Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

buglawton

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

A moot point, as by any measure we are going to be worse off after brexit, and under those circumstances it’s discretionary spending on perceived luxuries like flowers that stops first, even if they 8% cheaper...

Balderdash.. If leaving will make us worse off, why did joining slow down UK economic growth?

https://www.socialeurope.eu/eu-membership-accelerate-uk-economic-growth

...UK economy did not improve after joining the EU. Indeed, it clearly grew more slowly than it had in pre-accession decades.

...From 2.4% per annum from 1950-73 to 2.0% per annum for 1973-2007.

... (For) other major economies including the USA, Canada and Australia... the post-1973 slowdown was minor and much less than in the EU6.

1950-73 in the UK is often termed the ‘golden age’ in the UK, even by economists who argue that joining the EU was beneficial for UK economic growth.

HPC_Ghuol_Hunter

Herzlos wrote: »

Malta is lovely though.

Very crowded. I would have to live on Gozo.

chucknorris

HPC_Ghuol_Hunter wrote: »

Very crowded. I would have to live on Gozo.

I've only been there for a day trip from the mainland, but it was extremely peaceful and beautiful. I think I'd have to go for a holiday home on Gozo, and my home on the mainland.

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

Malta is lovely though.

For now, maybe.

It will be stuffed in a few years time when the Med Migrant Wars kick in.

Enterprise_1701C

They're desperately trying to get Malta to take more of the economic migrants, obviously want to wreck Malta as well as everywhere else now.

Chances are none of them will be allowed to stay - Malta have said it will allow genuine refugees to stay.

These ships going around rescuing people are the main cause of the crisis. If they had taken them back to Turkey or wherever when it first started happening then it would have been nipped in the bud. The rescue ships are the cause of the problem and the death of the mainly economic migrants are on their hands.

There are refugee centres nearby, ones that are being assisted by the UK at least, and I know they are not ideal, but surely they are better than drowning, and the people will be more willing to return home when they can.

When refugees reach a safe haven, surely they should be happy to have food and shelter, they should not be desperately trying to get to other countries etc. If you escape from war then you should be happy and grateful to be safe, you would not be complaining because you are in a camp with food and accommodation.

Malthusian

The Independent article is fake news. Ashcroft is very clear that he is talking about co-locating, not moving headquarters.

[Ashcroft quotes the Maltese Finance Minister]“It is not a question of whether you stay [in the UK] or you leave. It’s about protecting yourself. In a time of uncertainty, you protect yourself by having one foot here and one foot there."

[...] Political and business leaders are in agreement that if a UK company is looking to have a subsidiary firm or a smaller base in Malta its senior staff should find time to visit the island.

[...] So is Malta the answer for all UK firms seeking to co-locate post-Brexit? In short: no. [my emphasis]

The article is even headlined "Malta makes a strong case to host the EU outposts of British companies".

Yet the Independent and the Guardian choose to lie that Ashcroft is urging British companies to move to Malta.

Ashcroft's article is a fawning, blatantly paid-for advertorial and a complete waste of space, but nowhere does he advocate that British firms should move to Malta. He advocates that they should consider setting up an office in Malta from which they can sell to EU and North African markets. This is a perfectly sensible piece of advice.

This is not nit-picking or about spin. The difference between setting up a subsidiary or sales office in Malta, and moving an entire business to Malta, is obvious to anyone with an 11-year-old's grasp of how business works. But not if you are literally demented with hate.

kabayiri

I find a lot of this Brexit-inspired reporting is short termist and selective, and that's on both sides.

So...companies/individuals look at Malta. Well, it's been happening well before Brexit. They even invented a term for it - near sourcing.

If you don't like outsourcing or nearsourcing , then perhaps look at your bank / insurer / utility provider , as to why they have been moving tens of thousands of job roles for decades now.

Maybe such actions hollowed out the job market here a little, but it would depend on the area as to how well it coped with the change.

I think the Brexit vote demonstrates that some places are just more impacted by this type of change than others. Brexit exposed the imbalances in the economy, but they were already there.

kabayiri

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

...
These ships going around rescuing people are the main cause of the crisis. If they had taken them back to Turkey or wherever when it first started happening then it would have been nipped in the bud. The rescue ships are the cause of the problem and the death of the mainly economic migrants are on their hands.
...

Being honest, I supported 3 charities with monthly donations.

One of them was £10 per month to a charity which has been very active in this refugee area.

My reward for this support was an increasingly hard sell to get me to pay more!

I now think they are part of the problem, and not the solution. I've lost faith and cancelled the payments.

buglawton

Filo25 wrote: »

Because it's a small country that has become very rich at least partly through becoming a tax haven, as I have said many times before the problem for the UK is you lose more in taxes on the existing large tax base if you race to the bottom on rates than you do from any inflows, so you will have to cull public services here if you slash tax rates.

Generally in the UK we seem to have an age old problem, we want Scaninavian level government services and tax haven level tax rates!

So Singapore is a small nation that's rich by being a tax haven. Fair point.

The UK is a large nation. If it tried to be a tax haven (so following examples of Corporation tax & VAT from Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta and Holland) it would lose revenues that are needed to support it's large population and welfare state.

To which I have to add: Must the UK's tax model use internationality mobile taxes to support it's standing public sector costs? Taxes that large corporations and high net worth people run rings around?

Perhaps Singapore is ahead of the curve by devising taxes that traders, corporations and the rich don't bother to circumnavigate.

In my ideal Brexit (free from EU rules) there would be a radical redesign of UK tax system from Tariffs to VAT to income tax.

Rinoa

In case you only watch BBC headlines. Just breaking in Australia, possibly the biggest #DespiteBrexit yet: British defence giant BAE Systems has won the tender to design and manage the construction of nine anti-submarine warships. The deal represents the biggest peacetime building programme in Australian naval history and is worth $35 billion, or £20 billion. It is being reported that the clincher was Gavin Williamson’s decision to send Royal Navy ships to Australia and the Pacific.