The Political Thread

[IndigoPrime]

Oops. Turns out the Aussies don't give a shit about the UK once it leaves the EU either: http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2016/09/08/australian-trade-minister-says-special-relationship-with-uk

Oh well. I'm sure someone else might consider the UK a priority. Tuvalu, perhaps.

[The Legendary Shark]

"It is the situation within which the UK currently exists."

Which is not to say that just because this situation does exist, it must continue to exist or is the only option. Brexit presents an opportunity to both establish proper free trade and curtail unwarranted government oppression. Conversely, it also presents an opportunity for protectionists and corporatists to present their own opinions and solutions. Neither option is without problems.

"It. Doesn't. Matter. You act as though none of
these things exists, because you don't want
them to."

It does matter. It matters a great deal. If I acted as though these things didn't exist, why would I be so vociferous in my opposition to them? If what you say is true, it would be like me arguing to condemn unicorns.

"... the money we now earn is worth less. Savings are worth less."

This is not a Brexit phenomena. Money has been losing value for a very long time due largely to an over-creation of it. One only has to watch the Antiques Roadshow to have this confirmed. "My Granny bought this doodad in 1920 for £5 and now it's worth £150!" True, but in 1920 £5 was a week's wage and in 2016 £150 is a week's wage. The devaluation of money is an ongoing flaw in the system, not a consequence of Brexit. In fact, the next round of QE (where the banks create money to lend to governments to give to banks, leaving taxpayers with the bill) will exacerbate this problem far more. One thing we do agree on is that the average Joe or Jo Consumer doesn't care why their money is worth less, they only know that it is and that it's making their lives harder. That's the real tragedy here, irrespective of whether you are right or I am; the fact that ordinary people are suffering under political, financial and/or corporatist monoliths.

"You misunderstand. Your responses are echoes of Leave voters saying those criticising leaving the EU are causing the problems."

Then I apologise for my misunderstanding. I do not own a tv, read newspapers or pay very much attention at all to the MSM and so my comments come from independent sources and my own thoughts on the matter. To be clear, I do not think that it's the people criticising the Leave vote who are the problem. In my view, the problem is the EU itself and the protectionist mechanisms and bodies it has created.

"Really? You're just being an arse for the sake of it now. 'Web' doesn't just mean a sticky arachnid's happy home. It can mean a mesh, a lattice, a network, and a nexus."

Well, if your Japanese source is going to use a word without defining its meaning, then I am perfectly entitled to interpret it for myself and turn the analogy around. And enough with the name calling, already. You're better than that. We're both trying to get our points across as best we can and just because our positions are at odds, that doesn't mean we have to be.

[IndigoPrime]

Which is not to say that just because this situation does exist, it must continue to exist

On that at least we agree. But the choices now are the status quo and jumping off a cliff, without knowing what's below, but with the best option being some kind of safety net that will leave us clambering up to where we were, and the worst of which is jagged rocks.

What to you does "proper free trade" actually mean? Where in the world is that actually done and achieved? We currently have ALL our allies saying this is a colossal mistake. The only countries broadly in favour of Brexit are the likes of Russia. That in itself says a lot about "an opportunity to both establish proper free trade and curtail unwarranted government oppression".

This is not a Brexit phenomena.

You conflate inflation with a sudden devaluation of currency. They are not the same thing. Yes, £5 in 1900 and £5 now are entirely different things. But in 1900, people were paid rather less than now. What happened with Brexit is that relative to the rest of the world, the entire UK had about 10 per cent wiped off its value. This didn't happen gradually over time – it happened overnight, practically in an instant. And this was the response purely to the vote, not actually leaving.

One thing we do agree on is that the average Joe or Jo Consumer doesn't care why their money is worth less, they only know that it is and that it's making their lives harder.

And every single expert states this will get worse if we quit the single market.

Well, if your Japanese source is going to use a word without defining its meaning, then I am perfectly entitled to interpret it for myself and turn the analogy around. And enough with the name calling, already. You're better than that. We're both trying to get our points across as best we can and just because our positions are at odds, that doesn't mean we have to be.

Fair enough on the name-calling – I apologise and take that back. However, it would be absurd to think we need to define every single word in a debate, and it's picky to take a word and use that as an argument against a concept or idea rather than the concept or idea itself.

[Theblazeuk]

I think almost exclusively 'web' is used as a metaphor for complex structures built around separate nodes, rather than their sticky or non-sticky nature. As rather famously illustrated by the WWW. No need for sophistry

[The Legendary Shark]

"But the choices now are the status quo and jumping off a cliff..."

Maybe those are the choices presented to us from above but they are not the only choices. Only through conversations such as the one we are having now can other options be developed and explored. When a politician says there are only two options, I have learned that ninety nine times out of a hundred it's simply the presentation of a false dilemma. I do not accept that such a complicated and nuanced situation presents only two options.

"What to you does "proper free trade" actually
mean? Where in the world is that actually done
and achieved?"

Proper free trade is the ability for people to trade with whomever they like without outside interference. It is done all over the world by ordinary people every day of the year. If you said to me, "hey, Shark, I've got this book I want to sell, are you interested?", that's free trade. I either buy it or I don't.  If you said to me, "hey, Shark, I've got this book I want to sell, are you interested?", and some outside force steps in to block or tax that trade, that's not free trade. I suppose the thing that comes closest to proper free trade is ordinary people buying and selling second hand goods on Ebay. (And no - this doesn't mean turning over the entirety of international trade to Ebay - although it might be a good place to start designing a better trading system.)

"What happened with Brexit is that relative to the rest of the world, the entire UK had about 10 per cent wiped off its value."

Granted, but sudden dips are not uncommon and are generally instigated in the upper reaches of our economic system by the richest investors moving their money around for one reason or another. Nothing of real value was affected; 10% of the potatoes didn't evaporate from the fields, 10% of roads weren't swallowed by the Earth, 10% of the people didn't commit suicide. Real, tangible assets were completely unaffected, only the unreal markers suffered. Admittedly, this has a trickle-down effect on the rest of us and is, in my view, one of the major reasons why artificial (fiat) money must be disconnected from the real world, or at least re-tethered to some tangible asset like precious metals.

"And every single expert states this will get
worse if we quit the single market."

Every single expert? There's not one who disagrees? Even if this is true, I still have to be harsh and say that it might be necessary. It's a sad fact of life that most people live in a state of inertia - so long as they're relatively okay they see little need for change. Whilst I detest the idea of people suffering, maybe it'll jolt people out of their complacency and force them to develop new ideas and better systems. Furthermore, even though I have very little faith in government I cannot deny that it has a major effect on society. So maybe, just maybe, a government will come along that actually puts the people first - but this will only happen if the people exercise their God-given powers and demand it. I won't hold my breath.

"Fair enough on the name-calling – I apologise
and take that back. However, it would be
absurd to think we need to define every single
word in a debate, and it's picky to take a word
and use that as an argument against a concept
or idea rather than the concept or idea itself."

Humbly accepted and thank you. I haven't questioned every word in this debate, just that one. Perhaps I was being picky, but you can't deny that I hijacked that particular analogy to good effect!

[Theblazeuk]

I think we just won Legendary Politics Bingo

[IndigoPrime]

Proper free trade is the ability for people to trade with whomever they like without outside interference. It is done all over the world by ordinary people every day of the year. If you said to me, "hey, Shark, I've got this book I want to sell, are you interested?", that's free trade. I either buy it or I don't.

Hey, Shark, I'm a multinational corporate building cars with components from all over the world, with a view to selling those cars in the EU.

Hey, Shark, I'm a medical company, entirely reliant on cross-border support, research, development and free movement.

Hey, Shark, I'm an electronics manufacturers, building highly complex parts from elements part manufacturers elsewhere, and part designed and manufactured in the UK.

It's not about selling a book (and even that can be more complex than people realise). It's about the way in which modern business and trade works. People like Redwood keep bringing it down to "hey, let's just bin the EU and get back to country-to-country deals for specific things". Like I said, that's fine if you're living in the 1800s.

Granted, but sudden dips are not uncommon

In Western nations, rapid devaluation of this sort is extremely uncommon.

Nothing of real value was affected; 10% of the potatoes didn't evaporate from the fields, 10% of roads weren't swallowed by the Earth, 10% of the people didn't commit suicide. Real, tangible assets were completely unaffected, only the unreal markers suffered. Admittedly, this has a trickle-down effect on the rest of us and is, in my view, one of the major reasons why artificial (fiat) money must be disconnected from the real world, or at least re-tethered to some tangible asset like precious metals

Which is all lovely in a utopian future, but we live in the present. Yes, all the things that existed before still exist, but they are deemed to be worth less now. That's the fact of it. And the trickle-down effect is an immediate hit on everyone's own income and ability to buy. Beyond that, we have additional issues, in terms of tax receipts falling if we hard Brexit, which will mean either tax hikes or dramatic cuts to already stretched public services.

[The Legendary Shark]

And your prize is either a free TLSco lecture on socioeconomic praxiology and its relationship to historical interpretations of pseudopsychological religiosity with a special emphasis on our Draco reptilian overlords or some clouds.

[The Legendary Shark]

"Hey, Shark, I'm a multinational corporate building cars with components from all over the world, with a view to selling those cars in the EU."

Cool. Are you asking me to invest, purchase a franchise or buy a single car?

"It's about the way in which modern business and trade works."

Which is in essence the same way it's always worked. Party A produces or stocks something that Party B is willing to buy or rent. Negotiations are entered into and, if mutually acceptable, money changes hands. The major differences between 1800 and now are designed obsolescence (which really needs to be crushed), the distances involved (taken care of by modern transportation companies) and scale (useful as there are now more people).

"In Western nations, rapid devaluation of this
sort is extremely uncommon."

Germany - 1929
UK - 2008
Iceland - 2012
Um, okay - I'll give you that one.

"...which will mean either tax hikes or dramatic
cuts to already stretched public services."

Or reforming the banking system. Or switching to the Austrian economics system. Or stopping wasting money on foreign wars. Or turning the whole country into an international holiday camp (which was actually Hitler's plan if he won the war!). Or to become a tax haven. Or to become a US state (noooooo!). Or to lead the Commonwealth into world economic domination. Or to join forces with North Korea. Or to rebuild our manufacturing base. Or to become more self-sufficient. Or to keep entering every other country's national lottery until we've won everything. Or to become the world's foremost supplier of weed. Or to rebuild the Empire, this time on ethical grounds.

[IndigoPrime]

Which is in essence the same way it's always worked. Party A produces or stocks something that Party B is willing to buy or rent. Negotiations are entered into and, if mutually acceptable, money changes hands. The major differences between 1800 and now are designed obsolescence (which really needs to be crushed), the distances involved (taken care of by modern transportation companies) and scale (useful as there are now more people).

A major difference now is the manner in which many products are made and sold. You rarely have a complete 'widget' being made in country A solely through its own resources and then sold to country B. Today, a car manufactured in the UK, designed to be sold in the EU, may have parts, materials and components imported from any number of countries. Our current position within the EU makes a huge amount of trade viable that simply wouldn't exist without it; and it simplifies trade in key areas for UK companies, as noted earlier, who'd otherwise be subject to stringent and costly goods inspection. (And this is just talking about physical goods. Once you hit virtual, services and banking, we're in serious trouble on leaving the EU. And that's a ton of our economy and tax base.)

[The Legendary Shark]

I'm not sure that makes any difference, projects have always used materials and components imported from other countries right back to Stonehenge, the stone for which (provided it wasn't glacially transported) came from Wales.  The Trafford Park factory in Manchester started assembling Model T Fords in 1911, importing the major mechanical parts from Detroit and using local suppliers for bodies etc. Neither of these projects required the existence of the EU. With today's communication and transport technologies, such projects as car assembly are much easier than they were in the past. The only thing the EU contributes is taxes and tariffs to fund its own existence. Without the EU, things would be a lot smoother and businesses would be free to trade with whomever provided the best in what they need. As to the virtual world, the internet's only borders are those imposed by bodies such as the EU - again, remove the EU from the equation and it would run a lot smoother.

[IndigoPrime]

Without the EU, things would be a lot smoother

How?

[The Legendary Shark]

Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

[Jim_Campbell]

Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

You have literally no idea what you're talking about.

[The Legendary Shark]

No, you have no idea what I'm talking about. Big difference.