Why **couldn't** the UK leave the EU?

Why would a 20% VAT be relevant to the decision whether we stay in the EU if it is charged regardless?

Well, yes, basically, the EU has massively simplified trade and travel between EU nations - no more visas and currency caps, for starters.

It's also partly responsible for the longest period of peace in the entire history of Europe. No small achievement. Guy

Seperate issue. The proposal under discussion is leaving the EU, not leaving the EU and the WTO.

i'm not following you... the 20% is a tariff...

i can buy items without the tariff in many places...

no added value has been attended in the eussr...

regards

The UK still has slavery but neither the UK nor the USA have legal slavery.

An oft repeated assertion for which I have never seen any credible evidence. Would you like to provide some?

hmmmmmmm

separation is a human choice

regards

nor me neither

They can't be that high in view of the quantity of cheap products from China and other non-EU manufacturing countries which are flooding our markets.

So what's the difference? VAT is still applicable to goods purchased within the EU.

If you import something from the USA you pay VAT when you bring it into the EU. If you buy something from an EU country it will already have VAT included in its price.

Two reasons from history: WWII and Eastern Europe.

It is not about buying a TV, but stopping one national shooting another.

Yet no parliament is allowed to bind its successors. So if a particular government were to enter into an irrevocable treaty, would it not be acting outside its authority?

Quite and since we buy far more from them than they do us ...

How are you defining slavery?

No need! They don't charge us billions to belong, nor do they interfere in our laws.

No it is just that within the EU it is easier to trade goods than from outwith the EU. If we were to leave then selling into the EU becomes a little harder, a little more expensive with a little more bureaucracy and if we were almost the same price and quality as our EU competitor then they would tend go with the EU.

Andy

Verdun is a far more likely original motivation.

And cosmopolitanism existed even before WWI.

See Mazzini and Young Europe.

It's alleged to be both. As Anders Fogh Rasmussen says, "Quite simply, nations that trade together don't go to war against each other".

Alternatively, it's "about" removing science from the hands and imaginations of the rabble and placing it under the control of the educated elites who wouldn't abuse it and organise industrialised slaughter.

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 at 21:19:37, abelard wrote in uk.legal :

Thanks for that, but I prefer fantasy cricket to Fantasy economics. :)

To answer your question though, we'd obviously respond in kind, and AIUI they'd have more to lose than we would in that scenario.