Nothing at all to do with the 110 million sweetener or to quote them " amid a downturn in China and lower demand for their diesel engines. " ...all down to brexit ? And the move was also announced before the referendum .
The build cost of the factory alone was £1billion. So who knows what the total setting up cost would be. When those sort of costs are involved, being given £110million wouldn't be a deciding factor. There would be many more important considerations. Do you really think that the UK Government don't incentivise foreign companies setting up large factories in this country? Many foreign manufacturers have set up in the UK, primarily to gain the benefits of The Single Market. Around 60% of cars manufactured in the UK are exported to the EU. Who knows what will happen to this.
I used to be a manager for a company that manufactured a product in this country since the late 1800's until production and labour costs eventually meant moving the production side to Hungary , Vietnam and germany ...long before Brexit was an issue. .
Nothing at all to do with the 110 million sweetener or to quote them " amid a downturn in China and lower demand for their diesel engines. " ...all down to brexit ? And the move was also announced before the referendum .
The build cost of the factory alone was £1billion. So who knows what the total setting up cost would be. When those sort of costs are involved, being given £110million wouldn't be a deciding factor. There would be many more important considerations. Do you really think that the UK Government don't incentivise foreign companies setting up large factories in this country? Many foreign manufacturers have set up in the UK, primarily to gain the benefits of The Single Market. Around 60% of cars manufactured in the UK are exported to the EU. Who knows what will happen to this.
I used to be a manager for a company that manufactured a product in this country since the late 1800's until production and labour costs eventually meant moving the production side to Hungary , Vietnam and germany ...long before Brexit was an issue. .
The situation that you describe has occurred on many occasions. Sometimes through the exploitation of workers, by paying them meagre wages, exploiting children etc, and therefore allowing the companies involved to dramatically reduce their production costs.
The EU has been instrumental in introducing legislation to curb these practices.
However Brexit presents a different challenge where many manufacturers have set up in the UK, as a gateway to Europe. They have done so to access both the UK market, and the EU Single Market. If Brexit does not allow access to the EU, or interferes with supply lines, makes exporting more difficult, or costly, many more will relocate their factories.
Also many more that might have set up in the UK, will look elsewhere in Europe.
Just one small example. As a result of Trump and his trade wars, Harley Davidson are planning to set up in Europe, to avoid tariffs, and satisfy their European sales. Britain might have been their first choice, were it not for the uncertainty over Brexit. There are probably many companies in the same boat that also wont be choosing Britain as their European base.
When people shout about taking back control, particularly of our laws, they seem unaware of the fact that so much of our legislation that protects our workers was put in place by the EU rather than any British Government. In fact Jacob Rees-Mogg wants to repeal some of it as soon as we leave. This can be seen very quickly on the 5th video down on the previous page, the one headed equal pay.
When people shout about taking back control, particularly of our laws, they seem unaware of the fact that so much of our legislation that protects our workers was put in place by the EU rather than any British Government. In fact Jacob Rees-Mogg wants to repeal some of it as soon as we leave. This can be seen very quickly on the 5th video down on the previous page, the one headed equal pay.
Lets point out here , with regards to equal pay ..labour in 1964 proposed the " the right to equal pay for equal work" ..this was cemented by the parliaments 1970 equal pay act ...obviously this has been amended quite a lot since it's inception in 1975 ..but lets not give Europe the credit for implementing it in the uk. As far as the national minimum wage , you can credit labour with that ( national minimum wage act 1998) , again nothing to do with the E.U. As far as this article says 22 of the 28 E.U. member states have a statutory minimum wage set by the government >>>https://www.eca-international.com/insights/articles/august-2017/why-isn-t-there-an-eu-wide-minimum-wage
I am not clever enough to argue with the economic experts. Although I believe you can make stats fit particular arguments.
Some things seem really obvious.
EU membership allows us to trade with the 27 other members. It also allows us to trade with 68 other countries, that the EU currently have free trade deals with.
It would seem to me that it would be difficult to argue that this is not advantageous to our economy.
As members we are not allowed to do independent trade deals with other countries, but we can, and do trade with other countries, that we don't have free trade deals with.
Why doesn't Liam Fox get off his backside and increase our trade with other countries that the EU don't have free trade deals with?
Why cant we as members encourage the EU to speed up the process of free trade deals throughout the world?
The UK and Germany are both members of the EU. Germany do six times as much trade with China as the UK does. Why is this?
We are told that it will be very easy to do free trade deals with other countries. Yet remaining in close alignment with the EU in order to get a comprehensive trade deal after leaving, will make this very difficult.
After leaving will the EU see us as competitors?
For instance would they threaten the 68 countries that they currently have free trade deals with, that they would pull out of the current trade deals, if similar terms were offered to the UK?
I am not clever enough to argue with the economic experts. Although I believe you can make stats fit particular arguments.
Some things seem really obvious.
EU membership allows us to trade with the 27 other members. It also allows us to trade with 68 other countries, that the EU currently have free trade deals with.
It would seem to me that it would be difficult to argue that this is not advantageous to our economy.
As members we are not allowed to do independent trade deals with other countries, but we can, and do trade with other countries, that we don't have free trade deals with.
Why doesn't Liam Fox get off his backside and increase our trade with other countries that the EU don't have free trade deals with?
Why cant we as members encourage the EU to speed up the process of free trade deals throughout the world?
The UK and Germany are both members of the EU. Germany do six times as much trade with China as the UK does. Why is this?
We are told that it will be very easy to do free trade deals with other countries. Yet remaining in close alignment with the EU in order to get a comprehensive trade deal after leaving, will make this very difficult.
After leaving will the EU see us as competitors?
For instance would they threaten the 68 countries that they currently have free trade deals with, that they would pull out of the current trade deals, if similar terms were offered to the UK?
Likewise , I'm hardly an economic expert either , but the guardian offers reasons for the bolded part of your question above ..correct or not , make up your own mind >>>> "There are three reasons why Germany has a trade surplus worth 8% of GDP and exports almost five times as much to China as the UK does. The first is the exchange rate: while Britain’s manufacturers have been hobbled for years by an over-valued pound, Germany joined the euro at an extremely advantageous rate. Its trade surplus with other EU countries has soared since the single currency was launched almost two decades ago. Secondly, German industry has made itself more competitive through protracted cost-cutting, especially wage restraint. Finally, and most importantly, Germany has got its industrial strategy right: it has a skilled, well-educated workforce; it has a financial system that eschews short-termism; it has worked on all parts of the manufacturing process from initial design through to after-sales service. All this without a murmur from German business about the need for Berlin to run an independent trade strategy."
I am not clever enough to argue with the economic experts. Although I believe you can make stats fit particular arguments.
Some things seem really obvious.
EU membership allows us to trade with the 27 other members. It also allows us to trade with 68 other countries, that the EU currently have free trade deals with.
It would seem to me that it would be difficult to argue that this is not advantageous to our economy.
As members we are not allowed to do independent trade deals with other countries, but we can, and do trade with other countries, that we don't have free trade deals with.
Why doesn't Liam Fox get off his backside and increase our trade with other countries that the EU don't have free trade deals with?
Why cant we as members encourage the EU to speed up the process of free trade deals throughout the world?
The UK and Germany are both members of the EU. Germany do six times as much trade with China as the UK does. Why is this?
We are told that it will be very easy to do free trade deals with other countries. Yet remaining in close alignment with the EU in order to get a comprehensive trade deal after leaving, will make this very difficult.
After leaving will the EU see us as competitors?
For instance would they threaten the 68 countries that they currently have free trade deals with, that they would pull out of the current trade deals, if similar terms were offered to the UK?
Likewise , I'm hardly an economic expert either , but the guardian offers reasons for the bolded part of your question above ..correct or not , make up your own mind >>>> "There are three reasons why Germany has a trade surplus worth 8% of GDP and exports almost five times as much to China as the UK does. The first is the exchange rate: while Britain’s manufacturers have been hobbled for years by an over-valued pound, Germany joined the euro at an extremely advantageous rate. Its trade surplus with other EU countries has soared since the single currency was launched almost two decades ago. Secondly, German industry has made itself more competitive through protracted cost-cutting, especially wage restraint. Finally, and most importantly, Germany has got its industrial strategy right: it has a skilled, well-educated workforce; it has a financial system that eschews short-termism; it has worked on all parts of the manufacturing process from initial design through to after-sales service. All this without a murmur from German business about the need for Berlin to run an independent trade strategy."
They just showed a graph on Sky news showing the exchange rate of the £ against the $. The currency of world trade. The rate was $4 to the £ in 1945, with a constant fall to todays £1,28. You would think that this would be massively advantageous to exporters.
I was purely using German trade with China as an example. Some politicians are using our Eu membership as an excuse for a lack of trade outside of the EU. Our currency has constantly lost value against the dollar and the Euro, which gives UK exporters a huge advantage. Our politicians constantly tell us that we are the world leaders in many areas. It just doesn't stack up. You would expect that if we were world leaders, with our currency constantly falling in value, we would be able to increase our non EU trade dramatically.
I really don't know ...if you were to read all of the different statistics , reports , offered explanations and reasons for growth/lack of growth , then at the end, your head would be totally frazzled ...and to add to that scenario here's another bunch of stats , 2008 recession 10 years on from the office for national statistics :https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/articles/the2008recession10yearson/2018-04-30
I was purely using German trade with China as an example. Some politicians are using our Eu membership as an excuse for a lack of trade outside of the EU. Our currency has constantly lost value against the dollar and the Euro, which gives UK exporters a huge advantage. Our politicians constantly tell us that we are the world leaders in many areas. It just doesn't stack up. You would expect that if we were world leaders, with our currency constantly falling in value, we would be able to increase our non EU trade dramatically.
Well this an excerpt taken from the article , I'm going to link : "So the answer to whether or not a fall in your currency is a good thing depends on how and where you spend it, as well as the relationship between your country’s economic activity and the outside world. The claim that a weakened currency makes exports cheaper is true, but this is a short-term gain that comes with a proviso: what about the imports that those exports rely on, such as raw materials?
An estimated 50% of UK exports rely on imported components. These will become more expensive as the pound falls. So the gains made from a growth in exports will be limited.
A weaker currency can have more negative effects, too. It is often associated with low productivity growth and inflation due to an increase in the demand for retail goods and services. Take China’s currency: the renminbi is systematically undervalued to keep its exports competitive, but the country has a problem of low productivity because its products remain cheap without the need for investment in production." https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-a-weaker-pound-means-for-the-british-economy-61872
It concludes by saying : "In short, whether a fall in the value of a currency is good or bad depends on imports and exports, and the type of economy a country has. As the UK’s economy is centred on an influx of money to invest in its finance industry – which requires a strong currency to produce returns – it will feel the crunch. Claims that the fall in the pound are good for exports fail to take this into account."
I was purely using German trade with China as an example. Some politicians are using our Eu membership as an excuse for a lack of trade outside of the EU. Our currency has constantly lost value against the dollar and the Euro, which gives UK exporters a huge advantage. Our politicians constantly tell us that we are the world leaders in many areas. It just doesn't stack up. You would expect that if we were world leaders, with our currency constantly falling in value, we would be able to increase our non EU trade dramatically.
Well this an excerpt taken from the article , I'm going to link : "So the answer to whether or not a fall in your currency is a good thing depends on how and where you spend it, as well as the relationship between your country’s economic activity and the outside world. The claim that a weakened currency makes exports cheaper is true, but this is a short-term gain that comes with a proviso: what about the imports that those exports rely on, such as raw materials?
An estimated 50% of UK exports rely on imported components. These will become more expensive as the pound falls. So the gains made from a growth in exports will be limited.
A weaker currency can have more negative effects, too. It is often associated with low productivity growth and inflation due to an increase in the demand for retail goods and services. Take China’s currency: the renminbi is systematically undervalued to keep its exports competitive, but the country has a problem of low productivity because its products remain cheap without the need for investment in production." https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-a-weaker-pound-means-for-the-british-economy-61872
It concludes by saying : "In short, whether a fall in the value of a currency is good or bad depends on imports and exports, and the type of economy a country has. As the UK’s economy is centred on an influx of money to invest in its finance industry – which requires a strong currency to produce returns – it will feel the crunch. Claims that the fall in the pound are good for exports fail to take this into account."
The Eu have maintained from the start that they could not allow a non member to receive the same benefits as a member country, for obvious reasons. Therefore common sense tells me that, Less access to The Single Market means less trade. The immediate loss of free trade deals with 68 countries, means less trade. A starting point of being the only country in the world with no free trade deals will not boost our trade. The fact that one single new trade deal will take years to complete, will cause difficulties. All the above must damage our economy, lose jobs, and make many people poorer.
In the longer term many manufacturers may see it as advantageous to move production to a European country if there are logistical problems, supply chain, border, or administration difficulties, or increased costs in respect of customs charges, or tariffs.
12,000 lorries per day turn up at Dover each day. Lets say they can magic up the required 8,000 customs officers, and miraculously do away with the 5 year training period.
A two minute delay, gives them a 20 mile tailback. You havent got a few days to get this under control, as another 12,000 turn up the following day, and the same the day after.
This will make just in time manufacturing impossible.
i know this a fairly uninformed observation on my part, but i'm guessing you hold strong views on this subject?
I think that I have a pretty neutral view.
Agreed...I didn’t say biased, I said strong! As previously articulated, IMO, our economy will never recover in my lifetime...I’m 61 so hopefully I’ve got another 25 so we will still be in the **** then...
i know this a fairly uninformed observation on my part, but i'm guessing you hold strong views on this subject?
I think that I have a pretty neutral view.
Agreed...I didn’t say biased, I said strong! As previously articulated, IMO, our economy will never recover in my lifetime...I’m 61 so hopefully I’ve got another 25 so we will still be in the **** then...
That was an attempt at sarcasm. I will have to try harder.
Comments
2) Thats not in dispute
I used to be a manager for a company that manufactured a product in this country since the late 1800's until production and labour costs eventually meant moving the production side to Hungary , Vietnam and germany ...long before Brexit was an issue. .
The EU has been instrumental in introducing legislation to curb these practices.
However Brexit presents a different challenge where many manufacturers have set up in the UK, as a gateway to Europe. They have done so to access both the UK market, and the EU Single Market.
If Brexit does not allow access to the EU, or interferes with supply lines, makes exporting more difficult, or costly, many more will relocate their factories.
Also many more that might have set up in the UK, will look elsewhere in Europe.
Just one small example. As a result of Trump and his trade wars, Harley Davidson are planning to set up in Europe, to avoid tariffs, and satisfy their European sales. Britain might have been their first choice, were it not for the uncertainty over Brexit. There are probably many companies in the same boat that also wont be choosing Britain as their European base.
In fact Jacob Rees-Mogg wants to repeal some of it as soon as we leave.
This can be seen very quickly on the 5th video down on the previous page, the one headed equal pay.
Some things seem really obvious.
EU membership allows us to trade with the 27 other members. It also allows us to trade with 68 other countries, that the EU currently have free trade deals with.
It would seem to me that it would be difficult to argue that this is not advantageous to our economy.
As members we are not allowed to do independent trade deals with other countries, but we can, and do trade with other countries, that we don't have free trade deals with.
Why doesn't Liam Fox get off his backside and increase our trade with other countries that the EU don't have free trade deals with?
Why cant we as members encourage the EU to speed up the process of free trade deals throughout the world?
The UK and Germany are both members of the EU. Germany do six times as much trade with China as the UK does. Why is this?
We are told that it will be very easy to do free trade deals with other countries. Yet remaining in close alignment with the EU in order to get a comprehensive trade deal after leaving, will make this very difficult.
After leaving will the EU see us as competitors?
For instance would they threaten the 68 countries that they currently have free trade deals with, that they would pull out of the current trade deals, if similar terms were offered to the UK?
"There are three reasons why Germany has a trade surplus worth 8% of GDP and exports almost five times as much to China as the UK does. The first is the exchange rate: while Britain’s manufacturers have been hobbled for years by an over-valued pound, Germany joined the euro at an extremely advantageous rate. Its trade surplus with other EU countries has soared since the single currency was launched almost two decades ago. Secondly, German industry has made itself more competitive through protracted cost-cutting, especially wage restraint. Finally, and most importantly, Germany has got its industrial strategy right: it has a skilled, well-educated workforce; it has a financial system that eschews short-termism; it has worked on all parts of the manufacturing process from initial design through to after-sales service. All this without a murmur from German business about the need for Berlin to run an independent trade strategy."
The rate was $4 to the £ in 1945, with a constant fall to todays £1,28. You would think that this would be massively advantageous to exporters.
Some politicians are using our Eu membership as an excuse for a lack of trade outside of the EU.
Our currency has constantly lost value against the dollar and the Euro, which gives UK exporters a huge advantage.
Our politicians constantly tell us that we are the world leaders in many areas.
It just doesn't stack up.
You would expect that if we were world leaders, with our currency constantly falling in value, we would be able to increase our non EU trade dramatically.
"So the answer to whether or not a fall in your currency is a good thing depends on how and where you spend it, as well as the relationship between your country’s economic activity and the outside world. The claim that a weakened currency makes exports cheaper is true, but this is a short-term gain that comes with a proviso: what about the imports that those exports rely on, such as raw materials?
An estimated 50% of UK exports rely on imported components. These will become more expensive as the pound falls. So the gains made from a growth in exports will be limited.
A weaker currency can have more negative effects, too. It is often associated with low productivity growth and inflation due to an increase in the demand for retail goods and services. Take China’s currency: the renminbi is systematically undervalued to keep its exports competitive, but the country has a problem of low productivity because its products remain cheap without the need for investment in production."
https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-a-weaker-pound-means-for-the-british-economy-61872
It concludes by saying : "In short, whether a fall in the value of a currency is good or bad depends on imports and exports, and the type of economy a country has. As the UK’s economy is centred on an influx of money to invest in its finance industry – which requires a strong currency to produce returns – it will feel the crunch. Claims that the fall in the pound are good for exports fail to take this into account."
Therefore common sense tells me that,
Less access to The Single Market means less trade.
The immediate loss of free trade deals with 68 countries, means less trade.
A starting point of being the only country in the world with no free trade deals will not boost our trade.
The fact that one single new trade deal will take years to complete, will cause difficulties.
All the above must damage our economy, lose jobs, and make many people poorer.
In the longer term many manufacturers may see it as advantageous to move production to a European country if there are logistical problems, supply chain, border, or administration difficulties, or increased costs in respect of customs charges, or tariffs.
12,000 lorries per day turn up at Dover each day. Lets say they can magic up the required 8,000 customs officers, and miraculously do away with the 5 year training period.
A two minute delay, gives them a 20 mile tailback. You havent got a few days to get this under control, as another 12,000 turn up the following day, and the same the day after.
This will make just in time manufacturing impossible.
i know this a fairly uninformed observation on my part, but i'm guessing you hold strong views on this subject?
I will have to try harder.