James the cat:
Carryfast:
You the one making a “BS non existent link” in thinking a self sufficient trading regime would result in increased income. Did you not get the memo? What makes you think anyone in the world will pay for British goods, electronics at the prices of the pound when cheaper is available? It happened before, how do you propose it won’t happen again all over again? The whole reason Brit industry died is because of overseas options on goods. Are you saying you’d want the world to buy our stuff (sure they would over cheaper options) but deny British people the chance to buy overseas goods? They’d have none of it. You’d have to control the whole world. You probably want to. Now who’s system is starting to sound socialist? Mm? You’re arguments are as long as a short garden path and never well thought out.
As I said you need to understand the meaning of the words trade deficit’.IE we’re importing more than we export in terms of manufactured goods that we could/should be making for ourselves.In that environment all of your bs assumptions above become totally meaningless.IE we stand to gain more by taking back our domestic market place than we stand to lose in our so called ‘export’ markets.Especially when doing so removes the contradiction between Chinese etc wage rates v UK living costs while also putting our own people back to work for decent wages that not only pay the bills but also contribute to the country’s taxation revenue requirement.As opposed to the totally opposite, economically illiterate and suicidal,ideas contained in your posts. 
Ha ha I am getting under your skin. The mark of a frustrated self opinionated person always shows when they start talking down to people.
All this “you need to understand meaning of…”, “you’re unable to understand…” what a condescending man you are. I understand what a trade deficit is don’t you worry your self opinionated little google head.
It’s you that fails to understand basic written comprehension within a discussion. Basic communication. You’ve always done it. You don’t actually listen, read correctly or interpret what people are saying. You answer your own interpretation as you want to be so you can launch off dictating the same old points that don’t have any substance in their execution, when people disagree with you.
You’re droning on whilst missing what I’m saying. Instead of arguing with me why we SHOULD have a balance of trade and how I lack your knowledge (■■■■■■■■ by the way, I have 30 degrees and have been prime minister of 2 countries), why not answer why we don’t, and why it happened in the first place. None of your fancy little words addresses the fact that people may not choose to buy home grown products. Oh dear! What a problem! What are you going to do then??
What’s that you say old man? It’ll help the economy and I need to understand?? Ha ha, you plum, I get that in an ideal world we’d have a balance of trade. I’d like to ride to work on a unicorn and mow my solid gold grass on a weekend. But what you don’t get (because you’re not very good at comprehension) is that I’m saying you can blab on all you like that we need to do this, we need to do that, but the fact is, you can’t control what people buy to the extent your home grown industrial idea will work in balancing trade. Those products would need to compete in price and quality and desirability. In your 1960s world, people bought British because that’s all there was. Then options came along. It happened before. Hey, this is one you’re fond of throwing at people!:- a point you’ve ignored.
As for your little pearler where you misquoted and misunderstood me (unusual):- regarding not allowing people access to foreign market goods. Your response was “which part of trade barrier” do I not understand. Well, thats just it, I understand what a trade barrier is condescending-fast and couldn’t quite believe what you’re proposing. You want to artificially replicate a period that existed decades ago. It was nice while it lasted in retrospect and can see the attraction, but you intend using artificial methods to reinstate this period. A period that naturally existed by its time. You now want to force a return to this state by using, effectively trade barriers. Sanctions.
Ah but! I hear you cry! People will choose naturally when the balance of market forces created by your system dissolves any financial incentive to by foreign. Wanna bet money on that? It didn’t happen last time in the UK did it?
How do you propose to start fledging industries that will replace the foreign goods people enjoy? What will you do first. Create controlled trade barriers before these brands are to appear? Good luck with that. Lots of really ■■■■■■ off people in the population who now find it harder and more expensive to buy the things overseas they’re used to, whilst waiting for a UK alternative to crop up.
But then, if you have trade controls, good luck encouraging business creation to start the enterprises with trade restrictions in place. Maybe you could control trade later, after British industry has been reinvigorated. Mm, bit of a problem there. They’ve been trying to do that for years and it’s not happened. Pesky people will buy from overseas. What to do! Screw it, cut off Chinese imports, Euro car imports and tell folk they’ll love it when their wages one day go up when industry gets going. Right.
So. You’re going to effectively put measures in place to restrict people in the UK from buying goods for certain foreign markets, whilst other countries have access to those markets. USSR anyone? The world outside of the UK has not and will not change inline with your wishes. Markets don’t react well to countries who have trade restrictions. The countries that spring to mind that do have trade restrictions in place, shall we say are not exactly known for prosperity. In fact there existed a well known example of just the ideal you’re proposing. An example of what happens when the limited life span of Fordist idea was overtaken by the natural inevitable movement of capitalism and a movement to attempt to stem the tide. An example of trading restrictions in place. An example of an attempt to stem this capitalist world grapple for the lowest and cheapest denominator. An example of a product produced by the people and sold at a price the people could afford. The next model above priced so the powers that be could afford… the Trabant.
When you’re PM people will love you. You’ve not really thought this through have you.
Have a bash at answering my points using plain language. I bet you can’t get 5 steps without mentioning, “thatcher”, “socialism”, “Callaghan” or “Fordist” . Have a go. Here’s a clue, the greats of the world who lead well didn’t bleat on about history, lecturing people about the past did they? Your Henry Ford just told people, plain and simple what he was going to do for the future. Try it. I bet my bottom dollar you can’t because stripped of the history lessons and fancy hi brow missives, your ideas are not well thought out and would be naked to criticism. Emperors new clothes.
Edited multiple times - because I want to trump CF for the longest post. It’s my aim to have CF tell me my post was too long.
[/quote]
No your bs post is just another example of the type of thought process which says that replacing well paid jobs with cheap imports and applying socialist solutions to fix the results will work.
?
)those that at least left the nest. 
Maybe he should stick to his History of British Politics and keep it shut about stuff he has never experienced in life himself 