Discussion:
CZ2-01: 'We are not preparing for major food shortages' says the Cabinet Office
Add Reply
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 11:16:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html

‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office

by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017

Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.

As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment post-
Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.

The denial came in response to a Freedom of Information Act request that
asked whether things remain the same now as they were in 2012, when the
Cabinet Office issued a similar denial. For the purposes of the Act, the
department also speaks on behalf of the Prime Minister's Office.

Despite the present uncertainty as to whether trade talks between Britain
and the EU will even commence, let alone the shape that any trade
agreement might take, the denial by the Cabinet Office was categorical.

Cryzine has seen copies of all three documents - the request and the two
responses - none of which have yet been published.

The request asked for "any documents (...) regarding the possible
scenario of major food shortages or the threat of famine in the UK", a
scenario defined as "shortages in which at least 1% of the population
might be at risk of not getting enough to eat, unless emergency steps
(are) taken".

*****
Could the finest moment of Thomas Malthus, said to be the canonical
expresser of the Tory attitude towards the lower orders, be yet to come?
*****

It continues "These documents would include, for example, documents
regarding the scenario which might arise if financial collapse brings a
collapse of international trade, and importing food in the quantities in
which it is currently imported then becomes difficult or impossible."

The 2012 reply stated that "(the) Cabinet Office does not hold any
information relating to the type of scenario you describe (...) (A)
scenario of (that) severity is not considered likely in present
circumstances".

The second request, submitted last month, asked whether the statements
made in 2012 are still true today, "given the decision to leave the EU
and the consequent uncertainty including regarding the shape that will be
assumed by the UK's foreign trade relations in the near future".

The 2017 reply, released late last night, states in no uncertain fashion
that "the statements made in (the 2012) response still hold today".

The Cabinet Office repeats its unequivocal denial that it holds any
information regarding emergency food stocks.

It further states that "the UK has a highly effective and resilient food
supply chain (and) the resilience of the sector has been demonstrated in
response to potentially disruptive challenges in recent years", that "the
food industry remains highly resilient owing to the capacity of food
supply sectors and the high degree of substitutability of foodstuffs".

It is not clear how substitutability can prevent starvation in a country
such as Britain imports more than half its food.

*****
They know. They must know. Cryzine's advice: stock up on food now
*****

Explaining that "(the Government intends) to seek customs arrangements
that facilitate trade relationships with our European partners", the
Cabinet Office makes clear that it holds no papers regarding a possible
failure to achieve its intention.

The Cabinet Office's Nero-like denial comes in the face of statements by
various players in the British food industry that there there could well
be very serious problems.

* The National Farmers' Union has revealed that British horticulture had
a shortfall of 29% in its seasonal workforce in September, causing tons
of fruit to be left to rot across the country.

* Frazer Thompson, boss of Chapel Down, Britain's biggest winemaker, has
said in no uncertain terms that if the agricultural labour issue is not
sorted out after Brexit, Britain will "starve".

* The chief executive of supermarket giant Sainsbury, Mike Coupe, has
said that fresh food could be left rotting at the border if strict
customs controls for EU goods are introduced after Brexit.

* In an article published by the Royal Society, researchers have
emphasised that Britain imports more than half its food and its animal
feed

* While the Tory right paint World Trade Organisation terms as if they
are some kind of fallback in the event of "hard Brexit", the reality is
that no country has the right to trade with another country without a
trade agreement. In a country as reliant on food imports as Britain,
famine remains a very real possibility if trade breaks down.

* In July, leading food policy specialists in London, Sussex and Cardiff
published a briefing paper entitled "A Food Brexit: Time to Get Real",
warning that "the implications of Brexit for food are potentially
enormous". They found not just that "the entire UK food system is
dependent on migrant labour", but also "the UK food system faces real
challenges on food security". Their conclusion was stark and terrifying:
"The UK has no food policy".

*****
‘Could a population readjustment, also known as FAMINE, be around the
corner?
*****

In their words: "Supplies could be reduced, prices could become
increasingly volatile, environmental sustainability could be further
diminished, safety could be imperilled, inequalities could be amplified,
and public trust be undermined. The just-in-time distribution systems,
complex contracts, and labyrinthine supply chains cannot quickly or
easily be restructured."

But for the British government, it appears all can only possibly be
hunkydory.

We have to ask whether the finest moment for the wicked 19th century
English curate Thomas Malthus, believed by astute critics to be the
father of the quintessentially Tory and British ruling class attitude
towards the lower orders, is not still to come. Could a population
readjustment, also known as FAMINE, be around the corner?

###
abelard
2017-12-05 11:27:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
and the prices are higher than open market prices by virtue
of the eussr...and farming subsidies...

therefore it is much more likely food prices will drop after
brexit...

if eussr tariffs are imposed then all the more motive to
source elsewhere or increase uk production...

so why would anyone prepare for food shortages
when the market pressure on leaving the eussr
would run in the opposite direction?

even did, by some miracle, prices rise...during the
war when germany were trying to starve britain out...
we still manage to survive and the population were far more
fit because few were overweight or even sitting on
couches watching tv...

this is yet another non-story from people who do not
think for themselves
--
www.abelard.org
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 12:15:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
and the prices are higher than open market prices by virtue
of the eussr...and farming subsidies...
therefore it is much more likely food prices will drop after
brexit...
if eussr tariffs are imposed then all the more motive to
source elsewhere or increase uk production...
so why would anyone prepare for food shortages
when the market pressure on leaving the eussr
would run in the opposite direction?
even did, by some miracle, prices rise...during the
war when germany were trying to starve britain out...
we still manage to survive and the population were far more
fit because few were overweight or even sitting on
couches watching tv...
this is yet another non-story from people who do not
think for themselves
What open market would that be? There is no inter-country open market in
food.

And where might the labour come from to increase British production?

As for a comparison with the 1940s, Britain didn't import HALF ITS FOOD
then.

Donald
abelard
2017-12-05 12:20:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:15:40 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
and the prices are higher than open market prices by virtue
of the eussr...and farming subsidies...
therefore it is much more likely food prices will drop after
brexit...
if eussr tariffs are imposed then all the more motive to
source elsewhere or increase uk production...
so why would anyone prepare for food shortages
when the market pressure on leaving the eussr
would run in the opposite direction?
even did, by some miracle, prices rise...during the
war when germany were trying to starve britain out...
we still manage to survive and the population were far more
fit because few were overweight or even sitting on
couches watching tv...
this is yet another non-story from people who do not
think for themselves
What open market would that be? There is no inter-country open market in
food.
And where might the labour come from to increase British production?
As for a comparison with the 1940s, Britain didn't import HALF ITS FOOD
then.
you really need to study before posting such nonsense and
such silly questions

if fascist 'new' labour had not opened the doors to the poor
of the world britain would not have another million to
feed every 3 years

just another mess the eussr has dumped upon us...

the mechanisation of farming is also proceeding apace...

go study
--
www.abelard.org
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 12:25:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:15:40 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces
at home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the
Cabinet Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food
shortages.
and the prices are higher than open market prices by virtue
of the eussr...and farming subsidies...
therefore it is much more likely food prices will drop after
brexit...
if eussr tariffs are imposed then all the more motive to
source elsewhere or increase uk production...
so why would anyone prepare for food shortages
when the market pressure on leaving the eussr
would run in the opposite direction?
even did, by some miracle, prices rise...during the
war when germany were trying to starve britain out...
we still manage to survive and the population were far more
fit because few were overweight or even sitting on
couches watching tv...
this is yet another non-story from people who do not
think for themselves
What open market would that be? There is no inter-country open market
in food.
And where might the labour come from to increase British production?
As for a comparison with the 1940s, Britain didn't import HALF ITS
FOOD then.
you really need to study before posting such nonsense and
such silly questions
if fascist 'new' labour had not opened the doors to the poor
of the world britain would not have another million to
feed every 3 years
just another mess the eussr has dumped upon us...
the mechanisation of farming is also proceeding apace...
go study
They seem to be questions you can't answer. You prefer to call New Labour
"fascist" (where was the corporate state? when did it abolish any other
political parties?) and refer to the EU as the "EUSSR".

A large proportion of labour in British agriculture is migrant from
abroad. How quickly do you think it can be replaced with British labour?

Donald
abelard
2017-12-05 12:30:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:25:23 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:15:40 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces
at home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the
Cabinet Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food
shortages.
and the prices are higher than open market prices by virtue
of the eussr...and farming subsidies...
therefore it is much more likely food prices will drop after
brexit...
if eussr tariffs are imposed then all the more motive to
source elsewhere or increase uk production...
so why would anyone prepare for food shortages
when the market pressure on leaving the eussr
would run in the opposite direction?
even did, by some miracle, prices rise...during the
war when germany were trying to starve britain out...
we still manage to survive and the population were far more
fit because few were overweight or even sitting on
couches watching tv...
this is yet another non-story from people who do not
think for themselves
What open market would that be? There is no inter-country open market
in food.
And where might the labour come from to increase British production?
As for a comparison with the 1940s, Britain didn't import HALF ITS
FOOD then.
you really need to study before posting such nonsense and
such silly questions
if fascist 'new' labour had not opened the doors to the poor
of the world britain would not have another million to
feed every 3 years
just another mess the eussr has dumped upon us...
the mechanisation of farming is also proceeding apace...
go study
They seem to be questions you can't answer.
grow the fuck up or get kf''d
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
You prefer to call New Labour
"fascist" (where was the corporate state? when did it abolish any other
political parties?) and refer to the EU as the "EUSSR".
so you're ignorant on that score also...so why are you posting
to a politics group?
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
A large proportion of labour in British agriculture is migrant from
abroad. How quickly do you think it can be replaced with British labour?
so what...there is no problem with guest workers...meanwhile they
will rapidly be replaced by machinery...

if we are ever short of field worker there is a simple solution...
pay them more...
but we don't have to as there are far more available workers
than jobs...

you know nothing!
--
www.abelard.org
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 12:33:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:25:23 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:15:40 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
They seem to be questions you can't answer.
grow the fuck up or get kf''d
I don't know what "get kf''d" means. Is it street talk?
Post by abelard
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
You prefer to call New Labour
"fascist" (where was the corporate state? when did it abolish any other
political parties?) and refer to the EU as the "EUSSR".
so you're ignorant on that score also...so why are you posting
to a politics group?
No - you're a silly girl who can't argue her case without calling a
social democratic party "fascist" and calling the EU a union of soviet
socialist republics. Do you know what a "republic" is?
Post by abelard
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
A large proportion of labour in British agriculture is migrant from
abroad. How quickly do you think it can be replaced with British labour?
so what...there is no problem with guest workers...meanwhile they
will rapidly be replaced by machinery...
Between say March 2019 and when that year's harvest is brought in? Are
you crazy?
Post by abelard
if we are ever short of field worker there is a simple solution...
pay them more...
but we don't have to as there are far more available workers
than jobs...
you know nothing!
You are so rude, and you have no idea how tight just-in-time agricultural
production is.

I'm going to stop conversing with you unless you grow up a bit.

Donald
abelard
2017-12-05 12:45:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:33:54 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:25:23 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:15:40 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
They seem to be questions you can't answer.
grow the fuck up or get kf''d
I don't know what "get kf''d" means. Is it street talk?
it means killfiled...it means that your posts will be filtered out
and no longer seen by the person kf you

it is a way of removing time waster and other idiots....

you are not even interesting deranged...just boringly ignorant
and arrogant with it...

i don't tolerate boredom....it is the one think i kf posters for
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
You prefer to call New Labour
"fascist" (where was the corporate state? when did it abolish any other
political parties?) and refer to the EU as the "EUSSR".
so you're ignorant on that score also...so why are you posting
to a politics group?
No - you're a silly girl who can't argue her case without calling a
social democratic party "fascist" and calling the EU a union of soviet
socialist republics. Do you know what a "republic" is?
it is fascist...go study
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
A large proportion of labour in British agriculture is migrant from
abroad. How quickly do you think it can be replaced with British labour?
so what...there is no problem with guest workers...meanwhile they
will rapidly be replaced by machinery...
Between say March 2019 and when that year's harvest is brought in? Are
you crazy?
Post by abelard
if we are ever short of field worker there is a simple solution...
pay them more...
but we don't have to as there are far more available workers
than jobs...
you know nothing!
You are so rude, and you have no idea how tight just-in-time agricultural
production is.
anything but...i am letting you take my valuable time in the vague
possibility that you can learn
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I'm going to stop conversing with you unless you grow up a bit.
what? and take you seriously? don't be ridiculous
--
www.abelard.org
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 12:54:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:33:54 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:25:23 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:15:40 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:16:52 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
They seem to be questions you can't answer.
grow the fuck up or get kf''d
I don't know what "get kf''d" means. Is it street talk?
it means killfiled...it means that your posts will be filtered out
and no longer seen by the person kf you
it is a way of removing time waster and other idiots....
you are not even interesting deranged...just boringly ignorant
and arrogant with it...
i don't tolerate boredom....it is the one think i kf posters for
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
You prefer to call New Labour
"fascist" (where was the corporate state? when did it abolish any
other political parties?) and refer to the EU as the "EUSSR".
so you're ignorant on that score also...so why are you posting
to a politics group?
No - you're a silly girl who can't argue her case without calling a
social democratic party "fascist" and calling the EU a union of soviet
socialist republics. Do you know what a "republic" is?
it is fascist...go study
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
A large proportion of labour in British agriculture is migrant from
abroad. How quickly do you think it can be replaced with British labour?
so what...there is no problem with guest workers...meanwhile they
will rapidly be replaced by machinery...
Between say March 2019 and when that year's harvest is brought in? Are
you crazy?
Post by abelard
if we are ever short of field worker there is a simple solution...
pay them more...
but we don't have to as there are far more available workers
than jobs...
you know nothing!
You are so rude, and you have no idea how tight just-in-time
agricultural production is.
anything but...i am letting you take my valuable time in the vague
possibility that you can learn
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I'm going to stop conversing with you unless you grow up a bit.
what? and take you seriously? don't be ridiculous
Insulty knickers!

Donald
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-05 12:12:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment post-
Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill each year.

Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it not to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it, he either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish the next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.

Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that the latter is cheaper.

As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not sold. People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the British won't or can't buy it.

Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat can go into refrigeration with the same consequence.

There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will apply. In any case why should producers let down customers often of many years standing?

Why therefore should contingency measures such as you suggest be prepared.

This is a political action not a war!
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 12:30:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the
Cabinet Office
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment
post- Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied
having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food
provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you
been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill each
year.
Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it not
to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it, he
either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish the
next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.
Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food
produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that
the latter is cheaper.
As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same
reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not sold.
People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the British
won't or can't buy it.
Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate
over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit
etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat can
go into refrigeration with the same consequence.
There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo
between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will
apply. In any case why should producers let down customers often of
many years standing?
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first there's
the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and then second
what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is whack their prices
up.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Why therefore should contingency measures such as you suggest be prepared.
This is a political action not a war!
Tell that to Greeks and Icelanders.

I actually agree with most of what you type here, just not your logic.

As for "embargo", bear in mind that trade between two countries cannot
happen except by agreement.

Your belief that

"If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will apply"

is false. At least it is NOT automatic, as you and many other
commentators appear to think.

Donald
finally ditched mimo
2017-12-05 14:02:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the
Cabinet Office
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment
post- Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied
having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food
provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you
been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill each
year.
Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it not
to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it, he
either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish the
next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.
Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food
produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that
the latter is cheaper.
As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same
reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not sold.
People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the British
won't or can't buy it.
Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate
over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit
etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat can
go into refrigeration with the same consequence.
There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo
between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will
apply. In any case why should producers let down customers often of
many years standing?
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first there's
the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and then second
what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is whack their prices
up.
Good. That would cut demand and also cut the 30% which is thrown away.

It might even boost the health of the nation, if people ate less food and
lost a lot of weight.

Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Why therefore should contingency measures such as you suggest be prepared.
This is a political action not a war!
Tell that to Greeks and Icelanders.
I actually agree with most of what you type here, just not your logic.
As for "embargo", bear in mind that trade between two countries cannot
happen except by agreement.
Your belief that
"If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will apply"
is false. At least it is NOT automatic, as you and many other
commentators appear to think.
Donald
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 14:25:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the
Cabinet Office
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it
produces at home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the
EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment
post- Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally
denied having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food
provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you
been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill
each year.
Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it
not to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it,
he either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish
the next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.
Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food
produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that
the latter is cheaper.
As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same
reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not
sold. People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the
British won't or can't buy it.
Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate
over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit
etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat
can go into refrigeration with the same consequence.
There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo
between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements
will apply. In any case why should producers let down customers
often of many years standing?
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first
there's the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and
then second what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is
whack their prices up.
Good. That would cut demand and also cut the 30% which is thrown away.
It might even boost the health of the nation, if people ate less food
and lost a lot of weight.
Cut food supply and raise prices dramatically and do you think the
foodbanks (used by ever increasing numbers [*]) will be able to prevent
starvation?

(*)
https://www.trusselltrust.org/2017/04/25/uk-foodbank-use-continues-rise/
The Iceberg
2017-12-05 14:55:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
You actually reckon Great Britain of the 21st century, the world's 6th biggest economy, with the Greatest city in the world ie.London, could starve because we don't import enough food from the EUSSR, congrats, that has to be one of the dumbest posts ever seen! Lol Do you really live in a basement?! What planet are you on if you actually reckon that possible!
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 15:02:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Iceberg
You actually reckon Great Britain of the 21st century, the world's 6th
biggest economy, with the Greatest city in the world ie.London, could
starve because we don't import enough food from the EUSSR, congrats,
that has to be one of the dumbest posts ever seen! Lol Do you really
live in a basement?! What planet are you on if you actually reckon
that possible!
So you're saying there can't be famine in Britain because the number of
centuries since Jesus is 20 and a bit, and because London is not just
"great" but "greater" than any other city?

Do you realise how stupid you sound?
finally ditched mimo
2017-12-05 15:16:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by The Iceberg
You actually reckon Great Britain of the 21st century, the world's 6th
biggest economy, with the Greatest city in the world ie.London, could
starve because we don't import enough food from the EUSSR, congrats,
that has to be one of the dumbest posts ever seen! Lol Do you really
live in a basement?! What planet are you on if you actually reckon
that possible!
So you're saying there can't be famine in Britain because the number of
centuries since Jesus is 20 and a bit, and because London is not just
"great" but "greater" than any other city?
Do you realise how stupid you sound?
Well, I have to give you a prize for the most rapid ratcheting up of a
hypothetical forecast ever.

We have gone from importing half our food, then to food shortages, and now
famine in under 2 hours...
The Iceberg
2017-12-05 18:12:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Yes I'm saying there is ABSOLUTE ZERO chance of there ever being a famine in Britain in this day and age, it'll NEVER happen. You sound idiotic trying to pretend such a thing could ever happen, but then you did vote Remoan Lol prob touted all the oil running out nonsense about 10yrs ago too eh :)
finally ditched mimo
2017-12-05 18:22:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Iceberg
Yes I'm saying there is ABSOLUTE ZERO chance of there ever being a famine in
Britain in this day and age, it'll NEVER happen. You sound idiotic trying to
pretend such a thing could ever happen, but then you did vote Remoan Lol prob
touted all the oil running out nonsense about 10yrs ago too eh :)
Not forgetting all the “hoard cans of food/toilet rolls/camping gas
stoves” nonsense for when all the supermarkets ran out of food after
computers packed up with Y2K date re-set at the end of 1999.
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 19:30:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Iceberg
Yes I'm saying there is ABSOLUTE ZERO chance of there ever being a
famine in Britain in this day and age, it'll NEVER happen. You sound
idiotic trying to pretend such a thing could ever happen, but then you
did vote Remoan Lol prob touted all the oil running out nonsense about
10yrs ago too eh :)
Give a reason for your opinion if you can.
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 19:36:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by The Iceberg
Yes I'm saying there is ABSOLUTE ZERO chance of there ever being a
famine in Britain in this day and age, it'll NEVER happen. You sound
idiotic trying to pretend such a thing could ever happen, but then you
did vote Remoan Lol prob touted all the oil running out nonsense about
10yrs ago too eh :)
Give a reason for your opinion if you can.
That means saying something like this "I think it is impossible that there
will ever be a famine in Britain because..." and then citing some premises
and if necessary some chains of logic.

You clearly hold a strong opinion, so presumably you can say why you hold
it. Yes?
BurfordTJustice
2017-12-05 21:21:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Why do you disagree?


Details.



"Donald Jones, Cryzine" <***@remove-this.cryzine.com> wrote in message news:***@85.214.115.223...
: "Donald Jones, Cryzine" <***@remove-this.cryzine.com> wrote in
: news:***@85.214.115.223:
:
: > The Iceberg <***@gmail.com> wrote in
: > news:fc19650a-9f1e-493f-aff0-***@googlegroups.com:
: >
: >> Yes I'm saying there is ABSOLUTE ZERO chance of there ever being a
: >> famine in Britain in this day and age, it'll NEVER happen. You sound
: >> idiotic trying to pretend such a thing could ever happen, but then you
: >> did vote Remoan Lol prob touted all the oil running out nonsense about
: >> 10yrs ago too eh :)
: >
: > Give a reason for your opinion if you can.
:
: That means saying something like this "I think it is impossible that there
: will ever be a famine in Britain because..." and then citing some premises
: and if necessary some chains of logic.
:
: You clearly hold a strong opinion, so presumably you can say why you hold
: it. Yes?
The Iceberg
2017-12-06 14:55:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
There are tons of reasons and you've been given them, but mostly in the real world, Great Britain is a 21st century very modern hugely successful and very wealthy nation with huge global resources where a food shortage famine will NEVER EVER happen. Do you just live in a basement and never go out? Well pls go out, see a bit of the real world, live a bit of real life, instead of some Marx oriented fantasy land + Stop being such a negative git, you lost the referendum, get over it.
Byker
2017-12-05 15:29:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 11:16:54 AM UTC, Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at home
largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet Office
says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
You'd think that after all this time, queuing and rationing would be in be
in British DNA: https://tinyurl.com/y8meey39

More: https://tinyurl.com/y97h89to

Also:
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-rationing-in-the-UK-only-end-in-1954-9-years-after-WW2
BurfordTJustice
2017-12-05 17:28:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
For real!


"Byker" <***@do~rag.net> wrote in message news:4PSdnYn7Y5n_JrvHnZ2dnUU7-***@supernews.com...
: On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 11:16:54 AM UTC, Donald Jones, Cryzine
: > wrote:
: > CZ2-01
: > http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
: >
: > 'We are not preparing for major food shortages' says the Cabinet Office
: >
: > Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home
: > largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office
: > says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
:
: You'd think that after all this time, queuing and rationing would be in be
: in British DNA: https://tinyurl.com/y8meey39
:
: More: https://tinyurl.com/y97h89to
:
: Also:
:
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-rationing-in-the-UK-only-end-in-1954-9-years-after-WW2
:
:
abelard
2017-12-05 15:46:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the
Cabinet Office
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment
post- Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied
having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food
provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you
been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill each
year.
Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it not
to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it, he
either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish the
next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.
Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food
produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that
the latter is cheaper.
As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same
reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not sold.
People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the British
won't or can't buy it.
Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate
over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit
etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat can
go into refrigeration with the same consequence.
There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo
between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will
apply. In any case why should producers let down customers often of
many years standing?
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first there's
the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and then second
what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is whack their prices
up.
Good. That would cut demand and also cut the 30% which is thrown away.
It might even boost the health of the nation, if people ate less food and
lost a lot of weight.
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...

same way socialists seek power...

it's almost always baloney when analysed
--
www.abelard.org
Farmer Giles
2017-12-05 17:44:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the
Cabinet Office
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment
post- Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied
having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food
provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you
been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill each
year.
Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it not
to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it, he
either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish the
next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.
Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food
produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that
the latter is cheaper.
As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same
reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not sold.
People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the British
won't or can't buy it.
Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate
over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit
etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat can
go into refrigeration with the same consequence.
There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo
between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will
apply. In any case why should producers let down customers often of
many years standing?
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first there's
the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and then second
what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is whack their prices
up.
Good. That would cut demand and also cut the 30% which is thrown away.
It might even boost the health of the nation, if people ate less food and
lost a lot of weight.
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...
same way socialists seek power...
it's almost always baloney when analysed
Look at Humpty running with the hare as well as the hounds. What he
doesn't tell you is that he was/is a 'remainer'. It's the old Jewish
trick - get a foot in both camps, and jump whichever way serves your cause.
abelard
2017-12-05 19:04:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the
Cabinet Office
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment
post- Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied
having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food
provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you
been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill each
year.
Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it not
to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it, he
either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish the
next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.
Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food
produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that
the latter is cheaper.
As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same
reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not sold.
People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the British
won't or can't buy it.
Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate
over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit
etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat can
go into refrigeration with the same consequence.
There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo
between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will
apply. In any case why should producers let down customers often of
many years standing?
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first there's
the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and then second
what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is whack their prices
up.
Good. That would cut demand and also cut the 30% which is thrown away.
It might even boost the health of the nation, if people ate less food and
lost a lot of weight.
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...
same way socialists seek power...
it's almost always baloney when analysed
Look at Humpty running with the hare as well as the hounds. What he
doesn't tell you is that he was/is a 'remainer'. It's the old Jewish
trick - get a foot in both camps, and jump whichever way serves your cause.
you're so dumb my little puppy...

1)my reasons for 'being a remainer' were entirely geopolitical
2)i think britain is better out on economic grounds, which i
rate less important than the geopolitical considerations...
3)i'm for democracy...

too difficult for your pin head?

here, have another bone
--
www.abelard.org
Farmer Giles
2017-12-05 19:35:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
CZ2-01
http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the
Cabinet Office
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
by Donald Jones
Cryzine
5 Dec 2017
Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment
post- Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied
having any
information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
Have you ever heard such nonsense. The world is stuffed with food
provided there exists the where with all to buy it. Where have you
been? Apparently we dump £170m worth of the stuff into landfill each
year.
Food is the product essentially of farmers. They grow or rear it not
to feed the world but in order to sell it. If he can't sell it, he
either will not grow or rear it or will plough it in to nourish the
next year's crop in the hope that he will sell that.
Food is grown all over the world. The only difference between food
produced in the EU and that produced elsewhere in the world is that
the latter is cheaper.
As regards food grown in Europe it is grown for exactly the same
reason as anywhere else and suffers the same fate if it is not sold.
People in Europe do not buy or consume more food because the British
won't or can't buy it.
Certain foods like fresh fruit, vegetables etc. quickly deteriorate
over time and are unsaleable, Dry foods such as grain, dried fruit
etc. can enter storage but this adds to the cost. Similarly meat can
go into refrigeration with the same consequence.
There is no possibility whatsoever of there being a trade embargo
between the EU and UK. If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will
apply. In any case why should producers let down customers often of
many years standing?
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first there's
the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and then second
what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is whack their prices
up.
Good. That would cut demand and also cut the 30% which is thrown away.
It might even boost the health of the nation, if people ate less food and
lost a lot of weight.
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...
same way socialists seek power...
it's almost always baloney when analysed
Look at Humpty running with the hare as well as the hounds. What he
doesn't tell you is that he was/is a 'remainer'. It's the old Jewish
trick - get a foot in both camps, and jump whichever way serves your cause.
you're so dumb my little puppy...
1)my reasons for 'being a remainer' were entirely geopolitical
2)i think britain is better out on economic grounds, which i
rate less important than the geopolitical considerations...
3)i'm for democracy...
too difficult for your pin head?
here, have another bone
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons."
abelard
2017-12-05 19:44:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...
same way socialists seek power...
it's almost always baloney when analysed
Look at Humpty running with the hare as well as the hounds. What he
doesn't tell you is that he was/is a 'remainer'. It's the old Jewish
trick - get a foot in both camps, and jump whichever way serves your cause.
you're so dumb my little puppy...
1)my reasons for 'being a remainer' were entirely geopolitical
2)i think britain is better out on economic grounds, which i
rate less important than the geopolitical considerations...
3)i'm for democracy...
too difficult for your pin head?
here, have another bone
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons."
you've as much chance of counting as you have of thinking
for yourself...

take on someone your own size...this way you'll just keep
getting hurt

take your bone and be content
--
www.abelard.org
Farmer Giles
2017-12-05 19:47:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...
same way socialists seek power...
it's almost always baloney when analysed
Look at Humpty running with the hare as well as the hounds. What he
doesn't tell you is that he was/is a 'remainer'. It's the old Jewish
trick - get a foot in both camps, and jump whichever way serves your cause.
you're so dumb my little puppy...
1)my reasons for 'being a remainer' were entirely geopolitical
2)i think britain is better out on economic grounds, which i
rate less important than the geopolitical considerations...
3)i'm for democracy...
too difficult for your pin head?
here, have another bone
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons."
you've as much chance of counting as you have of thinking
for yourself...
take on someone your own size...this way you'll just keep
getting hurt
take your bone and be content
More wind and water from Babbelard the thicko. Watch those hounds,
Humpty, they might smell a rat.
abelard
2017-12-05 20:00:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...
same way socialists seek power...
it's almost always baloney when analysed
Look at Humpty running with the hare as well as the hounds. What he
doesn't tell you is that he was/is a 'remainer'. It's the old Jewish
trick - get a foot in both camps, and jump whichever way serves your cause.
you're so dumb my little puppy...
1)my reasons for 'being a remainer' were entirely geopolitical
2)i think britain is better out on economic grounds, which i
rate less important than the geopolitical considerations...
3)i'm for democracy...
too difficult for your pin head?
here, have another bone
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons."
you've as much chance of counting as you have of thinking
for yourself...
take on someone your own size...this way you'll just keep
getting hurt
take your bone and be content
More wind and water from Babbelard the thicko. Watch those hounds,
Humpty, they might smell a rat.
then get yourself a bath
--
www.abelard.org
Farmer Giles
2017-12-05 20:04:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:02:14 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Presumably, a group of remainers are trying to start a panic?
what else...fear mongering is all they ever have...
same way socialists seek power...
it's almost always baloney when analysed
Look at Humpty running with the hare as well as the hounds. What he
doesn't tell you is that he was/is a 'remainer'. It's the old Jewish
trick - get a foot in both camps, and jump whichever way serves your cause.
you're so dumb my little puppy...
1)my reasons for 'being a remainer' were entirely geopolitical
2)i think britain is better out on economic grounds, which i
rate less important than the geopolitical considerations...
3)i'm for democracy...
too difficult for your pin head?
here, have another bone
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons."
you've as much chance of counting as you have of thinking
for yourself...
take on someone your own size...this way you'll just keep
getting hurt
take your bone and be content
More wind and water from Babbelard the thicko. Watch those hounds,
Humpty, they might smell a rat.
then get yourself a bath
Poor old Humpty, entering another battle of wits completely unarmed.
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-05 14:34:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first there's
the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and then second
what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is whack their prices
up.
And has done or a large number of decades. Of course there are certain foods that we cannot produce for ourselves.

We do not grow many bananas, pineapples or citrus fruits for instance.

Of all the farms I have visited (and there are a few) over the years the farm labourer has become a rare species. You see he is better off working outside the industry or for one of those agricultural contractors who these days move in on an as needed basis with the latest machinery do a particular job and are away to the next farm. The only permanent staff employed these days are the farm manager (where applicable) and the stock man.

You are talking about casual seasonal workers. Traditionally these were recruited locally. Nowadays of course casuals come from much further abroad literally. Changes in the exchange rates have made this practice less profitable for them. There is only one solution and its not cancel Brexit it is to put up wages. This would add to costs of course but if these extra costs were unbearable then the more marginal producers would have to diversify into alternative activity. Supply would fall forcing prices up.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Why therefore should contingency measures such as you suggest be prepared.
This is a political action not a war!
Tell that to Greeks and Icelanders.
Iceland is not in the EU and the Icelanders I find to be a very resilient people. I wasn't aware that there was a food crisis in Greece either.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I actually agree with most of what you type here, just not your logic.
As for "embargo", bear in mind that trade between two countries cannot
happen except by agreement.
Nonsense! Trade has existed since the dawn of civilisation. In recent centuries/decades international trade has increased. There is every prospect that it will continue to do so.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Your belief that
"If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will apply"
is false. At least it is NOT automatic, as you and many other
commentators appear to think.
Both the EU, the UK and every member of the EU are members of the WTO as part of a 169 country community accounting for 98% of all world trade.

Members of the WTO are committed to trading with each other without any discrimination between members *except* where there is a trade agreement in existence. Then parties to that agreement can trade preferentially with each other at reduced or even zero tariffs.

This means that members of the EU are able to trade with each other freely. Those countries that are not members of the EU "single market" will be required to pay an external trade tariff is order to export goods into the market and will be able to impose a import tariff against imports from the market. These WTO tariffs are set by agreement between members and must be non discriminatory.

So the UK at present can trade freely within the EU as a member. However, this arrangement is far from ideal for three reasons.

First to be a member the UK hands over a lot of money to be a member of the EU (~£8.5bn net) with nothing in return in the form of grants etc.

Second the EU runs a trade deficit with the EU. Free trade does not favour a country that has a trade deficit with the other. Although exports are tariff free, tariffs on imports, which exceed exports, have to be foregone and hence lost.

Third the EU Customs Union offers a constraint on UK trade with non EU countries in that through it, the UK is forbidden from entering into FTAs with them. They can of course trade with them since virtually all of them are WTO members but only on WTO tariff terms.

Now if we leave the EU, we will no longer be part of the Single market or the Customs Union but will be able to trade with EU counties by virtue of our and their WTO membership. We will if we are able to negotiate FTA's with them *and* any other WTO member. We will pay no subscription to the EU.

To me it's a no brainer.
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 15:00:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Britain imports most of its food. As for home producers, first
there's the problem of finding the labour to replace migrants, and
then second what they'd do (for reasons you seem well aware of) is
whack their prices
up.
And has done or a large number of decades. Of course there are certain
foods that we cannot produce for ourselves.
We do not grow many bananas, pineapples or citrus fruits for instance.
Of all the farms I have visited (and there are a few) over the years
the farm labourer has become a rare species. You see he is better off
working outside the industry or for one of those agricultural
contractors who these days move in on an as needed basis with the
latest machinery do a particular job and are away to the next farm.
The only permanent staff employed these days are the farm manager
(where applicable) and the stock man.
You are talking about casual seasonal workers. Traditionally these
were recruited locally. Nowadays of course casuals come from much
further abroad literally. Changes in the exchange rates have made this
practice less profitable for them. There is only one solution and its
not cancel Brexit it is to put up wages. This would add to costs of
course but if these extra costs were unbearable then the more marginal
producers would have to diversify into alternative activity. Supply
would fall forcing prices up.
There is already a labour shortage and farmers are not responding to it
by putting up wages. They are letting the food rot in the fields.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Why therefore should contingency measures such as you suggest be prepared.
This is a political action not a war!
Tell that to Greeks and Icelanders.
Iceland is not in the EU and the Icelanders I find to be a very
resilient people. I wasn't aware that there was a food crisis in
Greece either.
What is the point of telling me you don't know about what I referred to,
as if that makes it false? There have been food shortages in Greece for
some years now, and they have been covered in the press. Fortunately
there has not, as far as I am aware, been famine, but remember that there
has been famine in living memory in that country, which makes people
resilient. Many in Britain don't have a clue.

Agreed about resilience in Iceland. My point was that an economy can fall
apart fast.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I actually agree with most of what you type here, just not your logic.
As for "embargo", bear in mind that trade between two countries
cannot happen except by agreement.
Nonsense! Trade has existed since the dawn of civilisation.
Trade started off as something you do only with enemies, but I take your
point. I was talking about in today's world.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
In recent
centuries/decades international trade has increased. There is every
prospect that it will continue to do so.
I was making a point about the WTO, which is widely described as if it
were a fallback. It is NOT a fallback. In a scenario of Brexit without
agreement, companies that export from mainland Europe to Britain simply
do not have the right to roll their lorries into Britain and sell "on WTO
terms". Without knowing what forms to fill in, because there wouldn't be
any forms, they simply wouldn't bother.

There is no pre-existing agreement between Britain and EU27 that trade
will fall back to if Britain crashes out of the EU without an agreement.
There would have to be negotiations.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Your belief that
"If no FTA is reached then WTO arrangements will apply"
is false. At least it is NOT automatic, as you and many other
commentators appear to think.
Both the EU, the UK and every member of the EU are members of the WTO
as part of a 169 country community accounting for 98% of all world
trade.
Members of the WTO are committed to trading with each other without
any discrimination between members *except* where there is a trade
agreement in existence. Then parties to that agreement can trade
preferentially with each other at reduced or even zero tariffs.
This means that members of the EU are able to trade with each other
freely. Those countries that are not members of the EU "single market"
will be required to pay an external trade tariff is order to export
goods into the market and will be able to impose a import tariff
against imports from the market. These WTO tariffs are set by
agreement between members and must be non discriminatory.
*"by agreement between members"*
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Now if we leave the EU, we will no longer be part of the Single market
or the Customs Union but will be able to trade with EU counties by
virtue of our and their WTO membership.
Only under tariff agreements yet to be struck.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
We will if we are able to
negotiate FTA's with them *and* any other WTO member. We will pay no
subscription to the EU.
Donald
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-05 16:49:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
There is already a labour shortage and farmers are not responding to it
by putting up wages. They are letting the food rot in the fields.
It is from firms like this:

http://www.burdenbros.co.uk/contractors

that farm labour comes these days.

Farm land is worth around £9000 /acre too expensive to be wasted like that! It's not unusual now for food to be grown under contract by farmers on behalf of food retailers or processors. An acreage is agreed at an agreed price before a seed has gone into the soil Occasionally a contractee will over order (maybe a better than expected harvest) when the farmer will be paid off and ordered to destroy the crop. There is no point in flooding the market to the contractee's commercial disadvantage.

Perhaps that is what you have seen. whatever the reason it is not shortage of labour. There will always be someone to harvest a crop if there is someone to pay.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Why therefore should contingency measures such as you suggest be prepared.
This is a political action not a war!
Tell that to Greeks and Icelanders.
now, and they have been covered in the press. Fortunately
there has not, as far as I am aware, been famine, but remember that there
has been famine in living memory in that country, which makes people
resilient. Many in Britain don't have a clue.
But isn't Greece a member of the EU? Are these people not European citizens? What's in EU membership for the people if they can be allowed to near starve to death.

I am confident that such a situation would not be allowed to happen here in modern times. Particularly as the progenitor of the crisis was Germany.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Agreed about resilience in Iceland. My point was that an economy can fall
apart fast.
And recovered fast.

When I went to Iceland after the crash and the missus and I bought two coffees and a couple of slices of cake for 65p each! We were back 18 months later and what a change. The locals had soon started letting out their spare rooms to tourists and turning their 4x4s into taxis with themsleves as driver guides.

I was filled with admiration for them that they didn't stand there with their hands out as they would have here. Those people will never be flat on their backs for long. It doesn't surprise me they recoered so quickly.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I was making a point about the WTO, which is widely described as if it
were a fallback. It is NOT a fallback. In a scenario of Brexit without
agreement, companies that export from mainland Europe to Britain simply
do not have the right to roll their lorries into Britain and sell "on WTO
terms". Without knowing what forms to fill in, because there wouldn't be
any forms, they simply wouldn't bother.
They don't have to! Non-EU countries have been trading with Europe under WTO terms for years. The mechanisms are already there.

USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan, China etc. etc.

No the WTO is not a fall bock It's just the biggest trading organisation of the lot!
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Members of the WTO are committed to trading with each other without
any discrimination between members *except* where there is a trade
agreement in existence. Then parties to that agreement can trade
preferentially with each other at reduced or even zero tariffs.
This means that members of the EU are able to trade with each other
freely. Those countries that are not members of the EU "single market"
will be required to pay an external trade tariff is order to export
goods into the market and will be able to impose a import tariff
against imports from the market. These WTO tariffs are set by
agreement between members and must be non discriminatory.
*"by agreement between members"*
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Now if we leave the EU, we will no longer be part of the Single market
or the Customs Union but will be able to trade with EU counties by
virtue of our and their WTO membership.
Only under tariff agreements yet to be struck.
Already struck between *all members* of the WTO and *must* be applied in a non discriminatory manner.
James Hammerton
2017-12-05 21:36:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
There is already a labour shortage and farmers are not responding to it
by putting up wages. They are letting the food rot in the fields.
http://www.burdenbros.co.uk/contractors
that farm labour comes these days.
Farm land is worth around £9000 /acre too expensive to be wasted like that! It's not unusual now for food to be grown under contract by farmers on behalf of food retailers or processors. An acreage is agreed at an agreed price before a seed has gone into the soil Occasionally a contractee will over order (maybe a better than expected harvest) when the farmer will be paid off and ordered to destroy the crop. There is no point in flooding the market to the contractee's commercial disadvantage.
Perhaps that is what you have seen. whatever the reason it is not shortage of labour. There will always be someone to harvest a crop if there is someone to pay.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Why therefore should contingency measures such as you suggest be prepared.
This is a political action not a war!
Tell that to Greeks and Icelanders.
now, and they have been covered in the press. Fortunately
there has not, as far as I am aware, been famine, but remember that there
has been famine in living memory in that country, which makes people
resilient. Many in Britain don't have a clue.
But isn't Greece a member of the EU? Are these people not European citizens? What's in EU membership for the people if they can be allowed to near starve to death.
I am confident that such a situation would not be allowed to happen here in modern times. Particularly as the progenitor of the crisis was Germany.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Agreed about resilience in Iceland. My point was that an economy can fall
apart fast.
And recovered fast.
When I went to Iceland after the crash and the missus and I bought two coffees and a couple of slices of cake for 65p each! We were back 18 months later and what a change. The locals had soon started letting out their spare rooms to tourists and turning their 4x4s into taxis with themsleves as driver guides.
I was filled with admiration for them that they didn't stand there with their hands out as they would have here. Those people will never be flat on their backs for long. It doesn't surprise me they recoered so quickly.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I was making a point about the WTO, which is widely described as if it
were a fallback. It is NOT a fallback. In a scenario of Brexit without
agreement, companies that export from mainland Europe to Britain simply
do not have the right to roll their lorries into Britain and sell "on WTO
terms".
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here are
the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right of
foreign companies to tradew with us?!

If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to the
UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain in
detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.

Without knowing what forms to fill in, because there wouldn't be
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
any forms, they simply wouldn't bother.
They don't have to! Non-EU countries have been trading with Europe under WTO terms for years. The mechanisms are already there.
USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan, China etc. etc.
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU via
numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often involving
mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or sector specific
agreements. None of the named countries trade with the EU purely on WTO
terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU of some sort), though
perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it -- see below.

For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the USA
under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a category
Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other treaties) under
"Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24 agreements for the USA
(*), ranging from topics such as mutual recognition and customs
cooperation to specific agreements on products such as wine and coffee:

http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=true&currentUser=null

(*) There are warnings here that the site is experiencing issues and
might not be returning all available results at the moment:
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/default.home.do

For Canada, you get 18 results, all predating CETA, the recently
concluded comprehensive FTA.

For Australia, you get 10 results.

For China, you get 5 results, but I counted at least 9 trade related
treaties in this more general list:
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/searchByCountryAndContinent.do?countryId=2101&countryName=China&countryFlag=treaties

Taiwan had just 2 results and Singapore 1, and the ones listed did not
look comprehensive from their titles, so it's possible these may be
close enough to pure WTO rules as to make little difference.


NB: Despite picking you up on this, I'm not claiming trade between
Britain and the rest of the world will cease if there's no deal.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
No the WTO is not a fall bock It's just the biggest trading organisation of the lot!
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Members of the WTO are committed to trading with each other without
any discrimination between members *except* where there is a trade
agreement in existence. Then parties to that agreement can trade
preferentially with each other at reduced or even zero tariffs.
This means that members of the EU are able to trade with each other
freely. Those countries that are not members of the EU "single market"
will be required to pay an external trade tariff is order to export
goods into the market and will be able to impose a import tariff
against imports from the market. These WTO tariffs are set by
agreement between members and must be non discriminatory.
*"by agreement between members"*
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Now if we leave the EU, we will no longer be part of the Single market
or the Customs Union but will be able to trade with EU counties by
virtue of our and their WTO membership.
Only under tariff agreements yet to be struck.
Already struck between *all members* of the WTO and *must* be applied in a non discriminatory manner.
I suspect this may be a reference to our need to create a new schedule
of commitments at the WTO - but that schedule can be put in place and
trading under it can proceed even if it is disputed by the other
members. The WTO boss himself denies there is a risk of trade disruption
as a result of Brexit:
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-will-not-cause-uk-trade-disruption-wto-boss-10632803

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 22:19:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here
are the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right
of foreign companies to tradew with us?!
The right is not so much granted as negotiated and agreed by treaty, and
the question is what rights would pertain (without any further
negotiation) under WTO rules if Britain leaves the EU. I'm sure that
British interests and interests in most foreign countries would welcome a
mutually beneficial trade agreement, but one would have to be negotiated
and my understanding is that Britain is not allowed to conduct its own
independent negotiations of any trade treaties with countries outside the
EU at this time.

Mel made a good argument to support the view that the WTO is some kind of
fallback, but I am not convinced it is much of one and I am currently
investigating.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to
the UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain in
detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think that.
Post by James Hammerton
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU via
numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often involving
mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or sector specific
agreements. None of the named countries trade with the EU purely on
WTO terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU of some sort),
though perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it -- see below.
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the
USA under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a
category Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other
treaties) under "Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24
agreements for the USA (*), ranging from topics such as mutual
recognition and customs cooperation to specific agreements on products
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=true
&currentUser=null
For Canada, you get 18 results, all predating CETA, the recently
concluded comprehensive FTA.
For Australia, you get 10 results.
For China, you get 5 results, but I counted at least 9 trade related
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/searchByCountryAndContinent.do?cou
ntryId=2101&countryName=China&countryFlag=treaties
Taiwan had just 2 results and Singapore 1, and the ones listed did not
look comprehensive from their titles, so it's possible these may be
close enough to pure WTO rules as to make little difference.
Any that are close to pure WTO rules would be the most interesting ones
:-)
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Already struck between *all members* of the WTO and *must* be applied
in a non discriminatory manner.
I suspect this may be a reference to our need to create a new schedule
of commitments at the WTO - but that schedule can be put in place and
trading under it can proceed even if it is disputed by the other
members. The WTO boss himself denies there is a risk of trade
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-will-not-cause-uk-trade-disruption-wt
o-boss-10632803
At the end of the day, does the WTO amount to much? "Most Favoured
Nation" is often (usually?) a misnomer. Countries that really get a lot
out of trading with each other negotiate terms that are more favourable
than WTO terms.
James Hammerton
2017-12-05 23:55:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here
are the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right
of foreign companies to tradew with us?!
The right is not so much granted as negotiated and agreed by treaty,
No. It *can* be negotiated and agreed by treaty and often is but there
is nothing to stop the UK saying unilaterally we'll accept goods that
meet our standards from any supplier whereever located. The fact we
import lots of goods is not because we persuaded other countries to lift
*export* controls but that we lowered barriers for importing.

Under WTO rules we can set conditions on imports from other WTO members
so long as we apply them equally to those members, but we can if we wish
negotiate trade agreements to develop deeper preferential trading
relationships with specific countries (the EU being a prime example).

and
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
the question is what rights would pertain (without any further
negotiation) under WTO rules if Britain leaves the EU.
The UK can continue to let in all the goods she lets in right now - this
does not need agreement from the other countries! What may need
agreement is the new schedule of tariffs or quotas but even there they
can be dealt with without disrupting trade. For detail on this specific
issue see: http://eureferendum.com/documents/BrexitMonograph008.pdf

NB: The author of that, Richard North, regards the WTO option as
unworkable but that's because of the view he has that transitioning from
EU member state to a "third country" (i.e. being outside the single
market) will involve disruptions caused by Britain's sudden transition
from being inside the tariff and regulatory barriers to trade the EU
erects to being outside them, causing disruption to EU/UK trade that may
clog our ports (and some of the EU's ports). It's not because the right
to export to the UK would suddenly disappear, and whilst this would
likely be an economic shock to the system if it did occur, I doubt even
Richard North would suggest it would cause famine.

I'm sure that
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
British interests and interests in most foreign countries would welcome a
mutually beneficial trade agreement, but one would have to be negotiated
and my understanding is that Britain is not allowed to conduct its own
independent negotiations of any trade treaties with countries outside the
EU at this time.
You are correct about the UK being barred from negotiating trade deals
as an EU member.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Mel made a good argument to support the view that the WTO is some kind of
fallback, but I am not convinced it is much of one and I am currently
investigating.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to
the UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain in
detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think that.
Then I'm not sure why you think a possibility of famine is on the cards.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU via
numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often involving
mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or sector specific
agreements. None of the named countries trade with the EU purely on
WTO terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU of some sort),
though perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it -- see below.
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the
USA under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a
category Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other
treaties) under "Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24
agreements for the USA (*), ranging from topics such as mutual
recognition and customs cooperation to specific agreements on products
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=true
&currentUser=null
For Canada, you get 18 results, all predating CETA, the recently
concluded comprehensive FTA.
For Australia, you get 10 results.
For China, you get 5 results, but I counted at least 9 trade related
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/searchByCountryAndContinent.do?cou
ntryId=2101&countryName=China&countryFlag=treaties
Taiwan had just 2 results and Singapore 1, and the ones listed did not
look comprehensive from their titles, so it's possible these may be
close enough to pure WTO rules as to make little difference.
Any that are close to pure WTO rules would be the most interesting ones
:-)
Maybe, but it doesn't alter the fact that the UK can allow people to
import goods from anywhere in the world if she wants to and it doesn't
require a trade agreement with the other governments concerned.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Already struck between *all members* of the WTO and *must* be applied
in a non discriminatory manner.
I suspect this may be a reference to our need to create a new schedule
of commitments at the WTO - but that schedule can be put in place and
trading under it can proceed even if it is disputed by the other
members. The WTO boss himself denies there is a risk of trade
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-will-not-cause-uk-trade-disruption-wt
o-boss-10632803
At the end of the day, does the WTO amount to much? "Most Favoured
Nation" is often (usually?) a misnomer. Countries that really get a lot
out of trading with each other negotiate terms that are more favourable
than WTO terms.
Yes, but that's because most countries practice some form of
protectionism (e.g. requiring standards to be met - some of the
protectionism may be justified) or impose tariffs or quotas and there's
thus mileage in negotisting deals which lower the trade barrers
resulting from such either by making it easier to demonstrate
conformance to standards or by lowering or eliminating tariffs.

It's not because trade can't occur without a treaty.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-06 07:25:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here
are the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right
of foreign companies to tradew with us?!
The right is not so much granted as negotiated and agreed by treaty,
No. It *can* be negotiated and agreed by treaty and often is but there
is nothing to stop the UK saying unilaterally we'll accept goods that
meet our standards from any supplier whereever located. The fact we
import lots of goods is not because we persuaded other countries to
lift *export* controls but that we lowered barriers for importing.
Under WTO rules we can set conditions on imports from other WTO
members so long as we apply them equally to those members, but we can
if we wish negotiate trade agreements to develop deeper preferential
trading relationships with specific countries (the EU being a prime
example).
and
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
the question is what rights would pertain (without any further
negotiation) under WTO rules if Britain leaves the EU.
The UK can continue to let in all the goods she lets in right now -
this does not need agreement from the other countries! What may need
agreement is the new schedule of tariffs or quotas but even there they
can be dealt with without disrupting trade. For detail on this
http://eureferendum.com/documents/BrexitMonograph008.pdf
NB: The author of that, Richard North, regards the WTO option as
unworkable but that's because of the view he has that transitioning
from EU member state to a "third country" (i.e. being outside the
single market) will involve disruptions caused by Britain's sudden
transition from being inside the tariff and regulatory barriers to
trade the EU erects to being outside them, causing disruption to EU/UK
trade that may clog our ports (and some of the EU's ports). It's not
because the right to export to the UK would suddenly disappear, and
whilst this would likely be an economic shock to the system if it did
occur, I doubt even Richard North would suggest it would cause famine.
I'm sure that
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
British interests and interests in most foreign countries would
welcome a mutually beneficial trade agreement, but one would have to
be negotiated and my understanding is that Britain is not allowed to
conduct its own independent negotiations of any trade treaties with
countries outside the EU at this time.
You are correct about the UK being barred from negotiating trade deals
as an EU member.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Mel made a good argument to support the view that the WTO is some
kind of fallback, but I am not convinced it is much of one and I am
currently investigating.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to
the UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain
in detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think that.
Then I'm not sure why you think a possibility of famine is on the cards.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU
via numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often
involving mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or
sector specific agreements. None of the named countries trade with
the EU purely on WTO terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU
of some sort), though perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it
-- see below.
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the
USA under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a
category Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other
treaties) under "Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24
agreements for the USA (*), ranging from topics such as mutual
recognition and customs cooperation to specific agreements on
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=tr
ue &currentUser=null
For Canada, you get 18 results, all predating CETA, the recently
concluded comprehensive FTA.
For Australia, you get 10 results.
For China, you get 5 results, but I counted at least 9 trade related
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/searchByCountryAndContinent.do?c
ou ntryId=2101&countryName=China&countryFlag=treaties
Taiwan had just 2 results and Singapore 1, and the ones listed did
not look comprehensive from their titles, so it's possible these may
be close enough to pure WTO rules as to make little difference.
Any that are close to pure WTO rules would be the most interesting ones
:-)
Maybe, but it doesn't alter the fact that the UK can allow people to
import goods from anywhere in the world if she wants to and it doesn't
require a trade agreement with the other governments concerned.
Can you give an example of a country with which that has ever happened?
How would Britain get its goods into the other country without the other
country's authorities agreeing to allow them in?
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 18:26:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here
are the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right
of foreign companies to tradew with us?!
The right is not so much granted as negotiated and agreed by treaty,
No. It *can* be negotiated and agreed by treaty and often is but there
is nothing to stop the UK saying unilaterally we'll accept goods that
meet our standards from any supplier whereever located. The fact we
import lots of goods is not because we persuaded other countries to
lift *export* controls but that we lowered barriers for importing.
Under WTO rules we can set conditions on imports from other WTO
members so long as we apply them equally to those members, but we can
if we wish negotiate trade agreements to develop deeper preferential
trading relationships with specific countries (the EU being a prime
example).
and
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
the question is what rights would pertain (without any further
negotiation) under WTO rules if Britain leaves the EU.
The UK can continue to let in all the goods she lets in right now -
this does not need agreement from the other countries! What may need
agreement is the new schedule of tariffs or quotas but even there they
can be dealt with without disrupting trade. For detail on this
http://eureferendum.com/documents/BrexitMonograph008.pdf
NB: The author of that, Richard North, regards the WTO option as
unworkable but that's because of the view he has that transitioning
from EU member state to a "third country" (i.e. being outside the
single market) will involve disruptions caused by Britain's sudden
transition from being inside the tariff and regulatory barriers to
trade the EU erects to being outside them, causing disruption to EU/UK
trade that may clog our ports (and some of the EU's ports). It's not
because the right to export to the UK would suddenly disappear, and
whilst this would likely be an economic shock to the system if it did
occur, I doubt even Richard North would suggest it would cause famine.
I'm sure that
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
British interests and interests in most foreign countries would
welcome a mutually beneficial trade agreement, but one would have to
be negotiated and my understanding is that Britain is not allowed to
conduct its own independent negotiations of any trade treaties with
countries outside the EU at this time.
You are correct about the UK being barred from negotiating trade deals
as an EU member.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Mel made a good argument to support the view that the WTO is some
kind of fallback, but I am not convinced it is much of one and I am
currently investigating.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to
the UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain
in detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think that.
Then I'm not sure why you think a possibility of famine is on the cards.
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by James Hammerton
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU
via numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often
involving mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or
sector specific agreements. None of the named countries trade with
the EU purely on WTO terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU
of some sort), though perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it
-- see below.
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the
USA under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a
category Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other
treaties) under "Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24
agreements for the USA (*), ranging from topics such as mutual
recognition and customs cooperation to specific agreements on
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=tr
ue &currentUser=null
For Canada, you get 18 results, all predating CETA, the recently
concluded comprehensive FTA.
For Australia, you get 10 results.
For China, you get 5 results, but I counted at least 9 trade related
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/searchByCountryAndContinent.do?c
ou ntryId=2101&countryName=China&countryFlag=treaties
Taiwan had just 2 results and Singapore 1, and the ones listed did
not look comprehensive from their titles, so it's possible these may
be close enough to pure WTO rules as to make little difference.
Any that are close to pure WTO rules would be the most interesting ones
:-)
Maybe, but it doesn't alter the fact that the UK can allow people to
import goods from anywhere in the world if she wants to and it doesn't
require a trade agreement with the other governments concerned.
Can you give an example of a country with which that has ever happened?
How would Britain get its goods into the other country without the other
country's authorities agreeing to allow them in?
You are talking about exporting! I was talking about importing because
you seems to think that our imports might stop under a no deal brexit
(hence your earlier predictions of famine)!

But even then, under WTO rules we'll be allowed export to other WTO
members under their tariffs and quotas. E.g. the EU won't suddenly ban
all of our goods, the most they'll do is impose tariffs and extra
customs checks and bureaucracy.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-06 10:11:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I was making a point about the WTO, which is widely described as if it
were a fallback. It is NOT a fallback. In a scenario of Brexit without
agreement, companies that export from mainland Europe to Britain simply
do not have the right to roll their lorries into Britain and sell "on WTO
terms".
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here are
the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right of
foreign companies to tradew with us?!
Occasionally there will be trade embargoes on particular countries These are totally politically motivated. Similarly there will be a list of prohibited goods where trade is prohibited altogether or subject to licence e.g. narcotics, counterfeit merchandise, firearms etc.

Excluding such exceptions, one rule applies. Trade is conducted between private individuals and companies. There is no government department to tell me what I can buy/sell from whoever and wherever I choose (subject always of course to the above)

We are a free country where our personal rights and privileges are respected.

However, governments do have and do exercise powers to impose duties on goods from other countries and even goods (e.g. alcoholic beverages) from this country. The former rights go back to the rule of kings. It was a convenience to tax goods passing through ports rather than chase round the country taking money from individuals.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to the
UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain in
detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think, I know that this country already imports roughly half of the goods internationally traded from countries outside the EU. Ever seen New Zealand Lamb in the supermarket? Australian tinned fruit? US computers/sotware? Virginia tobacco? Californian/Chilean/Australian/South African wine. Every other thing you buy comes from the Far East. How do you imagine these goods find their way into our shops if they are forbidden?

However, all such goods attract what is called an external tariff which is imposed by the edict of the EU. The money goes to the UK government (less a sliver that goes to the EU)

Now as members of the WTO were we not part of the EU and so there were no FTA applicable there would be instead of the EU Common tariff a WTO tariff. This tariff is set bi-annually, I believe by a convention of all the WTO member countries (all 169 of them) This tariff is non discriminatory which means it is the same in all member countries, for the same category of good. The money entirely goes to the governments of the importing country.

It is the objective of the WTO to reduce and eventually get rid of tariffs and right across the world in effect turning the world into one giant FTA.
Post by James Hammerton
Without knowing what forms to fill in, because there wouldn't be
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
any forms, they simply wouldn't bother.
They don't have to! Non-EU countries have been trading with Europe under WTO terms for years. The mechanisms are already there.
USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan, China etc. etc.
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU via
numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often involving
mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or sector specific
agreements. None of the named countries trade with the EU purely on WTO
terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU of some sort), though
perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it -- see below.
Not true!

Here is the EU's own list:

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/negotiations-and-agreements/

Find on it, China? US? Canada? Australia? New Zealand? Singapore? Taiwan?

Where are these big players you speak of? Japan? Brazil?
Post by James Hammerton
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the USA
under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a category
Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other treaties) under
"Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24 agreements for the USA
(*), ranging from topics such as mutual recognition and customs
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=true&currentUser=null
What about the chlorinated chicken controversy then? Trump threatens to pull out of the treaty which as yet has not even got off the ground neither has the much trumpeted agreement with Canada after 7 years of negotiation. Two agreements there in outline that are already in trouble.

That is why they are not included on my list.

Customs are a different matter altogether.

The international body responsible for the harmonisation of customs procedure is the World Customs Organisation which the UK joined as a founder member in 1952. Despite this the UK's voice within the WCO is muted since as a member of the EU Customs Union we are represented in the WCO by the EU. Further to that, because we are members of the EUCU we are prevented by edict from negotiating any new trade arrangement *with any country in the world* Once upon a time, London was the capital of World trade. Now, we don't even have a voice.

I'm afraid is what surrender of sovereignty means.

The EU does not enhance our power and influence, it does not give us more 'clout' It takes away that which we have. It's high time the process was reversed. We should get back to the notion of electing our own governors and holding them to account. Something else we can't to any more!

One day it will all end in tears bt I fear they may well be innocent tears.
finally ditched mimo
2017-12-06 10:41:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I was making a point about the WTO, which is widely described as if it
were a fallback. It is NOT a fallback. In a scenario of Brexit without
agreement, companies that export from mainland Europe to Britain simply
do not have the right to roll their lorries into Britain and sell "on WTO
terms".
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here are
the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right of
foreign companies to tradew with us?!
Occasionally there will be trade embargoes on particular countries These are
totally politically motivated. Similarly there will be a list of prohibited
goods where trade is prohibited altogether or subject to licence e.g.
narcotics, counterfeit merchandise, firearms etc.
Excluding such exceptions, one rule applies. Trade is conducted between
private individuals and companies. There is no government department to tell
me what I can buy/sell from whoever and wherever I choose (subject always of
course to the above)
We are a free country where our personal rights and privileges are respected.
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
However, governments do have and do exercise powers to impose duties on goods
from other countries and even goods (e.g. alcoholic beverages) from this
country. The former rights go back to the rule of kings. It was a convenience
to tax goods passing through ports rather than chase round the country taking
money from individuals.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to the
UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain in
detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think, I know that this country already imports roughly half of the
goods internationally traded from countries outside the EU. Ever seen New
Zealand Lamb in the supermarket? Australian tinned fruit? US
computers/sotware? Virginia tobacco? Californian/Chilean/Australian/South
African wine. Every other thing you buy comes from the Far East. How do you
imagine these goods find their way into our shops if they are forbidden?
However, all such goods attract what is called an external tariff which is
imposed by the edict of the EU. The money goes to the UK government (less a
sliver that goes to the EU)
Now as members of the WTO were we not part of the EU and so there were no FTA
applicable there would be instead of the EU Common tariff a WTO tariff. This
tariff is set bi-annually, I believe by a convention of all the WTO member
countries (all 169 of them) This tariff is non discriminatory which means it
is the same in all member countries, for the same category of good. The money
entirely goes to the governments of the importing country.
It is the objective of the WTO to reduce and eventually get rid of tariffs
and right across the world in effect turning the world into one giant FTA.
Post by James Hammerton
Without knowing what forms to fill in, because there wouldn't be
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
any forms, they simply wouldn't bother.
They don't have to! Non-EU countries have been trading with Europe under
WTO terms for years. The mechanisms are already there.
USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan, China etc. etc.
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU via
numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often involving
mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or sector specific
agreements. None of the named countries trade with the EU purely on WTO
terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU of some sort), though
perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it -- see below.
Not true!
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/negotiations-and-agreem
ents/
Find on it, China? US? Canada? Australia? New Zealand? Singapore? Taiwan?
Where are these big players you speak of? Japan? Brazil?
Post by James Hammerton
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the USA
under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a category
Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other treaties) under
"Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24 agreements for the USA
(*), ranging from topics such as mutual recognition and customs
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=true&curr
entUser=null
What about the chlorinated chicken controversy then? Trump threatens to pull
out of the treaty which as yet has not even got off the ground neither has
the much trumpeted agreement with Canada after 7 years of negotiation. Two
agreements there in outline that are already in trouble.
That is why they are not included on my list.
Customs are a different matter altogether.
The international body responsible for the harmonisation of customs procedure
is the World Customs Organisation which the UK joined as a founder member in
1952. Despite this the UK's voice within the WCO is muted since as a member
of the EU Customs Union we are represented in the WCO by the EU. Further to
that, because we are members of the EUCU we are prevented by edict from
negotiating any new trade arrangement *with any country in the world* Once
upon a time, London was the capital of World trade. Now, we don't even have a
voice.
I'm afraid is what surrender of sovereignty means.
The EU does not enhance our power and influence, it does not give us more
'clout' It takes away that which we have. It's high time the process was
reversed. We should get back to the notion of electing our own governors and
holding them to account. Something else we can't to any more!
One day it will all end in tears bt I fear they may well be innocent tears.
abelard
2017-12-06 11:23:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 10:41:12 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
why would you 'protest' that?
--
www.abelard.org
finally ditched mimo
2017-12-06 11:34:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 10:41:12 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
why would you 'protest' that?
Because I don’t like the idea of deliberately fracturing rocks deep
underground, just to release gas or liquid which has been quite happily
sitting there for millions of years.
abelard
2017-12-06 11:38:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:34:33 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by abelard
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 10:41:12 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
why would you 'protest' that?
Because I don’t like the idea of deliberately fracturing rocks deep
underground, just to release gas or liquid which has been quite happily
sitting there for millions of years.
are you against ploughing as well?

or coal mining?

or silver mines?
--
www.abelard.org
finally ditched mimo
2017-12-06 11:48:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:34:33 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by abelard
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 10:41:12 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by finally ditched mimo
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
why would you 'protest' that?
Because I don’t like the idea of deliberately fracturing rocks deep
underground, just to release gas or liquid which has been quite happily
sitting there for millions of years.
are you against ploughing as well?
Yes. Direct drilling is more cost effective and doesn’t destroy soil
structure.Look it up.
Post by abelard
or coal mining?
You may recall that in mines some form of support (pit props) are used in the
gaps which are left after the products have been removed.
Post by abelard
or silver mines?
Ditto.
abelard
2017-12-06 11:57:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:48:17 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by abelard
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:34:33 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Post by abelard
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 10:41:12 +0000, finally ditched mimo
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
why would you 'protest' that?
Because I don’t like the idea of deliberately fracturing rocks deep
underground, just to release gas or liquid which has been quite happily
sitting there for millions of years.
are you against ploughing as well?
Yes. Direct drilling is more cost effective and doesn’t destroy soil
structure.Look it up.
Post by abelard
or coal mining?
You may recall that in mines some form of support (pit props) are used in the
gaps which are left after the products have been removed.
Post by abelard
or silver mines?
Ditto.
--
www.abelard.org
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-06 11:33:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I was making a point about the WTO, which is widely described as if it
were a fallback. It is NOT a fallback. In a scenario of Brexit without
agreement, companies that export from mainland Europe to Britain simply
do not have the right to roll their lorries into Britain and sell "on WTO
terms".
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here are
the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right of
foreign companies to tradew with us?!
Occasionally there will be trade embargoes on particular countries These are
totally politically motivated. Similarly there will be a list of prohibited
goods where trade is prohibited altogether or subject to licence e.g.
narcotics, counterfeit merchandise, firearms etc.
Excluding such exceptions, one rule applies. Trade is conducted between
private individuals and companies. There is no government department to tell
me what I can buy/sell from whoever and wherever I choose (subject always of
course to the above)
We are a free country where our personal rights and privileges are respected.
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
However, governments do have and do exercise powers to impose duties on goods
from other countries and even goods (e.g. alcoholic beverages) from this
country. The former rights go back to the rule of kings. It was a convenience
to tax goods passing through ports rather than chase round the country taking
money from individuals.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to the
UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain in
detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think, I know that this country already imports roughly half of the
goods internationally traded from countries outside the EU. Ever seen New
Zealand Lamb in the supermarket? Australian tinned fruit? US
computers/sotware? Virginia tobacco? Californian/Chilean/Australian/South
African wine. Every other thing you buy comes from the Far East. How do you
imagine these goods find their way into our shops if they are forbidden?
However, all such goods attract what is called an external tariff which is
imposed by the edict of the EU. The money goes to the UK government (less a
sliver that goes to the EU)
Now as members of the WTO were we not part of the EU and so there were no FTA
applicable there would be instead of the EU Common tariff a WTO tariff. This
tariff is set bi-annually, I believe by a convention of all the WTO member
countries (all 169 of them) This tariff is non discriminatory which means it
is the same in all member countries, for the same category of good. The money
entirely goes to the governments of the importing country.
It is the objective of the WTO to reduce and eventually get rid of tariffs
and right across the world in effect turning the world into one giant FTA.
Post by James Hammerton
Without knowing what forms to fill in, because there wouldn't be
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
any forms, they simply wouldn't bother.
They don't have to! Non-EU countries have been trading with Europe under
WTO terms for years. The mechanisms are already there.
USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan, China etc. etc.
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU via
numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often involving
mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or sector specific
agreements. None of the named countries trade with the EU purely on WTO
terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU of some sort), though
perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it -- see below.
Not true!
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/negotiations-and-agreem
ents/
Find on it, China? US? Canada? Australia? New Zealand? Singapore? Taiwan?
Where are these big players you speak of? Japan? Brazil?
Post by James Hammerton
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the USA
under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a category
Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other treaties) under
"Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24 agreements for the USA
(*), ranging from topics such as mutual recognition and customs
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=true&curr
entUser=null
What about the chlorinated chicken controversy then? Trump threatens to pull
out of the treaty which as yet has not even got off the ground neither has
the much trumpeted agreement with Canada after 7 years of negotiation. Two
agreements there in outline that are already in trouble.
That is why they are not included on my list.
Customs are a different matter altogether.
The international body responsible for the harmonisation of customs procedure
is the World Customs Organisation which the UK joined as a founder member in
1952. Despite this the UK's voice within the WCO is muted since as a member
of the EU Customs Union we are represented in the WCO by the EU. Further to
that, because we are members of the EUCU we are prevented by edict from
negotiating any new trade arrangement *with any country in the world* Once
upon a time, London was the capital of World trade. Now, we don't even have a
voice.
I'm afraid is what surrender of sovereignty means.
The EU does not enhance our power and influence, it does not give us more
'clout' It takes away that which we have. It's high time the process was
reversed. We should get back to the notion of electing our own governors and
holding them to account. Something else we can't to any more!
One day it will all end in tears but I fear they may well be innocent tears.
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-06 12:45:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
We are a free country where our personal rights and privileges are respected.
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
I live not a 1000 miles from such a site at Kirkby Misterton, North Yorkshire.

Don't believe all you hear.

There are people living in that village who sincerely believe that the siting of the drill rig is totally unsatisfactory.

It is fair to say that there are others (possibly a majority) who either are indifferent to the installation or indeed are in favour on the grounds that it will bring much needed opportunities for employment into the area.

It is equally fair to say that a significant number of protesters there have no connection with the village at all. They are what at one time we would have called "rent a mob" They simply take things way too far.

Their ambition as far as one can tell is to stop contractors, members of the public, contractors and police from going about their lawful business though provocative behaviour, obstruction of the highway and minor criminal damage.

I myself have been delayed by disturbances there as I drove past, all be it a delay of no more than a couple of minutes or so. I in no way felt harassed or threatened but my only alternative to stopping was to drive over sitters in the roadway which, of course no responsible person would do.

The point is that this development before work commenced, went though public consultation, two public planning committee meetings, two appeals, a final appeal to the DotE over a period of two years. Anyone who had an axe to grind, had every opportunity to voice their feelings.

In a civilised society there is no better way to resolve issues Iwould like to know what makes these people tick and why they seem to think that they should have a personal veto on any development. If theirs were the way of doing things than no development would ever get started and would that mean a better world?

They have built aa 'camp' of a sympathetic farmer's land. Unlike the site, this has no planning consent. It is an eyesore from the outside (I have never been in) seemingly a fire hazard and probably a sanitary hazard too.

When the work is complete, the site will be totally innocuous (within a coule of miles there is a gas, though not fracked gas, wellhead that has been there 20 years or so) Most people drive by not noticing.

After a few years of operation the site will be dismantled, capped and the land restored to its original state. I came from a coal mining area. These people simply do not know how severely disruptive extractive industries can be. These people will have nothing to complain about.

There is absolutely no scientific evidence that fracking causes severe consequences or indeed any consequences at all.
finally ditched mimo
2017-12-06 13:02:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by finally ditched mimo
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
We are a free country where our personal rights and privileges are respected.
Unless, of course, “we” choose to protest at a potential fracking site.
I live not a 1000 miles from such a site at Kirkby Misterton, North Yorkshire.
Don't believe all you hear.
There are people living in that village who sincerely believe that the siting
of the drill rig is totally unsatisfactory.
It is fair to say that there are others (possibly a majority) who either are
indifferent to the installation or indeed are in favour on the grounds that
it will bring much needed opportunities for employment into the area.
It is equally fair to say that a significant number of protesters there have
no connection with the village at all. They are what at one time we would
have called "rent a mob" They simply take things way too far.
Their ambition as far as one can tell is to stop contractors, members of the
public, contractors and police from going about their lawful business though
provocative behaviour, obstruction of the highway and minor criminal damage.
I myself have been delayed by disturbances there as I drove past, all be it a
delay of no more than a couple of minutes or so. I in no way felt harassed or
threatened but my only alternative to stopping was to drive over sitters in
the roadway which, of course no responsible person would do.
The point is that this development before work commenced, went though public
consultation, two public planning committee meetings, two appeals, a final
appeal to the DotE over a period of two years. Anyone who had an axe to
grind, had every opportunity to voice their feelings.
In a civilised society there is no better way to resolve issues Iwould like
to know what makes these people tick and why they seem to think that they
should have a personal veto on any development. If theirs were the way of
doing things than no development would ever get started and would that mean a
better world?
They have built aa 'camp' of a sympathetic farmer's land. Unlike the site,
this has no planning consent. It is an eyesore from the outside (I have never
been in) seemingly a fire hazard and probably a sanitary hazard too.
When the work is complete, the site will be totally innocuous (within a coule
of miles there is a gas, though not fracked gas, wellhead that has been there
20 years or so) Most people drive by not noticing.
After a few years of operation the site will be dismantled, capped and the
land restored to its original state. I came from a coal mining area.
Then you will know all about subsidence, and the problems that can present.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
These
people simply do not know how severely disruptive extractive industries can
be. These people will have nothing to complain about.
There is absolutely no scientific evidence that fracking causes severe
consequences or indeed any consequences at all.
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-06 19:31:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by finally ditched mimo
Then you will know all about subsidence, and the problems that can present.
Yes I do but where I lived with mines 900+yards deep it wasn't really a problem.

I was alluding more to problems to do with spoil disposal. I would estimate that somewhere in the order of 200-300 acres of land were covered by spoil heaps.

Spoil heaps that were subject to spontaneous combustion. One burned for over 10 years before it was opened up and the fire finally extinguished. A sulphurous stink pervaded everywhere.

Ancient green lanes lined with the skeletons of once fine oaks killed by the environment.

During rainfall grey sludge used to get washed everywhere.

My mum used to reminisce what a beautiful village it was "before the Coal company (Later the NCB) ruined it." There are quite a few villages round Doncaster like this and quite a contrast between the villages the coal industry did not touch and those where they chose to site their pits.

Fortunately things are improving. The now disused spoil heaps around my mum's old house are now being leveled, covered with a good layer of soil and planted out with trees to form new woodland. The blessing is that the nature of the soil beneath the trees is such that it will not permit building and development. One can imagine how nice it will be in say 75 to 100 years time but of course those who suffered the 'tips' will not be around then.
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 18:18:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
I was making a point about the WTO, which is widely described as if it
were a fallback. It is NOT a fallback. In a scenario of Brexit without
agreement, companies that export from mainland Europe to Britain simply
do not have the right to roll their lorries into Britain and sell "on WTO
terms".
Surely the people to grant or deny them the right to sell goods here are
the UK government? Do you really think they would deny the right of
foreign companies to tradew with us?!
Sorry that was aimed at the other poster.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Occasionally there will be trade embargoes on particular countries These are totally politically motivated. Similarly there will be a list of prohibited goods where trade is prohibited altogether or subject to licence e.g. narcotics, counterfeit merchandise, firearms etc.
Excluding such exceptions, one rule applies. Trade is conducted between private individuals and companies. There is no government department to tell me what I can buy/sell from whoever and wherever I choose (subject always of course to the above)
We are a free country where our personal rights and privileges are respected.
However, governments do have and do exercise powers to impose duties on goods from other countries and even goods (e.g. alcoholic beverages) from this country. The former rights go back to the rule of kings. It was a convenience to tax goods passing through ports rather than chase round the country taking money from individuals.
Post by James Hammerton
If you really think WTO terms would prevent people selling goods to the
UK simply because we exit the EU without a deal, please explain in
detail why this is so, with relevant citations from the WTO's
rules/treaties.
I don't think, I know that this country already imports roughly half of the goods internationally traded from countries outside the EU. Ever seen New Zealand Lamb in the supermarket? Australian tinned fruit? US computers/sotware? Virginia tobacco? Californian/Chilean/Australian/South African wine. Every other thing you buy comes from the Far East. How do you imagine these goods find their way into our shops if they are forbidden?
I don't think they;re forbidden - quite the opposite! Again I was
responding to another poster's comments...
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
However, all such goods attract what is called an external tariff which is imposed by the edict of the EU. The money goes to the UK government (less a sliver that goes to the EU)
Now as members of the WTO were we not part of the EU and so there were no FTA applicable there would be instead of the EU Common tariff a WTO tariff. This tariff is set bi-annually, I believe by a convention of all the WTO member countries (all 169 of them) This tariff is non discriminatory which means it is the same in all member countries, for the same category of good. The money entirely goes to the governments of the importing country.
It is the objective of the WTO to reduce and eventually get rid of tariffs and right across the world in effect turning the world into one giant FTA.
Post by James Hammerton
Without knowing what forms to fill in, because there wouldn't be
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
any forms, they simply wouldn't bother.
They don't have to! Non-EU countries have been trading with Europe under WTO terms for years. The mechanisms are already there.
USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan, China etc. etc.
Point of fact: The larger of the named countries trade with the EU via
numerous trade agreements, in addition to WTO rules, often involving
mutual recognition agreements customs, cooperation or sector specific
agreements. None of the named countries trade with the EU purely on WTO
terms (they all have trade treaties with the EU of some sort), though
perhaps the smaller ones might be close to it -- see below.
Not true!
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/negotiations-and-agreements/
Hmmm - yet when you search the EU's own database and ask explcitly
trade agreements you find all of them, as I stated below... how do you
explain that? NB: The agreements listed in that DB are in force.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Find on it, China? US? Canada? Australia? New Zealand? Singapore? Taiwan?
Where are these big players you speak of? Japan? Brazil?
Post by James Hammerton
For example if you go here
(http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do), select the USA
under "Countries" and select "Trade Agreement" (there's also a category
Agreement on trade and cooperation which may list other treaties) under
"Nature of Agreement", it currently returns 24 agreements for the USA
(*), ranging from topics such as mutual recognition and customs
http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/AdvancedSearch.do?freshSearch=true&currentUser=null
What about the chlorinated chicken controversy then?
What about it?
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Trump threatens to pull out of the treaty which as yet has not even got off the ground neither has the much trumpeted agreement with Canada after 7 years of negotiation. Two agreements there in outline that are already in trouble.
That is why they are not included on my list.
Why does the EU database contain a whole bunch of treaties under the
category trade agreements and why do you ignore them?
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Customs are a different matter altogether.
The international body responsible for the harmonisation of customs procedure is the World Customs Organisation which the UK joined as a founder member in 1952. Despite this the UK's voice within the WCO is muted since as a member of the EU Customs Union we are represented in the WCO by the EU. Further to that, because we are members of the EUCU we are prevented by edict from negotiating any new trade arrangement *with any country in the world* Once upon a time, London was the capital of World trade. Now, we don't even have a voice.
I'm afraid is what surrender of sovereignty means.
The EU does not enhance our power and influence, it does not give us more 'clout' It takes away that which we have. It's high time the process was reversed. We should get back to the notion of electing our own governors and holding them to account. Something else we can't to any more!
One day it will all end in tears bt I fear they may well be innocent tears.
Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-05 15:51:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:30:13 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Icelanders.
all 250,00 of them...the population of croydon!

they're surrounded by a fish farm and are renting to
the computer corporate giants in order to save on
refrigeration

you really should study

or you could just keep digging
--
www.abelard.org
Donald Jones, Cryzine
2017-12-05 16:06:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:30:13 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Icelanders.
all 250,00 of them...the population of croydon!
Croydon hasn't had a population of 250,000 since the 1920s.
Its population was estimated as 380,000 a year and a half ago.

Harry
abelard
2017-12-05 16:09:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 16:06:29 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 12:30:13 -0000 (UTC), "Donald Jones, Cryzine"
Post by Donald Jones, Cryzine
Icelanders.
all 250,00 of them...the population of croydon!
Croydon hasn't had a population of 250,000 since the 1920s.
Its population was estimated as 380,000 a year and a half ago.
so iceland has even less...whoopdedoo...

even more fish to go around
--
www.abelard.org
BurfordTJustice
2017-12-05 13:25:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
For a start Britain should produce mre of its own food.

But where is the incentive to do so?




"Donald Jones, Cryzine" <***@remove-this.cryzine.com> wrote in message news:***@85.214.115.223...
: CZ2-01
: http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
:
: ‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
:
: by Donald Jones
: Cryzine
: 5 Dec 2017
:
: Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
: home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
: Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
:
: As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment post-
: Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied having any
: information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
:
: The denial came in response to a Freedom of Information Act request that
: asked whether things remain the same now as they were in 2012, when the
: Cabinet Office issued a similar denial. For the purposes of the Act, the
: department also speaks on behalf of the Prime Minister's Office.
:
: Despite the present uncertainty as to whether trade talks between Britain
: and the EU will even commence, let alone the shape that any trade
: agreement might take, the denial by the Cabinet Office was categorical.
:
: Cryzine has seen copies of all three documents - the request and the two
: responses - none of which have yet been published.
:
: The request asked for "any documents (...) regarding the possible
: scenario of major food shortages or the threat of famine in the UK", a
: scenario defined as "shortages in which at least 1% of the population
: might be at risk of not getting enough to eat, unless emergency steps
: (are) taken".
:
: *****
: Could the finest moment of Thomas Malthus, said to be the canonical
: expresser of the Tory attitude towards the lower orders, be yet to come?
: *****
:
: It continues "These documents would include, for example, documents
: regarding the scenario which might arise if financial collapse brings a
: collapse of international trade, and importing food in the quantities in
: which it is currently imported then becomes difficult or impossible."
:
: The 2012 reply stated that "(the) Cabinet Office does not hold any
: information relating to the type of scenario you describe (...) (A)
: scenario of (that) severity is not considered likely in present
: circumstances".
:
: The second request, submitted last month, asked whether the statements
: made in 2012 are still true today, "given the decision to leave the EU
: and the consequent uncertainty including regarding the shape that will be
: assumed by the UK's foreign trade relations in the near future".
:
: The 2017 reply, released late last night, states in no uncertain fashion
: that "the statements made in (the 2012) response still hold today".
:
: The Cabinet Office repeats its unequivocal denial that it holds any
: information regarding emergency food stocks.
:
: It further states that "the UK has a highly effective and resilient food
: supply chain (and) the resilience of the sector has been demonstrated in
: response to potentially disruptive challenges in recent years", that "the
: food industry remains highly resilient owing to the capacity of food
: supply sectors and the high degree of substitutability of foodstuffs".
:
: It is not clear how substitutability can prevent starvation in a country
: such as Britain imports more than half its food.
:
: *****
: They know. They must know. Cryzine's advice: stock up on food now
: *****
:
: Explaining that "(the Government intends) to seek customs arrangements
: that facilitate trade relationships with our European partners", the
: Cabinet Office makes clear that it holds no papers regarding a possible
: failure to achieve its intention.
:
: The Cabinet Office's Nero-like denial comes in the face of statements by
: various players in the British food industry that there there could well
: be very serious problems.
:
: * The National Farmers' Union has revealed that British horticulture had
: a shortfall of 29% in its seasonal workforce in September, causing tons
: of fruit to be left to rot across the country.
:
: * Frazer Thompson, boss of Chapel Down, Britain's biggest winemaker, has
: said in no uncertain terms that if the agricultural labour issue is not
: sorted out after Brexit, Britain will "starve".
:
: * The chief executive of supermarket giant Sainsbury, Mike Coupe, has
: said that fresh food could be left rotting at the border if strict
: customs controls for EU goods are introduced after Brexit.
:
: * In an article published by the Royal Society, researchers have
: emphasised that Britain imports more than half its food and its animal
: feed
:
: * While the Tory right paint World Trade Organisation terms as if they
: are some kind of fallback in the event of "hard Brexit", the reality is
: that no country has the right to trade with another country without a
: trade agreement. In a country as reliant on food imports as Britain,
: famine remains a very real possibility if trade breaks down.
:
: * In July, leading food policy specialists in London, Sussex and Cardiff
: published a briefing paper entitled "A Food Brexit: Time to Get Real",
: warning that "the implications of Brexit for food are potentially
: enormous". They found not just that "the entire UK food system is
: dependent on migrant labour", but also "the UK food system faces real
: challenges on food security". Their conclusion was stark and terrifying:
: "The UK has no food policy".
:
: *****
: ‘Could a population readjustment, also known as FAMINE, be around the
: corner?
: *****
:
: In their words: "Supplies could be reduced, prices could become
: increasingly volatile, environmental sustainability could be further
: diminished, safety could be imperilled, inequalities could be amplified,
: and public trust be undermined. The just-in-time distribution systems,
: complex contracts, and labyrinthine supply chains cannot quickly or
: easily be restructured."
:
: But for the British government, it appears all can only possibly be
: hunkydory.
:
: We have to ask whether the finest moment for the wicked 19th century
: English curate Thomas Malthus, believed by astute critics to be the
: father of the quintessentially Tory and British ruling class attitude
: towards the lower orders, is not still to come. Could a population
: readjustment, also known as FAMINE, be around the corner?
:
: ###
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2017-12-05 14:00:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 08:25:38 -0500, "BurfordTJustice"
Post by BurfordTJustice
For a start Britain should produce mre of its own food.
I don't think bananas will grow here or olives or... cost effectively
anyway. We import American wheat because our cereals are better for cake
and beer production. They don't make good bread. It a gluten thing. And
soooo on and sooooooooooo on.

I don't think you have thought this through. We could live easily on
half the food we presently consume. Think of the savings in healthcare
and I wouldn't have to look at melon arses like you wobbling down the
street.

Bring back the war diet! Pass the Taramasalata Shit.
Post by BurfordTJustice
But where is the incentive to do so?
: CZ2-01
: http://cryzine.com/2/01-Brexit-famine.html
: ‘We are not preparing for major food shortages’ says the Cabinet Office
: by Donald Jones
: Cryzine
: 5 Dec 2017
: Britain imports more than half its food, and even what it produces at
: home largely relies on labour from elsewhere in the EU. Yet the Cabinet
: Office says it knows nothing about the risk of food shortages.
: As the shape that will be taken by Britain's trading environment post-
: Brexit remains unclear, the Cabinet Office has formally denied having any
: information about even the possibility of major food shortages.
: The denial came in response to a Freedom of Information Act request that
: asked whether things remain the same now as they were in 2012, when the
: Cabinet Office issued a similar denial. For the purposes of the Act, the
: department also speaks on behalf of the Prime Minister's Office.
: Despite the present uncertainty as to whether trade talks between Britain
: and the EU will even commence, let alone the shape that any trade
: agreement might take, the denial by the Cabinet Office was categorical.
: Cryzine has seen copies of all three documents - the request and the two
: responses - none of which have yet been published.
: The request asked for "any documents (...) regarding the possible
: scenario of major food shortages or the threat of famine in the UK", a
: scenario defined as "shortages in which at least 1% of the population
: might be at risk of not getting enough to eat, unless emergency steps
: (are) taken".
: *****
: Could the finest moment of Thomas Malthus, said to be the canonical
: expresser of the Tory attitude towards the lower orders, be yet to come?
: *****
: It continues "These documents would include, for example, documents
: regarding the scenario which might arise if financial collapse brings a
: collapse of international trade, and importing food in the quantities in
: which it is currently imported then becomes difficult or impossible."
: The 2012 reply stated that "(the) Cabinet Office does not hold any
: information relating to the type of scenario you describe (...) (A)
: scenario of (that) severity is not considered likely in present
: circumstances".
: The second request, submitted last month, asked whether the statements
: made in 2012 are still true today, "given the decision to leave the EU
: and the consequent uncertainty including regarding the shape that will be
: assumed by the UK's foreign trade relations in the near future".
: The 2017 reply, released late last night, states in no uncertain fashion
: that "the statements made in (the 2012) response still hold today".
: The Cabinet Office repeats its unequivocal denial that it holds any
: information regarding emergency food stocks.
: It further states that "the UK has a highly effective and resilient food
: supply chain (and) the resilience of the sector has been demonstrated in
: response to potentially disruptive challenges in recent years", that "the
: food industry remains highly resilient owing to the capacity of food
: supply sectors and the high degree of substitutability of foodstuffs".
: It is not clear how substitutability can prevent starvation in a country
: such as Britain imports more than half its food.
: *****
: They know. They must know. Cryzine's advice: stock up on food now
: *****
: Explaining that "(the Government intends) to seek customs arrangements
: that facilitate trade relationships with our European partners", the
: Cabinet Office makes clear that it holds no papers regarding a possible
: failure to achieve its intention.
: The Cabinet Office's Nero-like denial comes in the face of statements by
: various players in the British food industry that there there could well
: be very serious problems.
: * The National Farmers' Union has revealed that British horticulture had
: a shortfall of 29% in its seasonal workforce in September, causing tons
: of fruit to be left to rot across the country.
: * Frazer Thompson, boss of Chapel Down, Britain's biggest winemaker, has
: said in no uncertain terms that if the agricultural labour issue is not
: sorted out after Brexit, Britain will "starve".
: * The chief executive of supermarket giant Sainsbury, Mike Coupe, has
: said that fresh food could be left rotting at the border if strict
: customs controls for EU goods are introduced after Brexit.
: * In an article published by the Royal Society, researchers have
: emphasised that Britain imports more than half its food and its animal
: feed
: * While the Tory right paint World Trade Organisation terms as if they
: are some kind of fallback in the event of "hard Brexit", the reality is
: that no country has the right to trade with another country without a
: trade agreement. In a country as reliant on food imports as Britain,
: famine remains a very real possibility if trade breaks down.
: * In July, leading food policy specialists in London, Sussex and Cardiff
: published a briefing paper entitled "A Food Brexit: Time to Get Real",
: warning that "the implications of Brexit for food are potentially
: enormous". They found not just that "the entire UK food system is
: dependent on migrant labour", but also "the UK food system faces real
: "The UK has no food policy".
: *****
: ‘Could a population readjustment, also known as FAMINE, be around the
: corner?
: *****
: In their words: "Supplies could be reduced, prices could become
: increasingly volatile, environmental sustainability could be further
: diminished, safety could be imperilled, inequalities could be amplified,
: and public trust be undermined. The just-in-time distribution systems,
: complex contracts, and labyrinthine supply chains cannot quickly or
: easily be restructured."
: But for the British government, it appears all can only possibly be
: hunkydory.
: We have to ask whether the finest moment for the wicked 19th century
: English curate Thomas Malthus, believed by astute critics to be the
: father of the quintessentially Tory and British ruling class attitude
: towards the lower orders, is not still to come. Could a population
: readjustment, also known as FAMINE, be around the corner?
: ###
Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2017-12-05 14:03:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:00:11 +0000, "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 08:25:38 -0500, "BurfordTJustice"
Post by BurfordTJustice
For a start Britain should produce mre of its own food.
I don't think bananas will grow here or olives or... cost effectively
anyway. We import American wheat because our cereals are better for cake
and beer production. They don't make good bread. It a gluten thing. And
soooo on and sooooooooooo on.
I don't think you have thought this through. We could live easily on
half the food we presently consume. Think of the savings in healthcare
and I wouldn't have to look at melon arses like you wobbling down the
street.
Bring back the war diet! Pass the Taramasalata Shit.
Pooh, does this mean we will have to drink British wine?

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
BurfordTJustice
2017-12-05 14:07:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
***@gmail.com

Since you speak it, it must be so, eh?
You tell us where all the extra productive arable fields are hiding that we
would need to cultivate, ie at least two extra field for every one we have
at present. You see, there's no point in providing incentives unless what
you hope to incentivise is actually possible.

Which it ain't.

Sorry, but we're way off self-sufficiency, have been ever since about 1800,
and can't do anything at all about it.
abelard
2017-12-05 15:44:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 09:07:03 -0500, "BurfordTJustice"
Post by BurfordTJustice
Since you speak it, it must be so, eh?
You tell us where all the extra productive arable fields are hiding that we
would need to cultivate, ie at least two extra field for every one we have
at present. You see, there's no point in providing incentives unless what
you hope to incentivise is actually possible.
Which it ain't.
Sorry, but we're way off self-sufficiency, have been ever since about 1800,
and can't do anything at all about it.
you don't keep up just like all you end of the world loons

it will all go under glass in due course or we can sell tanks
for bananas
--
www.abelard.org
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2017-12-05 16:05:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 09:07:03 -0500, "BurfordTJustice"
Post by BurfordTJustice
Since you speak it, it must be so, eh?
You tell us where all the extra productive arable fields are hiding that we
would need to cultivate, ie at least two extra field for every one we have
at present. You see, there's no point in providing incentives unless what
you hope to incentivise is actually possible.
Which it ain't.
Sorry, but we're way off self-sufficiency, have been ever since about 1800,
and can't do anything at all about it.
you don't keep up just like all you end of the world loons
it will all go under glass in due course or we can sell tanks
for bananas
Hydroponics is almost old tech nowadays. The quality is excellent both
organic and otherwise. I still have my vegetable patch though. It gives
the local cats somewhere to shit.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
abelard
2017-12-05 16:07:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 16:05:41 +0000, "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by abelard
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 09:07:03 -0500, "BurfordTJustice"
Post by BurfordTJustice
Since you speak it, it must be so, eh?
You tell us where all the extra productive arable fields are hiding that we
would need to cultivate, ie at least two extra field for every one we have
at present. You see, there's no point in providing incentives unless what
you hope to incentivise is actually possible.
Which it ain't.
Sorry, but we're way off self-sufficiency, have been ever since about 1800,
and can't do anything at all about it.
you don't keep up just like all you end of the world loons
it will all go under glass in due course or we can sell tanks
for bananas
Hydroponics is almost old tech nowadays. The quality is excellent both
organic and otherwise. I still have my vegetable patch though. It gives
the local cats somewhere to shit.
at least you don't live in the basement...

no cat should live indoors
--
www.abelard.org
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2017-12-05 17:32:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
no cat should live indoors
Yes, intuitively it just feels wrong despite the dangers.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
Loading...