Thread

1. neom · 1789557380 · focus · HN ↗

   No idea what this actually means, if it means easier trade, I'm all for anything that reduces our dependency on the yanks, as long as we don't need to be involved in their regulatory or legal regimes. The Americans are no longer our friends, Salut, mes amis Européens. :)

   1. FabCH · 1789557897 · focus · HN ↗

      Carney was asking for freedom of movement of goods, people and services, but without full monetary and legislative integration.

      So, easier to sell stuff, easier to buy stuff, free to just travel to/from Canada/EU and work there with no extra paperwork, free to buy and sell service from Canada to EU and vice versa.

      No Euro, no vote in EU, no ECJ, no payments into each others budget.

      Tighter integration than UK, not as tight as Norway/Switzerland/Iceland.

      Common defense was already agreed anyhow.

      I can tell you this enjoys broad support in the EU public. Although, no joke, a lot of peoples first reaction is: "They need to compete in Eurovision first. Otherwise they should wait for Australia to join first."

      1. leidenfrost · 1789560236 · focus · HN ↗

         AFAIK Charles III is the monarch both for UK and Canada.

         Doesn't this mean that Canada is, in a certain degree, dependent of UK?

         1. graemep · 1789560396 · focus · HN ↗

            No. He is separately the monarch of the UK and Canada. You could just as well argue that the UK is dependent on Canada for that reason.

            1. thaumasiotes · 1789566591 · focus · HN ↗

               You could, but it might be difficult to hear yourself over the explosive laughter of everybody around you.

               Which country would you say has a closer relationship with the King of England?

               1. triceratops · 1789568540 · focus · HN ↗

                  Which country would you say has a closer relationship with the King of Canada?

                  1. thaumasiotes · 1789569859 · focus · HN ↗

                     England, which is why he's called the King of England and never called the King of Canada.

                     1. amiga386 · 1789577517 · focus · HN ↗

                        There is no King of England. Charles III is King of the United Kingdom, and all places within. The UK does not have a King of England any more than they have a King of Scunthorpe or a King of North Piddle.

                        The last King of England was William of Orange, who died in 1702 and was succeeded by Anne, who was the last Queen of England. The Act of Union 1707 merged the Kingdom of Scotland and Kingdom of England into a single successor state, the Kingdom of Great Britain. In 1801 that became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and in 1922 became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

                        1. thaumasiotes · 1789631402 · focus · HN ↗

                           > Charles III is King of the United Kingdom, and all places within. The UK does not have a King of England any more than they have a King of Scunthorpe or a King of North Piddle.

                           It really shouldn't surprise you to learn this, but the ordinary name for the "United Kingdom" is "England".

                           1. dofm · 1789815115 · focus · HN ↗

                              Only among people who are wrong.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.