Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

cogito

Moby wrote: »

Agreed........ but my point is what do we do? Provide leadership and co-operate with potential allies to deal with huge issues coming down the pipeline or turn our backs? When the forces of nationalism and populism rise the world becomes an uglier place imo.

We don't need to be in the EU to do that despite what Barnier may think.

mrginge

vivatifosi wrote: »

I used to monitor foreign investment in the UK as part of my job mrgignge. While it is true companies come to the UK for a number of reasons, e.g. English language, the relative ease of set up and exit, generally business friendly outlook; access to the single market is a huge factor.

The major source of inward investment to the UK has always been the USA. When American companies look to move to Europe in the future they will want certainty as to whether they will get single market access. Otherwise, there are other options where English is widely spoken and which also have a business friendly outlook, e.g. Ireland.

We will still get investment from America. But if the likes of Amazon or Five Guys expand here, they are doing so by and large to serve our domestic market, which is very different to using the UK as a convenient stepping stone to continental Europe.

That's not to say we won't get any investment in the UK going forward, but we have to be able to signal to firms what the single market access will consist of. Business wants to be in possession of all the facts when expanding into a new market to mitigate risk.

All this is completely true. There is no doubt there will be a net negative of foreign investment relating to single market access and uncertainty will and has stalled any decisions.

But if there is also investment from Five Guys and Amazon despite restricted SM access then you can’t just ignore it because it doesn’t come with a ‘brexit’ sticker. You can’t just say it would have happened anyway so it doesn’t count.

Well you can, but if in five years you’re claiming Brexit is a disaster because 10 people have lost their jobs at Airbus supporting the EU market while 9 of them now work at Amazon supporting the uk market it’s going to be a tough sell.

gfplux

Will the Brexit dividend extend to the British Military?

Where will all this money come from if there is not a huge Brexit dividend?
I suspect Higher personal taxes and perhaps higher VAT will play a roll.
Brexiters told us that out of the EU Britain will be free to change VAT but they forgot to say it can go up as well as down.

This from Politico

QUOTE
Spend spend spend: Gavin Williamsons ongoing row with the PM about military funding, with the defense secretary demanding a big cash boost in time for the NATO summit in two weeks time to show Trump that Britain is serious about defense. The Times Deborah Haynes reports today that Williamson will demand £4 billion a year extra at a crunch meeting in No. 10 next week !!!8230; The Guardians Ewen MacAskill reports he is also at war with May and Hammond over a pay rise for the armed forces.
END QUOTE

gfplux

An extra tax on the over 40s. Is this something Britain can do once out of the EU.

From Politico

QUOTE
MIDDLE-AGE TAX: People aged 40 and over should pay an extra ring-fenced tax to fund social care services, a joint report by two parliamentary committees advises today. Sky News has the story. The Daily Express has quotes from former civil service chief Bob Kerslake agreeing that ministers should raise taxes to fund social care.;Everyone accepts the system needs more money; and that cant be done without tax rises,; he said. Its an insult to our intelligence for the prime minister to tell us theres a Brexit dividend.
END QUOTE

Herzlos

mrginge wrote: »

All this is completely true. There is no doubt there will be a net negative of foreign investment relating to single market access and uncertainty will and has stalled any decisions.

But if there is also investment from Five Guys and Amazon despite restricted SM access then you can!!!8217;t just ignore it because it doesn!!!8217;t come with a !!!8216;brexit!!!8217; sticker. You can!!!8217;t just say it would have happened anyway so it doesn!!!8217;t count.

Well you can, but if in five years you!!!8217;re claiming Brexit is a disaster because 10 people have lost their jobs at Airbus supporting the EU market while 9 of them now work at Amazon supporting the uk market it!!!8217;s going to be a tough sell.

Amazon and Five Guys, in the main, sell stuff to the end customer in domestic markets. They'll need to get their goods in from somewhere, but the single market doesn't affect their front-of-house operations.



And if we lose 10 skilled* Airbus jobs, replaced with 9** minimum wage warehouse/kitchen staff, is that going to be a good thing?


*I honestly don't know the breakdown of Airbus jobs, or what skill/pay levels there are, but I'm pretty confident the bulk of Amazon jobs will be warehouse staff or managers, and the bulk of Five Guys staff will be kitchen/serving staff or managers. Neither will be paid particularly well. Amazon in particular seems to be an awful employer and moving more and more towards automation.


**At this stage, I really doubt we'll going to be seeing parity in headcount. I reckon we'll probably gain somewhere about 25-50% of what we lose, whilst also moving down the pay scale. Plus, if we have a particularly nasty recession, places like Amazon (selling largely 'luxury' goods) and Five Guys (selling fast food) will likely see a reduction in business and staffing.

Enterprise_1701C

Personally I think that we would be losing jobs to eastern Europe if we stayed in the eu, they seem to like sending them over there.

And I suspect it will be very difficult for Airbus, where are they going to find that amount of skilled workers. It is worth noting that their majority shareholders are France and Germany. And if it was so important to stay within the single market, why would they be considering China or the US?

The eu will use any weapon at it's disposal to stop the UK making a success of Brexit, and are desperately trying to tie us to the single market to stop us doing so.

Lornapink

phillw wrote: »

The reality is that post brexit they can earn more money working elsewhere & they don't have to put up coming to a country they have discovered hates foreigners coming here.

What is your evidence that temporary fruit pickers hate nations that offer temporary pickers visa's, to include Australia and Japan?

Herzlos

Lornapink wrote: »

What is your evidence that temporary fruit pickers hate nations that offer temporary pickers visa's, to include Australia and Japan?

He's saying the English dislike foreigners, not that foreigners dislike the English.

phillw

mrginge wrote: »

Well you can, but if in five years you’re claiming Brexit is a disaster because 10 people have lost their jobs at Airbus supporting the EU market while 9 of them now work at Amazon supporting the uk market it’s going to be a tough sell.

I think your numbers need some work to be taken seriously.

Lornapink

phillw wrote: »

It's not a sound argument. Having unemployed doctors and nurses in their country won't improve anything.

WHO stats show just 1 Doctor for up to 300,000 citizens in some low income countries. These nations spend their meagre resources on training these vital personnel, only for greedy over-entitled Brits to encourage them to come here leaving the most desperate children on the planet with nothing.


Here's a little reading on some of the averages pertaining to Africa;


Data indicate that globally, there are 13 physicians per 10 000 population, with large variations between countries and regions. In the African Region, there are only 2 physicians per 10 000 compared with 32 per 10 000 in the European Region. Globally, there are 28 nurses and midwives per 10 000 population, ranging from a low of 11 per 10 000 in the African Region to a high of 79 per 10 000 in the European Region.


While there are no gold standards for assessing the sufficiency of the health workforce, WHO estimates that countries with fewer than 23 health-care professionals (counting only physicians, nurses and midwives) per 10 000 population will be unlikely to achieve adequate coverage rates for the key primary health-care interventions prioritized by the Millennium Development Goals.


http://www.who.int/whosis/whostat/EN_WHS09_Table6.pdf