robroy:
Right…I’m riding ■■■■■■■■ on this thread …so as to speak 
What I mean is, I have not read the last 12 pages, mostly because I can’t be arsed, (and another reason I would like to bet a weeks wages 60% of the posts originate from Carryfast,) lifes to [zb] short to even consider it 
I’m voting out,.
I have no problem with trade, like the original ‘Common Market’ concept, but I have no desire to be a member of a European Superstate, or the USE…, ruled by non elected Belgians, Germans or whatever.
If you’d have been bothered to read my posts they are mostly all about defence of the Nation State against those obviously supporting Federation.
Fell free to post as many times as you like as to what’s your problem with that. 
Having said that there’s no way the Nation State can survive economically without the reservation of the right to impose trade tarrifs to maintain at least trade balance.Or a level playing field in the form of harmonised minimum wage levels and costs environment.
Thought I’d share this with you as it’s a totally unbiased view of life after Brexit, and nothing to do with the BBC and may be of use to the undecided or anyone fearful of Brexit’s implications.
Neil Woodford who is one of the most successful investment fund managers currently managing £8.6billion, commissioned the highly respected Capital Economics Group to produce a report on the likely impact of Brexit on the UK.
Its a very long report, in fact its even longer than Carryfast’s posts, but even if you skip through it you should get the basics
The report can be found at the link below and there’s also a video in which Neil discusses the economic side of the report.
woodfordfunds.com/economic-impa … it-report/
Carryfast:
raymundo:
Carryfast:
M&S were importing from the Far East long before the UK joined the common market, the global textile market having moved over there.
As for M+S importing from cheap labour countries before we joined the EEC that’s total bs.I should know bearing in mind my mother worked there as a warehouse stock employee for more than 30 years long before and after we joined the EEC and she’s confirmed that you’re talking bollox.
During the 90’s while driving for Eagle Freight of Gt Blakenham I was fetching back to the UK women’s garments made in either Minsk, Vilnius or Moscow that were destined for M&S, and also going to C&A. I used to run out there with the all the raw materials needed even down to the price tags and hangers and the only difference when it came back as the finished article was the price ie. £9.99 for C&A but £39.99 for M&S. all made to the same quality.
edit … CF never said the first line but the next two are his and the rest are mine 
[/quote
We were actually obviously referring to M+S buying policy ‘before’ 1973. On that note did you read the link describing Corah’s operations.
And I was actually obviously referring to M+S buying policy ‘during’ the 90’s, that’s why I entered the date, or didn’t you read that bit ?
Reckon Jay’s Berlin Wall analogy just about sums things up.
A question to those that are for it.
If we were NOT in it already.
Would you vote to join an EU that would dilute our total self government, override our domestic laws, allow almost unlimited immigration, and demand millions of pounds per year for the privilege.
raymundo:
Carryfast:
raymundo:
Carryfast:
M&S were importing from the Far East long before the UK joined the common market, the global textile market having moved over there.
As for M+S importing from cheap labour countries before we joined the EEC that’s total bs.I should know bearing in mind my mother worked there as a warehouse stock employee for more than 30 years long before and after we joined the EEC and she’s confirmed that you’re talking bollox.
During the 90’s while driving for Eagle Freight of Gt Blakenham I was fetching back to the UK women’s garments made in either Minsk, Vilnius or Moscow that were destined for M&S, and also going to C&A. I used to run out there with the all the raw materials needed even down to the price tags and hangers and the only difference when it came back as the finished article was the price ie. £9.99 for C&A but £39.99 for M&S. all made to the same quality.
edit … CF never said the first line but the next two are his and the rest are mine
[/quote
We were actually obviously referring to M+S buying policy ‘before’ 1973. On that note did you read the link describing Corah’s operations.
And I was actually obviously referring to M+S buying policy ‘during’ the 90’s, that’s why I entered the date, or didn’t you read that bit ?
Which was relevant to the discussion,of M + S buying policy before EEC/EU membership,how. 
wing-nut:
Thought I’d share this with you as it’s a totally unbiased view of life after Brexit, and nothing to do with the BBC and may be of use to the undecided or anyone fearful of Brexit’s implications.
Neil Woodford who is one of the most successful investment fund managers currently managing £8.6billion, commissioned the highly respected Capital Economics Group to produce a report on the likely impact of Brexit on the UK.
Its a very long report, in fact its even longer than Carryfast’s posts, but even if you skip through it you should get the basics
The report can be found at the link below and there’s also a video in which Neil discusses the economic side of the report.
woodfordfunds.com/economic-impa … it-report/
How can any credibility be given to a report which suggests that the free movement of labour has a supposed ‘beneficial’ effect on growth and keeping wage levels down.That’ll do wonders for the Labour vote.So tell us how does keeping wage levels down create ‘growth’.Oh wait.Remind us again what was the growth figure for at least the previous 4 years v 1972.
While where do you personally stand on the question of Federation v Nation State ?.
Terry T:
Carryfast:
3 result in a net addition to the domestic labour supply in the form of free movement.
You need to be mentally challenged not to realise this. Plenty don’t though.
I deliver to plenty of places where in the warehouse you struggle to hear an English voice. A few times I’ve had to ask for someone English to speak to and 5 mins later an English supervisor will appear. Now these foreigners in these jobs are low/non skilled workers in crappy jobs. We have hundreds of thousands of British people who are suited to these jobs sitting on benefits which is paid for by, oh yeah, the tax payer.
There is no doubt that many of the benefit Brits choose benefits coz they’re too lazy to work in a warehouse or think it’s beneath them. Importing cheap labour isn’t the answer. Forcing Brits into these jobs is the answer.
I keep hearing about how migrants contribute more in tax than what they take out but you can bet your left bollock they don’t take into account wider issues such as the thousands of unemployed Brits that could be made to do these jobs that are funded by the tax payer to sit at home, the extra burden put on public services, housing shortages, school place shortages and god knows what else.
Another classic, oh the NHS would collapse without foreign nurses. Well I doubt you’ve done much good to the health services of the nations you poached these nurses from. So much for caring about Africa.
Maybe we wouldn’t need foreign labour if nursing in the UK was an attractive job. Ditto truck driving. [zb] conditions backed up by cheap imported labour will always win though. There ARE people benefitting from cheap imported labour but its certainly not the average British tax payer.
Errrm Not totally true,(too much tory brainwashing ) there are many unemployed who want to work, but won’t work for peanuts because their own weekly household living expenses mean that they would be worse off, in particular of they are single without kids, they get no in work benefits , it is also more expensive to live as a single person
Maybe if the supply of cheap labour from EE ect, wasn’t so plentiful , then these scumbag employers would have to increase the wage levels , or employ less people
Then you have employment agencies and some companies who don’t advertise their vacancies in the uk or in English , because they do not want English people working for them, There is a hell of a lot going on out there what leads to people being on the dole that this government and it’s loyal media won’t talk about
It 's also why they don’t want us to leave the corrupt anti democratic EU
I didn’t say every brit on the dole wants to be there. Far from it. I’ve been on the dole and hated almost every second of it.
But, as you said, some brits are better off on benefits and won’t do jobs that make them financially worse off than claiming JSA and god knows what other benefits. A good start would be to increase wages, like you said. But instead the big companies ship in the foreigners from abroad and let the tax payer sort the rest out. The government let it happen because it keeps their donors happy.
Like I said, a select few benefit from the current situation but it’s not the likes of me and you.
wing-nut:
Neil Woodford who is one of the most successful investment fund managers currently managing £8.6billion
And you think somebody like this has your interests at heart?
I was better off on benefits at one time, I was being paid as a carer (around £60 a week) and was told that I could earn up to £70 per week working elsewhere. I intended to do a couple of days driving for the £70 but the Jobcentre said that if I did that I would have to pay council tax, plus my wife would have to pay for her own medical items and they advised me to take everything offered and Income Support would make up the shortfall. They then paid the Council Tax and medical expenses which went against my principles. However principles dont feed mouths so for 8 years I took whatever they offered until I turned 60 years of age and it all changed then as Income Support stopped!
Pete.
Harry Monk:
wing-nut:
Neil Woodford who is one of the most successful investment fund managers currently managing £8.6billion
And you think somebody like this has your interests at heart?
He’s made me enough money over the years for a very comfy retirement so the answer has to be yes
Heres a question.
I keep hearing if we cut foreign labour then employers will have to increase wages due to no cheap foreign labour. Great in theory but if that happens, I can see one of two things happening -
- Everyone gets a wage increase. The cost of selling for companies goes up due to higher production cost. Companies dont buy from them as they are more expensive than other sources outwith the UK. Companies inside UK close down one by one. Or
- They dont offer a wage increase at all and instead say “bugger that. We’re not paying that. Lets relocate to X country. Cheaper to produce”
BTW, im not saying we should accept ■■■■■■ hourly wages just to be lucky to have a job, im just asking what will getting higher wages (if that even happens post brexit. No law says they MUST give a wage increase) do to the end result of the UK job market. Is there something in place to counter balance the increase in production costs that will be felt from a wage spike?
wing-nut:
Harry Monk:
wing-nut:
Neil Woodford who is one of the most successful investment fund managers currently managing £8.6billion
And you think somebody like this has your interests at heart?
He’s made me enough money over the years for a very comfy retirement so the answer has to be yes
Are you for real? Yes, I’m sure Neil Woodford has made a whole bunch of money for a comfortable retirement, but where exactly do the interests of an investment fund manager and a truck driver cross paths?
Personally i never vote for many many reasons. Like stated before i prefer to leave politics to the young ( they still believe they can make a difference ). The innocence of youth
If you vote to leave ? You are a racist/fascist? So they say in some camps
If you vote to stay you will get a racist/fascist government some camps say?
hahahahahahahahaha
Vote for a lesser evil? Nah! Pass me a beer
Good luck at the polls folks
The-Snowman:
Is there something in place to counter balance the increase in production costs that will be felt from a wage spike?
Yes it’s called strong unions that are prepared to fight for decent wages in ‘real terms’.Which obviously means the Fordist economic model and increased profit based on increased turnover not the unsustainable idea of increasing profit margins based on minimising of wages.The idea of taking advantage of the cheapest labour possible obviously being contradictory to the Fordist model.On that note remind us what the present economic growth figure is under the post Fordist model.
Harry Monk:
Are you for real? Yes, I’m sure Neil Woodford has made a whole bunch of money for a comfortable retirement, but where exactly do the interests of an investment fund manager and a truck driver cross paths?
+1
Although the wheels are even falling off the investment sector because of the simple link between wage levels,economic growth and the sustainability of decent interest rates in a low growth environment. 
Carryfast:
The-Snowman:
Is there something in place to counter balance the increase in production costs that will be felt from a wage spike?
Yes it’s called strong unions that are prepared to fight for decent wages in ‘real terms’.Which obviously means the Fordist economic model and increased profit based on increased turnover not the unsustainable idea of increasing profit margins based on minimising of wages.The idea of taking advantage of the cheapest labour possible obviously being contradictory to the Fordist model.On that note remind us what the present economic growth figure is under the post Fordist model.
Eh? Please reread the question. I didnt ask about getting a wage increase. I asked whats to stop companies not buying the now more expensive UK alternative if a wage rise actually happens. It is a fact of life that companies buy the cheapest possible (give or take obviously) so a strong union fighting for wages doesnt help if no one is buying from the company at the other end
The-Snowman:
Eh? Please reread the question. I didnt ask about getting a wage increase. I asked whats to stop companies not buying the now more expensive UK alternative if a wage rise actually happens. It is a fact of life that companies buy the cheapest possible (give or take obviously) so a strong union fighting for wages doesnt help if no one is buying from the company at the other end
I’ll reverse the question can the economy handle the resulting deflationary environment required to sustain the reduction in wages needed to compete in a race to the bottom economic environment.IE you know small things like negative interest rates and house price and other asset value ‘corrections’.Bearing in mind the resulting negative equity trap for the banks. 
As opposed to Fordist economics and all the trade controls needed to sustain them.
On that note although you might not have noticed it the banks are desperately trying to head off exactly that situation IE the catastrophic deflation scenario.
uk.reuters.com/article/uk-eurozo … KKCN0VZ29H
rickackerman.com/2009/12/mor … illl-rule/
Carryfast:
The-Snowman:
Eh? Please reread the question. I didnt ask about getting a wage increase. I asked whats to stop companies not buying the now more expensive UK alternative if a wage rise actually happens. It is a fact of life that companies buy the cheapest possible (give or take obviously) so a strong union fighting for wages doesnt help if no one is buying from the company at the other end
I’ll reverse the question can the economy handle the resulting deflationary environment required to sustain the reduction in wages needed to compete in a race to the bottom economic environment.IE you know small things like negative interest rates and house price and other asset value ‘corrections’.Bearing in mind the resulting negative equity trap for the banks. As opposed to Fordist economics and all the trade controls needed to sustain them.
When you ask a question on a forum, I think its bad manners to be rude to someone who takes the time to answer you but FFS carryfast you’re pushing the limits here! To answer your first part, I dont know if it can or not. Probably not, but does it matter if the alternative is no one buying an even more expensive UK product and companies sell up and ship out to somewhere with cheaper wage bills? All I want to know is, if wages DO increase, thats great for a few months, maybe a year or two. But as more companies high tail it out of the UK because no one is buying from them because they are too expensive due to increased wage bill, it doesnt end well for the employees or the uk population in the long run
The-Snowman:
Carryfast:
The-Snowman:
Eh? Please reread the question. I didnt ask about getting a wage increase. I asked whats to stop companies not buying the now more expensive UK alternative if a wage rise actually happens. It is a fact of life that companies buy the cheapest possible (give or take obviously) so a strong union fighting for wages doesnt help if no one is buying from the company at the other end
I’ll reverse the question can the economy handle the resulting deflationary environment required to sustain the reduction in wages needed to compete in a race to the bottom economic environment.IE you know small things like negative interest rates and house price and other asset value ‘corrections’.Bearing in mind the resulting negative equity trap for the banks. As opposed to Fordist economics and all the trade controls needed to sustain them.
When you ask a question on a forum, I think its bad manners to be rude to someone who takes the time to answer you but FFS carryfast you’re pushing the limits here! To answer your first part, I dont know if it can or not. Probably not, but does it matter if the alternative is no one buying an even more expensive UK product and companies sell up and ship out to somewhere with cheaper wage bills? All I want to know is, if wages DO increase, thats great for a few months, maybe a year or two. But as more companies high tail it out of the UK because no one is buying from them because they are too expensive due to increased wage bill, it doesnt end well for the employees or the uk population in the long run
Which part of the choice is between inflation until employers blink first and trade barriers and wage harmonisation to stop race to the bottom economics.Or catastrophic deflation,didn’t you understand.
The EU obviously not being into any of the former.
Which then just leaves the same argument but on a much smaller scale within the domestic environment where it will be much easier to settle.
