Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Thrugelmir

ilovehouses wrote: »

Take a look back through this thread. With no sense of irony brexiters on a daily basis post evidence of how well the economy has performed since joining the EU.

The economy has been living on borrowed time for some years. Likewise borrowed money. I have no doubt that exiting the EU will be blamed entirely on future economic performance. When the issue is far more complex.

There was a survey posted here yesterday suggesting foreigners think British built cars command a 9% premium. Now that needs a massive pinch of salt but what premium do you think an Austin Allegro might have attracted by virtue of being British built?

Is British Leyland the best example you think of. Given the UK's rich heritage of producing classicly engineered road cars. Along with it's involvement in the hi tech world of F1.

Tromking

ilovehouses wrote: »

There was a survey posted here yesterday suggesting foreigners think British built cars command a 9% premium. Now that needs a massive pinch of salt but what premium do you think an Austin Allegro might have attracted by virtue of being British built? AIUI British Leyland never made an aggregate profit over the course of its existence - never mind a premium - the taxpayer had to discount the cars to shift them.

So just to be clear, to counter the point that foreign consumers might think that a bit of kudos comes with the purchase of British goods, you reference BL`s Austin Allegro, a car that hasn't been in production for about 35 years?

spikyone

Herzlos wrote: »

Not improved standards, shared resources and research, free movement or consistent regulations?

Improved standards? Little to do with the EU - in many cases (for example animal welfare) the UK has actually driven those standards, and we are not so stupid that we couldn't define whatever standards we consider suitable without the EU guiding us.

Shared resources and research? Cross-border research is not going to stop when we leave, and frankly the notion of "shared resources" whilst we're paying into the economies of net beneficiary nations whilst jobs are moved to those same nations to reduce costs (I've seen first hand a former employer move jobs from Spain to Romania in the name of cost saving) is a little ridiculous.

Consistent regulations? Roughly half our trade is with non-EU nations who potentially have differing regulations anyway. It's a complete non-issue.

ilovehouses wrote: »

Which means the list is a virtue signal. Given the subject of immigration was front and centre of the referendum campaign it's a bit odd that 'seeing a few less foreigners in the UK' didn't make it to the list.

I voted leave, and I didn't do so because I wanted fewer foreigners in the UK. I did vote leave (in part) because it's preposterous that an unqualified European can move to the UK without a job and send benefits back to his family, whilst a qualified citizen from outside the EU that wishes to work in an industry where we have skills shortages has to jump through all manner of hoops. I hope that post-Brexit, we'll be in a position to judge all potential migrants equally and use it to boost our economy rather than as a means to export money. It was only the Remain camp that portrayed the Leave campaign as being entirely about "keeping foreigners out". If Remainers had bothered listening to anyone else's point of view, their own campaign might have been more effective.

wunferall

ilovehouses wrote: »

Take a look back through this thread. With no sense of irony brexiters on a daily basis post evidence of how well the economy has performed since joining the EU.

Wrong.

On a daily basis Brexiters post evidence of how well the economy has performed since Brexit was announced despite remainers telling us we would see immediate and severe consequences. Well we haven't, what with no emergency budget; no immediate recession; no millions of jobs lost etc. etc. etc.

If you are so enamoured with how the EU supposedly improves the economies of it's member countries why are you not trumpeting the success of Italy, Greece or Spain? Spain (which is doing better than poor Italy) is touting it's growth over the past year but has only recently recovered to pre-crisis levels. If the UK economy is because of the EU it stands to reason (and even more-so with Euro membership) that so must Greece, Spain and Italy be the fault of the EU.

Arklight

wunferall wrote: »

Wrong.

On a daily basis Brexiters post evidence of how well the economy has performed since Brexit was announced despite remainers telling us we would see immediate and severe consequences. Well we haven't, what with no emergency budget; no immediate recession; no millions of jobs lost etc. etc. etc.

If you are so enamoured with how the EU supposedly improves the economies of it's member countries why are you not trumpeting the success of Italy, Greece or Spain? Spain (which is doing better than poor Italy) is touting it's growth over the past year but has only recently recovered to pre-crisis levels. If the UK economy is because of the EU it stands to reason (and even more-so with Euro membership) that so must Greece, Spain and Italy be the fault of the EU.

Great. You've just justified independence for Stoke on Trent.

wunferall

Arklight wrote: »

Great. You've just justified independence for Stoke on Trent.

And for the rest of the UK, as decided by 17,410,742 voters. Brexit here we come.

Tromking

ilovehouses wrote: »

I'm not trying to counter the point. A brand probably does command a premium by virtue of being 'British'.

I used the Austin Allegro example because it shows just how far we've come in the intervening decades. If foreigners think British made cars command a 9% premium today the Austin Allegro of yesteryear must've been zero.

..and foreigners allegedly think British food and drink commands a 20 odd percent premium. Now there's a set of words you wouldn't have heard uttered in the 70's.

We've come a long way.

The inference being then that our 40 year membership of the EEC/EU has transformed the way foreigners view British goods?

wunferall

ilovehouses wrote: »

It's perspective.

British Leyland employed 250,000 people. Morgan make lovely road cars but currently employ less than 200.

Why Morgan? You can't compare that to BL so why not mention Nissan, Honda, Toyota or Mini or how the UK now exports more cars than it ever has in the past?

How many do Aston Martin and McLaren employ and why do you not rejoice in their recent announcements of expansion instead of employing diversionary tactics?

At the same time as British Leyland employed 250,000 workers the coal mines employed 290,000. Times change.

That is perspective, not your attempts at decrying our country.

Thrugelmir

ilovehouses wrote: »

Question. For how many decades have you held this view?


It's perspective.

British Leyland employed 250,000 people. Morgan make lovely road cars but currently employ less than 200.

Some considerable time. Comes from the environment that I spent my working life in and been exposed too. Along with the people that I had the good fortune to work for. Events are rarely as surprising as the media make out.

That 250,000 was the old fashioned pre robotic production lines.

TVR are coming back. Then there's Aston Martin, Rolls Royce, Mclaren, Jaguar, Bentley, Range Rover., AC, Ariel, Lotus.

British Leyland was a joke. Certainly for those of us that remember Red Robbo. The arrival of the Japanese was revolutionary for the UK car industry. With the early imported Datsuns set a standard. As it was they they brought the change in working practices, quality etc once they commenced manufacturing.

cogito

ilovehouses wrote: »

Take a look back through this thread. With no sense of irony brexiters on a daily basis post evidence of how well the economy has performed since joining the EU.

Some of that is because of government policy but some is because we've been forced to compete by sharing common standards across the bloc and we've thrived upon it. We've got open and unimpeded access to the single market and a massive pool of available skilled labour on the doorstep. There's no 'might have' about it.

And of course it's distinctly possible that many of these things would have come about under the Common Market. It didn't need to evolve into the EU for them to happen.

Edit - on reflection, I believe that the Single European Act brought them about and that was pre-EU.