BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Where do I fit into your spreadsheet?

What spreadsheet?

On political leanings influencing Brexit opinions

surrey_commuter

Joelsim wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ya know the CETA EU/Canada trade deal? The one Britain has looked to copy?

Fell through. Walloon regional gov't veto'd the whole thing.

This is big news - how many different votes will need to be held to agree a trade deal with the UK? This really will take years.

Anybody else think our time and energy would be better spent nailing down the WTO issues?

Our time and energy would be better spent opposing Brexit. End of.

To clarify when I said "our" I meant the UK Govt.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Where do I fit into your spreadsheet?

What spreadsheet?

On political leanings influencing Brexit opinions

There isnt one. Just an observation based on the behaviours and political dislikes of some on here. You didn't spring to mind TBH.

But do you not see any connection?

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

There is a range of forecast outcomes for each scenario - including hard Brexit. You still seem to take the worst case outcome available.

Funnily enough, I think I'm a realist.

IMO this is pretty much spot on from what I've read over the past year.

https://www.cer.org.uk/insights/why-27- ... ine-brexit

Not sure how assuming the worst case outcome in any scenario is realistic. Its just pessimistic.

Plus, you're starting to sound like a stuck record.

thats rich coming from you.

what are the less pessimistic scenarios? for the employees we are losing, directly attributed to Brexit, the outlook is poor.

This is giving me some good evidence to back up my little theory, thanks

Let's try to give you a hypothetical example. An economic forecast is published saying that the adverse economic impact of hard BREXIT at some point in the future is somewhere in the range of £1 billion - £2 billion per year. A forum member, let's call him Soeljim, spots the forecast and says confidently that the economic impact will be £2 billion per year. I.e. the worst case scenario in the forecast. This situation is repeated each time an economic forecast with a range of impacts is published.

As for the jobs that your employer is shedding, is there a link to anything in the press where this has been attributed to BREXIT? After all, any job losses that are attributed to Brexit will be newsworthy.

Also, take it you are still in a job?

TheBigBean

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

Stevo_666

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

It's one of the possible outcomes. The point is that we really don't know how things will pan out. Not in these negotiations and not in the longer term.

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

It's one of the possible outcomes. The point is that we really don't know how things will pan out. Not in these negotiations and not in the longer term.

We don't know for sure but the complexity of the situation and the EU decision making process suggests that there is no way we will conclude a deal in two years. This is backed up by a lack of will for such a deal on both sides.

Therefore why not spend the 2 years nailing down the WTO situation and trying to agree grandfathering.

The fact that this puts me in the same camp as the headbangers suggests it could end up getting broad support. I will caveat it with the thought that A50 will need to be triggered to remove the last hope from Brexiteers.

surrey_commuter

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

Getting net migration below 100,000 would be a lot easier with more emigration.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

It's one of the possible outcomes. The point is that we really don't know how things will pan out. Not in these negotiations and not in the longer term.

We don't know for sure but the complexity of the situation and the EU decision making process suggests that there is no way we will conclude a deal in two years. This is backed up by a lack of will for such a deal on both sides.

Therefore why not spend the 2 years nailing down the WTO situation and trying to agree grandfathering.

The fact that this puts me in the same camp as the headbangers suggests it could end up getting broad support. I will caveat it with the thought that A50 will need to be triggered to remove the last hope from Brexiteers.

Not a daft idea by any means, although probably best run in parallel with the EU negotiations to hedge our bets.

I posted quite a few pages back the point that the UK was a member of the WTO in its own right (as well as the other EU countries and the EU itself). Assuming this isn't wrong there is no need for the UK to rejoin the WTO. We'll see, but it would be a good start.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

Getting net migration below 100,000 would be a lot easier with more emigration.

Obviously, given that net migration is equal to immigration less emigration. Not sure what your point is?

joelsim

At the risk of wanting to sound like a stuck record rather than someone with his head stuck in the ground...

Check LSE, PWC, Treasury, IMF forecasts. They are all way above your £2bn per annum for a hard Brexit, which is the only likely outcome.

Clearly you know better than the experts.

Stevo_666

Joelsim wrote:

At the risk of wanting to sound like a stuck record rather than someone with his head stuck in the ground...

Check LSE, PWC, Treasury, IMF forecasts. They are all way above your £2bn per annum for a hard Brexit, which is the only likely outcome.

Clearly you know better than the experts.

:roll:

Read my post again. As stated in the post, it was a hypothetical example to help mamba understand the point that I was making. The numbers were purely illustrative. Clearly you have a problem understanding the point.

joelsim

Stevo 666 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

At the risk of wanting to sound like a stuck record rather than someone with his head stuck in the ground...

Check LSE, PWC, Treasury, IMF forecasts. They are all way above your £2bn per annum for a hard Brexit, which is the only likely outcome.

Clearly you know better than the experts.

:roll:

Read my post again. As stated in the post, it was a hypothetical example to help mamba understand the point that I was making. The numbers were purely illustrative. Clearly you have a problem understanding the point.

Going back to your spreadsheet, you're the epitome of a Tory. All will be fine, don't worry.

It won't.

Stevo_666

Clearly the point has hit home given your rather stroppy reaction

joelsim

Stevo 666 wrote:

Clearly the point has hit home given your rather stroppy reaction

Au contraire. I just despair at you blindly supporting the Tories no matter what they do.

Hammond and May at loggerheads now.

490/650 MPs voted Remain. And the Govt has been told by their legal people that they are likely to lose the People's court case.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

At the risk of wanting to sound like a stuck record rather than someone with his head stuck in the ground...

Check LSE, PWC, Treasury, IMF forecasts. They are all way above your £2bn per annum for a hard Brexit, which is the only likely outcome.

Clearly you know better than the experts.

:roll:

Read my post again. As stated in the post, it was a hypothetical example to help mamba understand the point that I was making. The numbers were purely illustrative. Clearly you have a problem understanding the point.

Do you think that Brexit will be good for the economy then? what are the less pessimistic scenarios? Even Boris a few days before "coming out" wrote an article on why the EU is good and leaving is bad....... eh?

yes i m still in a job, contracts have been moved back into europe by our former EU partners, reasons given uncertainty over Brexit, the fuji think at mo isnt going to have an immediate effect but our directors have decided to scale back for both these reasons and this means job loses an.d ths statement given to us is the Brexit.

You cant go on saying these people are ALL liars, just because it suits your narrative, i told you about the lack of leadership over this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/british-res ... 1471339813

No doubt these top scientists are lying too when they dont take UK positions?

Stevo_666

Joelsim wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Clearly the point has hit home given your rather stroppy reaction

Au contraire. I just despair at you blindly supporting the Tories no matter what they do.

Hammond and May at loggerheads now.

490/650 MPs voted Remain. And the Govt has been told by their legal people that they are likely to lose the People's court case.

As someone who voted to remain, I would be quietly relieved if that happened, although the ramifications of parliament going against the referendum result is hard to predict. I also have my doubts as to how likely it is to succeed - we may get a better steer this week.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

At the risk of wanting to sound like a stuck record rather than someone with his head stuck in the ground...

Check LSE, PWC, Treasury, IMF forecasts. They are all way above your £2bn per annum for a hard Brexit, which is the only likely outcome.

Clearly you know better than the experts.

:roll:

Read my post again. As stated in the post, it was a hypothetical example to help mamba understand the point that I was making. The numbers were purely illustrative. Clearly you have a problem understanding the point.

Do you think that Brexit will be good for the economy then? what are the less pessimistic scenarios? Even Boris a few days before "coming out" wrote an article on why the EU is good and leaving is bad....... eh?

yes i m still in a job, contracts have been moved back into europe by our former EU partners, reasons given uncertainty over Brexit, the fuji think at mo isnt going to have an immediate effect but our directors have decided to scale back for both these reasons and this means job loses an.d ths statement given to us is the Brexit.

You cant go on saying these people are ALL liars, just because it suits your narrative, i told you about the lack of leadership over this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/british-res ... 1471339813

No doubt these top scientists are lying too when they dont take UK positions?

More imagining what I have said or not reading previous posts :roll:

I never said Brexit would be good for the economy, what I am challenging is the degree of pessimism shown by some on here.

Let's also get some of these issues into perspective:
- Weak pound. It has been lower than this vs the Euro as recently as 2009.
- Inflation. Forecast to go up to between 2-3%. In the period 2008-2012 inclusive, the average CPI was 3.3%
- Reduced growth. Forecast for 2017 still shows GDP growth, albeit reduced to around 1%. In line with in main EU competitions and way above the reductions in GDP during the GFC. Some countries GDP went down by up to 5% yoy in that period.

Stevo_666

Interesting article on the UK car manufacturing situation, how there is more to it than the customs tariff issue and some of the options open to us:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/14/this-is-the-right-way-to-help-carmakers-after-brexit/

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

Getting net migration below 100,000 would be a lot easier with more emigration.

Obviously, given that net migration is equal to immigration less emigration. Not sure what your point is?

Total net immigration is 330,000 of which only half is from the EU. That means, to me, that the number can not go sub 100,000 without encouraging emigration. So there might be a good reason to not look after EU citizens rights and to carry on being beastly to foreigners.

Even if you banned all immigration from the EU you would only halve the number.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

Getting net migration below 100,000 would be a lot easier with more emigration.

Obviously, given that net migration is equal to immigration less emigration. Not sure what your point is?

Total net immigration is 330,000 of which only half is from the EU. That means, to me, that the number can not go sub 100,000 without encouraging emigration. So there might be a good reason to not look after EU citizens rights and to carry on being beastly to foreigners.

Even if you banned all immigration from the EU you would only halve the number.

Got the gross immigration (EU/non EU spilt) and gross emigration figures? Not sure the maths make sense on a net basis.

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

It's one of the possible outcomes. The point is that we really don't know how things will pan out. Not in these negotiations and not in the longer term.

We don't know for sure but the complexity of the situation and the EU decision making process suggests that there is no way we will conclude a deal in two years. This is backed up by a lack of will for such a deal on both sides.

Therefore why not spend the 2 years nailing down the WTO situation and trying to agree grandfathering.

The fact that this puts me in the same camp as the headbangers suggests it could end up getting broad support. I will caveat it with the thought that A50 will need to be triggered to remove the last hope from Brexiteers.

Not a daft idea by any means, although probably best run in parallel with the EU negotiations to hedge our bets.

I posted quite a few pages back the point that the UK was a member of the WTO in its own right (as well as the other EU countries and the EU itself). Assuming this isn't wrong there is no need for the UK to rejoin the WTO. We'll see, but it would be a good start.

With the time and resources we have available it may be wise to sack off the EU negotiations.

There seem to be more than enough grey areas with WTO to keep us busy more than busy for two years

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I think WTO + grandfathering is a good place to start.

The rights of EU citizens in the UK is also something that will need to be dealt with.

Getting net migration below 100,000 would be a lot easier with more emigration.

Obviously, given that net migration is equal to immigration less emigration. Not sure what your point is?

Total net immigration is 330,000 of which only half is from the EU. That means, to me, that the number can not go sub 100,000 without encouraging emigration. So there might be a good reason to not look after EU citizens rights and to carry on being beastly to foreigners.

Even if you banned all immigration from the EU you would only halve the number.

Got the gross immigration (EU/non EU spilt) and gross emigration figures? Not sure the maths make sense on a net basis.

I was trying to work out if the net figures told us anything and I think they do anyway here is some detail.
https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

At the risk of wanting to sound like a stuck record rather than someone with his head stuck in the ground...

Check LSE, PWC, Treasury, IMF forecasts. They are all way above your £2bn per annum for a hard Brexit, which is the only likely outcome.

Clearly you know better than the experts.

:roll:

Read my post again. As stated in the post, it was a hypothetical example to help mamba understand the point that I was making. The numbers were purely illustrative. Clearly you have a problem understanding the point.

Do you think that Brexit will be good for the economy then? what are the less pessimistic scenarios? Even Boris a few days before "coming out" wrote an article on why the EU is good and leaving is bad....... eh?

yes i m still in a job, contracts have been moved back into europe by our former EU partners, reasons given uncertainty over Brexit, the fuji think at mo isnt going to have an immediate effect but our directors have decided to scale back for both these reasons and this means job loses an.d ths statement given to us is the Brexit.

You cant go on saying these people are ALL liars, just because it suits your narrative, i told you about the lack of leadership over this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/british-res ... 1471339813

No doubt these top scientists are lying too when they dont take UK positions?

More imagining what I have said or not reading previous posts :roll:

I never said Brexit would be good for the economy, what I am challenging is the degree of pessimism shown by some on here.

Let's also get some of these issues into perspective:
- Weak pound. It has been lower than this vs the Euro as recently as 2009.
fIr point
- Inflation. Forecast to go up to between 2-3%. In the period 2008-2012 inclusive, the average CPI was 3.3%
if wages do not go up then imported inflation is a problem
- Reduced growth. Forecast for 2017 still shows GDP growth, albeit reduced to around 1%. In line with in main EU competitions and way above the reductions in GDP during the GFC. Some countries GDP went down by up to 5% yoy in that period.

what the others are doing is irrelevant. We seemed to have shaved 1% off our growth rate

joelsim

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

At the risk of wanting to sound like a stuck record rather than someone with his head stuck in the ground...

Check LSE, PWC, Treasury, IMF forecasts. They are all way above your £2bn per annum for a hard Brexit, which is the only likely outcome.

Clearly you know better than the experts.

:roll:

Read my post again. As stated in the post, it was a hypothetical example to help mamba understand the point that I was making. The numbers were purely illustrative. Clearly you have a problem understanding the point.

Do you think that Brexit will be good for the economy then? what are the less pessimistic scenarios? Even Boris a few days before "coming out" wrote an article on why the EU is good and leaving is bad....... eh?

yes i m still in a job, contracts have been moved back into europe by our former EU partners, reasons given uncertainty over Brexit, the fuji think at mo isnt going to have an immediate effect but our directors have decided to scale back for both these reasons and this means job loses an.d ths statement given to us is the Brexit.

You cant go on saying these people are ALL liars, just because it suits your narrative, i told you about the lack of leadership over this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/british-res ... 1471339813

No doubt these top scientists are lying too when they dont take UK positions?

More imagining what I have said or not reading previous posts :roll:

I never said Brexit would be good for the economy, what I am challenging is the degree of pessimism shown by some on here.

Let's also get some of these issues into perspective:
- Weak pound. It has been lower than this vs the Euro as recently as 2009.
fIr point
- Inflation. Forecast to go up to between 2-3%. In the period 2008-2012 inclusive, the average CPI was 3.3%
if wages do not go up then imported inflation is a problem
- Reduced growth. Forecast for 2017 still shows GDP growth, albeit reduced to around 1%. In line with in main EU competitions and way above the reductions in GDP during the GFC. Some countries GDP went down by up to 5% yoy in that period.

what the others are doing is irrelevant. We seemed to have shaved 1% off our growth rate

And a hard Brexit will shave even more off, a lot more.

joelsim

Stevo 666 wrote:

Interesting article on the UK car manufacturing situation, how there is more to it than the customs tariff issue and some of the options open to us:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/14/this-is-the-right-way-to-help-carmakers-after-brexit/

And here's another view. What many of these commentators are failing to grasp is that there are 27 countries involved.

https://www.ft.com/content/e801b67a-920 ... 778b55a923

The UK’s car industry is doomed to a sharp decline if the country loses access to the EU single market, the head of Germany’s auto industry lobbying group has warned, with automakers likely to move production to low-cost EU countries in eastern Europe.

The comments by Matthias Wissmann mark the first time a senior figure in the German car industry has publicly outlined the consequences from a change to Britain’s trading arrangements with the EU for a sector that has powered the UK’s industrial renaissance in recent years.

“If there’s a ‘hard Brexit’ then we will see a shift to central and south-eastern Europe,” Mr Wissmann, head of the German Association of the Automotive Industry, said, adding countries such as Slovakia and Poland “are very attractive, have low labour costs and are part of the EU”.


A former German transport minister and one of the country’s most powerful lobbyists, Mr Wissmann also predicted that no carmaker would make big UK investments in the current climate. “The longer the period of uncertainty lasts, the longer people will be reluctant to invest,” he said.

Theresa May, UK prime minister, has promised to start formal divorce talks with the EU by March and has indicated that she wants a clean break from the EU single market and customs union so as to be able to reassert control over Britain’s borders.

At the same time, she has indicated she might seek to shield some favoured sectors — including the car industry — from the impact of Brexit. She recently gave assurances to Japanese carmaker Nissan that trading conditions at its Sunderland plant would not change after Britain’s EU exit.

Carlos Ghosn, Nissan chief executive, had previously said he would not invest in the site unless the UK government offered compensation to offset the impact of any new tariffs the company might face.

Still, many business leaders are worried that Mrs May is more focused on immigration than the economic consequences for Britain of severing its ties to Europe’s common market. Such concerns have fuelled the 17 per cent fall in the value of sterling since the June 23 referendum.

In Germany, too, many in the business community view Mrs May’s rhetoric with alarm. Germany exported 809,000 vehicles to Britain last year, representing 18.4 per cent of its total motor exports.

Some British ministers have speculated about the possibility of seeking sectoral deals to keep trade flowing, including a special regime for key traded goods such as cars.

But Angela Merkel, German chancellor, last week warned against such “comfortable” deals and urged companies engaged in sectoral talks on market access to avoid compromising on EU principles — particularly freedom of movement.

Mr Wissmann backed that position. “The UK is an important market for us but the EU market is much more important,” he said. “If the EU were to fall apart, that would be a lot worse for our industry.”

Germany’s priority must be “to keep the EU 27 together”, he said.

Foreign investment into Britain’s car industry over the past few decades — particularly from Germany — has fuelled a big rise in output. BMW, for example, employs about 8,000 people in Britain and last year produced more than 200,000 Minis there — about 12 per cent of UK car production.

But Mr Wissmann warned that the UK could end up like Italy, whose output of cars has shrunk from about 2m a year 20 years ago to 500,000 now. Slovakia’s production has risen from virtually zero to more than 1m vehicles in the same period. “If the UK doesn’t want to suffer the same fate as Italy’s car industry, it must be concerned to retain full access to the single market,” he said.

Mike Hawes, chief executive of UK motor industry body the SMMT, echoed Mr Wissmann’s warning. He said the fundamentals of the UK car industry “remain very strong”, it had been “extremely competitive in recent years, attracting international investment and growing production to levels that are approaching a record high”. But “maintaining the trading conditions we enjoy within the single market is essential” to beating international competition and preserving the sector’s success, he added.

Many carmakers with plants in the UK already have operations in eastern Europe. Toyota and Renault-Nissan both have factories in Turkey, while Opel, the General Motors division that owns Vauxhall, has two manufacturing sites in Poland. Jaguar Land Rover is constructing a factory in Slovakia, its first big plant outside the UK, which is due to open in 2018.

Stevo_666

The article that I linked gives the options that are in the control of the UK or not dependent on a trade deal - of which the key component is import/export tariffs (and which is far from the only factor in this situation).

So how is gaining the agreement of 27 countries relevant to those options?

Some other points from the article you quoted:
- Moving production to countries like Turkey is a primarily a cost based decision that cannot be matched in Western Europe regardless of single market access. Note that Turkey is not part of the single market.

- Can you explain why Italian car production has shrunk by 75% while the country has been part of the single market for the entire period that the single market has existed?

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

The article that I linked gives the options that are in the control of the UK or not dependent on a trade deal - of which the key component is import/export tariffs (and which is far from the only factor in this situation).

So how is gaining the agreement of 27 countries relevant to those options?

Some other points from the article you quoted:
- Moving production to countries like Turkey is a primarily a cost based decision that cannot be matched in Western Europe regardless of single market access. Note that Turkey is not part of the single market.

- Can you explain why Italian car production has shrunk by 75% while the country has been part of the single market for the entire period that the single market has existed?

Not sure about that Nissan reference - I thought it was illegal for govts to compensate for tariffs

joelsim

Steve, in order to have any sector of industry to be safeguarded from the effects of a hard Brexit and in such still trade like it does in the single market now, needs the approval of at least the vast majority of all 27 nations which frankly isn't going to happen. As I have said until I'm blue in the face, which you consistently ignore the key objective is not to damage the EU 27 nations by giving the UK a special deal. Which part of that are you struggling to understand?

In addition over 50% of components are sourced from abroad.

No one is going to be gagging to invest in a country going down the toilet.

Stevo_666

Joelsim wrote:

Steve, in order to have any sector of industry to be safeguarded from the effects of a hard Brexit and in such still trade like it does in the single market now, needs the approval of at least the vast majority of all 27 nations which frankly isn't going to happen. As I have said until I'm blue in the face, which you consistently ignore the key objective is not to damage the EU 27 nations by giving the UK a special deal. Which part of that are you struggling to understand?

You are missing the point entirely.

Try reading the article as it appears that you haven't.

What is is saying overall is that there are factors other than a deal with the EU that are relevant to the car industry in the UK. Anyone with some decent commercial experience will realise this. Yes, a deal with the EU is relevant but there are other factors, as demonstrated by the points about Turkey and Italy.

Now can you answer my question about Italy.