Home » Posts tagged 'bilateral trade deals with Britain'

Tag Archives: bilateral trade deals with Britain


Join 17,388 other followers

Brexit + Commonwealth & NAFTA Trade = Economic Powerhouse

by John Brian Shannon

Timid minds are wondering whether the UK should continue along the Brexit path that British voters approved in 2016.

But just imagine what kind of world it would be today if Winston Churchill had given in to timidity during WWII, or if Albert Einstein was too small a man for the job, or if Franklin Delano Roosevelt was too afraid of failing and thereby didn’t pursue his plan to ‘put a chicken in every pot’ in Depression-era America? We’d be living in a far different world now, wouldn’t we?

There is a thing about leaders and it’s this, if they don’t actually Lead they are useless baggage. And that’s all that needs to be said about that.

Prime Minister Theresa May was given a mandate by voters to take the UK out of the European Union, and whether it rains too hard on Sunday, or if Manchester United can’t seem to win a game, or even if the Russians are scaring us, Brexit must remain at the forefront of Britain’s To-Do List and everything else must be considered a distraction until the job is done.

How the UK can fulfill its proper role in the world

With a strong UK government the chips would fall into place rather quickly and completely bereft of excuses, the following would occur:

  1. Brexit (even a WTO or so-called ‘Hard Brexit’) or a sweet-for-both-sides Brexit would occur by the designated date of March 29, 2019.
  2. The UK would apply to join the (by then) recently renegotiated NAFTA accord — or perhaps all the parties would agree they’d be better served by partial UK membership in NAFTA. Hey, you never know until you try, but magic occurs when people of goodwill meet-up to plan mutual success!
  3. The UK would enter into trade negotiations with every Commonwealth member nation to see what the UK can offer those nations (expertise, financial services, high-tech) and what those nations can offer the UK (agricultural products, oil and gas, metals and minerals, perhaps even a source of low-cost seasonal labour for UK farms) and so much more! Again, you never know until you try!
  4. And remember, Theresa… the goal isn’t to say; “Well, at least we tried.” The goal is to secure a standardized free trade agreement, or a standardized low-tariff trade agreement with the Commonwealth nations and every non-Commonwealth nation — especially the NAFTA ones.

What’s to Gain?

By accomplishing those steps in the proper order, the UK economy would grow 5% over existing projections — or the government is doing it all wrong.

India alone will have 1.3 billion consumers by 2019, and the United States, the highest-consuming nation in the world, will have 331 million consumers by 2019.

Post-Brexit does not mean five or ten years after Brexit — it means one year after Brexit.

These goals are eminently achievable and there can be no excuses for not hitting these metrics by 2020.

Orchards full of apples will be missed for the sake of handfuls of grapes if the UK government is too ‘small’ for the job, or if it suffers from low ambition, or if because of timidity, it can’t grab the brass ring of destiny.

The time is now for the UK to take control of its future and to stop being distracted from the oft-stated goal of Building a Better Britain.

More power to Theresa May’s government for as many days, months or years they strive to meet the will of voters and continue to work to fulfill the UK’s rather obvious destiny!

To BE, or not to BE, that is the Brexit Question

by John Brian Shannon | September 7, 2016

Britain's Choice: To Be, or Not to Be.

To Be, or not to Be (from Hamlet 3:1)

by William Shakespeare

To be, or not to be: that is the question. Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them?

To die: to sleep no more, and by sleep we say end the heartache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to, ’tis a consummation devoutly to be wish’d.

To die, to sleep. To sleep. Perchance to dream. Ay, there’s the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil must give us pause. There’s the respect that makes calamity of so long life.

For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, the oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely, the pangs of despised love, the law’s delay, the insolence of office and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes, when he himself might his quietus make with bare bodkin?

Who would fardels bear to grunt and sweat under a weary life; But that the dread of something after death, the undiscover’d country from whose bourn no traveller returns, puzzles the will and makes us rather bear those ills we have, than fly to others that we know not?

Thus conscience does make cowards of us all; and thus the native hue of resolution is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought, and enterprises of great pith and moment with this regard, their currents turn awry and lose the name of action.

Soft you now the fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons, be all my sins remember’d.

Courtesy of Art of Europe

And so it is with regards to Brexit.

It would be so much easier to not Brexit and to continue along in a substandard life rather than strive to become more — the so much more that Britain is capable of should she decide to shrug-off her complacency and (declining) comforts.

What is a calling more than a science, a search more than a destination, a way of life more than a set of rules issued by others in foreign countries? It’s name? Democracy.

And that’s what the Brexiters are looking for, whether stated or unstated, whether fully reasoned in advance or not.

The same sort of people who threw off the blanket in the time of King George III in search of a more democratic government (“No taxation without representation!”) are the same sort of people who don’t want Brussels to dictate the price of bread or the ingredients in their butter. Let’s be honest, the EU has rules on everything from how many fish in a can of kippers to the price of petrol, and everything in between.

Many of these rules are good and fair rules to be sure. However, they are rules made in Brussels for the benefit of EU corporations and the EU’s 504 million citizens — and Britain’s input is minimal with only 64 million people. To put it succinctly, only the utterly naive Britons think EU membership revolves around them and that the EU was created for Britain’s benefit.

Each year, billions more pounds sterling leave Britain than the country receives in return. The early American settlers railed against “No taxation without representation!” — yet this situation is worse because there is some amount of representation, but it is representation in a foreign capital, by foreigners, and with the demands of 440 million other EU citizens taking priority over British citizens. It is a carefully crafted schadenfreude and almost every EU nation is on the receiving end of it — including Britain and Germany.

Not only that, but those billions of pounds could be better-spent by a British government that dedicates itself to the people of Britain.

The way forward for the well-being of Britain’s people is not by handing billions of pounds sterling and complete authority over their lives to eurocrats in Brussels — the way forward is by increasing trade links with all Anglosphere nations and by forging evermore bilateral trade links around the world with non-Anglo nations.

True Democracy doesn’t require the handing-over of all the money and all of the rights in exchange for whatever allowance Brussels deems to send in return.

That’s not Democracy, that’s Prostitution.

%d bloggers like this: