Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

cogito

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

“If all else fails, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through”

General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett - 1917.

Ah, Blackadder.

cogito

Lungboy wrote: »

Flexibility for our politicians would be wonderful if it wasn't this shower of idiots we have in power you're handing it to. I have zero faith in them to make any worthwhile use of it, so the immediate damage of a No Deal isn't worth the risk.

We handed it to idiots like Heath and Major without whom we wouldn't be in this mess.

gfplux

Herzlos wrote: »

I have as many answers as you, but I'm just going by the logic.


I think there was talk about letting anything in-transit through to completion, to avoid folk caught out on Brexit day. Anyone else bringing anything into the UK that's not covered by a single market will need to be stopped at customs. That could take anything from seconds to hours, per vehicle, which will compound.


Delays in goods arriving, or an increase in costs of goods, will hurt any UK manufacturing that involves importing components from the EU. How much of an impact will depend on how much they import, and how price sensitive their customs are (i.e. a high end widget company that has 1% EU components can likely just add the cost increase on that 1% onto the retail price. However something that has 90% EU components and price sensitive customers will pay a lot more for the compoents but need to absorb the cost themselves.
Businesses that rely on just-in-time will need to spend a huge amount of warehousing for a few weeks buffer to prevent the factory line from stalling waiting for goods.



For huge volume stuff the costs might be high enough to justify investing in EU factories next time.

We all agree that a hard Brexit is full of unknowns.

However your view does not take into account that things will happen BEFORE the end of March 2019.
If by January 2019 a hard Brexit is on the cards things will begin to change then.

Owner drivers will not plan for their Lorry to be stuck in a line at the ports.
Transport Company’s will not being do so either.
Distribution wharehouses May have less to distribute by February.
Ferry Companys with no bookings for April will have to decide wether to take some ferries out of service.
Cargo airlines might be leasing additional aircraft or the reverse
Just in Time factories will be planning to mothball plant.
Etc etc etc.
The effects of a hard Brexit are not 4 months away but just around the corner.

Yes everything is speculation but the trigger will have to be pulled on those contingency plans well before April 1st 2019.

I suspect that any poster privi to these insider plans has been told not to discuss them as it involves shareholder value, reputation and money and could get them reprimanded or the sack.
This is not conspiracy theory just how things work.

andrewf75

Tromking wrote: »

I note however a reluctance on the other side to similarly concede that long term, Brexit and the undoubted flexibility it would give our politicians locally, could be the making of us.

I'm on the remain side and not at all reluctant to concede the potential advantages of Brexit. It could be the making of us, but given that we're already doing pretty well the risks are far greater to the downside surely?

Brexit in many ways can be boiled down to the fact that some of us are optimists in character and others pessimistic.

Disagree. You can't claim that your side is the optimistic one just because you're optimistic about a particular course of action! Had the vote gone the other way, you'd be pessimistic and we'd be optimistic so its got nothing to do with character just about which side has got their way!

Chadsman

cogito wrote: »

You just did make it up. If you have actually read that article, you would know that it says nothing of the kind.

The article says

The decision to launch the fund was nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit.

Just suppose this was a lie how likely is it they would admit it was a lie?

cogito

Chadsman wrote: »

The article says
Just suppose this was a lie how likely is it they would admit it was a lie?

For a start, it's not JRM's own money. Second, do you know how many other funds have set up offshore vehicles?

kabayiri

andrewf75 wrote: »

I'm on the remain side and not at all reluctant to concede the potential advantages of Brexit. It could be the making of us, but given that we're already doing pretty well the risks are far greater to the downside surely?
...

My view was in part formed from the long term direction of the EU.

Just as the future of the UK carries risks, so does the EU.

Increasingly, I feel the EU is going in a direction which does not easily align with the UK.

We more naturally align with the USA in my view. This would explain why a vast amount of our capital and technology business has strong links to USA companies.

Chadsman

cogito wrote: »

For a start, it's not JRM's own money. Second, do you know how many other funds have set up offshore vehicles?

So how would a liar respond?

andrewf75

kabayiri wrote: »

Increasingly, I feel the EU is going in a direction which does not easily align with the UK.

you could say that about the US as well I think!

Don't disagree with you. These things are just about weighing up pros and cons and coming down on one side.

cogito

Chadsman wrote: »

So how would a liar respond?

Ooh, look! A straw man.

If he didn't lie, he wouldn’t need to respond.