EU Brexit impact - Treasury Analysis

mwpt

CLAPTON wrote: »

One wonders why that market magic doesn't work in their own countries.

I don't know. If you ever happen to spot one out your way (they talk funny and sometimes look different) and you have your gloves ready to shake hands, perhaps you could ask. Just don't make eye contact as sometimes foreigners feel this is a sign of dominant aggression and may attack out of instinctive fear.

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

I don't know. If you ever happen to spot one out your way (they talk funny and sometimes look different) and you have your gloves ready to shake hands, perhaps you could ask. Just don't make eye contact as sometimes foreigners feel this is a sign of dominant aggression and may attack out of instinctive fear.

it is a serious economic question

but you don't deal in them do you

cells

CLAPTON wrote: »

it is a serious economic question

but you don't deal in them do you

More people in poor countries also creates more jobs.

However the productivity of an additional person in a rich country is higher than that of the same person in a poor country for obvious reasons.

So globally if we want the world to get richer it makes sense that people from poor countries migrate to richer countries. It even makes sense internally its called urbanisation. Or even better it makes sense for the richer countries to put k. Place economic accelerators for the poorer countries the main one of which is a cheap efficient electricity grid.

missbiggles1

CLAPTON wrote: »

One wonders why that market magic doesn't work in their own countries.

Not much in the way of service industries in war torn Syria or sub Saharan Africa.

michaels

cells wrote: »

More people in poor countries also creates more jobs.

However the productivity of an additional person in a rich country is higher than that of the same person in a poor country for obvious reasons.

So globally if we want the world to get richer it makes sense that people from poor countries migrate to richer countries. It even makes sense internally its called urbanisation. Or even better it makes sense for the richer countries to put k. Place economic accelerators for the poorer countries the main one of which is a cheap efficient electricity grid.

So for the rich country GDP up...but GDP per capita probably down. Oh well.

cells

michaels wrote: »

So for the rich country GDP up...but GDP per capita probably down. Oh well.

Perhaps but I'm not so sure. I can accept that the person coming to the UK from a poor country is likely to take up low paid work but the story doesn't end there. If a million such people arrive they create demand for doctors solicitors directors etc etc through their needs and wants. They might not be able to take or fill those jobs as a group in the first generation but it might mean a local with a law degree can work as as a solicitor rather than at a McDonalds. So secondry demands might push up productivity of there n the economy.

Also there is the general productivity gains from having more people.

CLAPTON

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Not much in the way of service industries in war torn Syria or sub Saharan Africa.

I was unaware that Poland, Romania, Spain, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, India could reasonably be called war torn.

Miss_Samantha

Michael Gove seems to suggest that the UK could remain in the EEA or EFTA: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36074853

Of course, as said this implies that freedom of movement would still exist, and probably that financial contributions would still have to be made:

His comments rule out any idea of a post-Brexit UK government seeking to replicate a trade deal on the lines of Norway or Switzerland, which offer free access to EU markets, but which also commit those countries to pay contributions to the EU budget and free movement of EU citizens across borders.

He also said:

He likened a vote to stay in the EU as a vote "to be a hostage, locked in the boot of a car driven by others to a place and at a pace that we have no control over".

Interestingly the Norwegian's government (but not the people) would like to join the EU because that way they would at least have a seat at the table.
So it seems that an existing EEA member thinks exactly the opposite.

Edit:
All the current members of EFTA are part of the EEA except Switzerland. However Switzerland is still part of the Schengen area.

Therefore, if Micheal Give's plan is for Britain to only be part of EFTA it means that we would be the most isolated country in Europe.

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

More people in poor countries also creates more jobs.

However the productivity of an additional person in a rich country is higher than that of the same person in a poor country for obvious reasons.

So globally if we want the world to get richer it makes sense that people from poor countries migrate to richer countries. It even makes sense internally its called urbanisation. Or even better it makes sense for the richer countries to put k. Place economic accelerators for the poorer countries the main one of which is a cheap efficient electricity grid.

in what way is the 'productivity ' of some-one servicing coffee higher in the UK than is say Poland?
they will be paid more of course

in any event 'productivity ' in the UK is low mainly because there is no incentive to improvement productivity due to unlimited cheap labour from abroad.
If we want higher productivity we need to limit the endless flow of cheap labour and so force business to invest

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Seeing as this has gone unanswered lets open it up to the forum....

Fella wrote: »

As part of the EU we're subject to laws that were often put in place directly against UK interests..

Can you point out some of these laws that are directly against our interests and that we didn't have the ability to veto if we wished?

Anyone?