We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Trade Implications of Brexit....
Options
Comments
-
A more sensible approach would be to transition to the EEA and retain the access to the SM and FOM, say for 10 years, and use that time to (a) see what changes happen in the EU (we are not the only ones with FoM issues) and (b) develop trade deals with non-EU nations. This would manage the risks more effectively.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0
-
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Brexiteers in particular, although to be fair perhaps also much of the public in general, seem to have a decidedly out of touch view of what modern Trade actually does.
"modern Trade" recognizes that free trade between countries is a good thing per se, and not a "concession" which must be paid for by countervailing political concessions regarding sovereignty, migration, etc.
It is the EU that is out of touch, not the UK.0 -
the one thing we do know for certain is that trade make both parties to the exchange richer
this is true whether one trades with white christian european countries or with the rest of the world
the one thing we don't know yet and we urgently need to know is exactly how much poorer is the EU willing to make the people of the EU purely for political reasons.
We probably can guess its quite a lot as they already rejoice in damaging the southern european states and rejoice at the population falls in the eastern states.
Even if I accepted the cynical view you have of this (and I accept there is some evidence of this), I cannot believe that France, Germany, Netherlands etc will stand for that.
As to the southern states, their profligate approach to their own economies for years needed to be constrained as indeed, to a lesser extent did our own, and France's, as will Germany's.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
Eric_the_half_a_bee wrote: »"modern Trade" recognizes that free trade between countries is a good thing per se, and not a "concession" which must be paid for by countervailing political concessions regarding sovereignty, migration, etc.
It is the EU that is out of touch, not the UK.
Perhaps unsurprisingly you have missed the point...
A free trade deal is completely different to a single market.
Trade is no longer simply about selling goods produced in Britain to Europe or vice versa.
The UK has for many decades now courted absolutely huge amounts of inwards investment based on positioning itself as a launch pad for global business into the EU single market.
Foreign companies have invested Billions of pounds, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs, in placing their EU manufacturing facilities or HQ's in the UK precisely because it was within the single market and within the EU Customs Union.
The access afforded to these companies from being within the single market is far greater than the access afforded by a simple free trade deal and cannot be easily replicated if the UK leaves the single market.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Eric_the_half_a_bee wrote: »"modern Trade" recognizes that free trade between countries is a good thing per se, and not a "concession" which must be paid for by countervailing political concessions regarding sovereignty, migration, etc.
It is the EU that is out of touch, not the UK.
Meanwhile we have voted to Leave and may well end up with WTO terms of trade, not free trade.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Perhaps unsurprisingly you have missed the point...
A free trade deal is completely different to a single market.
Trade is no longer simply about selling goods produced in Britain to Europe or vice versa.
The UK has for many decades now courted absolutely huge amounts of inwards investment based on positioning itself as a launch pad for global business into the EU single market.
Foreign companies have invested Billions of pounds, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs, in placing their EU manufacturing facilities or HQ's in the UK precisely because it was within the single market and within the EU Customs Union.
The access afforded to these companies from being within the single market is far greater than the access afforded by a simple free trade deal and cannot be easily replicated if the UK leaves the single market.
why is inward investment beneficial to the people of the UK: it simply means that all future revenues and profits are tranferred abroad for the benefit of their shareholders.
why are the jobs desirable as you constantly preach we are short of labour: the immigration required is a huge burden on our infrastructure and a very costly one which makes us poorer
far better that more jobs go to Poland and so save the huge costs both financial and social in moving 1 million people a few thousand miles.0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »That simply boils down to the old "bird in the hand or two in the bush" argument - and I'm not sure it's valid.
Although Im arguing the opposite side i.e. that the two in the bush will eventually be worth more.HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »
And my problem with the leave argument is they've refused to acknowledge the reality of the compromises which will need to be made, and what we'll definitely lose in order to possibly gain elsewhere.
Yes they should as there will definitely be lots of losers. And the Govt should be talking about what contingencies they'll put in place to attempt to mitigate some of that & compensate where possible, although I haven't heard much on that score.
The problem is no politician wants to acknowledge that a given group will lose out, it's like trying to get an MP to say if he thinks we'd be better off if house prices went up or down. None of them will ever say because they don't want to alienate the home owners or the homeless. So they say meaningless stuff like we need a strong or healthy housing market without ever explaining what they think that means.0 -
why is inward investment beneficial to the people of the UK: it simply means that all future revenues and profits are tranferred abroad for the benefit of their shareholders.
why are the jobs desirable as you constantly preach we are short of labour: the immigration required is a huge burden on our infrastructure and a very costly one which makes us poorer
far better that more jobs go to Poland and so save the huge costs both financial and social in moving 1 million people a few thousand miles.
I have spent the majority of my working life working for overseas parented businesses with locations in the UK. Those businesses paid local taxes, including corporation tax and employers NI. They also support a large cohort of smaller British businesses that sell them goods and services. They employ a lot of British people and help keep our unemployment stats low.
The world is moving towards more globalisation, not less.Please stay safe in the sun and learn the A-E of melanoma: A = asymmetry, B = irregular borders, C= different colours, D= diameter, larger than 6mm, E = evolving, is your mole changing? Most moles are not cancerous, any doubts, please check next time you visit your GP.
0 -
why is inward investment beneficial to the people of the UK: it simply means that all future revenues and profits are tranferred abroad for the benefit of their shareholders.
why are the jobs desirable as you constantly preach we are short of labour: the immigration required is a huge burden on our infrastructure and a very costly one which makes us poorer
far better that more jobs go to Poland and so save the huge costs both financial and social in moving 1 million people a few thousand miles.
Your truly extraordinary dislike for immigration is well known, but.... just..... Wow.
Why is investment and job creation a good thing?
Really?
Can we get past these ever more bizarre posts and justifications.....
It's clear you have a really extreme dislike of immigration at an emotional level.
Can you, honestly for a change, just explain why?
Why do you dislike immigration so much you're willing to latch onto ever more extreme and tenuous reasons to prevent it?“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards