European Union - Ramifications

[walm]

NRS said:

It is hard to sort out the actual sums, but it would be along the lines of:

• We (maybe) don't have to give as much money to the EU to be a member of the club
• We would benefit if it did come to tariffs, since we import more from the EU than they do from us. So the cost of tariffs is in our benefit.
• We can get our fishing grounds back, instead of giving the majority of the fishing quota to other countries. They don't give us their farmland, so why should we give our fishing grounds away? This has destroyed a lot of the coastal communities.
• We don't have to bail out poor economies when generally the UK is much stronger than a lot of the other EU countries.
• We can act more quality and do what is best for the UK, rather than leaving stuff up to a big body which isn't oriented around what is best for the UK, and as a bigger body is slow to act. Look at Iceland recovery for example.
• Less migrants = higher salary for people in the UK due to less competiton for jobs (potential for poorer people in particular to benefit)
• Less money coming in from other countries to push UK house prices up (both investment and migrants). Lower house prices will mean more British people can own homes and have less debt/ it's a more affordable debt to salary ratio.

Obviously there are some disadvantages, but who knows how they balance out in practice (a lot will also depend on the agreements negotiated when leaving).

Some of which are great, but seem to me to be swamped when we look at the cost of a recession and currency weakness.

Also:
- Fishing is tiny. Agriculture in TOTAL is 2% of GDP.
- Farmers do have a net gain from the EU from CAP. (That may be offset by some of the EU savings going to them, in fairness.)
- Migrants are just not a big deal. 0.3% of the population each year. In certain discrete industries there might be some minimal wage pressure (lots of employers suggest that UK born people just don't even apply for the jobs). Employment is at a cyclical peak (huge peak actually) - that has a far bigger impact on wages.
- I would prefer lower house prices but it is somewhat bad for the economy and I think that one should sort itself out once rates start going up again WHICH THEY WON'T NOW!!!
- Choosing what's best for the UK - again great in theory but the EU just didn't seem to have much influence on regs - although that is purely anecdotal. And of course offset by the ease of trading. To quote my clothing manufacturing friend "it was as easy to sell to Frankfurt as it was to Birmingham." Well that's going to go!

In any case, I happily accept that the sovereignty and democracy issues might well be a price worth paying to many, that's absolutely fair enough.

[DonkeyApple]

KimJongHealthy said:

DonkeyApple said:

Hmm.

- Nope. http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=...
- Was never going to happen and anyone with a functioning IQ level knew that.
- Nope. Nowhere near ruin. Flux is the correct word.
- An announcement by a man who lied all the way up to the 23rd. Lied previously about PFI to get elected. Part of a Govt that lied about almost ever facet of their election manifesto. Why is he suddenly telling the truth for the first time in his career?
- Racist tw4ts are racist tw4ts and yes they do think they've been given a green light. How long will that last?

What we do have is a whole load of hysteria from people who simply still aren't thinking straight or are panicking because they've taken on too much debt to be shock resistant?

We've only just rolled the dice and while they are still rolling there is no real upside to running about lobbing abuse, distributing non truths and enhancing division.

What we know for sure is that there will be a pull back on GDP in the short term regardless of whether we actually end up leaving or not. The focus is on the long term and how to ensure growth after the uncertainty.

- Yup. http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=... Comparing it to Euro which also plunged is pointless.
- People with IQ level of a pickled cucumber believed and voted to leave.
- When was the last time such "flux" occured?
- So you're saying that there will be no taxes increase or budget cuts as a result of the referendum in forthcoming years?


Britain just got out of one recession right into another. Some people have £400k in overseas funds. Some have mortgage and businesses facing 20+ years of ongoing financial turmoils.


To begin with my work, our EU grants for biotech research will disappear, dozens of PHD students and researchers from all over Europe are facing losing their funding and the government has already announced there's no money to cover it from what we "saved by not paying the EU". That's one of the leading scientific research organisations in Europe being f***k hard by racist morons who already regret their votes. Congratulations.


So what did Britain actually achieve, apart from paying pretty much the same amount for EEA membership but having exactly 0 influence on EU decisions in a very near future?

What are the real benefits of leaving EU, apart from HURR DURR TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY HURR DURR MAKE BRITAIN GREAT AGAIN HURR DURR RECOLONIZE INDIA HURR DURR!

Edited by KimJongHealthy on Tuesday 28th June 11:53

- why is comparing it to our most important rival currency pointless? It's rather relevant.
- The stupids were on both sides, majority of remainers had no real idea what they were voting for, hence the safe option. You cannot logically argue that it was one sided.
- 2008, 2003, 2001, 1987, 1979, 1973
- nope. Not saying that at all.


'Some people have £400k in overseas funds. Some have mortgage and businesses facing 20+ years of ongoing financial turmoils.' And some don't.

PS, we've not left the EU. No funding has changed. That's the whole point. Being hysterical today has no upside.

Let's see where the racist monkeys are down the road. They can't form any part of the UK going forward whether we leave or not and they won't. London finances the UK and we will keep importing everyone that we need to get the job down, whether we import them from the regions or across the borders.

[HappyMidget]

walm said:

Jockman said:

Walm, you are a numbers guy. On a list of priorities, sovereignty and democracy are not high up. It's all about the numbers.

Many disagree with that.

Fair enough. That does seem to be the honest answer. And I can't argue with that.
I guess I just saw some trying to give a rational answer based on numbers too, which never made sense.

I would die for democracy. The only thing money means to me is car parts.

[twinturboz]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Well, either that or,

• Recession
• Inflation, and
• Inability to leave UK and work freely in EU.

Time will tell.

I don't think the last point will play out, well not in its entirety anyway. The UK will try and negotiate rules or caps but I don't see how they'll be able to have access to the the single market whilst at the same time not having some sort of free movement of labour.

[sealtt]

'Sovereignty' (using the meaning given in this debate) and globalisation are not 100% compatible. Globalisation breaks down national borders, and sovereignty requires strong national borders. I think that's where the age divide comes from, older people are used to independent nations, younger people are used to highly interconnected ones.

The key to having the maximum amount of 'sovereignty' (and we can take that to mean simply control over the rules that everyone plays by) is to be as big a player as possible globally, especially over the next 50 years. Being a leading member of the EU would surely be beneficial to this.

Alternatively you could just shut everything down North Korea style and then be sure of control over the rules that way. I suppose Brexit is voting for something in between, I'm not sure that is possible.

[sealtt]

KimJongHealthy said:

Basically Britain decided not to wear a hat outside just to show mum who's the boss here and ended up with cold.

To some extent - though I think it's more a case of just not liking the hat and then getting outside and realising that the alternative to a hat is a tesco bag wrapped around your head !

[Dr Jekyll]

sealtt said:

The key to having the maximum amount of 'sovereignty' (and we can take that to mean simply control over the rules that everyone plays by) is to be as big a player as possible globally, especially over the next 50 years. Being a leading member of the EU would surely be beneficial to this.

I can't find that option on the menu. All I can find is 'member that provides cash in order to be alternately jeered at or ignored by everyone else'.

[Simpo Two]

KimJongHealthy said:

To begin with my work, our EU grants for biotech research will disappear

Bingo! But EU money is not free, we paid it in to start with.

As for your casual assertion that anyone who disagrees with you has the 'IQ of a pickled cucumber', which I find ignorant and insulting, I'll see you and raise you one.

[DonkeyApple]

KimJongHealthy said:

We're not second Norway. Norway is energetically self sustainable and sits on piles of cash. Britain is in debt and has to import fuel. And even Norway doesn't like membership fees without having any impact on the policies.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brex...



London finances will melt once Britain leaves EU. Many banks already announced shifting both low and high level jobs to mainland Europe to access the EU markets. Frankfurt will be new London in 10 years time, remember my words.

Manufacturing will do the same. Asian car companies will have no interest in running factories in Britain as it won't give them duty-free access to the EU market. Bye bye Honda, Toyota, Nissan... British car industry is long gone, it's all owned by European or Asian companies anyway.

British economy relies on financial and services sectors, botch of which will either lose access to the EU markets and simply move to Europe, or in order to keep the money flowing Britain will pay EEA membership fees making the entire brexit pointless.



So what exactly have you won in this battle?

Frankfurt has been trying to be the new London for decades. The EU has never liked the fact that their financial services sector is dominated by an outlier structured on a separate currency that allowed too much independence. Stay or go, the EU will be fighting to move flow away from London. How soon we forget the Tobin tax and its implications.

Manufacturing? What do you think have happened to BMW's margins on their British built products versus their German built? And how many global deep water ports do we have compared to other EU members? And how do our road times for port to factory stack up? And why are you so insistent that the EU will halt trading with the UK? There isn't a significant businesses in the whole of the EU that wants that, not a significant private individual. So why are you claiming that trade will halt with the EU?

Why exactly were you so keen to remain? Do you think excessive wealth divides are morally acceptable? Given how we only survived 2008 due to having our own currency do you genuinely think it prudent to continue down the road to the Euro? Given that what has kept the peace in Europe for 70 years has been the presence of the military might of the US do you believe in an EU army? And are you confident that such an army would never be used on its own people? If so, please push forward the evidence.

And most importantly of all, do you believe that global resources are not finite despite what all experts say? And if they are finite, what is your view on being part of a group hamstrung by political/regional compromise fighting for access to those resources in contrast to being free to focus on the exact resources needed and able to secure them without compromise?

In short, why would you vote for the status quo when it is clear to see that the whole direction it is being moved in by a group of extremists is not at all good for long term welfare?

The difference here is that your views, as illustrated above, are based on your direct personal benefit. Mine are to the almost certain detriment of my personal wealth.

[Simpo Two]

DonkeyApple said:

The difference here is that your views, as illustrated above, are based on your direct personal benefit. Mine are to the almost certain detriment of my personal wealth.

Me too. The UK needs a new leader - shall you and I go for it?

[DonkeyApple]

KimJongHealthy said:

Simpo Two said:

KimJongHealthy said:

To begin with my work, our EU grants for biotech research will disappear

Bingo! But EU money is not free, we paid it in to start with.

As for your casual assertion that anyone who disagrees with you has the 'IQ of a pickled cucumber', which I find ignorant and insulting, I'll see you and raise you one.

We're facing severe budget cuts, pound value melting and no money to cover the difference in many years to come. That's a fact.

No it isn't. It is a possibility. This is what I mean about the hysteria while the dice are still rolling. It serves no purpose.

[feef]

On the topic of the EU army, it would have to have been passed by referendum in the UK first and then parliament, before enabling the UK representatives in Brussels to give it the green light. Anything less would have been a veto and prevented it happening

France has said they aren't keen on the idea of an EU army either, so I suspect the concern about that particular event is a red herring.

However, if/when Britain leaves the EU, and say France decide to accept an EU army and vote it through, then the UK leaving the EU makes an EU army more likely, not less.

Would Britain be happy with an EU army on it's doorstep? To use and augment a quote from an earlier comment "can you be sure it won't be used on their own or their naighbours"?

[DonkeyApple]

feef said:

On the topic of the EU army, it would have to have been passed by referendum in the UK first and then parliament, before enabling the UK representatives in Brussels to give it the green light. Anything less would have been a veto and prevented it happening

France has said they aren't keen on the idea of an EU army either, so I suspect the concern about that particular event is a red herring.

However, if/when Britain leaves the EU, and say France decide to accept an EU army and vote it through, then the UK leaving the EU makes an EU army more likely, not less.

Would Britain be happy with an EU army on it's doorstep? To use and augment a quote from an earlier comment "can you be sure it won't be used on their own or their naighbours"?

In that scenario, without the British armed forces, it would effectively be a standing German army. Without access to the British armed services it dies a death as the majority of members see Britain as the stabilising force against German dominance.

For me, the belief in the EU as it is currently structured died with the bail-in of the Greek banks and the crushing of their peoples' voice. Combine that with the other unsavoury distortions of the concept of a free trading market and it is inconceivable to me to give my vote to what has morphed into such an insidious structure. If our actions lead to a pulling back of current EU policy or a restructure back to more ethical roots then I will be extremely happy, if it does not then I simply prefer to be on the outside on the impending result.

[DonkeyApple]

KimJongHealthy said:

DonkeyApple said:

KimJongHealthy said:

Simpo Two said:

KimJongHealthy said:

To begin with my work, our EU grants for biotech research will disappear

Bingo! But EU money is not free, we paid it in to start with.

As for your casual assertion that anyone who disagrees with you has the 'IQ of a pickled cucumber', which I find ignorant and insulting, I'll see you and raise you one.

We're facing severe budget cuts, pound value melting and no money to cover the difference in many years to come. That's a fact.

No it isn't. It is a possibility. This is what I mean about the hysteria while the dice are still rolling. It serves no purpose.

Why start topics and discuss anything at all then? Talking about new Porsche model next year serves no purpose since we don't know what's it going to be like. I think we can close Pistonheads and go home now.

There is a somewhat huge difference between discussing a subject while it is in play and running around making wild claims as statements of fact. That is all.

[NRS]

walm said:

Some of which are great, but seem to me to be swamped when we look at the cost of a recession and currency weakness.

Also:
- Fishing is tiny. Agriculture in TOTAL is 2% of GDP.
- Farmers do have a net gain from the EU from CAP. (That may be offset by some of the EU savings going to them, in fairness.)
- Migrants are just not a big deal. 0.3% of the population each year. In certain discrete industries there might be some minimal wage pressure (lots of employers suggest that UK born people just don't even apply for the jobs). Employment is at a cyclical peak (huge peak actually) - that has a far bigger impact on wages.
- I would prefer lower house prices but it is somewhat bad for the economy and I think that one should sort itself out once rates start going up again WHICH THEY WON'T NOW!!!
- Choosing what's best for the UK - again great in theory but the EU just didn't seem to have much influence on regs - although that is purely anecdotal. And of course offset by the ease of trading. To quote my clothing manufacturing friend "it was as easy to sell to Frankfurt as it was to Birmingham." Well that's going to go!

In any case, I happily accept that the sovereignty and democracy issues might well be a price worth paying to many, that's absolutely fair enough.

Currency weakness will help manufacturing in the UK since it will be cheap to export from here.

- Why do you think fishing is such a small part of the economy? It's because we give away so much of our fish to other EU countries. It's one of the main reasons Norway is not in the EU.
- Farmers may benefit, but it concentrates wealth in the rich farmers since it is related to land size, and so as with much of the rest of the EU way of working it concentrates wealth for the rich(er) people.
- Migrants are not a big deal for you and me as we have more than enough money to cover costs. But for those struggling on much lower salaries when they don't get a pay rise for years due to extra competition for jobs then it really has a big impact as they were struggling already. We actually benefit from the cheaper plumbers etc. Perhaps on it's own it is not a big issue, but it is compounded by globalisation reducing the number of jobs.
- Rates will go up to counter inflation at some point most likely.
- The ease of trading is benefiting business owners (generally the more so the bigger the business). Having small countries that aren't trading with the EU follow EU rules was not great for them. It doesn't benefit the workers who wages have stagnated (although purchases often become cheaper).

feef said:

On the topic of the EU army, it would have to have been passed by referendum in the UK first and then parliament, before enabling the UK representatives in Brussels to give it the green light. Anything less would have been a veto and prevented it happening

France has said they aren't keen on the idea of an EU army either, so I suspect the concern about that particular event is a red herring.

However, if/when Britain leaves the EU, and say France decide to accept an EU army and vote it through, then the UK leaving the EU makes an EU army more likely, not less.

Would Britain be happy with an EU army on it's doorstep? To use and augment a quote from an earlier comment "can you be sure it won't be used on their own or their naighbours"?

You mean like all the other EU topics that have been referendums in the UK? Or how the EU is shown to respect referendum results, such as the French vote on the EU consitiution for example?

[walm]

NRS said:

Currency weakness will help manufacturing in the UK since it will be cheap to export from here.

Manufacturing is 10% of GDP.
I doubt any manufacturer is dedicated to exports.
Their domestic business will be in jeopardy.
And don't forget that they will be paying more for COGS so the only bit cheaper is labour and not a huge amount of manufacturing is all that labour intensive these days, as you say it is all automated.

So higher COGS, higher distribution costs, domestic sales under pressure and a chance tariffs make us uncompetitive in two years.

But other than that... great!

You are right, I am not disagreeing, it's just not a guaranteed net positive even for mostly export focused businesses, IMHO.

[feef]

NRS said:

You mean like all the other EU topics that have been referendums in the UK? Or how the EU is shown to respect referendum results, such as the French vote on the EU consitiution for example?

The topic of defence in this regard is specifically written into UK legislation that it would require a referendum in addition to parliamentary approval. That's not a suggestion nor a promise, it's law.

[hornet]

NRS said:

Currency weakness will help manufacturing in the UK since it will be cheap to export from here.

That rather depends on what their primary inputs are and where they come from. Any export benefit is eroded if you (or indeed your supply chain) rely on USD denominated commodities as inputs. Not a one way street by any means.

[Ozzie Osmond]

sealtt said:

The key to having the maximum amount of 'sovereignty' (and we can take that to mean simply control over the rules that everyone plays by) is to be as big a player as possible globally, especially over the next 50 years. Being a leading member of the EU would surely be beneficial to this.

That is my view. However, it appears a majority of voters disagreed, believing that Britannia will rule the waves once more as soon as they get their industrial and agricultural communities away from the grip of the evil masterminds in London/Brussels and stop the immigration which has fuelled the British economy for the last few decades.

[anonymous-user]

Ozzie Osmond said:

DonkeyApple said:

Do you think excessive wealth divides are morally acceptable?

Welcome to the socialist republic of Britanistan.

How do you deduce your statement from that question?