ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Brexit

Closed Thread
Old 22nd June 2018, 02:06 AM   #1
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,384
Brexit: Now What? Part 5

Mod InfoContinuation thread from: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=324086
Posted By:Darat
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
No doubt all of this was covered in excruciating detail in David Davis' industry sector impact analyses and various mitigating strategies identified.
From Airbus' own risk assessment:

Quote:
No deal Brexit

In case of the UK leaving the EU without a deal on the 29th March 2019, there would be no Transition Phase, the UK would leave the Single Market, the Customs Union and the European Court of Justice jurisdiction. Therefore, WTO rules would kick in and numerous frictions would heavily impact our operations and that of our supply chain.

Airbus’ production is likely to be severely disrupted due to interruption to the flow of parts and/or discontinued airworthiness. Given today’s prevailing uncertainty, buffer stocks would be needed (estimated value circa €1B, not accounting for lead time and logistics disruptions).

Given Airbus’ steep ramp-up demands on the best-selling A320 and A350 families, our critical industrial capabilities are already running at full capacity. With no spare capacity left over years to come, every disruption to production would most likely turn into an unrecoverable delay.

Every week of unrecoverable delay would entail material working capital impact, re-allocation cost, cost for inefficient work, penalty payments to customers and up to €1B weekly loss of turnover. Despite the incremental stocks, the disruptions in a no deal Brexit situation are likely to add up to several weeks; potentially translating into a multi-billion impact on Airbus.
Which is why they wrote to Michael Barnier asking why he was preventing contingency plans being discussed.

UK jobs are at risk in the longer term, but in the shorter term it is Airbus as a whole that is at risk.

EDIT: And of course if Airbus needs government support in the short term, Boeing will be running straight to the WTO.

Last edited by Darat; 22nd June 2018 at 02:27 AM.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 03:32 AM   #2
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 17,813
Farage Tweets

"Hardly surprising Airbus are threatening us today when they've taken billions in EU funding."

Bloody EU, subsidising companies to provide British jobs.
Personally, I can't wait till I'm fighting off the rats for the last packet of Super Noodles.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 03:46 AM   #3
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 25,269
I suppose this is good news for businesses like mine, the government has woken up to the fact that there is a service industry (and that we have a trade surplus with the EU). The bad news is that the response is to demand that the EU drops trou and gives the UK frictionless access to the EEA without the UK having to meet any criteria the government doesn't want to meet.


Quote:
In a speech at a business festival in Liverpool, Business Secretary Greg Clark today insisted that services must be part of any Brexit deal with the EU and issued a series of demands.

UK employees servicing EU customers must be allowed to travel just as frictionlessly as the goods that have dominated the negotiations so far.

Professional qualifications of UK workers must be recognised in the EU to allow companies to send qualified staff at short notice to perform business-critical functions including training or installing, servicing and repairing products sold to EU customers.

UK firms must also be able to send any profits generated by services delivered in the EU back to the UK.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44561987

IOW the usual combination of entitlement and special pleading from the UK.

The magical thinking continues regarding customs

Quote:
First, the maximum facilitation (max fac) model which envisages using new (unspecified) technology to reduce friction at our ports, airports and, crucially, at the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

Second, a new "customs partnership" that would see the UK collecting EU tariffs on goods bound for European markets on the EU's behalf - and sending them on to Brussels - with the option of paying refunds on goods remaining in the UK.

The first option will cost UK business up to 10bn per annum - and 20bn in total for both sides - according to HMRC. It's a calculation not disputed by the business secretary.

The second has been dismissed as unworkable by the EU, which says it would essentially make the UK a border authority for a bloc of which it was no longer a member.
Lucky we have 350m a week
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 03:52 AM   #4
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,384
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
I suppose this is good news for businesses like mine, the government has woken up to the fact that there is a service industry (and that we have a trade surplus with the EU). The bad news is that the response is to demand that the EU drops trou and gives the UK frictionless access to the EEA without the UK having to meet any criteria the government doesn't want to meet.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44561987

IOW the usual combination of entitlement and special pleading from the UK.
Surely it's only special pleading if the UK wasn't offering reciprocity on all of these (which I assume it will be).
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 03:56 AM   #5
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 25,269
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
Surely it's only special pleading if the UK wasn't offering reciprocity on all of these (which I assume it will be).
Good point

Though I query whether the UK is seeking a symmetrical relationship and hence having full reciprocity.


edited to add....

Actually it is special pleading IMO, expecting the EU to move on some or all of its "red lines" but being completely unwilling to move on any of the UK's red lines.

Last edited by The Don; 22nd June 2018 at 03:57 AM.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 04:08 AM   #6
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,339
One problem with unemployed UK Brits taking jobs like fruit-picking is the problems getting back on unemployment/JSA/whateverthehellitsrebrandednext. I know there are categories for seasonal work but the general incompetence of DWP, its hostility and now the threat of the period of no benefits under the Universal Credit scheme and the ease with which people are sanctioned would make me very wary of risking it.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 04:21 AM   #7
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'
Posts: 14,043
Originally Posted by Wudang View Post
One problem with unemployed UK Brits taking jobs like fruit-picking is the problems getting back on unemployment/JSA/whateverthehellitsrebrandednext. I know there are categories for seasonal work but the general incompetence of DWP, its hostility and now the threat of the period of no benefits under the Universal Credit scheme and the ease with which people are sanctioned would make me very wary of risking it.
The areas of highest employment round me voted to leave in large numbers. Seems that bussing them to east Anglia and Lincolnshire to work and live in temporary tin huts for the summer is the best reward they could get. Withdrawing their benefits if they refuse to take up meaningful employment is not unreasonable considering the situation is one of their own making.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 04:27 AM   #8
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,339
The BBC documentary "The Day Migrants Left".
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


From the BBC
Quote:
Evan Davis presents a programme exploring the effects of immigration in the UK by focusing on Wisbech, a town in Cambridgeshire.

Since 2004 this once prosperous market town has received up to 9,000 immigrants seeking work - the majority from Eastern Europe. But with nearly 2,000 locals unemployed and claiming benefits, many of them blame the foreign workers for their predicament.

To test if the town needs so many foreign workers, immigrant employees are temporarily removed from their jobs, and the work given to the local unemployed. Now the town's British workers have a chance to prove they can do it.

Eleven British unemployed workers are recruited to go into a range of different Wisbech workplaces including a potato company, an asparagus farm, an Indian restaurant and a building site run by a local landlord.

Moving beyond the workplace, Evan Davis investigates how the town's local public services, such as schools and the NHS, are coping with the demands of the new arrivals.

As the British unemployed workers get to grips with their new jobs, this documentary examines the facts and dispels the myths around the subject of immigration.
Wudang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 05:37 AM   #9
Strawberry
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,746
*sigh*

How many times?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHUtFkD7Rmg
Strawberry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 05:46 AM   #10
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,384
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
edited to add....

Actually it is special pleading IMO, expecting the EU to move on some or all of its "red lines" but being completely unwilling to move on any of the UK's red lines.
How are:
- recognition of qualifications
- repatriation of service income
- client visits

captured by the EU red lines?

IIRC mutual recognition of qualifications was in the list of things the EU requested; service income will also include stuff like Google advertising booked in Dublin and Netflix revenue booked in Belgium. Client visits is more arguable, but short-term working visas shouldn't be an issue.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 05:54 AM   #11
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,647
Quote:
"We can't sign off on the EU Withdrawal Agreement, or agree a Transition Period, unless there is a solution to the imperative to avoid a border in Ireland. If there is not, then no deal"

"Ah OK but no deal means a border in Ireland"

"Um . . . ."

Right. The EU won't let the UK get away with any crap regarding it's departure from the EU and UK throws a snit.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 06:33 AM   #12
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 25,269
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
How are:
- recognition of qualifications
- repatriation of service income
- client visits

captured by the EU red lines?

IIRC mutual recognition of qualifications was in the list of things the EU requested; service income will also include stuff like Google advertising booked in Dublin and Netflix revenue booked in Belgium. Client visits is more arguable, but short-term working visas shouldn't be an issue.
You're looking at a single, narrow, point. I am considering the broader picture. The UK is hoping (expecting ?) that the EU will provide us with most of the benefits of EEA and/or customs union membership without having to do any of the things that we don't want to. Heck the whole "customs partnership" model is based on this kind of asymmetrical thinking.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 07:25 AM   #13
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,384
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
You're looking at a single, narrow, point. I am considering the broader picture. The UK is hoping (expecting ?) that the EU will provide us with most of the benefits of EEA and/or customs union membership without having to do any of the things that we don't want to. Heck the whole "customs partnership" model is based on this kind of asymmetrical thinking.
The obvious red lines for the UK are:
- no freedom of movement
- no ECJ jurisdiction

For the EU they are:
- indivisibility of the 4 freedoms

Beyond that everything is up for negotiation. In reality the best economic solution for both sides is as close a relationship as possible without breaching the red lines.

The perceived asymmetry comes from the theorists in the EU who want a clear division between deals with "third countries" and EU rules, even if that ignores previous deals the EU has done, and would harm EU economic interests. They are entitled to take that approach, but they too are cherry-picking.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 09:53 AM   #14
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 8,454
Can I be the first person to say "floodgates"...?

BBC News: BMW joins Airbus in Brexit warning

"The car giant BMW has followed plane maker Airbus in warning of the adverse consequences of Brexit.

BMW UK boss Ian Robertson told the BBC it needed clarity by the end of the summer. It makes the Mini and Rolls Royce in the UK.

Earlier, Airbus warned it could leave the UK if it exits the European Union single market and customs union without a transition deal.

The UK government says it is confident of getting a good deal for industry.

The customs union brings together the EU's 28 members in a duty-free area, in which they pay the same rate of duty on non-EU goods."
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 10:25 AM   #15
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
Airbus has issued lots of warnings saying it's about to leave, but hasn't left yet. That's not to say it won't leave, of course, but it won't be as quick or as easy as they're implying.

Airbus spent about half a billion modernizing the wing-building plant. If they want to build a similar plant, say in Poland, then they'll have to spend the same again, and then also spend a lot of time moving / training and building up all the expertise necessary. In the meantime they'll still have to fulfil existing orders for airliners, and they won't want to pay tariffs on all the wings for them as those would come out of their profits.

Airbus is heavily dependent on EU grants - some of which have been ruled illegal by the WTO, and they've had to pay big fines as a result. I wonder how much influence has been bought to bear on Airbus by the EU.

Airbus has built new factories in China and the USA before Brexit was even a thing. It makes you wonder how they are able to give lavish press releases about the benefits to them of building new plants in those non-EU countries, but seemingly unable to continue working in a future non-EU UK.

So yes, perhaps they will eventually leave, or perhaps they're just crying wolf because they think it gives them some potential commercial benefit. Perhaps the UK government will give them what they want and negotiate a BRINO. Time will tell.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 01:04 PM   #16
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 19,321
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
Mod InfoContinuation thread from: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=324086
Posted By:Darat


From Airbus' own risk assessment:



Which is why they wrote to Michael Barnier asking why he was preventing contingency plans being discussed.

UK jobs are at risk in the longer term, but in the shorter term it is Airbus as a whole that is at risk.

EDIT: And of course if Airbus needs government support in the short term, Boeing will be running straight to the WTO.
unicorn.jpg


from

https://twitter.com/how_apt/status/1010140078348357633
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 02:16 PM   #17
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 17,890
Originally Posted by ceptimus View Post
BRINO
I've a fancy that I coined that acronym first. Can't be sure. But I've seen it in the media lately too. #PossibleFame
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 02:36 PM   #18
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,539
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
I've a fancy that I coined that acronym first. Can't be sure. But I've seen it in the media lately too. #PossibleFame

You'll always be famous in our hearts.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 11:21 PM   #19
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'
Posts: 14,043
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
You'll always be infamous in our hearts.
fixed
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd June 2018, 11:51 PM   #20
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 25,269
A no deal Brexit - and all that entails - is a distinct possibility

Quote:
Senior Cabinet ministers have insisted the UK is prepared to walk away from Brexit talks without a deal, on the second anniversary of the vote.

Liam Fox said Theresa May was "not bluffing" over her threat to quit negotiations, while Boris Johnson called for a "full British Brexit".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44575929
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 03:58 AM   #21
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 25,269
It seems that the government is so confident about the success of Brexit that dissenting voices should be silenced

Quote:
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has said that "threats" by business over Brexit are "completely inappropriate".

He was responding to warnings by Airbus and BMW that investments in the UK could be jeopardised by Brexit uncertainty.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44593095

I guess businesses should just shut up and then pull out of the UK without warning if the post-Brexit situation makes it too difficult to do business.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 04:31 AM   #22
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 17,813
Consensus among the Brexiters seems to be that Airbus will toe the EU line because of the subsidies they get.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 05:06 AM   #23
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,511
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Consensus among the Brexiters seems to be that Airbus will toe the EU line because of the subsidies they get.
Why could a "complete Brexit" UK not be even more generous with its subsidies? Some of the fabled "Brexit dividend" might be used for this purpose

Last edited by Craig B; 24th June 2018 at 05:07 AM. Reason: Punctuation
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 05:14 AM   #24
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 19,321
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Why could a "complete Brexit" UK not be even more generous with its subsidies? Some of the fabled "Brexit dividend" might be used for this purpose
Because that would involve the UK ending up suffering from punitive tariffs and thus involve the UK taxpayer effectively paying the other countries (through those tariffs) in order to keep UK businesses afloat - as opposed to them competing fairly and bringing in money through exports?
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 08:42 AM   #25
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
Remember that Airbus is about 25% state owned by Germany, France, and Spain - so when Airbus is trying to influence Brexit that influence is partly coming from foreign EU states.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 08:53 AM   #26
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
Tariffs are nearly always import tariffs charged by the importing states - so if the EU imposes a tariff on goods it imports from the UK, that, by itself, doesn't cost UK companies anything. Of course, it would be likely to have an impact on their export volumes as some of their former EU customers would choose to swap to buying things from other sources rather than pay the increased prices because of the tariffs.

If the UK retaliates by also charging import tariffs then that means that UK customers and companies have to pay more money for any goods coming from the EU. That extra money flows to HMRC (UK government) who could then choose to spend it on subsidies somewhat negating the extra costs, though in reality they would be more likely to spend it on the usual government spending departments - defence or similar - or use it to reduce taxes below what they otherwise might be.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 12:08 PM   #27
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,511
Originally Posted by ceptimus View Post
... the usual government spending departments - defence or similar - or use it to reduce taxes below what they otherwise might be.
I'm sure you wish that the only government spending was on the military "or similar" and that money should otherwise only be used to reduce taxes, but that's not how things stand. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gove...United_Kingdom. The highest spending is on social protection, health, and education. Pity, I suppose, but there it is.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 12:59 PM   #28
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
Well, if we have to introduce new tariffs because the EU won't negotiate a sensible trade deal, it will be a sort of windfall tax for the government to spend on whatever they need to. But of course, tariffs will harm the economy so in the longer run they'll have even less to spend.

It's true that tariffs will harm the EU too, of course, but their tariffs will be spread across a much larger group of customers so it won't hit them as hard as it hits the UK. The EU probably figure it's worth their economy taking a hit providing they can make the UK suffer more and therefore dissuade any other EU countries that might be thinking of leaving.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 01:29 PM   #29
P.J. Denyer
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,607
It's just occured to me that I'm playing Mad Max:Fury Road so much at the moment is because a post apocalyptic wasteland in which men eat dog food and the maggots from corpses while fighting to the death for a canteen of water seems a reassuring escape from our Brexit future and the idea that Jacob Rees-Mogg is a realistic candidate for leadership of our country.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 02:25 PM   #30
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
In what ways do you think Jacob Rees-Mogg would be worse than our current Prime Minister? And how does he compare with Jeremy Corbyn who is another contender for the post?
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 02:25 PM   #31
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,539
Originally Posted by ceptimus View Post
<snip>

It's true that tariffs will harm the EU too, of course, but their tariffs will be spread across a much larger group of customers so it won't hit them as hard as it hits the UK.

<snip>

I'm not sure I understand this.

If the cost of delivering a product to a customer goes up due to the cost of a tariff being included, why does it matter how many people are in the country (or trade group)? Each customer purchasing that product is still going to pay the same increase, whether there's a million people there or a billion.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 02:42 PM   #32
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
It has less effect (on the whole country or countries) when the same amount of tariffs are spread across a larger population. Of course for the individual or company that has to pay the extra cost it's just the same, but a million euros of tariffs spread across a population of a few hundred million will have less effect on the area than a million euros of tariffs imposed on a country of less than a hundred million.

We've heard many times the mantra, "We buy more from them than they buy from us" so if tariffs are imposed at the same rates by both the EU and the UK, then the UK will spend more on tariffs than the EU does - and that higher cost will be spread across a smaller population.

All this assumes that trade continues at roughly the same levels as before - but that is an incorrect assumption. The actual tariffs paid will depend on how much stuff the UK continues to import from the EU after Brexit, and how much stuff the EU continues to import from the UK. Both amounts will most likely be substantially less after the imposition of any tariffs, but how much less depends on the levels of any tariffs, and how easily and cheaply alternative goods can be obtained from elsewhere.

Last edited by ceptimus; 24th June 2018 at 02:45 PM.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 03:07 PM   #33
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,539
Originally Posted by ceptimus View Post
It has less effect (on the whole country or countries) when the same amount of tariffs are spread across a larger population. Of course for the individual or company that has to pay the extra cost it's just the same, but a million euros of tariffs spread across a population of a few hundred million will have less effect on the area than a million euros of tariffs imposed on a country of less than a hundred million.

<snip>

That country of less than a hundred million would have to buy a few hundred times more pieces per person for that to be true.

Unit price is unit price. The purpose of a tariff is to discourage or encourage the purchase of some product. By way of affecting the unit price. It doesn't make any difference how many people are in the targeted market. The change in price for that item costs each one of them equally.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

Last edited by quadraginta; 24th June 2018 at 03:09 PM.
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 03:21 PM   #34
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
Let me try again.

A smaller population (the UK) buys more from the EU than the EU buys from the UK.

So if the same tariff levels (as a percentage of the cost of the imported items) are applied both ways, that means that, on average, each UK citizen will pay more in tariffs than each citizen in the EU.

Even if the total trade both ways were the same, the average tariff paid by a UK citizen would still be greater because of the smaller population.

If the total trade in each direction were proportional to the population of the importing country or countries, only then would the average tariff paid by each individual be the same - but that isn't the case right now.

Last edited by ceptimus; 24th June 2018 at 03:26 PM.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 09:10 PM   #35
MCel58
Demented Hen
 
MCel58's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 956
Originally Posted by ceptimus View Post
Tariffs are nearly always import tariffs charged by the importing states - so if the EU imposes a tariff on goods it imports from the UK, that, by itself, doesn't cost UK companies anything. Of course, it would be likely to have an impact on their export volumes as some of their former EU customers would choose to swap to buying things from other sources rather than pay the increased prices because of the tariffs.

If the UK retaliates by also charging import tariffs then that means that UK customers and companies have to pay more money for any goods coming from the EU. That extra money flows to HMRC (UK government) who could then choose to spend it on subsidies somewhat negating the extra costs, though in reality they would be more likely to spend it on the usual government spending departments - defence or similar - or use it to reduce taxes below what they otherwise might be.
The issue with tariffs is not just a finished goods issue but a supply chain issue where tariffs will have been applied in multiples depending on the complexity of that supply chain. Most large EU/UK manufacturers have EU wide supply chains and the tariffs will result in higher prices for the end customer. This is also true of the food supply chains of the major supermarkets like Asda, Tesco, Waitrose et al. The continuation of relatively cheap food in the UK must be a major Brexit risk, and to expect everyone in the UK to only buy UK produce will be challenging to say the least. If you also consider that the rest of the EU will still have the choice of the other 27 countries to create tariff free supply chains then it would be amazing if they decided to stick with the parts of their supply chain in the UK.The UK will not have that option and will either have to pay the tariffs or increased distribution and logistics costs from moving their supply chain to other trading partners who will offer them a tariff free deal.

Last edited by MCel58; 24th June 2018 at 09:22 PM.
MCel58 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 11:13 PM   #36
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'
Posts: 14,043
Originally Posted by MCel58 View Post
The issue with tariffs is not just a finished goods issue but a supply chain issue where tariffs will have been applied in multiples depending on the complexity of that supply chain. Most large EU/UK manufacturers have EU wide supply chains and the tariffs will result in higher prices for the end customer. This is also true of the food supply chains of the major supermarkets like Asda, Tesco, Waitrose et al. The continuation of relatively cheap food in the UK must be a major Brexit risk, and to expect everyone in the UK to only buy UK produce will be challenging to say the least. If you also consider that the rest of the EU will still have the choice of the other 27 countries to create tariff free supply chains then it would be amazing if they decided to stick with the parts of their supply chain in the UK.The UK will not have that option and will either have to pay the tariffs or increased distribution and logistics costs from moving their supply chain to other trading partners who will offer them a tariff free deal.
Tariffs are not the only issue. Most pan-european manufacturers such as car manufacturers operate just-in-time systems where parts are not held in stock but are bought in as needed. Free movement of goods assists that. Customs checks are seen as a big barrier. Manufacturers who source parts from the EU are likely to save money by moving into the customs area their parts come from.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 11:32 PM   #37
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,376
Genuine question, I don't know the answer. If there is a "no deal" break next spring, and we plunge out of the EU with nothing agreed, do we still pay the "divorce settlement" (C. 39 billion)?
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 11:44 PM   #38
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
"Nothing is agreed till everything is agreed." It means that deals already agreed and signed don't necessarily apply until a final setlement is reached. So in principle the UK could withhold the payments if a satisfactory trade deal isn't reached. Most commentators think the UK would still honour the payments - or at least a sizeable proportion of them.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th June 2018, 11:46 PM   #39
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'
Posts: 14,043
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Genuine question, I don't know the answer. If there is a "no deal" break next spring, and we plunge out of the EU with nothing agreed, do we still pay the "divorce settlement" (C. 39 billion)?
Yes but we could renage, probably not a good move if we are to sign deals with other countries. Info here
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 25th June 2018, 12:05 AM   #40
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,610
http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-bid...-brexit-2017-2

Did the EU ever agree that the UK was entitled to a share of the assets it has paid towards over its years of membership? The assets include buildings, but also wine, fine art, and financial investments. Last I heard was that the EU was still insisting that all liabilities belonged to member countries (and former member countries) but that all assets belonged to the EU itself.

Last edited by ceptimus; 25th June 2018 at 12:07 AM.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:10 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.