Well that would probably turn out really good, if it was North Korea youâre talking about. In real life brexit holds little weight when it comes to individual interest groups wanting something or other. Norway recently relaxed the requirements for cabotage and you might take a second to figure out why they even allow it in the first place. Hint: itâs not for the lack of a national transport industry.
Oh wait you mean the roads of Europe are full of Norwegian trucks hauling European loads as part of opening itself up to the single European transport market.
While by that logic North America is an example of a North Korean type Communist regime in which opening up its road transport market to Mexican third country,let alone cabotage operations,would actually benefit its own road transport industry.
How does allowing East Euro operations to take over the Norwegian transport market,based on race to the bottom economics,translate as Norwegian jobs for Norwegian drivers ?.Or similar in the case of the UK road transport market.
Franglais:
Imposing taxes will invite reciprocal taxes on UK trucks going to Eu. So UK traffic gets dearer and work is lost. And who has more clout with the Gov, hauliers or business wanting costs (transport) kept low?
Edit. I meant to quote AndrewGâs post.
As it is though Franglais UK trucks going into Europe is minimal, even if it harmed this side of it a further tax imposed on incoming traction would boost UK hauliers business with a lot more ferry trailers coming in. I know its swings and roundabouts ect but as it is the UK is over run by foreign competition and possibly this could even this out a little. Yes. i totally agree, the govt has the say but only by hauliers banding together (did i just say that??) will things ever change. A cabotage ban A real game changer!
But any tax on transport would raise the cost of all imports for UK consumers, and of raw materials. It would increase the cost of UK produced goods being sold overseas so reducing competitiveness.
OK, argue that the taxes could be used as subsidies to chosen industries, but international trade agreements will prevent this(not just the EU) and if it didnât, how long until those subsidies were diverted off elsewhere by governments?
Any attempted tilting of the table in our favour will ensure that our trading partners/competitors will be tugging it the other way too.
Carryfast:
How does allowing East Euro operations to take over the Norwegian transport market,based on race to the bottom economics,translate as Norwegian jobs for Norwegian drivers ?.Or similar in the case of the UK road transport market.
Who said anything about it being good for the national transport sector? What Iâm saying is that brexit is a simple ploy to fool the uneducated masses into hope that in todays globalized economy, leaving the EU will do, well, anything.
Franglais:
But any tax on transport would raise the cost of all imports for UK consumers, and of raw materials. It would increase the cost of UK produced goods being sold overseas so reducing competitiveness.
OK, argue that the taxes could be used as subsidies to chosen industries, but international trade agreements will prevent this(not just the EU) and if it didnât, how long until those subsidies were diverted off elsewhere by governments?
Any attempted tilting of the table in our favour will ensure that our trading partners/competitors will be tugging it the other way too.
Letâs get this right you want Brits to give up their jobs to cheaper East Euro competition to give the customer lower rates.So how does that fit in with calls for rate rises across the industry and an end to race to the bottom economics to improve terms and conditions for drivers ?.Or for that matter fit the description of Brit jobs for Brit workers.
Also why does it need to be a taxed base âre alignmentâ of the trading environment as opposed to a quota based one ?.In which case which international regulations would stop us doing that bearing in mind the example of Mexicoâs restrictions on access to the North American transport market even under NAFTA ?.
gerard:
Exactly Luke it was going along nicely doing nobody any harm , and then it gets hijacked by a brexit debate
Strange how Switch didnât seem to want to moan about Franglais and Milodon supposedly hijacking anything,with their pro race to the bottom single market side of the âdebateâ,that Conor started,before Iâd posted anything.
Thought you ignored any threads with CF embedded ?
I didnât realise heâd hijacked it till i opened it
Yes Carryfast why have you ruined yet another thread with all this utter drivel about North Korea and Communism, Norway etc? Your constant unwanted interventions are ruining threads such as these.
When I see long winded sentences with no punctuation, âBSâ and âin that regardâ my heart sinks. Itâs not that you donât have a right of reply, but your writing style and near constant references to the same small group of subject areas (I donât need to name them) put me and iâm sure a lot of people off.
Thought you ignored any threads with CF embedded ?
I didnât realise heâd hijacked it till i opened it
Yes Carryfast why have you ruined yet another thread with all this utter drivel about North Korea and Communism, Norway etc? Your constant unwanted interventions are ruining threads such as these.
When I see long winded sentences with no punctuation, âBSâ and âin that regardâ my heart sinks. Itâs not that you donât have a right of reply, but your writing style and near constant references to the same small group of subject areas (I donât need to name them) put me and iâm sure a lot of people off.
Keep
It
Short
and
Simple
It was actually Milodon not me who referred to Korea based on the same old zb if we dare to walk away from the EU and try to stop our road transport industry being wiped out by race to the bottom foreign under cutting,weâll be like North Korea blah zb blah.All that concerning a debate started by Conor,again not me. While ironically unlike Switchâs trolling all my posts are pre modded.You couldnât make it up.
Carryfast:
It was actually Milodon not me who referred to Korea based on the same old zb if we dare to walk away from the EU and try to stop our road transport industry being wiped out by race to the bottom foreign under cutting,weâll be like North Korea blah zb blah.
Well, no. What I said is, that the UK is not North Korea, so thatâs why dreams of taxes for foreign hauliers etc are nothing but a â â â â â â â â â for the simpleminded.
Franglais:
But any tax on transport would raise the cost of all imports for UK consumers, and of raw materials. It would increase the cost of UK produced goods being sold overseas so reducing competitiveness.
OK, argue that the taxes could be used as subsidies to chosen industries, but international trade agreements will prevent this(not just the EU) and if it didnât, how long until those subsidies were diverted off elsewhere by governments?
Any attempted tilting of the table in our favour will ensure that our trading partners/competitors will be tugging it the other way too.
Letâs get this right you want Brits to give up their jobs to cheaper East Euro competition to give the customer lower rates.So how does that fit in with calls for rate rises across the industry and an end to race to the bottom economics to improve terms and conditions for drivers ?.Or for that matter fit the description of Brit jobs for Brit workers.
Also why does it need to be a taxed base âre alignmentâ of the trading environment as opposed to a quota based one ?.In which case which international regulations would stop us doing that bearing in mind the example of Mexicoâs restrictions on access to the North American transport market even under NAFTA ?.
I was addressing a suggestion from AndrewG about taxing foreign trucks entering the UK. Thatâs why tax was mentioned.
Iâm not happy about cheap foreign hauliers either. It affects my job and me personally as much most on here.
My point is Brexit will not really improve the situation! Itâs being sold as a cure all. A way to turn the clock back to the 1960s when we still traded with the Commonwealth and still had a manufacturing industry. Sorry, but it ainât gonna happen.
There are problems with Globalisation. Massive problems, and I think weâre better inside a strong trading group like the EU than as a small independent trading country. The EU isnât perfect but itâs better to be in it than out of it. Weâre better trading with them rather than competing against Japanese and Korean cars and electronics. Do we want to complete against Chinese Mexican and Indian labour rates? These are are competition in the outside world.
There wonât be any containers moving anywhere if we canât export on the world market, and no imports if we canât afford them.
Others agree and disagree for all sorts of reasons, some economic some political, but putting that aside the fact that Europe has Not had a War for 70 years is a strong argument in itâs favour too.
gerard:
Exactly Luke it was going along nicely doing nobody any harm , and then it gets hijacked by a brexit debate
Strange how Switch didnât seem to want to moan about Franglais and Milodon supposedly hijacking anything,with their pro race to the bottom single market side of the âdebateâ,that Conor started,before Iâd posted anything.
To be fair I didnât mention anyone in my RIP post. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it, in a smoking area of course
itl only be the tangs from northern ireland that will be affectedâŚthey paddys wont give a monkeys as they will still be in europe.
how about adding that one to the mix.
dieseldog999:
itl only be the tangs from northern ireland that will be affectedâŚthey paddys wont give a monkeys as they will still be in europe.
how about adding that one to the mix.
Do you wanna start a thread about the paddies not building Trumpâs wall because theyâre already digging the footings for the wall tween Eire and N.I. ?
A real game changer!
What was it that got you on that then?