The Brexit Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
NarrowBandFtw said:
Any country, rich or poor, that the UK can expand business with when not hampered by the EU.
Click to expand...

You know things like demand and price are a factor in trade right? What makes you think these countries want what the UK is selling and can afford to buy it in any kind of meaningful amount?
 
Cray said:
You know things like demand and price are a factor in trade right? What makes you think these countries want what the UK is selling and can afford to buy it in any kind of meaningful amount?
Click to expand...
The fact that America and China can be counted among those countries should be comforting. They certainly have the money, just a question of what deals they'll get into with the post-brexit UK.
 
Frequent visitor said:
That she was, but she negotiated hard for better terms. She was successful in that. Her successor, the present PM, believes in being reasonable (to take a charitable view), but is being skinned by the EU. They are in a tough position, with all their nice little (I mean big!) perks under threat if we leave. Balancing the EU budget will be a difficult task. They will need less staff too, as the work load will be reduced when we leave. It was Mrs. T. who famously said "there is no such thing as a job for life", but the EU do not believe that.
Click to expand...
So she bargained hard for the UK to get concessions and now the anti-EU crowd want to throw all that away and start again. Seems like a smart move.

The EU doesn't believe in a job for life.

The truth seems to be that the UK had unusually good EU membership terms, skewed in their favour, rather than being the poor doormat of the EU the leave side has portrayed them as.

There is still a place for manufacturing though while it will provide skilled jobs, as good automation does, there won't be much place for lower skilled jobs. The humans are there to handle things that, even though machines can do them, humans do better and more efficiently (see Toyota's factory designs, and their move back to using more people, for example). However the EU doesn't prevent the UK from bolstering their manufacturing or reforming their economy. No, what stands in the way is politics and wealthy vested interests which have nothing to do with whether or not the UK is a member of the EU. In fact many of the political proponents of leaving the EU are likely to be part of the problem.

It is also the case that many lower skilled jobs in the UK were being done by illegal immigrants prior to the free movement of people from Europe to the UK. So those that lost out were not UK citizens and it is unlikely an exit is going to suddenly provide more of those sort of jobs for UK citizens, either because they cost too much or simply don't want to do that sort of menial work.
 
Cray said:
You know things like demand and price are a factor in trade right? What makes you think these countries want what the UK is selling and can afford to buy it in any kind of meaningful amount?
Click to expand...

Read this : https://www.southafricanmi.com/eusa.html
SA trade with the UK is significant. Imports and Exports. Both countries benefit.
 
zippy said:
Read this : https://www.southafricanmi.com/eusa.html
SA trade with the UK is significant. Imports and Exports. Both countries benefit.
Click to expand...

I don't dispute that we do a lot of trade with the UK, I dispute that South Africa and other African countries could suddenly afford & demand a whole lot more trade than they currently to make up for a drop in trading with the EU.
 
The_Assimilator said:
You don't know anything about one of the foremost Tory proponents of Brexit, the backward and discriminatory views he stands for, how his financial position allows him to not have to worry about any negative effects of Brexit, and what he would gain financially from it. Not to mention he's one of the people who loves those immigration policies that you blame Theresa May for.

You don't understand that in a service-based economy like the UK, a trade deficit is not necessarily a bad thing.

You don't understand that there is no such thing as a "self-sufficient" country anymore. For example, good luck building a microchip design and manufacturing facility from scratch!

You don't understand that manufacturing is a dead corpse walking in the first world and that trying to save jobs or rebuild a local manufacturing base is laughable, especially in a service-driven economy. The only case that first-world manufacturing makes sense is if it's as automated as possible, and automation doesn't create many jobs, so it doesn't get votes, so politicians don't want to talk about it.

You don't understand critical, vital issues around Brexit and the motivations of the people pushing for it the hardest, yet you seem to support it. Why?
Click to expand...
You are pretty dogmatic, but offer little reasoning in support. I note your opinions with interest. I suspect you think your views are axiomatic. You seem to have made quite a few assumptions about what I do or do not understand.

My main reasons for wishing to leave the EU are the expanionism of the EU, and its corruption. I see the expansionism as dangerous for peace, as shown in the area around the Crimea recently.

I am not unduly concerned about the economic side of things. People will always find a way to obtain what they wish to buy. The 'borderless' state of the EU in the taxation sense encourages the large businesses to centralise their activities where it suits them. Their interests do not necessarily accord with with the interests of the population at large. The Schengen arrangement is very nice for tourists, and I benefit from that. But travelling with Customs boundaries was no great hassle: in fact I enjoyed watching my fellow Customs staff doing their thing. The Immigration side of things is perhaps another matter, and Schengen has eased that for sure. But it is easier for crooks too, and for illegal immigrants. (Mrs. Thatcher's removal of exchange controls I find convenient too - but so do people of ill intent.)

Other countries have come to realise the dangers in allowing their manufacturing bases to move to (usually) low cost areas. The USA is one. But it is not just that: in some cases the research facilities have moved too, and the Chinese have been demanding technology transfer as part of the price of setting up in China. The use by businesses of low wage economies has resulted in the criticism surrounding their use of sweat shops.

The service based companies such as banks and insurers and miscellaneous wheelers and dealers currently do not have a high reputation in the UK.

Some of the 'backward and discriminatory' views you attribute to Mr. Rees Mogg may possibly be views I support. As you do not identify them it is difficult to know. I do support some of his views, but not all of them. Is that a problem conceptually for you?

Many people do not understand the fuss about Immigration. The most recent instances involved the EU, and centred around the decision by Mr. Blair to allow the full benefits of EU mobility to the newly enrolled eastern european states with immediate effect, rather than have a transition period as we did when we joined and as other EU countries did when the eastern europeans became members. The result was that they came here in large numbers, and being EU citizens they were entitled to the same social security benefits as UK citizens. That caused some negative journalism. It was not always fair reporting to be sure, but it was often vigorous.

Most UK born citizens think that they have the right to marry and bring in their wives, and are surprised to find differently. It certainly used to be the case. I did not follow it closely at the time, but there was perceived to be a problem with some Commonwealth people coming here to work, which they certainly did in most cases, particularly in the textile trade. They were not necessarily unskilled either. Having become citizens, they then tended to bring in their families and then extended families. That was not always well received, but could not be curbed in just their cases without being unlawfully discriminatory. So attempts to curb that alleged problem resulted in my 'born in the UK' rights being taken away as well. That sort of unintended consequence is not uncommon. We have similar examples with the NHS for example, where the fuss about so called 'health tourists' led to UK born citizens living elsewhere - such as France or Spain - being denied access to the NHS, which they had previously enjoyed. Many had contributed to it during their lifetimes work,and felt hard done by. The UK and the French came to an arrangement whereby the UK paid the French to give UK citizens resident in France access to the French health service, which seems good sense.
I said that I know little of Rees Mogg: you transmute that to not knowing "anything about" him. He seems to have fairly recently emerged into brexit prominence, but you have to bear in mind that I spend quite some time in other countries than my own, where such issues are not that widely reported, and in any case I have an interest in those other countries as well. I made my decision about the EU referendum without reference to his views. I seemed to be in a minority in my views at the time, but apparently the polls got it wrong - again!

You poke a jibe about my comment on self sufficiency in manufacturing. I am well aware that for centuries there was trade around the world, often in volving hardship and danger to the traders. The Romans were active just a mile or so from where I now live, and in many other places both within and without their empire. There are many other examples too. I have stood on a part of the Old Silk Road and seen lorries passing in great numbers. I have stood on the banks of the Congo at its mouth watching ships pass by. Working in Customs & Excise gave me such experiences, and the chance to talk to both senior and junior businessmen, which was a privilege. I perhaps understand more than you think.

But I am naturally sceptical, as my career required. I am a euro sceptic, but that phrase has been hijacked to mean opposed to the EU. I actually support much of it in theory, if not in practice. Right now the balance for me is against staying in.

I do not like the tendency of people to be dogmatically for or against a concept.
 
noxibox said:
So she bargained hard for the UK to get concessions and now the anti-EU crowd want to throw all that away and start again. Seems like a smart move.

The EU doesn't believe in a job for life.

The truth seems to be that the UK had unusually good EU membership terms, skewed in their favour, rather than being the poor doormat of the EU the leave side has portrayed them as.

There is still a place for manufacturing though while it will provide skilled jobs, as good automation does, there won't be much place for lower skilled jobs. The humans are there to handle things that, even though machines can do them, humans do better and more efficiently (see Toyota's factory designs, and their move back to using more people, for example). However the EU doesn't prevent the UK from bolstering their manufacturing or reforming their economy. No, what stands in the way is politics and wealthy vested interests which have nothing to do with whether or not the UK is a member of the EU. In fact many of the political proponents of leaving the EU are likely to be part of the problem.

It is also the case that many lower skilled jobs in the UK were being done by illegal immigrants prior to the free movement of people from Europe to the UK. So those that lost out were not UK citizens and it is unlikely an exit is going to suddenly provide more of those sort of jobs for UK citizens, either because they cost too much or simply don't want to do that sort of menial work.
Click to expand...
Why do you have to be a touch pejorative in your argument - 'the anti-EU crowd' being an example?

I am one of those who thinks it is time to leave the EU. I do not present the UK as being a doormat of the EU. So I think you should withdraw your assertion that 'being the poor doormat of the EU the leave side has portrayed them as.' It is factually incorrect. To my certain knowledge (some of my friends are leavers, some remainers) I am not alone.

The point you make about lower skilled jobs is interesting. if we take in higher skilled people, as we do, we are accused by the sending countries of taking resources they need - a valid point. According to the papers recently the UK is presently a place of high employment. If I go to a car wash for example it is cheap and manned by Bulgarians. Some years ago it would have been black people. Given that we have a high employment rate, that must mean that the black people have found other jobs. The fuss re immigration as I recall was over eastern europeans coming here to claim benefits rather than to work - or so the tabloids claimed.
 
Frequent visitor said:
In that case, with two way trade, the countries would have funds to buy from us?
Click to expand...
Balance of payments is a different argument - the question is do they demand what the UK is selling at the price they are selling it...?
 
In a nutshell, May is saying that they will boost their exports by spending 4 billion pounds in order to retain the same trade conditions that they have right now under the EU? How does retaining the same conditions boost anything? :ROFL:

Theresa May has announced that the UK has secured its first post-Brexit trade deal during her trip to boost British exports in Africa.
The prime minister confirmed that Britain would replicate a deal the EU currently has with six southern African nations.
She also added that the UK would invest an additional £4bn in African economies, with the hope of further match investment from the private sector to come.
Click to expand...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...africa-visit-cape-town-leave-eu-a8510761.html
 
Frequent visitor said:
Did she say that this investment was conditional on favourable trade terms?
Click to expand...

Not sure, the deal for the investments is apparently signed, not sure if the trade conditions are a condition precedent.

It's 4 billion of public money and 4 billion of private investment (not sure if the private part is conditional, it probably is).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X