Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Rough_Justice

gfplux wrote: »

UPDATE

This is apparently a multinational
I cut the rest to avoid posting it again.

This is also apparently a multipost.
Is there any good reason why you could not edit the original?
I'm sorely tempted to press the "Spam" button.


As a multinational company why do you find it surprising that work is being outsourced?
Especially when the UK is currently running at what is technically known as full employment.

Rough_Justice

Arklight wrote: »

Eh?

You have to queue up and go through passport control to cross the border. Admittedly it!!!8217;s quite quick but it isn!!!8217;t an open border.

Your link also points out that you can!!!8217;t even take a hire car over because the insurance is invalid.

No it doesn't so why attempt to deceive?
It very clearly says :

It is legally permitted to cross the borders in a North Cyprus car rental from the North to the South of the island but it is not advised to do this at this time

Read the rest for a complete explanation.
South to north for example so long as you ensure adequate cover there is no problem.

buglawton

gfplux wrote: »

UPDATE

This is apparently a multinational

One of the posters here is in the IT industry.
I would be interested in a responce to the following.
Thank you.

This is a copy and post from a kitchen table somewhere in the UK

QUOTE
Chatting with my other half this evening.....
The company where he works are in the process of outsourcing a lot of IT jobs to parts of Europe where labour is cheaper.
Hubby is moving his team abroad.
This evening, with a sigh of relief, he said "I've had another Pole authorised"
To make sure I'd understood correctly I asked
"Is this a Polish worker in Poland to do the work that a Brit was doing in Britain?"
"Yes" he said.
The irony of this was not lost on either of us.
END QUOTE

Very old news to me (who is in IT). I am aware of whole departments having been shipped to the cheaper edges of the EU long before Brexit was a word. EU money has been used to subsidise some very large industrial moves like this too. Mixed results because salaries are rising so fast in exactly those cheaper zones and local IT people there are footloose.

Ironically, Brexit might actually reduce this form of outsourcing for services to the UK government and its service providers who may then not be legally compelled to accept EU based bids.

Rough_Justice

ilovehouses wrote: »

That's true though - we won't be able to meaningfully negotiate new trade deals until we know what the EU trade deal is and we won't know that until about 31st December 2020.

Nothing to do with being allowed and more to do with the practical difficulties.

Rubbish!
If there is no trade agreement by March 2018 then we will see a WTO Brexit.
In case you missed it, negotiations on trade are due to commence soon, after the Brussels summit where Tusk expects the EU27 to agree the transition arrangements.

So the UK (and the rest of the world) will know what trade agreement has been reached between the EU and the UK by March 2018 at the latest and any "practical difficulties" are purely imaginary on your part.

Herzlos

mrginge wrote: »

You sound very much like you know what this backstop position is.
Which is incredible seeing as how there is no actual agreed backstop position.

All that has been agreed is to ‘come up with a backstop’. It’s nothing more than a can kick in order to defer the difficult decisions to being dealt with alongside the trade talks.

I am bored of repeating this, but trade and Irish border get sorted together.
That is and always was the sensible option.

The backstop is well defined; if we can't solve the border problem we've agreed to regulatory and customs alignment for NI. In essence, it stays in. We spent pages debating it.

What isn't known is what solution the UK will come up with for the border or more accurately who they'll throw under the bus.

Rinoa

Herzlos wrote: »

The backstop is well defined; if we can't solve the border problem we've agreed to regulatory and customs alignment for NI.

In that agreement they have actually inserted that well known phrase "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed"

Clearly the 'backstop' only refers to any deal done with the EU. If there is no deal, there is no agreement for an Irish border.

The Govt. are probably thinking any deal making a border necessary won't be acceptable anyway.

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

The backstop is well defined; if we can't solve the border problem we've agreed to regulatory and customs alignment for NI. In essence, it stays in. We spent pages debating it.

What isn't known is what solution the UK will come up with for the border or more accurately who they'll throw under the bus.

Ok. If that is correct then you can point us all in the direction of the agreed text for this !!!8216;well defined!!!8217; backstop.

Please bear in mind that if you trot out the eu!!!8217;s proposal in their draft agreement we will all fall off our chairs laughing.

But when you do find this fantasy text we can then wonder why none of the following have cottoned on to this incredible about face by TM -

Any brexit mp
The DUP
The media
the Irish govt
The eu
Nigel Farage

FYI.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/dup-unconcerned-at-renewed-uk-pledge-to-backstop-1.3433076

GreatApe

ilovehouses wrote: »

It's a bit naive to think a £4k price hike on something would affect only the mix of branding but not the volume.

If VAT on cars went from 20% to 50% that would be a 25% price hike.
A £50k BMW would go up in price to £62.5k so up £12,500
A £12k Ford would go up in price to £15k so up £3,000

Total volume of car sales would fall perhaps 15% but its more likely to be say for example 25% fall in sales of the high end 10% in the middle and 0% fall in the low end the reason is some of the higher end buyers would shift towards middle end models and middle end buyers to lower end models.

My estimate is that it would reduce UK imports of cars by about £10 billion in value
Domestic GDP would go up as more is spent on repair and maintenance and less on importing German luxury cars. The balance of trade would also be £10 billion better off.

Herzlos

mrginge wrote: »

Ok. If that is correct then you can point us all in the direction of the agreed text for this !!!8216;well defined!!!8217; backstop.

Please bear in mind that if you trot out the eu!!!8217;s proposal in their draft agreement we will all fall off our chairs laughing.

I've seen nothing to indicate the clause has changed, rather the opposite:

The U.K. has agreed that the EU’s “backstop” option for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland — which would include Northern Ireland remaining in the EU’s customs territory, and was rejected outright by Prime Minister Theresa May — should remain in the draft legal withdrawal text

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-and-uk-reach-brexit-transition-deal/amp/

Given everything else May climbed down on why do you think this would be an exception?

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

I've seen nothing to indicate the clause has changed, rather the opposite:



https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-and-uk-reach-brexit-transition-deal/amp/

Given everything else May climbed down on why do you think this would be an exception?

Is that it?

Ok fine. I guess Jacob Rees mogg will be doing his nut when he eventually gets round to reading politico.eu.