Free trade, and how it is understood by Anglo-Saxons

[TheStinger]

The UK were the ones holding out for access to US markets but we didn't get it which is a shame really.

Everyone else does well out of the deal

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by TheStinger
The UK were the ones holding out for access to US markets but we didn't get it which is a shame really.

Everyone else does well out of the deal

If you believe that the European airlines have now access to the US airtransport market, you are wrong. What is open is the transatlantic market for flights between an EU nation and the US (which is the recognition that the Atlantic ocean is not a US sea, great improvement indeed). The US airtransport market between US cities is still strictly reserved to the US airlines, the ownership of which is still limited to 25%. And the EU airlines are still forbiden to have access to Central and South America from the US territory.

[DinoDoc]

[Arrian]

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


If you believe that the European airlines have now access to the US airtransport market, you are wrong. What is open is the transatlantic market for flights between an EU nation and the US (which is the recognition that the Atlantic ocean is not a US sea, great improvement indeed). The US airtransport market between US cities is still strictly reserved to the US airlines, the ownership of which is still limited to 25%. And the EU airlines are still forbiden to have access to Central and South America from the US territory.

I don't beleive that at all.

European airlines do well because they get more slots to teh US, the US do well becasue they get access to EU markets. The UK already had reasonable access to teh transatlantic market so they don't really get anything out of the deal.

The big winners are the US, nothing in what I posted suggested otherwise

[DAVOUT]

The subject of this thread is FREE TRADE, not how well are doing the EU or US airlines. And the Open Skies agreement makes clear the natural attitude of the UK and the US which were both reluctant to accept more free trade in the skies as required by the EU.

I therefore suggest that the Anglo-Saxons stop explaining how free trade is good for us. We know free trade enough, we just want it to make us as much good as it does to them. If they have good reasons to limit free trade, there are instances when we also have good reasons.

[molly bloom]

Adam Smith is now featured on our twenty pound notes.

If anyone would like one as a souvenir of Great Britain, let me know, and I'll run to the cashpoint and get you some.

[DAVOUT]

[Dinner]

I'd love to see the 75% domestic ownership rule get dumped and I'd like to see foreign airlines start running domestic routes in the US since the additional competition will result in lower prices.

That said the EU shot itself in the foot on this one. They already have an internal open skies agreement which lets various European based airlines control any route in Europe instead of the strictly nationalist policies which controlled the airline business until little over a decade ago. By already giving away most of their internal market they're in a weak bargaining position against the US especially since individual European states stated they'd sign unilateral treaties with the US (indeed states like Austria already have) if the EU didn't conclude their negotations promptly.

That meant the US wasn't in a hurry to sign anything but a sweet heart deal from the EU since they knew they could always fall back and sign unilateral treaties with the various EU members. The EU just wasn't in a good bargaining position.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


In my tribe, we name "anglo-saxon" any human being whose native language is english (or one of its degeneration), living under the common law, and unable to appreciate frogs.

And in our language we call anyone who flies a french flag a cheese eating surrender monkey.....

[Dinner]

Originally posted by TheStinger
Well it seems the French et al are prepared to accept this, it is only the UK who are holding out for access to US markets.

IIRC Uk is regarded as anglo saxon by the Frenchies so I'm not sure your argument holds much sway

Mostly it is just BA which is pissed off because they currently control Heathrow as a hub and they'd be forced to give up some of the landing rights to competitors in order to create more competition. The continental based airlines like that since they think they can get additional landing rights in London which is Europe's busiest airport.

Natural BA doesn't like losing its dominant position though. In any event if the US doesn't open domestic routes to European based airlines by the end of 2010 then the EU has the right to void the treaty.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Sandman
Why do you call the US and UK 'anglo-saxon'?

I believe it is common in France to refer to free trade and economic liberalization as the "Anglo-Saxon Model". At least Chirac goes on and on about such things all the time.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Richelieu


No need for that: Harry will come back from Irak and go bat**** on his own family.

It could be like Nepal's royal family.

[Dinner]

This treaty has virtually nothing to do with free trade and everything to do with the weakness and disunity of the EU. They couldn't get their act together so they US played the EU members off of each other to get what it wanted.

[Odin]

Originally posted by TheStinger
Law derived by the common man vs law dervied form a meglomaniac midget.

I know which I would choose

QFT

Common Law: