BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

rick_chasey

briantrumpet said:

elbowloh said:

From the Times,

MasterCard have announced that they are increasing the fee it charges UK customers buying goods from the EU from 0.3% to 1.5%.

What's the rationale? Have their costs increased, or is it opportunism?

Yes opportunism; I think it's because there were previously strict regulations on what they could charge for inter-EU fees.

A bit like roaming charges.

Since Brexit, cross-Channel card fees no longer fall under an EU cap on transaction levies.

is the line in the FT

TheBigBean

It's one of the things the EU did well although they went a bit overboard on credit card fees.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

It's one of the things the EU did well although they went a bit overboard on credit card fees.

It is a real shame they couldn't come to an agreement for continuing these kinds of things.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

It's one of the things the EU did well although they went a bit overboard on credit card fees.

It is a real shame they couldn't come to an agreement for continuing these kinds of things.

I'm not sure how it could have been agreed, but it is one of the problems of having a limited number of companies control an increasing amount of all payments. I've been wondering whether a BoE crypto currency would be a good thing.

surrey_commuter

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

elbowloh

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

surrey_commuter

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

no argument from me because I see that and relaxing of employment regulation as bad for the consumer and employee.

But you would have to admit that removal of red tape was a frequently mentioned benefit of Brexit.

pangolin

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

no argument from me because I see that and relaxing of employment regulation as bad for the consumer and employee.

But you would have to admit that removal of red tape was a frequently mentioned benefit of Brexit.

I think the implication was that it would either be of benefit to the public (less admin for companies means they can lower their prices, haha) or just remove 'silly' rules that are there for the sake of it like the famous bendy banana.

Whether that implication stood up to much scrutiny is another matter. Examples of the opposite happening will no doubt be dismissed as a one off, while examples of it being of benefit to us proles will remain mysteriously elusive.

surrey_commuter

pangolin said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

no argument from me because I see that and relaxing of employment regulation as bad for the consumer and employee.

But you would have to admit that removal of red tape was a frequently mentioned benefit of Brexit.

I think the implication was that it would either be of benefit to the public (less admin for companies means they can lower their prices, haha) or just remove 'silly' rules that are there for the sake of it like the famous bendy banana.

Whether that implication stood up to much scrutiny is another matter. Examples of the opposite happening will no doubt be dismissed as a one off, while examples of it being of benefit to us proles will remain mysteriously elusive.

surely the whole deregulation argument is about having a more business friendly environment which is good for the economy which is good for everybody?

on a micro level you may have less employment rights and so more likely to get exploited or fired on a whim but the UK is more likely to win, job creating, inward investment which means that you are more likely to have a job because it is less lucrative and less secure.

john80

surrey_commuter said:

pangolin said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

no argument from me because I see that and relaxing of employment regulation as bad for the consumer and employee.

But you would have to admit that removal of red tape was a frequently mentioned benefit of Brexit.

I think the implication was that it would either be of benefit to the public (less admin for companies means they can lower their prices, haha) or just remove 'silly' rules that are there for the sake of it like the famous bendy banana.

Whether that implication stood up to much scrutiny is another matter. Examples of the opposite happening will no doubt be dismissed as a one off, while examples of it being of benefit to us proles will remain mysteriously elusive.

surely the whole deregulation argument is about having a more business friendly environment which is good for the economy which is good for everybody?

on a micro level you may have less employment rights and so more likely to get exploited or fired on a whim but the UK is more likely to win, job creating, inward investment which means that you are more likely to have a job because it is less lucrative and less secure.

The state needs to sort out their end of the bargain though. If it is a hire and fire culture beyond what is already a pretty dire situation for a lot of workers at the bottom of the pile then they need to sort out benefits. You need to be able to transition seamlessly between being in and out of work. There is not point in asking someone to go and take a job that they know is risky or short term if it is going to impoverish them when the inevitable happens. Is it so hard to have a system that gives you the essentials to live but nothing else on the dole and work gives you a percentage above this that means that it is worth working.

surrey_commuter

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

pangolin said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

no argument from me because I see that and relaxing of employment regulation as bad for the consumer and employee.

But you would have to admit that removal of red tape was a frequently mentioned benefit of Brexit.

I think the implication was that it would either be of benefit to the public (less admin for companies means they can lower their prices, haha) or just remove 'silly' rules that are there for the sake of it like the famous bendy banana.

Whether that implication stood up to much scrutiny is another matter. Examples of the opposite happening will no doubt be dismissed as a one off, while examples of it being of benefit to us proles will remain mysteriously elusive.

surely the whole deregulation argument is about having a more business friendly environment which is good for the economy which is good for everybody?

on a micro level you may have less employment rights and so more likely to get exploited or fired on a whim but the UK is more likely to win, job creating, inward investment which means that you are more likely to have a job because it is less lucrative and less secure.

The state needs to sort out their end of the bargain though. If it is a hire and fire culture beyond what is already a pretty dire situation for a lot of workers at the bottom of the pile then they need to sort out benefits. You need to be able to transition seamlessly between being in and out of work. There is not point in asking someone to go and take a job that they know is risky or short term if it is going to impoverish them when the inevitable happens. Is it so hard to have a system that gives you the essentials to live but nothing else on the dole and work gives you a percentage above this that means that it is worth working.

nobody is proposing strengthening employment rights.

I agree that you need to make it easy to switch in and out of employment but the problem is in making it worthwhile working and avoiding a cliff edge in benefits.

Pre covid I think we were probably at full employment so you would need a raft of measures to encourage people to become economically active

rick_chasey

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

pangolin said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

no argument from me because I see that and relaxing of employment regulation as bad for the consumer and employee.

But you would have to admit that removal of red tape was a frequently mentioned benefit of Brexit.

I think the implication was that it would either be of benefit to the public (less admin for companies means they can lower their prices, haha) or just remove 'silly' rules that are there for the sake of it like the famous bendy banana.

Whether that implication stood up to much scrutiny is another matter. Examples of the opposite happening will no doubt be dismissed as a one off, while examples of it being of benefit to us proles will remain mysteriously elusive.

surely the whole deregulation argument is about having a more business friendly environment which is good for the economy which is good for everybody?

on a micro level you may have less employment rights and so more likely to get exploited or fired on a whim but the UK is more likely to win, job creating, inward investment which means that you are more likely to have a job because it is less lucrative and less secure.

The state needs to sort out their end of the bargain though. If it is a hire and fire culture beyond what is already a pretty dire situation for a lot of workers at the bottom of the pile then they need to sort out benefits. You need to be able to transition seamlessly between being in and out of work. There is not point in asking someone to go and take a job that they know is risky or short term if it is going to impoverish them when the inevitable happens. Is it so hard to have a system that gives you the essentials to live but nothing else on the dole and work gives you a percentage above this that means that it is worth working.

You have the wrong party in charge if you think the gov't is going to do anything to strengthen laws in favour of the employee over the employer.

pblakeney

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

pangolin said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am going to clarify that I am not taking the p1ss

This is a genuine example of a benefit of Brexit as it is a cutting of the legendary bureaucracy and red tape

Its a benefit for the credit card company i guess, not so much for the consumer or the seller (as it may deter customers from making the purchase).

I may be wrong but I would be surprised if much of the vaunted cuts in red tape and bureaucracy were meant to be a benefit to the consumer

You think an oligopoly with extremely high barriers to entry is better off without having some form of regulation?

Either make it easier to be a competitor (without putting the consumer at risk), or you have to reign in their cartel tendencies.

The roaming price gouging was and is a market failure in my book and the rules around that limited that externality.

no argument from me because I see that and relaxing of employment regulation as bad for the consumer and employee.

But you would have to admit that removal of red tape was a frequently mentioned benefit of Brexit.

I think the implication was that it would either be of benefit to the public (less admin for companies means they can lower their prices, haha) or just remove 'silly' rules that are there for the sake of it like the famous bendy banana.

Whether that implication stood up to much scrutiny is another matter. Examples of the opposite happening will no doubt be dismissed as a one off, while examples of it being of benefit to us proles will remain mysteriously elusive.

surely the whole deregulation argument is about having a more business friendly environment which is good for the economy which is good for everybody?

on a micro level you may have less employment rights and so more likely to get exploited or fired on a whim but the UK is more likely to win, job creating, inward investment which means that you are more likely to have a job because it is less lucrative and less secure.

The state needs to sort out their end of the bargain though. If it is a hire and fire culture beyond what is already a pretty dire situation for a lot of workers at the bottom of the pile then they need to sort out benefits. You need to be able to transition seamlessly between being in and out of work. There is not point in asking someone to go and take a job that they know is risky or short term if it is going to impoverish them when the inevitable happens. Is it so hard to have a system that gives you the essentials to live but nothing else on the dole and work gives you a percentage above this that means that it is worth working.

nobody is proposing strengthening employment rights.

I agree that you need to make it easy to switch in and out of employment but the problem is in making it worthwhile working and avoiding a cliff edge in benefits.

Pre covid I think we were probably at full employment so you would need a raft of measures to encourage people to become economically active

If we were in full employment then why did we have to stop all these foreigners coming in stealing our jobs?
#nevermadesense

rick_chasey

If we were at full employment why was wage growth so stagnant?

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

If we were at full employment why was wage growth so stagnant?

Since the referendum employees were hedging their bets a bit, so didn't demand wage increases.

yorkshireraw

john80 said:

Post brexit if you don't have any presence in the market in which you sell them good luck to you. This is on both sides of the channel and was obvious to everyone that had a brain in 2016 as to get things the electorate wanted such as the end of freedom of movement we were erecting borders and therefore barriers to trade. Consider it karma to those that ignored the concerns of an electorate for decades without caring where it would lead. We are were we are and it was an inevitable journey in large part due to the EU institutions.

In 2015, prior to the UK General Election, the EU was not in the top 10 list of things the UK electorate were concerned about. It was a non issue for all but a few self-interested / promoting con men.
Most people couldn't name one single thing (that wasn't factually inaccurate or just plain wrong) about EU membership that caused difficulty to their lives (and would be resolved by the UK leaving).

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

If we were at full employment why was wage growth so stagnant?

Since the referendum employees were hedging their bets a bit, so didn't demand wage increases.

Ha, not me...

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

If we were at full employment why was wage growth so stagnant?

Since the referendum employees were hedging their bets a bit, so didn't demand wage increases.

Ha, not me...

Sure, but it was a noticeable economic factor. That, and businesses were holding back cash and investments. No idea what impact Covid has had on that. Sadly, my annual economic lecture doesn't seem to be happening this year.

loltoride

skyblueamateur said:

The price of all Taiwanese frames are going to increase regardless because of the large increase in container freight charges from the Far East. They've tripled since October because of a shortage of containers.

Not exactly true the major problem is the raw materials in particular aluminum, I know of manufacturers that have warehouses full of carbon bikes but no parts to complete build as of this morning.

skyblueamateur

loltoride said:

skyblueamateur said:

The price of all Taiwanese frames are going to increase regardless because of the large increase in container freight charges from the Far East. They've tripled since October because of a shortage of containers.

Not exactly true the major problem is the raw materials in particular aluminum, I know of manufacturers that have warehouses full of carbon bikes but no parts to complete build as of this morning.

I was using bikes as an example. All product from the Far East will increase in cost due to the massive, massive increase in shipping costs.

We were paying USD4,500 for a 40' HQ Container and are now paying anywhere between USD13-16,000. That's not an increase you can just absorb. We've been experiencing this since mid-December.

We are also experiencing raw material increase of between 3-8% but this has been offset somewhat by the strengthening pound.

skyblueamateur

I think what we've been experiencing was confirmed a few pages back in a BBC News link

ddraver

I know remainers are supposed to be the adults and so not laugh at such things but I really can't help it when it's Brexit Pary MEPs...

https://twitter.com/livefrombrexit/status/1353708492742340608?s=20

Moron

surrey_commuter

skyblueamateur said:

loltoride said:

skyblueamateur said:

The price of all Taiwanese frames are going to increase regardless because of the large increase in container freight charges from the Far East. They've tripled since October because of a shortage of containers.

Not exactly true the major problem is the raw materials in particular aluminum, I know of manufacturers that have warehouses full of carbon bikes but no parts to complete build as of this morning.

I was using bikes as an example. All product from the Far East will increase in cost due to the massive, massive increase in shipping costs.

We were paying USD4,500 for a 40' HQ Container and are now paying anywhere between USD13-16,000. That's not an increase you can just absorb. We've been experiencing this since mid-December.

We are also experiencing raw material increase of between 3-8% but this has been offset somewhat by the strengthening pound.

I get that there will be a wide variation but what sort of goods values are we talking in one of these containers?

I can not begin to guess how many sofas or bike frames you could get in a container

skyblueamateur

surrey_commuter said:

skyblueamateur said:

loltoride said:

skyblueamateur said:

The price of all Taiwanese frames are going to increase regardless because of the large increase in container freight charges from the Far East. They've tripled since October because of a shortage of containers.

Not exactly true the major problem is the raw materials in particular aluminum, I know of manufacturers that have warehouses full of carbon bikes but no parts to complete build as of this morning.

I was using bikes as an example. All product from the Far East will increase in cost due to the massive, massive increase in shipping costs.

We were paying USD4,500 for a 40' HQ Container and are now paying anywhere between USD13-16,000. That's not an increase you can just absorb. We've been experiencing this since mid-December.

We are also experiencing raw material increase of between 3-8% but this has been offset somewhat by the strengthening pound.

I get that there will be a wide variation but what sort of goods values are we talking in one of these containers?

I can not begin to guess how many sofas or bike frames you could get in a container

There can be massive variations.

We buy some smaller parts that are reasonably high value but lower volume so when amortised its not too bad.

On the flip we also purchase reasonably large parts with little value. These are obviously going to have a hefty price increase.

With regards sofas I would guess maybe 60 in a 40' HQ container so would add approx. £150-£200 per sofa.

TBF I'm unsure how they package them so could well be underestimating how many you get in a container.

TheBigBean

Shipping costs from China aren't related to Brexit though, are they?

skyblueamateur

TheBigBean said:

Shipping costs from China aren't related to Brexit though, are they?

Correct and I never said they were. I was actually stating a few pages back that not all price increases were going to be due to Brexit but other external factors as well. This being the biggest one.

david37

TheBigBean said:

Shipping costs from China aren't related to Brexit though, are they?

no but dont let that stop them moaning. I think there might be a small amount of brexit issues in that some of the UK / EU ports have brexit related delays but the main issue appears to be related to covid disruption.

Disruption at ports leading to blockage and some of the mega factories stopping or pausing shipments and containers effectively being taken out of circulation.

In which case once capacity returns to normal and back logs have cleared, the price should come back down.

Wether that results in lower prices remains to be seen.

Stevo_666

It does appear that there are several factors influencing the cost and that the price rises are not limited to shipping to the UK. For example:
https://hellenicshippingnews.com/container-rates-soar-on-the-north-asia-to-europe-trade-routes/