Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

posh*spice

ukcarper wrote: »

The party's that want a second referendum have a relatively small number of MPs, there probably would be MPs in major parties that would vote for another referendum but not enough to get the vote through.

90%plus of voters voted for parties who wanted to Leave the EU at the GE..... Labour ran a Leave the EU manifesto as well as the Tories....

The British want to Leave the EU

(I can't speak for those who aren't really British but just live here and think they are entitled to tell the rest of us what we should think)

posh*spice

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Wrong.

The EU's accounts have been fully signed off since 2007 without qualification.

There have been some errors reported in EU programme spending by member states, including the UK, and this has been noted under those accounts as signed off but qualified.



Nope.

The claim was that 4% of money was missing.

That is an outright lie.



The EU did not mis-state their financial position.

The annual audit picked up around 3.8% of spending, almost all by EU member states, that has been accounted for but where the rules of the various spending programmes may not have been followed or the paperwork submitted was incorrect.



The member states.

Bore off Hamish. You LOST.

And nothing you have predicted has materialised.

"I pity the fool"

Rusty_Shackleton

cogito wrote: »

I don't have the time to deal with any of your post except the above sentence in reply to which I would say that you wouldn't be saying this if remain had won.

Actually since the majority of the population of this country have little real interest in, and weak knowledge of, how their own government and legal system works, i would have said referendums are highly inappropriate had you asked me several years ago, let alone when we get to the farce of the EU ref.

The best part of advanced democracies is that they are full of checks and balances to prevent extremists of any persuasion getting their way. A lot of people moan about the slow pace of change by governments, but rash decisions rarely go well. Just look at the chaos in whitehall in trying to actually understand all the implications of brexit, never mind addressing them.

Rusty_Shackleton

posh*spice wrote: »

90%plus of voters voted for parties who wanted to Leave the EU at the GE..... Labour ran a Leave the EU manifesto as well as the Tories....

The British want to Leave the EU

(I can't speak for those who aren't really British but just live here and think they are entitled to tell the rest of us what we should think)

Are you trying to say all 'native' brits are pro brexit? :rotfl: you certainly dont speak for me (born in England, always lived in England), and you certainly dont speak in general terms for the Scots or Northern Irish.

CKhalvashi

posh*spice wrote: »

90%plus of voters voted for parties who wanted to Leave the EU at the GE..... Labour ran a Leave the EU manifesto as well as the Tories....

The British want to Leave the EU

(I can't speak for those who aren't really British but just live here and think they are entitled to tell the rest of us what we should think)

This is a passport, more specifically it's mine. I therefore get as much as a say as you do in the domestic affairs of the UK. As you guys keep reminding me, I don't always get my own way, therefore neither do you.

If you don't like my citizenship status, get your MP to change the law. Don't be surprised if they say no, however.

GreatApe

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

3D printing is in it's infancy - is there a reason you think it won't improve to the point of being commercially useful in the future? Thinking about the manufacturing I work in, 3D printing is far more efficient (in terms of material used) than milling and offers greater accuracy and intricacy than moulds/casting and larger scale material extrusion.

Of course, 3D printing is already used for rapid (and cheap) prototyping, but there will be enormous benefits to manufacturing when it can be scaled up for mass production, the quality improves, and as the printers are equipped to handle a greater number of materials. Think about the possibilities of the speed and cost base of mass production, but the ability to customise each individual unit as the designer see's fit.

To give a basic comparison, pre-photocopiers if you wanted to mass produce a document you needed a printing press, now commercial printers are closer to photocopiers than printing presses for all but the largest volume jobs. But the real advantage isn't that photocopiers can print so quickly and cheaply, it's that it doesn't matter if the copier is printing the same page a thousand times, or a thousand different pages once... it's just as fast, and the marginal cost of changing what you're printing is zero.

I see absolutely no reason to call a 3D printer a '3D printer'. I would call them 'little factories with very limited materials and processes'.

There are many reasons why these minin factories with limited materials can not replace larger factories with a much wider range of materials.

Some quite basic reasons, like the simple fact buying materials retail at low volume is quite expensive whereas the large factories buy direct either raw materials or semi finished goods. This is a far bigger problem than many '3D printer' advocates realise. Just look at a basic electrical item a kettle it's about 1kg in mass and you can buy a cheap kettle for a fiver. You probably can't buy 1kg of the raw materials that cheaply at retail prices.

Another is the range of materials used is very limited.
Almost all the actual products you buy are many material or worse yet have computer chips in them.

Can a 3D printer work copper work steel work plastic and work glass all at once?l No it isn't eben close to that

Also another very important factor is utilisation. A small mini factory on your desk being used twice s year isn't going to be economic. A proper factory working 24/7 will easily be the more efficient route

Going 100 years into the future. Most things will be near free as they will be fully automated. In which case who wants a useless tiny mininfactory on their desk when the amazon drone wipp deliver one from the proper factory in 30 minutes.


Also we have very capable 3D printers yet most people don't make use of them they prefer the convenience of buying from a factory. I'm thinking of bread machines or even simpler a yougirt machine otherwise known as a glass jar. A glass jar is a yoghurt 'printer' or mininyoghurt factory. Pour milk in pour some bacteria in and wait there you go. The reason people won't be printing their own electricals or toys is the same reason we don't print our own bread or 'print' our own yoghurt.
You could even view a chicken as a meat 'printer' or a meat factory. In fact its pretty much as advanced a factory as you can get the meat printer mends itself finds its own materials and just gets on with it and is even self replicating yet who 3D prints chicken meat?

GreatApe

economic wrote: »

if one large machine can produce something for the whole population why do you need to have everyone have their own machine to produce the same thing?

the only benefit to a 3d printer is to tailor make something for yourself and thats it. but thats not comparable to mass production of an single product which is by far way way cheaper.

The main advantage to home manufacturing is speed,

I have a printer at home not because its cheaper or better but because when I want to print a document I don't want to wait 1-2 days for it to be delivered. Also delivery is expensive but it's going to get a lot cheaper with self drive vans or even smaller self drive robots think something the size of a dog with a range if five miles delivering small packages probably making use of the pavement rather than roads.

But that's not quite the same with trying to print objects.
If I want a new kettle I can order it next day on amazon prime or walk into tesco or even go without a kettle for a day

If I wanted to 3D print a kettle I would need a 3D printer and a stock of multiple types of plastic, copper, steel, nickle, chromium and probably a whole load more. Importantly my 3D printer if it didn't have one of the two dozen materials needed I would have to order the material (in which case why not order a kettle) and retail price for materials are very high.

Another factor in manufacturing is the dirt and smells created and other waste. When people are concerned about a coal fire plant a hundred miles away with the prevailing wind blowing out the waste products to the sea how many people are going to be happy with the waste products of even one off manufacturing right in their kitchen? Nice bit of welding fumes alongside your cereal and toast?

menachem

When people are concerned about a coal fire plant a hundred miles away with the prevailing wind blowing out the waste products to the sea how many people are going to be happy with the waste products of even one off manufacturing right in their kitchen? Nice bit of welding fumes alongside your cereal and toast?

No one wants that kind of smell, IMHO. But, the reality is people can't do about it because, it is part of economy. The more a country have good economy status, the more the environment gets damage.

gfplux

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

3D printing is in it's infancy - is there a reason you think it won't improve to the point of being commercially useful in the future? Thinking about the manufacturing I work in, 3D printing is far more efficient (in terms of material used) than milling and offers greater accuracy and intricacy than moulds/casting and larger scale material extrusion.

Of course, 3D printing is already used for rapid (and cheap) prototyping, but there will be enormous benefits to manufacturing when it can be scaled up for mass production, the quality improves, and as the printers are equipped to handle a greater number of materials. Think about the possibilities of the speed and cost base of mass production, but the ability to customise each individual unit as the designer see's fit.

To give a basic comparison, pre-photocopiers if you wanted to mass produce a document you needed a printing press, now commercial printers are closer to photocopiers than printing presses for all but the largest volume jobs. But the real advantage isn't that photocopiers can print so quickly and cheaply, it's that it doesn't matter if the copier is printing the same page a thousand times, or a thousand different pages once... it's just as fast, and the marginal cost of changing what you're printing is zero.

I look at the possibilities of 3D printing like home printing. I imagine almost everyone posting here have their own printer.
Possibly one day we will have a home 3D printer or a "local" one. Certain goods bought from the Amazon of the time will actually be a piece of software downloaded to the home or local printer.
We will have less delivery times, less delivery pollution, less jobs , and almost instant gratification.

gfplux

setmefree2 wrote: »

It would be great to see some useful information come out of the EU - some sort of grown up conversation really needs to happen - they seem to have their heads buried in the sand....you get the impression they have spent the last year just dreaming up bigger and bigger amounts that they can screw out of us....

I find it extraordinary that in June the EU publish a set of position papers that are then called demands by Brexiters and when Britain does the same two months later it is considered a clever move.
It does not matter how you gloss over it. Britain spent months waisting time (let's not go over that again) Then found itself ridiculed for being under prepared (wether true or not Britain lost the PR game) and now is playing catch up and of all things calling it "moving the debate forward"

Whatever has gone on in the past Britain is reaching an important phase in the negotiations. Britain has just one hurdle to jump. To show sufficient progress on the (agreed) three first things on the agenda and then move on to trade.
I hope, I think we all hope that Britain succeeds but in that they have to show good will or trade talks will not start till later in the year.