If we vote for Brexit what happens

kabayiri

davomcdave wrote: »

Why do we face a choice? We've had both since the industrial revolution started to replace labour with capital in a serious way in the brewing industry in 1750 and you could argue that it's been happening since the agricultural revolution started in the 17th Century. Every industrialised country has a mix of workers and available work.

What suddenly changed in 2017?

The rate of change will increase, that's what is different.

Technological progress is not linear. It never has been.

Key enablers arrive which provide a jump in our capability.

Advanced materials management and machine autonomy will soon reach a point where we have to rethink our approach to the remaining division of work.

davomcdave

mrginge wrote: »

I didn't say that.



Your example is full of subjective criteria that purely acts to support your theory.
You assume that a machine is the alternative option.
You assume that appropriate machines do not exist.
You assume that costs cannot be passed on.
You assume that the farm / supermarket cannot support increased costs through lower margins.

I assume that either a machine or a person can pick strawberries. Mea culpa. If I am wrong what else could pick them? Is there a huge reserve of trained dog strawberry pickers that I was previously unaware of?
Show me a website selling strawberry picking machines.
Costs can't be passed on when there are others able to sell in your place. Tesco can just as easily buy strawberries from its suppliers of tomatoes in the Netherlands and Spain as it can from Suffolk.
The fact is that if you raise costs in a low margin industry and revenues can't increase to match it then the marginal producers will go bust.

This is just pointless. Honestly.

kabayiri

davomcdave wrote: »

...
This is just pointless. Honestly.

Your obsession with strawberries is the pointless thing.

I couldn't give a stuff about them.

If you really want to work out how we feed the world, then we should change our attitudes towards eating insects.

Strawberries? That fixes nothing except fans of tennis.

kabayiri

cogito wrote: »

Agreed. There seems to be a myth that trade agreements between countries are a necessary part of doing business. They aren't.

If the current trend continues, the world of business will be dominated by a handful of businesses in the future.

These businesses will tell the nation states what the trading rules need to be.

StevieJ

Conrad wrote: »

And yes I expect total immigration to be bought well down, if not, heads will roll - voters will not in future think the EU is to blame - its clear cut

Does that mean we can have 2nd referendum to get us back in :-)

StevieJ

Arklight wrote: »

There are plenty of fruit picking and very low tech agrarian industries in the South East that rely on immigrant labour.

Where do you think all that dried oregano and bags of pre-cut Tesco salad come from? As someone who did those jobs as a student in the pre-immigrant 90s I got a first hand understanding of how hard this kind of labour is.

One September the employment agency guy said "all the employers around here go into mourning in September when you lot go back to college."

It wasn't because of a lack of labour. There were plenty of unemployed men left over from the Tories' first decimation of skilled manual labour in the 80s, who if forced by the Jobcentre would resentfully show up and lean on a broom for £2.15 an hour. But there was no one other than the students who would actually do the work.

All that will happen if we stop low wage immigration is that the jobs will go, and pre-bagged salad will go back to being a luxury that rich people have.

The ultra Libertarian Right fancy their chances of making an impact 'Post Brexit' If they get a foothold it could be back to Victorian Britain, get a job or starve.

Conrad

davomcdave wrote: »

The fact is that if you raise costs in a low margin industry and revenues can't increase to match it then the marginal producers will go bust.

This is just pointless. Honestly.

Change is a fact of life, in or out of the EU. EU rule changes constantly cause farms and other concerns to go out of business. This idea being in the EU equates with no change, low inflation, no uncertainty etc etc is for the birds.

Herzlos

Conrad wrote: »

Change is a fact of life, in or out of the EU. EU rule changes constantly cause farms and other concerns to go out of business. This idea being in the EU equates with no change, low inflation, no uncertainty etc etc is for the birds.

No one has said staying in the EU means no change. Everything changes.

But we want those changes to be beneficial and well managed.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

In yet another example of the EU's domineering stance, Poland rejects an EU threat to penalise Poland over migration issues:

“I do not see how it will be possible to punish Poland for anything because the refugee problem, the problem of immigration, is not connected to structural funds,”

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/04/05/poland-hits-back-eu-bullying-not-possible-bloc-punish-poland-migrants/

Also against what Poles perceive as unfairness regarding an EU directive on air pollution:

the Polish government is questioning both the way the new rules are being implemented and the distribution of the burden among EU member states.

http://www.thenews.pl/1/2/Artykul/301301,Poland-appeals-against-EU-directive-on-air-pollution-report

This remember whilst Poland's PM asks that "relations between the European Union and Britain should be based on the principles of partnership and reciprocity."
http://www.thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/301400,Partnership-and-reciprocity-basis-for-EUUK-relations-Polish-PM

Will the EU themselves persuade more and more members of its parliament to be at least sympathetic to the UK regarding Brexit?
After all, the EU's resolution on Brexit was passed by 516 votes to 133 with 50 abstaining.

Since the UK has 73 MEP's and assuming all voted against (I know, but for ease) does that not already mean that 60 voted against the EU resolution and 50 abstained?
Combined that is 110 out of what should be a total of 678 when UK MEP's are excluded.

This has the potential to become more interesting than many realise IMHO.

kabayiri

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

...
Will the EU themselves persuade more and more members of its parliament to be at least sympathetic to the UK regarding Brexit?
After all, the EU's resolution on Brexit was passed by 516 votes to 133 with 50 abstaining.

...

This has the potential to become more interesting than many realise IMHO.

I agree. At some point the impact of Brexit will be seen to hit certain member states more than others.

That's a hard political sell to your own voters for any member state. Telling the Spanish fruit grower that the loss in trade is a worthwhile price for EU unity and strength...well, they may not quite see it the same.

I think a clever UK strategy is to identify the weakest links in the Union and target those.