Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

GreatApe

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No one wants insolvent companies. Far better to drive them out of business. Then mop up their trade. With low interest rates zombie businesses simply survive. Not healthyfor the wider economy.

That is just lefty nonsense

GreatApe

Thrugelmir wrote: »

With the UK running a record trade deficit. Something has to give. If the economy is to rebalance.

What does that mean? How did you conclude that we were out of balance is there a scale we can put the economy onto?

economic

according to this:

http://www.ercouncil.org/chart-of-the-week/tag/trade-balance?currentPage=9

we have been in a trade deficit more often then not since the early 60s.

gfplux

ess0two wrote: »

Diesel cars, which you fail to admit, given the alienation of diesel is it any wonder sales are down.

I gave the link to the story so posters could read everything themselves.
Sure diesel car sales fell heavily, who would be surprised. Even in a booming economy diesel car sales would be in trouble.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41884203

Further into the story is this quote.
---
"In its latest report, the SMMT said there were 158,192 new cars sold last month, a 12.2% decline.
All sectors suffered declines, with business sales 26.8% lower, fleet sales down by 13% and private buyer demand falling by 10.1%.
However, demand for Alternatively Fuelled Vehicles (AFV), including electric and hybrid, rose again, increasing by 36.9% to 8,244 registrations.
Sales of petrol vehicles grew by 2.7%.
"However, these gains were unable to offset heavy losses in the diesel segment, as continuing consumer concerns resulted in its biggest hit yet, with demand down 29.9%," the SMMT said.
Sales of diesel vehicles fell by 21.7% in September."
---
What do you think about the fall in purchases by Business, fleet and private buyers? In my opinion the numbers are shocking and frightening for Britain and British workers in car supply. No one including myself should find satisfaction in this. As a guide to the economic welfare of Britain this is very worrying.
We should all hope that sales in November and December are better.

In addition.
Workers wherever they are (Britain or the 27) should be very worried if they work in a factory producing Diesel engines for cars.

Enterprise_1701C

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No one wants insolvent companies. Far better to drive them out of business. Then mop up their trade. With low interest rates zombie businesses simply survive. Not healthyfor the wider economy.

Aldermore bank appear to be the latest company to fall into foreign ownership. A growing profitable business as well.

So where do you draw the line? Many start-up companies start insolvent, should they immediately be sold off? While a company exists it has the chance to turn around and break into profit again, if it is sold off where is the incentive?

It's like with nationalised companies, the unions ensure that the management have to jump through impossible hoops just to sack someone that really should not be in the job, where is the incentive to do well if you can't be booted out for doing badly?

If you are in business you don't stay down the first time you are knocked down, you get up and fight until you win.

mayonnaise

masterwilde wrote: »

Seriously..... so Greece is doing so well hey? how about Spain?

A simple graph can answer this question.

Arklight

masterwilde wrote: »

So i was always a leaver and never for the dross the media speculated.

The reality is Europe is governed by the elite for the elite, they dont care about the individual countries or people of those countries. This is evidenced by the poorer countries in the EU. Now ask yourself when its open knowledge that the EU is always looking to recruit new member states, who other than poor countries are left? Who will pay for the upgrades to them, the constant inflow of money they need?

Now with regards to trade agreements, the UK should decide who with and at what price, not the Brussels elite. We should have the power to decline or accept.

Now with regard to money, well on a country scale whats the issue, the world runs on a debt based economic model, debts are not paid for, they are kicked down the road for the next generation. This should be a problem but isnt, as evidenced by the western world.

I was with you until this bit:


Now with regards to trade agreements, the UK should decide who with and at what price, not the Brussels elite. We should have the power to decline or accept.


The Leave side doesn't seem to appreciate that in order to achieve this we need international partners to agree. We have been told by Leave that the entire world is clamouring to sign free trade agreements with us, but all these months on, there is no evidence of this at all.


We have been told by Leave that the EU will split apart and all the major players will sign free trade agreements, and all that has happened is they've closed ranks and told us to get ready for WTO terms.


Everything that Leave promises is going to happen is not happening. The only thing that has happened is that we've learnt that many Leave supporters don't understand the difference between free trade, and tariff free trade, and that our economy is tanking.


Yes global elite etc etc, I don't disagree with you, it's just I'm more interested in being able to keep paying my mortgage.

ukcarper

phillw wrote: »

How can trading terms remain the same or get better if the "will of the people" rejected the current terms.

Do you not read anything or just deliberately misunderstand what has been said, these are countries we are already trading with, they do not have a trade deal with EU so our trade with them does not depend on us being in EU so us leaving will make no difference.

This is the whole problem with both sides in this argument they are so blinkered in thier views they can only see things from thier side.

CKHALVASHI Made a rash statement that 80% of our trade was dependent on us being in EU when it was pointed out that only 43% of our trade is with EU he started making excuses to justify his post. Now 43% is a large part of our trade and if we don't get a good deal it will be adversely effected so why come out with all the other nonsense.

System

masterwilde wrote: »

Now with regards to trade agreements, the UK should decide who with and at what price, not the Brussels elite. We should have the power to decline or accept.

I wish I could live in this fantasy world.

Herzlos

ukcarper wrote: »

Do you not read anything or just deliberately misunderstand what has been said, these are countries we are already trading with, they do not have a trade deal with EU so our trade with them does not depend on us being in EU so us leaving will make no difference.

Surely you understand that it's more nuanced than a binary trading/not-trading deal, and that the trade flows better for countries with a deal than those using WTO?

Also, the assumption is that we'll just take a copy of any trade agreements that the EU has made when we leave, and that all of those trading partners will accept the same terms they gave the EU, because we're so important. The reality is that the EU has much more bargaining power than we do, so can potentially get terms accepted that we can't. Thus any country that we're proposing takes a copied EU deal will likely want to alter the terms to be more favourable for them, even if it's after an interim where we maintain the status quo.

Realistically, the absolute best case for these copied deals is that we can get exactly the same terms the EU has unless we're making serious concessions.