Jump to content
BANGKOK

My Thai Life

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    1,175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by My Thai Life


  1. 23 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

    More trolling. This is not going to end well for you.

    There is no Brexit outcome that will not end well for me personally. 

     

    There are some outcomes that will be not well in the short term for democracy, and there are some outcomes that will be not well in the short term for economics.

     

    Medium to long term, democracy and free trade will continue to flourish in the UK. After all we invented both.

     

     


  2. 3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

    Please, spare us the alleged curriculum vitae. Like all other posters here, your comments should be judged on the basis of their quality.

    As for you not being a supporter of Leave...this is like those Americans who say I-don't-support-Trump-but...It's very clear you support leave. So spare us the pretense of impartiality.

    If the Brexit referendum were to be reversed on the basis of a putsch you would have an excellent point. On the basis that Parliament ignored the referendum, you'd have a good one too. But since a 2nd referendum would be voted on the by mostly same electorate that voted on the first I just don't understand how that is undemocratic.

    My cv is true - worked in over 25 countries, citizenship of 2 EU countries, PR (Permanent Residence) in 2 further countries, quaternary education. I probably pay more in tax than you earn as a salary.

     

    Your cv so far is that you holidayed with a British working class mining family during the coal strike. But you still hate the working class, and you still don't understand us.

     

    Brexit has been coming for 30-40 years - it has nothing to do specifically with Trump.

     

    Sir Ivan Rogers, possibly the most knowledgeable Brit about EU bureaucracy, and a devout remainer, believes that  a 2nd ref is out of the question. I've posted  about this this twice in the last few weeks, so I won't repeat the link, as I assume you actually read this forum and can use google if you don't.

     

     

     

    • Like 1

  3. 1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

    ahoy,

    hold on a sec krap, you don't need no A50 in order to negotiate a withdrawal deal EU-UK

     

    I am not comfortable with the way you approach this,

    you are talking in capitals with absolutes

     

    this is not mathematics with one correct answer

     

    this is all about what the two parties agree on

     

    there is nothing between heaven and earth that is not possible in a customs union

    its a question of finding a common path

    1. No A50 needed? Really? Ok. Actually I agree in principle. But we need to advise the EU bureaucrats and the HoC/L.

     

    2. "Capitals with absolutes"? I have used bold to highlight a key point.

     

    3. "Mathematics"? I agree. Economics is not a zero sum game. But try telling that to the Project Fear "forecasters". I seem to be the only person on TVF who has read the forecasts at source - certainly there is no evidence that anyone else has.

     

    4. "this is all about what the two parties agree on". Really? I thought you'd been telling us for months that it's all about simply following EU rules for departure.

     

    5. "there is nothing between heaven and earth that is not possible in a customs union". There are many things that are possible inside a CU. But the limitations on members of a CU are as I described. Where are you getting the info to support your assertion from? Can you name any other CUs?

     

    You are one of the more articulate and polite "remainers", though I suppose that that term should really be reserved for people who are actually entitled to vote. Your posts have suggested that you have a long personal history with the EC. Would you mind if I asked you to elaborate?

     

    By the way, your recent posts have suggested you reside in Yorkshire. Really? I lived in York for a couple of years a long while back. How's it going now?

     

    • Like 2

  4. 1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

    I don't see how that's possible given the huge regulatory burden that you claim the EU imposes on British business. And how do Sweden at Number 2 and the Netherlands at number 4 manage it?

    I don't claim a huge regulatory burden, it's a fact which is available to anyone who can use google. But I'll give you a general hint. A custom union is the most advanced kind of Trade Agreement yet devised by capitalism. I'll assume that the benefits are reasonably well known. But the disbenefits are not so well known: (1) a huge regulatory burden for member nations (how else can diverse national standards be harmonised) (2) a loss of sovereignty for member nations (3) the enforcement of external (3rd country) tariffs which (i) do not suit all members (ii) support inefficient practices (CAP) (Iii) destroy or seriously undermine some developing nations (I'm sure that you as a "progressive" wouldn't approve of that if you knew more about it) (4) the inability to sign independent FTAs. These disbenefits do not include the disbenefits that many people see in the Single Market, which is a separate topic that I won't go into in detail.

     

    I don't understand what you're trying to say in your 2nd sentence. I have no business or personal experience of the Nordics (apart from a girlfriend or two), but I do know that Sweden's population is less than London's. As for the Netherlands, I have visited many times, even set up offices and businesses there. It's an extremely easy place to do business: the Dutch combine the creativity of the British with the process orientation of the Germans and the liberalism of London (my home town): the Netherlands is a truly great place in my experience.

     

     

     

     


  5. 1 hour ago, oilinki said:

    Generally it makes sense to be prepared to invest when the prices of companies, technologies and patents are dropping towards the bottom. Preparing to buy cheap stocks, which one day will hopefully rise back up again.

    Of course, everyone knows this, even non-investors.

     

    But I think Forbes' recent assessment of the UK as the number 1 country for business provides a more complete and well reasoned explanation.

     

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2018/12/19/the-best-countries-for-business-2019-u-s-down-u-k-on-top/#149805f452d5

     

    Also a few weeks ago I posted figures for recent inward investment for the major EU economies. I can't recall the exact figures offhand, but the UK was way ahead in the number 1 spot.

     

    By the way, the FTSE midcap has less exposure to the EU than the FTSE 100. That's one reason why business execs from 200 medium size enterprises recently wrote to May advising her to take a WTO exit. I've posted this twice already in the last few weeks.

     

     

     

    • Like 2

  6. But bad news for the eurozone

     

    Professor Otmar Issing, the founding chief economist of the European Central Bank and the chastened prophet of the euro project: “One day, the house of cards will collapse.”

     

    And from the London School of Economics:

     

    "The calamitous EMU saga has led to the “most serious economic crisis in the history of the European Union”. It has done “more lasting damage” to swaths of Europe than the Great Depression of the 1930s, and pitted eurozone states against each other in a bitter struggle for control over the levers of policy."

     

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/01/02/euro-has-failed-threatens-democracy-should-abolished/

    • Haha 1

  7. Private equity firm Bowmark Capital has just raised its largest ever fund of £600m in a mere 10 weeks to invest in UK mid-market companies. In the word of one of the managing partners:

     

    “The success of the fund-raising demonstrates that the UK remains an attractive market for private equity, notwithstanding current Brexit uncertainties."

    • Like 1

  8. The UK Office of National Statistics reports that exports in the last year to non-EU countries were £342 billion while exports to EU countries were £274 billion.

     

    In the same period, the growth in exports continued to outstrip the growth in imports, almost halving the UK’s trade deficit from £23.4 billion to £15.8 billion. Most exceptionally, since the referendum, exports have increased by £111 billion to £610 billion. (This demonstrates that the BoE pre-referendum forecast was wrong.)

     

    Add to this the fact that British firms raised by far the most venture capital in the EU this year – over 70pc more than France or Germany.

    • Like 2

  9. Forbes ranks the UK as the best country for doing business for the 2nd year running, and sees a free trade Brexit as a positive outcome.

     

     “The process of exiting the European Union will afford the government opportunities to correct any remaining structural deficiencies that might be holding back an already high-performing economy,” per the report. “The U.K. has one of the world’s most efficient business and investment environments and will soon be open to expanded global trade relationships.”

     

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2018/12/19/the-best-countries-for-business-2019-u-s-down-u-k-on-top/#1d8afc1c52d5

     

    • Like 1

  10. 18 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

    How could it have massive associated costs if doing business is so easy in these EU nations. What you are claiming makes no sense.

    I honestly don't understand why you don't understand. But I assume you're being honest in what you say, so I'll try to explain. All figures below are taken from the UK SME CEO news item that I referenced a few weeks ago.

     

    92% of British companies don't have any business with the EU (I think I mis-typed 97% before). But this 92% still has to comply with EU regulations. This compliance costs time, money and resources. It is completely unnecessary for the 92%. (So 100% of companies are facing EU regulatory compliance expense but only 8% trade with the EU.)

     

    Add to this the fact that this 92% represents 87% of the British economy. (So 100% of UK business faces EU regulatory expense even though only 13% of the economy is with the EU.)

     

    Add to that the fact that this is ocurring in all EU countries (obviously the %ages will vary in each country). It really is madness.

     

    • Like 1

  11. 6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

    How difficult can it be to comply with those regulations if Denmark is the 3rd easiest country in the world to do business in? And Norway which is an EFTA nation is #7. Both ahead of the USA.

    As I said, you are looking at it through the wrong end of the telescope.

     

    It is absurd for the 92% of British companies, who account for the 87% of the UK economy to waste time and money complying with regulations they don't need and don't use. This is surely self-evident.

     

    If you're still not getting the point, then do some research: calculate the number of UK companies in the 92%, multiply by a notional annual cost for unnecessary EU compliance, factor that into the project fear "forecasts" (because none of the project fear forecasters have done so) and send your results to the New York Times. You will be adding to the debate.

     

    • Like 1

  12. 2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

    How encumbered are they? According to the World Bank Ease of Doing Business index, Denmark ranks #3 in the world and the UK #9. Both rank very high. Is the EU somehow making business more difficult for the UK than for Denmark? For reference, the USA ranks #8.  Out of the top 20 nations, 8 are in the EU. Not every problem an EU country faces is the fault of the EU.

    You're looking at this question through the wrong end of the telescope.

     

    Obviously the UK is one of the easiest places in the world to do business. We invented free trade and the legal apparatus to support that.

     

    The idea that the 92% of British companies who don't do business with the EU should waste time and money complying with EU regulations is clearly farcical. Only someone driven by ideology could fail to see that.

     

    • Like 2

  13. On 12/21/2018 at 5:24 PM, tebee said:

    Firms are pausing or diverting investment

    This is a good argument for no-deal.

     

    It gets us to the real negotiation more quickly than any other option. May's WA just postpones the real negotiations for another year or 2 or 3 ....

     

    Everyone seems to understand now that the WA is the weakest position for the UK to negotiate from, as well as being more expensive.


  14. On 12/17/2018 at 10:46 PM, Naam said:

    bus or no bus the £350mm per week (£18.2bb) was a blatant lie. here's the beef from Uk's "Office for National Statistics":

    better swallow your beef

     

    £350 million per week is roughly what the UK pays the EU excluding the rebate.

    Factoring in the rebate the UK pays around £250 million per week, but it doesn't have control of the 100m difference.

     

    https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/

     

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...