If we vote for Brexit what happens

Herzlos

I think you underestimate the paperwork burden of not having FoM or a customs union, but we'll never agree there.

Lack of FoM means it's harder to get and move staff. Not a deal breaker but could put off the right candidates or just make it too much hassle to bother. Makes life for companies that travel a lot much harder.

Lack of customs union means it's a lot harder to get and move stuff. Sure it's an electronic form and some minor overhead, but that may be enough to turn UK produce from about-competitive to uncompetitive. It also really hurts anyone relying on Just-In-Time supply (a big thing in manufacturing and retail to keep inventory costs down) as having to pass through the ROW customs system can mean unpredictable delays.

Also, I was under the impression that Le Penn has decided against trying to leave the EU, and is now just trying to push for a separate (concurrent?) currency?

The EU's negotiating position is better because it has one that is also backed up by years of precedent; why should it offer anything except the status quo? We want to change it, so we should be making the counter offer.

sann420

Once Britain is out of the EU, the remaining EU countries will try their best to get the banks in London to move to an EU state. Its common sense as it means loads of jobs and loads of taxes. Since they are a union and we are alone with no say in what laws they make. Just a few regulations here and there would mean the big banks will suddenly realise that doing business from London will cost 100m more pa than if they move to Frankfurt or Dublin. So they will do long term cost analysis and start moving.

Traditionally every financial institution wants to base themselves in London because of prestige but also herd mentality. In this day and age of internet there is no reason why they cannot scatter their business across multiple EU states and still function seamlessly.

London isn't exactly the cheapest place to do business any way. The basic jobs will probably go to cheaper Eastern/Southern Europe and highly skilled ones will be happily taken over by Northern Europeans. The people with skills that they don't have readily available in those destinations can easily be issued work permits. Never under estimate the power of a 30% bonus or payrise to entice the Londoners to an EU destination.

Countries like Germany may not like taking the hit on car sales initially but once all the dust settles in 5 years or so they will be more prosperous with more jobs and a whole new industry to work with. They will think long term future and not just car sales this year.

Another thing is that Germans produce quality products and therefore can command a premium. People who buy their cars are also wealthier any way. I don't see most people wanting a Merc downgrading to a Nissan because the Merc just became 10% more expensive.

On the other hand what world class products does Britain produce that it will still be able to convince buyers to purchase even after they become more expensive??? :eek:

Thrugelmir

sann420 wrote: »

Once Britain is out of the EU, the remaining EU countries will try their best to get the banks in London to move to an EU state.

On what grounds? Only benefits the Country where they actually move to. They'll be infighting between the individual states not a cohesive plan.

CLAPTON

sann420 wrote: »

Once Britain is out of the EU, the remaining EU countries will try their best to get the banks in London to move to an EU state. Its common sense as it means loads of jobs and loads of taxes. Since they are a union and we are alone with no say in what laws they make. Just a few regulations here and there would mean the big banks will suddenly realise that doing business from London will cost 100m more pa than if they move to Frankfurt or Dublin. So they will do long term cost analysis and start moving.

what stops them doing that now : is it love of the UK?

Traditionally every financial institution wants to base themselves in London because of prestige but also herd mentality. In this day and age of internet there is no reason why they cannot scatter their business across multiple EU states and still function seamlessly.

London isn't exactly the cheapest place to do business any way. The basic jobs will probably go to cheaper Eastern/Southern Europe and highly skilled ones will be happily taken over by Northern Europeans. The people with skills that they don't have readily available in those destinations can easily be issued work permits. Never under estimate the power of a 30% bonus or payrise to entice the Londoners to an EU destination.

so they all currently sacrifice profits for prestige?

Countries like Germany may not like taking the hit on car sales initially but once all the dust settles in 5 years or so they will be more prosperous with more jobs and a whole new industry to work with. They will think long term future and not just car sales this year.

unemployed german car workers may not take your long term view

Another thing is that Germans produce quality products and therefore can command a premium. People who buy their cars are also wealthier any way. I don't see most people wanting a Merc downgrading to a Nissan because the Merc just became 10% more expensive.

On the other hand what world class products does Britain produce that it will still be able to convince buyers to purchase even after they become more expensive??? :eek:

another person that distains the UK : how did we become one of the richest countries in the world by producing only second rate products?

[Deleted User]

CLAPTON wrote: »

how did we become one of the richest countries in the world by producing only second rate products?

By printing money. That's how you become rich today.

The_Last_Username

Herzlos wrote: »

Also, I was under the impression that Le Penn has decided against trying to leave the EU, and is now just trying to push for a separate (concurrent?) currency?

The EU's negotiating position is better because it has one that is also backed up by years of precedent; why should it offer anything except the status quo? We want to change it, so we should be making the counter offer.

I will take the last two points since the others have been covered plenty before.

Think of Marine Le Len as being similar in some ways to Nicola Sturgeon in Scotland, in that she wants the power at any price.
In that she will say whatever it takes to get herself into a position of power.
She wants France out but she knows that to appeal to a greater audience and secure more votes she must (be seen to, at least) moderate her stance.
That is all Marine is doing, pure and simple.

As for the EU having a better negotiating position because of years of precedent - perhaps you should consider the centuries of precedent before the EU existed.
All through which the UK traded with europe and indeed globally - very successfuly as I think you would have to agree.
It is the EU that attempted to change that.

Regarding your "paperwork" comment btw the vast majority of what exists is the EU's own requirement as a form of protectionism.
It was never needed before the EU, was it?
People travelled for work before the EU.
Members of my family did so both in years past and in centuries past, including my own father.
So why do you think it should it be worse without the EU?
Straw-clutching is how your argument appears, TBH.

sann420

CLAPTON wrote: »

another person that distains the UK : how did we become one of the richest countries in the world by producing only second rate products?

Name the world class products that Britain produces then ?

As far as I know its only the banks.

Matt_L

sann420 wrote: »

Name the world class products that Britain produces then ?

As far as I know its only the banks.

Dyson not a world class product??

The_Last_Username

sann420 wrote: »

Name the world class products that Britain produces then ?

As far as I know its only the banks.

Then you need to improve your knowledge base.
Use this as a starting point:
http://www.worldstopexports.com/united-kingdoms-top-import-partners/

Click on the "companies" tab and start learning.

Ninety-one UK corporations rank among Forbes Global 2000 for 2015. Below is a sample of the major companies headquartered in the UK that Forbes listed

That begins to explain and before you mention "world class products" think about where these exports are going?
That's right, around the world.
Did you really need a better definition of "world class"?
Or perhaps you think that these exports are second-rate, substandard or somesuch?
Obviously why the world buys them, eh?

From pharmaceuticals to aerospace, hydraulic motors to broadcasting equipment - really quite a diverse list.
Of major exports.

Sapphire

Thrugelmir wrote: »

On what grounds? Only benefits the Country where they actually move to. They'll be infighting between the individual states not a cohesive plan.

It also needs to be borne in mind that London has been a great financial centre since the early 1700s – I believe the first one, in fact. That's when the Bank of England was founded, as well as several major banks that still exist today. The banking infrastructure's roots are very deep in London, and they've survived much turmoil without being destroyed.

It is very unlikely that all this would be dismantled after Brexit and moved to the troubled Continent. I can't see banks moving to France, for example, with its 'tradition' of industrial action, not to mention other serious issues that are impinging onto continental Europe. Certainly, offices may be opened in other countries, but not many HQs, in my view… :cool: