we have and will spend some amounts on implementing Brexit, customs etc but we’ll get that back in tariffs

Oh yeah? The number of things we’ll now need is looking pretty big.

Will tariffs depress exports though?

we have and will spend some amounts on implementing Brexit, customs etc but we’ll get that back in tariffs

hilarious

jambalaya – Member

@mike the Tories aren’t spending anything on Brexit

At it again I see. from the Sun too, so hardly a hostile newspaper.

THE £1.5 billion cost of delivering Brexit was hidden deep in the Budget small print, the Sun can reveal.
The Chancellor has earmarked £400 million a year for the two Whitehall departments set up to oversee our EU divorce

Interesting all this stuff about Keynesian economics and whether it’s a workable solution, but I actually think the labour party are thinking far more radically. Something along the lines of this.

I don’t. I think they want to offer a giveaway manifesto and scream spend, spend, spend. I don’t think there’s any logic behind it.

HOWEVER, the growth ponzi sceme we’re all living in is mental, so anyone who did offer a controlled worldwide economic decline instead of growth until we all die like rabbits would win my vote. Can’t see that being popular in poorer nations, of course.

hilarious

80% of the tariffs we already collect from the rest of the world (and we are the EU’s largest importer from outside the block) are sent to Brussels.

Net tariffs from a WTO deal with the EU are projected to be in the region of €12bn pa

If we have a free trade deal we don’t need all the extra customs

Whatever we spend on customs infrastructure and jobs the French, Dutch, Irish etc have to spend the same and then they have to send 80% of anything collected to Brussels, we get to keep the money.

[ delete ]

I don’t. I think they want to offer a giveaway manifesto and scream spend, spend, spend. I don’t think there’s any logic behind it.

If they weren’t interested in new ideas they wouldn’t be looking at things like a universal basic income. In terms of implementation I think they probably are looking to spend a lot up front, then move to a more sustainable model. You can’t do a managed decline (or more likely standstill) from such a low base, people won’t accept it. You have to invest and make the gains first, then move to something based on long term sustainability.

jambalaya – Member

@daz pretty well, they have halved the deficit. That’s incredibly difficult (and painful) to do.

At least the people who died as a direct result of the Tories (and by default yours, if you voted for them) austerity policies won’t get to feel any more of that pain.

If we have a free trade deal we don’t need all the extra customs

Mmm but since we have no idea IF we will have a trade deal (and time is running out) we will have to start implementing things anyway because they will need to be operational straight away. Do you agree?

Whatever we spend on customs infrastructure and jobs the French, Dutch, Irish etc have to spend the same and then they have to send 80%

Surely not? We have to double our capacity – they will only have to increase by a small amount?

Net tariffs from a WTO deal with the EU are projected to be in the region of €12bn pa

Net meaning minus the tariffs we will have to pay as well?

we will have to start implementing things anyway because they will need to be operational straight away. Do you agree?

I don’t.

We don’t need to have better customs on day 1 or rigidly enforce import tarrifs on day 1. It’s up to us. Our borders won’t be any more leaky than they already are. (If you think our borders are leaky.)

jambalaya – Member
hilarious

Net tariffs from a WTO deal with the EU are projected to be in the region of €12bn pa

hilarious indeed, uncited jambafact, plus ca change…

£12bn gross maybe, but a little lie here, a little lie there, you should really go back to the brexit thread, its the perfect home for BS!

edit . William Norton, “Mitigating the impact of UK-EU tariffs”, Civitas, 9 January 2017. reckons 5.2bn off that from reciprocal tarrifs,

Treasury reckons long term WTO -7% gdp
NIESR reckons up to -7.8%

https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/r116.pdf

All threads lead back to brexit I see. It’s almost becoming a STW Godwin’s law 🙂

On the subject though, and relevant to the thread, I think I trust Kier Starmer a million times more than boris, Davis and Liam Fox to provide a better outcome.

If you want some light relief re brexit read the manifesto section on it. It’s like a send up off snake oil salesman and populist clap trap.

Amazed a smart bloke like Starmer was happy to stand behind such tosh

@kimbers prominent Remain econimist (I forget his name) said an “opportunity cost” of 2%, ie we’d still grow but by 2% less. None of that of course assumes we sign new trade deals or factors in the likelihood of a true eurozone crises. The Treasury has hugely discredited itself via its role in Osbourne’s Project Armageddon. Anyway Corbyn is a lifelong Leaver and Labour are supporting Brexit where it counts, in the Parliamentary votes. The rest is just trying to score political points in opposition.

So I played the game here. I named a Labour policy (nationalising stuff at below market value – eg utilities at historic valuation rather than current) … now STW lefties have to name a country successfully following such a policy. It’s neither Germany nor Sweden.

Hmmmm….

You said it’s ok for Brexit to have an opportunity cost, but it’s not ok for renationalisation to have one?

Railways should be nationalised – who cares if some money is lost in the process? It’s the principle.

(Note, I am paraphrasing here to make a point)
(The point being that you seem to be cherry picking arguments to confirm your existing bias)

How to nationalise railways. Don’t renew any deals on them.

You have picked a tough policy there because most of the countries that have successfully run state owned stuff were the ones who didn’t sell them off for peanuts to their mates.

Now maybe list the countries trading on WTO terms alone (ie no trade deals)

jambalaya – Member

ie we’d still grow but by 2% less.

Considering our economy grew by 1.6% in the last year and 1.8% the year before, that’s mathematically challenging

Northwind that was cumulative over 15 (?) years. Personally I am expecting a healthy jump upwards in our GDP post any resolution inc wto as investment returns once there is certainty

@molgrips yes I would expect trade with the EU to decline further (has fallen materially in last 10 years), more locally sourced products, imports/exports better distributed globally.

@kimbers that was a net number I saw (admittedly highest one) your number is £5.4bn mine was about £10bn (I quoted €)

Apologies for Brexit diversion but that’s a Labour policy too

Labour want to nationalise utilities esp water at below market value. That will lead to legal challenges from shareholders and French (supported by their government)

Railways are arguably “better” in state hands but for sure they’ll cost a lot more to run that way and either fares and/or subsidies will be higher. They’ll be many more strikes (Unions knowing a Labour Govt will cave in or making a political point to Tories)

we have and will spend some amounts on implementing Brexit, customs etc but we’ll get that back in tariffs

Magic Money Tree located !!

They’ll be many more strikes (Unions knowing a Labour Govt will cave in or making a political point to Tories)

jambafact

1898 con
1912 lib
1913 coalition
1921 coalition
1926 con
1972 con
1979 lab
1981 con
2011 con

https://visual.ons.gov.uk/the-history-of-strikes-in-britain/

It’s about far more than simple GDP.

The Thatcher years saw GDP jump significantly, but the benefits were concentrated on a relatively small group and geographical area, not to be distributed across the entire economy. One of the few things I agree with Osborne on is the need to create a more evenly distributed economy in the North – northern powerhouse if you will.

It’s fast becoming apparent that Hayekian economics simply shift wealth upward and offshore. It’s simply not working for the majority.

As for nationalisations, please remember that our rail and utilities are in part owned by state run organisations from Europe (in particular France and Germany). It’s truly the worst of all worlds right now. Better to nationalise the basic utilities and transport, one of the reasons why utilities and transport is so expensive for the end user is that we’re paying for cumulative decades of no investment (thank you Tories, both blue and red).

And if Tory policies aren’t popular with ordinary people, then I would go so far as to suggest that there are extremely good reasons for that.

more locally sourced products

Right. So how is this going to work? A few scenarios:

1) The product is much cheaper from an EU country because it’s cheaper/easier to make there (like say, wine). If we source locally prices will go up, which will drive inflation.

2) The product isn’t cheaper from an EU country, in which case it’ll be being sourced locally anyway cos transport is cheaper.

3) If there’s a local product available, that is competitive we’d already be buying it (see 2) but if it’s not available, we can’t simply start buying it. Take wine for instance – to start sourcing wine locally we’d need 20 years of investment in vineyards before this would work. So we’re back to 1.

Any thoughts Jam?

(to clarify, I am accusing you of over-simplification to suit your bias – brushing details under the carpet, if you like)

Excuse Brexit talk here …

Mols you seen to have missed the fact we are are talking about how WTO will change trade flows between the UK and the EU. I am assuming new trade deals with countries (so zero tariffs) and WTO with the EU. The EU loses its tariff advantage and has to stand on its own two feet. As we are open8ng up new relationships and removing EU penal tariffs (like on African coffee producers) trade with the EU will go down and Rest of the World will go up. Even if we have a free trade deal with the EU they will lose out as we sign new free trade deals elsewhere, why not tariff free cars and components from Japan and USA ?

Corbyn wanted out of the EU as it ties his hands re Nationalisation and Govt support/subsidy

Corbyn wanted out of the EU as it ties his hands re Nationalisation and Govt support/subsidy

and he’ll go back to that view if he ever got in…

s we are open8ng up new relationships and removing EU penal tariffs (like on African coffee producers) trade with the EU will go down and Rest of the World will go up.

For food, yes. This is great. More food miles is exactly what we need. Why get green beans from Spain when you can get them from Kenya?

But anyway – that only applies to food.

why not tariff free cars and components from Japan and USA ?

Cos US cars are shite. I don’t want EU cars to be more expensive than US cars. We’ll even be able to fudge our own safety rules to let them in. Hoo bloody ray.

Anyway. Off-topic.

TurnerGuy – Member
Corbyn wanted out of the EU as it ties his hands re Nationalisation and Govt support/subsidy
and he’ll go back to that view if he ever got in…

Love it! Brexiter & anti-corbyn lies all bundled up into one package

Love it! Brexiter & anti-corbyn lies all bundled up into one package

just like saying John McDonnell is a marxist…

just like saying John McDonnell is a marxist…

Difficult to deny when he says the words ‘I’m a marxist’ 😆 and is lauded by self confessed marxist Ernie Lynch ‘I find McDonnell’s politics closest to my own’ 😆

I guess voting for a marxist chancellor can get folk into this odd state of denial.

Jezza’s been keeping his head down on Brexshit – but as a leaver must be tickled pink red at what’s happening – but couldn’t help having a crack at financial services again yesterday and a Trumpesque attack on Morgan Stanley for not being “with the program”. With Haringay Hollow Out I am surprised he has time for all this.

What have we done to deserve these kind of politicians. And to think he could easily be the next PM 😯

Except that’s not what happened, is it?

He was responding to Morgan Stanley’s comments about him.

Link.

Still, don’t let the facts get in the way.

Indeed don’t

Not being with the program is the direct reference to the MS note. Obviously hit a raw nerve for poor old jezza.

I guess voting for a marxist chancellor can get folk into this odd state of denial

Who’s denying it.

THM, the irony is strong this morning.

The only Trumpesque thing about this is you attempting to spin it as an unprovoked attack on Morgan Stanley by JC.

It wasn’t.

Your post is the very definition of fake news.

On the contrary I make specific reference to MS not being with the program. I am well aware of what they said – read the “offending” report

Only you are claiming that it is unprovoked

Jezza obviously a bit upset about MS views!!

but couldn’t help having a crack at financial services again yesterday and a Trumpesque attack on Morgan Stanley for not being “with the program”

So you meant that Corbyn didn’t say the words “with the program” but included it in your sentence anyway because it was in reference to what Morgan Stanley told its investors. Yes, of course you did…

I can’t find a link to the text of Morgan Stanley’s statement. Did they use the words “with the program?” (That’s a genuine question…not doubting that that’s exactly what thm meant in his post.)

On the contrary, I think he’s quite happy that his views have been reported.

Oh look, he’s even made a sick edit about it…

[video]https://youtu.be/pfYEiDg67AI[/video]

How many CEOs did jezza refer to in his diatribe? Why did he mention the (insert number) of CEOs that he did?

He even went as far as to say that (insert name) should not be running “our country” – he clearly was a bit emotional

Capitalism at its best
FFS, how is this allowed to go on every time?

Well if anyone knows about emotional outbursts, it’s you thm.

Why did you use “with the program” as a quote? Who said that? I’ve asked if it was MS because I didn’t hear those words in JC’s YouTube video. I can only assume you got it from the MS statement, which I haven’t seen. Is it in there somewhere?

It’s almost as if he’s using the killfile on you DD