,
4 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
(1/4) The problem with the US FTA in the Brexit debate isn't USTR prowess, Trump's mercantalism, a threat to the NHS, chlorinated chicken, digital taxes, or that Pelosi's Congress may block it.
It's the absurd fetishism of its likely impact as some unprecedented game changer.
It's the absurd fetishism of its likely impact as some unprecedented game changer.
(2/4) When analysing Brexit HMT assumed (beyond all sane expectations) rapid conclusion of FTAs providing full tariff elimination (again, insane expectation) with not only the US, but 16 other economies.
The result was barely above the margin of error. Total.
The result was barely above the margin of error. Total.
(3/4) This isn't a Remainer Cabal within Treasury being negative.
It is entirely in line with what mainstream economists tell us about doing FTAs with distant lands.
Nice, and usually of real benefit to a few sectors, but never game changing for the economy. Ever.
It is entirely in line with what mainstream economists tell us about doing FTAs with distant lands.
Nice, and usually of real benefit to a few sectors, but never game changing for the economy. Ever.
(4/4) An FTA with the US, if well negotiated and conducted with well defended red lines, is a nice policy to pursue.
However, as other trade justifications for Brexit have fallen away, the US FTA has had to carry the full weight of delivering sunlit uplands.
It can't and won't.
However, as other trade justifications for Brexit have fallen away, the US FTA has had to carry the full weight of delivering sunlit uplands.
It can't and won't.
