Receiving the signal
Will I need a new phone/sat nav to use this new system or will it be easier to just move abroad now?
Unperturbed by posturing in the UK and EU, the European Space Agency has welcomed the latest pair of Galileo satellites to its spaceport in Kourou, French Guyana, ahead of a July launch. Galileo is Europe's global satellite navigation system. Satellites 25 and 26 will join their siblings, the imaginatively named 23 and 24, …
I believe for consumer purposes, you won't notice any difference if the UK is involved or not. Like you can already pick up GLONASS and everything else if your phone supports it, the core product for the public is out there and usable.
However, you need a phone that supports GLONASS, they aren't (I believe) transmitting a plain GPS (as in the US GPS system) signal, they transmit their own.
The next-gen of phones will likely all support GPS, GLONASS and Galileo. Whether it will make your satnavving any more accurate is questionable, really. It's supposed to but I doubt you'll see much practical difference.
The real problem is that we'll have to pay through the nose to use the interesting stuff (commercial, military, etc. for everything from planes to cruise ship).
Navstar is the name of the American satellite system that provides the GPS service. The user facing service has always been referred to as "GPS" (or possibly "Navstar GPS" if you want to be very formal). It would be indeed be a good idea if people started referring to it as Navstar, but good luck in getting Americans to do that.
If we're going to get picky on naming then the generic term is GNSS.
There's also the Chinese one as well of course.
It'd be pretty unlikely that all of them would be disabled simultaneously, and if jammed the encrypted signal would be jammed too, so it's really not that big a deal.
"Navstar s the name of the American system, not GPS. GLONASS, Navstar and Galileo are all types of GPS."
That's exactly backwards. The American system is explicitly called the Global Positioning System; Navstar was an old name that is no longer used. GPS, GLONASS, Galileo and others are all satellite navigation systems (GNSS is the usual abbreviation for "Global Navigation Satellite System"); only one of them is called GPS.
As for the question about whether you need a new phone, it probably depends on how old your phone is. Galileo and newer GPS satellites are designed to be easily compatible so at least in the future most devices will support both by default. For now, all the separate systems require a separate receiver, so you need to check which ones they can actually use. GLONASS support is fairly common in addition to GPS, and Galileo isn't too unusual, so it's quite possible a current phone will work them all. Beidou and NAVIC are currently only regional, so you're unlikely to find support for them in phones not sold in the relevant regions.
"For now, all the separate systems require a separate receiver, so you need to check which ones they can actually use. GLONASS support is fairly common in addition to GPS, and Galileo isn't too unusual, so it's quite possible a current phone will work them all. Beidou and NAVIC are currently only regional, so you're unlikely to find support for them in phones not sold in the relevant regions."
Actually, if you look at the specifications for the available smartphones, most of the new ones have support for A-GPS, GLONASS and often BDS (see phonearena or gsmarena for specs on many phones). A few phones can receive Galileo, but it seems to be fairly uncommon.
I have some hopes that Galileo may be added to that list, but currently chipsets and integrated tri-band antennas for the three bands used by the A-GPS, GLONASS and BDS GNSS systems are widely available.
Given that there are a billion or more people in China buying smartphones, and most of the phones are built there, I expect that those three will remain the 'standard' set. It is possible that the Chinese government may even quietly encourage all phone manufacturers to include BDS.
BeiDou-3 currently has 9 satellites up, with 35 planned by 2020, giving global coverage. India's NAVIC and the Japanese QZSS are regional and likely will be ignored by most chipsets and most phones sold outside those regions.
If Galileo has sufficient advantages or can be added at insignificant cost it will likely become the fourth 'customary' GNSS in most devices.
A hypothetical British GNSS would probably come in after the other minor systems, given relative populations and sizes of economy... in other words, unless it can be handled by a receiver designed for one of the three or maybe four major systems, it will be a regional specialty item in phones and GNSS receivers.
We already have Galileo support in newer phones - such as the OnePlus 5T. It depends on the underlying chipset. Almost all phones would support it later this year I hope. By using multiple systems (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo) and triangulating the signal using software we can achieve a high location accuracy.
Well, since I am British, a British Hans ... Hans is OK by me ... then again, we will probably keep Patrick and replace the Union Jack with trídhathach na hÉireann on the vessel ... would make them more than happy ... as for the Hans hands pun, well ... it is getting old ... but I really like this one:
When I get out of my car, it is Hans-free.
My point was, why do you presume that they're all queuing up to trade with the UK? The UK can't dictate terms, they may trade with the UK if it's advantageous for them.
And why do you think time has stopped still? They're in their own local trading blocs now, only the UK has found it necessary to leave its own trading bloc in a moment of national madness.
And finally their markets aren't big enough to replace the EU.
This article critically interrogates claims that a British exit from the European Union (EU) (Brexit) will create opportunities for the UK to escape the EU’s apparent protectionism and cumbersome internal politics in order to pursue a more liberal and globalist trade agenda based on the Commonwealth. Taking a historical view of UK and EU trade relations with the Commonwealth in Africa, the author highlights the way in which the incorporation of the majority of Commonwealth states into the EU’s preferential trading relationships has reconfigured ties between the UK and its former colonies over time. Further, the author suggests that the EU’s recent attempts to realise a vision for an ambitious set of free trade agreements in Africa—the Economic Partnership Agreements—was disrupted not by EU protectionism or internal politics but rather by African resistance to the EU’s liberal agenda for reciprocal tariff liberalisation and regulatory harmonisation. The UK therefore faces a complex challenge if it is to disentangle its trade relations with Africa from those of the EU and to forge its own set of ambitious free trade agreements with African Commonwealth partners.
Did they promise an extra £350M/week for the NHS?
No, and nor did the Brexit bunch. It's just remainer FUD.
No, you are right, they didn't. They did strongly allude to it though. Which is much the same when it comes to broken promises and campaign lies.
It's not really Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, more easily spotting something that's at best underhand manipulative and at worst an outright lie.
Not that the remain campaign didn't twist things as well though.
They are two completely distinct sentences with the second not mentioning how much the NHS should be funded. Apparently.
@ Dan 55
"But pay no attention to the poster next to Boris Johnson..."
Ha! He is a numpty. At the start I expected the official leave campaign had been intentionally set up as a trojan horse to give the gov the result they wanted. That is until I saw the campaign on both sides. I dont think either of them did anybody proud.
How many people in the Space faring, aircraft carrier, nuclear nation that is India ?
About 1.35 billion. With an average annual income of $1,670 in 2016.
The population of the EU is around 510 million. With an average annual income in 2017 of $21,340. (Highest income - Denmark, $43,454. Lowest - Bulgaria, $5,700.)
I know which I'd rather trade with.
If only economics worked like clockwork. A magical clockwork world wherein the number of people in a trade bloc is the same as the number of people who purchase goods and services from member nations of the trade bloc. Such a place where, for instance, 510 million people can all be counted as 510 million actual customers who actively purchase from, say, the UK.
Funnily enough, except for the history and antics of man (and woman), the real world does not work like clockwork.
510 million people do not automatically constitute 510 million paying customers for each member nation of the EU. No one is so entitled to believe they have the automatic right to count population stats this way.
The economy's health is dependent on partners that trade with it and not on the fancies of statisticians who point at numbers and conclude "There! There they are! 510 million people and all of them will purchase at least something from the UK each week"
Much better to have real and confirmed businesses plus real and confirmed people who will purchase our products and services than to have a set of numbers of prospects of which fewer than 10% might purchase goods and services from us. And, yes, I am aware it runs both sides of the Brexit debate.
So, I think you can tell what I think of your 'But, but, but there are 510 million people in the EU who earn between $5,700 and $43,454 per annum who will prefer to order sugar from us via Amazon or eBay instead of loyally walking to their local corner shop to enjoy a quick cig and a natter with their neighbours.'
That $43,454 figure is a bit too precise for my liking.
What you actually need to consider is how many people and businesses in the EU actually purchase from the UK and invest in the UK, how much of this collective transaction can EU bureaucracy interfere with, what's left of that calculation that favours the UK, how much will non-EU trade and investment bring to the UK, and what's the then total trade balance? Compare that balance with the existing balance to decide whether leaving the EU is a net benefit or gain to UK trade and industry.
Alternatively, show your lack of education and life experience, rely on hysterical loops, and try to predict economics with Clockwork Theory.
In any case, Brexit is not purely about economics.
"Brexit is purely about harking back to a mythical golden age. The thing about mythical golden ages is they are mythical."
That is kinda funny because the only people I know who talk about the mythical golden ages are Remainers; and they are increasingly anonymous cowards.
"... how much of this collective transaction can EU bureaucracy interfere with?"
Ermm, you are aware that India is hugely bureaucratic, are you not? Bureaucracy which the UK has no say in, unlike the EU bureaucracy? And has barriers to trade which are not going to disappear just like that (esp. under the current Indian government)?
What products/services is the UK more likely to be able to sell to Indian customers than EU customers?
Given that this is in a comment line on Galileo - worth pointing out that India has it's own indigenous Sat Nav, IRNSS, so probably sensibly enough when Mr Davis pitches up in the back of a BAE taxi flogging counterfeit Galileos at the bargain price of 3-5 billion India is likely to say ' No Thanks - we already have one - how about we sell a copy to you, cheap at only 300 million'.
>Mr Davis pitches up in the back of a BAE taxi flogging counterfeit Galileos at the bargain price
Given the current level of uk.gov's negotiating skills, he'd come back with an expensive 30 year deal (with eye watering cancellation clauses)
for a rebadged Indian positioning system and visa-free movement of Indian citizens to the UK.
Just for tariff free trade on some Indian owned products like Jaguar/Land Rover and Tata Steel.
is larger and more diverse (& tolerant & a far larger market
Take the CIA annual stats handbook and check your numbers. Commonwealth is around one third of the GDP of Eu. If recomputed in purchasing power or GDP per capita due to these being rather low for India and Pakistan it is even less.
So as a matter of fact, the commonwealth is smaller than Eu using any standard market assessment metrics known to man. Except the delusional Kipling recital ones.
It is also not a uniform market and there is no free (or even facilitated) movement of goods and services by any means. At all. There are tariffs, limitations and external agreements by countries (including with the Eu) which prevent them from giving any sort of economic significance to the Commonwealth as an entity. So as a matter of fact - it is not a market. It is a construct for the purposes of exercising nostalgia.
If it was all about nostalgia why does it prosper ?
And the proposal is to work with the Commonwealth which inter alia would perhaps include trade agreements, beneficial to both parties, perhaps by reducing food tariffs, while extending the science & technical co-operation that is currently crippled by EU tariffs and rules explicitly designed to impose unfavourable trade conditions on our once favoured trading partners of the Commonwealth.
We did this before ( although we were promised that this would not happen), changed our trading focus, last time we swapped a global based market for a local continentally bound closed custom union which had/has the belief it should be a state. This time we can leave a customs union and rejoin a global market place, resolving the dichotomy caused by the wish of the EU governing (un-elected) bodies for ever closer union compared to the apparent wish of the British NOT to be part of a centrally governed super state
Prosper in what sense? The Commonwealth Games? CHOGM? Hmmm...
I emigrated in 2004 and live in Australia now. The Australian Government has made lots of nice noises towards its counterpart at Westminster, true. There have even been some trade agreement working parties. But there won't be any actual negotiations until after March 2019 for some peculiar reason.
However, after working through the same sort of preliminaries since 2015, guess who Australia's actually negotiating a comprehensive trade agreement with right now, even as I write? Oh yes, it's the EU.
In truth, the underlying position in Canberra towards the UK is polite indifference - "if we can do a deal and get something out of it, fine: if not, too bad, it's lower down the list of priorities than trade with China, the US and the EU".
Beyond that, even if it's not grounded in economic or political fact, the tide is against the UK: while some still sentimentally hanker, many older Australians and Kiwis have not forgotten what they perceive as Britain's betrayals in the 1970s. Meanwhile, as far as I can see, the younger ones simply don't care: the UK is just somewhere neat to go backpacking. The Commonwealth Games is merely an excuse for more 'Aussie Gold'. CHOGM 2018 was barely reported here (I had to hunt for coverage).
The world has moved on. So all I can say is good luck - you really will need it.
What I find extraordinarily funny, here, is that the UK treated the EU like shit, much more so its vassal states in the Empire back then and somehow thinks that the EU is open to ever more negotiation, will allow cherry-picking and the nations in the commonwealth will somehow get amnesia... does nobody in the UK remember the cotton BS you enforced on India (+Pakistan, +Bangladesh) in a not too distant past ? You think they'll go, "Hey, lords, why do we not do that again, it was cool for us to get treated like shit ?"
You really think the UK can compete with Indian or Pakistani wages ?
I dunno, I just dunno ... beyond help.
A high growth rate is easier to acheive if you start from a low number than when you starting-point has centuries of growth behind it.
A high growth rate is also hard to consolidate with stringent safety-, environmental- and labor-rules.
Freed of all of these, both the EU and the UK could much more easily acheive growth numbers similar to those acheived in Asia today. However; Is this a rabbit hole that we WANT to enter?
I have so far been under the impression that NHS at al is something that the UK wants to keep?
I have so far been under the impression that NHS at al is something that the UK wants to keep?
What gave you that impression. Not the Trusts, which seems a prep stage to small Regional Health Insurance Companies, nor the Outsourcing to increasingly dodgy and inept businesses....
"[...] & tolerant & a far larger market & mostly lacking in ant-Democratic edicts and directives)"
Tolerant is the last word I would use for many of the Commonwealth countries. With some notable exceptions like Canada, New Zealand, and Australia - many of the others are still promoting Victorian colonial era bigotry under the guise of religious piety. Not to mention institutionalised corruption and cronyism.
Some members of the Tory Party would probably be happy to see those standards imposed in the UK as part of trade deals.
>We should just take our toys now, get with the Commonwealth...
Commonwealth citizens laugh at people like you.
>>Perhaps not everyone is aware of what the Commonwealth is ? (& does)
Enlighten us peter_dtm. What does the Commonwealth do?
What are its major achievements these last 25 years, say?
"What are its major achievements these last 25 years, say?
One could ask the same of the EU!"
Created the only international manufacturer of large commercial aircraft that can compete with Boeing.
Created the largest collection of safe, peaceful, advanced, democratic countries outside of North America.
Currently a world leader in privacy protection.
A world leader in scientific research and engineering - CERN, ELT (39m mirror!), AIP submarines, etc.
It's not perfect - there seems to be a lot of regulation, and too much socialism, but those are endemic world problems these days.
Canada is a non-full member of ESA.
What I find so funny is how some Brits fool themselves to believe Brexit is considered such a splendid idea among the Commonwealth countries. The reality is very different and leaving the EU Britain is destroying the bridge for the CW countries through Britain to the EU.
Brexit is a deeply stupid goal* and the CW countries are hardly too keen to bail out the UK.
In other news regarding Galileo "following its exit from the European Union. As a result, Airbus plans to relocate work on the Ground Control Segment (GCS) from its Portsmouth premises to an EU state".
*Disclaimer, while one has to assume Brexit means Brexit I still feel the fat lady has not yet started singing.
" the CW countries are hardly too keen to bail out the UK."
Exact;y. If they're keen to do business then it's because there's advantage to _them_ in doing so.
I lived in one of those countries when Britain dropped all its trade deals and went into the EEC - to be honest in many ways it was a relief because "made in britain" had become a warning label, but the economic hit was severe for most countries (dutch disease).
They've almost all diversified their trading now and the UK is a small island a long way off, which really doesn't produce much of worth that anyone wants to buy.
We should just take our toys now, get with the Commonwealth and create a decent Newton constellation- after all, the Commonwealth is global and very diverse, unlike some other local small minded wannabe super states
There are so many reasons why this is pipe dream dreamt up by people still living in a fantasy empire world that no longer exists.
There are political, financial and geographical reasons why this is a non starter (name me one project in the last 50 years where India, Australia and Canada have worked together), but I will give you a technical reason.
Where are you going to get the bandwidth for you new constellation? This is a limited resource and will take international treaties.
I was born in one of those Commonwealth countries.
My ancestry is a mix of British and continental European.
I am proud of that heritage, and have a fair bit of regard for both sides of it.
However, I keep getting the impression that a lot of the stay at home British natives have an ingrained cultural belief that the citizens of those countries look to the UK in some preferential way, and perhaps for leadership or as a role model.
That is not necessarily true. In fact, despite apparent British faith in their superiority (not everyone, of course, but quite a few), many of us, particularly those with superior educations and an interest in history and culture, find British practices and social structures backward, undeveloped, and backward-looking. A hereditary aristocracy? Really? 'Class based' social stratification? Discrimination or social evaluation based on what school you went to, or your regional accent, or your religion?
Someone needs to drag the UK kicking and screaming into the 20th century, and then it can start working on catching up with the rest of us.
I have the option of establishing the right to live in the UK, or one of the continental EU nations. With the UK leaving the EU (along with its apparent desire to become an uber-surveillance state that would dumbfound Orwell), it's not going to be the UK.
It is entirely likely that most Commonwealth countries are not really interested in preferential ties to the UK as much as with other parts of the world, including the EU. You may make some headway with India and Pakistan if you liberalize immigration enough...
There's a thin argument in favour of a second GNSS system for the world. GLONASS is becoming moribund. GPS is excellent and becoming more so. Galileo is a decent backup.
Though I think the budgetary justification used by the EU was something about counting sheep more accurately...
The argument is thin because it seems highly unlikely that the USA would ever deprive the rest of the world access to the civil GPS service, and any space event that affects GPS satellites would likely wipe out Galileo too.
The only really hard reason to build your own GNSS system is if you want to conduct some overseas military operations using precision munitions and you don't want the USA stopping you from doing so. Given that the EU members seem hell bent on having pathetic military capabilities, apart from France perhaps, one wonders why the EU is bothering with Galileo at all apart from the bragging rights.
it seems highly unlikely that the USA would ever deprive the rest of the world access to the civil GPS service
How could they do that, without making all GNSS receivers (including US ones) useless? For that matter, how could the EU allow widespread use of Galileo, except to Brits?
Military-precision controls I can see, but the civililian service is surely beyond that level of control now.
"Given that the EU members seem hell bent on having pathetic military capabilities"
I read recently the Germans were discussing meeting their NATO required spending to which one of them said they wouldnt know how to spend that much nor on what. Considering their airforce has less than 10 working eurofighters of 70 and when they sent pilots and aircraft to help in Iraq the only one to arrive at the destination was the war minister I think it would be pretty easy.
"why the EU is bothering with Galileo at all apart from the bragging rights"
I am a little bothered when people say the UK should build their own because the EU's is nothing more than a vanity project anyway. I am amused that the block in multiple (self inflicted) crises is blowing money on satellites but thats their problem not ours.
codejunky>Considering their airforce has less than 10 working eurofighters of 70
Don't worry codejunky. When the F35 start failing the UK will just get them fixed ASAP by sending them over to...
It's going to be TURKEY, codejunky. Sorry about that old chap. I know you have deep fears about the Turks and all. :(
Hello again my troll. Can you explain how your comment about getting RAF planes fixed abroad has anything to do with the shortage of German aircraft (or military)? Or even anything to do with my comment?
Or did you just want to add some racism again? I dont know what your problem is with foreigners but it does make me uncomfortable.
codejunky> Hello again my troll.
I'm not lying about Turks getting to fix 'em though, am I. Unlike your good self likes to lie about Turks and Visa free travel. ;-)
Aw codejunky, did you add the racism jibe to try and deflect from being called on your faux propaganda. Again. You are barking up the wrong tree. Yet again. Your assumption about my background (like a lot of your assumptions in general ) are totally false.
Toodle-pip. Watch out. All this guff you spread will eventually come back and bite you on your derriere.
For decades, until about 1994, the Bundeswehr and Luftwaffe were limited to the defense at its borders, exclusively. Germany would support the coalition financially in the first Gulf war, for example.
Since, the situation has changed, slightly - they are now allowed to "defend" Germany even outside of their borders. Besides, why do you take the most peaceful army in the EU, apart from Austria ?
France, for example, has quite a substantial airforce.
Maybe you read into the "Der Spiegel" article to single out the Luftwaffe, which claimed that less than a dozen aircraft were combat ready due to a mechanical problem plaguing the Eurofighters; the Luftwaffe did not wish to comment on the number of combat ready fighters. You forget that the Luftwaffe also has a fleet of Tornados. Also, although the mechanical troubles are real, the numbers appear to be press exaggeration, they damn well know the Luftwaffe cannot say how many fighters are combat ready. The Luftwaffe just commented that there were more combat-ready Eurofighter aircraft now than what was divulged to parliament last year (so 50+).
And Dr_N quite rightly pointed out the fact that the RAF cannot even repair its own aircraft and needs cooperation from Turkey, of all NATO allies, Turkey ???? So, as a Brit, one first needs to sweep ones doorstep before one comments on the neighbour's ... assuming our codejunky is a Brit, of course, deepest apologies if you are not, I did not mean to insult.
"Any link to your claim about "10 working eurofighters of 70", or is it just bull.."
Worth asking. Source- http://www.dw.com/en/only-4-of-germanys-128-eurofighter-jets-combat-ready-report/a-43611873
While they may have that many aircraft it does not mean they are in a usable state. The spending issue I mentioned was here-
"The problem stems from a cooling liquid leak in the aircraft’s wing pod sensors, which are used to recognize hostile jets or incoming attacks. Without the defense system the Eurofighter jets are not combat ready."
So what about the rest, with more than 600 built and used in Austria, Italy, Germany, the United Kingdom, Spain and Saudi Arabia. The air forces of Oman, Kuwait and Qatar are export customers,..
Is it a new problem/discovery, does it affect only the German air force.
"The only really hard reason to build your own GNSS system is if you want to conduct some overseas military operations using precision munitions and you don't want the USA stopping you from doing so. Given that the EU members seem hell bent on having pathetic military capabilities, apart from France perhaps, one wonders why the EU is bothering with Galileo at all apart from the bragging rights."
As I understand it, GNSS is critical for precision ICBM and SLBM targeting. Without it, you are limited to countervalue strategies (city busting with large or many warheads). Counterforce strategies require GNSS. Countervalue is useful for deterrence, but for actual war-fighting you really want precision to take out hardened military and political targets.
If Europe wants a real deterrent capability, you need your own GNSS.
China and India are primarily armed with shorter ranged missiles aimed at targets within several thousand kilometers. That's probably why they both started with regional nav systems...
"The argument is thin because it seems highly unlikely that the USA would ever deprive the rest of the world access to the civil GPS service"
The US system isn't accurate enough - and without "competition" from other providers it never will be..
FWIW my old Saumsung Galaxy Note 4 can see Navstar GPS, Glonass, Beidou and Gallileo from its london location. Newer phones add to that mix plus tend to be dual/triple band, unlike the older L1-frequency-only receivers.
Russia and China hastened adoption of their constellations by slapping a tarriff on any navigation products (and phones) imported that don't support them.The EU probably won't do the same thing, but it's hoping that a 10-20 times better level of civilian accuracy will sell it.
As for the chipmakers: it's cheaper to roll all the standards into one chipset than to produce a dedicated device and the units have more than enough horsepower to keep up with a miniscule power budget, so that's what they've all done. (makes a change from my motorola A1000 that'd flatten its 2100mAh battery in 40 minutes if the GPS was left switched on, wasn't very sensitive and took 20 minutes to get a lock)
I don't get it.. Why do people think former colonies even want to trade with the UK, over the EU, US, China? The UK is simply too small. It does not have its own access to those desirable markets anymore and does not make anything of global and infungible value.
That India will sign an exclusive trade agreement, better than what it offers the EU, for what exactly? What are people smoking?
I'll need that to survive Brexit.
The UK is (currently) the world's 5th biggest economy. So we are worth having a deal with. Especially if the US, China, and EU are being too intransigent (which they are). The US is, well, Trumpian. China is more interested in deals that see it dominate, not partner. The EU imposes a ton of burdensome rules, and isn't interested in explaining why the principal of free movement of people won't get extended to cover countries it might want a trade deal with outside of the European continent.
For example Japan and the UK seem to be becoming very cosy, a number of defence treaties have been signed in recent years.
There's the TPP agreement that has gone ahead without the USA. That would be a good one to get in on.
It's all madness really. There's a good chance the EU will collapse under the weight of its own corpulance. France and Germany weren't too happy with the latest budget inflation being demanded by the EU commission (20% ish). Can you imagine a democratic government getting away with 20% tax increase across the board?
The UK is (currently) the world's 5th biggest economy.
And going down...
So we are worth having a deal with. Especially if the US, China, and EU are being too intransigent (which they are). The US is, well, Trumpian. China is more interested in deals that see it dominate, not partner. The EU imposes a ton of burdensome rules, and isn't interested in explaining why the principal of free movement of people won't get extended to cover countries it might want a trade deal with outside of the European continent.
I agree that a Trump US is anti free trade, but you ignore a number of things. Firstly is geography. Even in a global market it makes more sense for say Australia to align itself with SE Asian markets on its doorstep. Population size, the EU is a much bigger market meaning it is easier to align standards etc. All countries have rules, but the bigger you are, the more economical it is to align to them. Again UK customer base is to small for that to make sense.
Lets also not pretend the UK has any interest in extending freedom of movement...
For example Japan and the UK seem to be becoming very cosy, a number of defence treaties have been signed in recent years.
I see no evidence for that. Japan has always liked the UK because it provided a gateway to european markets. Japanese buisnesses are generally flabbergasted that it is about to leave the EU
There's the TPP agreement that has gone ahead without the USA. That would be a good one to get in on.
It's all madness really. There's a good chance the EU will collapse under the weight of its own corpulance. France and Germany weren't too happy with the latest budget inflation being demanded by the EU commission (20% ish).
That's the brexit dream isn't it. The UK will leave and drag the rest of Europe down to its level. Except it isn't happening. Support within the EU for the project has increased with the referendum. There will always be arguments within the EU and challenges, but that does not mean there is any appetite for a breakup of the EU generally
Can you imagine a democratic government getting away with 20% tax increase across the board?
You do know that the EU has a parliament that is democratically elected and the commission consists of representatives of democratically elected governments don't you?
"Population size, the EU is a much bigger market meaning it is easier to align standards etc. "
Exactly. Just happened to come across this in relation to a project I'm working on:
The Australian Design Rules (ADRs) are national standards for vehicle safety, anti-theft and emissions. [...] The Australian Government's policy is to harmonise the national vehicle safety standards with international regulations where possible and consideration is given to the adoption of the international regulations of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE).
I'll grant that EU >< UNECE but it is a good example of standards harmonisation.
Enough of this undermocratic 'standards harmonisation' talk. Cutting 'unnecessary red tape' was the fundamental building block to restore democracy; enforce the will of the people of every single piece of Westminster legislation; proclaim British values as seperate and distinct to European values; strengthen Europe as a whole and European countries large and small by breaking them back into a collection of isolated nation states with seperate currencies and closed borders; end the wrongful freedom of the world's 50 poorest nations to export to the EU tariff free; end the 'protectionist' global reach of the EU's existing trade deals; reintroduce isolationism, protectionism and tariffs as political weapons where large countries once again get to bully enemies and smaller nations economically, blah, blah, blah...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019