are for.

I do not think anyone claimed that was a red line non negotiable demand.

Your standards lead to animal abuse. You get immunosuppressed birds that leads to farmers dumping them with antibiotics, leading to the rapid reduction in efficacy of those drugs for the human population.

And they do have be washed with chlorine as one of the links in the article points out clearly. To not do it would lead to bacterial contamination that would lead to the industry losing a fortune.

[Novus America]

A fair point.
Now this is a legitimate point to raise in negotiations.

A good argument with data to back it up. I like this.

However we get that (small) surplus under current WTO rules.

Why not just continue with that then?
A separate agreement would have to demonstrate some improvement over the current one.

Actually our trade deficit is pretty much entirely the fault of one country, China.
To a (much) leader degree Germany and Japan.

But the UK is not on our shit list, which is a fair argument as to why we should go easier on you.

Still a separate agreement has to offer some improvement.

We are not threatening an embargo over the chickens or anything.

That is just one point we raised in negotiations.
I am sure there is a compromise that could be worked out on that.

If we have a free trade agreement with another country and not with the US then the stuff we used to buy from you we will start buying from them as it would be cheaper than paying WTO tariffs. Much like the US would with what they buy from the UK. But we buy more from you than you buy from us so it would be the US shooting themself in the foot.

The status quo is already in favour of the US and I don't think Trump would be happy at losing about 650,000 jobs under his watch. The UK is already prepared to get fucked at this point and our leaders have demonstrated they don't give a shit. The US would be playing chicken with people already resigned to dying, not a good move.

Sure, you could use the fact that someone is offering you a better deal as a negotiation point to get a deal with us.
But who is doing so?
But if someone is that is a valid negotiation tactic.

You guys have every right to play the game too. To get whatever advantage you can.

But you make some fair arguments as to why we should not go too hard on you.
I am sure the USTR will take that into consideration.
Of course what you and I say means , but hopefully for you your trade representative makes these points.

Again you guys are not on our shit list so I doubt we will go too hard on you.

[Ostroeuropa]

The Western Democracies must hang together or they will hang separately. Propping each-other up is essential to avoid belligerant interference in our politics from the likes of the Sauds and Chinese. No matter what occurs, the UK will not use economic or trade policy to try and bully the US into political or speech concessions.

[Novus America]

But your article does also states there is no evidence our “lower” standards have actually increased the actual danger of anything.

And we do not HAVE to wash it. Some here do, some do not.
If the washing fixes any other issues what is the problem?

But sure, I am sure if the washing of chickens are such a big deal something could be worked out on that.
That is what negotiations are for.

I do not think anyone claimed that was a red line non negotiable demand.

Your standards lead to animal abuse. You get immunosuppressed birds that leads to farmers dumping them with antibiotics, leading to the rapid reduction in efficacy of those drugs for the human population.

And they do have be washed with chlorine as one of the links in the article points out clearly. To not do it would lead to bacterial contamination that would lead to the industry losing a fortune.

My article points out not all our chickens are washed with chlorine.
Not all need to be.
Some might need to be but after the are washed they are safe.

But if the chickens are a big deal I am sure something can be worked out.
I do not think it is a non negotiable red line demand.

[Novus America]

The Western Democracies must hang together or they will hang separately. Propping each-other up is essential to avoid belligerant interference in our politics from the likes of the Sauds and Chinese. No matter what occurs, the UK will not use economic or trade policy to try and bully the US into political or speech concessions.

Well I am sure the UK will try to use trade policies to get trade concessions. Which it has ever right to do.

But you make a far point. China is the real enemy, and we must all keep that in mind.

Still we will have our disagreements here and there.

But the UK is definitely an ally, so I do agree we should not go too hard on the UK.

Still we will not agree with you on everything all the time.
But these are all points your trade representative should raise.

If you make good pints you will get a better deal.
Do you have a good trade representative?

[Salandriagado]

The point is the enforced lowering of safety standards, continual attempts to dismantle the NHS in order to allow American pharmaceutical companies to make more profits, enforced US copyright laws, etc., etc., etc.

Sure, you have your wants, and we have ours. Obviously we want more market access, otherwise why would we sign a trade agreement at all?

But if you refuse some of our wanted market access, we will limit some of your market access in return.

Nobody is forcing you to sign anything.
If you do not like the terms do not sign.

But you will not get what you want either.

No, those are things that the US, as a matter of policy, actively forces everybody who signs trade agreements with them of any form to agree to.

[Salandriagado]

do you have any real investment in this chicken or are you just defending it because it has become a proxy for american influence in the united kingdom and you feel an attack on it as an attack on america which makes you sad

No, I have no investment.
It is just if you want the chicken ban, we want something in return.

We have been screwed over in way too many trade deals, we are now playing hard ball, as we should.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That's the only response that absurd statement deserves. Which trade agreement, precisely, do you think was anything other than unambiguously in

I simply will oppose any trade deal that is not beneficial to the US.

To the US, or to US corporate interests?

[Novus America]

Sure, you have your wants, and we have ours. Obviously we want more market access, otherwise why would we sign a trade agreement at all?

But if you refuse some of our wanted market access, we will limit some of your market access in return.

Nobody is forcing you to sign anything.
If you do not like the terms do not sign.

But you will not get what you want either.

No, those are things that the US, as a matter of policy, actively forces everybody who signs trade agreements with them of any form to agree to.

Do you have a source the US never makes compromises on those points?
Those are some of our standard opening demands but I have never heard us say they are red line demands we never negotiate on.

And if we do we are in the wrong.

[Fartsniffage]

Do you have a good trade representative?

Have you been paying any attention to Brexit at all?

[Salandriagado]

The fact that you wash cheap poultry in something more than water is the demonstration that standards are poor. Meat producers don't increase their cost for no reason. Plus there were links about it in the article I gave you about why the ban was put in place.

But your article does also states there is no evidence our “lower” standards have actually increased the actual danger of anything.

And we do not HAVE to wash it. Some here do, some do not.
If the washing fixes any other issues what is the problem?

But sure, I am sure if the washing of chickens are such a big deal something could be worked out on that.
That is what negotiations are for.

I do not think anyone claimed that was a red line non negotiable demand.

In 2017, there were some 1.2 million (400/100k population) cases of salmonella in the US, of which 23,000 (7.7/100k population) resulted in hospitalisation, and 450 (0.15/100k population) in death. The most recent figures that I can find for the UK are from 2016, but there were a total of 8,630 cases (13/100k population), 24 hospitalisations (0.036/100k population), and 0 (0/100k population) deaths.

So yes, your shitty standards are actively killing people.

[Salandriagado]

The Western Democracies must hang together or they will hang separately. Propping each-other up is essential to avoid belligerant interference in our politics from the likes of the Sauds and Chinese. No matter what occurs, the UK will not use economic or trade policy to try and bully the US into political or speech concessions.

The US, on the other hand, has "use trade policies to bully the UK into political concessions" as a matter of public policy.

[Fartsniffage]

But your article does also states there is no evidence our “lower” standards have actually increased the actual danger of anything.

And we do not HAVE to wash it. Some here do, some do not.
If the washing fixes any other issues what is the problem?

But sure, I am sure if the washing of chickens are such a big deal something could be worked out on that.
That is what negotiations are for.

I do not think anyone claimed that was a red line non negotiable demand.

In 2017, there were some 1.2 million (400/100k population) cases of salmonella in the US, of which 23,000 (7.7/100k population) resulted in hospitalisation, and 450 (0.15/100k population) in death. The most recent figures that I can find for the UK are from 2016, but there were a total of 8,630 cases (13/100k population), 24 hospitalisations (0.036/100k population), and 0 (0/100k population) deaths.

So yes, your shitty standards are actively killing people.

To be fair, the US also has salmonella outbreaks linked to lettuce from time to time. I'm not sure how they manage to do that but still....

[Salandriagado]

No, those are things that the US, as a matter of policy, actively forces everybody who signs trade agreements with them of any form to agree to.

Do you have a source the US never makes compromises on those points?
Those are some of our standard opening demands but I have never heard us say they are red line demands we never negotiate on.

And if we do we are in the wrong.

Can you name a single US trade agreement from the last 50 years that hasn't included such things?

[Novus America]

But your article does also states there is no evidence our “lower” standards have actually increased the actual danger of anything.

And we do not HAVE to wash it. Some here do, some do not.
If the washing fixes any other issues what is the problem?

But sure, I am sure if the washing of chickens are such a big deal something could be worked out on that.
That is what negotiations are for.

I do not think anyone claimed that was a red line non negotiable demand.

In 2017, there were some 1.2 million (400/100k population) cases of salmonella in the US, of which 23,000 (7.7/100k population) resulted in hospitalisation, and 450 (0.15/100k population) in death. The most recent figures that I can find for the UK are from 2016, but there were a total of 8,630 cases (13/100k population), 24 hospitalisations (0.036/100k population), and 0 (0/100k population) deaths.

So yes, your shitty standards are actively killing people.

See that is a better argument, but is that the fault of chickens?
Or even food?
You can get salmonella from lots of things besides chicken and food.

[Novus America]

Do you have a good trade representative?

Have you been paying any attention to Brexit at all?

I assume that is a no.

But just because your Parliament is a mess does not mean you trade representative is necessarily bad.

[Novus America]

No, I have no investment.
It is just if you want the chicken ban, we want something in return.

We have been screwed over in way too many trade deals, we are now playing hard ball, as we should.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That's the only response that absurd statement deserves. Which trade agreement, precisely, do you think was anything other than unambiguously in

I simply will oppose any trade deal that is not beneficial to the US.

To the US, or to US corporate interests?

Clearly given our massive deficit since the 70s we have been getting bad deals since then.

See what is good for certain US corporate interests is not always good for the US.
Many of our own companies actively screw the US and actively work against the US.
Many of our corporations have zero to our country, unfortunately.

[Novus America]

Do you have a source the US never makes compromises on those points?
Those are some of our standard opening demands but I have never heard us say they are red line demands we never negotiate on.

And if we do we are in the wrong.

Can you name a single US trade agreement from the last 50 years that hasn't included such things?

Well obviously said rules do not apply to the WTO, which we signed.

https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements
Here is a list of our current non WTO agreements.

But I do not know the exact terms of each of them of course.

[Fartsniffage]

Have you been paying any attention to Brexit at all?

I assume that is a no.

But just because your Parliament is a mess does not mean you trade representative is necessarily bad.

We don't have any. All trade negotiations have been conducted via the EU since 1992.

[Novus America]

I assume that is a no.

But just because your Parliament is a mess does not mean you trade representative is necessarily bad.

We don't have any. All trade negotiations have been conducted via the EU since 1992.

Well it looks like you do have one. Liam Fox.
Does he know what he is doing?
(I do think only putting MPs in charge of departments is odd but eh, limits your options though).

[Souseiseki]

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That's the only response that absurd statement deserves. Which trade agreement, precisely, do you think was anything other than unambiguously in




To the US, or to US corporate interests?

Clearly given our massive deficit since the 70s we have been getting bad deals since then.

See what is good for certain US corporate interests is not always good for the US.
Many of our own companies actively screw the US and actively work against the US.
Many of our corporations have zero to our country, unfortunately.

i'm not economist but it's my understanding that "defecit = bad" is a very oversimplified and not necessarily correct view of trade. do you think the US was somehow bullied by rando countries into bad deals?

[Fartsniffage]

We don't have any. All trade negotiations have been conducted via the EU since 1992.

Well it looks like you do have one. Liam Fox.
Does he know what he is doing?
(I do think only putting MPs in charge of departments is odd but eh, limits your options though).

His position was only established in 2016, after the vote to leave. Take from that what you will.