The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)

The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Murph7355 said:
Sway said:
...

I've been considering what the forum would have been like had it been around at the time of the ERM or Maastricht. Bloody entertaining I'm assuming!
This is an interesting angle...

//ajd and MrrT... What were your views on these things at the time?

Do you think we had a lucky escape with the Euro?
Oh God, don't start them off on that st. You won't get an honest answer

Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Dr Jekyll said:
kelvink said:
UK Airlines must apparently move their head offices to the EU and have a majority of their capital shares owned by EU shareholders.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...

Quote:

"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.

Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.

The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."

scratchchin I didn't see this one coming.
That's just for flights within the EU, it won't affect airlines flying in or out of the EU. Any UK airline that did want to fly routes within the EU would just have to set up an EU subsidiary.
Exactly- it's a non story.

Mrr T

12,152 posts

264 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Murph7355 said:
Sway said:
...

I've been considering what the forum would have been like had it been around at the time of the ERM or Maastricht. Bloody entertaining I'm assuming!
This is an interesting angle...

//ajd and MrrT... What were your views on these things at the time?

Do you think we had a lucky escape with the Euro?
I was against the Maastricht treaty.

Against shadowing the ERM.

And against the euro.

DapperDanMan

2,622 posts

206 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Pan Pan Pan said:
///ajd said:
JawKnee said:
Tuna said:
///ajd said:
obviously didn't get the memo about turning into fishermen.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/782075/brexit-...

(ultra friendly media link, guardian not required)
So an American company that trades globally says that they have a contingency plan to increase headcount in Europe so that they can serve European clients with minimum of fuss after Brexit.

What's the news? After Brexit, I assume a number of UK companies will also be looking at more head count in Europe to increase trade. That's what trading globally looks like.

I'm not sure what you thought that item proved.
These jobs wouldn't be leaving if it wasn't for Brexit. If all companies start doing this as you say they will then we are going to see many many thousands of jobs leaving this country.

We've been stitched up.
It is surprising how some of the brexiteers don't seem to care.

Perhaps it is just a front or they daren't allow themselves to believe that their vote could have cost many many jobs. I suspect many didn't think the risks were real - indeed this is still a common mantra that it was all scaremongering. It wasn't though was it. Banks actively moving some operations can only be seen as bad news for the UK. Literally pissing away our GDP. That 1% the EU costs us already looks trivial.

And the idea that factories like the Mini plant will start making lots of different models just for the UK. Do they not teach economies of scale at school anymore? Still it is what Minford promised you.
Where were you, and Jawknee when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s steel industry from an annual output of 45 millions tons a year, down to 11 million tons, with the resultant closures of plants and job losses?

Where were you, when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s aluminium industry from 400 thousand tons per annum to 43 thousand tons?

Where were you when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s cement industry from a capacity of 20 million tons, down to 12 million tons a year?

Where were you when the EU transferred thousands of UK Ford jobs to other EU states, and used EU money from EU coffers of which the UK is the second largest net contributor to pay for that transfer? Thanks to the EU, our own money is being used to take jobs out of the UK and into the EU.
Where were you when the EU`s seizure of 80% of the fish stocks in UK territorial waters (without any compensation from the EU) decimated the UK fishing industry, which lead to the economic and social decline of many UK coastal communities? If anyone is a traitor to the UK it is someone who voted for the UK to remain in the corrupt, self serving, money grabbing, failing, dishonest EU.
Like to back this up with sources?
I guess the rise of China/India had nothing to do with steel decline then?
Wasn't cement production hit by the financial shakeup around 2008 with a reduction in construction?

If you care to look there are plenty of examples where EU money has been used to generate parts of the UK not normally considered worthy by Westminster. Of course that would require you to accept that it wasn't all bad which is a very difficult thing to do I know.

The simple truth is that Brexit will not fail because everything negative will be because of something else and everything positive will be because of Brexit.


Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
DapperDanMan said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
///ajd said:
JawKnee said:
Tuna said:
///ajd said:
obviously didn't get the memo about turning into fishermen.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/782075/brexit-...

(ultra friendly media link, guardian not required)
So an American company that trades globally says that they have a contingency plan to increase headcount in Europe so that they can serve European clients with minimum of fuss after Brexit.

What's the news? After Brexit, I assume a number of UK companies will also be looking at more head count in Europe to increase trade. That's what trading globally looks like.

I'm not sure what you thought that item proved.
These jobs wouldn't be leaving if it wasn't for Brexit. If all companies start doing this as you say they will then we are going to see many many thousands of jobs leaving this country.

We've been stitched up.
It is surprising how some of the brexiteers don't seem to care.

Perhaps it is just a front or they daren't allow themselves to believe that their vote could have cost many many jobs. I suspect many didn't think the risks were real - indeed this is still a common mantra that it was all scaremongering. It wasn't though was it. Banks actively moving some operations can only be seen as bad news for the UK. Literally pissing away our GDP. That 1% the EU costs us already looks trivial.

And the idea that factories like the Mini plant will start making lots of different models just for the UK. Do they not teach economies of scale at school anymore? Still it is what Minford promised you.
Where were you, and Jawknee when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s steel industry from an annual output of 45 millions tons a year, down to 11 million tons, with the resultant closures of plants and job losses?

Where were you, when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s aluminium industry from 400 thousand tons per annum to 43 thousand tons?

Where were you when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s cement industry from a capacity of 20 million tons, down to 12 million tons a year?

Where were you when the EU transferred thousands of UK Ford jobs to other EU states, and used EU money from EU coffers of which the UK is the second largest net contributor to pay for that transfer? Thanks to the EU, our own money is being used to take jobs out of the UK and into the EU.
Where were you when the EU`s seizure of 80% of the fish stocks in UK territorial waters (without any compensation from the EU) decimated the UK fishing industry, which lead to the economic and social decline of many UK coastal communities? If anyone is a traitor to the UK it is someone who voted for the UK to remain in the corrupt, self serving, money grabbing, failing, dishonest EU.
Like to back this up with sources?
I guess the rise of China/India had nothing to do with steel decline then?
Wasn't cement production hit by the financial shakeup around 2008 with a reduction in construction?

If you care to look there are plenty of examples where EU money has been used to generate parts of the UK not normally considered worthy by Westminster. Of course that would require you to accept that it wasn't all bad which is a very difficult thing to do I know.

The simple truth is that Brexit will not fail because everything negative will be because of something else and everything positive will be because of Brexit.
This EU money-you mean OUR money. You know-give them £10B, they flick us a 250M in grants. And why do you care. Non failure, i.e a success is good, right?

Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
here you go Dapper http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-steel-industry-fa...

Haven't read it but the opening paragraph 'china not to blame. The EU is' ok.

DapperDanMan

2,622 posts

206 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Burwood said:
This EU money-you mean OUR money. You know-give them £10B, they flick us a 250M in grants. And why do you care. Non failure, i.e a success is good, right?
The point is that Brexit will not fail because any failure will not be the fault of Brexit but any success will be because of it. The title of the OP is 'The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)' I am saying the consequences will never be placed at the foot of the Brexit decision.

Also we give the EU money to have access to the single market etc. Have you worked out how much that is worth to the UK? Do you see this as just we write them a cheque they write us a smaller cheque so we lose?

Burwood said:
here you go Dapper http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-steel-industry-fa...

Haven't read it but the opening paragraph 'china not to blame. The EU is' ok.
Maybe you should read it. It says nothing of the sort, you are confusing the EU with Europe.

The EU bans state aid across the EU and steel prices in Europe are to cheap for the UK to compete. So leaving the EU will help Steel production how?

Edited by DapperDanMan on Thursday 23 March 16:16

Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
i'm not vaguely interested in the EU aiding or defeating the steel industry. My mistake if i posted a bad article.

Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.

Fittster

20,120 posts

212 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Burwood said:
i'm not vaguely interested in the EU aiding or defeating the steel industry. My mistake if i posted a bad article.

Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.
How will you know if it would have been higher still if we had retained EU membership?

DapperDanMan

2,622 posts

206 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Burwood said:
i'm not vaguely interested in the EU aiding or defeating the steel industry. My mistake if i posted a bad article.

Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.
So this is the bit where if I don't put my money where my mouth is anything I have to say is therefore wrong? That one was tried earlier wasn't it, skin in the game and all that.

I think what it shows is just how desperate the 'debate' on here has become where I need to lay down a bet with someone I have never met on some number that we have to decide needs to be higher or lower in 3 years time.

It seems to be that Brexit doesn't just have to happen but everyone must agree that it is a good idea that way if the st hits the fan the responsibility is a collective one. Well you voted for it if it turns to st we know who to call. Remember that only 37% of those able to vote did so to leave, if you want the country to unite behind the decision then maybe try to be magnanimous in victory instead of a bunch of gloating football hooligans.

Mrr T

12,152 posts

264 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Burwood said:
Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.
If we leave the EU with no agreement (hard brexit) I would bet £10 that you are wrong.

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
Burwood said:
Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.
If we leave the EU with no agreement (hard brexit) I would bet £10 that you are wrong.
If you can define hard Brexit clearly and we agree on it, so we'll all know if we get one, I'd be in for a £100 bet as per Burwood given the loser pays to a charity of the winner's choosing. No agreement is a bit broad I think, as there will surely be agreement on some issues.

Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
Burwood said:
Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.
If we leave the EU with no agreement (hard brexit) I would bet £10 that you are wrong.
I want the bet to be bigger

Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Mrr T said:
Burwood said:
Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.
If we leave the EU with no agreement (hard brexit) I would bet £10 that you are wrong.
If you can define hard Brexit clearly and we agree on it, so we'll all know if we get one, I'd be in for a £100 bet as per Burwood given the loser pays to a charity of the winner's choosing. No agreement is a bit broad I think, as there will surely be agreement on some issues.
I give enough to charity. This is cash in my pocket smile

and the the poster who said 'how do we know it wouldn't be higher still if we remained'. well i guess there is a price for getting control of our country back. The EU is stagnant anyway so lets just say GDP growth better than the EU (not hard).

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Burwood said:
turbobloke said:
Mrr T said:
Burwood said:
Paying that money for access to the SM is a bad deal in my opinion. I'm happy to take any wager that our GDP will be higher in 3 years that it is today. Unemployment lower. Any metric you want.
If we leave the EU with no agreement (hard brexit) I would bet £10 that you are wrong.
If you can define hard Brexit clearly and we agree on it, so we'll all know if we get one, I'd be in for a £100 bet as per Burwood given the loser pays to a charity of the winner's choosing. No agreement is a bit broad I think, as there will surely be agreement on some issues.
I give enough to charity. This is cash in my pocket smile
OK fair enough smile

Pan Pan Pan

9,777 posts

110 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
DapperDanMan said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
///ajd said:
JawKnee said:
Tuna said:
///ajd said:
obviously didn't get the memo about turning into fishermen.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/782075/brexit-...

(ultra friendly media link, guardian not required)
So an American company that trades globally says that they have a contingency plan to increase headcount in Europe so that they can serve European clients with minimum of fuss after Brexit.

What's the news? After Brexit, I assume a number of UK companies will also be looking at more head count in Europe to increase trade. That's what trading globally looks like.

I'm not sure what you thought that item proved.
These jobs wouldn't be leaving if it wasn't for Brexit. If all companies start doing this as you say they will then we are going to see many many thousands of jobs leaving this country.

We've been stitched up.
It is surprising how some of the brexiteers don't seem to care.

Perhaps it is just a front or they daren't allow themselves to believe that their vote could have cost many many jobs. I suspect many didn't think the risks were real - indeed this is still a common mantra that it was all scaremongering. It wasn't though was it. Banks actively moving some operations can only be seen as bad news for the UK. Literally pissing away our GDP. That 1% the EU costs us already looks trivial.

And the idea that factories like the Mini plant will start making lots of different models just for the UK. Do they not teach economies of scale at school anymore? Still it is what Minford promised you.
Where were you, and Jawknee when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s steel industry from an annual output of 45 millions tons a year, down to 11 million tons, with the resultant closures of plants and job losses?

Where were you, when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s aluminium industry from 400 thousand tons per annum to 43 thousand tons?

Where were you when membership of the EU reduced the UK`s cement industry from a capacity of 20 million tons, down to 12 million tons a year?

Where were you when the EU transferred thousands of UK Ford jobs to other EU states, and used EU money from EU coffers of which the UK is the second largest net contributor to pay for that transfer? Thanks to the EU, our own money is being used to take jobs out of the UK and into the EU.
Where were you when the EU`s seizure of 80% of the fish stocks in UK territorial waters (without any compensation from the EU) decimated the UK fishing industry, which lead to the economic and social decline of many UK coastal communities? If anyone is a traitor to the UK it is someone who voted for the UK to remain in the corrupt, self serving, money grabbing, failing, dishonest EU.
Like to back this up with sources?
I guess the rise of China/India had nothing to do with steel decline then?
Wasn't cement production hit by the financial shakeup around 2008 with a reduction in construction?

If you care to look there are plenty of examples where EU money has been used to generate parts of the UK not normally considered worthy by Westminster. Of course that would require you to accept that it wasn't all bad which is a very difficult thing to do I know.

The simple truth is that Brexit will not fail because everything negative will be because of something else and everything positive will be because of Brexit.
When will you realize that the UK has NEVER received a single net penny of funding from the EU in all the time since the UK joined the EEC? Getting a tiny part of your OWN money given back, does not constitute positive funding from the EU. The UK has always paid in far more than it has ever received back from the EU, and it has been doing this for almost all of the 40+ years since it joined the EEC..
If I represented the EU, and you represented the UK, and we met in the street, both of us knowing we wanted to trade with eachother, but I charged you twenty quid, before I would even let you talk to me about trade, let alone doing any, You would be down twenty quid before you had done any trading with me at all.
If I then gave you 3 quid of your OWN money back, you would be walking a way with 3 quid of your OWN money in your pocket, whilst I would walk away with 17 of YOUR lovely UK pounds in my pocket, which you have just given me for nothing.
If I then compound the deal, by selling 24 billion quids worth more of my goods and services to you, than you are able to sell to me (UK/EU Trade deficit figure for 2016 alone) which of us do you think has come away with the best deal? and this has been the case for almost the entire 40 plus years since the UK joined the EEC? Essentially the UK is paying the EU 10.8 billion pound a year of the UK taxpayers cash, to run a multi billion pound overall trade deficit with EU. Does that really look like a good deal for the UK to you?
When we add in the fact that the EEC seized 80% of the fish stocks from UK territorial waters when the UK joined the EEC, but paid the UK no compensation for this, decimating the UK fishing industry, and causing the economic and social decline of many UK coastal communities. and the fact that cash from EU coffers (of which the UK is the second largest net contributor) has been used to take manufacturing jobs out of the UK and into other EU member states, the Ford plant in Southampton being just one example the picture becomes even worse. They are using the money we gave them, to take UK manufacturing jobs out of the UK. I worked for a UK cement based industry, and one of our factories was shut down whilst we were importing the same product from an EEC cement based manufacturer in Belgium. So I know first hand how good the EU has been for UK manufacturing jobs.

Mrr T

12,152 posts

264 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
If you can define hard Brexit clearly and we agree on it, so we'll all know if we get one, I'd be in for a £100 bet as per Burwood given the loser pays to a charity of the winner's choosing. No agreement is a bit broad I think, as there will surely be agreement on some issues.
Hard brexit is NO agreement. It’s seems the favoured option of our brexit buffoons.

Sway

26,070 posts

193 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
Hard brexit is NO agreement. It’s seems the favoured option of our brexit buffoons.
What, not even WTO MFN recognition?

I thought the whole premise of yours and ajd's positions was that loss of single market would be negative compared to last May?

Yet now it's only no deal at all, and less good than of we stayed in?

OK, let's break out down:

£50 says that by the conclusion of the negotiations, there is a general FTA in place, including access to the European market for the financial services sector.

Another £50 says that UK financial services sector revenues are the same or higher than FY 15/16 two years after we formally leave the EU.

A final £50 says that UK GDP grows faster than the rEU's in the three year period after we formally leave the EU.

FiF

43,960 posts

250 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
As pointed out months ago, agreement on anything, even something relatively trivial, is technically not an exit with no agreement.

Anyway considering the bhing about people offering bets, one seems to recall that prior to the referendum it was the Remain camp taunting people to put their money up. How times change, comedy gold.

Edited by FiF on Thursday 23 March 19:21

wc98

10,334 posts

139 months

Thursday 23rd March 2017
quotequote all
DapperDanMan said:
So this is the bit where if I don't put my money where my mouth is anything I have to say is therefore wrong? That one was tried earlier wasn't it, skin in the game and all that.

I think what it shows is just how desperate the 'debate' on here has become where I need to lay down a bet with someone I have never met on some number that we have to decide needs to be higher or lower in 3 years time.

It seems to be that Brexit doesn't just have to happen but everyone must agree that it is a good idea that way if the st hits the fan the responsibility is a collective one. Well you voted for it if it turns to st we know who to call. Remember that only 37% of those able to vote did so to leave, if you want the country to unite behind the decision then maybe try to be magnanimous in victory instead of a bunch of gloating football hooligans.
nothing desperate at all about a bet. it is showing physical confidence in the words you type . a certainty of opinion that someone that didn't really have a strong opinion either way would not have.

ajd is adamant he is correct in terms of a negative outcome of brexit, he should be all over any bet offered by a brexiter regarding positive outcomes .unless of course he is being overly dramatic and doesn't really have the conviction in the words he types that he would like us to believe he has.

i see no gloating, just people trying to understand the negative position of some and countering certain claims. my personal gloating was done in the brief instant the bookmaker handed over my winnings the day after the result. only a small sum, but evidence of the conviction i had in my belief the country would vote to leave.
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED