Brexit Phase Two - Trade

It will still be a drop in the ocean in comparison with the NHS budget and may damage our tourist industry.
Not so sure if it is well marketed; I don't see why the premium for anyone should be charged more than £150 for 12 months cover (I came in at £129). It has to be (a) affordable (b) attractive (c) accessible i.e. guarantees access and (d) comprehensive. For the UK we could even invest the funds raised into a sovereign health fund, so that the model generated more money for the NHS. I bet you that there would be insurance companies out there who would willingly run such a scheme. We might moan about the NHS but enough people seem to pitch up here and avail themselves of its services. Chasing after them post-treatment is, imho, too late. Get some cash in up front instead.
 
Last edited:
1. Erm, I started the first step of my career ladder as a paid member of staff in 2009, that's 4 years after starting undergrad and before that I did eight years - see unlike you, I actually served.

2. I'm not the one who survives on benefits.

So a professional student then.

Academia, the last resort of the non employable.
 
Not so sure if it is well marketed; I don't see why the premium for anyone should be charged more than £150 for 12 months cover (I came in at £129). It has to be (a) affordable (b) attractive (c) accessible i.e. guarantees access and (d) comprehensive. For the UK we could even invest the funds raised into a sovereign health fund, so that the model generated more money for the NHS. I bet you that there would be insurance companies out there who would willingly run such a scheme. We might moan about the NHS but enough people seems to pitch up here and avail themselves of its services. Chasing after them post-treatment is, imho, too late. Get some cash in up front instead.

Yes, but many of the big health insurers are American, and that thought causes sixteen shades of apoplexy in Guardianistalabd.
 
Strange! You do know there's a left wing case for Brexit, don't you? And from a historical viewpoint it's traditionally been the Tories who supported the EU and Labour who've opposed it. Trade unions, Tony Benn, Bob Crow, Michael Foot, etc; all opponents of the EU.

Lexit: the EU is a neoliberal project, so let's do something different when we leave it

Tony Benn was very anti EU


When I saw how the European Union was developing, it was very obvious that what they had in mind was not democratic. I mean, in Britain you vote for the government and therefore the government has to listen to you, and if you don’t like it you can change it. But in Europe all the key positions are appointed, not elected – the Commission, for example. All appointed, not one of them elected.
[..] And my view about the European Union has always been not that I am hostile to foreigners, but that I am in favour of democracy. And I think out of this story we have to find an answer, because I certainly don’t want to live in hostility to the European Union but I think they are building an empire there and they want us to be a part of that empire, and I don’t want that.
 
That's Sixty; AL is a postdoc i.e. he has got his PhD and is working. Sixty grandly informed me thither night that he was not a PhD student but a PhD candidate no less, so he is clearly 'candidating' for his PhD.

Ah, so a professional academic. Generally pretty useless individuals who rely on hard outs to study belly button dandruff and other such pointless issues.
 
Ah, so a professional academic. Generally pretty useless individuals who rely on hard outs to study belly button dandruff and other such pointless issues.
In my experience, Life Sciences postdocs usually end up being sponsored by industry and are at the cutting edge of innovation. a_l works in bio-tech ISTR. Sixty doesn't work...
 
I suppose if you read them properly rather than just grabbing the headlines it might make sense to you.

if the Government begins talks with countries already in negotiations with the EU.
(Despite that article you quoted being almost 2 years old and before A50 was declared)

Is just one little snippet. Nothing to stop UK doing trade deals with those the EU isn't in negotiations with.
Like the aforementioned Taiwan, for example.

Now, I know I'm easily confused (and there's a challenge for the mongs to do their selective quoting again) as I'm not a financial and trade expert like some retired tech, a SNCO in a Jock Regiment, someone who once stamped passports and a so-called civil servant who sorts paperclips out in between spending his working days on here but Business Insider, Just Business, Business info and even the BBC make references to bi-lateral agreements UK has with quite a few countries, both Commonwealth and others, that have not been negotiated through the EU (although they list many that we do have agreements with by dint of EU talks).
Now, the only thing they mention that restricts these agreements is that any other EU country that may be involved must be consulted with first and those MS must be in agreement. Eff all about not being allowed, being banned and so on.

Do we have bi-lateral agreements or not? The US, for example The UK has its own bilateral trade relations with the US. It also works through the European Union (EU).
The one we've just done with Taiwan

Just for a start, go through this bit:
Bilateral Agreements
No EU member state can enter bilateral trade deals unless the whole EU is involved.
 
In my experience, Life Sciences postdocs usually end up being sponsored by industry and are at the cutting edge of innovation. a_l works in bio-tech ISTR. Sixty doesn't work...

They are generally single, have poor social skills and bad hygiene, and are generally proof positive of the old saying that educated is not the same as smart.
 
I suppose if you read them properly rather than just grabbing the headlines it might make sense to you.

if the Government begins talks with countries already in negotiations with the EU.
(Despite that article you quoted being almost 2 years old and before A50 was declared)

Is just one little snippet. Nothing to stop UK doing trade deals with those the EU isn't in negotiations with.
Like the aforementioned Taiwan, for example.

Now, I know I'm easily confused (and there's a challenge for the mongs to do their selective quoting again) as I'm not a financial and trade expert like some retired tech, a SNCO in a Jock Regiment, someone who once stamped passports and a so-called civil servant who sorts paperclips out in between spending his working days on here but Business Insider, Just Business, Business info and even the BBC make references to bi-lateral agreements UK has with quite a few countries, both Commonwealth and others, that have not been negotiated through the EU (although they list many that we do have agreements with by dint of EU talks).
Now, the only thing they mention that restricts these agreements is that any other EU country that may be involved must be consulted with first and those MS must be in agreement. Eff all about not being allowed, being banned and so on.

Do we have bi-lateral agreements or not? The US, for example The UK has its own bilateral trade relations with the US. It also works through the European Union (EU).
The one we've just done with Taiwan

Just for a start, go through this bit:
Bilateral Agreements
fair enough. I couldn't find anything under UK free trade deals.

So.

what's the point of the eu then? In a global business sense rather than a supra national political sense.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top