BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

1…11041105110711091110…2102

Comments

  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Why don't one of you explain how you arrive at a realistic net-positive outcome then? The ability to submit to the US demands more easily doesn't count, before you trot that one out.

    UK is roughly what, 2, 2.5% of global GDP?

    The US is what, 25%?

    EU is what, 22%?

    I don't need to - I think we should stay in the EU - but that doesn't mean that I think all the leavers reasons are wrong - I just don't agree with the overall stance of leaving. Like all democracy - it's compromise....

    This reply makes no sense. Compromise on what?
    Staying in the EU vs Leaving the EU - it's all compromise - somethings will be better in, somethings better out - the compromise is rather obvious isn't it?

    That's not what I'm discussing. This should be fairly clear.

    I've made a statement that I can't see any realistic situation whereby the UK's negotiating position with any major power is net-positive following Brexit, and you've said that this is only one 'opinion' - well offer me a convincing alternative opinion. As far as I'm concerned, it's fairly factual unless someone can convince or prove otherwise. It's logical and sensible. I don't need to know I'm going to end up really hurt if I step out in front of a car travelling 40mph, regardless of what anyone else says, nor do I need to do it before I can categorically say that that is the case.

    I'm saying, to continue the analogy, that I will be hurt by being hit by the car, and you're saying "ah, but you don't know exactly *how* you'll be hurt, so you don't know".

    hmm - well - I disagree with your analogy - putting yourself in front of an object moving at 40mph has a commonly known outcome - even my 3yo knows it - so shall I ask my 3yo if we can do better in or out?
    and you are only stating your opinion - which is no more valid than anyone else's here - and seemingly at about the level of a 3yo ...
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,935
    So if my argument is at the level of a three year old, where is it falling down?
    _
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,360
    Man: Oh look, this isn't an argument.

    Mr. Vibrating: Yes it is.

    Man: No it isn't. It's just contradiction.

    Mr. Vibrating: No it isn't.

    Man: It is!

    Mr. Vibrating: It is not.

    Man: Look, you just contradicted me.

    Mr. Vibrating: I did not.

    Man: Oh you did!!

    Mr. Vibrating: No, no, no.

    Man: You did just then.

    Mr. Vibrating: Nonsense!

    Man: Oh, this is futile!

    Mr. Vibrating: No it isn't.

    Man: I came here for a good argument.

    Mr. Vibrating: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So if my argument is at the level of a three year old, where is it falling down?

    you seem to be arguing with yourself - that's where it's falling down.

    Can you not comprehend that SOME PEOPLE believe we will be able to negotiate better deals and be better off outside the EU ?
    If you can't comprehend that basic concept then there's no point discussing it further.

    You're welcome to continue arguing - but I don't do arguing - and I tell that to my 3yo.
  • drhaggis
    drhaggis Posts: 1,150
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So if my argument is at the level of a three year old, where is it falling down?

    you seem to be arguing with yourself - that's where it's falling down.

    Can you not comprehend that SOME PEOPLE believe we will be able to negotiate better deals and be better off outside the EU ?
    If you can't comprehend that basic concept then there's no point discussing it further.

    You're welcome to continue arguing - but I don't do arguing - and I tell that to my 3yo.

    Some people believe there are alien stations monitoring earth from the lagrangian stability points...
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    DrHaggis wrote:
    Some people believe there are alien stations monitoring earth from the lagrangian stability points...
    Indeed ...

    Other people are looking for the presence of aliens in the universe ...
    https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/the-search- ... ife-signs/

    Are NASA scientists completely nuts?
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 18,957
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So if my argument is at the level of a three year old, where is it falling down?

    you seem to be arguing with yourself - that's where it's falling down.

    Can you not comprehend that SOME PEOPLE believe we will be able to negotiate better deals and be better off outside the EU ?
    If you can't comprehend that basic concept then there's no point discussing it further.

    You're welcome to continue arguing - but I don't do arguing - and I tell that to my 3yo.


    He's asking why people believe that.
    What are they basing it on?
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,824
    edited June 2019
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So if my argument is at the level of a three year old, where is it falling down?

    you seem to be arguing with yourself - that's where it's falling down.

    Can you not comprehend that SOME PEOPLE believe we will be able to negotiate better deals and be better off outside the EU ?
    If you can't comprehend that basic concept then there's no point discussing it further.

    You're welcome to continue arguing - but I don't do arguing - and I tell that to my 3yo.


    He's asking why people believe that.
    What are they basing it on?

    Indeed. It's all very postmodern to say "well that's just what some people believe" but do those beliefs have any validity?

    We can't predict exactly what will happen, but you'd think someone could outline, say, a handful of specific examples of where a quantifiable benefit *could* be achieved.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • bonzo_banana
    bonzo_banana Posts: 256
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,824
    Bonzo Banana wrote:
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.

    Government borrowing goes back way, way before the current parties.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • darkhairedlord
    darkhairedlord Posts: 7,180
    rjsterry wrote:
    Bonzo Banana wrote:
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.

    Government borrowing goes back way, way before the current parties.
    Punctuation too.
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 18,957
    DpzvKfLXoAA97Di.jpg:large


    Also

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trad ... SKCN1MC305


    Size matters.
    (As the UK is finding out)
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,920
    rjsterry wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So if my argument is at the level of a three year old, where is it falling down?

    you seem to be arguing with yourself - that's where it's falling down.

    Can you not comprehend that SOME PEOPLE believe we will be able to negotiate better deals and be better off outside the EU ?
    If you can't comprehend that basic concept then there's no point discussing it further.

    You're welcome to continue arguing - but I don't do arguing - and I tell that to my 3yo.


    He's asking why people believe that.
    What are they basing it on?

    Indeed. It's all very postmodern to say "well that's just what some people believe" but do those beliefs have any validity?

    We can't predict exactly what will happen, but you'd think someone could outline, say, a handful of specific examples of where a quantifiable benefit *could* be achieved.
    Simples really. As soon as we leave the rest of the World will be gagging to do deals. Begging really, just because we are GREAT BRITAIN.

    As I understand it. :?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,767
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Why don't one of you explain how you arrive at a realistic net-positive outcome then? The ability to submit to the US demands more easily doesn't count, before you trot that one out.

    UK is roughly what, 2, 2.5% of global GDP?

    The US is what, 25%?

    EU is what, 22%?

    I don't need to - I think we should stay in the EU - but that doesn't mean that I think all the leavers reasons are wrong - I just don't agree with the overall stance of leaving. Like all democracy - it's compromise....
    Me neither. Although Rick knows fine well that asking for a reasonably accurate forecast of the outcome of complex trade negotiations to which we will not be party is in reality not possible.

    That wasn't the question.

    Rick said: "I can't see any practical theory which suggests the UK can get a more beneficial deal with the US without the leverage of being part of the EU." You seem to be arguing "well, I guess we'll just never know until we see what happens".
    That's not how I read it. I guess it isnt clear.

    But in any event missing my point, so nothing new there.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • drhaggis
    drhaggis Posts: 1,150
    Slowbike wrote:
    DrHaggis wrote:
    Some people believe there are alien stations monitoring earth from the lagrangian stability points...
    Indeed ...

    Other people are looking for the presence of aliens in the universe ...
    https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/the-search- ... ife-signs/

    Are NASA scientists completely nuts?

    You will find there is quite a difference between testing Fermi's paradox and stating we're being closely monitored. Also, you might find it enlightening to read about extremophiles, and astrobiology.

    "Some people believe..." is not a good way to build a strong argument.

    EDIT: Yes, the NASA people are nuts for using their talent & skills not for obiously direct personal benefit.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,935
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So if my argument is at the level of a three year old, where is it falling down?

    you seem to be arguing with yourself - that's where it's falling down.

    Can you not comprehend that SOME PEOPLE believe we will be able to negotiate better deals and be better off outside the EU ?
    If you can't comprehend that basic concept then there's no point discussing it further.

    You're welcome to continue arguing - but I don't do arguing - and I tell that to my 3yo.


    So, to be clear, your contribution to the debate around the UK’s bargaining position to sign things like trade deals with big nations, is that “some people believe you are wrong” and not saying why or how.

    At what point did you think that was a worth while contribution?
    _
  • antonyfromoz
    antonyfromoz Posts: 482
    Bonzo Banana wrote:
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.

    TBH I am not sure why you think that the UK trading under WTO rules is suddenly going to produce a local UK manufacturing base that has the ability to replace the imports that will still be flooding in from overseas but you might have some insight into the future that I lack. The idea of us suddenly discovering funding, investors and expertise to kickstart new homegrown manufacturing capacity like this (where are they all now?) seems to me as likely as Brexiteers like Jacob Rees Mogg's promises of higher wages and jobs for all after Brexit.

    I can see from the research I have done that the transition is certainly going to be far more complicated than many seem to think, and that is before we even begin to try to negotiate some trading deals from our newly self-inflicted position of weakness. Have a read of this blog and get some idea of the complications we face if we move to WTO rules: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/09/ ... ndustries/
  • robert88
    robert88 Posts: 2,696
    I don't see why making our own stuff is a good idea. We don't have the skills nor the economies of scale, our management is renowned for being rubbish and the expense of re-jigging the infrastructure would not be recouped.
  • Lagrange
    Lagrange Posts: 652
    Where is 'our management' renowned for being rubbish?
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,920
    Lagrange wrote:
    Where is 'our management' renowned for being rubbish?
    Name Westminster’s achievements in the past 3 years.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Jez mon
    Jez mon Posts: 3,809
    Robert88 wrote:
    I don't see why making our own stuff is a good idea. We don't have the skills nor the economies of scale, our management is renowned for being rubbish and the expense of re-jigging the infrastructure would not be recouped.


    Potentially more high value engineering (and manufacturing) would result in a more even distribution of economic productivity, and would result in a more balenced economy.

    Trying to win back high volume mass manufacturing does seem a bit of a mugs game.
    You live and learn. At any rate, you live
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,935
    Bonzo Banana wrote:
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.

    There's a lot going on in this - too much to go through, but I'd like you to explain how you understand free trading between nations to have "winners and losers"?

    Because the whole point of proper free trade is everyone wins. I have a feeling you're conflating unfettered capitalism in a fairly raw form with free trade - that ain't the case.

    https://www.economicshelp.org/trade2/be ... ree_trade/
    _
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    Robert88 wrote:
    I don't see why making our own stuff is a good idea. We don't have the skills nor the economies of scale, our management is renowned for being rubbish and the expense of re-jigging the infrastructure would not be recouped.

    We are an economy of 60 million people. Take the humble washing machine and assume that we replace our washing machine every ten years and there are around 27.2 million households in the UK. That means that a UK manufacturer could sell to a market of 2.7 million machines per annum. Alternatively we could buy a washing machine from elsewhere in the world with money generated from some other form of enterprise within the UK. Unfortunately if this alternative enterprise is us all holding the door open for each other then we might be on the road to ruin. I think the above proposal is a pretty depressing continuation of the decline in the UK economy.

    As consumers we hold all the power. For example if Ford wish to shut down their engine manufacturing plant then why would I continue to look at buying a ford as my next car when Nissan also do a pretty equivalent product in the UK. You don't have to get many in the market place to think like this and before long brands are pretty unsustainable when they have no loyalty to a reasonable sized market.
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Bonzo Banana wrote:
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.

    There's a lot going on in this - too much to go through, but I'd like you to explain how you understand free trading between nations to have "winners and losers"?

    Because the whole point of proper free trade is everyone wins. I have a feeling you're conflating unfettered capitalism in a fairly raw form with free trade - that ain't the case.

    https://www.economicshelp.org/trade2/be ... ree_trade/

    If everyone wins then why do we have a high debt as a percentage of GDP and we are not flush with cash. Surely with all this free trade we have been doing for decades would have delivered an economy that can pay for education, health and social care which seems currently to be a struggle for the UK government. If it is working so well then maybe and explanation as to why the above basic needs require us to borrow to fund this would be helpful. Maybe we plan never ending growth to get ourselves out of the problem we currently face.
  • cruff
    cruff Posts: 1,518
    john80 wrote:
    Robert88 wrote:
    I don't see why making our own stuff is a good idea. We don't have the skills nor the economies of scale, our management is renowned for being rubbish and the expense of re-jigging the infrastructure would not be recouped.

    We are an economy of 60 million people. Take the humble washing machine (non-British, unless you count EBAC (accounting for less than a quarter of one percent of washing machine purchases since launch) and assume that we replace our washing machine every ten years and there are around 27.2 million households in the UK. That means that a UK manufacturer could sell to a market of 2.7 million machines per annum. Alternatively we could buy a washing machine from elsewhere in the world with money generated from some other form of enterprise within the UK. Unfortunately if this alternative enterprise is us all holding the door open for each other then we might be on the road to ruin. I think the above proposal is a pretty depressing continuation of the decline in the UK economy.

    As consumers we hold all the power. For example if Ford (American) wish to shut down their engine manufacturing plant then why would I continue to look at buying a ford as my next car when Nissan (Japanese) also do a pretty equivalent product in the UK. You don't have to get many in the market place to think like this and before long brands are pretty unsustainable when they have no loyalty to a reasonable sized market.

    So - the economic strategy is to start a car and washing machine production line for UK consumers from scratch? In isolation from the rest of the world? From a position of no expertise? With no cheap labour to drive costs down?

    AI think you'll find its a lot more complicated than that...
    Fat chopper. Some racing. Some testing. Some crashing.
    Specialising in Git Daaahns and Cafs. Norvern Munkey/Transplanted Laaandoner.
  • cruff
    cruff Posts: 1,518
    john80 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Bonzo Banana wrote:
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.

    There's a lot going on in this - too much to go through, but I'd like you to explain how you understand free trading between nations to have "winners and losers"?

    Because the whole point of proper free trade is everyone wins. I have a feeling you're conflating unfettered capitalism in a fairly raw form with free trade - that ain't the case.

    https://www.economicshelp.org/trade2/be ... ree_trade/

    If everyone wins then why do we have a high debt as a percentage of GDP and we are not flush with cash. Surely with all this free trade we have been doing for decades would have delivered an economy that can pay for education, health and social care which seems currently to be a struggle for the UK government. If it is working so well then maybe and explanation as to why the above basic needs require us to borrow to fund this would be helpful. Maybe we plan never ending growth to get ourselves out of the problem we currently face.
    Because the 'system' (free trade backed my captialism) isn't necessarily the problem - the lack of regulation and absence of any sensible form of checks and balances is.
    Fat chopper. Some racing. Some testing. Some crashing.
    Specialising in Git Daaahns and Cafs. Norvern Munkey/Transplanted Laaandoner.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,935
    john80 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Bonzo Banana wrote:
    My own viewpoint conflicts with just about every political party of the UK who seem to think a free trade agreement is beneficial but my viewpoint is with Europe we have a huge trade deficit and as we buy in a surplus of goods the sterling we export is re-invested in the UK buying up assets and industry which means even further erosion of the UK economy so I actually favour WTO low tariffs in order to give our economy some breathing room in order to create products more cheaply here than imports and considering our trading deficit this seems a logical thing to do. We are definitely the losers when it comes to the free trade agreement with the EU at least and we really have to stop buying so many goods from China. Also being able to set our own sales tax on a product by product basis means we can reduce the damage of certain imports which are very damaging and as we restore a reasonable level of production in that area we can reduce that sales tax. I guess my point is I just want the UK to run a realistic economy not funded on borrowing and can't see how a free trade agreement can help us currently. A free trade agreement is great for Europe as they are running a surplus but its terrible for us.

    I realise to many free trade is almost a religion but there are always winners and losers of such an agreement. If we had true free trade where there were no minimum wages and no borrowing then as people keep buying imports they reduce the size of the economy become much poorer and force lower wages on themselves which helps correct the trade deficit because they can't afford to buy imports and the value of the pounds falls making exports more competitive but by constantly injecting borrowed money into the economy and paying people too much the self-correcting mechanism is disabled. I like the minimum wage and would prefer better political control of imports etc through tariffs and sales tax.

    Also if we are going to do anything about the environment surely that means stop moving so many goods around the world but try to localise production even if that means smaller less efficient factories, using the same goods for longer and repairing them rather than replacing them. Growing more of our own food and much more recycling of items. All things that would help repair our economy and also repair the world itself.

    I think if both Labour and Conservative governments had refused to borrow money years ago and not propped up the economy the economy would have shrunk more dramatically and we would have left Europe many years ago before such damage was done financially. I don't even have children but find it morally wrong that future generations have to suffer because of the current population's greed and stupidity. I wouldn't borrow money in your name and expect that to be legal yet governments borrow from future generations in order to hide their incompetence.

    There's a lot going on in this - too much to go through, but I'd like you to explain how you understand free trading between nations to have "winners and losers"?

    Because the whole point of proper free trade is everyone wins. I have a feeling you're conflating unfettered capitalism in a fairly raw form with free trade - that ain't the case.

    https://www.economicshelp.org/trade2/be ... ree_trade/

    If everyone wins then why do we have a high debt as a percentage of GDP and we are not flush with cash. Surely with all this free trade we have been doing for decades would have delivered an economy that can pay for education, health and social care which seems currently to be a struggle for the UK government. If it is working so well then maybe and explanation as to why the above basic needs require us to borrow to fund this would be helpful. Maybe we plan never ending growth to get ourselves out of the problem we currently face.

    So the maths of 'free trade' and the logic behind it are fairly irrefutable.

    What you're complaining about are the consequences of political choices governments have made that really have nothing to do with trade at all.
    _
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    john80 wrote:
    We are an economy of 60 million people. Take the humble washing machine and assume that we replace our washing machine every ten years and there are around 27.2 million households in the UK. That means that a UK manufacturer could sell to a market of 2.7 million machines per annum. Alternatively we could buy a washing machine from elsewhere in the world with money generated from some other form of enterprise within the UK. Unfortunately if this alternative enterprise is us all holding the door open for each other then we might be on the road to ruin. I think the above proposal is a pretty depressing continuation of the decline in the UK economy.
    Nice exemplar of the classic "manufacturing is real jobs, anything else doesn't count" fallacy.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    DrHaggis wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    DrHaggis wrote:
    Some people believe there are alien stations monitoring earth from the lagrangian stability points...
    Indeed ...

    Other people are looking for the presence of aliens in the universe ...
    https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/the-search- ... ife-signs/

    Are NASA scientists completely nuts?

    You will find there is quite a difference between testing Fermi's paradox and stating we're being closely monitored. Also, you might find it enlightening to read about extremophiles, and astrobiology.

    "Some people believe..." is not a good way to build a strong argument.

    EDIT: Yes, the NASA people are nuts for using their talent & skills not for obiously direct personal benefit.

    Er - you said "Some people believe"

    and Nasa is nuts? I disagree - whilst there may be no obvious direct personal benefit - without the sort of work that goes in, we'd not progress and still be sat in our caves eating raw food ...
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,824
    bompington wrote:
    john80 wrote:
    We are an economy of 60 million people. Take the humble washing machine and assume that we replace our washing machine every ten years and there are around 27.2 million households in the UK. That means that a UK manufacturer could sell to a market of 2.7 million machines per annum. Alternatively we could buy a washing machine from elsewhere in the world with money generated from some other form of enterprise within the UK. Unfortunately if this alternative enterprise is us all holding the door open for each other then we might be on the road to ruin. I think the above proposal is a pretty depressing continuation of the decline in the UK economy.
    Nice exemplar of the classic "manufacturing is real jobs, anything else doesn't count" fallacy.

    Quite apart from the fact that if people want a washing machine for a couple of hundred pounds, no worker is ever going to get rich screwing them together.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition

Categories