Brexit

DandelionPatrol

Tromking wrote: »

Quite rightly both our personal views will hold no sway in any ruling on this by the ECHR. My worry with it however is that a distant judiciary may make a cold and perhaps a perfectly logical ruling that may be seen by many as interference with the UK's right to defend itself in the way it see fit. It may please many that hauling our volunteer armed police before the beak individually is always necessary, but as I've said the issues are not always are clear cut as they appear.

OK, but I think that the H&S conviction of the Met is enough to show that it is a UK view that this was not a fit way to defend the UK.

So if there is an 'adverse' verdict in the case before the ECHR, I think that it would be false to present it as an interference in the UK defending itself.

DeMenezes had rights which were abused and to me, it would be the worst kind of cynicism to use any kind of verdict as an argument against UK involvement in the ECHR or for Brexit. [I note btw that you are concerned that this may happen]

PixelPound

Generali wrote: »

Not really. The referendum is pretty simple: stay or go.

Will it be as simple as that or will the question be more complicated than "should we stay? Yes/No"

Generali wrote: »

.
For example, many things have to be sold in round numbers: 400g or 800g loaves of bread for example. How long do you think the imperial pint of 568ml would last as an acceptable measure if the UK quits the EU? Not long I would think. That would then leave manufacturers and exporters of liquids with a quandary: retool to 500ml quantities to be able to export to Europe or just concentrate on the home market.

The reality is that leaving the EU would at best lead to the status quo vis-a-vis tariffs or, more likely, complicate matters yet further.

The imperial pint measure will last as long as there is demand for it. The question should be will round metric measures last? Milk for instance is available in pints and litres, there is a demand for both, one by those who prefer pints as its part of Britishness (I suppose you could argue whether this will decrease as generations pass), and metric because of price (less volume so should be less cost). Manufacturer already retool for demand, being in or out of the EU doesn't make a difference. Low price retailers like poundland already get manufacturers to retool to have smaller volumes to hit the price point they need, so whether they retool to cater for the EU will have nothing to do with whether we are in/out or where to concentrate on but whether there is demand and profit enough to cover retool costs. Though really retooling may simply be changing numbers in programs rather than need for new machinery.

antrobus

Generali wrote: »

...According to Riccardian theory we would be better off simply dropping tariffs on imports even if other countries don't reciprocate..... .

I don't remember that bit from Ricardo. Although, of course, he did discover comparative advantage, which is the whole basis of the free trade argument.

I think that international trade is an example of the prisoner's dilemma. The best option is to agree on free trade, but failing an agreement, the second-best option is to protect your own home market, because not doing so, when everyone else is, would be the worst option of all.

Hence the importance of negotiating trade agreements.

DandelionPatrol

Generali wrote: »

For example, many things have to be sold in round numbers: 400g or 800g loaves of bread for example. How long do you think the imperial pint of 568ml would last as an acceptable measure if the UK quits the EU? Not long I would think. That would then leave manufacturers and exporters of liquids with a quandary: retool to 500ml quantities to be able to export to Europe or just concentrate on the home market.

The reality is that leaving the EU would at best lead to the status quo vis-a-vis tariffs or, more likely, complicate matters yet further.

I don't think this is a big issue. A look through my workshop shows that anything non-edible is sold in round metric quantities. A look through the larder shows that dry foods are also generally sold in round metric quantities, apart from perhaps things like crisps and muesli bars which are packed in portions.

Fluids like vinegar and oils are sold in metric quantities, although pickles and preserves seem to be sold in odd weights with don't seem to be round in metric or imperial. I can see milk going metric in due course. Bottled beer seems also to be either round metric 500ml or 550ml, which is probably a metric pint equivalent.

Probably 10 years from now, only the pulled pint will survive in pubs. There would be resistance to standardising on 500ml, because it would just be a price rise in disguise, although I can see 600ml being readily accepted.

And none of this would be affected one way or the other by Brexit.

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

Riccardo wrote about Comparative Advantage almost exactly 200 years ago and most people either don't get it or don't believe it ("you hear that giant sucking sound? ").

People keep voting for socialism despite the very clear evidence that it makes you poorer, less free and might be fatal.

well, that seems all very strange and rather different from your usual argument, that seems to be, that Armageddon will strike the UK economy if it leaves the EU.

In fact you actually believe that the best thing economically would be for the UK to withdraw and abolish tariff barriers with the whole world.

a very different vision : and one worth posting repeatedly I would have thought

well worth fighting for.

kabayiri

I doubt most people will vote on the basis of complex trade related issues.

Fundamentally, people will decide whether they buy into what the EU is becoming.

I can only judge on what the EU has implemented so far, and I think there have been fundamental flaws with things like the CAP and the Euro which they have been slow to acknowledge and unwilling to deal with.

I personally like the idea of a looser EU construct which Cameron and co have floated, but it doesn't seem to have much support on the continent.

antrobus

nic_c wrote: »

Will it be as simple as that or will the question be more complicated than "should we stay? Yes/No"....

The question will be "Should the UK remain a member of the EU?". As opposed to the question asked in 1975 which was, "Do you think the UK should stay in the European Community (Common Market)?"

purch

I will listen to the arguments that leaving the EU will destroy trade, in the same way I listened to the arguments that not joining the EUR would destroy trade.

:rotfl:

I think you will find it is the same people making the same argument.

There will be consequences whatever the decision, just as there were consequences from not joining the EUR but they will not necessarily all be bad.

Tromking

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

OK, but I think that the H&S conviction of the Met is enough to show that it is a UK view that this was not a fit way to defend the UK.

So if there is an 'adverse' verdict in the case before the ECHR, I think that it would be false to present it as an interference in the UK defending itself.

DeMenezes had rights which were abused and to me, it would be the worst kind of cynicism to use any kind of verdict as an argument against UK involvement in the ECHR or for Brexit. [I note btw that you are concerned that this may happen]

I would hope the H&S conviction has resulted in a situation where similar mistakes can no longer happen. Is there any point, bearing in mind the likelyhood of a conviction in pinging individuals who in all probability made honest mistakes in a time of great stress? I understand one of the issues that the CPS had to take into account was the real possibly that scores of volunteer armed police were threatening to hand in their weapons such was their collective concern at the possible hanging out to dry of one of their own. I watched Michael Portillo last night make the point that what may do for our membership of the EU could be a contentious issue or event that brings our in built antipathy toward Europe and Europeans to the fore.

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

well, that seems all very strange and rather different from your usual argument, that seems to be, that Armageddon will strike the UK economy if it leaves the EU.

In fact you actually believe that the best thing economically would be for the UK to withdraw and abolish tariff barriers with the whole world.

It would in an ideal world but, as I said, that would be politically impossible.

Read to the end of the post, not just to the point where you start getting excited.