But there right-whingers who speww bullshit every day for a living like Rod Liddle, Melanie Phillips, Carole Malone, Richard Littlejohn and James Delingpole – funny you never say anything about that…

Those Chinese dissidents must be delighted.

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas.

What do you think market forces are other than the expressed will in aggregate of individuals?

Well the people you buy stuff from benefit from the exchange. Otherwise they wouldn’t do it. Hence global trade is one of the best ways of raising up the standards of the least well off in the world. As for race to the bottom, it is pretty much the strategy of all those horrible scandinavian countries like Sweden and Denmark: deregulate but redistribute.

Yes, it’s all…… I got mine, fuck you, with you people isn’t it.

You don’t give a flying toss for the people who have to make your car, pizza, corn flakes. Those are the people who get screwed over in your Rand …..race to the bottom.

“well, you can fuck right off with your tyranny of the majority and I’ll take the free trade thank you.”

Thanks for proving my point. Just as I said….. Democracy and free trade are incompatible.

Er no it’s not. Freee trade means aligning or ideally abolishing import and other taxes such that goods flow dependent on market forces, rather than regulation. Strangely, despite us bothe being in the EU, I’m not allowed to buy turkish cigarettes on the internet, so it’s not quite happened yet.

Eh? Free trade is simply saying that of the various car manufacturers around the world I should be able to choose whichever one I wish for the car that I’m going to buy. Ditto pizzas, vegetables, windmills, banking services and any and every thing else.

*I* get to choose, I the consumer. I get to vote with my money.

Now, if you’re saying that democracy is incompatible with this, that which car, vegetable, pizza, windmill or banking service I should be *allowed* to buy is to be determined by, what, it’s not even majority vote now, is it? , *democratic means* then, well, you can fuck right off with your tyranny of the majority and I’ll take the free trade thank you.

Democracy is great for many things but determining what manufacturer I can buy my ice cream from doesn’t strike me as
one of them.

When it comes to fish stocks Canada and Norway appear better at this task than the EU.

Peter Shore and Tonny Benn have criticised the EU for a lack of democracy. Even Shirley Williams respected Peter Sore’s arguments.

The EEC/EU developed before international trade talks such as GATT and WTO .
Therefore how much benefit does the EU actually provide now, to the UK.

Surely one of the problems is the high unemployment in the EU. Increasing the skill base of the EU and removing any laws which increases the cost and deters employment, surely should be greatly reduced. The danger is that in France much graduate employment is dependent on who one knows. The various employment laws deter small and family companies fron expanding by taking on more staff.

The danger is that the EU benefits middle class people who work for the state sector,not working class people employed in industry or agriculture.

Try again, What I said was …….Democracy and free trade are incompatible.

If you have given the people’s rights to regulate themselves away by signing up to free trade agreements with other countries, then you don’t believe in democracy. Thatcher talked about socialism by the back door. Global Free trade is a right wing wet dream by the back door.

Which is why to start with Conservatives were such supporters of the EU. They liked the idea of free trade in Europe, and being run by un elected bankers. This is why Conservatives like trading with China, a military dictatorship that outlaws unions, and most regulations. They see the way it is stripping away workers rights in the west. ……(If you don’t obey we will move your job to China.)

The great race to the bottom is now on.

Disappointed yes.

1) Arguing that trade surpluses are a good thing is terribly stupid. Surprised to see him making that mistake. Imports are the point, the benefit, of trade. Exports are just the shite we do to pay for them.

2) Gross contribution isn’t important. Nett is, maybe.

3) This is important for it talks to the nett costs of the whole shebang. Which as every fule kno is about what are, well, all the costs and all the benefits. The cost of regulation is obviously a cost of the system. Some like to think that Germany not invading France again is a benefit of the EU: I prefer to point out that last time they actually took France and won’t make that mistake again. Obviously not worth the candle.

4) That’s been around for a while that number. It’s, I think, a Think Tank number but no, it’s not TPA. But generally regarded as sound. £25 a week per household.

5) You’re right about Ostrom….or even Hardin. We’ve a Commons Tragedy here and it clearly needs managing. The successful fisheries are those that go with an Ostrom/private property type mix (Faroes, Iceland etc). And that also requires that it’s done reasonably locally (note that Ostrom herself doesn’t think that the informal collective agreements can work over a few thousand participants). Not centrally for 500 million people. So it won’t be solved while it’s the EU trying to do the solving. In short, it’s not just that the EU have been crap at this it’s that the EU is the wrong scale to try and deal with the problem.

6) But he’s right: the Government always has refused to say….

7) No, he does have a point. for we’d still be WTO members. You have to treat all WTO members the same and you can’t put trade barriers up to a WTO member. The only legal direction of movement is down.

Well, he’s wrong actually, it’s Luxembourg. BTW, finance is a smaller part of the Swiss economy than it is of the UK’s. Their exports are more like German: capital machinery.

9) We are heavily regulated: see point 3).

10) Eh? Democracy and light regulation are incompatible? You’re aware that Sweden and Denmark are more lightly regulated (even if more heavily taxed) than the UK in many ways? No minimum wage etc? And you’re aware that their tax systems accord more closely with market liberal economics than our own? Lower taxes on capital, lower taxation of corporate profits? Taxes mainly levied upon incomes and then even higher again on consumption? Exactly what a liberal economist would propose for an open economy?

My own list would go on a bit about Roman and Civil law and the near insane task of trying to graft one onto the other. And I’d be a great deal ruder. For example, I tried to get UKIP to use this as a poster idea: A photo of Barroso with the caption “Would you buy a used Constitution from this man?”

Well, it made me laugh anyway..

So we can ignore you then.

Anyway, back to Hannan.

My beef boils down to one thing. Given that Point 10 is mostly rhetoric, we have a top nine reasons to leave the EU. And they just aren’t that good. Even a cursory glance would tell anyone whose mind is not already made up already that its a poor list. It lacks references (the CAP figure for example), it lacks logic (the fisheries proposal for example), it relies on counterfactuals which prove very little (the import/export surplus/deficit point for example).

I would have loved to have spent more time really fisking but Left Foot Forward got there first.

@Tim Worstall I can understand you taking Dan’s side, if you are in fact taking anyone’s side, but you must be disappointed that one of the figureheads of the “UK out of the EU” club has put together such a poor list. Also:

“Don’t you eat food”

???

CAP is solely responsible for the existence of food? Before CAP there was no food? In those parts of the world without CAP there is no food?

Jeepers.

LOL

[1] I’ve opened an Aussie Shiraz so I should be okay now.

That said, I do agree with a lot of his points – although in terms of deregulation I get the feeling he’s hoping that we would follow a ‘small government’ path upon leaving the EU, which isn’t overly likely.

Oh, and in addition he is saying “lets get our sovereignty back, so we can give it away again in extreme free trade agreements. See, that is why I take with a large pinch of salt all the blah, blah, blah about sovereignty from the Right wing. They would just give it away to GAT and free trade agremmnets that also destroy our right to govern ourseves.

You can’t be for extreme free trade and democracy at the same time. The two things are condritictry. But the Right does not really belive in democracy, they just want far right wing policies and if they can only get them by giving our sovereignty to unelected American multi nationals then that is fine by them.

???

CAP is solely responsible for the existence of food? Before CAP there was no food? In those parts of the world without CAP there is no food?

Jeepers.

Eh? That the only “actual policy area run by the EU” is entirely vile, counterproductive and crap is not a valid argument against the EU? Or CAP?

That the one policy area they’ve managed to get their hands on they’ve managed to entirely fuck up to the detriment of the lives of hundreds of millions of human beings is not an argument against them?

What, you think it’s an argument in favour of them getting their hands on more policy areas then?