Brexit Referendum Superthread

Thomas_...

That's a very interesting article about a leaked memo that confirms that the UK govt still has no clue on how to deliver Brexit and some more insights into the split of the cabinet itself on that subject.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37983948

'There is no plan' for Brexit, leaked memo says

The government has no overall Brexit plan and a negotiating strategy may not be agreed by the cabinet for six months, a leaked memo has suggested.
The memo - obtained by the Times and seen by the BBC - warns Whitehall is working on 500 Brexit-related projects and could need 30,000 extra staff.
However, there is still no common exit strategy "because of divisions within the cabinet", the leaked document adds.

...

The leaked Cabinet Office memo - written by an un-named consultant and entitled "Brexit Update" of 7 November - suggests it will take another six months before the government decides precisely what it wants to achieve from Brexit or agrees on its priorities.

...

The report criticises Mrs May, who it says is "acquiring a reputation of drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself" - an approach it describes as being "unlikely to be sustainable."
The Times says the document also identifies cabinet splits between Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Brexit Secretary David Davis and International Trade Secretary Liam Fox on one side, and Chancellor Philip Hammond and Business Secretary Greg Clark on the other.
According to the newspaper, the memo said: "Every department has developed a 'bottom-up' plan of what the impact of Brexit could be - and its plan to cope with the 'worst case'.
"Although necessary, this falls considerably short of having a 'government plan for Brexit' because it has no prioritisation and no link to the overall negotiation strategy."
...
It estimates an additional 30,000 extra civil servants could be required to meet the workload.
...

Well, before they hire 30k extra civil servants to do the Job, they should know what they are going to do in the first place and this might take more time than just another six months.

Thomas_...

Getting even better:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37921598

France 'will definitely close UK border at Calais'
The French government is "definitely" going to close the UK border post in Calais after Brexit, a close ally of presidential election frontrunner Alain Juppe has told the BBC.
Arnaud Danjean said France no longer wanted the "negative burden" of migrants aiming to cross the Channel being detained on its soil.
The change would be an "uncomfortable consequence" of Brexit, he said.
The UK government wants the post in Calais to remain in use.
...
Mr Danjean told Analysis: "When it comes to border management, we will have to find a new agreement, definitely, because you can't make as if nothing has happened.
"And we all know that the vote for Brexit was mainly expressed because of migration and immigration issues. So, it has an impact and we cannot continue like this.
"I cannot imagine a French politician and a French president telling people, 'Well, you know, the Brits have decided to leave but we have to enforce the border at our border'. This would be very hard to explain."
...
"On this very important issue of border management, an effort should be made also on the British side."
Despite Mr Juppe's statements about moving border checks, Downing Street has said it expects the Le Touquet agreement to continue.
Asked to respond to the comments from No 10, Mr Danjean said: "I can understand the position, but I'm not sure it's a sustainable one."
...
But several senior French politicians say the build-up of thousands of refugees and migrants on the French side of the Channel has caused the country damage.
Mr Juppe described it as "disastrous " for France's image, while having "extremely serious economic and security consequences for the people of Calais".
...
"The problem with that is that there will be many dead in the Channel," he said. "That seems obvious because migrants will want to cross, will be able to cross, since the border will be moved to Dover."

This also doesn't comes from nowhere, there is a real concern in France about the chances of Ms Le Pen in the next years presidential election to win it if the French govt can't get a grip on the migration problem. Another point that proves how naive the Brexiteers are, just thinking that voting for leaving the EU will have no consequences even in merely bilateral agreements like this in which the EU was not involved, but France is clearly fed up with that Situation and once that Agreement is suspended, the Brits will have to see for themselves how to secure their own coast once the migrants know about the change and have a try to cross the Channel without being hold back in France.

Thomas_...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37982229

Government is failing UK workers over Brexit - McDonnell

The government's "shambolic" approach to Brexit is failing to equip the UK economy for leaving the EU, shadow chancellor John McDonnell will say.
Mr McDonnell will accuse Chancellor Philip Hammond of being isolated from cabinet colleagues and will say he is "too weak" to make Brexit a success.
...
Their approach will "continue to undermine the ambitions of working people", he will say.
...
"We want to see an end to tax giveaways for the wealthy. And we need a serious commitment from government to invest across the whole of our country."
Mr McDonnell will accuse Mr Hammond of lacking influence over the process of withdrawing from the EU, saying: "The CEO of Nissan probably knows more about our Brexit negotiating position than the chancellor."
"Britain cannot afford a weak chancellor who cannot find his voice, when our country faces the biggest economic challenges for a generation. It's time he steps up to the task and stands up to his cabinet colleagues."
...

There is nothing else to expect from a Tory govt, isn't it?

Thomas_...

The victim of a politically motivated murder in the Brexit campaign should not be forgotten. The perpetrator is now on trial and although there were no further incidents like this in which an anti-Brexit person was murdered, the background of the perpetrator tells a lot about his mindset and likely also about some likeminded people who felt free to abuse and threaten other people soon after the Brexit Referendum delivered the win on the Leave side.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-37978582

When I heard about the murder of Mrs Cox on that very day, I turned away from these Brexiteers in utter disgust and there was no understanding for their argumentation left on my side. This was a step too far and what happened after the referendum, committed by some of the Brexiteers was just good enough to deepen my contempt for them.

I hope that this Mr Mair gets his hard punishment that he deserves for what he did.

Jim2007

K-9 wrote: »

I think we are getting close to arguing we should have common tax rates and, real shock horror, common tax rules in the EU.

Do we seriously want to go down that road?

We have already decided to go there! And yes it is very likely that you will eventually may see common tax rules for income determination and local plus federal tax rates like you find today in most federal states. Common tax rules would help prevent companies from using transfer pricing etc from avoiding taxes and local/federal tax rates would probably ensure that the EU is more fairly financed than the current VAT system.

Fratton Fred

Jim2007 wrote: »

And that is exactly what is missing in the US and the UK today - the sense of community and putting the community before oneself. It is all about me, what I want, what I can buy etc... You just have to listen to them, they don't care about that happens to their neighbours, their community, the country, the environment etc. as long as they are OK, that is all that matters....

That's a ridiculous statement.

The common theme, particularly from the labour heart lands, was that enough is enough. Thousands of people in the UK have seen their earnings potential constantly eroded due to a conveyor belt of immigration, whilst having to pay taxes to build the infrastructure in the countries those immigrants are coming from.

For years there has been no complaints, for fear of being labelled racist or xenophobic, but finally the camel's back was broken.

If you ask a lot of Brexiters why they voted the way they did, they will tell it was to look after their community, not the well being of some European politician from a poor country who, despite constantly asking the eu for help building roads, is earning more than the German chancellor and has three gilt edged pension funds.

demfad

Fratton Fred wrote: »

That's a ridiculous statement.

The common theme, particularly from the labour heart lands, was that enough is enough. Thousands of people in the UK have seen their earnings potential constantly eroded due to a conveyor belt of immigration, whilst having to pay taxes to build the infrastructure in the countries those immigrants are coming from.

For years there has been no complaints, for fear of being labelled racist or xenophobic, but finally the camel's back was broken.

If you ask a lot of Brexiters why they voted the way they did, they will tell it was to look after their community, not the well being of some European politician from a poor country who, despite constantly asking the eu for help building roads, is earning more than the German chancellor and has three gilt edged pension funds.

Ridiculous. The UK's net gain from the EU is massive. They will be a lot worse off after leaving. The concentration on financial services in London has everything to do with the UK government and less to do with the EU. After the 2008 crash there was a global deflation led by Wall street. The previous inflation enriched the top 1% and when the house of cards collapsed the debt was socialised.
With one of the biggest Financial services centres in the world the UK were happy to push this type of world economy to the eventual detriment of its own people. Blaming emigrants who have every right to travel to work in countries benefitting from the single market is just cowardly and wrong.

ancapailldorcha

demfad wrote: »

Ridiculous. The UK's net gain from the EU is massive. They will be a lot worse off after leaving. The concentration on financial services in London has everything to do with the UK government and less to do with the EU. After the 2008 crash there was a global deflation led by Wall street. The previous inflation enriched the top 1% and when the house of cards collapsed the debt was socialised.
With one of the biggest Financial services centres in the world the UK were happy to push this type of world economy to the eventual detriment of its own people. Blaming emigrants who have every right to travel to work in countries benefitting from the single market is just cowardly and wrong.

Whether or not the UK will be worse off depends on access to the single market moreso than the EU. If the UK can maintain full access, there shouldn't be much of an issue though EU bodies such as the EMA will want to move to the continent. In this scenario, the main issue is the UK being unable to veto any anti-market policies from Brussels.

recedite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This got missed in Trump shenanigans.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/nov/09/uk-trade-deficit-widens-september-exports-fall-pound-drop

Anti-Brexit scaremongering did a certain amount of damage to consumer and business confidence this year, but even the rabidly anti-brexit Guardian newspaper has to admit in that article that....

Britain’s trade position looked better in the third quarter overall, with the trade in goods deficit narrowing by £1.5bn compared with the second quarter, to £33.bn.

Its not where you are that counts, its the direction you are going in.

Similarly, dire warnings of inflation due to a weak £ pound are failing to materialise.

Fratton Fred

demfad wrote: »

Ridiculous. The UK's net gain from the EU is massive. They will be a lot worse off after leaving. The concentration on financial services in London has everything to do with the UK government and less to do with the EU. After the 2008 crash there was a global deflation led by Wall street. The previous inflation enriched the top 1% and when the house of cards collapsed the debt was socialised.
With one of the biggest Financial services centres in the world the UK were happy to push this type of world economy to the eventual detriment of its own people. Blaming emigrants who have every right to travel to work in countries benefitting from the single market is just cowardly and wrong.

which is probably why the financial areas voted to remain.

Ont he other hand, self employed people are earning the lowest since 1995. What do you think the reasons are for that?

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37678065

FrancieBrady

recedite wrote: »

Its not where you are that counts, its the direction you are going in.

[/URL]

...and that direction is?

recedite

recedite wrote: »

Structural funds are a good idea. But in the long term, peripheral countries don't want charity, they want jobs. Exports from the core countries, mainly Germany have boomed while also remaining competitive since the € was introduced. A neat trick made possible by having a common eurozone currency. The flip side of that is that peripheral countries have been unable to devalue and therefore boost their own industries. The result is that their workers are expected to migrate to Germany, to where the work is, even though they don't really want to.

Except the UK of course, where industries are now booming as a result of the drop in the £.

When I see the same car/van for sale in each euro country with the same € price tag, and when I see a branch of the European Investment Bank in each European town and city busily handing out loans created at the ECB in Frankfurt to small businesses and homeowners, at the exact same interest rate in each country, then I will know we all live in a single market.

Huh?

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

That's a ridiculous statement.

The common theme, particularly from the labour heart lands, was that enough is enough. Thousands of people in the UK have seen their earnings potential constantly eroded due to a conveyor belt of immigration, whilst having to pay taxes to build the infrastructure in the countries those immigrants are coming from.

For years there has been no complaints, for fear of being labelled racist or xenophobic, but finally the camel's back was broken.

If you ask a lot of Brexiters why they voted the way they did, they will tell it was to look after their community, not the well being of some European politician from a poor country who, despite constantly asking the eu for help building roads, is earning more than the German chancellor and has three gilt edged pension funds.

Figures show a marginal effect if any for this.

whatstherush

recedite wrote: »

Similarly, dire warnings of inflation due to a weak £ pound are failing to materialise.

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/798482965856546816

Fratton Fred

Deleted User wrote: »

Figures show a marginal effect if any for this.

could you provide these?

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

could you provide these?

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/research/Documents/workingpapers/2015/swp574.pdf

page 22

Not surprisingly, the results show that there are clear differences, in the impact of immigration on wages, across occupations. The static results suggest that the statistically significant negative effects of immigration on wages are concentrated among skilled production workers, and semi/unskilled service workers. In the latter cases, the coefficients indicates that a 10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services — that is, in care homes, bars, shops, restaurants, cleaning, for example — leads to a 1.88 percent reduction in pay.

conclusion on page 24

Conclusion wrote:

This paper asks whether immigration has any impact on wages. It answers this question by considering the variation of wages and immigration across regions, occupations, and time. Occupations turn out to be a relatively important dimension. Once the occupational breakdown is incorporated into a regional analysis of immigration, the immigrant-native ratio has a significant small impact on the average occupational wage rates of that region. Closer examination reveals that the biggest effect is in the semi/unskilled services sector, where a 10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants is associated with a 2 percent reduction in pay. Where immigrants come from — EU or non-EU — appears to have no impact on our economy wide results; with the impact within the semi/unskilled services sector being small. These findings accord well with intuition and anecdotal
evidence, but do not seem to have been recorded previously in the empirical literature.

Even anti-migration parties agree the effect is small
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/24

Good overall piece here too on the UK migration patterns and effects
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:EK07wSGRrwUJ:https://www.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

First Up

Fratton Fred wrote: »

could you provide these?

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit05.pdf

demfad

Fratton Fred wrote: »

which is probably why the financial areas voted to remain.



http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37678065

Ofcourse the financial areas voted to remain. But the EU did not create the UKs dependency on finance, the UK did this all by itself. If the UK wants to shift the balance back towards a sustainable model it needs to do this gradually. Torpeedo-ing it's economy by leaving the single market isn't the way forward. The UK also needs to be able to exert influence on the world economy. It cannot or should not wish to be a lapdog partner to Trump and his right wing cronies some of whom wish the destruction of the EU. It's place now is at the centre of the EU helping drive policy as Theresa May wished before the Brexit result.

Ont he other hand, self employed people are earning the lowest since 1995. What do you think the reasons are for that?

As I said it's the socialisation of the financial collapse. It gets paid for by higher taxes and lower wages, which has zero to do with immigrants.
The 1% avoid the hit and the poorest get poorer. And the blame goes on the fella who looks different.

What do you think are the reasons for this?

Fratton Fred

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/research/Documents/workingpapers/2015/swp574.pdf

page 22


conclusion on page 24


Even anti-migration parties agree the effect is small
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/24

Good overall piece here too on the UK migration patterns and effects
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:EK07wSGRrwUJ:https://www.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

those figues show a reduction in pay. dress it up how you like, but most people would expect to see their wages increase, not decrease.

I also provided a link that shows self employed people earning less than in 1995.

Statistics are great, but to someone who trained to become a plumber, only to see the average pay of a plumber become depressed due to an influx of immigrants, stats don't mean a thing.

An old school friend of mine started his own cab company, their main bread and butter is doing runs to Heathrow airport for £25 a go. They are now competing with two other cab companies owned by Poles who charge £20 a run. They can't compete with that, because they all own their cars, have mortgages and families. Their competition has a revolving number of drivers who are working for a few months before returning to Poland and share accommodation and cars.

simply saying that there is only a slight decrease in wages because some BoE figures say so is not the reality of the person who is affected.

Fratton Fred

demfad wrote: »

As I said it's the socialisation of the financial collapse. It gets paid for by higher taxes and lower wages, which has zero to do with immigrants.
The 1% avoid the hit and the poorest get poorer. And the blame goes on the fella who looks different.

What do you think are the reasons for this?

the reason for what?

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

those figues show a reduction in pay. dress it up how you like, but most people would expect to see their wages increase, not decrease.

I also provided a link that shows self employed people earning less than in 1995.

Statistics are great, but to someone who trained to become a plumber, only to see the average pay of a plumber become depressed due to an influx of immigrants, stats don't mean a thing.

An old school friend of mine started his own cab company, their main bread and butter is doing runs to Heathrow airport for £25 a go. They are now competing with two other cab companies owned by Poles who charge £20 a run. They can't compete with that, because they all own their cars, have mortgages and families. Their competition has a revolving number of drivers who are working for a few months before returning to Poland and share accommodation and cars.

simply saying that there is only a slight decrease in wages because some BoE figures say so is not the reality of the person who is affected.

None of this rebuts what I posted?

Your "earnings potential constantly eroded due to a conveyor belt of immigration" seems to be a little hyperbolic considering the extent of any earnings decrease (marginal as I said) that can be attributed to immigration.

The perils of free trade eh? That some costs (which necessarily some percentage used to accrue to someone as receipts) get reduced. Is it not quite difficult / hypocritical to pursue and espouse protectionist labour policies whilst also seeking out and glorifying the idea of free-trade deals elsewhere? Something I never quite manage to get my head around tbh.

Regarding expections of wage growth, what are these expectations founded on? We have been in a low/no inflation period in recent times. Wages can actually grow in real terms without nominal increases under those circumstances. "Expecting" something without a rational basis for it is not exactly sound is it?
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/inflation-cpi

Your final sentence is arguing perception, not reality. Unless you'd like to challenge the BoE figures? Or the LSE ones also posted? Or MigrationWatch's verdict? It absolutely is the reality of the person affected when looked at in macro terms (which Governments must do!).

demfad

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Ont he other hand, self employed people are earning the lowest since 1995. What do you think the reasons are for that?

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37678065

The question you posed yourself but gave no answer for?

Fratton Fred wrote: »

the reason for what?

Fratton Fred

Deleted User wrote: »

None of this rebuts what I posted?

Your "earnings potential constantly eroded due to a conveyor belt of immigration" seems to be a little hyperbolic considering the extent of any earnings decrease (marginal as I said) that can be attributed to immigration.

The perils of free trade eh? That some costs (which necessarily some percentage used to accrue to someone as receipts) get reduced. Is it not quite difficult / hypocritical to pursue and espouse protectionist labour policies whilst also seeking out and glorifying the idea of free-trade deals elsewhere? Something I never quite manage to get my head around tbh.

Regarding expections of wage growth, what are these expectations founded on? We have been in a low/no inflation period in recent times. Wages can actually grow in real terms without nominal increases under those circumstances. "Expecting" something without a rational basis for it is not exactly sound is it?
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/inflation-cpi

Your final sentence is arguing perception, not reality. Unless you'd like to challenge the BoE figures? Or the LSE ones also posted? Or MigrationWatch's verdict? It absolutely is the reality of the person affected when looked at in macro terms (which Governments must do!).

yet you haven't commented on the link that shows self employed people earning less than they were in 1995?

Fratton Fred

demfad wrote: »

The question you posed yourself but gave no answer for?

if you ask any builder, taxi driver, plumber, courier driver, hairdresser or a whole host of other self employed people, they will tell you exactly why it is.

People can get the same service from an eastern european for less.

demfad

Fratton Fred wrote: »

if you ask any builder, taxi driver, plumber, courier driver, hairdresser or a whole host of other self employed people, they will tell you exactly why it is.

People can get the same service from an eastern european for less.

Besides imaginary hearsay, can you supply substantiation that this is the reason and also show why costs would be less for one self employed person compared to another?

First Up

Fratton Fred wrote:

yet you haven't commented on the link that shows self employed people earning less than they were in 1995?

The nature of "self employment" has changed drastically since 1995 (when the internet was in its infancy). The category now includes many who would previously have been on a company's payroll but who now sell their services, in many cases on a casual or part-time basis (as in Uber etc.).

Attributing all or even any of this to immigration is very superficial analysis.

Fratton Fred

demfad wrote: »

Besides imaginary hearsay, can you supply substantiation that this is the reason and also show why costs would be less for one self employed person compared to another?

New entrants to a market are always cheaper, that us how they access market.

Young people in a country short term have a very low cost of living requirement and will often work longer hours for a lower hourly wage.

Employers will try (and often succeed) in paying a recent immigrant less.

Any other economics 101 lessons you require?

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

yet you haven't commented on the link that shows self employed people earning less than they were in 1995?

What comment are you looking for?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37678065

The foundation said that many more people had taken up lower-paid jobs in the so-called "gig economy", essentially self-employed workers taking on a variety of different roles, while the proportion of self-employed business owners with their own staff had fallen. The number of hours worked by the self-employed had also declined.

It makes zero mention of immigration. However, the study which explicitly set out to measure the impact of immigration on wages determined that there is a small effect.

Fratton Fred

https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2016/jun/18/eu-vote-brexit-working-people-rents-wages

Fratton Fred

Deleted User wrote: »

It makes zero mention of immigration. However, the study which explicitly set out to measure the impact of immigration on wages determined that there is a small effect.

but there is still an effect?

People have had their wages pegged back, which is why the labour heart lands seem to have voted in their droves to leave the eu.