EU referendum

[EalingBlue2]

What you mean is, some people don't think like you, and so they must be wrong.
You may like to factor in the possibility that some 'black boys' don't either.

I said that was a an unfair comment on the Eton Tory boys, though its true and if they do then they are.

 

[Balti]

yawn

small dick syndrome I suspect

that and a massive chip on his/her shoulder

 

[EalingBlue2]

yawn

small dick syndrome I suspect

that and a massive chip on his/her shoulder

You are right of course , if chips weren't there and schlongs were bigger there would be more on here bravely typing away and making keyboard calls for bringing back crucifictions and writing off thousands of teachers or even whole religions or nations and more often . But a few of us who due to our sex or size of appendage, just aren't brave enough to take on such worthy and powerful foes from behind our floral curtains.

 

[SWP's back]

My first post on this one so excuse me If I've missed similar points. The UK has a large trade deficit with the EU i.e. we bring in more than we ship out. Latest figures for the month show that we are £8.1bn apart. Coming out of the EU means a renegotiation of a trade deal when the UK clearly relies more on EU imports that it does exports. If tariffs came in to play then the best we could hope for is the same percentage on both directions - no way the EU would let us charge them for imports without a equal measure the other way, (especially when they currently get our exports without penalty). This would mean the UK paying MORE for it's imports than it would receive in tariffs for it's exports.

You've got that totally the wrong way around.

 

[hgblue]

You've got that totally the wrong way around.

Apparently they're going to charge us more to buy their stuff. I don't think there's many economists posting on here. :-)

 

[SWP's back]

Apparently they're going to charge us more to buy their stuff. I don't think there's many economists posting on here. :-)

It would certainly be an interesting tactic.

The funny thing is the poster apologising if others had posted similar before in over 100 pages when he's actually done pretty well to come up with an original idea/point.

 

[hgblue]

It would certainly be an interesting tactic.

The funny thing is the poster apologising if others had posted similar before in over 100 pages when he's actually done pretty well to come up with an original idea/point.

We're the EUs most important customer, certainly in the case of France and Germany. We are a relatively rich, geographically close economy, who are paying full whack for their expensive luxury goods, (eg cars and champagne). This makes it extremely important for them that they don't piss us off, and economic suicide for them to engage in some sort of trade war with us. Tariffs hurt them in two ways, because they risk alienating a really important market (will the British people continue to buy their stuff if they are seen as responding vindictively to a democratic vote) and their goods become more expensive than their competition. French farmers and German car manufacturers would be in open revolt if this was even suggested, and the Eurozone would be plunged into an even deeper crisis. It aint happening.

 

[SWP's back]

We're the EUs most important customer, certainly in the case of France and Germany. We are a relatively rich, geographically close economy, who are paying full whack for their expensive luxury goods, (eg cars and champagne). This makes it extremely important for them that they don't piss us off, and economic suicide for them to engage in some sort of trade war with us. Tariffs hurt them in two ways, because they risk alienating a really important market (will the British people continue to buy their stuff if they are seen as responding vindictively to a democratic vote) and their goods become more expensive than their competition. French farmers and German car manufacturers would be in open revolt if this was even suggested, and the Eurozone would be plunged into an even deeper crisis. It aint happening.

Oh I know that 100%. I was just smiling that he thought someone else would have gotten it back to front before him.

 

[EalingBlue2]

We're the EUs most important customer, certainly in the case of France and Germany. We are a relatively rich, geographically close economy, who are paying full whack for their expensive luxury goods, (eg cars and champagne). This makes it extremely important for them that they don't piss us off, and economic suicide for them to engage in some sort of trade war with us. Tariffs hurt them in two ways, because they risk alienating a really important market (will the British people continue to buy their stuff if they are seen as responding vindictively to a democratic vote) and their goods become more expensive than their competition. French farmers and German car manufacturers would be in open revolt if this was even suggested, and the Eurozone would be plunged into an even deeper crisis. It aint happening.

The trouble I see with the outers is they assume that divorce is rational and that both parties act in the overall self interest. It is in a sense logical but the entire history of the globe shows that the best overall outcome is nearly never pursued or achieved. What will make this so different to everything history has taught us?

 

[blueonblue]

I'm not seeing how we would be ever be in the drivers seat in a renegotiation to be honest. We currently trade with the EU under the most favourable terms possible (free). I don't see any scenario where us leaving would allow us to get a better deal,

It seems that there are still people who think we get cheaper goods under the EU when nothing could be further from the true, we pay MORE for goods than we would on the world market, that does mean we also get more for what we sell there, but thats only 9% of our exports as opposed to the 91% we sell to the rest of the world. Yet we hamper that 91% because of the rules and regulations applied across the board on industry just to sell that 9% rather than target them to meet the requirements of the destinations as they do in the rest of the world.

Besides what we sell to the EU currently now there will be an immediate bonus to our exit with a virtually waiting market because one thing that has not come up is the return of our fishing grounds, I can only assume its an age thing on here to remember just how big our fishing industry was and can be again, this on its own means thousands of jobs with associated services (Fishermen,boat builders, engineers, dockers, process workers, packers, net makers etc ) and the corresponding increase in exports.

 

[EalingBlue2]

It seems that there are still people who think we get cheaper goods under the EU when nothing could be further from the true, we pay MORE for goods than we would on the world market, that does mean we also get more for what we sell there, but thats only 9% of our exports as opposed to the 91% we sell to the rest of the world. Yet we hamper that 91% because of the rules and regulations applied across the board on industry just to sell that 9% rather than target them to meet the requirements of the destinations as they do in the rest of the world.

Besides what we sell to the EU currently now there will be an immediate bonus to our exit with a virtually waiting market because one thing that has not come up is the return of our fishing grounds, I can only assume its an age thing on here to remember just how big our fishing industry was and can be again, this on its own means thousands of jobs with associated services (Fishermen,boat builders, engineers, dockers, process workers, packers, net makers etc ) and the corresponding increase in exports.

It is a pity there aren't any fish or at least whilst some are recovering very few of the mackerel , herring and cod are at more than a fraction of what they used to be. The boats will come from Korea or elsewhere as will all the other elements. Going out of Europe isn't going to reverse a century of manufacturing going and environmental damage. It is true though we could close the waters for decades and try to stock them back up.

I reckon the main reason that Bluemoon is keen on getting out is that we'd be selling Fernando as he couldn't get a work permit

 

[roaminblue]

Professor Minford CBE is one of the leading economists in the country, an well worth looking up on youtube if you want to weigh up the pros an cons of what the politicians are trying to tell you.

I would argue that is not the case. Intelligent man, committed to his work, yes. But in my opinion he is most certainly not one of the leading economists in the country. He has some interesting, if embedded views.

its probably worth noting, for clarity, that he is also a huge proponent of laissez faire, free market economics. He's very much in the "leave them alone" and the market will sort them out type.

Its also worth noting that the last time he took a hard line political stance, he was also in support for "moving from the status quo". The previous incident, he truly believed that a change in the industry structure and (micro) economics of the regions that would be affected, would see massive gains in economic productivity as people moved from the status quo to finding innovative ways of seeking out growth and prosperity. That the citizens of these regions would be offered the freedom of choice and drive their economies through opportunity. He was referring of course, to the shutting down of the mines, and the citizens were those who were due to be fired. Some would argue that he was incorrect and that many of these regions' economic growth has remained depressed since.

It doesn't surprise me that he is in the "leave" camp, and I have sympathy for a number of free market ideals (although I think governmental intervention is a key tenant in a developing economy, some free market policies do seem very attractive - whether they can (or ever have been) implemented successfully in developed economies which embrace the "visible hand" is open for debate) as a number of those who are leading the charge for the "leave" camp, share similar ideals (Farage, Johnson etc.). But I would caution anyone who believes in a strong public sector, government intervention in markets that are predisposed to an element of manipulation (real estate, financial markets etc) and who is leaning towards "leave" to look behind the veneer of Minford's words, and try and examine, in a bit more granularity, the context in which he is speaking and his own modes of comportment.

 

[roaminblue]

It seems that there are still people who think we get cheaper goods under the EU when nothing could be further from the true, we pay MORE for goods than we would on the world market, that does mean we also get more for what we sell there, but thats only 9% of our exports as opposed to the 91% we sell to the rest of the world. Yet we hamper that 91% because of the rules and regulations applied across the board on industry just to sell that 9% rather than target them to meet the requirements of the destinations as they do in the rest of the world.

Do you have a source for the above paragraph, I'd be very interested on reading more into this.

Thanks

 

[blueonblue]

Then stopping the Spanish & Portuguese`s factory ships will give the fish time to recover as the British fleet builds up, nor will the ships be purchased abroad if the government has any f*cking sense, because without the EU tell us we can not simple buy home made products thats exactly what we can do, maybe we will buy a few from the EU because they wont be needing them anymore.
The fishing industry is labour intensive based within the home ports, so Hull, Fleetwood, ect will see a huge upsurge in employment and all the benefits that brings to the areas.

Fishing is one of the industries where there are people all over the world ready and willing to buy, we can so easily build this back up to be a major export business in short order.

 

[SWP's back]

The trouble I see with the outers is they assume that divorce is rational and that both parties act in the overall self interest. It is in a sense logical but the entire history of the globe shows that the best overall outcome is nearly never pursued or achieved. What will make this so different to everything history has taught us?

Well for a start the above is bollocks.

 

[blueonblue]

I would argue that is not the case. Intelligent man, committed to his work, yes. But in my opinion he is most certainly not one of the leading economists in the country. He has some interesting, if embedded views.

Yet he has been the go to guy for at least three governments when the shit has hit the fan, just consulted on exit before the commons select committee who acknowledge him as just that, its personal preference who you choose, but I do think over the years he has been right far more often than most an has the numbers to back up his views.

You can watch his evidence at the select committee when he lays out his views, not his best performance because he is a typical academic talking to people who have at best a scant knowledge of the subject, but worth a watch.

 

[malg]

Australia want us to stay in, so sick it up:

SYDNEY The former British colony of Australia wants Britain to stay in the European Union, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said, weeks before Britain holds a referendum on EU membership.

Bishop told reporters in Washington that "a strong UK as part of the European Union would be in Australia's interests", according to the Australian Associated Press.

Bishop said that she told British Prime Minister David Cameron of the Australian position at a meeting in Washington on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit, AAP said.

Britain holds a referendum on EU membership on June 23.

Britain's entry into the Common Market in 1973 was widely considered a betrayal in Australia, upending decades of tradition and a host of tariff agreements.

But now Britain takes only 2.5 percent of Australia's exports, while China takes more than 31 percent.

 

[KenTheLandlord]

The trouble I see with the outers is they assume that divorce is rational and that both parties act in the overall self interest. It is in a sense logical but the entire history of the globe shows that the best overall outcome is nearly never pursued or achieved. What will make this so different to everything history has taught us?

Well for a start the above is bollocks.

By bollocks, you mean correct.
Every outcome has been to suit those that hold the whip hand.
The ramifications and fall out, of that blinkered policy, in which Britain has been vigorous, is being felt all over the world and it is never more accurate than in the current times.

 

[SWP's back]

By bollocks, you mean correct.
Every outcome has been to suit those that hold the whip hand.
The ramifications and fall out, of that blinkered policy, in which Britain has been vigorous, is being felt all over the world and it is never more accurate than in the current times.

Not at all. It's bollocks. To suggest that everything in life and global politics is done to spite other nations rather than work for mutual benefaction is fucking bollocks.

And to answer, Britain would have the whip hand due to the net trade deficit with Europe. That's the fucking point everyone bar three hyperbolic 'inners' are making.

 

[roaminblue]

Not at all. It's bollocks. To suggest that everything in life and global politics is done to spite other nations rather than work for mutual benefaction is fucking bollocks.

And to answer, Britain would have the whip hand due to the net trade deficit with Europe. That's the fucking point everyone bar three hyperbolic 'inners' are making.

Net when viewed as one country. Across 27 countries we aren't the main trading partnerfor any of them. The comment of "trading deficit" in isolation doesn't paint a true picture of the relationship.

You're a portfolio manager I memory serves? I'd be interested in seeing your opinion of my comment on trade that I posted (many) pages ago.

A summary of a few others' analysis but o can link to raw data life you want