OV9

Orange Cola wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:08 pm Ok, so I'm going to take a hit of a couple of grand a year in income growth to save 5% tax on the other halfs monthly necessity at a couple of quid a pop.

Got another one?

The problem is this is the stupid level the debate gets dragged down to. OC's hypothetical projection of a "couple of grand" loss in income growth measured against a reduction in the price of tampons, which he's arbitrarily taken as the only benefit.

If you are really interested in an example of a change that is most likely to be positive and tangible to your finances then I would say a reduction in food prices as a result of the elimination of the common external tariff on non-EU producers. Given food is a proportionally larger percentage of expenditure for low income families then it is actually very 'progressive' from a political standpoint.

By all means feel free to disregard all of the above as you will everything else though. It makes no difference to me.

GG. wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:31 pm

Orange Cola wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:08 pm Ok, so I'm going to take a hit of a couple of grand a year in income growth to save 5% tax on the other halfs monthly necessity at a couple of quid a pop.

Got another one?

The problem is this is the stupid level the debate gets dragged down to. OC's hypothetical projection of a "couple of grand" loss in income growth measured against a reduction in the price of tampons, which he's arbitrarily taken as the only benefit.

If you are really interested in an example of a change that is most likely to be positive and tangible to your finances then I would say a reduction in food prices as a result of the elimination of the common external tariff on non-EU producers. Given food is a proportionally larger percentage of expenditure for low income families then it is actually very 'progressive' from a political standpoint.

By all means feel free to disregard all of the above as you will everything else though. It makes no difference to me.

Currently we import around 30% of our food. 70% of that food is imported from the EU, tariff free, so only 9% of our food would be cheaper if, and it’s a big if, tariffs were dropped completely. Of course, that would mean 21% of our food could go up if the EU applied tariffs to us (which they have to because of the common tariff).

Next...

GG. wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:53 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:39 pm

GG. wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:35 pm I don't owe you any explanations Rev. I know you're angry but you need to get over it. I'm never going to convince you because you're coming at it from a perspective that it's just the end and an injustice so justifying things is just a waste of time.

Not one single Brexiteer has ever even attempted to explain why they think any option is better whenever I've asked them, and I've asked a lot. You don't owe me an explanation but the fact that you can't even offer one speaks volumes. You have to take personal responsibility for the economic disaster and erosion of rights you voted for. Damn right I'm fucking angry and I won't get over it.

I've already given you a list of specific points and one about democracy/sovereignty. I literally don't know what you want from me

Do you mean by "any option is better" - one which increases GDP? Is that what you mean?

Is that your best list of specifics? Hoovers, fish and tampons? Seriously? That’s it?

I also seem to be unable to see your answer about sovereignty so you’ll need to either quote it or write it again.

Better would be higher employment, high quality education, more money in all our pockets, a functioning health service, strong exports, lower cost of living, a world class workforce that’s in demand, high levels of life satisfaction. You can add or subtract from these as you see fit, but for the love of God, tell me what will be better.

You've just identified a consistent assumption that is often made by remain that undermines the heart of your argument - that the status quo now is the way it will stay indefinitely. Why do you think the split between EU/ROW is 70/30? That is because the CET is doing its job and making non-EU imports uncompetitive. As soon as that tariff on non-EU goods is removed they then become competitive and people start buying them. 30+ percent in some cases (i.e. dairy products).

You've also demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of tariffs in stating "that would mean 21% of our food could go up if the EU applied tariffs to us (which they have to because of the common tariff)". Tariffs are applied on imported goods, not exported (in the vast majority of cases - export tariffs do exist but made little sense as you're harming your own producers). The CET doesn't impose tariffs on goods leaving the EU to non-EU countries. If would be up to us whether we put tariffs on imported EU goods. There is nothing obliging us to do so and therefore EU agri-produce only gets more expensive if we engage in a Trump-esque trade war. You've got your thinking a bit backwards on that point.

The above explanation is a good example of why you can't talk about this in one sentence soundbites. Each and every subject has a certain degree of complexity to is (which of course if the central point behind the "people didn't know what they were voting for" argument).

Tariffs are typically applied bi-laterally. See the Trump tariff wars for details. The EU will apply tariffs on the goods we export to the EU and we will apply the same reciprocal tariffs on the goods we import from the EU, hence food imported from the EU will have a tariff applied.

Tell me again how I don’t understand how tariffs work? You’re so naive. Your basing everything on all tariffs being scrapped. They won’t be.

Also, most of our imported food comes from the EU because ITS THE CLOSEST PLACE TO IMPORT IT FROM!

Sorry Rev, you're fundamentally misunderstanding this issue, the shelf life of food doesn't start ticking away until it's reached the port of the country it's destined for. The several days or weeks it spends on a boat isn't counted.

Orange Cola wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:24 pm Sorry Rev, you're fundamentally misunderstanding this issue, the shelf life of food doesn't start ticking away until it's reached the port of the country it's destined for. The several days or weeks it spends on a boat isn't counted.

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:18 pm Tariffs are typically applied bi-laterally.

Bilaterally between two states on the imports of the other. You're not helping your cause here.

You can bring up the argument that it affects us exporting to the EU, which is correct (which was not the debate we were having about the effect on consumers). But that is counterbalanced by the fact the pound has fallen which has actually meant exports are already cheaper to EU purchasers than they were before which offsets much of that difference.

"Next" as you would say.

ETA: I'm also not basing if "on all tariffs being scrapped" as you say. We could retain tariffs if we wanted at a lower level. Thing is (and this is the kicker) who get tariffs raised after we leave versus who gets the tariffs from the CET. (Hint - before it goes into the EU's coffers, after, anything we choose to levy afterwards goes to us).

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:34 pm - Stay in and carry on as we were

Not really an option though, is it? An embolden EU is hardly likely to yield to the UK if we roll back on this. We’ll be bound to the rules, and have to pay for the privilege and have even less influence

Option 2 is our only choice for now and work from there IMO

Still a gigantic clusterfuck all round...

GG. wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:31 pm

Orange Cola wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:08 pm Ok, so I'm going to take a hit of a couple of grand a year in income growth to save 5% tax on the other halfs monthly necessity at a couple of quid a pop.

Got another one?

The problem is this is the stupid level the debate gets dragged down to. OC's hypothetical projection of a "couple of grand" loss in income growth measured against a reduction in the price of tampons, which he's arbitrarily taken as the only benefit.

Hypothetical projection? Are you fucking mad? We've had a couple of years of stunted growth already with investors and suppliers either pulling or putting prices up, building in "Brexit clauses" to contracts on commodities which can't be bought elsewhere for the same money or less. I could quantify the cost today for where I work if it wasn't sensitive information so I'll give you the end result which is the pound in my pocket calculation. I'm 2.5% down on pay ALREADY and we haven't even fucking left the EU yet!

Christ almighty. Stop saying this is yet to come, it's already fucking here!

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:27 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:34 pm - Stay in and carry on as we were

Not really an option though, is it? An embolden EU is hardly likely to yield to the UK if we roll back on this. We’ll be bound to the rules, and have to pay for the privilege and have even less influence

Option 2 is our only choice for now and work from there IMO

Still a gigantic clusterfuck all round...

If we withdraw Art 50, nothing changes from where we were pre-referendum.

GG. wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:27 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:18 pm Tariffs are typically applied bi-laterally.

Bilaterally between two states on the imports of the other. You're not helping your cause here.

Let me try to dumb this down to your level:

Anything we export to the EU will have the common tariff applied. As a result, we will almost certainly apply the same tariff to anything we import from the EU. Which would include the 21% of food we currently import. Have I made that clear enough?

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:30 pm

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:27 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:34 pm - Stay in and carry on as we were

Not really an option though, is it? An embolden EU is hardly likely to yield to the UK if we roll back on this. We’ll be bound to the rules, and have to pay for the privilege and have even less influence

Option 2 is our only choice for now and work from there IMO

Still a gigantic clusterfuck all round...

If we withdraw Art 50, nothing changes from where we were pre-referendum.

Do you honestly believe we’ll go right back to where we were if we roll back on Art 50??

Unsurprisingly, Cunts want cheap tampons.

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:39 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:30 pm

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:27 pm

Not really an option though, is it? An embolden EU is hardly likely to yield to the UK if we roll back on this. We’ll be bound to the rules, and have to pay for the privilege and have even less influence

Option 2 is our only choice for now and work from there IMO

Still a gigantic clusterfuck all round...

If we withdraw Art 50, nothing changes from where we were pre-referendum.

Do you honestly believe we’ll go right back to where we were if we roll back on Art 50??

Legally, nothing will change. We retain our voting rights, our vetoes, our exemptions.

Orange Cola wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:30 pm

GG. wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:31 pm

Orange Cola wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:08 pm Ok, so I'm going to take a hit of a couple of grand a year in income growth to save 5% tax on the other halfs monthly necessity at a couple of quid a pop.

Got another one?

The problem is this is the stupid level the debate gets dragged down to. OC's hypothetical projection of a "couple of grand" loss in income growth measured against a reduction in the price of tampons, which he's arbitrarily taken as the only benefit.

Hypothetical projection? Are you fucking mad? We've had a couple of years of stunted growth already with investors and suppliers either pulling or putting prices up, building in "Brexit clauses" to contracts on commodities which can't be bought elsewhere for the same money or less. I could quantify the cost today for where I work if it wasn't sensitive information so I'll give you the end result which is the pound in my pocket calculation. I'm 2.5% down on pay ALREADY and we haven't even fucking left the EU yet!

Christ almighty. Stop saying this is yet to come, it's already fucking here!

I know you'll pick up on that so let me give you specifics. There are three companies in the whole world who produce a vital commodity, without it we can't sell the product. Could we do the commodity in house? Yes but that would cost at least £500,000,000 to do, realistically probably closer to a billion but putting that forward would just be naysaying would it? The three companies who already make this commodity are all based in Europe BUT they have manufacturing sites globally. Currently the commodity is produced in the European plants because it's the only way we can import the commodity tariff free and we can nip over with a couple of forty footers twice a week and bring it back.

Can't do that any more when we exit.

Either we import from another country or we import from the EU still but we have too add on a tariff to the commodity whatever that cost is. Also, we don't have the convenience of nipping around in a couple of trucks without getting stopped, instead we will have to hire or buy a warehouse to contain the commodity to ensure the rate of supply is upheld. We do that currently but only for a day or so's worth of stock 'cos you know, space costs money. If we have import duty to pay we need a larger warehouse to keep the stock, which costs more money, so we can meet the same guarantee of rate and flow. We also need enough stock in there to bridge the admin time taken to process the import duty on each item and last time I checked the admin work doesn't do itself so now we have to employ people we never needed before to do some admin that we never had before.

Times that by each commodity on the finished product which is produced in Europe - some 60% of it - and add that cost onto the end product because it outstrips your profit margin and suddenly you're pricing yourself out of the competition.

So without frictionless tariff free trade with countries that can produce the required commodities we're literally screwed. You can't tell me we're going to have that in place by March 2019 or any time soon after that.

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:39 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:30 pm

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:27 pm

Not really an option though, is it? An embolden EU is hardly likely to yield to the UK if we roll back on this. We’ll be bound to the rules, and have to pay for the privilege and have even less influence

Option 2 is our only choice for now and work from there IMO

Still a gigantic clusterfuck all round...

If we withdraw Art 50, nothing changes from where we were pre-referendum.

Do you honestly believe we’ll go right back to where we were if we roll back on Art 50??

Seemingly. It makes as much sense as a lot of the other stuff he's saying.

The fact that all the Tory Brexiteers who have business interests outside of politics are executing on their strategies to ensure their businesses continue to have a foot within the EU tells you everything you need to know.

GG. wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:45 pm

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:39 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:30 pm

If we withdraw Art 50, nothing changes from where we were pre-referendum.

Do you honestly believe we’ll go right back to where we were if we roll back on Art 50??

Seemingly. It makes as much sense as a lot of the other stuff he's saying.

What have I said that doesn’t make sense? Be specific. Still disagree with me on tariffs? Do you think we’ll import from the EU tariff free? Or are there countries out there that export the food we want that’s a couple of hours transport away? Which foods do you think we’ll stop importing from the EU? Which countries will we source them from?

You keep saying I don’t make sense and yet you haven’t successfully refuted anything yet and you still haven’t told us all what will be better.

This should be easy for you if I’m demonstrably wrong and the benefits so clear.

Orange Cola wrote: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:44 pm
Currently the commodity is produced in the European plants because it's the only way we can import the commodity tariff free and we can nip over with a couple of forty footers twice a week and bring it back.

Can't do that any more when we exit.

Hang on a minute - you're talking about imports again. Are you assuming that whatever it is that you're talking about will have a punitive tariff slapped on it by the UK when we leave - has that been posed as a definite? I'm asking you a genuine question.

Also, the way things are heading, with TM's formulation you needn't worry about it because we won't be leaving that tariff free zone (or indeed really Brexiting).