Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

Conrad

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

No, I lack faith in Westminster to properly support anywhere but London and the South East. Why? Because of the overwhelming lack of support and investment for anywhere but London and the South East from Westminster, for decades.

Follow your logic.
If Aussies dislike Govt policy you are arguing they ought to have a foreign body take over those decisions?


Do you see a mass movement for this in Australia or Canada?


Why not we the people demand Govts make better choices for us, why off-shore these decisions AND KEEP IN MIND MANY EU projects in UK are viewed as expensive white elephants (Newsnight did a piece on this from Wales)

Conrad

SUMMARY

UK will benefit from tailored local decision making and knowing who to blame for poor policy.

Rusty_Shackleton

Conrad wrote: »

Follow your logic.
If Aussies dislike Govt policy you are arguing they ought to have a foreign body take over those decisions?


Do you see a mass movement for this in Australia or Canada?


Why not we the people demand Govts make better choices for us, why off-shore these decisions AND KEEP IN MIND MANY EU projects in UK are viewed as expensive white elephants (Newsnight did a piece on this from Wales)

Interesting examples Canada and Aus, because both have federal governments. This means the individual states have vastly more power than any region of England does, and often more than the devolved administrations of the UK do. I agree, too mch centralised power is a problem, but the EU favours a federal, regional approach. The nationalist approach (i.e. The UK govt.) is the problem.

Its like all the comparisons about 'the US wouldnt join the EU', which a ridiculous analogy. An appropriate one is you dont see individual US states wanting to succeed from the union. The US, and to a lesser extent Aus and Canada are more akin to the EU, we're more akin to a state within them.

always_sunny

GreatApe wrote: »

Why do we need to produce things cheaper than anyone else, does apple produce the cheapest phones on earth?

The argument from Conrad (on the oranges) is that the EU imposes a 16% tariff on imported oranges to favour Spanish ones.

But oranges from out of the EU are available, so much available that the UK in 2015 imported 45% of citruses from non-EU countries. .
Should the EU have zero tariffs on everything so that they're cheaper than Spanish ones?
What is the argument you/Conrad are trying to prove with that post?

Either the argument work both ways or it's negatively biased towards the EU only.
Take that argument to Services (UK product), why should local resources (people) be favoured when resources from other countries would work cheaper?
Why are British exports increasing now? Cause the pound is tanking.

(FWIW, most Apple products are not manufactured in the United States)

But let's wait post Brexit to assess whether the UK becomes the 'free market' or whether it's as protectionist as it is today.

GreatApe

Conrad wrote: »

I envisage a flowering of higher end and cottage industry type manufacturing.

That is because you have no real grasp of economics or fundamental science even though I suspect you think your great at both.

Who would have said 15 yrs ago we'd have the car manufacturing we see today.

Almost everybody because the car manufacturing plants we have today we had 15 years ago too. Nothing additional has been added.

2002 uk production 1.82 million vehicles
2016 uk production 1.82 million vehicles

We have huge growth in brewing as but one example.

I suspect that is also wrong like your car info being wrong. Looking at uk alcohol consumption its down 20% since 2004 so while some micro brewing may have expanded the overall production has not it has actually decreased. Your the guy looking at the 2 jobs created and ignoring the 50 lost

Underground farms are springing up all over the place such as here;

No they are not, they are the fringe of the fringe growing not calorific foods but garnishes and the like which are the easiest things to do this with and often but freak circumstances like a disused bunker available for free. Try doing it from scratch see how you fair. Also food production is and has to be people lite in 20 years time we may go from 1% of the people farming to 0.1% of the people farming so from irrelevant today to more irrelevant tomorrow

GreatApe

always_sunny wrote: »

The argument from Conrad (on the oranges) is that the EU imposes a 16% tariff on imported oranges to favour Spanish ones.

But oranges from out of the EU are available, so much available that the UK in 2015 imported 45% of citruses from non-EU countries. .
Should the EU have zero tariffs on everything so that they're cheaper than Spanish ones?
What is the argument you/Conrad are trying to prove with that post?

Either the argument work both ways or it's negatively biased towards the EU only.
Take that argument to Services (UK product), why should local resources (people) be favoured when resources from other countries would work cheaper?
Why are British exports increasing now? Cause the pound is tanking.

(FWIW, most Apple products are not manufactured in the United States)

But let's wait post Brexit to assess whether the UK becomes the 'free market' or whether it's as protectionist as it is today.

conrade is a silly monkey he holds exactly opposite views in his mind and thinks both will be true

If the UK went totally free trade we would be throwing our farmers under the bus. I am not for or against that I would need to think it though more but for Conrade exiting the EU means we will get much cheaper food and our farmers would thrive too. They dont add up.

cogito

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

Interesting examples Canada and Aus, because both have federal governments. This means the individual states have vastly more power than any region of England does, and often more than the devolved administrations of the UK do. I agree, too mch centralised power is a problem, but the EU favours a federal, regional approach. The nationalist approach (i.e. The UK govt.) is the problem.

Its like all the comparisons about 'the US wouldnt join the EU', which a ridiculous analogy. An appropriate one is you dont see individual US states wanting to succeed from the union. The US, and to a lesser extent Aus and Canada are more akin to the EU, we're more akin to a state within them.

Under federal governments, all member states have equal voting weight. In the EU, voting weight is based on population so Germany has about 15 times as many votes as Malta so the EU is not a never will be a federal entity as the Germans, French and Italians would never allow it.

There was an earlier comment on here about why aspects of Brexit negotiations could not start until December. It's because of the Germans election and Michel Barmier cannot go to the loo without German permission.

GreatApe

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

No, I lack faith in Westminster to properly support anywhere but London and the South East. Why? Because of the overwhelming lack of support and investment for anywhere but London and the South East from Westminster, for decades.

The most recent example that comes to mind, DfT cancelled planned rail electrification in Wales, midlands and the north a week or so before announcing they'll press ahead with crossrail 2. Then you've got HS2, only going ahead because its seen to benefit London.

At least the EU allocated funds to areas based on need and deprivation.

Why not make it a federal uk with each region responsible for its own taxes and its own spending?

London would fly more than it does now and the rest would sink more than they are now. To pretend otherwise is stupid.

cogito

always_sunny wrote: »

But let's wait post Brexit to assess whether the UK becomes the 'free market' or whether it's as protectionist as it is today.

You're saying that the UK is protectionist today. As the UK must impose tariffs dictated by the EU, that must mean that the EU is protectionist.

Some of us have always known that. Welcome to the club.

Rusty_Shackleton

GreatApe wrote: »

Almost everybody because the car manufacturing plants we have today we had 15 years ago too. Nothing additional has been added.

2002 uk production 1.82 million vehicles
2016 uk production 1.82 million vehicles

You're accusing somebody of having no grasp of economics or fundamental science while quoting two figures in abstract. For production figures to have any meaning in this topic it needs the context of production over time.

Anyway, I remember MG Rovers collapse in 2005, there was a lot of fear for the future of car production in this country. The plants might be on the same site, but how many jobs were lost and have since been regained (or possibly not replaced at all)?