Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Graham_Devon

Ballard wrote: »

In general, Africa doesn!!!8217;t get enough water so I think that buying flowers or crops from that continent would be detrimental to the man in the street.

I guess we should just stick to stealing their doctors and nurses instead then...

If you want to help a country, the very best thing you can do is create a demand for the goods they supply. This in turn helps their economy, and, in turn, helps their infrastructure. It's what we have done since god knows when.

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

What does it tell you about the UK being willing to trash it's economy for political reasons? I'm always amazed that people think the UK is right to hurt itself for political reasons but the EU won't.

I've run through the numbers a few times and reckon Brexit is only really going to cost in the region of 2% of German car sales. Maybe less if customers just move down the value stack (3 series instead of 5, Volkswagen instead of Audi, Skoda instead of VW). It won't hurt them enough to jeopardise the Euro.

We'll come to an agreement, and I'm sure it'll include cars and car parts, but that could still really damage us.

The U.K. government is carry through the democratic process and the majority of politicians want a reasonable trade deal and have been willing to make concessions to achieve one.

Perhaps you could provide us with your workings on German car sales, and I'm not sure customer loyalty will be worth a 10% increase

gfplux

ukcarper wrote: »

This is your problem I'm not saying they need us more than we need them but if you think a no deal won't have a detrimental effect on the EU you are very blinkered indeed, no company will be happy with a risk a large percentage of thier sales. You like many of the extreme brexiters have a very narrow view and the outcome will not be as bad as you and others think or the bed of roses some brexiters think.

I was responding to the charge that EU governments will give the U.K. a good deal because of pressure from Industry.
This pressure is also coming from British Industry and my point is that if you take Britain as the example can YOU see anyone in Government changing their position because of this pressure? I do not think so.
Therefore why would other Governments bend to the will of industry.
What is bad for the goose is bad for the gander.
I think a no deal will be a disaster. Common sense will prevail but do expect to see damage on both sides. Britain in my opinion is not in the best of condition to ride out this damage.

A constants from most Brexiters.
They need us etc etc etc
Which is just silly

Another constant from a few Brexiters
A no deal is better than a bad deal OR we should just walk away.
Which is downright dangerous

buglawton

Herzlos wrote: »

You are of course aware that the poorest countries in Africa pay exactly 0% in tariffs for goods going to the EU, right?

Yes indeed, tariffs are usually paid by consumers in the receiving country not producers in the sending one. Very mischievous, Herzlos!

Reading http://www.tuaeu.co.uk/how-the-eu-starves-africa/ where I see that EU tariffs on Africa are 7.5% to 30% on produce, also there are dumping-magnitude subsidies for the EUs' own producers that interfere intensely in Africa's own agricultural viability.

Now I know perfectly well that were the UK to get a clean Brexit (and probably before we even joined), the UK would be doing similar things.
The difference is our govt will be much more accountable than Brussels and more open to good cause pressure groups in the UK.

Another aspect is that the EU includes some hot countries so there's more direct competition in agriculture with Africa. The UK might not have such a direct agenda against Africa.

Graham_Devon

Herzlos wrote: »

I've run through the numbers a few times and reckon Brexit is only really going to cost in the region of 2% of German car sales. Maybe less if customers just move down the value stack (3 series instead of 5, Volkswagen instead of Audi, Skoda instead of VW). It won't hurt them enough to jeopardise the Euro.

We'll come to an agreement, and I'm sure it'll include cars and car parts, but that could still really damage us.

Look at VW in the US.

VW in the us provide US customers with:
1. Better specifications for lower costs
2. Better warranties
3. Better aftercare
4. Better recalls
5. Compensation
6. Double the warranty

Why do they do this? They have stiffer competition. Competition which doesn't exist here.

When the VW emissions scandal emerged, who were first in the queue to get recalled? The US customers. Who received compensation? The US customers. They could even hand back their cars and get what they paid back, minus fair wear and tear.

What did UK and EU customers get? An apology, a long wait, and a recall at the customers own costs of getting the car there at specific times, and no compensation.

And length of warranty? 6 years, compared to our 3. Same mileage.
http://www.vw.com/warranty/

The only reason for all of this is that VW have to try harder. They have more brands to compete with. Here, they can seemingly do what they please. Customers problem.

VW threatened to pull out of the US if it fined them the amount the US originally stated it would. The US fined them, VW paid up, and carried on. We fined them...hmm, nothing.

ukcarper

gfplux wrote: »

I was responding to the charge that EU governments will give the U.K. a good deal because of pressure from Industry.
This pressure is also coming from British Industry and my point is that if you take Britain as the example can YOU see anyone in Government changing their position because of this pressure? I do not think so.
Therefore why would other Governments bend to the will of industry.
What is bad for the goose is bad for the gander.
I think a no deal will be a disaster. Common sense will prevail but do expect to see damage on both sides. Britain in my opinion is not in the best of condition to ride out this damage.

The British government is tied to result of referendum I'm sure if they weren't they would concede a lot more. Although I'm not convince a no deal will be a disaster it will definitely be worse than a reasonable deal and that would be of benefit to both sides.

Sapphire

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I guess we should just stick to stealing their doctors and nurses instead then...

If you want to help a country, the very best thing you can do is create a demand for the goods they supply. This in turn helps their economy, and, in turn, helps their infrastructure. It's what we have done since god knows when.

Yes, I agree. I notice that things like green beans sold in supermarkets often come from Kenya, and other foods also come from Africa, South America and other not well off areas of the world. The only thing is that they are all packaged to the nth degree in plastic bags or boxes and bags (I believe this is done somewhere in continental Europe, and no doubt it's another scam by large corporations for their profit).

What I've resolved to do is to buy as much as I can in the market, which sells loose vegetables and fruits. As well as perhaps helping poorer areas of the world, I don't particularly want to eat food that's been kept in plastic, and it is also less expensive unpackaged. I will have to resolve how to keep things in the fridge for a few days (i.e. not wrapped in plastic), and also how to assess how much, exactly, I should buy, since I've grown lazy and never take any notice of weights when things are in packets. :think:

Of course, I also buy as much as possible that is produced in the UK, of all kinds of things. I'll favour our goods over those of any other country whenever possible.

iro

Herzlos wrote: »

You are of course aware that the poorest countries in Africa pay exactly 0% in tariffs for goods going to the EU, right?

There are tariffs imposed on any product which is processed, so tomatoes which are placed in tins 40%straight away.

Why?

To protect inefficient EU producers, denying developing countries access to your markets through value added processing is evil because it condemns the poorest nations to being nothing more than primary producers and locked into never ending under development and poverty.

Herzlos

iro wrote: »

There are tariffs imposed on any product which is processed, so tomatoes which are placed in tins 40%straight away.

Why?

To protect inefficient EU producers, denying developing countries access to your markets through value added processing is evil because it condemns the poorest nations to being nothing more than primary producers and locked into never ending under development and poverty.

But for those countries the 0% tariffs apply across the board. Processed or not.

Thrugelmir

Originally Posted by gfplux

This pressure is also coming from British Industry .

There's very little left of British Industry other than the name. The concern is growing from multinationals who have a vested interest in free trade. Ultimately profit being their concern. With the Chinese slowly and surely making inroads into European markets.