The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[L00b]

I do hope you keep in touch with us when you move to the promised land across the Channel, and tell us how wonderful it is being a grownup in Utopia.

It's not Utopia: it's a known quantity. Not the wholly uncertain one which the UK has become through political adventuring. It's far easier to make plans over timescales and execute them in such a context: there's a lot less unknown variables.

 

No crystal ball is ever harmed or even looked at in any of my posts, still less so about any of my life choices. Simply objective analysis, careful planning, then execution: I'm as far from a gambler as you could imagine.

 

Brexit will harm my career in any which way it eventually happens if I stay in the UK, that's unavoidable because the law is what it is and the legal tests and conditions under that law are what they are (and I'm completely ignoring the personal EU migrant angle here, and all the other more subjective issues, of which there are tons).

 

Brexit is going to happen, it was always going to happen once Parliament voted to approve Theresa May's triggerring Article 50.

 

Therefore I have to exit the UK before Brexit happens if I am to safeguard my career. And I have to safeguard my career because I'm the main breadwinner. So no choice.

 

Given that context, I might as well start early, to pick the best opportunities still about, before the bulk of the Brexodus gets underway.

 

Where are the best opportunities for my line of work? EU capitals and large cities jostling to hoover up City and other assorted UK talent. We don't like big capitals like Paris, so smaller; and we're not bothered about returning to Ireland permanently. So continent. Preferably with little established competition around, so Germany is out. Then job located, advertiser needs investigated, application made, interview secured and attended, job offerred at the interview, on the terms I was looking for because I knew what I was worth to them. All as planned and executed.

 

Smug? Arrogant? Nope. Nothing more than turning a life knock into an opportunity, methodically. And It's not bragging if you can back it up. Muhammad Ali said that.

IHope it's not the big mistake you think we are making..

I hope so for the sake of the 48% left behind.

 

But as my yardstick is factual (i.e. economic, not political) and is the UK such as it was economically pre-referendum, then looking at where it is now after some 18 months (relative to where it factually was, and where it could have been in view of intervening statistics and also recent GDP studies), it's already a big mistake.

 

One for which I can't see a way out for the UK, other than push through and try and bounce back on the other side. Whichever way you look at it, and even through the most optimistic goggles, that's not going to happen short- or even medium-term.

Edited December 13, 2017 by L00b
typos

[I1L2T3]

Loob is exactly right: it’s about a level of certainty.

 

I’ve said this before but my own company and our clients are planning for the next April-April financial year. March 2019 falls within it.

 

People need to think about that. As a business how do you plan for that.

[L00b]

Loob is exactly right: it’s about a level of certainty.

 

I’ve said this before but my own company and our clients are planning for the next April-April financial year. March 2019 falls within it.

 

People need to think about that. As a business how do you plan for that.

You factor the UK uncertainty as a fixed variable until March 2019 at the earliest (because a new GE before then would make things still more economically uncertain, not less - regardless of who wins it), and the UK government's current red lines as variables with limited motion ranges.

 

And then plan accordingly, in view of the rest of the variables including, importantly, the pragmatic timescales involved (e.g. application procedures to secure exploitation licenses elsewhere in the EU27, if that planning involves <new> EU offices).

 

Personally, when our business decided to (try to-) expand in an already-congested domestic market instead of opening an EU office (which I would have done, and gladly stayed with my current UK firm but 'from afar'), for me that was crunch time, at which I started answering headhunters approaches and seriouslty considering job opportunities. That was late this summer. Because I knew then, that there just wouldn't be enough time to reconsider and reboot the EU office project in 2018 for a pre-March 2019 opening.

Edited December 13, 2017 by L00b

[Car Boot]

The member of the fractionally larger voting block calls members of smalling group "conformist", probably fails to see the irony.

 

The vast majority of the politicians in the House of Commons and the House of Lords, along with high ranking careerist members of the civil service, the BBC and the Bank of England all wanted us to vote Remain.

 

And below them we have the decent, hard working people who voted to Leave.

 

It was truly a revolutionary act to go against the will, and might, of the establishment. To vote Leave was to be a non-conformist. To be a revolutionary opposing the will of the bankers and big business. Those considering voting to Leave were expected, nay, demanded to fall into line with the establishment. A cowering, quivering wreck after being assaulted by Project Fear. Voting to Leave was an act of heroism.

 

On the other hand, to vote Remain was a submissive act of obedience. Passively conforming to the will of the establishment. A safe option for those who desire the status-quo, and fear change. Even when it's change for the better.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2017 at 11:39 ----------

 

"More than half said their clients have had to increase wage rates to attract workers, while three-quarters of providers have themselves had to invest more money and resources into sourcing workers, so increasing the cost of labour supply."

 

Many people voted Leave to give the poor a pay rise.

 

Voting to Remain would have rewarded the bankers.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Car Boot

[tinfoilhat]

The vast majority of the politicians in the House of Commons and the House of Lords, along with high ranking careerist members of the civil service, the BBC and the Bank of England all wanted us to vote Remain.

 

And below them we have the decent, hard working people who voted to Leave.

 

It was truly a revolutionary act to go against the will, and might, of the establishment. To vote Leave was to be a non-conformist. To be a revolutionary opposing the will of the bankers and big business. Those considering voting to Leave were expected, nay, demanded to fall into line with the establishment. A cowering, quivering wreck after being assaulted by Project Fear. Voting to Leave was an act of heroism.

 

On the other hand, to vote Remain was a submissive act of obedience. Passively conforming to the will of the establishment. A safe option for those who desire the status-quo, and fear change. Even when it's change for the better.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2017 at 11:39 ----------

 

 

Many people voted Leave to give the poor a pay rise.

 

Voting to Remain would have rewarded the bankers.

 

How? How is better for the working man under a right wing Tory government without the eu to stop any excesses? How is it better for poorer communities who aren't going to get eu money any more for regeneration? You think the Tories are going to wheel barrow in millions to Cornwall or former mining communities?

 

EDIT people voted leave for PAY RISES!?!?!?

 

Has the cat stepped on your keyboard or something?

[melthebell]

How? How is better for the working man under a right wing Tory government without the eu to stop any excesses? How is it better for poorer communities who aren't going to get eu money any more for regeneration? You think the Tories are going to wheel barrow in millions to Cornwall or former mining communities?

 

EDIT people voted leave for PAY RISES!?!?!?

 

Has the cat stepped on your keyboard or something?

They really do think all these foriegners will go home, all this money we save on housing, pay and benefits will magically make everybody richer

[L00b]

They really do think all these foriegners will go home, all this money we save on housing, pay and benefits will magically make everybody richer

On the basis of umpteen post-referendum studies I have seen (all widely reported in the MSM, do your own Googling), many will, without a shadow of a doubt. Many already have, as a matter of fact.

 

The problem is, the UK won't be growing economically as much as a result (because collectively EU migrants were positive/net contributors, meaning collectively they generated more value out of their economical activity than they cost to sustain that activity), whereby the tax-and-expenditure balancing of No.11 may well end up a zero sum game (less expenditure on with housing, pay and benefits but also less tax income = equilibrium maintained, but at a lower level) post-2019 or 2021, with nobody in the UK better off.

 

Or worse, with everybody in the UK quite possibly worse-off, if more of the migrants generating high value and high tax income (e.g. doctors and other professionals) end up going in proportion, relative to migrants generating less value and lower tax income (e.g. warehouse operatives and hospitality personnel).

 

As to which situation will actually arise, I leave that to the future. The above is simply fact-based, objective conjecture.

Edited December 13, 2017 by L00b

[ENG601PM]

How is better for the working man under a right wing Tory government without the eu to stop any excesses?

I always thought that was what Her Majesties Loyal Opposition is for.

 

How is it better for poorer communities who aren't going to get eu money any more for regeneration? You think the Tories are going to wheel barrow in millions to Cornwall or former mining communities?

 

I hope we will agree that the world, and the Tories for that matter have moved on since the 80's. The current crop of Conservatives average just to the left of Blair's government. That said, they did have a track record of the sort of investment you suggest, including building the M62 in the 50's / 60's, to regenerating Liverpool in the 80's, up to the Northern Powerhouse and HS2/3 in the 10's.

 

It's silly and untrue to suggest that the UK needs protectionist EU intervention when there's a Conservative government. EU Objective One funding for South Yorkshire, Wales and Cornwall was under Labour.

 

In case you've forgotten, it's the UK's money to begin with, but with a huge EU bureaucracy and 3rd nation funding fee applied to before being returned. Future UK governments will be able to make funding decisions that suit domestic needs, not based on whether French Farmers are going to set Paris on fire.

[tinfoilhat]

I always thought that was what Her Majesties Loyal Opposition is for.

 

 

 

I hope we will agree that the world, and the Tories for that matter have moved on since the 80's. The current crop of Conservatives average just to the left of Blair's government. That said, they did have a track record of the sort of investment you suggest, including building the M62 in the 50's / 60's, to regenerating Liverpool in the 80's, up to the Northern Powerhouse and HS2/3 in the 10's.

 

It's silly and untrue to suggest that the UK needs protectionist EU intervention when there's a Conservative government. EU Objective One funding for South Yorkshire, Wales and Cornwall was under Labour.

 

In case you've forgotten, it's the UK's money to begin with, but with a huge EU bureaucracy and 3rd nation funding fee applied to before being returned. Future UK governments will be able to make funding decisions that suit domestic needs, not based on whether French Farmers are going to set Paris on fire.

 

It is the uks money, you're dead right. It will be spent (And I reckon it will be coming out of an ever smaller pot) by UK government's on whatever will give them greatest political traction ie former coalfields won't see any under Tory government's because they won't vote Tory and they won't get money under Labour because they'll vote Labour anyway - I've been quite consistent on this view and seen nothing to think it will change. The EU dish it out purely on where the GDP is lowest - UK government's won't bother.

[Bargepole23]

The vast majority of the politicians in the House of Commons and the House of Lords, along with high ranking careerist members of the civil service, the BBC and the Bank of England all wanted us to vote Remain.

 

And below them we have the decent, hard working people who voted to Leave.

 

It was truly a revolutionary act to go against the will, and might, of the establishment. To vote Leave was to be a non-conformist. To be a revolutionary opposing the will of the bankers and big business. Those considering voting to Leave were expected, nay, demanded to fall into line with the establishment. A cowering, quivering wreck after being assaulted by Project Fear. Voting to Leave was an act of heroism.

 

On the other hand, to vote Remain was a submissive act of obedience. Passively conforming to the will of the establishment. A safe option for those who desire the status-quo, and fear change. Even when it's change for the better.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2017 at 11:39 ----------

 

 

Many people voted Leave to give the poor a pay rise.

 

Voting to Remain would have rewarded the bankers.

 

And the equally decent, hardworking people who voted to Remain.