In article , (bob) wrote:

Optimist wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:35:32 +0100, "JohnD"
wrote:

"Optimist" wrote in message
...

Leaving the EU will save £10 billion a year net so lack of money need
not be an issue.

How does that work then? On the assumption that joining eg EFTA will
not require a considerable annual contribution from the UK? Seriously?

This, in a nutshell, is the outright lie that too many gullible
would-be Brexiteers have been sold. If the UK were to have a
Norway-style relationship to the EU then the likely annual contribution
(on an equivalent per capita basis) would be ca £8B, even assuming that
the UK wasn't required to pay some punitive rate. (Plus accepting most,
if not all, of the 4 freedoms.)

Forgetting about EFTA altogether and regressing to plain WTO
arrangements really isn't a viable option either, for anyone with
enough patience and interest see eg:


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...-treasury-comm
ittee


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...-treasury-comm
ittee
Why a Norway-style arrangement? Much better is we get tariff-free
access to EU market in return for tariff-free access to UK market. No
freedom of movement, no subsidies to EU.

Almost certainly the rEU won't go for that.

If EU does not agree, WTO tariffs apply. German industrialists and
French farmers would be up in arms, so EU will cave in. If not, tough,
EU dole queues get longer.

Meanwhile UK negotiates trade deals with rest of world (there have been
approaches already).

When was the last time the UK negotiated a trade deal? The various
countries of the world are queueing up to screw over a desperate Britain
that needs trade deals fast and has no experience at how to negotiate
them.

And all the savings from EU budget contributions and more will be spent to
compensate for the costs of being outside the single market. Delusional!

--
Colin Rosenstiel