The EU debate - Part III

Do you actually not what economists mean when they talk about tarrifs and trade barriers? It's seldom so simple as a price mark up on imported goods. It means often skillfully erected and complex barriers intended to protect home markets. It's a practice that was widespread in the 1930s and which was partly responsible for turning the Wall Street crash into a world wide depression

Think Volkswagen falling foul of spurious emissions regulations in the US (the real purpose of which was to force the German manufacturor to alter their production set up for the US market, at great cost and inconvenience).

I don't think you have any idea how international trade works, or what hoops exporters are often forced to jump through to get their products into global markets - the EU single market is guilty of protectionism on a massive scale, as is the US. Leaving the EU - which we haven't done yet btw - will make access to both these markets considerably more difficult for British based businesses and will certainly make the UK less attractive to foreign investors wanting to base themselves in Europe.

 

Doesn't matter how often you say it dogmatic Pete is incapable of taking this in.

 

I've found usernames can effectively serve that function, it's why I try not to pay attention to the posters name, as often, you can accurately predict the content so skim over it. It certainly seems to frame the replies from some, that seem to be supporting what they see as their "pals" more than engaging in an open discussion.

That runs the risk of missing the odd occasion they post something interesting or funny.

 

Very random anti Labour rant!

 

Why is it so difficult to understand that if 44% of our total export trade is affected by tariffs and/or other restrictions, and only 12--3% of the EU's is, that we have more to lose than they do!?....

 

Or just parroting right wing rubbish that they've dug up on some website?

 

Sadly when you are trapped in the delusion that your opinion must be right then it is impossible to consider the alternatives

 

The EU obviously has so many problems that I am happy that the UK is leaving it. If a country decides to be awkward for protectionist reasons then I'd be more than happy to sell to more enlightened countries.
If a potential client comes to me and wants me to do some things that are not sensible and even after I explain the problems they still insist I ask them to keep looking for an accountant. There's plenty of sensible people around.

 

I'm astonished you get any business. Someone who is in as **** physical condition as you are is clearly a lazy bastard so why would anyone trust you with their accounts?

I guess that's why you have to rent out the various box rooms in your HMO slum.

 

If a right wing paper quotes a left wing or apolitical source, presumably they then become right wing by default.

Following that logic, if someone perceived as left wing on here posts, any content then becomes left wing, or vice versa. It'd be just silly.

It's why I try to read the message rather than the author. You get a wider picture that way, and when things change, you don't end up stuck dogmatically trying to defend a position that's no longer viable or end up reduced to polemic responses.

 

I agree,
Better still check the quality of the report by referring to several sources rather than assume a single source is right/wrong.

 

I know what you mean. In the years I have been on the not606 Hull City threads I have never put anybody on ignore. Here I don't want to waste too much time reading nonsense or insults so if somebody says: "It's not trade barriers that are being negotiated as there currently are none." it is quite obvious that you are not going to get any sense out of them. If somebody quotes two percentages and says because of that the UK will lose without explaining why and then throws out insults even though most sensible people have decided that avoiding insults is the best way then it's obvious that they have temper issues.

 

This is the man who has lashed out with snide remarks more often than any other poster.
The man who when he fails to understand a point being made automatically assumes the other person is an idiot rather than confront his own position.

 

It's the only sensible way to do it. If somebody says something it is crazy to just dismiss their argument just because of who they are rather than because of what they said. Unfortunately, some people are incapable of critical analysis and resort to insulting commentators or publications because of who they are and they are not able to contribute to a sensible discussion.

 

Only one person is bonkers enough to believe he's so right that he set up a political party

 

I know it's scary, can't find an express one yet

 

I don't subscribe to either view. I'm what you'd call Centre-left. I think Corbyn is a total dick and a not very well disguised Trot, who's views are stuck in the 1970's.

Conversely, I have little time for most of the conservative policies. They're aimed at maintaining the status quo, as they always have been. And people like Rees-mogg, and his ilk, personify all that's wrong with society in Britain.

 

WHAT THE **** IS AN EYE TOAST?

 

I've had enough dealings with politicians to know that most are incapable of rational judgement.
They see their job as defending a position, not to determine whether it is right/wrong good bad.
Most are from wealthy backgrounds(all parties) and see it all as just one big game.

 

How much of the UK exports to the EU are services and how much made goods?