BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.0 -
I think what @john80 is driving at is that GDP growth without any of it reaching large chunks of the population is not much different from no GDP growth from their point of view.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.0 -
So long term trend growth rate was 2-2.5%, if that soared to 3% for 5-10 years then I would argue that virtually everybody would be better off.rjsterry said:I think what @john80 is driving at is that GDP growth without any of it reaching large chunks of the population is not much different from no GDP growth from their point of view.
Public sector worker - no pressure on wage increases or job cuts.
Private sector employees more likely to get payrise and less likely to get laid off.
Rely on, or use public sector - no pressure for budget cuts and more likely to see improved funding.
Taxpayer - more likely to see a tax cut
Less unemployment/ poverty - crime rate likely to fall.
Unless I am missing something then yes without rising GDP you have nothing0 -
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.0 -
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.0 -
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.0 -
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.0 -
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.0 -
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Hahaha you are a deluded idiot. Really.Stevo_666 said:
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live0 -
Try answering the questions. Unless of course you're resorting to insults because you can'tvegas76 said:
Hahaha you are a deluded idiot. Really.Stevo_666 said:
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Yup. Deluded idiot.Stevo_666 said:
Try answering the questions. Unless of course you're resorting to insults because you can'tvegas76 said:
Hahaha you are a deluded idiot. Really.Stevo_666 said:
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live-1 -
Original. A lot of bitter losers have called me that.vegas76 said:
Yup. Deluded idiot.Stevo_666 said:
Try answering the questions. Unless of course you're resorting to insults because you can'tvegas76 said:
Hahaha you are a deluded idiot. Really.Stevo_666 said:
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Thanks for proving my pig headed point.Stevo_666 said:
Original. A lot of bitter losers have called me that.vegas76 said:
Yup. Deluded idiot.Stevo_666 said:
Try answering the questions. Unless of course you're resorting to insults because you can'tvegas76 said:
Hahaha you are a deluded idiot. Really.Stevo_666 said:
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live0 -
And minevegas76 said:
Thanks for proving my pig headed point.Stevo_666 said:
Original. A lot of bitter losers have called me that.vegas76 said:
Yup. Deluded idiot.Stevo_666 said:
Try answering the questions. Unless of course you're resorting to insults because you can'tvegas76 said:
Hahaha you are a deluded idiot. Really.Stevo_666 said:
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live
And you still haven't answered any of my questions in either thread. Are you unwilling, or just incapable? If your 'politics is competence', you would have done it by now"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Bye bye gammon.-2
-
Fuck off-1
-
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.0 -
It seems the EU don't understand the game that is be played with FS and equivalence. When they realise that their approach is putting EU FS companies at risk of collapse I expect them to hastily agree equivalence.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
It should be fun when they and this board finds out the reality
0 -
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.0 -
For a guy that has historically banged on about the four freedoms being great for the UK where would you put the majority of immigrants in the example above. Maybe you have switched sides and seen the benefits of a points based immigration system. Unless you are planning on locking your gran up in the house and providing no food or water till she dies there will be a GDP benefit. Yet again you have not looked up the definition of GDP. I will give you a clue. GDP does not care where the money for goods and services comes from. It just totals what has been spent.surrey_commuter said:
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.0 -
The simple act of moving to the UK will itself have increased the GDP by the journey alone. I suspect you are trying to talk about GDP per capita, but that wasn't the original point.surrey_commuter said:
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.0 -
Got any graphs for us today that don't show the complete period in question?Stevo_666 said:
Try answering the questions. Unless of course you're resorting to insults because you can'tvegas76 said:
Hahaha you are a deluded idiot. Really.Stevo_666 said:
Its not a zero sum game. How will the EU benefit if we do badly, given that we are one of their major export markets?vegas76 said:
Yes. And vinegar.Stevo_666 said:
Love the mentality on show here. You'll fit in well here.vegas76 said:
Hahahhahaa the last 4 years, and particularly the last 6 months have shown what a bunch of bungling idiots this tory party is.TheBigBean said:
The idea usually implied on this thread is that the UK isn't sufficiently competent to play games.rjsterry said:
The implied idea that we are not playing games is pretty funny. Of course they're playing games: who would expect either party to behave differently?Stevo_666 said:
Same goes for the EU. I suspect they already know the answer (as do we) but are playing games.rick_chasey said:What I don't get it is, the UK has been asking for equivalence for a long time. 3-4 years in fact.
This information should in large part have been readily available. The Treasury is easily the best staffed function in whitehall. Time isn't really an excuse.
Need to get 100 people to work the weekend? Just do it, FFS. Need to draft more people in? Get on with it.
Equivalence is really really properly important to FS. I mean really important.
I hope the EU absolutely screws the UK for everything it's got and forces the best of its industries to relocate to mainland Europe.
Would you like ketchup with your chip?
And I'll watch and eat while the EU benefits from the UK's self destructive spree.
And do you think this would benefit you? Sometimes it's good to remember where you live================
2020 Voodoo Marasa
2017 Cube Attain GTC Pro Disc 2016
2016 Voodoo Wazoo0 -
For those who don't believe the UK holds the upper hand in the FS equivalence negotiation they should read this twitter thread. It will be funny when the EU and the remoaners on here realise their position is built on sand
0 -
john80 said:
For a guy that has historically banged on about the four freedoms being great for the UK where would you put the majority of immigrants in the example above. Maybe you have switched sides and seen the benefits of a points based immigration system. Unless you are planning on locking your gran up in the house and providing no food or water till she dies there will be a GDP benefit. Yet again you have not looked up the definition of GDP. I will give you a clue. GDP does not care where the money for goods and services comes from. It just totals what has been spent.surrey_commuter said:
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.
Beyond ironic isn’t it that you are so passionately arguing for the benefits of EU immigration.john80 said:
For a guy that has historically banged on about the four freedoms being great for the UK where would you put the majority of immigrants in the example above. Maybe you have switched sides and seen the benefits of a points based immigration system. Unless you are planning on locking your gran up in the house and providing no food or water till she dies there will be a GDP benefit. Yet again you have not looked up the definition of GDP. I will give you a clue. GDP does not care where the money for goods and services comes from. It just totals what has been spent.surrey_commuter said:
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.
Research suggests that EU immigrants are a net economic benefit as they turn up educated and leave before they get sick and old.0 -
TheBigBean said:
The simple act of moving to the UK will itself have increased the GDP by the journey alone. I suspect you are trying to talk about GDP per capita, but that wasn't the original point.surrey_commuter said:
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.
She swam0 -
I dont believe i am but looking at your responses i am questioning your reading comprehensionsurrey_commuter said:john80 said:
For a guy that has historically banged on about the four freedoms being great for the UK where would you put the majority of immigrants in the example above. Maybe you have switched sides and seen the benefits of a points based immigration system. Unless you are planning on locking your gran up in the house and providing no food or water till she dies there will be a GDP benefit. Yet again you have not looked up the definition of GDP. I will give you a clue. GDP does not care where the money for goods and services comes from. It just totals what has been spent.surrey_commuter said:
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.
Beyond ironic isn’t it that you are so passionately arguing for the benefits of EU immigration.john80 said:
For a guy that has historically banged on about the four freedoms being great for the UK where would you put the majority of immigrants in the example above. Maybe you have switched sides and seen the benefits of a points based immigration system. Unless you are planning on locking your gran up in the house and providing no food or water till she dies there will be a GDP benefit. Yet again you have not looked up the definition of GDP. I will give you a clue. GDP does not care where the money for goods and services comes from. It just totals what has been spent.surrey_commuter said:
Let’s simplify it. In these two examples do you think there is an identical impact on GDP?john80 said:
When you look up the definition of GDP please advise the group how either of the examples above would not boost GDP. Kind of proving my original point are you not.surrey_commuter said:
Go on give it a try.john80 said:
I am not even going to answer this as it is so fecking obvious.surrey_commuter said:
Why do you think GDP figures would be great if we doubled the population?john80 said:
Only where there is context in the form of the gdp growth. It is the lack of care as to what type of growth is going on that is the problem. Gdp figures would be great if we doubled the population but the vast majority of the populations quality of life and access to services would suffer.surrey_commuter said:Could we agree
Could we agree that most people don’t realise how important a steady increase in GDP is to them?john80 said:
The basic point is that a good democracy is often at odds with business for the greater good of the population. If this was not the case we would still have victoria employment practices. We would still have victorian environmental laws. The constant quest for a steady gdp increase is actually not that important to most people. Allowing your economy to rely on certain sectors is a fools errand.rick_chasey said:
This is not easy to read, and I'm not really sure what you're driving at.john80 said:
The problem with this logic is that if you extrapolate it up then it shows the weakness in running a country with just money leading the decisions. What percentage would be required to sell the inhabitants of that country down the river. What if China said in 2025 when they might be the leading economy in the world that we cannot trade with them unless we sign up to a one way extradition process where having a flag was enough to get deported and put in the Ghulag. Maybe France want all the fishing rights so that some Southerners can keep selling financial products to this market. Maybe Nissan want the UK to have the four freedoms so that they don't have to pay import taxes or export taxes on goods. At what point does it not work within a democracy this money first obsession you have.rick_chasey said:Let's have a look at the fish vs FS scale.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06193/
2019 parliament report puts FS at 6.9% of UK GDP and 3.1% of all UK jobs (who knew, FS was high earning, eh?) That's £132bn to the economy per year and 1.1m jobs
(As an aside: 43% of financial services exports went to the EU and 34% of financial services imports came from the EU)
Anyway, fish. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2017-0256/CDP-2017-0256.pdf
two years older at 2017, so expect some marginal differences.
There were 4,000 businesses in the fishing industry in 2016. These businesses employed 24,000 people and contributed £1.4 billion (0.12% of the all UK economic output.) to the UK economy in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA – a measure similar to GDP, abeit flattering, as it's just 0.12% of the all UK economic output)
(For Scottish Indie's, just over half of these fishermen are in Scotland...)
So we're not that far off FS being two orders of magnitude more valuable than fishing.
Let me put my point in a different way. A lot more jobs are affected by screwing up FS than are affected by screwing up Fishing.
That may not be the *only* factor in deciding what to prioritise, but it is surely a bloody big one?
It is probably peoples failure to understand this simple concept that has led us to where we are.
I find it helps to take two extreme examples.
So on the one hand add 68 million Elon Musks and on the other add 68 million penniless economically inactive people.
Elon Musk moves to the UK and sets up a factory employing 1,000 people.
My penniless granny moves here to live with me here after losing her life savings buying crypto currencies and has no income or entitlement to any benefits.
Research suggests that EU immigrants are a net economic benefit as they turn up educated and leave before they get sick and old.0
