They are going the water this down so much it will be like we didn't leave. i hope
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Who told you this?
But we will be paying more for the privelige and the inability to set policy.
What people need to remember is that, with any free trade agreement, there is always a body set up to deal with disputes, which is no way democratic. Often, but not always, it is the WTO.
When Australia set up "plain packaging" on their cigarettes, Ukraine opened a dispute against them on behalf Philip Morris. Five other countries also sued them. In no way shape or form is this "democratic". Australia however did win this dispute.
Obviously the EU goes way beyond that but it should be remembered that EU laws are created only when passing two chambers; the EU Parliament (democratically elected across the whole of Europe), and the Council of Ministers (hopefully democratically elected in each EU country).
However, obviously the EU treaties are not created by EU parliament, but negotiated by the EU28 countries. And once opted in, they are difficult to change (unless you leave) meaning you lose a bit of sovereignty to the EU. And the EU are very slow to change things that have been negotiated in the treaties (read:they don't).
Would a democratically elected EU head or heads help? Yes.
But I don't believe you are at all correct in your assessment.
Unlike the EU Trump absolutely hate free trade agreements. In his opinion these deals give smaller countries a level playing field with the US and are therefore hurting the US worker interest. He won the elections by promising a new way of making trade deals that are heavily staked towards the US. This is not the right time to make trade deals with the US.
Perhaps I am being too broad, I suppose I don't truly know the exact mechanics of EU governance and ignorance is what begets my fear of it - but it certainly seems like there are rather a large number of ex UK officials with impressive pensions who I recall being vociferous on the remain campaign.
Everything has to be voted for, some officials are appointed by others but that's no different to the UK where the PM isn't directly voted for by the country, they vote for their MP. I find the EU more democratic than the current UK system, for a start you have the House of Lords, I don't think any of those were voted in by the public.
When the heck have Tony Blair and John Major ever worked for the EU? This doesn't make any sense.
If politics was a compulsory GCSE subject, Yes would have probably won considerably
You're kidding, right? Google "tony Blair EU presidency". He's was desperately trying to become the president of the European Union for years.
The treaties that the UK signed up to were all subject to a parliamentary vote at Westminster, just like all other UK legislative changes. Nothing was forced on the UK and, on the whole, the EU was relatively pragmatic in recognising that the UK was slightly different to its continental partners. Maybe they could have thrown Cameron more of a bone in the early 2016 talks but they, like Cameron, probably thought Remain would win anyway.
But he didn't. Which is the point. There wasn't personal profit for him campaigning for remain.
The UK electors vote for their constituency MP. In voting for the particular MP, they can be 99.999999999% certain who that MP would support as Prime Minister. They can, equally, be 99.999999999% certain that they will not know who any Prime Minister will 'nominate' as an EU Commissioner on their behalf for the UK because it is never mentioned in the parties' manifestos. And they will never know who the Prime Minister will choose to vote for as Chief Commissioner beause that is never discussed in the GE manifestos either. That is what so many of us see as undemocratic.
Out of a thousand or so HoL members, about 850 were appointed by the same Politicos ( all parties ) who also decide(d) who to 'nominate' as EU Commissioners on behalf of the UK.
Same people, same system really - if you feel the HoL isn't democratic, I can't see how you can believe the appointment of EU Commissioners is democratic.
And don't get too hung up about cream cakes. I just used it as an example that moving anything from anywhere to anywhere else in a very short time critical delay is entirely possible these days. It might be cream cakes today, but there could also be a 280kg drill bit travelling from Texas to off-shore Angola at the same time, on the same planes / tenders and with the same transit time. And in answer to the questions - most of the rigs are owned by the Angolan Government and are operated by American drilling companies so I've no idea what the tax flow is with these. We just collect stuff in, usually, Lagos, and fly it down to Luanda where we hire tenders to deliver to the rigs - whether its cream cakes, toilet rolls or drill bits, anything in fact which is needed with a degree of urgency.
And the bit about once inside the EU, everything moves about quite efficiently.
Well, one of the reasons that the Dutch like the EU is that about 75+% of imports into the EU pass through Rotterdam, and the Dutch get to keep 20% of Tariffs collected on behalf of the EU. That's a lot of jobs and a lot of money from Tariffs fixed by the EU, not the Dutch, and why a NEXIT is unlikely to happen anytime soon.
As for efficiencies, yes of course there are time saving efficiencies moving stuff across borders inside the EU - but the 'old' TIR system coped quite well for decades. And an example of how these efficiencies are there for manufacturers, not for the public -
THe BMW Mini Plant in Oxford receives about 170 inbound trucks each day with components from all over Europe, which arrive in crates called ' gitterboxes ' all the same size, spec, etc, so that they can be handled uniformly once inside the Oxford Plant. The trucks then return back to Europe with nothing but empty gitterboxes from the previous deliveries to use for the next deliveries. Meanwhile, the finshed cars are then exported by a combination of road / rail / ship back into Europe.
Now this obviously suits BMW, but do you really believe that all these inefficiencies aren't factored into the price of a Mini when you buy it ? If you buy Spanish grown fruit and vegetables, do you really believe that you're only paying for the truck to bring them from Spain, and not for the empty truck returning to Spain ?
So all of us consumers are already paying for ( or should I say contributing to ) inefficient Supply Chains which more and more manufacturers use for their own benefit rather than for the benefit of us consumers because it's now easier to move 'stuff' around inside the EU.
The part about logistics is just such utter bullshit it warrants a more detailed reply when I'm back at home, but this can't just stand here uncontested. Holy feck.
I won't comment on logistics as it's way out of my line of work but, more fundamentally, why is the EU always presented as a lose for Britain? It's just as likely there are consumers in the rest of the EU who, in a purely short-term financial sense, pay slightly more for products due to components sourced from the UK as opposed to what something would cost imported tariff-free from China. Components that keep factories running and small towns viable.
And even this discussion of goods would be missing the point given the enormous net benefit the UK financial and other services sectors get from EU access.
You're right....The physical proximity of the UK to Mainland Europe is often overvalued seeing as export of UK manufactured products ( apart from cars ) is dwarfed by the revenues of banking / insurance / etc which the UK sells into the EU.
So, what would be your solution? Tossing the components over the canal via giant catapults? These goods still need to be delivered, standardized crates or not. How exactly does a decrease in efficiency for the manufacturer translate into an increase in efficiency for "the public"? What does that even mean? Do you really think products would become cheaper if we'd move away from a standardized supply chain management?
When I've got time I will reply but so have I since 1985 not directly in logistics but commercial wise from procurement to sales and everything in between, shipping stuff from all over the world to all over the world, especially to and from Africa. Documentation, customs, inspections, finance, legal requirements, certification,shipping breakbulk, airfreight, courrier, containers. Until I retired last July, hooray!
I must admit I've never arranged shipment of a cream cake but have shipped a small spare part to entire factories.
However, the most important point is the 20% you keep talking about, which I've addressed in earlier posts. All 28 EU countries import from outside the EU thus once these goods are within the EU they in free circulation.
It might have a tiny bit to do with 26 countries exporting into 1, or 2 if some trucks progress to Ireland and going the other way erm ...chocolate cake doesn't take up much room.
Last edited:
Wow, how did I not know this.
The Brexit argument just breaks apart (even more than normal) when you factor in this.
I said it multiple times.
Must not have been listening
Your whole premise regarding effiency and BMW is bullshit.
Let's just accept that it is true (which it isn't) that those 170 lorries leave GB empty. How exactly does BMW profit from that compared to a system where that isn't the case? Because it wouldn't. The consumer paying extra for supply chains like that, ultimately, either makes their cars less competetive (e.g. more expensive) or reduces their margin. Which no sane company will ever accept if there's a better solution. Seriously, please explain for me how BMW would profit there above it's costumers.
But this isn't true anyway. First of all, a wide margin of parts for thoe cars doesn't arrive by lorry in GB, but by Train (and sometimes even by plane). Then, it get's distributed onto lorries and moved toward the plant. Neither of those parts of the supply chain are owned by BMW, but by other companies. None of these companies will just accept empty shipping. As for trains, these will just move other goods back from GB. Yes, there might be some unused capacities mocing back, but no supply chain is 100% effective. As for the lorries inside GB, these are owned by forwarding agents not only being used by BMW; but by multiple companies. You can be 100% sure they, for their own good, will have other costumers and contracts which mean they use ther lorries as effective as possible. Those gitterboxes you talked about are not only standartized for BMW; but for literally everything. We used them in the medium sized builders merchant I worked at as a student, my father has got them at his cement plants, my father in law at his import-export business with China. The notion they are just going empty back to Europe on lorries is stupid.
Also, empty truck returning to spain...lul.
Have you really ever worked in logistics? This is not how this works.
Electors vote for their MP, before the election May was the PM, not elected, after this election May will not be PM for very long so another PM will be appointed by the Tory party, your 99% has dropped to about 20%.
There is a difference between nominate and elect , who elected Juncker?
Who in the public voted for the Brexit team, who in the public voted who was going to be Home Secretary or any post for that matter.
How anyone can claim the Uk system is more democratic than EU is beyond me.
The cream cake thing digresses from this thread but was interested how all the checks, documentation etc are bypassed to get something delivered via Angola when they are notoriously one of the slowest in the world at clearing goods.
You mention the TIR system, we are in 2017 and things have moved on a bit, if/when the UK no longer free movement of goods , as indicated by Barnier in relation to the Irish border, checks will be made , will Kent become a lorry park?
Lorries will always try to have loads in both directions of their journey to maximise their profit, but if there's not enough to sell, there's not enough to transport.
If you have the misfortune to have to deal with these global logistics companies, as we do, every day, because they're our customers - we're just sub-contractors in a longer supply chain between USA and oil producers throughout West Africa - you'd be shot at dawn for suggesting there is such a thing as 'standardized' supply chain management. Each and every one of them inists they have a unique solution. It's bollocks, but....
What I am trying to explain ( seemingly unsuccessfully ) is that the 'free passage' of physical products within the EU is exploited by cross-border manufacturers and retailers to ensure that the supply chain they eventually end up with is for their own benefit. The EU would have you believe that free passage of 'physical goods' inside the EU is to the benefit of the consumers. OK...If you go to Italy once a month, as we do, and on the way back fill your car with Tariff Free Perroni, as we do, then it obviously is.
But manufacturers and retailers don't set up their supply chains for the benefit of their customers. They do it for their own benefit, usually because it makes life easier and / or cheaper for themselves and, if, there is then a knock-on benefit for a certain group of consumers, then that's an indirect, usually unintended benefit for that group.
Current EU free passage rules facilitates this enormously. And even worse, some manufacturers and retailers then take the piss by having all their stock in Ireland or wherever, despatch it from there; and bill you from Luxemburg
End result - The supply chains are not optimised for speed and cost of delivery to the customer. If you're a manufacturuer, it might mean that your JIT order date is now 4 days instead 24 hours if the stock was in the same country as yourself. So you need to carry more stock. So you have to finance that stock. So your costs go up. And, usually, so do your prices. Who pays for that ? We do, the consumers.....
So you think that the importing company hasn't paid any of those? And you think that the cream cake maker (how has it come to this...) wouldn't suddenly have to suffer from indoor tariffs when it exports? That's the whole problem with tariffs: everyone loses, it's just a question of how much and who loses more. That's how we have come to that whole idea of free trade, you know. It's especially funny when people in Germany talk about the re introduction of tariffs when just 150 years ago, we had a convoluted system of those between our 100+ member states. Nobody would want to go back to that either I guess. Because in the end, the whole country profited when those were gone.
Bullshit. Utter, absolute bullshit. But keep riding that horse, everyone knows how companies *love* to make their products more expensive by shoveling money to logistic companies. Makes so much sense.
That part was interesting because most truck companies aren't from Spain and their drivers don't necessarily go back to Spain, they will go where they are needed and generally not empty.
I find it fascinating how much people overestimate the actual power of appointed executives in the European Union. The prime example of that would be Jean-Claude Juncker, who is sometimes build up to be some type of evil overlord who governs the EU like a king. While he loves to talk big and holds a certain degree of influence inside the Union, he does not decide on policies or which direction the Union goes.
This type of influence has always been (not only of the EU but also its predecessors) in the hands of the central piece of power of the Union: the European Council.
This body consisting of the democratically elected leaders of each of the members states is the main driver of the policies of the Union. There the biggest decision are made. To be put into motion and law it has to be passed by the European parliament (consisting of democratically elected people) and often times the national parliaments of each of the member states.
Some of the critique on the EU is justified in my eyes, especially when it comes to its bureaucratic apparatus, which is from my perspective overblown, slow moving and sometimes self serving. While this can be said for nearly every national bureaucratic body, it feels more pronounced in Brussels. This issue should have been tackled a long time ago.
However, what certainly can´t be said about the EU is that it is undemocratic. The whole thing is build from a model of represantive democracy and like every other democracy it puts people into executive positions without being elected but appointed (like ministers or secretaries).
Of course the import company has paid those fees. I never said that. But he hasn't paid it to **the UK Government** which is why trade deals need to be fairly and carefully.
Indeed. Although you still need to be careful. Globalisation is a powerful tool, you don't necessarily want huge areas of industry disappearing overnight because somewhere else can do it cheaper.
But yeah, there is a lot of wastage. Brexit will create thousands of jobs in Dover, Calais and Dublin. But that's a lot like creating thousands of jobs digging a hole in the ground and then filling it in again. Yes you are creating jobs; to everyone elses detriment.
That happens
Of course. Most of them will be from Poland and Germany. A typical chain might look like
Fruits Spain > Germany
Fruits and car parts Germany > Czech Republic
Car parts and beer CR > Spain
And all over again. This is what you do. Because it's the most profitable.
To Britains, in that case.
Apart from some very isolated, special cases, it just doesn't.
Would be actually more likely the other way round.
Are you sure about this? Like, really really sure?
Because from my recollection, Road Freight takes 10 times the number of goods per kg per mile than Rail Freight does.
Which is why it's such a nonsense when people talk about increasing the amount of goods going by rail to decrease the amount going by road. If you doubled the amount of goods going by rail (which let's face it, is a near impossible task), you'd only be cutting the number going by road by 10%. Barely even noticeable to the average person.
I've always wondered do other EU countries have a different relationship with their MEPs? And is this relationship the reason they are generally more pro EU?
It's probably too simplistic to say most people in UK don't know who their MEP is but there's probably an even greater disconnect between constituents and their MEP than with their MP. Is there a closer relationship in other EU countries?
It's probably too simplistic to say most people in UK don't know who their MEP is but there's probably an even greater disconnect between constituents and their MEP than with their MP. Is there a closer relationship in other EU countries?