Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

A._Badger

Herzlos wrote: »

We pay money into the pot to run the EU - the regulatory bodies, administration and stuff. That saves us a huge amount of cost in that we don't need to run them on our own (we're essentially only paying 1/28th of the cost of each). On top of that the reduced trade red tape saves businesses a huge amount of money allowing them to generate more profit which is taxed, and opens up new enterprises.

Codswallop! Show us these 'savings' supposedly brought about by the imposition of EU regulations and show us these 'new enterprises' you claim are thus encouraged.

EU regulations serve the interests of large corporations, which actively conspire to restrict and prevent competition. The examples are numerous and were well covered by Dyson in his complaints about the regulations covering domestic electrical products and how they favour the dominant German manufacturers. From my own experience I can confirm that exactly the same has happened in the horticultural chemicals market.

goral

Herzlos wrote: »

The money we get back back isn't in a refund from the EU, as you said, if everyone was reimbursed more than they paid in it'd go bust immediately. It's more subtle than that (and akin to the 2 examples I provided).



We pay money into the pot to run the EU - the regulatory bodies, administration and stuff. That saves us a huge amount of cost in that we don't need to run them on our own (we're essentially only paying 1/28th of the cost of each). On top of that the reduced trade red tape saves businesses a huge amount of money allowing them to generate more profit which is taxed, and opens up new enterprises.


(using figures plucked out of the air) If we pay £10bn into the EU but it saves us £20bn in costs, then we're £10bn/year better off by paying into the EU than if we didn't.

Unfortunately the Brexit argument, which makes a good sound bite, doesn't hold up to scrutiny. They claim that leaving the EU will save us £10bn/year, whilst ignoring that it'll cost us £20bn/year and thus we're actually £10bn/year worse off.


Just like my Costco membership - I could save £20/year if I got rid of it, but I'd be paying hundreds more a year on my purchases. The headline looks good, but I'm significantly worse off.

I just want add tariffs and border check for goods.
Now, you can send to EU any thing without any tariffs or paperwork except invoice.
After brexit, you need custom agency, who will prepare the necessary documents every time any company sends or receives something from the EU. Is not free is not cheep!
It take time and money. So, you can say £10bn/y UK will be beater, but business will pay much more. And on top of this is to recruit more border officers, and custom officers.
Some company from EU will stop trade with UK, because this difficulty and reduce of profit (add tariffs).
Is just one example, one which will be visible immediately after December 31 this year.
Another one is schools. Johnson scrap Erasmus+ student exchange scheme. This bring much less opportunity for British student who study nearly all subject. Of course it not apply for rich people. But for student from common background.
Nearly 90% of tourist attraction has EU subsidies. Some are 100% fund from EU. Like Coast path, Pennie Way - what will happen with this places? Local council definitely will have no mony for keep them in good condition.
Is just small example what UK take back from EU.
And finally - all of You in Britain, had a chance to get money (grands) from the EU for start and run your own business it was so easy. Now it will be finish.

Herzlos

A._Badger wrote: »

Codswallop! Show us these 'savings' supposedly brought about by the imposition of EU regulations and show us these 'new enterprises' you claim are thus encouraged.

Well here's £15bn saved by not needing to fill out customs paperwork: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-no-deal-latest-businesses-customs-forms-hmrc-a9147866.html


So we're already within spitting distance of what we pay the EU for membership.


Free movement of people, goods, capital and services open up all sorts of business opportunities. It's so much easier taking a van full of electrical equipment to customers on the continent when you don't need to import it all.

fewgroats

Thrugelmir wrote: »

You mean a Momemtum democracy. Where their idea is of having just one candidate on an election ballot party......

As opposed to the Hide-in-a-fridge-from-Andrew-Neil-and-Piers-Morgan party? How can we even fully know what the Tory ideas were?

A._Badger

Herzlos wrote: »

Well here's £15bn saved by not needing to fill out customs paperwork: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-no-deal-latest-businesses-customs-forms-hmrc-a9147866.html


So we're already within spitting distance of what we pay the EU for membership.

Well, we might be. If I were able to screw my eyes up ever so tight and believe a word HMRC says. Unfortuinately, I'm not able to be that gullible.

Herzlos wrote: »

Free movement of people, goods, capital and services open up all sorts of business opportunities. It's so much easier taking a van full of electrical equipment to customers on the continent when you don't need to import it all.

Free movement of people has resulted in a considerable burden to the UK, not least by suppressing wages but also in benefits and costs to the NHS.

As for 'loading a van with electrical goods', how on earth do you imagine China and Japan sell products to the EU, without being extorted for membership fees?

Herzlos

A._Badger wrote: »

Free movement of people has resulted in a considerable burden to the UK, not least by suppressing wages but also in benefits and costs to the NHS.

All of the evidence shows the free movement has had no real impact on wages and has benefited the NHS - think about it, the migrants coming over here are usually young and healthy, and will potentially leave again before they get to the stage in life where they cost money.

As for 'loading a van with electrical goods', how on earth do you imagine China and Japan sell products to the EU, without being extorted for membership fees?

I'm not talking about selling those goods to Europe, I'm talking about providing services with them - equipment installation repair, diagnostics, travelling musicians, etc. Can you image how bad it'd be if you had to take some diagnostic equipment with a price tag of £20k over to a customer in Europe, without free movement of goods?



There's talk of UK business travellers having to apply for a Carnet in order to take their laptops with them. That's a huge amount of additional red tape and cost.

Moe_The_Bartender

Mel_Low1 wrote: »

What "international treaty" would that be please?

You didn’t seriously expect Herzlos to answer did you? He's posted a couple of times since your question so he’s presumably read it and decided not to reveal his ignorance.

He should probably start with Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty which I assume he’s heard of. If that fails, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties might help him.

Moe_The_Bartender

Herzlos wrote: »

All of the evidence shows the free movement has had no real impact on wages and has benefited the NHS - think about it, the migrants coming over here are usually young and healthy, and will potentially leave again before they get to the stage in life where they cost money.

All the evidence shows that free movement is a disaster for countries like Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia and Latvia which have seen substantial declines in their populations since joining the EU. The new EU President, Andrej Plenkovic of Croatia said as much in his press conference marking Croatia's first rotating presidency since joining the bloc. “Croatia suffers a population loss equivalent to losing a small city every year,”

They may potentially leave or, more likely, may not.

Herzlos

Free movement is causing serious brain/youth drain in Easter European states, where we reap the benefits.
Are you proposing we leave the EU for the sake of Latvia? That's almost as credible as leaving the EU for the sake of African farmers.

Mel_Low1 wrote: »

What "international treaty" would that be please?

Article 50.

P.S. - The timeline is only "unrealistic" because the EU take forever to agree anything among themselves. 20 years it took for the Mercosur deal to reach "agreement in principal" stage for example - and that stalled!

And we're negotiating with the EU, who take forever to negotiate anything because so many nations have a say. So what's wrong with saying that us expecting to reach a 10+ year negotiation in 11 months is unrealistic?

adindas

Herzlos wrote: »

Free movement is causing serious brain/youth drain in Easter European states, where we reap the benefits.
Are you proposing we leave the EU for the sake of Latvia? That's almost as credible as leaving the EU for the sake of African farmers.
Article 50.
And we're negotiating with the EU, who take forever to negotiate anything because so many nations have a say. So what's wrong with saying that us expecting to reach a 10+ year negotiation in 11 months is unrealistic?

You will get the best people if you do not prioritise / limit people to the EU countries.

Free movement in the EU while you get the best people, good people from EU countries, you could also get movement of bad people, criminals, romanian . bulgarian gypsies, people who can not compete in their own countries are free to move. You will get a better result if you maintain control to screen who you want who you do not want.

Also prioritising the EU people is even hinder the Labour market for the best people for the country.

What about the best people from other countries such as Japan, Korea, China India, Russia, US, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong and many other countries.

Just look at in the US how many CEOs, richest people on earth, scientists actresses come from other countries other than EU.