| Bofferbrauer2 said: The UK lowering their trade barriers would: a) kill the UK economy (that's the ugly truth; it would just be cheaper to import everything that produce anything in the UK anymore) and millions of jobs that way b) would need to be instated first, which will take time, time where there at least theoretically would need to be a hard border (I say theoretically since if that would get voted early on after leaving, that would be faster than building up walls) Lowering the barriers would allow the UK to import tons of goods at no cost for the countries exporting to the UK, but the exports of the UK are still subject to the tariffs of every single country that they want to export to - and by removing the import tariffs, they would also remove any incentive on their side to remove their tariffs. After all, they would already have the best deal then, selling cheap to the UK but buying nothing that they produce themselves, as they are protected by their own tariffs. |
a) That doesn't matter, the UK has a trade deficit regardless. If the UK is going to rack up a deficit of over 150 billion dollars they may as well just get more value for their money. While some industries may get hurt in the process it would vastly increase the consumers buying power ...
b) "selling cheap to the UK but buying nothing that they produce themselves"
That's not true. The UK has some desirable industries to invest in such as biotechnology and healthcare which the Americans are eyeing at ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
@underlined: Certainly so, though in most cases it will be cheaper to just move to another country, especially if, like you said above, UK would ditch their tariffs. Producing cheap elsewhere in a third world country and shipping it to the UK tax-free would be much more advantageous to those companies than stay on the island. |
No, it's unrealistic to completely rely on other countries to meet the needs of the UK's supply chain. There's way too much protection around the energy sector in the world so the UK must keep extracting hydrocarbons from the North Sea and start fracking as well. Also if an industry is highly automated, there's no reason to not keep them in the UK as well. Healthcare is not something that could be outsourced either. In other words there are many political and logistical roadblocks with your proposal ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
@bolded: If you think so. But I wouldn't buy any of those unless forced upon. |
It's just based on irrational fear. The world cannot afford to keep feeding itself with humane animal husbandry practices, non-hormone treated beef, and non-GMO foods ...
It's a miracle that the EU's self imposed measures of austerity been kept up for as long as it has ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
@italic: It doesn't make deep learning at all illegal. What it makes illegal is collecting tons of data without knowledge of the users they collect them from, give them a right to opt out, have their data deleted if they ask to, and see in detail all the data the companies collected of an individual in the EU. It doesn't disallow to collect data at all, it's just that they now must ask first if and what data they are allowed to collect. The tech hub may be an advantage for the UK. Seriously, I hope it does, as Brexit should not be coming on the back of the common people. |
It pretty much does since since these algorithms that makes these decisions regarding the user requires a "right to explanation" and there's no way to explain how an algorithm came to a specific decision when one is training the network by feeding it some data. The most powerful form of deep learning is effectively banned so there's no way to include data from Europeans in training a deep neural network unless the business wants to get fined ...
Here's the even more damning assessment about GDPR from Brookings Institute, "Regulations prohibit any automated decision that ‘significantly affects’ EU citizens. This includes techniques that evaluates a person’s ‘performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behavior, location, or movements." AI can't have any material impact on EU citizens ...
As for your last line, it goes against democratic ideals that the common people should not experience the decision they've made ... (the common people bear all of the responsibility for brexit)
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
Case in point about your argument you were using in previous posts about the expensive EU food products and that the UK would undercut them: I'm in the Philippines right now. But apart from some sweets, the only UK product I could find was Spam (Filipino seem to love that at least, considering the plethora of variations available). From other EU countries, I found Juices (all cheaper than US variants btw and on par to South African juices), Chocolate butter, Milk, Powdered Milk, tons of sweets (especially chocolates and waffles), Honey, Tomato sauce, Olive oil, even some fruits and vegetables... and in almost all cases, the European products are at least competitive to Chinese, Korean, Australian or American products. |
Well that's exactly what brexit is supposed to solve. It let's the UK become more competitive by stripping away crippling EU regulations. The price of chicken and beef are respectively 20% and 40% cheaper in America compared to Britain. Less restrictions on GMOs would also be very helpful as well ...
As for the other countries, European agriculture products being competitive to Korea or Australia really isn't saying much. Korea just straight imports most of their food products from China and the same applies to Japan, Russia, Taiwan as well. Australia has some of the most extreme labour protection laws on this planet so the price of many common commodities including agriculture skyrockets. For China, despite decimating everyone in terms of production output they're still politically shunned upon around the world even after having the world make them accept harsher conditions for joining the WTO ...
| Bofferbrauer2 said:
Yes, the CAP was set up to protect European farmers from competition from outside the EU. But Macron already announced last year (or 2017, not entirely sure about the date) that they are willing to kill the CAP. Even just thinking that is a sign that the European farmers don't need the protection anymore, as they are increasingly exporting their goods on the world market, and with success as you can see from the above. And yet, apart from Spam and some sweets, I don't see anything British here. It may be a reason of taste, but I guess it's more because UK products are not as competitively priced as with other European products |
Macron effectively reversed his stance on CAP just to score some political points to get the violent protests from the yellow vests off his neck ...
We're talking about a leader here who is more despised than either May or Trump by their own people and when he faces a new election (whether he continues to participate or not) after no deal brexit happens, thoughts are going to be popping up by French citizens about EU membership as their farmers safety nets are going to get smaller ... (it's going to turn into an ugly shitstorm)
France is one of the more Eurosceptic nations after Britain and they'll be wondering who's going to fill the hole for the CAP budget ...
Last edited by fatslob-:O - on 24 March 2019
