Why are the other Euro countries and some British corporations insistent that we can only get free trade with Europe if Freedom of Movement is guaranteed?
CETA, the free trade deal between Canada and the EU includes tariff free trade and regulation standardisation. But nothing about free movement. Explain.
C'mon Eurofags.
>>79159747
It's not that it's "undoable" or "impossible".
It's that Brussels is not likely to negotiate freely, openly and favourably with former members.
It's basically asking for the EU's biggest advantage (free trade) without any of the duties and obligations that (to member/normal states) come with it.
I keep hearing a comparison with Norway but I'm not sure what the deal is with them.
There probably are ways out of it somehow.
>>79161495
Norway is part of the Schengen zone so even though they're not part of the EU the borders are still open there.
>>79161495
>It's basically asking for the EU's biggest advantage (free trade) without any of the duties and obligations that (to member/normal states) come with it.
The implication of what you say here is that the EU know and accept that freedom of movement is not wanted by anyone then. If it's a trade off, gotta take the bad (free movement) to get the good (free trade) then who in the fuck in the EU actually endorses freedom of movement?
Euros may be in for a shock though. I'm not yet certain, but I think consensus is if we have to keep freedom of movement, we'll leave the lot.
>>79159747
Because without it an imbalance of wealth would build between the lazy countries and the innovative countries. This is a bad thing when the lazy country can't devalue their currency.
With freedom of movement you allow people to move from the lazy countries to the innovative countries, undercut wages and send the money home.
Of course they can't admit this without branding wogs lazy and setting off trigger warnings everywhere.
>>79159747
Because freedom of movement brings all of those immigrant that these corporations hire for pennies. The corps are basically trying to make their expenses as low as possible.
>>79162098
But how's Britain affect this? We use £. So our economy being particularity strong or weak at a given moment won't directly fug the EU will it?
>With freedom of movement you allow people to move from the lazy countries to the innovative countries, undercut wages and send the money home.
And this is depressing as hell by the way m8. Fanks.
>>79161819
You yourself still haven't grasped the fact that the EU is nowadays a political union first and a trade union second. If they were a trade union first they'd try to secure trade with the UK instead of just getting butthurt. They're only using trade as a means of power, which is why they took in shithole countries like Greece and the whole of Eastern Europe in the first place. They're seriously consider letting fucking Turkey to join.
Ironically, the fact that they're addicted to power more than money will be their undoing.
>>79161819
I think it is that way: no country likes freedom of movement from the outside to themselves. Save maybe from countries with demographic issues like Germany who need any fresh workers to pay pensions.
This natural and immediate disadvantage though has already an advantage built-in: the fact that your citizens can move freely too (making the deal even more appealing for countries with emigration like Romania or Poland).
Freedom of movement doesn't only affect people also, but money, goods, and services, meaning for example that I get Sky Television and a Vodafone service for cheaper (that's why some corporations in the UK were against Brexit). You on the other hand get Audis and Peugeots for cheaper.
Freedom of movement is ALSO about people, workforce, expertise and professionals, but not exclusively.
>>79162522
>You yourself still haven't grasped the fact that the EU is nowadays a political union first and a trade union second.
This was becoming clear, hence the result. So they may well be on a power trip, but it is only the trade aspect of the EU that keeps the other members happy. If you're right then the negotiating will highlight the true nature of the EU today and likely be it's end.
>>79162239
>>79162239
>But how's Britain affect this?
It doesn't, but you were meant to join the Euro before Black Wednesday happened.
On paper you have a good case for joining the free market while keeping your border control, but Junker is out to fuck you hard and make an example of you so don't count on it.
Because if people realize that they can have literally everything worthwhile about the EU without actually being a part of it, others are going to start leaving too.
The EU should never have been more than a free trade zone in the first place, and even the EU itself seems to implicitly agree that at the very least that's alll the common people want it to be, because all the arguments in favor of the EU center around trade and the economy.
>>79162673
I don't think anyone has issue with the freedom of movement of goods.
I accept that the ability to move easily around Europe is nice but I think the cons outweigh the pros in this case.
>>79162702
Yes. That's why Eroscepticism has been rising steadily with increased immigration and a crumbling economy. People only tolerate a political union as long as they can continue living in luxury. I'm willing to bet that, if not a majority, at least a big portion of Remainers voted the way they did because of muh necessary evil and muh economy. When the next recession hits and people realize the EU gives them jack shit in terms of financial security, they'll want to leave just out of spite.
I mean, last autumn you saw how the EU deals with a crisis. It can't. It was left to national governments to deal with the migrant crisis on their own because the EU's response was literally
>''Lol I guess we should spread them around a little. And centralize more power to the union. Even though Schengen and the Dublin agreement have precautionary measures against shit like this, we'll just say it's due to the EU not having enough power.''
It's literally a Soviet-tier expansionist political project with no long term pragmatic planning.
>>79162714
>On paper you have a good case for joining the free market while keeping your border control, but Junker is out to fuck you hard and make an example of you so don't count on it.
Especially after Farage's leaving speech too I fear. It's all just going to highlight how the EU is not in the interest of the people of Europe though, if the case for free trade is strong but the EU says no cause reasons.
>>79161819
But the UK was never part of the Schengen area, yet it had free market access.
>>79159747
because freedom of movement is about wealth transfer from west to east, wage suppression and larger profit margins
>>79159747
Free trade isn't the same as access to the single market.
>>79159747
Its a meme, most people see through it and any politician that says its true is a traitor and should hang.
>>79165234
This meant we still had border checks, though people from the EU had to do less when entering the UK in terms of checks and visa and shit. EU citizens were still allowed to come here to work and were entitled to benefits.
>>79165466
Free trade is tariff free access right?
>>79162673
people define a nation, dilute the people dilute the nations
