Brexit: Now What? Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
UK farmers wouldn't be happy. The EU is their biggest customer.

They could maintain EU standards and be uncompetitive in the home market or comoete with US imports and lose their export market.
Click to expand...

And somehow this is a win, well maybe it is if you have shares in some food supplier who can squeeze their costs still further?
 
Garrison said:
Amber Rudd made an inaccurate statement? I am shocked...
Click to expand...

She really does seem to be rather dim. The cabinet seems to consist of intellectually mundane individuals, but even amongst this motley crowd, Rudd stands out as the class dunce.
 
uke2se said:
But that wouldn't work. That's sort of the point.
Click to expand...

Especially regarding food exports from the UK. The USA has twice attempted to ban UK meat on the grounds of BSE contamination risk. The EU protected British livestock exports (well... they enacted retaliatory tariffs and the USA backed down).

Without EU wide threat of retaliatory tariffs, I anticipate a revival of a US ban on British meat.
 
Information Analyst said:
Or they could go from a "hard CTA" applying only to British (inc. IoM CIs, etc.) and Irish passport holders.
Click to expand...

jimbob said:
How?
Click to expand...

ddt said:
I have a cunning plan for that. Check their passports at the border.
Click to expand...

catsmate said:
I don't need a passport to enter the UK from Ireland.
Click to expand...

ponderingturtle said:
Now, but we are talking after Brexit when that will no longer be the case.
Click to expand...
Indeed. The fundamental problem with applying different rules at the border for different nationalities is that you first need to see the traveller's passport before you can decided which rule applies. Which defeats the current regimen that you can cross the border without passport.

Which part of "cunning plan" did you not understand, catsmate? ;)
 
Hardly economy-shattering, but an indication about the plethora of relatively minor things that could become just a little more of an issue post-Brexit, in this case for the music industry:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-43867724

Ady's tour manager, Chris Jones, says potential changes to touring are "quite a large concern".

"If we needed visas and a carnet (see below) then we have to declare everything we're taking when we leave the UK and then possibly every time we change country around Europe.

"It would slow everyone down, there's also a large cost that can be involved in that."
Click to expand...

It's this kind of relatively minor administrative things that make stuff harder. Of course Brexit was billed as a way of sweeping away red tape....

There are easy ways around this kind of thing.....

Michael Dugher is the boss of UK Music - the group which advises the government on the music industry.

He says there could be a "practical solution" to the potential challenges of touring Europe.

"I think it can be fixed by something like a touring passport," he says.

"[It's] basically a visa arrangement... whereby you're able to tour at relatively short notice and not be restricted in terms of the number of countries you can go to.
Click to expand...

The thing is, that these things have to be put in place and the clock is ticking. There are hundreds (thousands ?) of industries each with their own requirements. The Department for Brexit lacks the bandwidth to deal with central issues like the NI border, these sorts of minor things will likely be years away from getting any attention and by then all the effort will be going into free trade deals instead.

What a mess...
 
As we know from the Brexit campaign, Britain is full. We don't want any more foreigners coming here steeling our jobs, sending their kids to our schools and lengthening our queues at the post office.

That is why we can celebrate today that we have prevented a large number of these foreigners coming over here to cure our sick.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43898969
 
Lothian said:
As we know from the Brexit campaign, Britain is full. We don't want any more foreigners coming here steeling our jobs, sending their kids to our schools and lengthening our queues at the post office.

That is why we can celebrate today that we have prevented a large number of these foreigners coming over here to cure our sick.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43898969
Click to expand...

Of course these are non-EU workers. ceptimus insists that we can be fairer to them in the post-Brexit future :rolleyes:
 
Lothian said:
As we know from the Brexit campaign, Britain is full. We don't want any more foreigners coming here steeling our jobs, sending their kids to our schools and lengthening our queues at the post office.

That is why we can celebrate today that we have prevented a large number of these foreigners coming over here to cure our sick.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43898969
Click to expand...

The Don said:
Of course these are non-EU workers. ceptimus insists that we can be fairer to them in the post-Brexit future :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Can anyone explain the advantages of quotas for skilled workers?

It seems like a good way to hobble the economy to solve a non-existent problem. Face it, an Indian neurosurgeon is hardly likely to take *my* skilled job.

In fact, skilled immigrants in my office are more likely to make my job secure - about half my colleagues are immigrants, most of whom originally came to the UK to study for their first or subsequent degrees.
 
Meanwhile over on Badscience

Little waster said:
dyqik said:
Japanese Ambassador to UK said:
You do realise that every Japanese company will be gone in ten years time if you dont have frictionless trade with Europe
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Ignore him he's just another bitter remoaner.

Once the Japanese companies recognise that post-Brexit Global Britain is just like pre-Brexit, except with less access to its biggest export markets, massively disrupted supply lines and more openly xenophobic people I'm sure they'll be falling over themselves to pour billions into the UK. I'm sure the mackem's pride in the continuing success of their Nissan factory will only be equalled by their pride in the continuing success of their football team.
You forget that although we will instantly lose frictionless access to the EU-27 and forfeit their 85 existing trade deals from the very moment of B-Day, we are quietly confident that Liam Fox will be almost ready to sign a reasonably favourable Birdshit-for-Jam trade deal with Kiribati within a decade or so. Man, those I-Kiribati drive a hard bargain.

Like anyone soberly considering making a massive longterm investment; vague platitudes, fringe economic ideas and nationalistic braggadocio will always trump any lower-risk, safer options in the Japanese's decision-making process.
Click to expand...

ETA: Highlighting about the cruellest part of the conversation
 
Last edited:
as a leeds fan, boro had a good manager in monk he was doing a great job.
our upcoming preseason trip to myanmar has been the highlight of our season.
 
Last edited:
Doghouse Reilly said:
I found this piece on why the Left should be embracing Brexit to provide a lot of food for thought. Would be interested in hearing some thoughts about the ideas expressed therein from those of you opposed to Brexit.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/04/brexit-labour-party-socialist-left-corbyn
Click to expand...

I am not an economist, and indeed do have problems with a lot of economic forecasting, and the basic assumptions in it. However in this situation, it's more along the lines of thinking out various scenarios.

I don't think the graphs are as strong evidence as they claim.

For example the 1970s oil shock was pretty independent of the UK joining the EEC but the article and that had a huge impact on our GDP growth, and this was pretty soon after the UK joined the EEC, so saying that the growth rate didn't increase is not surprising.


These results are consistent with other studies that show that tariff liberalization in itself does not promote growth or even trade. In fact, the opposite is often true: as Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang has shown, all of today’s rich countries developed their economies through protectionist measures. This casts serious doubts over the widespread claim that leaving the Single Market would necessarily mean “lower productivity and lower living standards.” It also exposes as utterly “implausible,” in the words of the Cambridge researchers, the Treasury’s claim that Britain has experienced a 76 percent increase in trade due to EU membership, which could be reversed upon leaving the EU. The Cambridge economists conclude that average tariffs are already so low for non-EU nations seeking to trade within the EU that even in the case of a “hard Brexit” trade losses are likely to be limited and temporary.
Click to expand...

Tariffs are not the main problem in my opinion - yes, they will disadvantage UK companies relative to EU companies in bidding for access to the EU and that this is likely to be more damaging to them than the chance of having higher prices for a far smaller market at home due to reduced competition (and with the UK customers paying for the reduced competition).

The main problem is in standards, delays and uncertainty.

At the moment, a UK company can ship to a German company with no more paperwork than it would to ship to another UK company. There are common standards, so the German company knows that its incoming goods are compliant, and it knows that there are not going to be customs delays (I've had samples shipped from China for work, and it's very difficult to estimate when they will arrive).


These deeply embedded neoliberal ideas can only be challenged by a democratic revolution in British politics — but here again the Brexit debate has hampered progress, revealing a profound mistrust of democracy. This is exemplified by the claims that without the “protection” of the Single Market the UK would slip into a dystopian nightmare, where it would be overrun with “genetically modified foods, chlorinated chicken, and access to procurement of protected sectors like health care” and where, as Denayer writes, human rights would be “substantially” reduced, and “principles of fair trials, free speech and decent labour standards” would be compromised. While it may be true that in some areas previous right-wing British governments have been positively constrained by the EU in their push for all-out deregulation and marketization, the notion that the British people are incapable of defending their rights in the absence of some form of “external constraint” is patronizing and reactionary.
Click to expand...

Hollow laugh here.

I see no reason to believe that a Socialist Utopia will arrive because of a Brexit arranged by a Conservative government propped up by the DUP.

ETA: I am not sure that their idea of a Socialist Utopia is actually desirable either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom