Post Brexit Free Trade Deal With USA.

With the promise of Brexit becoming a reality, and the new PM actually lighting a fire under the hitherto somnambulant ‘workers’ of Whitehall of whom the majority are probably ‘remainers’, because it will mean less work for them, the possibility of a free trade deal with the USA is now a distinct possibility.

The United Kingdom unfortunately has no recent independent experience of its own negotiating FTAs, having relinquished that power over trade policy to the European Union some years ago. As the United Kingdom prepares to regain its decision making policy very shortly the government has many issues to consider, including whether it wishes to pursue free trade agreements and, if so, with whom, how quickly, how deeply, and how exclusively.

What will this form take, how might it galvanise and energise the UK industry. The US is presently the UK’s largest export market for machinery and material manufactures, chemicals, fuels, food and crude materials.

It is the 2nd largest source of imports, these being machinery including computers: US$87 billion and 12.9% of total imports, Vehicles: $75.1 billion 11.2%, electrical machinery, equipment: $69 billion 10.3%, mineral fuels including oil: $66.9 billion 9.9%, gems, precious metals: $40.2 billion 6% and pharmaceuticals: $30.3 billion 4.5%.

The possibility had already been discussed by Trump and May and some figures from that came out.
UK-US trading and investment: a special relationship

With the change of PM, change of gears and a more determined drive towards actually leaving the EU instead of preparing to be friendly and trying to achieve the best for both parties, the EU tone has become even more belligerent with Macron in full ‘you will be punished’ mode.

Trump in direct contrast to Obama has invited us to the head rather than the back of the line. A refreshing change to both him and the attitude and posture the EU has taken from the word go.
Brexit revelation: How EU admitted it wanted to punish Britain – ‘We want to shoot!’
and...still does.

Since it seems that they are already major trading partners a good agreement given the present good will on both sides could be good for both. Suggestions are already being made.
An “Ideal” US-UK Free Trade Agreement | IFT
 
Last edited:
Realistically, what we need is something deeper and more meaningful, we need both free trade and simplified/preferential immigration rules as well

Education, science, business & finance should be able to interact seamlessly across the Atlantic (and, arguably, with all the five eyes nations). The UK has several of the worlds greatest universities, along with a shared language, culture and legal structure - the opportunity to welcome US further education students to the UK shouldn't be missed, as this will subsequently feed the other sectors of industry & science.
 
@celticguy obvious feels this a bad thing but has no observations to make as to why. Then judging from previous posts and reading material possibly not given it much thought.
Ad hominem much?
 
The US is also the UK’s largest export market for services (Finance, Law, Insurance etc)

Aus & NZ offered May use of their negotators, as did Next - May declined.

The way Trump works I see him offering "Free Trade on everything, see how it goes and tweak if somethings not working". He offered EU a FTA at his first G8, EU said no.

Forget the chlorinated chicken hysteria, nobody has to buy it. However, we seem fine about eating chlorinated salad veg and drinking chlorinated water.

@labrat

+1 World Top 100 Unis: USA 29, UK 18, Rest of EU 12 (highest 50th)

Defence too eg This Gun
 
Last edited:
Ad hominem much?
Oh dear a thumbs down.

In explanation.

By all means disagree, but forgive me for simply wondering why he does not offer an alternative opinion...and an opinion on why this might be so.

@celticguy obviously also did not like his reading material being brought into the matter either with another press of the mong button.

Though that does rather suggest arrested development, and an immature reflex, than a more adult forward speculation on what the country is likely to experience or need.

Ad hom... or simply my observation, which I hope, is as valid as his.
 
Last edited:
Oh dear a thumbs down.

In explanation.

By all means disagree, but forgive me for simply wondering why he does not offer an alternative opinion...and an opinion on why this might be so.
Let me see if I got this right. You start a thread and because one member of the site does not respond you slag him off.
@celticguy obviously also did not like his reading material being brought into the matter either with another press of the mong button.

Though that does rather suggest arrested development, and an immature reflex, than a more adult forward speculation on what the country is likely to experience or need.

Ad hom... or simply my observation, which I hope, is as valid as his.
Yet more ad hom, at least you've edited out what you had previously written.

I am actually now of the opinion that you only started this thread with the express intent of ad hom a member. You do know that the poo poo head thread exists purely for those members who are unable to express their dislike of another member in a suitably kindergarten manner.
 
There's two contradictory statements if i ever saw them.

IFT is a private, not-for-profit, non-partisan research organisation.

IFT’s President is the Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan. IFT is managed by an Executive Board, and has an International Advisory Board, which includes former heads of government, trade ministers and business leaders.

Another "think tank" with opaque funding. Just a reminder, Hannan's interests are US big business, he's a perennial liar renowned for fibbing big time and then deleting his tweets when proven to be making stuff up.

 
Last edited:
Let me see if I got this right. You start a thread and because one member of the site does not respond you slag him off.
Yet more ad hom, at least you've edited out what you had previously written.

I am actually now of the opinion that you only started this thread with the express intent of ad hom a member. You do know that the poo poo head thread exists purely for those members who are unable to express their dislike of another member in a suitably kindergarten manner.
He put me on ignore after I showed one of his long posts was mostly plagiarism.
 
He put me on ignore after I showed one of his long posts was mostly plagiarism.
I expect he put you on ignore because you're a crayoning twat.
 
As I've said previously on other threads, Trump is not a friend of free trade. He takes the view that he can't "win" unless he sees you "losing". His latest trade "success" has all parties (including the US) economically worse off than before.

By all means start exploratory talks, but don't be in a rush to sign a deal with the US and don't commit to anything too early. Trade treaties are meant to last decades, and you need to look to the long term to derive the real benefits.
 
Point of order: that looks like a ring-binder, not a lever-arch.

(ex-Civil Servant nerves twitching here)
 
H&W situation uncertain?
(I tried to find the NI/Belfast thread but failed)


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 
As I've said previously on other threads, Trump is not a friend of free trade. He takes the view that he can't "win" unless he sees you "losing". His latest trade "success" has all parties (including the US) economically worse off than before.
I think that he has been pretty open for a number of decades that he saw ‘fair’ trade as preferable to ‘free’ trade, particularly regards those nations who received a direct benefit to their economy from the additional security offered by U.S. military involvement in the region.

I think he’s also been pretty clear that he wasn’t a fan of free trade where it allowed offshoring of jobs from the US as it had wider negative impacts on the long term viability of the US economy.

 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Top