If we vote for Brexit what happens

cells

StevieJ wrote: »

I should imagine that consumers with spare cash will be splashing to get jobs done and items bought before the large price increases. I guess that will be foreign goods also though

I saw on the TV some person say it might be a good idea to buy your big ticket items now (TV/Fridge/Washing-Machine/Mobile etc) before the fall kicks in. Some people will act on that and again its going to show higher sales and activity

It reminds me of the russian ruble collapse where the public went out and emptied the shops within a few days. Of course its not as drastic as that nowhere near but it shows in the near therm it brings up false positives (retailers businesses booming)

cells

Tourism will boom too, part of it will be good and sustained due to a lower currency but in the near term 0-12 months it will also boom simply because brexit and the pounds fall is all over the media not just in the UK but also Europe/USA too of course that will be temporary and wont last.

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

I saw on the TV some person say it might be a good idea to buy your big ticket items now (TV/Fridge/Washing-Machine/Mobile etc) before the fall kicks in. Some people will act on that and again its going to show higher sales and activity

It reminds me of the russian ruble collapse where the public went out and emptied the shops within a few days. Of course its not as drastic as that nowhere near but it shows in the near therm it brings up false positives (retailers businesses booming)

its an odd use of the phase 'false positive' if something is predictable and indeed predicted, is completely logical and something every econmist would see as inevitable.
however when dealing with EU religious zealots why should I be surprised.

wotsthat

CLAPTON wrote: »

many companies do cover their foreign currency commitment for a year or so. obviously your company doesn't.

that has nothing to do with diversification of customers, products and suppliers unless you reject sales to the euro countries once you reach a pre determined level (seems unlikely to me however).

Can you name a few of the many companies that fully cover their currency requirements a year ahead? Is that the perfect length of time? We cover 9 - 12 months and I'd suggest that's quite unusual because you need to tie up a lot of cash flow.

I know the man in the street thinks hedging and forward buying are a panacea but if the cost of a product goes up by 15% it goes up by 15%. It can't be insured away - only delayed. Why not keep an eye on petrol prices as a real world example?

I think your comment about not planning for exchange rate changes shows a lack of knowledge about how business works. We're not making plans to specifically deal with our predictions of $1:20 or $2.00 Sterling but planning to react efficiently if/ when changes do occur. A degree of hedging buys time but it doesn't mean the cost of UK imports won't be increasing by 15% - 20%.

setmefree2

CLAPTON wrote: »

So, if the majority of people of the EU considered that there was a better way to organise their economies and societies, you would oppose that because you are a 'believer in the EU as a concept'.
No wonder so much harm has been done by similar mad people because they believed in a 'concept'.

Apparently there are not that many believers any more- because if the EU made it easy apparently everyone would leave!

cells

Conrad wrote: »

We are allocated a fishing quota that allows us to catch 30% of the fish caught in UK waters. Between Norway and ourselves we could completely change the dynamics of fisheries - just a thought...

If Hollande wishes to punish us, well 2 can play at that childish game.

Listening to the chief of Tate & Lyle, he was explaining how his company will make more profits once tariffs on imported sugar cane are removed, making our sugar much more competitive than the EU's. A prime example of the opportunity that awaits us.

on both counts they are ridiculous

fish accounts for close to zero of course economy and zero x 3 is still close to zero. Seriously its something like 0.05% of GDP at the retail level (so probably 0.01% at the catch level)

Sugar!! Seriously! Sugar? The whole economic output of all sugar in all food consumed is less than £1 billion at retail level and likely about 1/3rd of that at farm/import level. So somewhere in the region of £0.3B pa how much of that are you going to save? 10%? And what about the domestic sugar producers what happens to them when you import 10% cheaper sugar from brazil?

by comparison if the sunderland plant gets rid of the quashqui model (keeps running with the rest) your looking at ~£6 billion lost in GDP versus your fish and sugar of not even 1/10th of that

bengal-stripe

CLAPTON wrote: »

No wonder so much harm has been done by similar mad people because they believed in a 'concept'.

Are you talking about those who in the recent debate used the word 'sovereignty' as a battle cry, which, after all, is nothing but another 'concept'?

setmefree2

A taste of what's to come between the EU and UK

Indian cotton exports to Pakistan slump amid tensions -traders

MUMBAI/KARACHI, Oct 7 (Reuters) - Rising hostilities between India and Pakistan have brought their $822 million-a-year trade in cotton to a juddering halt, as traders who are worried about uncertainty over supplies and driven by patriotism hold off signing new deals.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3827203/Indian-cotton-exports-Pakistan-slump-amid-tensions-traders.html#ixzz4MPJxCibR

Still, we import a lot of clothes from India maybe we'll get a good deal on all that cotton going spare.

AnotherJoe

mwpt wrote: »

No, it wouldn't.

As as an EU citizen and believer in the EU as a concept, I hope that the UK does not receive a better deal outside the EU. I don't wish to see the UK punished, or decline, but if the choice is the UK being being excluded or further fractures in the EU because nations see it is better to tear it apart, then my choice is pro EU. I believe many other EU citizens would see it the same way.

So essentially you are happy to have the UK gradually watered down until it has as much power as any local county council? Because thats what it comes down to, you are a citizen of the UK yet dont believe in its sovereignty, in the ability of its people to choose their own laws, instead you are happy for Slovenia, Lithuania, Sweden and 24 other countries to have as much say in, for example who can come and work in the UK, as any UK citizen. That would finish quite literally as the end of this country as a sovereign nation.

Basically you want a United States of Europe where individual countries have fewer powers than states in the USA (and then only what the EU condescendingly decides they can have).

And then you wonder, with a attitude like that, why the voters told people with those views, to go to hell? Had that been the open approach of the Leave camp, rather than Project Fear, they'd have been lucky to 8% let alone 48%. But thanks for exposing your wish to destroy this country.

CLAPTON

bengal-stripe wrote: »

Are you talking about those who in the recent debate used the word 'sovereignty' as a battle cry, which, after all, is nothing but another 'concept'?

No, 'sovereign' boundaries have various practical implications and it is they that I wish to reclaim.
I'm a pragmatist and not an idealist or believer in grand designs that ignore the human condition.