UK after leaving the EU.

Discussion in 'Western Europe' started by william walker, Oct 13, 2016.

  1. cerberus

    cerberus Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    12,746
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know all that - it's just that I believe he would be head and shoulders above all the proven losers we currently have to choose from. Nor would he be fooled and hoodwinked by the charlatans of the EU27 in the exit negotiations as I'm certain May will be. They'll run rings around her. In fact, between them all they could stop our withdrawal.
     
  2. cerberus

    cerberus Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    12,746
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And with HSBC leading the way . . . like hell they will - although they might open a few 'branch offices' here and there. If the government called their bluff we'd never hear another peep out of them.
     
  3. cerberus

    cerberus Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    12,746
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Trophy Points:
    113
    :roll: You still scaremongering? Haven't you noticed that all those catastrophes you predicted never did happen? The EU is on the brink, and then it will no longer be a trading partner; our markets will be global post-Brexit, and there are lots of rich countries out there.
     
  4. diamond lil

    diamond lil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,588
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I must have dreamt them all. How much is the pound worth now?...and we haven't even left.

    India and China? Lol.
    And I've not forgotten how the USA can't wait to buy our NHS, even if you have,
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2017
  5. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    3,178
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    HSBC have offices all over the world. There s nowhere to move to. They are there already. Everywhere.
    They are based in London and will continue to be, but the name should give some indication of where they will relist their stocks if they feel regulations here are too tough. They threaten to go home. The Honk Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation.
    I used to be a share holder during the banking crisis, a crisis HSBC weathered better than all other banks, the punitive banking laws unfairly targeted HSBC, a bank which required no bail outs, at that time I was a significant share holder of the company. I voted for them to leave the UK and rebase in HK.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2017
  6. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    3,178
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Thankfully the value of the pound has dropped post Brexit.
    Successive governments have been trying and failing for years to lower the value of the pound.

    Get rid of those muppets... and guess what, the pound lowered in value.
    It is however going back up again. This national windfall is expected to be short lived.

    If you want a high valued Pound, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. We have a trade deficit. We are involved in loss making deals internationally. We lose money on international trade.

    We make a loss. Each day we trade with the world, we get poorer in aggregate.
    Each day we trade with the EU, we get poorer in aggregate.

    To correct this we want low valued Pounds and tariffs.
    Or we can keep on haemorrhaging money each day until we have none left.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2017
  7. Latherty

    Latherty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,988
    Likes Received:
    486
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Indeed you have.

    Increased risk in EU and GBP just meant capital flight, and the cut in interest rates also has a direct effect on currency.

    Its been a boon for our exporters, as it was intended to be, and does have inflation effects though considering the threat of negative inflation at the time, inflation that is closer to target is something of a relief.

    It makes far more sense to align ourselves with countries to whom we export, rather than those from whom we import.
    If we are not aligned with our importing partners, they suffer. If we are not aligned to our export partners, we suffer. Its not so much China and India, but the swathe of smaller nations that require an external financial hub because they don't have sufficient critical mass to have their own.

    Who in the USA is keen on "buying" the NHS?
     
  8. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    3,178
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    All their medical industries would love new markets to expand into.
    Most of them are already selling here of course and the NHS is their biggest UK market.

    But we might imagine a global conglomerate opening a private hospital or clinic. A new Yank owned BUPA for example.
    Certainly NHS monopoly would be on the negotiating table in any TTIP deal.
     
  9. cerberus

    cerberus Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    12,746
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Like we don't haemorrhage it enough in so-called 'overseas aid', where most of it finds its way into the Swiss bank accounts of the er, grateful recipients? We must be effing crazy!
     
  10. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    9,667
    Likes Received:
    389
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Female
    :roflol::roflol::roflol: the poor man of Europe. Enjoy your return.
     
  11. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    3,178
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Return?
    Did you think I ever became rich under the EU? That I have prospered from it or under it, in any way?

    Poor man of the UK, poor man of Europe. What difference have you ever made to my finances?
    None.
    Not you, not the EU. I'm not looking to you or your preferred politicians to make me money.
    The EU costs money. It doesn't make any money at all.
    Not one of them contribute to our economy. They all get paid out of taxation of it.

    The EU has made me poorer, and during our period of EU membership, this country has not got richer, only deeper in debt.
    Part of the reason we are getting deeper and deeper into debt is that we operate a trade deficit with the EU. We lose money when we trade with them.

    The more we trade, the poorer we get.
    But Champagne tastes nice. So hey, lets crack open another bottle and tell ourselves how much richer we all are for having bought it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2017
  12. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    9,667
    Likes Received:
    389
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Female
    No surprise here



    https://www.forbes.com/sites/france...mpletely-deluded-about-brexit/2/#2c2570cf2c25

     
  13. Denizen

    Denizen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2013
    Messages:
    3,964
    Likes Received:
    907
    Trophy Points:
    113
    UK is spiralling down economically and has lost ground against the US$ and the German DEM.

    The real question is, is there a bottom at US$ 1.25 or will UK keep falling.

    There does not seem to be any creative leadership in the UK. All they do is recycle the old failed economic policies in a race to the bottom.

    [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  14. WeekDayCross

    WeekDayCross Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2017
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    I wish we could stop looking at GDP as if it were a good thing instead of a mixture of good and bad. Overtime for Police and the Emergency Services boosts GDP in times of unrest , disaster and traffic congestion. Maybe we should be more selective in what we use to measure human welfare and call it possibly GDW.
     
  15. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    3,178
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    This is an interesting economic dynamic.
    How do you measure the value of public services?

    I feel that way lies, anarchy or ultra right wingism. Let a free market be the indicator.
    It's so impossible to tell what the value of these things are economically, that my mind overheats and I stop valuing them entirely.
    It's very important to recognise that these things do have an economic value, but I am damned if I can tell you what that is.

    Neither are all of them positive values, I might add.
    Over time or otherwise.

    For those people who do like to put a value on these things I feel distrust. I am getting sales pitched.

    I prefer a different approach to it. What can we afford to spend on it? What's the best value we can get for those £'s.
     
  16. WeekDayCross

    WeekDayCross Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2017
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    The same as goods and services produced in the Private Sector. The Private Sector view anything created by them as wealth creation therefore good, but if it is created by the Public Sector it is a drain on the public purse so therefore bad.
     
  17. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    3,178
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yeah, and this is my default position too. The first retreat of a lazy mind.
    Too much of that position is economically true to ignore the relationship. Too often is that a correct statement when applied to any particular state service. It's not 100% true. It's not even 95% true, but broadly speaking, this is the true relationship.
    Money in vs money out. Private sector pays for public sector.

    In Marxist terminology perhaps, the means of production are privately owned.
    Government here provides services.

    The problem with placing a value on public services, is that payment process and the service provided aren't obviously connected. Alright with a Traffic Warden it is.
    By and large tax is taken from anywhere and spent anywhere. So what I am getting in no way relates to what I want or what I am willing/able to pay for.
    Road tax for example is raised on motorists, (because they have a confiscatable vehicle to tax against), but also spent on trains and buses.

    Equally my vote is not indicative of any value I place on any service. And a vote in an election doesn't to equate to approval or value found in any, or indeed all, state provisions.

    In order to measure value, choice in the market place is required.
    Economics uses peoples behaviour to measure value.
    They vote with their wallets and then we measure it.

    I put it to you that it is inherently impossible to measure value in a monopoly scenario. So when people operating in one, explain their economic value in the relationship.... I am not able to trust them until they join the private sector.
    Unable to qualify their claims economically unless we first test them.

    Politics>economics.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2017
  18. WeekDayCross

    WeekDayCross Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2017
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    There should be no problem placing a value on public services. If I buy a train ticket, the operator can be either be privately owned or publicly owned. Also when the Banks were bailed out and went into public control did the services they continued to provide suddenly cease to be wealth creating and therefore good to a drain on the public purse so therefore bad. The only change that existed was a change in the composition of shareholders. The USA made it's fortune out of World War ll and the Space Race, so it could be argued that it is not the Private Sector that are the wealth creators and as always they are purely opportunistic and predatory . I have no problem with monopolies providing they are properly run and scrutinised to the highest degree. Maybe these monopolies can perform better if they are devolved down to regional and local levels and suited more to local needs. We definitely don't want lots of companies running everything. This only leads to confusion marketing which is purely designed to confuse and not to inform. It also gives those companies an opportunity to transfer jobs overseas in order to pay lower wages, ignore human rights and environmental laws. There is no choice in the market place. Resources go to the highest bidder which are those who have probably the least need creating a gravy train of unrepairable consumer goods designed to wear our and be replaced at periodical intervals.
     
  19. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    3,178
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    No, the money trail becomes arcane in the public sector.

    If I buy a train ticket, does that ticket pay for the train, pay part of the cost of the train, and the rest taken from others sources, indirect taxation, say motorists for example, or does that ticket money get diverted elsewhere and so on. Indirectly tax other projects.

    Corruption is the curse of social systems. Obsfuscations and dodgy book keepings.
    I can't get an honest answer from them.
    They say it costs X and then they charge me more. And they hide this information from me deliberately. Spin their figures and so on.


    In the train example, limited parts of our UK train infrastructure is privately owned. The tracks are state owned. They still run the monopoly. No train company can end the subsidised train tickets. Nor have they any self interest to do so.

    A train service operated under government licence or a government operated train service. Big difference.
    Ooooh yeah. That will change soo much. Like... all the headed notepaper and the paint jobs on the train carriages.
    Wow.
    Great plan.


    Lots of companies running every thing is often considered to be better than just one company running everything, for the consumer.
    Monopoloies are good for those operating them, but bad for those unable to shop elsewhere.

    It should be noted, that in my own country, the UK, private companies invented the railway. So we know that model does work.
    It's not ridiculous stupid talk, it's accepted wisdom that private investment/capitalism provides a functional medium to provide this service.
    We may argue that others are better, but this system is a an effective one. There is no crisis.

    I put it to you however that in the previous state run system, that there was a crisis. Taxation had been corrupted through unionism. The money got spent on wages and workers pensions instead of the tracks and hundreds of people died.

    And how did they manage to eventually stop all the mega crashes?
    They asked the private sector to invest. They had to be bailed out.
    They always have to be bailed out. Subsidy, grant. Privatisation. Nationalisation.




    There is usually choice in the market place.
    Sometimes the choice is so obvious as to be reasonable considered no choice at all.

    Example. I have paid for NHS insurance. So why would I choose to pay a private hospital when I have already paid my NHS.

    I do have the choice to pay again for the same treatment elsewhere if I wish.
    I do have the choice to emigrate or work solely in the black economy.
    But some choices just lead to the obviously better solution.

    And so this is with resources and their prices.
    In order to decide when human demand is most needed, humans are free to place a quantative describable value on those resources.

    A price. They guy who values it most, buy's it.

    This is maximum efficiency. The fabled "free market".
    The fantasy, economists dream of that would enable them to know both the price and the value of everything.
    but there is no free market, never has been and never will be, because politics> economics.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2017
  20. The Rhetoric of Life

    The Rhetoric of Life Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2017
    Messages:
    2,600
    Likes Received:
    620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You don't want to nationalise anything to turn Britain into a command economy like China or Cuba.
    You want privatised companies with government stepping in to ensure against price fixing.
     

Share This Page