"The EU need us more than the UK needs them." Let's rephrase that:
The market of 450M people, a $19.7 trillion GDP, and 27 countries... needs the market of 65M people, a $2.6 trillion GDP and one country, more than the other way around.
Does that makes ANY sense to you?
The market of 450M people, a $19.7 trillion GDP, and 27 countries... needs the market of 65M people, a $2.6 trillion GDP and one country, more than the other way around.
Does that makes ANY sense to you?
If you believe that one country can negotiate against 27 countries and come out on top, especially if one of those 27 countries on its own has a larger economy, you must believe that the people of that one country are inherently superior to those in the 27.
So stop pretending that a committed brexiteer PM would have just walked in there, been firm with the EU and gotten everything we wanted. Because you're right: Our only leverage is to walk away. But the EU already knows that would hurt us a hell of a lot more because of the above.
The only thing having a Mogg, Johnson or Farage leading our Brexit negotiations would achieve is we'd be on "No Deal" a lot faster.
(Always remember: all the brexiteers promised us a "better deal" with the EU)
(Always remember: all the brexiteers promised us a "better deal" with the EU)
I'm just so tried of being accused of talking the country down, or not backing Britain, every time that I dare to imply that maybe taking on 27 countries at once might not go so well.
Especially when basic geography means UK trade will always rely on those countries most of all.
Especially when basic geography means UK trade will always rely on those countries most of all.
And yes, that is why I tweeted this. Because we are a great nation. But being great doesn't mean we can defy the laws of geography, economics and international diplomacy.
