ARM decided to list in the US (not London)...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/02/arm-brexit-float-us-hermann-hauser-uk-london
Due to....
Brexit idiocy....
It’s them sunny uplands, right?
Again with the rather childish straw men. It’s almost like you don’t want to engage with the substance of the discussion.
again?
because it's been done and i've posted lengthier responses on it on several threads and a number of these threads are now intertwined. people, some of whom have a habit of repeating that they couldn't vote for labour under any circumstances, are determined that they know better how to achieve removal of the tories from office. i would humbly suggest that being a voter probably doesn't qualify them any more for the task at hand than it does someone who has received an education to run a school.
do i think KS is better than a.n.other leader of a political party, well, anywhere? no. in fact now that johnson has been removed i think him too much alike sunak for the job at hand. a technocrat. lacking in charisma. general election results have a fr greater correlation to the leader's approval ratings than the party's polling. i think the next general election is going to be a lot closer than people think and that there is a dangerous apathy, similar to that over the referendum and we saw how that turned out.
he's what we've got and i feel like i need to work with that. you may not. your choice.
it would be easy to write off those who voted for brexit, particularly those who were effectively screwing themselves over while gleefully thinking they were screwing others, and frankly i'm all right jack, at least for the moment, but despite that i'd rather live in a better country that actually makes attempts to improve people's lives and the lot of the next generation despite having no children of my own.
a large part of the business of elections is not having the better argument. if you think it is, well that's OK, but if it were i'd suggest we wouldn't be where we are now, out of the EU, and with our 5th Tory PM in 7 years. did nigel farage have the better argument? did johnson? you want to treat the electorate as grown ups? crack on and see how far it gets you. i'm not being dismissive of the electorate when i say that, or at least not in my head i'm not, but people have busy lives. if all they learn about politics is from 15 minutes snatched watching ITN or BBC news over a ready meal that wraps up with a happy-ending story about a lost dog how far do you think a nuanced argument about MMT is going to get? (to get in my own 'crossing the streams' of threads 🙂 )
i think i take a pragmatic view. i'm sorry if i come across as childish but we're all here, shouting at clouds, brought together by the pursuit of riding bikes around in circles in the woods so...
ARM decided to list in the US (not London)…
yep. despite the personal intervention of several PMs.
So what else do you think he will do that will actually make a concrete difference?
I’m not an international trade expert. Maybe find one in Twitter.
Not needed. The only things that would make a significant differnce are CU and SM - to take those need the freedoms. Starmer has ruled that out. that means there has to be non tarriff barriers to trade - thats how the EU works. Regulatory alignment will help a little but thats all. Other non tarrif barriers will still exist.
We are not going to get any sort of close relationship with the EU without breaching Starmers red lines
"We will not be joining the single market. We will not be joining a customs union.”
Kier Starmer, Monday 4 July 2022 / 7:30 PM
And I'll add to that:
“We have exited the EU and we are not going back - let me be very clear in the north east about that. There is no case for rejoining."
Kier Starmer, 14 February 2022 / 9.15 AM
This is a former QC stating that there is no case to rejoin. And flushing his own credibility down the toilet in the process.
Sure, Brexit corrupts everything with its various looking glasses, but it is his choice to take this stance. So let's hope that his advisors are right, because he isn't getting my vote.
I'm basically just saying the same thing over and over again in slightly different words now, so unless something new* and pertinent to the thread comes up, that's me done for a bit.
*Probably another lost company operation or investment or research funding or opportunity for cultural enrichment - to add to the list. It won't be long until another lost opportunity comes up.
Miolgrips - its pretty strightforward stuff
You said there must be more that would help other than CU /SM. But you cannot back it up and then slag me for making my case.
its really not hard to grasp the basics with a bit of reading. Detail is very complex but the basics are not
Do not join CU / SM and refuse the 4 freedoms then trade barriers will still remain - significant ones.
Miolgrips – its pretty strightforward stuff
I.. what..
I don’t think that’s the case. There’s more to “alignment” than being in the SM/CU, surely this is obvious?
Quote from you
So if its obvious what is it?
There’s more to “alignment” than being in the SM/CU, surely this is obvious?
Go on then, @molgrips, please tell us what the more obvious things we can do are, as a country to allign ourselves...
please tell us what the more obvious things we can do are, as a country to allign ourselves…
I didn't say the things were obvious. I said that it was obvious that there would be things we could do.
Just a few possibilities:
Regulatory alignment
Acceptance of each others standards
Recognition of each others' qualifications
Easy and/or persistent visas for workers (this isn't the same as FoM)
Trade deals
Participation in European programmes
None of which will make any significant difference to trade. I even mentioned regulatory alignment
thiose things will not alter the relationship in any material way, will not solve the trade issues and visas will not bring more staff into the UK.
thiose things will not alter the relationship in any material way
If you say so boss.
will not solve the trade issues
I did't say they would solve trade issues. I said they were things that could move the UK closer to the EU without rejoining, which is what you asked for.
An inch closer when we moved miles away - of no significance whatsoever and I really wouldn't consider them " moving closer" anyway.
TJ, don't you think you're being slightly disingenuous? How could easier access to working Visas not bring more staff to the UK? In the same way that tightening the rules would naturally reduce the number of people.
Regulatory alignment
Acceptance of each others standards
Recognition of each others’ qualifications
Easy and/or persistent visas for workers (this isn’t the same as FoM)
Trade deals
Participation in European programmes
Youv'e literally just descibed single market and customs union with the EU.
Easy and/or persistent visas for workers (this isn’t the same as FoM)
This particular bit we had already as a hard fought bonus/special concession, but will not get back if we re-enter.
TJ, don’t you think you’re being slightly disingenuous? How could easier access to working Visas not bring more staff to the UK?
Staff in some categories can now get visas. guess what? No one hardly came. Why take a visa to the UK at cost and without much in the way of rights when you can go to Germany earn a higher wage without a visa and have full rights
Very few EU workers are going to come here on a visa.
Staff in some categories can now get visas. guess what? No one hardly came. Why take a visa to the UK at cost and without much in the way of rights
What I am saying is that they could change the terms of visas...
Youv’e literally just descibed single market and customs union with the EU.
Yes and no. But those are all things that could be done to some extent or other unilaterally or bilaterally that would being us closer to the EU without actually joining it. Which is what was asked.
That's exactly my point TJ. Make visas expensive, difficult to obtain and with extremely limited rights, it is hard to attract people. Change that, and you will attract more people. As already stated, of course it isn't as good as FoM.
Yes and no. But those are all things that could be done to some extent or other unilaterally or bilaterally that would being us closer to the EU without actually joining it. Which is what was asked.
Starmer has categorically ruled this out, see my links above.
Labour are a racist, populist, nationalist, insular, inward looking party with no new ideas, or long term plans.
Labour are just as bad as the Tories.
To hell with them.
Starmer has categorically ruled this out, see my links above.
Just read these (again) looks like Starmer is categorically ruling IN quite a few of the things I suggested:
"However, we will seek to find new flexible labour mobility arrangements for those making short-term work trips and for musicians and artists seeking short-term visas to tour within the EU."
"Labour will maintain Britain’s data adequacy status meaning our data protection rules are deemed equivalent to those in the EU, enabling UK digital services companies to compete."
"We would seek to agree mutual recognition of conformity assessments across specified sectors so that our producers no longer need to complete two sets of tests, or two processes of certification, to sell their goods in both the UK and the EU."
"Labour will seek mutual recognition of professional qualifications to enable our world leading service industries to do business in the EU."
"Labour would eliminate most border checks created by the Tory Brexit deal."
So basically, what I've been saying. Moving closer to the EU without joining CU/SM. This is rapprochement, and it is likely to continue slowly until we are eventually in the CU/SM in all but name, at which point we can start to talk about rejoin. But that's many years away.
If you were a UK manufacturer competing against cheaper imports, your position has improved.
Has that happened?
but logically, you’d expect a significant increase in school trips inside the UK.
Has that happened?
As far as manufacturing goes, we manufacture relatively little. IIRC it is - excuse me, was - something like 20% of our GDP, possibly less. Rather our big selling point is - er, was - services. I am not aware of any UK manufacturer currently going "well, thank god for brexit, we're so much better off!!" (Please, if you know different I'd love to hear it.) The threat of cheaper imports was never really from Europe but rather the Far East, and in leaving the EU we've ****ed our export market which was surely exponentially greater than any domestic trade we could hope for.
As for school trips, well, a huge uptick in excursions to Blackpool instead of Krakow isn't something I'd be cheering on. Is this even actually a thing anymore? When I was at school I remember two school trips, an Accounts trip to London, and the heady heights of Ribchester for History. There were skiing trips too but they were the exclusive domain of the rich kids.
Labour are a racist, populist, nationalist, insular, inward looking party with no new ideas, or long term plans.
Perhaps, but,
Labour are just as bad as the Tories.
No they aren't.
Given the choice between being kicked in the bollocks or shot in the face I'll take the bollocks, thanks.
I agree with your sentiment, but we had the same nonsense from Corbyn with his perpetual fence-sitting and refusal to take a position on brexit. Turned well last time.
Labour are a total car-crash of B-S....so they are certainly giving the tories a run for No.10 in that respect.
Half of that is just wishful thinking and the rest is just tinkering around the edges and will have no significant effect
“We would seek to agree mutual recognition of conformity assessments across specified sectors so that our producers no longer need to complete two sets of tests, or two processes of certification, to sell their goods in both the UK and the EU.”
This one in particular is really important for me.
And Mattyfez, I have not seen a series of governments as downright dangerous as these Tories in all my days. I'd vote for anything within reason which could remove them from office. My vote will be irrelevant in terms of electing an MP, but should still have meaning in the wider context.
the rest is just tinkering around the edges and will have no significant effect
Hmm, not really quality analysis that, so I'll withhold my judgement.
"We would seek to agree mutual recognition of conformity assessments across specified sectors so that our producers no longer need to complete two sets of tests, or two processes of certification, to sell their goods in both the UK and the EU.”
“Labour will seek mutual recognition of professional qualifications to enable our world leading service industries to do business in the EU".
Now those would be useful.
In my line of work we had to piiiish away somewhere between quarter and half a MILLION quid to duplicate our accreditations in an EU based country as well as in the UK.
THEN have to maintain and re-accredit 2 systems each year.
And the profit for those EU projects gets recognised in the EU. The Co paid tax on that profit in the EU, not the UK.
In other words, leaving the EU was utterly shiiite for business AND the UK Economy AND the exchequer income.
Why does it matter ? Well, I'm one of the rare people in this country that brings foreign €€ in for the work I do - you know - to offset the fhooking mahooosive balance of trade deficit and to pay for all those services we'd like to have working like the NHS, public transport, publicly paid for education, rossers on the streets, etc.
Given the choice between being kicked in the bollocks or shot in the face I’ll take the bollocks, thanks.
Or you could vote lib dem?
Not aimed at you, but people bleat on about the troubles of the two party system, whilst also upholding it by voting labour or conservative.
It's lib dem policy to get back into the EU, It's lib dem policy for PR voting.
All of which Labour and the tories have rulled out.
Vote Labour!
We are absolutely usless and self-serving, but we are marginally less usless and self-serving than the tories!
Not really confidence inspiring, is it?
That was a rhetorical question, BTW.
As far as manufacturing goes, we manufacture relatively little. IIRC it is – excuse me, was – something like 20% of our GDP, possibly less.
This sentence in a nutshell makes a very clear point for me. I don't care that manufacturing is 20% of GDP. I do care that I've spent 100% of my working life in manufacturing. And yes, there are UK based manufacturing businesses that are definitely going to benefit from the extra expense and customs challenges involved in sourcing materials from the EU.
Let's be clear, I voted to remain, want to rejoin THe EU, would have voted for a federal europe if I'd ever had the chance. I just think that repetitively pronouncing that no one and nothing is better after Brexit is a logical fallacy and needs to be challenged. For example, lots of already very wealthy people have done very well from Brexit. It's been great for them. Can we talk about that?
Did you feel like you lived in a better society at the end of the Thatcher era or the end of new labour? Or at the end of new labour and current times? Under the last labour government you would see a definitive course of treatment start within 18 weeks of contact with the health service. Under the Tories, what? 18 months?
Rich Penny +1
Mattyfez, there's a decent chance I could vote Lib Dem, but that won't be increased by blatant lies about Labour being worse than the Tories.
It’s lib dem policy to get back into the EU, It’s lib dem policy for PR voting.
All of which Labour and the tories have rulled out.
Actually, the Lib-Dems are for getting into government and against not getting into government. The problem with voting Lib-Dem is that you don't know which of their policies are going to get thrown on the bonfire of compromise in order to secure as many cabinet posts as possible.
What you want from a junior party in a coalition (in a FPTP voting system) is for them to have one issue that is their single demand and for them to then basically wander the halls of Westminster covered in petrol holding a lighter saying, 'I'm going to do it! I'm going to do it!'
Say what you like about the DUP, they knew how to be a junior coalition partner.
Actually, the Lib-Dems are for getting into government and against not getting into government. The problem with voting Lib-Dem is that you don’t know which of their policies are going to get thrown on the bonfire of compromise in order to secure as many cabinet posts as possible.
Welcome to the reality of PR and coalition government.
We are so NOT used to it, we can't understand it, and in our dumbed down, social media soundbite, everything is black or white world, it blows our tiny brains.
LibDems empowered some of the Tory disasters when in power. They also slowed others. Things got worse after the coalition once the Tories had persuaded everyone it was the LibDems fault.
I'd happily vote LibDem if it meant stopping a Tory candidate. Of the three main parties, they've done the least damage to the country in the last 10 years.
In my line of work we had to piiiish away somewhere between quarter and half a MILLION quid to duplicate our accreditations in an EU based country as well as in the UK.
THEN have to maintain and re-accredit 2 systems each year.
And the time you spend working on this is time you can't spend doing actual profitable work.
Re Lib Dems, I absolutely would vote for them if it were the best chance of getting rid of Tories. You can't complain about people not voting positively for the policies they want - FPTP doesn't reward that, so people don't do it. That's the problem with it.
I would probably vote Plaid if I could vote however I wanted. It was my second vote in the WG elections.
Welcome to the reality of PR and coalition government.
The UK doesn't have PR. It's not like you've got four years to do some of your policies and then a decent chance of another four years after that to pursue the rest.
If a party finds itself as the junior partner in a coalition (or supply and confidence or whatever) then you have a very limited amount of time to maximise your impact.
You don't have time to be a sensible party of government.
https://getprdone.org.uk/ten-years-after-the-av-referendum-what-are-the-lessons/
The Lib-Dems had their shot at making lasting change (and possibly even saving the UK) and they blew it in order to be in a 'proper' government.
Sure, they slowed things down for a couple of years. They could have stopped them completely.
Absolute waste of space.
Lib Dems slowed nothing down in coalition with the tories. they enabled a tory government. Refusing to go into coalition would have led to a weak tory minority government that would have soon collapsed.
And an election. And probably the 2015 Tory majority would have come in 5 years earlier.
I also think the LibDems often made the wrong compromises in office, but once they were out of office… well… things have been “a bit choppy” since then, to say the least.
Actually, the Lib-Dems are for getting into government and against not getting into government. The problem with voting Lib-Dem is that you don’t know which of their policies are going to get thrown on the bonfire of compromise in order to secure as many cabinet posts as possible.
As said, that's the reality of compromise, I'd say you don't understand it but presumably you've lived under it long enough to know better 🤷♂️
Yes they compromised on the wrong things but are people still hanging on to this 'sins of your fathers' nonsense that happened 13 years ago? Is anyone of that administration even around now?
There's a lot not to like about the Lib Dems but that point is just getting silly now.
I find it quite difficult to care about the opinions of parties not in power because they, erm, aren’t in power.
Yeah, but the past Brexit enthusiasms of Labour are relevant when our resident political strategists are, erm, advocating for Labour to blame Brexit on the Tories.
Yes they compromised on the wrong things but are people still hanging on to this ‘sins of your fathers’ nonsense that happened 13 years ago? Is anyone of that administration even around now?
Yes, and none of the Lib-Dems who said they were going to abolish tuition fees in Scotland and reneged on that promise as soon as Labour offered them some seats at the table after the first Scottish Parliament election are around either.
The question is what makes you think things are going to be any different this time if the Lib-Dems are offered a sniff of power, given the last two chances they've had they've burned the people who voted for them?
If they rebrand as a bunch of lunatics who are not going to do anything other than fix the electoral system and rejoin the EU I might reconsider.
Pretending that they were just acting like any other coalition partner in a functioning democracy ignores the fact that there have been coalition governments in the UK for exactly 5 of the last 78 years.
The lib-dems had not just a once in a lifetime chance but a once in a multiple generational chance to alter the course of the UK forever. Maybe it wouldn't have worked and maybe they would have suffered at the next election for it but that's just the reality of being committed to a cause.
The Lib-Dems have no cause. They are the absolute worst kind of career politicians. Those who don't even have the guts to go play with the big kids in Labour or the Tories. They are absolute nothings of politics.
There’s a lot not to like about the Lib Dems but that point is just getting silly now.
Pragmatism would suggest sometimes you need to hold your nose and look forward.
Or you could carry on fighting lost battles and see the Tories get back in.
Principles are great.
