If we vote for Brexit what happens

A_Pict_In_A_Past_Life

davomcdave wrote: »

So you mean that the revenues of all of the Indian companies in the UK were almost as much as the Italian Post Office or Australia's third biggest bank. I can see why Indian companies are reluctant to invest in Britain.

http://beta.fortune.com/global500/list

Isn't that just a little like comparing yourself to Richard Branson - and wondering where your private island is?
Instead of being happy in your work and grateful for your Spanish holiday every July?

Not every company can be a Fortune500 company.

Arklight

The brexiteers here really are grabbing fistfuls of straws as they try and convince themselves that India is going to come and save them.

A_Pict_In_A_Past_Life

I don't see anywhere or anyone saying that India will save them.
All I see are a few posts about trade with India - and some argumentative types denying the trade exists.

But then these deny everything which isn't negative or obviously pro-EU it seems.

davomcdave

Arklight wrote: »

I would welcome someone more knowledgeable than me explaining what counts as FDI. If TATA steel buy a steel plant for £1bn then presumably that year there is £1bn in FDI from India. If they then hire Doris the tea lady on £12,000 a year - is than then a further £12,000 of FDI or does it not count as foreign?

If the following year then government than spend £2bn bailing out the Tata steel plant, does that make Indian FDI -£1bn? (Presumably by now Doris is in the Jobcentre+)

FDI is measured as equity purchases from overseas. Tata paying Doris is a flow of cash not an equity purchase so that is not FDI regardless of whether the money comes from India or the UK. If Doris sets herself up as a tea making company and sells that company to Tata Steel, their purchase of Doris Tea Solutions Inc. is FDI.

FDI is normally quoted net so if Tata Steel buys a UK steel plant for a billion and Doris Tea Solutions rather than merging with Tata Steel arranges to buy Apala Cha Wallahs for £200mn instead then net FDI will be £800mn.

Arklight

davomcdave wrote: »

FDI is measured as equity purchases from overseas. Tata paying Doris is a flow of cash not an equity purchase so that is not FDI regardless of whether the money comes from India or the UK. If Doris sets herself up as a tea making company and sells that company to Tata Steel, their purchase of Doris Tea Solutions Inc. is FDI.

FDI is normally quoted net so if Tata Steel buys a UK steel plant for a billion and Doris Tea Solutions rather than merging with Tata Steel arranges to buy Apala Cha Wallahs for £200mn instead then net FDI will be £800mn.

Very clear - thank you.

davomcdave

A_Pict_In_A_Past_Life wrote: »

Isn't that just a little like comparing yourself to Richard Branson - and wondering where your private island is?
Instead of being happy in your work and grateful for your Spanish holiday every July?

Not every company can be a Fortune500 company.

No it isn't, that's ridiculous. The point is that Indian companies are quite small in total. You post this figure of tens of billions but actually that's muck all in the grand scheme of things. The point of comparison is that you take a difficult, abstract concept and make it easier to understand. If you still don't understand then there's little I can do to help you.

kabayiri

I'd agree with Davo that is is unwise to get too hung up on India.

However, there is a valid analysis buried within this discussion.

We, as a nation, should be looking at where the future opportunities (and challenges) are coming from.

Now you might consider that the EU could become almost a self sustaining ecosystem, and thus buffer itself from global challenges. It's a school of thought.

Personally, I think we need to start thinking much more long term; identify areas which will grow where we can actively gain from, globally.

A good example was on the tv the other day, with the use of UK materials technology to help develop salt water filters

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39482342

The demand for this sort of product is potentially huge, but much of it will come from outside the EU.

Conrad

davomcdave wrote: »

Note that the reason for Central Banks moving out of the Euro doesn't really have anything to do with the EU, it's voters voting for dodgy parties and negative interest rates. My opinion is that the tide is going to turn quite quickly on interest rates so that problem is, in my opinion, going to go away pretty soon. Eurozone inflation is rising, albeit from low levels, and unemployment is at an 8 year low, albeit quite a high one.

.

So there's plenty of risks of Remaining then, as we said all along? Risks whether we leave or remain, that's life.

davomcdave

kabayiri wrote: »

I'd agree with Davo that is is unwise to get too hung up on India.

However, there is a valid analysis buried within this discussion.

We, as a nation, should be looking at where the future opportunities (and challenges) are coming from.

Now you might consider that the EU could become almost a self sustaining ecosystem, and thus buffer itself from global challenges. It's a school of thought.

Personally, I think we need to start thinking much more long term; identify areas which will grow where we can actively gain from, globally.

A good example was on the tv the other day, with the use of UK materials technology to help develop salt water filters

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39482342

The demand for this sort of product is potentially huge, but much of it will come from outside the EU.

Surely what happens under a capitalist system is that someone thinks of an opportunity, for example farm-in-a-hole. Then they try to find a market for that farm-in-a-hole, for example credulous forum posters. Hopefully they then sell many farms-in-a-hole (farm-in-a-holes?) and get rich.

It's very hard for the government to identify quality future opportunities like farm-in-a-hole before time so hard for them to back the right horse. Maybe the government decides, incorrectly, that farm-not-in-a-hole is the right technology to support as the Farm-not-in-a-hole Manufacturers Association get into the ear of the trade minister. Before you know it the government has signed a bunch of agreements that allow farm-not-in-a-hole products to be sold into India whereas farm-in-a-hole, the ag-tech of the future, is locked out.

Conrad

A_Pict_In_A_Past_Life wrote: »

I don't see anywhere or anyone saying that India will save them.
All I see are a few posts about trade with India - and some argumentative types denying the trade exists.

But then these deny everything which isn't negative or obviously pro-EU it seems.

Yes, I don't get drawn into the long arguments quibbling over figures, you never get anywhere. I prefer over-arching big picture points.


In this context the big picture is;

• We will still trade perfectly well with Europe, there will be no net loss
• We are BETTER able to exploit new global opportunities
• India represents but one of many opportunities
• We wont be paying £25 million daily club fee
• A more nimble autonomous Britain is an even better proposition for enterprise and investment
• Capitalism will flower better than when our hands are tied in so many ways by Brussels - farming is but one example of a UK sector hamstrung by stifling EU constructs and subsidies