Goodbye Brussels, hello Burnley.

[Trailertrash]

We have an ageing demographic.Europeans of procreation age do not want kids they want shiny new things. The population is growing because old buggars like me are living far longer hanging on to our wealth and blowing it on cruises and California's. In twenty years we will be begging these Poles, Syrian's and such like to come here. The message to you youngsters is too get out and bonk.... Make kids. You are going to need them when you are too old to run things. The country belongs to whoever can use it. In the meantime keep working to pay my pension I will need the cash in two years to buy a shiny new California.

 

[Trailertrash]

An excellent idea.

Do you happen to have their phone numbers?

 

[GrannyJen]

Agree. with knobs on!!!

One can certainly see those!

 

[Ambler]

Looks a bit fishy to me.
A load of cods I think.

 

[AlanH99]

I am not sure that you fully understand the concept of a single market.

If pay is too low then internal EU migrants will stay put or go to where pay is higher, and employers will move to the labour.

That's when it is too low. Up to this point there will be people just above the 'too low' level struggling to make ends meet. Employers will aim to reduce wages to this level. The minimum they can get away with. Cheap immigrant labour helps them to do this.

The four freedoms, to which I referred in another post, are all about creating a level paying field. The bigger the single market, the lower the costs to business and the greater the GDP per capita.

Do you remember the era when British workers were migrating to other EU countries due to a lack of work in the UK: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet?

The level playing field you speak of means reducing workers' wages for some and raising them for others. The native British worker will have their wages reduced whilst immigrants will have their wages increased when compared to the wages in their own country. That's why they come.

Greater GPD per capita benefits those with greater disposable income. Those with less disposable income do not get enough to compensate for the lower pay.

When someone at the lower end of the labour market has to take a 20% pay cut to compete with immigrant workers, it's not much comfort to him or her to say, "But the price of a new car has gone down."

I remember Auf Wiedersehen, Pet. It was when workers from Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, Greece and Ireland could work in each other's country. As most of these countries had broadly similar wage rates there wasn't mass immigration like there is now.

Now there are 21 more countries in the EU with the right for any of their workers to come to the UK. That's quite different to 1983 when Auf Wiedersehen, Pet first came to our screens.

Clever word play calling it a level paying field though.

 

[AlanH99]

...(oops, bit hasty with the post key!!), but meant to add...

...I think you confuse CONTROL with ASSURE. There's a huge difference.

Now I get it.

 

[Black Sheep]

Employers do lay down pay rates but supply and demand will come into play. If the supply of labour is high, wages are driven down as competition between job seekers will mean the one who will accept the lowest wages will get the job. Uncontrolled immigration will result in high labour supply and lower pay.

The lowest legal rate is the minimum wage but this only allows for a pretty basic standard of living. This shouldn't be seen as the standard wage but if there are too many applying for a limited number of jobs, it will become the standard wage for many.

Hello again AlanH99. Sadly there are some unscrupulous employers that will try and take advantage of fluctuations in the labour market. I have family and friends that have lost their jobs with Teeside Steelworks. I have heard accounts of some employers attempting to reduce the wages of remaining jobs in the Redcar area since over 2000 local people were laid off.

I think it is events like this that refute your theory that immigrants drive down wages. Your reply to my comment highlights that in reality it is some 'greedy employers' that actually attempt to drive down wages.

In order to protect all ordinary people from unscrupulous employers I believe it would be helpful for our society to collectively ensure we have fair rates of pay and conditions of service agreed for as many jobs as possible - that all employers are obliged to adhere to. We still have this type of arrangement in place for many people that work for our NHS which covers an extremely wide range of different jobs.

I agree - the current minimum wage is inadequate.

 

[VW Cali]

Generally discussions like these are highly emotive.

Let's now wait and see after May, Rudd, Johnson, Gove, Farage etc have delivered on Britain for Britain. Or was in England for England since those Scots didn't agree.

Farage thinks Commonwealth will deliver. Could he be loved there? Will they look to source British goods and services over say Europe and Asia, and US, thereby increasing employment here. Then increases in productivity will lead to greater employment for actual Britons.

An experiment. Farage was a broker not trusted with a discretionary penny but now future of Britain on his opinion. Let us wait and see.

I opined 3 months ago on amother forum that cable will target 1.1500. Now I opine that it will see a short term rally, maybe as high as 1 3500 or more and then in 6 months look to go towards 1.000 parity with USD. Is this good for Britain? Certainly could help with exports, assuming quality is there....

Many intertwined factors at play currently. Let's see how it plays out. Could one be forgiven for thinking that our politicians have neither the acumem nor inclination to care about what matters?

Let's see how job creation goes, and the quality of products and services once the EU and other immigrants are out.

 

[AlanH99]

Hello again AlanH99. Sadly there are some unscrupulous employers that will try and take advantage of fluctuations in the labour market. I have family and friends that have lost their jobs with Teeside Steelworks. I have heard accounts of some employers attempting to reduce the wages of remaining jobs in the Redcar area since over 2000 local people were laid off.

I think it is events like this that refute your theory that immigrants drive down wages. Your reply to my comment highlights that in reality it is some 'greedy employers' that actually attempt to drive down wages.

In order to protect all ordinary people from unscrupulous employers I believe it would be helpful for our society to collectively ensure we have fair rates of pay and conditions of service agreed for as many jobs as possible - that all employers are obliged to adhere to. We still have this type of arrangement in place for many people that work for our NHS which covers an extremely wide range of different jobs.

I agree - the current minimum wage is inadequate.

I don't think we differ greatly in our basic views on the labour market. Just in the terminology. If I said, "The availability of cheaper, immigrant labour drives down wages." , it would be wordier but less contentious.

Incidentally, I'm not blaming immigrants for coming to UK for a better living, I would consider doing the same in their position. But I wouldn't disagree with the indigenous population if they said I was causing their wages to be reduced because I would work for less than them.

 

[AlanH99]

Generally discussions like these are highly emotive.

Let's now wait and see after May, Rudd, Johnson, Gove, Farage etc have delivered on Britain for Britain. Or was in England for England since those Scots didn't agree.

Farage thinks Commonwealth will deliver. Could he be loved there? Will they look to source British goods and services over say Europe and Asia, and US, thereby increasing employment here. Then increases in productivity will lead to greater employment for actual Britons.

An experiment. Farage was a broker not trusted with a discretionary penny but now future of Britain on his opinion. Let us wait and see.

I opined 3 months ago on amother forum that cable will target 1.1500. Now I opine that it will see a short term rally, maybe as high as 1 3500 or more and then in 6 months look to go towards 1.000 parity with USD. Is this good for Britain? Certainly could help with exports, assuming quality is there....

Many intertwined factors at play currently. Let's see how it plays out. Could one be forgiven for thinking that our politicians have neither the acumem nor inclination to care about what matters?

Let's see how job creation goes, and the quality of products and services once the EU and other immigrants are out.

There is a misconception that Leave voters believed all that politicians told them. This view is a conceit of both politicians and Remainers.

Politicians because they are often conceited anyway, and Remainers because of a belief they followed logical research and anyone who disagrees must have been swayed by lies. Believe it or not, many Leavers did research the facts so your idea that the future of Britain rests on Farage's opinion is wrong.

I can understand how Remainers make this mistake as many of the Leavers interviewed for TV etc were not the most articulate. It was as if they were chosen to portray a stereotype. Some were outright racists and many uneducated.

However, the fact that over half the voters wanted to leave the EU should be evidence enough that the selection of interviewees was not representative of people who voted Leave.

 

[Amarillo]

However, the fact that over half the voters wanted to leave the EU should be evidence enough that the selection of interviewees was not representative of people who voted Leave.

Simple questions.

At what point do you believe the average British Citizen will have a greater standard of living outside the EU than they would have had inside the EU?

On what evidence do you base that conclusion?

 

[VW Cali]

There is a misconception that Leave voters believed all that politicians told them. This view is a conceit of both politicians and Remainers.

Politicians because they are often conceited anyway, and Remainers because of a belief they followed logical research and anyone who disagrees must have been swayed by lies. Believe it or not, many Leavers did research the facts so your idea that the future of Britain rests on Farage's opinion is wrong.

I can understand how Remainers make this mistake as many of the Leavers interviewed for TV etc were not the most articulate. It was as if they were chosen to portray a stereotype. Some were outright racists and many uneducated.

However, the fact that over half the voters wanted to leave the EU should be evidence enough that the selection of interviewees was not representative of people who voted Leave.

Actually, I do not think all Brexiteers actually believed the politicians telling them to leave.

Farage's impact was indirect.

He stirred off the initial debates, rightly or wrongly. This got the Tory knickers in a twist. Cameron then did the usual superficial analysis and bet all on party unity.

And then the referendum got called.

So in this sense Farage was the instigator. His opinion drove it whether people believed his facts or not.

Again, interestingly, people voted Brexit for a number of emotive reasons. I have met people from all walks of life who have done so, but on average they tend not to be the professional middle class educated types. Old money over 60s that I know voted Leave to great despair of their children for example. In them I think childhood memories of Britain on its own played a part.

Not all who voted Leave are xenophobic. But the problem is that Leavers did almost no worthwhile analysis. Zilch. Sound bites aside no neurons were engaged.

This does not mean Remainers had much better arguments. The point I explained to everyone from the beginning, including a current senior cabinet minister, was that the worst decisions are those where value is uncertain but greater uncertainty and risk more so.

You don't go into business, trade, war or any act unless the opposite is true.

And this to my mind this is the great mistake of the Leavers.

They have let a vacuous and rather incapable lot lead them into a situation with increased risk and no clear tangible value as yet. Rather stories are beung made up. About China, Japan or Commonwealth. Exports on back of weaker sterling without discussion about what products and services could become more competitive in the face of a weaker currency. Car exports? I do not think so. Large scale engineering? I don't think so.

I want to see detail. But detail is conspicuously by its absence.

The politicians throwing sound bites around, along with media and journalists, are entirely bereft of analysis and understanding. Not only so but they seem disinclined by nature to be able to do other than vacuous sound bites.

The positive feedback loop in this case (and I use it in the sense of mathematics rather than social good) is extremist politics leading to right wing shifts to more established politicians pandering to the shift, leading to further reinforcement.

In the meantime analysis and sober thinking and planning suffers. The politicians have shown that none of them have GB at heart, and simply lack the acumen and independence to rise above and do some sober analysis. They are the problem rather than the solution.

 

[AlanH99]

Simple questions.

At what point do you believe the average British Citizen will have a greater standard of living outside the EU than they would have had inside the EU?

On what evidence do you base that conclusion?

When they don't have to compete against cheaper immigrant labour and so can command higher wages.

Evidence:
Higher wages give a greater standard of living for the average British Citizen who is an employee.

 

[Amarillo]

When they don't have to compete against cheaper immigrant labour and so can command higher wages.

Evidence:
Higher wages give a greater standard of living for the average British Citizen who is an employee.

I can no longer take you seriously.

 

[VW Cali]

I can no longer take you seriously.

Yours was a serious and considered question.

With sterling much lower and likely to go much lower cost of goods imported will go up. So higher wages will be needed or else lower standard of living.

Where will the higher wages come from? There are people from all walks of life here. I would be curious to know which areas will benefit exit from the common market.

Tourism is obviously one such example. With higher sterling more Britons will possibly vacation here, and maybe more from abroad visit (though against this is the reduced appeal of going to a more insular society).

What other areas?

I am genuinely baffled. If we produced competitive international goods and services then it could be a good thing. But do we? Alas, large scale engineering and services have not bern our strength. First poor quality killed us off, and this stretches back believe it or not to the 1st World War where Germany had taken the lead, and then a culture at both worker and investment level that has no respect for the needs of successful manufacturing.

This leaves finance and innovation.

In finance, with a bitter divorce from the EU, does anyone here think there is a sizeable risk of EUR clearing leaving London? If it does, what happens to The City?

Innovation: Britain has always been lucky to have tremendous innovation here. But when has it ever been supported here? From China to Japan, Korea to Switzerland to Germany and Sweden, and of course France and US not onky is there a culture of innovation but respect for it and un understanding of what it takes to deliver on it. Britain has never had that, and the current politicians are total ignoramuses on the topic. They are just village idiots and nothing more. Full of sound, and zero understanding, and I mean zero.

So EDF will build a much needed nuclear facility for long neglected power shortfalls, backed by Chinese investment, snd off goes one eyed May lecturing both the Europeans and the Chinese.

Maybe innovation will come through British Universities? But unlike MIT, Michigan, Berkeley or Caltech, we are already trying to make foreign academics feel uncomfortable. Places for growth? I don't think so.

I am genuinely interested in actual opinions of members here because they likely come from different areas of the economy and have some insights to share.

But at the moment it is looking like a return to 70s Britain, accelerated at mad rush speed by daily utterances of politicians. Brain drawn abroad rather than success here seems the most likeky scenario.

 

[Black Sheep]

I don't think we differ greatly in our basic views on the labour market. Just in the terminology".

Hello AllanH99. I think there is a key premise behind our views on the labour market that is very different. I see ordinary people doing their best to try and make a living from honest work. You appear to be fixated with one specific group of ordinary people - and unfairly blaming them for some very important social and economic difficulties that the world (not just the UK ) is facing.

 

[VW Cali]

Hello AllanH99. I think there is a key premise behind our views on the labour market that is very different. I see ordinary people doing their best to try and make a living from honest work. You appear to be fixated with one specific group of ordinary people - and unfairly blaming them for some very important social and economic difficulties that the world (not just the UK ) is facing.

This is exactly the issue with exclusive focus on immigration and foreigners.

No country I know of has ever benefited from insularity. 70s Britain with brain drawn is on the cards with current attitudes, and the caught in headlights approach of politicians.

When madness rules, there is no logic anymore.

 

[Amarillo]

aybe innovation will come through British Universities? But unlike MIT, Michigan, Berkeley or Caltech, we are already trying to make foreign academics feel uncomfortable. Places for growth? I don't think so.

Innovation is the most likely answer to a hard Brexit. I cannot see tourism, even with a cheaper pound helping us much while tourist visas for nationals of Developing Nations are so hard to obtain, including visas for people in high wealth brackets (£250,000 to £1,000,000).

Britain has a natural advantage for innovation as English is pretty much the default language for research, and we are blessed with some of Europe's very best universities. Brexit will undoubtedly cut much of that research funding (why would the UK Government widely fund EU nationals to conduct research in the UK, and why would the EU fund research groups in the UK?) However, it won't stop privately funded research, and pharmaceuticals look likely to be a big area for innovation over the next 50 years.

The other big area for innovation are driverless cars. It seems likely that the next generation of car will have three main components: body, engine and power source and software. Unfortunately, Britain lags way behind the US in driverless technology, but freed from the EU it might just be able to catch up.

For innovation to rescue us, we need to be as welcoming as possible to foreign born students: we need to find and welcome the next Srinivasa Ramanujan,

If we are ever to catch up with the position we would have had if we remained in the EU, I estimate it will take a minimum of 5 decades. We can look forward to a minimum of 2 decades of stagnation; the pain will be felt most keenly by the less advantaged in our society.

 

[VW Cali]

Innovation is the most likely answer to a hard Brexit. I cannot see tourism, even with a cheaper pound helping us much while tourist visas for nationals of Developing Nations are so hard to obtain, including visas for people in high wealth brackets (£250,000 to £1,000,000).

Britain has a natural advantage for innovation as English is pretty much the default language for research, and we are blessed with some of Europe's very best universities. Brexit will undoubtedly cut much of that research funding (why would the UK Government widely fund EU nationals to conduct research in the UK, and why would the EU fund research groups in the UK?) However, it won't stop privately funded research, and pharmaceuticals look likely to be a big area for innovation over the next 50 years.

The other big area for innovation are driverless cars. It seems likely that the next generation of car will have three main components: body, engine and power source and software. Unfortunately, Britain lags way behind the US in driverless technology, but freed from the EU it might just be able to catch up.

For innovation to rescue us, we need to be as welcoming as possible to foreign born students: we need to find and welcome the next Srinivasa Ramanujan,

If we are ever to catch up with the position we would have had if we remained in the EU, I estimate it will take a minimum of 5 decades. We can look forward to a minimum of 2 decades of stagnation; the pain will be felt most keenly by the less advantaged in our society.

Tom,

You are absolutely spot on. I could not agree more with your analysis and also your time scales.

But the luddite, self interested politicians are headed the other way...

Is there a useful neuron in May, Johnson, Rudd put together? Hammond has substance and maybe Greg Clarke but that is about it.

Even such a sensible political journalist like Peter Oborne is caught up irrelevant points.

 

[Amarillo]

Tom,

You are absolutely spot on. I could not agree more with your analysis and also your time scales.

But the luddite, self interested politicians are headed the other way...

Is there a useful neuron in May, Johnson, Rudd put together? Hammond has substance and maybe Greg Clarke but that is about it.

Even such a sensible political journalist like Peter Oborne is caught up irrelevant points.

 

[Amarillo]

Is there a useful neuron in May

She has been playing her cards very close to her chest.

As she was a remainer, I have a rapidly fading hope that she will try to swing public opinion in favour of remain, and Tony Blair might just be right on the way to save the UK's economy and the 413 year old union with Scotland:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ay-eu-public-opinion-shifts-brexit-tony-blair

Happily, Article 50 is not final. A member state can withdraw their Article 50 request anytime before the actual withdrawal from the EU. There are about 30 months for public opinion to shift sufficiently far for a rethink.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldselect/ldeucom/138/13804.htm

About 4% of the June 2016 electorate will have moved on to a higher place by March 2019, replaced by about 4% of a younger, and perhaps wiser, generation.

 

[calicasas]

Innovation is the most likely answer to a hard Brexit. I cannot see tourism, even with a cheaper pound helping us much while tourist visas for nationals of Developing Nations are so hard to obtain, including visas for people in high wealth brackets (£250,000 to £1,000,000).

Britain has a natural advantage for innovation as English is pretty much the default language for research, and we are blessed with some of Europe's very best universities. Brexit will undoubtedly cut much of that research funding (why would the UK Government widely fund EU nationals to conduct research in the UK, and why would the EU fund research groups in the UK?) However, it won't stop privately funded research, and pharmaceuticals look likely to be a big area for innovation over the next 50 years.

The other big area for innovation are driverless cars. It seems likely that the next generation of car will have three main components: body, engine and power source and software. Unfortunately, Britain lags way behind the US in driverless technology, but freed from the EU it might just be able to catch up.

For innovation to rescue us, we need to be as welcoming as possible to foreign born students: we need to find and welcome the next Srinivasa Ramanujan,

If we are ever to catch up with the position we would have had if we remained in the EU, I estimate it will take a minimum of 5 decades. We can look forward to a minimum of 2 decades of stagnation; the pain will be felt most keenly by the less advantaged in our society.

Having been in engineering research myself for many years, in a world leading UK company, certainly over half of my department were from other European countries. A few others from other parts of the world. What generated most patents were these 'foreign European' workers. I remember One Engineer from Madrid, having generated several important patents wanted to return to Spain. The company paid to set up office in Madrid, pay for his air fares once per month to return to uk for meetings and paid for local dwellings, and increased his salary - such was the need to keep him. He had worked in Holland and France before then. I would certainly guarantee that some proportion of these people will return to their countries of origin under Brexit and furthermore deter others coming to the uk. I also guarantee that there won't be a sudden upsurge or desire to come to the uk. In terms of access to this European talent pool the only way is down.
In practice, over the longer term, these positions may very well be taken up from countries with a strong science background like India or other parts of the world.
I know now of some people (one just this week) either returning or being put off coming to the uk...

 

[Amarillo]

In practice, over the longer term, these positions may very well be taken up from countries with a strong science background like India or other parts of the world.

I think that it is inevitable that countries with larger populations will, over time, catch up and overtake the UK. The UK has punched way over its weight for a great many years. The only way to effectively compete with these rising nations is as part of a much larger block.

 

[VW Cali]

She has been playing her cards very close to her chest.

As she was a remainer, I have a rapidly fading hope that she will try to swing public opinion in favour of remain, and Tony Blair might just be right on the way to save the UK's economy and the 413 year old union with Scotland:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ay-eu-public-opinion-shifts-brexit-tony-blair

Happily, Article 50 is not final. A member state can withdraw their Article 50 request anytime before the actual withdrawal from the EU. There are about 30 months for public opinion to shift sufficiently far for a rethink.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldselect/ldeucom/138/13804.htm

About 4% of the June 2016 electorate will have moved on to a higher place by March 2019, replaced by about 4% of a younger, and perhaps wiser, generation.

Thought provoking.

At this point her antics and those of her cabinet seem designed to show how absurd Brexit is. But I suspect it is inadvertent rather than by design.

Is there an outside chance of a no Brexit? It doesn't seem like it. A second referendum was turned down. The fact that 75pct of elected parliamentarians were Remainers who then say they will automatically implement an advisory vote tells you whether they care about GB first, or their own local political careers.

This is the beginning of what now seems like an accelerating rush to the bottom.

As for scientists and engineers coming to Britain from India that is a forlorn hope. Since the 1970s the best have always gone to the US. The opportunities are bigger, science and tech is respected, and less insularity.

As a test I asked some Indian IT experts and the answer was unequivocal. US it was. Further they would feel uncomfortable in the political climate here.

All this talk about controlled immigration of skilled workers from non EU by Brexiteers is just talk. Anyone asked those skilled workers whether they would like to come here over other developed countries?

 

[Amarillo]

Thought provoking.

At this point her antics and those of her cabinet seem designed to show how absurd Brexit is. But I suspect it is inadvertent rather than by design.

Is there an outside chance of a no Brexit? It doesn't seem like it. A second referendum was turned down. The fact that 75pct of elected parliamentarians were Remainers who then say they will automatically implement an advisory vote tells you whether they care about GB first, or their own local political careers.

This is the beginning of what now seems like an accelerating rush to the bottom.

Almost certainly - as I said, a rapidly fading hope.

However, I think that Tony Blair is correct: if there is a big shift in public opinion against Brexit, it may never happen.

As for scientists and engineers coming to Britain from India that is a forlorn hope. Since the 1970s the best have always gone to the US. The opportunities are bigger, science and tech is respected, and less insularity.

As a test I asked some Indian IT experts and the answer was unequivocal. US it was. Further they would feel uncomfortable in the political climate here.

All this talk about controlled immigration of skilled workers from non EU by Brexiteers is just talk. Anyone asked those skilled workers whether they would like to come here over other developed countries?

I have had a different experience of Indian IT workers. The few I have spoken to prefer living and working in Britain. With the British class system, they find it culturally closer to their social order than the US. My friend Veejay, with whom I climbed Scarfell Pike and he experienced snow for the very first time, is a Brahmin, so that might make a difference. (A Brahmin IT worker seems to be an oxymoron.)

Russians certainly prefer the UK to the US - it is closer to home.

The Chinese look to Canada, though the elite buy their foreign bolt holes in Portugal. My sister-in-law, who is Chinese and now lives in Sevenoaks, flogs 500,000 euro Portuguese villas to the Chinese elite: anyone who pays more than half a million Euros for a home in Portugal is entitled to Portuguese residency, so the elite snap them up from plan to use as an insurance policy against an anti corruption purge. Their children go to British universities.