Brexit Encore

[Alan Klein]

Almost all short-term talk about prices is a waste of time. The prices of consumer goods depend primarily on production volumes. Remember when everyone predicted that we'd never have large numbers of  "full-frame" digicams. Priuses are expensive compared to Cruzes for similar reasons that Porsches are.

Remember when people said that introducing pollution controls in cars would destroy the industry. You don't hear them complaining about being able to breath the air in our cities now, do you?

And comparing technologies without fully accounting for historic subsidies of sunset industries and unaccounted-for "externalities" is basically propaganda. Koch Industries has loads of lobbyests on the payroll to propagate this tripe. Read past the con.

It's not what things cost that matters, it's what value you're getting. And it's also what it costs NOT to spend the money.

If you're dead set on an electric, I would lease for three years.  Buying and getting stuck later on with a much depreciated auto would not be "valuable".

[Manoli]

Both Alans and Robert ,
Are you aware of what thread you’re posting in ?

[faberryman]

If you're dead set on an electric, I would lease for three years.  Buying and getting stuck later on with a much depreciated auto would not be "valuable".

This might not have occurred to you, but the value of the car at the end of the term is factored into the lease rate.

[Alan Klein]

This might not have occurred to you, but the value of the car at the end of the term is factored into the lease rate.

Taken over to the the other climate thread.

[Robert Roaldi]

Both Alans and Robert ,
Are you aware of what thread you’re posting in ?

Quite right, I screwed up. My apologies. I'd better get that second cup of coffee soon.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Food shortages for several months...

That can only be a good thing, given the UK’s precipitous slide into Obesitystan (as if Britainistan is not enough).

[Rob C]

That can only be a good thing, given the UK’s precipitous slide into Obesitystan (as if Britainistan is not enough).

Careful; you could give the wrong impression of your sensibilities!

:-)

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

That can only be a good thing, given the UK’s precipitous slide into Obesitystan (as if Britainistan is not enough).

Food shortages welcome here:

[Chris Kern]

it . . . does look like preciously little actual preparation (contingency planning) is going on at the UK side (which may be a distorted view due to media coverage). Food shortages for several months, and disruptions of medical supplies are no laughing matter.

Maybe the UK media prefer to report about the political side of things, but the man in the street will have a different perception of how the career politicians have taken care of the store.

Ahhh, never underestimate the power of Fake News.

How is this for a scenario?  Boris takes the U.K. into a hard Brexit, triggering shortages in Britain and a Europe-wide recession, immediately loses an election, and from his perch as a resurrected newspaper columnist blames the new government for bungling his finely-engineered plans.

Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, Trump's trade wars trigger a collapse of the U.S. stock market and a continent-wide recession, Trump loses the election, and from his perch as the opiner-in-chief at the Fox cable news channel blames the newly-elected Democrats for destroying his booming economy.

Who knows, they may already be practicing their mantra: "Après nous, le déluge."  (Although in Trump's case, it's likely to come out as "Afternoon, in Duluth.")

[Rob C]

Ahhh, never underestimate the power of Fake News.

How is this for a scenario?  Boris takes the U.K. into a hard Brexit, triggering shortages in Britain and a Europe-wide recession, immediately loses an election, and from his perch as a resurrected newspaper columnist blames the new government for bungling his finely-engineered plans.

Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, Trump's trade wars trigger a collapse of the U.S. stock market and a continent-wide recession, Trump loses the election, and from his perch as the opiner-in-chief at the Fox cable news channel blames the newly-elected Democrats for destroying his booming economy.

Who knows, they may already be practicing their mantra: "Après nous, le déluge."  (Although in Trump's case, it's likely to come out as "Afternoon, in Duluth.")

I like that, though I fear it.

Rob

[Alan Klein]

Ahhh, never underestimate the power of Fake News.

How is this for a scenario?  Boris takes the U.K. into a hard Brexit, triggering shortages in Britain and a Europe-wide recession, immediately loses an election, and from his perch as a resurrected newspaper columnist blames the new government for bungling his finely-engineered plans.

Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, Trump's trade wars trigger a collapse of the U.S. stock market and a continent-wide recession, Trump loses the election, and from his perch as the opiner-in-chief at the Fox cable news channel blames the newly-elected Democrats for destroying his booming economy.

Who knows, they may already be practicing their mantra: "Après nous, le déluge."  (Although in Trump's case, it's likely to come out as "Afternoon, in Duluth.")

Is Germany moving towards recession the fault of Britain or America?  Europe is very capable of screwing things up all by themselves.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Boris takes the U.K. into a hard Brexit, triggering shortages in Britain and a Europe-wide recession...

Then why is Europe such a jerk?

Treating a departing member in a friendly and supportive manner, instead of purely punitive, would make other members more willing to stay, and potential new members more willing to join.

[Alan Klein]

Then why is Europe such a jerk?

Treating a departing member in a friendly and supportive manner, instead of purely punitive, would make other members more willing to stay, and potential new members more willing to join.

Europe might not be able to make a soft deal.  However, they still want to sell their German autos, French wines, and other stuff to British buyers.  So they have to make some accommodation.  Of course, America will be in a stronger position to make a good deal with Britain as they'll need us more.  And that might help us make a better trade deal with the rest of Europe.  Everyone could benefit.

[jeremyrh]

Then why is Europe such a jerk?

Treating a departing member in a friendly and supportive manner, instead of purely punitive, would make other members more willing to stay, and potential new members more willing to join.

Which is the "punitive" bit ?

[Rob C]

Don't let facts get in the way, but the UK exports are some 39% to Europe, and 11% to the USA.
As far as imports go, something like 48% is coming from Europe, and 7.5% is coming from the USA.

Looks like the UK needs Europe more than anybody else and the reverse is also true.
That's why Brexit was a bad plan, but apparently such is life and shit happens ...

Cheers,
Bart

That's why it's such a mess: they had no plan, just a bunch of slogans and a couple of rented buses. And heaps of money. That it worked tells you more than you need to know about the intelligence of the British masses, without whose blind assistance it would not have flown.

It was a sell based on fear of other languages, the promises of heaven on Earth, and the wonderful excuse of being, at last, visibly and socially able to latch onto Johnny Foreigner as the cause of one's own mistakes, ineptitude and lack of ability to cut it in life.

And irony of ironies: the fear factor is what those same people now accuse those with open eyes of using when they outline all the horrors that await after a no-deal exit from our best customers. How brilliant an idea: walk out on the best deal you had since Empire, in the dim hope that some benign, future president of the US will fall in love with you and think you are "worth it", as they say in the makeup ads; might even make you a new US state, as it were! How cute and ironic would that be?

Rob

[jeremyrh]

Don't let facts get in the way, but the UK exports are some 39% to Europe, and 11% to the USA.
As far as imports go, something like 48% is coming from Europe, and 7.5% is coming from the USA.

Looks like the UK needs Europe more than anybody else and the reverse is also true.
That's why Brexit was a bad plan, but apparently such is life and shit happens ...

Cheers,
Bart

I think Alan meant that UK will need USA more than USA will need UK, so they will be hoping to sell us chlorine chicken and ractopamine pork, as well as taking over the NHS.

[Rhossydd]

That it worked tells you more than you need to know about the intelligence of the British masses, without whose blind assistance it would not have flown.

Simplistic and wrong. The brexit vote was 'won' by the most careful, devious and dubious bit of advertising the world has seen.
Few bexiters ever seriously expected to 'win', they just intended to stir things up a bit. They're now in a terrible hole trying to deflect any blame about their lack of a plan and the chaos soon to ensue if they do leave onto anyone else.

[Rob C]

Simplistic and wrong. The brexit vote was 'won' by the most careful, devious and dubious bit of advertising the world has seen.
Few bexiters ever seriously expected to 'win', they just intended to stir things up a bit. They're now in a terrible hole trying to deflect any blame about their lack of a plan and the chaos soon to ensue if they do leave onto anyone else.

Simplistic, yes; wrong, no.

Sure it was clever advertising, but as with all ads they only work if the folks who see them buy into them. That's the reflection of the audience. An audience that takes its cues from social media, for crissakes, and from specifically socially aimed/targeted newspapers.

I can't quite understand why "just intended to stir things up a bit" makes any sense. Unless there is a focussed agenda, you don't spend shitloads of money just for the hell of it. Not in politics, where there is always an angle. Detonating a political atomic bomb is not the same thing as making a crowd in an airport, holding a few marches in the streets. Expectations of intended chaos - at the very least - are impossible to discount, and the display of cynicism by folks such as Boris are amazing: remember how he had two versions of a newspaper article prepared, quit or remain, right up to the last moment when he finally decided which camp to espouse? That's not stirring things up, that's jockeying for office. Then think of the Gove/Boris relationship if more internecine bloodletting is of interest.

I'm left wondering if the veiled bottom line has been to ruin Great Britain, break it up into little minor states, achieve personal political power, create supply monopolies for certain Brexit backers in the food and drinks industry or whether, indeed, we are simply dealing with a clique of very wealthy psychotics. Looking across the Atlantic makes me think that's no idle speculation; what can go down there can just as easily do so in the UK.

[Rob C]

Europe might not be able to make a soft deal.  However, they still want to sell their German autos, French wines, and other stuff to British buyers.  So they have to make some accommodation.  Of course, America will be in a stronger position to make a good deal with Britain as they'll need us more.  And that might help us make a better trade deal with the rest of Europe.  Everyone could benefit.

Where there is a winner there has to be a loser. No prizes fo guess who that will have to be, as you suggest.

Why would the UK seek that situation for itself?

One reason why the European model was working so well for us when inside the group: the playing field was understood and agreed, and all gained from it. Try to deal with a giant (the US), and you get what he deigns to toss your (little England) way. Anyone who ever ran a business knows where the power lies. As most surely does Mr T. He must be giving Mrs T. extra hugs to celebrate just how easily he has fooled so many people across the pond.

[Rhossydd]

Sure it was clever advertising, but as with all ads they only work if the folks who see them buy into them.

You really haven't grasped the width and depth of what's happened with brexit.

I'm left wondering if the veiled bottom line has been to ruin Great Britain, break it up into little minor states, achieve personal political power, create supply monopolies for certain Brexit backers in the food and drinks industry or whether, indeed, we are simply dealing with a clique of very wealthy psychotics.

The bigger picture is seen when you look at the funding, it's not about breaking up the UK, that's just the consequential damage. It's more about damaging the EU and their economic and social power.