Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result (Vol 2)

[turbobloke]

amusingduck said:

jakesmith said:

Here is consumer confidence over the last 10 years, if you think a 15 point drop in 12 months won't cause consumers to think twice before making financial commitments then you are in denial. This will certainly be influencing retail, consumer spending and property transactions

Sway said:

Retail figures were out today - up 3% year on year...

Also

Land Registry House Price Index for mid 2017 said:

Property prices have risen by 4.7% compared to the previous year.

[NJH]

If Corbyn had of won the election the pound would have tanked and we would have seen capital flight out of the country. How does that make one feel about making your life and political decisions on the whims of market traders? Might as well never vote for anything to change, as the only things the markets want are more globalisation, less regulation and more free money in the system to bubble us towards another crash.

[Pan Pan Pan]

Troubleatmill said:

jakesmith said:

What about contributions from the EU? We may be a net contributor but all those tourist attractions in Cornwall and Wales aren't going to get sweet FA when we leave the EU, they will be hit bloody hard. Maybe they can all move to the fishing industry?

See all that money we send to the EU? Once we are out - that money is in our pocket and we could spend a little supporting tourism etc

We could spend it how we wish and not be told by the EU how to spend it.

Imagine that!

It is amazing how many people still believe that the UK receives cash FROM the EU. It does not, all it receives and has ever received, is a tiny fraction of its own taxpayers cash, which is returned to the UK from EU coffers, and even then, the UK is fined by the EU if it does not spend that tiny proportion of its OWN cash the way the EU tells it to.
As an example. If I am walking down the street, as Mr UK, and I meet Mr EU coming the other way, we both know we want to do some trade with eachother. However Mr EU says to me, I have to give him money (say 20 quid) before he will even let me just talk to him about doing some trade. So I hand over the twenty quid, and Mr EU gives me 3 quid out of the 20 quid I have just given him, of my OWN money back.
Mr EU then proceeds to sell me more of his goods and services, than I am able to sell to him, (to the tune of 71 billion pounds worth for 2016 alone) meaning in relation to the EU, his business will be err busy, and mine less so.
So we have a situation where I have paid Mr EU 20 quid, to allow his business to do more trade into the UK, than mine can into the EU. He therefore walks away with 17 pounds of my money in his pocket, which he has got for nothing, while I walk away with 3 quid of my OWN money in my pocket, and with an unbalanced (in his favour) level of trade. Shockingly some seem to think this is some kind of great deal for the UK FFS?

[turbobloke]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Troubleatmill said:

jakesmith said:

What about contributions from the EU? We may be a net contributor but all those tourist attractions in Cornwall and Wales aren't going to get sweet FA when we leave the EU, they will be hit bloody hard. Maybe they can all move to the fishing industry?

See all that money we send to the EU? Once we are out - that money is in our pocket and we could spend a little supporting tourism etc

We could spend it how we wish and not be told by the EU how to spend it.

Imagine that!

It is amazing how many people still believe that the UK receives cash FROM the EU.

Totally amazing, but it's about faith and dogma with many such people so accurate data won't make any impression.

[Troubleatmill]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Troubleatmill said:

jakesmith said:

What about contributions from the EU? We may be a net contributor but all those tourist attractions in Cornwall and Wales aren't going to get sweet FA when we leave the EU, they will be hit bloody hard. Maybe they can all move to the fishing industry?

See all that money we send to the EU? Once we are out - that money is in our pocket and we could spend a little supporting tourism etc

We could spend it how we wish and not be told by the EU how to spend it.

Imagine that!

It is amazing how many people still believe that the UK receives cash FROM the EU. It does not, all it receives and has ever received, is a tiny fraction of its own taxpayers cash, which is returned to the UK from EU coffers, and even then, the UK is fined by the EU if it does not spend that tiny proportion of its OWN cash the way the EU tells it to.
As an example. If I am walking down the street, as Mr UK, and I meet Mr EU coming the other way, we both know we want to do some trade with eachother. However Mr EU says to me, I have to give him money (say 20 quid) before he will even let me just talk to him about doing some trade. So I hand over the twenty quid, and Mr EU gives me 3 quid out of the 20 quid I have just given him, of my OWN money back.
Mr EU then proceeds to sell me more of his goods and services, than I am able to sell to him, (to the tune of 71 billion pounds worth for 2016 alone) meaning in relation to the EU, his business will be err busy, and mine less so.
So we have a situation where I have paid Mr EU 20 quid, to allow his business to do more trade into the UK, than mine can into the EU. He therefore walks away with 17 pounds of my money in his pocket, which he has got for nothing, while I walk away with 3 quid of my OWN money in my pocket, and with an unbalanced (in his favour) level of trade. Shockingly some seem to think this is some kind of great deal for the UK FFS?

You missed a bot..
The £3 Mr EU gives you back on projects to spend in the name of the EU.. Mr EU tells you what you have to spend it on.

So... if the boiler goes pop in your house... You might think spending the £3 towards fixing that is a good thing....

But no... Despite it being the middle of winter and you have no heating or hot water.... if Mr EU insists the money must be spent adorning your front garden with garden gnomes - that is what you have to spend it on.

Utterly bonkers situation.

[FiF]

jakesmith said:

Nothingtoseehere said:

But calling us "simple minded idiots" yesterday was level of insight on your part?

Not everyone's contribution to the debate on this is as compelling or considered as Sway's above.

With all due respect to Sway, what was written was covered time and again before the referendum, on here and elsewhere. People didn't want to understand or listen though.

Meanwhile the level of debate continues at times to grovel at infantile levels. Listened to a Worcester Remainer proudly claiming to be one of a group giving Tim Martin CEO of Wetherspoons a hard time. The thrust of their argument is that Tim was getting some flak on Facebook, so he told someone to "put a sock in it." So this group of Remainers are sending him envelopes containing dirty stinky socks. Childish clowns.

[jakesmith]

Troubleatmill said:

You missed a bot..
The £3 Mr EU gives you back on projects to spend in the name of the EU.. Mr EU tells you what you have to spend it on.

So... if the boiler goes pop in your house... You might think spending the £3 towards fixing that is a good thing....

But no... Despite it being the middle of winter and you have no heating or hot water.... if Mr EU insists the money must be spent adorning your front garden with garden gnomes - that is what you have to spend it on.

Utterly bonkers situation.

What's utterly bonkers is your analogy.
UK government spending budget is about £800b
2016 EU contribution from the UK was £13b
2016 EU contribution to UK was £4.5b
Net contribution is £8.5b, or 1% of UK tresury spend

To put that into context, 2014 mean UK household income was approx £30,000. Net EU cost is equivalent to £300 a year to the average household in the UK. Or in other terms, 3 and a half days pay. Hardly leaves them unable to maintain the house does it.

[jakesmith]

Sway said:

Retail figures were out today - up 3% year on year...

Retail figures were up 1.6% value not 3%

A major grocer, which represents 12% of UK retail spend, has today put 1200 head office retail staff on consultation. Hardly healthy.

Bank of America has also picked Dublin as its EU hub which is, if you know the industry, a very unusual move away from London

Edited by jakesmith on Friday 21st July 21:40

[Dick Dastardly]

jakesmith said:

A major grocer, which represents 12% of UK retail spend, has today put 1200 head office retail staff on consultation. Hardly healthy.

What has that got to do with brexit?

[Troubleatmill]

Dick Dastardly said:

jakesmith said:

A major grocer, which represents 12% of UK retail spend, has today put 1200 head office retail staff on consultation. Hardly healthy.

What has that got to do with brexit?

There is only so much food we can buy.....Those Aldi and Lidl chappies are expanding at a healthy rate of knots.... guess what that means for others.

[jakesmith]

Dick Dastardly said:

What has that got to do with brexit?

Read the thread to find out

[Sway]

jakesmith said:

Sway said:

Retail figures were out today - up 3% year on year...

Retail figures were up 1.6% value not 3%

A major grocer, which represents 12% of UK retail spend, has today put 1200 head office retail staff on consultation. Hardly healthy.

Bank of America has also picked Dublin as its EU hub which is, if you know the industry, a very unusual move away from London

Edited by jakesmith on Friday 21st July 21:40

You're right, I was wrong - apologies.

It was actually 5.7% across all retail sectors:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/re...

[Troubleatmill]

jakesmith said:

Troubleatmill said:

You missed a bot..
The £3 Mr EU gives you back on projects to spend in the name of the EU.. Mr EU tells you what you have to spend it on.

So... if the boiler goes pop in your house... You might think spending the £3 towards fixing that is a good thing....

But no... Despite it being the middle of winter and you have no heating or hot water.... if Mr EU insists the money must be spent adorning your front garden with garden gnomes - that is what you have to spend it on.

Utterly bonkers situation.

What's utterly bonkers is your analogy.
UK government spending budget is about £800b
2016 EU contribution from the UK was £13b
2016 EU contribution to UK was £4.5b
Net contribution is £8.5b, or 1% of UK tresury spend

To put that into context, 2014 mean UK household income was approx £30,000. Net EU cost is equivalent to £300 a year to the average household in the UK. Or in other terms, 3 and a half days pay. Hardly leaves them unable to maintain the house does it.

Analogy is very apt... you are opting to skew it.

Let's keep it simple.
Why would I give you £1000. Of that £1000- you say "Hell fella - here's £200 back" - but I'm forced to spend it on specific stuff you want me to buy.
I'd rather keep my £1000 - and spend it on what I want.

[Dick Dastardly]

jakesmith said:

Read the thread to find out

Have done but I guess you'll have to spell it out to me.

From my angle I see a CEO that was taken on by Tesco 3 years before the referendum to combat the cheaper (Audi, Lidl) competition. He was given the job as he is a well known axe-man and started cost cutting straight away. 4 years on he is still doing so. Brexit or no Brexit, Tesco needed to go on a diet and start getting competitive.

There's a joke in there somewhere about horrible foreign supermarkets coming over here and taking the job of our home grown retailers.

[don'tbesilly]

jakesmith said:

Dick Dastardly said:

What has that got to do with brexit?

Read the thread to find out

The thread is about Brexit, the possible job losses at Tesco's has nothing to do with the UK leaving the EU.

[jakesmith]

don'tbesilly said:

The thread is about Brexit, the possible job losses at Tesco's has nothing to do with the UK leaving the EU.

It's relevant if you read back to a bit before it was brought up on the thread as you will understand the context.

[Tuna]

don'tbesilly said:

The thread is about Brexit, the possible job losses at Tesco's has nothing to do with the UK leaving the EU.

But it's bad news, so it must be because of Brexit!!

[Murph7355]

jakesmith said:

...
Bank of America has also picked Dublin as its EU hub which is, if you know the industry, a very unusual move away from London
...

Why would BoA choose London as it's EU hub when London won't be in the EU?

The important thing will be what happens to its business activities across Europe (note not the EU). Of which they have said nothing. They haven't even said whether the Dublin move will create any jobs in Dublin, where they already have 700 people...6,500 or so in the UK...

[Nothingtoseehere]

Troubleatmill said:

Analogy is very apt... you are opting to skew it.

Let's keep it simple.
Why would I give you £1000. Of that £1000- you say "Hell fella - here's £200 back" - but I'm forced to spend it on specific stuff you want me to buy.
I'd rather keep my £1000 - and spend it on what I want.

Not only that,but everything you buy has to have a nice little plaque saying ' funded by the EU'.

[///ajd]

Murph7355 said:

Why would BoA choose London as it's EU hub when London won't be in the EU?

The important thing will be what happens to its business activities across Europe (note not the EU). Of which they have said nothing. They haven't even said whether the Dublin move will create any jobs in Dublin, where they already have 700 people...6,500 or so in the UK...

Nothing to see here.
No one said jobs wouldn't move out of London.
And they might not have done anyway. Who knows.
And even if they have, its only a few, hardly matters.
Etc.