Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

mrginge

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well... You could just try asking them.;)

As has been done many times by polling companies, including this one by Yougov on the costs of reducing net EU migration.

The fact that the graph says ‘all voters’ on top should make it fairly obvious that for the message you are attempting to portray, it is worthless.

1. We know that about half of all voters do not care about immigration because they voted remain.
2. We know that if you ask *any* sample ‘how much extra would you be willing to pay for something’ the answer is always skewed towards nothing.

A first year gcse student could spot the holes in that graph.

Rinoa

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

..... but I understand this idea was dead on arrival once the CEOs of some of Britain's largest manufacturing employers met May in 10 Downing St earlier this year and told her in no uncertain terms they would be forced to move large parts or all of their businesses out of the UK were an FTA to end up the way the UK proceeded.

Complete nonesense of course.

If it won't be viable for manufacturers to be based here and sell to the EU, then surely it will be equally unviable for firms to be based in EU and sell to us.

If our manufacturers have to move factories to the EU, why won't EU manufacturers have to move factories to the UK to sell us stuff.

Sounds good to me. With a a current deficit in goods of £100BN that's an awful lot of factories coming here soon.

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

This plan business is funny IMO

A well worn Remain complaint is the lack of a plan.

When you point out the EU plans (with timescales) for a United States of Europe, the very same people slag off this plan as scaremongering !

So why do you think the same wouldn't happen to the highly detailed and published Leave plan?

There's no doubt a highly detailed Leave plan would be slated pretty hard.


But you're comparing apples with elephants here. The plans from some people for a united states of Europe has nothing to do with the Remain plan, because it's only one option for the future of the EU and we have the ability to steer it as we please.


A better parallel would be the Scottish Independence white paper, which was pretty detailed and available to the public in advance of the referendum. I don't remember any real objections to it though.


However over in the Brexit campaign, Leave didn't have as much as a post-it note plan, and by all accounts still doesn't. None of the prominent Leave campaigners want to do anything beyond shout complaints in the sidelines.


You had a brilliant opportunity to reinvent the UK on the world stage, to do something incredible, and you (Leave campaign) have done nothing but try to get almost complete EU membership without paying for it.

kabayiri

mrginge wrote: »

The fact that the graph says ‘all voters’ on top should make it fairly obvious that for the message you are attempting to portray, it is worthless.

1. We know that about half of all voters do not care about immigration because they voted remain.
2. We know that if you ask *any* sample ‘how much extra would you be willing to pay for something’ the answer is always skewed towards nothing.

A first year gcse student could spot the holes in that graph.

Imagine the outrage at a poll using similar language, but from the other side!

"How much longer are you willing to wait for council accommodation, to support FOM ?

- No time
- 3 months
- 3 years
- decades"

All you'd get is inconsistency from the public, because people keep telling them that migration is both evil and extremely beneficial. No wonder trust is so low.

Herzlos

Rinoa wrote: »

Complete nonesense of course.

If it won't be viable for manufacturers to be based here and sell to the EU, then surely it will be equally unviable for firms to be based in EU and sell to us.

If our manufacturers have to move factories to the EU, why won't EU manufacturers have to move factories to the UK to sell us stuff.

It depends on where the bigger market is, how many goods are sold there and how the supply chain works.


The more you sell into a market with a trade barrier, the more cost effective it'll be to be in that market.


Say you make cars, in the UK, but sell 80% of your output to the UK, it's likely you'll stay and just bump up the price on the EU cars.
But if you sell 80% of your cars into the EU (a market that's 10x the size of the UK), it'd make more sense to move to the EU.


If you make parts of a thing (like aircraft wings), with the rest coming from/going to somewhere across a trade border, then it makes sense to move everything into the same trading bloc. From there it makes sense that the bloc to use is either the one with the biggest market, or with the most existing factory.


So sure, there may be some EU businesses will open up UK factories in order to sell to the UK market. But I suspect most will just put up the prices. You need to remember that the UK has a population of ~50m Vs the EU's ~500m, and that our trade by percentage is equally inbalance (EU is ~45% of our exports, we're ~8% of the EUs).

Rinoa

Interesting. Twice as many would rather leave on WTO terms than accept the chequers deal.

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

Imagine the outrage at a poll using similar language, but from the other side!

"How much longer are you willing to wait for council accommodation, to support FOM ?

- No time
- 3 months
- 3 years
- decades"

All you'd get is inconsistency from the public, because people keep telling them that migration is both evil and extremely beneficial. No wonder trust is so low.

Asking people how much they'd give up for something is a pretty good indication of how much they actually care about it. And your example is a great one of a leading question; people may assume that less FoM migrants means less demand for social housing, but I suspect very few of them are actually in the social housing queue due to not being eligable on arrival, and that reducing FoM means less tax income, thus less money to provide social housing.

Rinoa

Herzlos wrote: »

The more you sell into a market with a trade barrier, the more cost effective it'll be to be in that market.

Well, exeactly.

Herzlos wrote: »

You need to remember that the UK has a population of ~50m Vs the EU's ~500m, and that our trade by percentage is equally inbalance (EU is ~45% of our exports, we're ~8% of the EUs).

Typical remainer stats. Current UK population 67M.
EU population minus UK 433M.

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

Asking people how much they'd give up for something is a pretty good indication of how much they actually care about it...

No it isn’t. It’s a very bad indication.

Please stop making things up about subjects you don’t know anything about.

Mum_of_1

mrginge wrote: »

No it isn’t. It’s a very bad indication.

Please stop making things up about subjects you don’t know anything about.

But isn't that pretty much a summary of what Team Remain have been doing since the Brexit referendum was announced?