Latest post of the previous page:
since time immemorial, sadly. Ever watch "Gladiator" and dear old Olly Reed?Nick wrote:Ahem!! Since when was enslaving someone a matter of trade?animist wrote:trade may or may not be beneficial to both sides: was the trade between Africa and Europe which involved slaves crossing the Atlantic beneficial to both sides?Nick wrote: OTOH, I think it will be good news for Britain. Why should it be worse than the one we currently have? Surely it gives us both the opportunity to improve on it. and remember trade is not a zero-sum game, is it?
back to the rhetoric. I gave you several reasons, genuine ones, why this is not likely; I could also have mentioned that Britain will be a novice in negotiating such deals. Even if the EU does have protectionist elements - which is true - how can trade deals with outsiders be construed as protectionist? Have you ordered your copy of Ian Dunt's book yet?Nick wrote:One extrmely good reason why a newly liberated UK will be able to strike a better deal with Canada as an independent nation than as part of the EU is that we will no longer be constrained by the trade destroying, insular, protectionist restrictions so beloved of our continental neighbours.Anyway, your logic is askew. If Britain leaves the EU then the deal already done between the EU and Canada will lapse. Any new deal which Britain manages to strike with Canada will probably be better than the situation characterised by lack of deals in which Britain finds itself, but it is unlikely to be better than the deal already struck on Britain's behalf by the EU. Give me a good reason why some new deal between a newly isolated Britain and Canada will match the existing deal