Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Brits are not expecting the government to handle the tariffs well – politicalbetting.com

1246

Comments

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,965
    I have thought for a while that James O'Brexit used PB as source material. He's only gone and ripped off TSE's Ferris Bueller clip.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,485
    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    A broad hint from Gvt on R4 this morning that a draft deal is already heading towards the Mango Mussolini's desk

    Guaranteed it will be a shit sandwich deal
    I am also fairly suspicious of the deal. Especially with Sir Giveaway negotiating it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,220

    MattW said:

    Selebian said:



    MattW said:

    Selebian said:

    Completely offtopic, but just got sent a link to this clip from Tomorrow's World in 1989 on the home of 2020. https://www.bbc.co.uk/videos/cnk55nnnyxpo

    Really not bad - covers insulation an passive heat generation, smart heating/lighting controls and things like smart speakers. The biggest miss is the interior design!

    That's very interesting, thank-you. But I see no cat.

    It seems to overestimate automation, and embedded technology. Notes on passive are relevant, as the Passive Haus concept was around - the first official one was 1990.

    But Passive Haus is about passive, which is about making it need less technology except in very limited respects such as little or no heating.

    It's also presentation by - I think - the Christine McNulty who was visiting a conference at the Windows on the World Restaurant in the World Trade Centre on September 11th 2001.

    https://www.londonremembers.com/subjects/christine-mcnulty
    On absence of cats, it's a utopian vision of the future :tongue:
    Watching it, they also mention reduced use of energy to remove the need for fossil fuels *. And the material aerogel - which I did not know was quite that old.

    Nigel and Lee and Donald are twisting again like it was 1989, not last autumn.
    Aerogel (the developed, producible version) is believed to have come out of experiments to create foam type materials for holariums in nuclear weapons - sometime in the 50s.
    It shows how tricky a material it is, and it is just about 60% of the thickness of PIR per insulation value, and PIR is just about 60% of the thickness of polystyrene sheet.

    You can get aerogel as blankets for the last decade or so (iirc), and I know people who have used it in certain applications eg insulating external doors, which are often a cold bridge. You could even justify it on cost grounds if it makes your room a few inches bigger inside as floor area is one way of setting house value.

    Bit it's still not very load bearing.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135

    Woke up with a terrible thought this morning.

    What if Trump's tariffs work? From a US POV I mean. He'll be given a third term and a landslide.

    They won't. Murica voted Trump to do many things - a key one was make things cheaper.

    This makes everything more expensive.

    I touched on Vietnam. Mega tariff on Nikes makes the Nikes more expensive. Or Nike could invest (as MAGA won't let the government do it) to build factories and train workers and create supply chains to make Nikes in Murica. Which makes Nikes more expensive.

    Any way you cut this, Americans will be paying more. In many cases, a lot more.

    This only works for him if the propaganda ministry persuades Muricans that paying more is patriotic because The Whole World hates them. Or the simpler option which is simply pass an EO removing the need for further meaningful elections in this time of National Emergency.
    Here is where Trump might accidentally have a point, even if it is not the point he thinks he has.

    In traditional Adam Smith capitalism, everyone benefits from free trade. Vietnam gets investment and jobs. America gets cheap trainers.

    But that is not what happens because Nike captures most of the profit. Americans still have to pay hundreds of dollars and Vietnamese workers are paid peanuts. Neither group gets the benefit promised by their economics textbooks.
    Advertising makes capitalism less efficient and should be prohibited. Discuss.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    Yet, for some reason, British GDP per capita has since 2010 (ie since before the Brexit debate, referendum campaign, result and aftermath) to date grown by as much or more than the Eurozone has.

    So those "loads" of British producers are simply not showing up in the economic data at all. Unless for some unsubstantiated reason you think there's reason to believe that in the counterfactual where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown even more than the Eurozone - in which case I beg the question: why?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,009
    glw said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    That's a very narrow view of what is going on. Starmer can't afford to pick a fight with Trump as he's one of the few leaders who seems to have some influence on Trump when it comes to Ukraine. Europe needs at least one person who can stop Trump throwing in the towel and handing Ukraine to Russia. I think Starmer is doing a pretty good job all things considered.
    Utter bollocks, another idiot with a bad dose of Trumpitis
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,009

    malcolmg said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It's also a good day at the office for Brexit.

    Bollocks

    Brexit cost the UK economy 10 times as much as 'only having 10% tariffs instead of 20%' saves
    There is no doubt this is a positive for Brexit and certainly will make the case to rejoin much harder to make

    However, there is a real opportunity for an exciting and new arrangement with countries across the globe coming together in a new and wider security and trading association

    The question to be asked is are today's politicians and leaders capable of delivering such a opportunity?
    How could anyone possibly think this is a brexit benefit, bit like you only getting one leg cut off and saying it was beneficial as I have one left. madness, almost as crazy as Trumpitis.
    In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

    It'd be better to not have any tariffs, but since they're happening whether we like it or not, 10% is absolutely better than 20%.

    Indeed it gives us a competitive advantage.
    they walk our streets, how can people like you be so dumb and survive.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    malcolmg said:

    glw said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    That's a very narrow view of what is going on. Starmer can't afford to pick a fight with Trump as he's one of the few leaders who seems to have some influence on Trump when it comes to Ukraine. Europe needs at least one person who can stop Trump throwing in the towel and handing Ukraine to Russia. I think Starmer is doing a pretty good job all things considered.
    Utter bollocks, another idiot with a bad dose of Trumpitis
    Two things can be true simultaneously.

    1: Trump is a deranged, dreadful, awful leader whom America should not have foisted upon the world.

    2: America has foisted Trump upon the world, so he needs to be handled as best as we can manage.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135
    Question for the day: Should I order something from the US today, before retaliatory tariffs, or buy European as my contribution to the [trade] war effort?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,009

    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    A broad hint from Gvt on R4 this morning that a draft deal is already heading towards the Mango Mussolini's desk

    Guaranteed it will be a shit sandwich deal
    I am also fairly suspicious of the deal. Especially with Sir Giveaway negotiating it.
    For sure ,will be we give them £20 and they give us a £10 and a chlorinated chicken, back from these clowns.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It's also a good day at the office for Brexit.

    Bollocks

    Brexit cost the UK economy 10 times as much as 'only having 10% tariffs instead of 20%' saves
    There is no doubt this is a positive for Brexit and certainly will make the case to rejoin much harder to make

    However, there is a real opportunity for an exciting and new arrangement with countries across the globe coming together in a new and wider security and trading association

    The question to be asked is are today's politicians and leaders capable of delivering such a opportunity?
    How could anyone possibly think this is a brexit benefit, bit like you only getting one leg cut off and saying it was beneficial as I have one left. madness, almost as crazy as Trumpitis.
    In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

    It'd be better to not have any tariffs, but since they're happening whether we like it or not, 10% is absolutely better than 20%.

    Indeed it gives us a competitive advantage.
    they walk our streets, how can people like you be so dumb and survive.
    You're the dumb one if you think that suffering double the harm is better than half the harm, just because you'd prefer no harm.

    I'd prefer not to get injured, but if I am hurt I'd rather lose one pint of blood than two. That doesn't mean I'm eager to lose a pint of blood any time soon, but if something were to happen outside my control, I'd prefer a lesser harm than a greater one.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,696

    Question for the day: Should I order something from the US today, before retaliatory tariffs, or buy European as my contribution to the [trade] war effort?

    Surely buying war games material from the US counts as defence procurement and you should be decoupling. Who knows, the Americans may have a kill switch.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,616
    Scott_xP said:

    @implausibleblog

    Sky News, "Ireland now has a 20% tariff"

    "Northern Ireland has a 10% tariff"

    "That is going to make the Windsor framework even harder to implement"

    Yay, Brexit!

    https://x.com/implausibleblog/status/1907544682680156324

    Indeed. We have a comparative advantage and will no doubt have to figure out how to solve the wrinkle. But it’s up to the EU to make a proposal as they are the ones with the issue and let’s see what they offer us.

    If they decide to impose trade barriers on the UK because of Trump’s actions that would be … foolish
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,183
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @implausibleblog

    Sky News, "Ireland now has a 20% tariff"

    "Northern Ireland has a 10% tariff"

    "That is going to make the Windsor framework even harder to implement"

    Yay, Brexit!

    https://x.com/implausibleblog/status/1907544682680156324

    That sound like a trading opportunity for the Northern Irish.
    And might push Ireland out of the customs union, which I have long thought was the obvious end game.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,027

    Scott_xP said:

    You are fighting yesterday's battles

    You are trying to spin yesterday's crushing defeat as a glorious victory

    Brexit looks as dumb today as it did yesterday, and will continue to do so
    Remoaners are always speciously pointing to the perceived lack of 'Brexit benefits' as if Brexit was meant to be an instant pay cheque, not a freedom that requires actual use to be enjoyed.

    Well, by happy coincidence, here you go. Just by being outside the EU, tariffs on our exports to the US are halved vs. those being levied on those from the bloc. And it's happened regardless of how shit the British Government is. You're welcome.
    I think you are making the mistake of assuming that what ever was said last night has any sort of long-term permanence.

    The moment Trump wants to bully the UK into doing something he is going to threaten to increase our tariffs to 25%. If that happens would you admit that the "benefit" of Brexit has disappeared overnight?
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 900

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Scott_xP said:

    True, but as I've said, the point still stands.

    The point being that Brexit was an economic disaster, and "only 10%" doesn't even begin to make up for it
    No it wasn't Scott. Covid was an economic disaster. The Ukraine war was an economic disaster. Trumponomics might well be an economic disaster, Brexit was an invisible blip by comparison. My expectation is still that it will be a long-term positive, as I think there is a risk of the European economy going through some pretty turbulent times, but either way it is small beer compared to three other economic disasters that have happened since.

    Seeing Brexit in isolation from the Trump tariffs, Covid and the Ukraine war makes no sense. Leaving the EU left us more exposed to the consequences of all three.

    Hm. But I'd argue we dealt with Covid better than the EU - partly because of Brexit - and I'd argue that, partly as a result of Brexit, we were able to respond more decisively to Ukraine: had we still been a member of the EU, it would have been much more difficult to act unilaterally and any EU response would have been hindered by the anchor of Hungary (and then Slovakia). And we're surely in a better place to respond to Trumponomics outside the EU than in it?
    Indeed.

    Far from making us "exposed", Brexit has done what it was supposed to and made us more nimble and able to act independently.

    It has also removed the EU security blanket and ensured fully accountability for the Government of the day. Of whom we've already evicted one and their replacement know they are fully accountable and can be evicted too.

    Had we still been in the EU we'd be facing higher tariffs due to German exports and be expected to have a "unified" rather than individual response.
    They should have put that on the side of the bus.

    "In the event a lunatic starts a global trade war based on a ratio he copied from Wikipedia, massive trade friction with our nearest neighbours will be mitigated somewhat because our trade deficit on goods with the US will continue to be rubbish..."
    Still better than anything Remain could have written by way of a persuasive argument...
    Yes, sadly "we won't be worse off" isn't exciting
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,925
    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    Both markets are important
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,837
    I don't agree with Trump about anything, but he has a gift for making people ask novel questions.

    The tariff discussion, SFAICS, is being conducted along odd lines. It's as if until yesterday global world trade was conducted in a market free in every respect, according to well regulated standards and with a workforce of delighted and well paid billions, and that a perfected world, run according to the two simple Smith/Ricardo rules - The Invisible Hand and The Law of Comparative Advantage - has just been trashed.

    I don't think any of this (slightly exaggerated) account is true. But I don't know where any different truth lies.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    Yet, for some reason, British GDP per capita has since 2010 (ie since before the Brexit debate, referendum campaign, result and aftermath) to date grown by as much or more than the Eurozone has.

    So those "loads" of British producers are simply not showing up in the economic data at all. Unless for some unsubstantiated reason you think there's reason to believe that in the counterfactual where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown even more than the Eurozone - in which case I beg the question: why?
    I'm not sure how the metric you've replied with is relevant to the point I made.

    There are goods from British producers that I can't buy in the EU, because of Brexit. Your statistics do not magic that away.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    OllyT said:

    Scott_xP said:

    You are fighting yesterday's battles

    You are trying to spin yesterday's crushing defeat as a glorious victory

    Brexit looks as dumb today as it did yesterday, and will continue to do so
    Remoaners are always speciously pointing to the perceived lack of 'Brexit benefits' as if Brexit was meant to be an instant pay cheque, not a freedom that requires actual use to be enjoyed.

    Well, by happy coincidence, here you go. Just by being outside the EU, tariffs on our exports to the US are halved vs. those being levied on those from the bloc. And it's happened regardless of how shit the British Government is. You're welcome.
    I think you are making the mistake of assuming that what ever was said last night has any sort of long-term permanence.

    The moment Trump wants to bully the UK into doing something he is going to threaten to increase our tariffs to 25%. If that happens would you admit that the "benefit" of Brexit has disappeared overnight?
    The "benefit" of Brexit is that we can set policies that match our data and our needs, and that we have a government elected at the ballot box that is accountable for those policies and that we can evict if we aren't happy with their performance.

    That benefit is never going away. The past 24 hours have revealed that benefit again, in a clear form, not for the first and not for the last time.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 900
    OllyT said:

    Scott_xP said:

    You are fighting yesterday's battles

    You are trying to spin yesterday's crushing defeat as a glorious victory

    Brexit looks as dumb today as it did yesterday, and will continue to do so
    Remoaners are always speciously pointing to the perceived lack of 'Brexit benefits' as if Brexit was meant to be an instant pay cheque, not a freedom that requires actual use to be enjoyed.

    Well, by happy coincidence, here you go. Just by being outside the EU, tariffs on our exports to the US are halved vs. those being levied on those from the bloc. And it's happened regardless of how shit the British Government is. You're welcome.
    I think you are making the mistake of assuming that what ever was said last night has any sort of long-term permanence.

    The moment Trump wants to bully the UK into doing something he is going to threaten to increase our tariffs to 25%. If that happens would you admit that the "benefit" of Brexit has disappeared overnight?
    Quite, he's an incontinent nutter, he's likely to piss all over someone else any second
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    Yet, for some reason, British GDP per capita has since 2010 (ie since before the Brexit debate, referendum campaign, result and aftermath) to date grown by as much or more than the Eurozone has.

    So those "loads" of British producers are simply not showing up in the economic data at all. Unless for some unsubstantiated reason you think there's reason to believe that in the counterfactual where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown even more than the Eurozone - in which case I beg the question: why?
    I'm not sure how the metric you've replied with is relevant to the point I made.

    There are goods from British producers that I can't buy in the EU, because of Brexit. Your statistics do not magic that away.
    Oh well.

    We have a comprehensive zero tariff agreement with the EU and any such goods that you talk about are so inconsequential in aggregate that on a macroeconomic level they don't even register on the statistic I mentioned.

    On a micro level you may be irritated. That micro irritation needs to be weighed against all the other benefits such as improved democratic accountability, improved ability to set individualised policies and not paying membership fees etc, etc that we get from not being members.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,220
    edited April 3
    I haven't said Good Morning (Afternoon).

    Bad News: The cycle and mobility aid bus service proposal for the Silvertown Tunnel does not cope with normal mobility aids. Gah. Cockups continue. Is this being run by the goons of Network Rail?

    Weirdly, aiui it does not even meet all the normal standards for TFL vehicles. Which is beyond nuts. As far as I can see there is only one ramp - so people who cannot turn round on board have to reverse off, down the ramp. And it can't "kneel" and extend the ramp at the same time, so it's steeper than necessary.

    Technical assessment by my favourite disabled charity, Wheels for Wellbeing:
    https://wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/silvertown-tunnel-cycle-bus-access-information/

    More encouraging. The story of a chap who has a rare (20 people worldwide) condition called MDP Syndrome, who is due a double amputation, and doing a "Goodbye Legs" sponsored ride.

    His mobility aids are a Brompton and a Clip-on E-cycle which goes on his manual wheelchair. The latter cost £3-5k each and need to be on motability. Worth a read.

    https://wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/goodbye-legs-ride/
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    Yet, for some reason, British GDP per capita has since 2010 (ie since before the Brexit debate, referendum campaign, result and aftermath) to date grown by as much or more than the Eurozone has.

    So those "loads" of British producers are simply not showing up in the economic data at all. Unless for some unsubstantiated reason you think there's reason to believe that in the counterfactual where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown even more than the Eurozone - in which case I beg the question: why?
    I'm not sure how the metric you've replied with is relevant to the point I made.

    There are goods from British producers that I can't buy in the EU, because of Brexit. Your statistics do not magic that away.
    Oh well.

    We have a comprehensive zero tariff agreement with the EU and any such goods that you talk about are so inconsequential in aggregate that on a macroeconomic level they don't even register on the statistic I mentioned.

    On a micro level you may be irritated. That micro irritation needs to be weighed against all the other benefits such as improved democratic accountability, improved ability to set individualised policies and not paying membership fees etc, etc that we get from not being members.
    It's that sort of attitude - only the economic statistics matter, individuals are irrelevant - that led to some of the worst horrors of Soviet Communism.

    Strange attitude for a freedom-loving libertarian, but you do you, as the kids say.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,268
    What's to stop companies looking to tariff shop given the arbitrary and vastly differing tariff levels?

    EU companies set up UK plc and export goods for a marginal fee (let's say 0.5%), UK plc puts a stamp on the box as our value add and then exports to the US at 10% tariff rather than the EU's 20%?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,811

    I have thought for a while that James O'Brexit used PB as source material. He's only gone and ripped off TSE's Ferris Bueller clip.

    Oil! I posted it first...

    https://bsky.app/profile/foxinsoxuk.bsky.social/post/3lluf326xak2d
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,696
    In slightly happier news I think we could get close to an all time solar generation record today, despite it only being April.

    Wall to wall across virtually the entire country, and already 9.5gw just under an hour before peak insolation. Yesterday peaked around 10.7 I think.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    edited April 3

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    Yet, for some reason, British GDP per capita has since 2010 (ie since before the Brexit debate, referendum campaign, result and aftermath) to date grown by as much or more than the Eurozone has.

    So those "loads" of British producers are simply not showing up in the economic data at all. Unless for some unsubstantiated reason you think there's reason to believe that in the counterfactual where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown even more than the Eurozone - in which case I beg the question: why?
    I'm not sure how the metric you've replied with is relevant to the point I made.

    There are goods from British producers that I can't buy in the EU, because of Brexit. Your statistics do not magic that away.
    Oh well.

    We have a comprehensive zero tariff agreement with the EU and any such goods that you talk about are so inconsequential in aggregate that on a macroeconomic level they don't even register on the statistic I mentioned.

    On a micro level you may be irritated. That micro irritation needs to be weighed against all the other benefits such as improved democratic accountability, improved ability to set individualised policies and not paying membership fees etc, etc that we get from not being members.
    It's that sort of attitude - only the economic statistics matter, individuals are irrelevant - that led to some of the worst horrors of Soviet Communism.

    Strange attitude for a freedom-loving libertarian, but you do you, as the kids say.
    Quite the contrary, as a freedom-loving libertarian I want to have the freedom to vote for policies that suit us as a country and evict the government if they don't follow those policies. Democracy matters, something that the Soviets lacked.

    And something the EU is not very good at either. It has elections, but no proper demos or democratic accountability. Liberal democracy is about more than the mere act of holding elections.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,925
    In replying to Stella Creasy in the Commons just now Jonathan Reynolds said that he feels very strongly it is not a choice between the US and the EU, as they are two key long term trading and security partners
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,220
    Foxy said:

    I have thought for a while that James O'Brexit used PB as source material. He's only gone and ripped off TSE's Ferris Bueller clip.

    Oil! I posted it first...

    https://bsky.app/profile/foxinsoxuk.bsky.social/post/3lluf326xak2d
    If this is James O'Brien, can somebody tell him to start talking about the inaccessible Silvertown Tunnel disabled people bus !
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,696
    edited April 3
    Ratters said:

    What's to stop companies looking to tariff shop given the arbitrary and vastly differing tariff levels?

    EU companies set up UK plc and export goods for a marginal fee (let's say 0.5%), UK plc puts a stamp on the box as our value add and then exports to the US at 10% tariff rather than the EU's 20%?

    Rules of origin are somewhat more demanding than that.

    However, using the same flow (but with no need for the UK) you can benefit from the first sale for export rule.

    European manufacturing company sells dutiable goods at cost-plus to European trading / HQ company (in EU or UK or wherever), which then sells to US distributor at resale minus and retains most system profit.

    The first sale - from manufacturer to trading company - is the one that sets the customs valuation.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,814
    edited April 3

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    The productivity cost of Brexit per OBR is 4% of yearly GDP, according with other economists of up to 6% hit, which maps to around £100 billion a year. The potential US tariff savings against the EU is about $6 billion a year, an order of magnitude less. And this implies the EU/UK tariff difference will be permanent, which is unlikely, while the Brexit cost obviously is permanent.

    I'm in favour of the government working to minimise the US tariff hit, as long as it doesn't make concessions that ignore the bigger picture.
    That productivity cost data is BS.

    Taking 2010 as the baseline (so deliberately before Brexit was coined as a term, the referendum, or it's aftermath) the UK has per capita grown by as much/more than the Eurozone.

    The idea that in the counterfactual universe where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown by even more than the Eurozone is just unsubstantiated BS. There is no evidence or reason to believe it.

    Those projections come from the same Garbage In, Garbage Out modelling that forecast immediate recession and millions unemployed if we voted to Leave.
    Brexit was economically illiterate, as your comment here so clearly demonstrates, just as Trump's tariffs are also economically illiterate. The only good thing about the tariffs is that they can be rescinded, as they probably will be eventually, while we're stuck with Brexit permanently.
    It was only economically illiterate based upon flawed modelling that claimed it was. Modelling whose outcome does not match reality.

    Real life data, as I demonstrated, has confounded the modelling.
    If you introduce trade friction and additional costs that inevitably reduces trade and investment, with a consequent real reduction in wealth. What the modelling does is to put a value on the loss of productivity, not that there is one - we know that. Furthermore there modelling shows the reduction in wealth is significant but manageable. So it comes down to, do the upsides whatever they are, which supporters of Brexit are strangely incapable of articulating, outweigh the many costs including the cost to trade?

    Supporters of Brexit would have a lot more credibility if they accepted basic economic realities and the real costs of Brexit, but focused on whatever the advantages are. The bullshit isn't coming from the economists here.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,997
    Considering how Trump lurches from one set of tariffs to another, how can any company plan to relocate factories?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,696

    In replying to Stella Creasy in the Commons just now Jonathan Reynolds said that he feels very strongly it is not a choice between the US and the EU, as they are two key long term trading and security partners

    MRD applies
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135
    Ratters said:

    What's to stop companies looking to tariff shop given the arbitrary and vastly differing tariff levels?

    EU companies set up UK plc and export goods for a marginal fee (let's say 0.5%), UK plc puts a stamp on the box as our value add and then exports to the US at 10% tariff rather than the EU's 20%?

    That's kinda why tariff/customs law becomes very complicated with rules for country of origin, and so small companies get completely banjaxed, even if there's nominally a zero tariff. Companies will have to provide copious paperwork tracking what percentage of the work/material/value of the good originated in Britain.

    Otherwise all tariff regimes that applied different tariffs to different countries would already have collapsed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,972
    algarkirk said:

    I don't agree with Trump about anything, but he has a gift for making people ask novel questions...

    "Oh, look, Trump just smashed another global system; how do we rebuild it ?" hasn't been a novel question for a while, unfortunately.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,411
    Ratters said:

    What's to stop companies looking to tariff shop given the arbitrary and vastly differing tariff levels?

    EU companies set up UK plc and export goods for a marginal fee (let's say 0.5%), UK plc puts a stamp on the box as our value add and then exports to the US at 10% tariff rather than the EU's 20%?

    Good afternoon everyone.
    Well I saw the list I assumed that something like this would be almost immediately in place in SE Asia.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,997

    Considering how Trump lurches from one set of tariffs to another, how can any company plan to relocate factories?

    Which is the exact problem with government by executive order. At least acts of Congress have a degree of permanence.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,485
    edited April 3

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    The subject of trade frictions with the EU is an interesting one, despite having nothing to do with the current topic.

    It is understood, and understandable, that the EU aren't going to give us frictionless trade any more. However, I think it was and is down to our own Government to take steps to ameliorate these issues.

    We had a transition period - did we use it to take every possible measure to ensure British exporters were ready for the new requirements? OK, if they want a biography for every whelk, how do we deliver that? Is there a digital solution? Could we use QR codes? Is Ai now a solution? We should have aimed at becoming a regulation-meeting superpower ‐ which would also have helped companies get ready to export elsewhere.

    Failing those changes, if other issues lay with deliberate or just happenstantial obstructionism on the part of EU customs officials, how could we have supported them? We seem OK with vainly chucking hundreds of millions at the French to fail to deal with boat people. How about buying French customs officials new equipment to speed their import processes?

    Failing ALL that, if it was still impossible for a few companies to export to the EU profitably, how did we/could we support those companies to find alternative markets - possibly by exporting elsewhere but more likely by displacing an import. This would seem particularly helpful in the case of British fish and British lamb ‐ neither of which we eat enough of within our national diet.

    Instead, our authorities, in some cases wilfully in my view, especially in Scotland, just threw their hands up and offered hypocritical tea and sympathy.

    So I don't accept that being an independent country is impossible due to EU trade frictions - indeed it is a return to the status quo. If you disagree, look at how saturated we are in Indian imports ‐ not just in textiles but in foods. They seem to manage and don't wish to join the EU to make their problems go away.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,811
    In even more bonkers news Trump's team have confirmed that the tariffs were selected on the basis of size of the trade deficit.

    https://bsky.app/profile/duncanweldon.bsky.social/post/3llvbg7u3cs27

    “To conceptualize reciprocal tariffs, the tariff rates that would drive bilateral trade deficits to zero were computed”

    ustr.gov/issue-areas/...

    Even more weirdly the tariffs seem to have been calculated on the basis of Internet domain rather than national border (hence Svalbard, BIOT and the penguin tax).

    https://bsky.app/profile/vfxgordon.bsky.social/post/3llvdeah2x22o


    do they explain why the tariffs are broken down by internet domain and not by country? Because I'd like to hear that excuse.

    Most of the places at the bottom of this list are not individual countries, but all of them have their own top level internet domain.

    (.hm is the Penguins btw)

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,637
    Foxy said:

    do they explain why the tariffs are broken down by internet domain and not by country? Because I'd like to hear that excuse.

    Because the policy was written by an AI engine, trained on the Internet, not the Real World
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,384
    Utterly OT but posting this at a later time (and a couple of days later) for people who aren't on early in the morning:

    Episode 14 of the Undercutters podcast is out, looking ahead to the Japanese Grand Prix:

    Podbean: https://undercutters.podbean.com/e/f1-2025-japanese-grand-prix-preview-and-predictions/

    Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/3vDvE8kHodqc8fXGckW77P

    Amazon: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/bcfe213b-55fb-408a-a823-dc6693ee9f78/episodes/51f955ff-feed-4fda-b8c9-834a39b846b8/undercutters---f1-podcast-f1-2025-japanese-grand-prix-preview-and-predictions

    Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/f1-2025-japanese-grand-prix-preview-and-predictions/id1786574257?i=1000701688081

    Transcript: https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2025/04/f1-2025-japanese-grand-prix-preview-and.html


    The race reviews from 2023 and 2024 had an interesting coincidence: both featured a driver or two making early pit stops only to lose out late on as those on fresher rubber got ahead. I suspect Racing Bulls will suffer as they've been weak on strategy so far. It might also be something to bear in mind if you live live betting (I tend not to, especially at 6am).
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,981
    Foxy said:

    In even more bonkers news Trump's team have confirmed that the tariffs were selected on the basis of size of the trade deficit.

    https://bsky.app/profile/duncanweldon.bsky.social/post/3llvbg7u3cs27

    “To conceptualize reciprocal tariffs, the tariff rates that would drive bilateral trade deficits to zero were computed”

    ustr.gov/issue-areas/...

    Even more weirdly the tariffs seem to have been calculated on the basis of Internet domain rather than national border (hence Svalbard, BIOT and the penguin tax).

    https://bsky.app/profile/vfxgordon.bsky.social/post/3llvdeah2x22o


    do they explain why the tariffs are broken down by internet domain and not by country? Because I'd like to hear that excuse.

    Most of the places at the bottom of this list are not individual countries, but all of them have their own top level internet domain.

    (.hm is the Penguins btw)

    Wtf
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,925
    TimS said:

    In slightly happier news I think we could get close to an all time solar generation record today, despite it only being April.

    Wall to wall across virtually the entire country, and already 9.5gw just under an hour before peak insolation. Yesterday peaked around 10.7 I think.

    Ours are working well at present
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,925
    TimS said:

    In replying to Stella Creasy in the Commons just now Jonathan Reynolds said that he feels very strongly it is not a choice between the US and the EU, as they are two key long term trading and security partners

    MRD applies
    Forgive me but what is MRD ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,314
    edited April 3
    Foxy said:

    In even more bonkers news Trump's team have confirmed that the tariffs were selected on the basis of size of the trade deficit.

    https://bsky.app/profile/duncanweldon.bsky.social/post/3llvbg7u3cs27

    “To conceptualize reciprocal tariffs, the tariff rates that would drive bilateral trade deficits to zero were computed”

    ustr.gov/issue-areas/...

    Even more weirdly the tariffs seem to have been calculated on the basis of Internet domain rather than national border (hence Svalbard, BIOT and the penguin tax).

    https://bsky.app/profile/vfxgordon.bsky.social/post/3llvdeah2x22o


    do they explain why the tariffs are broken down by internet domain and not by country? Because I'd like to hear that excuse.

    Most of the places at the bottom of this list are not individual countries, but all of them have their own top level internet domain.

    (.hm is the Penguins btw)

    Svalbard isn’t part of the EEA, unlike Norway. I wonder if there are separate customs arrangements for the other listed territories.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,485
    You know actually, with the confusion around these tariff policies, there is something of a possibility that a skilled Government could get the British car tariff down to the standard 10% too.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,637

    You know actually, with the confusion around these tariff policies, there is something of a possibility that a skilled Government could get the British car tariff down to the standard 10% too.

    Nope

    Even if Trump agreed to it (he wouldn't) he wouldn't stick to it

    Israel dropped their import tariffs to 0% and still got whacked

    You can't reason with a lunatic
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,306
    edited April 3
    TimS said:

    In slightly happier news I think we could get close to an all time solar generation record today, despite it only being April.

    Wall to wall across virtually the entire country, and already 9.5gw just under an hour before peak insolation. Yesterday peaked around 10.7 I think.

    Talking of the sun and stars - I’ve just been to see one of the largest sextants ever built: alias the “Observatory of Ulugh Beg”, warmaker turned astronomer - constructed in the 15th century and only rediscovered in 1908. It is ENORMOUS, and now buried deep and big underground

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulugh_Beg_Observatory


    Quite mindblowing, this place. So many wonders. Islamic Samarkand was the Silicon Valley of the medieval world
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,837

    Considering how Trump lurches from one set of tariffs to another, how can any company plan to relocate factories?

    In his weird and boring speech yesterday Trump went on and on about literally trillions of investments from big players into the USA. Does anyone know if it's true or if he made it up?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,485
    OllyT said:

    Scott_xP said:

    You are fighting yesterday's battles

    You are trying to spin yesterday's crushing defeat as a glorious victory

    Brexit looks as dumb today as it did yesterday, and will continue to do so
    Remoaners are always speciously pointing to the perceived lack of 'Brexit benefits' as if Brexit was meant to be an instant pay cheque, not a freedom that requires actual use to be enjoyed.

    Well, by happy coincidence, here you go. Just by being outside the EU, tariffs on our exports to the US are halved vs. those being levied on those from the bloc. And it's happened regardless of how shit the British Government is. You're welcome.
    I think you are making the mistake of assuming that what ever was said last night has any sort of long-term permanence.

    The moment Trump wants to bully the UK into doing something he is going to threaten to increase our tariffs to 25%. If that happens would you admit that the "benefit" of Brexit has disappeared overnight?
    If it's higher than the EU, of course the benefit would have disappeared.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,637


    Julian Jessop
    @julianHjessop
    ·
    1h
    FYI, here's the economic 'justification' for 'reciprocal tariffs' 👇

    TL;DR - the US administration assumes that in the absence of trade barriers, bilateral trade would always balance.

    I would expect someone with GCSE Economics to do better than this 🙄

    https://x.com/julianHjessop

    I said it earlier. Trump, and all of his advisors, are the dumbest people on Earth, who got rich by being lucky in the richest country on the planet.

    They are going to fuck it up in spectacular fashion, and never understand why it didn't work

    This is what happens when the entire court is composed of only those who swear fealty to the mad king.

    c.f. BoZo and his crew...
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    The productivity cost of Brexit per OBR is 4% of yearly GDP, according with other economists of up to 6% hit, which maps to around £100 billion a year. The potential US tariff savings against the EU is about $6 billion a year, an order of magnitude less. And this implies the EU/UK tariff difference will be permanent, which is unlikely, while the Brexit cost obviously is permanent.

    I'm in favour of the government working to minimise the US tariff hit, as long as it doesn't make concessions that ignore the bigger picture.
    That productivity cost data is BS.

    Taking 2010 as the baseline (so deliberately before Brexit was coined as a term, the referendum, or it's aftermath) the UK has per capita grown by as much/more than the Eurozone.

    The idea that in the counterfactual universe where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown by even more than the Eurozone is just unsubstantiated BS. There is no evidence or reason to believe it.

    Those projections come from the same Garbage In, Garbage Out modelling that forecast immediate recession and millions unemployed if we voted to Leave.
    Brexit was economically illiterate, as your comment here so clearly demonstrates, just as Trump's tariffs are also economically illiterate. The only good thing about the tariffs is that they can be rescinded, as they probably will be eventually, while we're stuck with Brexit permanently.
    It was only economically illiterate based upon flawed modelling that claimed it was. Modelling whose outcome does not match reality.

    Real life data, as I demonstrated, has confounded the modelling.
    If you introduce trade friction and additional costs that inevitably reduces trade and investment, with a consequent real reduction in wealth. What the modelling does is to put a value on the loss of productivity, not that there is one - we know that. Furthermore there modelling shows the reduction in wealth is significant but manageable. So it comes down to, do the upsides whatever they are, which supporters of Brexit are strangely incapable of articulating, outweigh the many costs including the cost to trade?

    Supporters of Brexit would have a lot more credibility if they accepted basic economic realities and the real costs of Brexit, but focused on whatever the advantages are. The bullshit isn't coming from the economists here.
    I've been quite explicit on what the advantage is: democratic accountability.

    Democracy matters and is about more than the mere act of holding elections. We elect a government in the UK and can hold that government to account if it enacts policies we object to.

    The same does not work in the EU, despite the existence of almost entirely meaningless European Elections there is no commensurate European demos, European Government or European accountability.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,225
    MattW said:

    I haven't said Good Morning (Afternoon).

    Bad News: The cycle and mobility aid bus service proposal for the Silvertown Tunnel does not cope with normal mobility aids. Gah. Cockups continue. Is this being run by the goons of Network Rail?

    Weirdly, aiui it does not even meet all the normal standards for TFL vehicles. Which is beyond nuts. As far as I can see there is only one ramp - so people who cannot turn round on board have to reverse off, down the ramp. And it can't "kneel" and extend the ramp at the same time, so it's steeper than necessary.

    Technical assessment by my favourite disabled charity, Wheels for Wellbeing:
    https://wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/silvertown-tunnel-cycle-bus-access-information/

    More encouraging. The story of a chap who has a rare (20 people worldwide) condition called MDP Syndrome, who is due a double amputation, and doing a "Goodbye Legs" sponsored ride.

    His mobility aids are a Brompton and a Clip-on E-cycle which goes on his manual wheelchair. The latter cost £3-5k each and need to be on motability. Worth a read.

    https://wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/goodbye-legs-ride/

    Cheeky question as I've just realised you might be a fount of knowledge here - I have some colleagues trying to recruit for a study of children and young people with disabilities and their mobility needs - do Wheels for Wellbeing have much contact with that younger group? Or do you know of other organisations that do?

    They're looking to interview young people (age 8-18) and also parents (of children any age up to 18) on experiences and difficulties with mobility, so need charity contacts for recruitment via social media, mailing lists etc. They're aware of Newlife and LimbBo, though I don't think they've had any luck getting in touch with the latter.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,637
    algarkirk said:

    Considering how Trump lurches from one set of tariffs to another, how can any company plan to relocate factories?

    In his weird and boring speech yesterday Trump went on and on about literally trillions of investments from big players into the USA. Does anyone know if it's true or if he made it up?
    Apple apparently committed to $500bn in US something, but given how badly they flamed out when they tried to build a single Mac model in the US it seems unlikely they are going to replicate the entire Asian supply chain for a single iPhone
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,961
    If anybody is wondering why the proposed new air fighter for the USA is called "F-47", the rumour is that it's because Trump II is the 47th POTUS.

    (facepalm)
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,961
    algarkirk said:

    I don't agree with Trump about anything, but he has a gift for making people ask novel questions.

    The tariff discussion, SFAICS, is being conducted along odd lines. It's as if until yesterday global world trade was conducted in a market free in every respect, according to well regulated standards and with a workforce of delighted and well paid billions, and that a perfected world, run according to the two simple Smith/Ricardo rules - The Invisible Hand and The Law of Comparative Advantage - has just been trashed.

    I don't think any of this (slightly exaggerated) account is true. But I don't know where any different truth lies.

    Stripping the value judgement words from your second sentence: no it's pretty much bang on.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,485
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    The productivity cost of Brexit per OBR is 4% of yearly GDP, according with other economists of up to 6% hit, which maps to around £100 billion a year. The potential US tariff savings against the EU is about $6 billion a year, an order of magnitude less. And this implies the EU/UK tariff difference will be permanent, which is unlikely, while the Brexit cost obviously is permanent.

    I'm in favour of the government working to minimise the US tariff hit, as long as it doesn't make concessions that ignore the bigger picture.
    That productivity cost data is BS.

    Taking 2010 as the baseline (so deliberately before Brexit was coined as a term, the referendum, or it's aftermath) the UK has per capita grown by as much/more than the Eurozone.

    The idea that in the counterfactual universe where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown by even more than the Eurozone is just unsubstantiated BS. There is no evidence or reason to believe it.

    Those projections come from the same Garbage In, Garbage Out modelling that forecast immediate recession and millions unemployed if we voted to Leave.
    Brexit was economically illiterate, as your comment here so clearly demonstrates, just as Trump's tariffs are also economically illiterate. The only good thing about the tariffs is that they can be rescinded, as they probably will be eventually, while we're stuck with Brexit permanently.
    It was only economically illiterate based upon flawed modelling that claimed it was. Modelling whose outcome does not match reality.

    Real life data, as I demonstrated, has confounded the modelling.
    If you introduce trade friction and additional costs that inevitably reduces trade and investment, with a consequent real reduction in wealth. What the modelling does is to put a value on the loss of productivity, not that there is one - we know that. Furthermore there modelling shows the reduction in wealth is significant but manageable. So it comes down to, do the upsides whatever they are, which supporters of Brexit are strangely incapable of articulating, outweigh the many costs including the cost to trade?

    Supporters of Brexit would have a lot more credibility if they accepted basic economic realities and the real costs of Brexit, but focused on whatever the advantages are. The bullshit isn't coming from the economists here.
    You might have a little more credibility yourself if you acknowledged for a kick off that there was a significant fiscal cost associated with EU membership, which we no longer pay, and which is far more tangible than any perceived loss from trade friction, given that it is entirely visible in the public accounts. The fact you've failed to do so and are farting on about "whatever they are" shows you are not debating in good faith.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    viewcode said:

    If anybody is wondering why the proposed new air fighter for the USA is called "F-47", the rumour is that it's because Trump II is the 47th POTUS.

    (facepalm)

    He was also President number 45.

    So P45 for Trump seems better.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,306
    I am happy to report that the greatest work of Islamic astronomy, Ulugh Beg’s Zij il-Sultani - an amazing “book of stars”…. is now kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England

    I reassured our Uzbek guide, Bobur, that this is the best place for it
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,961
    edited April 3

    TimS said:

    In replying to Stella Creasy in the Commons just now Jonathan Reynolds said that he feels very strongly it is not a choice between the US and the EU, as they are two key long term trading and security partners

    MRD applies
    Forgive me but what is MRD ?
    @Big_G_NorthWales, "MRDA" = "Mandy Rice-Davies Applies".

    Mandy Rice-Davies was a 1960's model and showgirl famous for saying "well he would say that, wouldn't he" (technically "well he would, wouldn't he") in court. "MRDA" is a shorthand used to point out that the person would say a thing because of his/her bias.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,151
    Leon said:

    I am happy to report that the greatest work of Islamic astronomy, Ulugh Beg’s Zij il-Sultani - an amazing “book of stars”…. is now kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England

    I reassured our Uzbek guide, Bobur, that this is the best place for it

    I'm definitely visiting Uzbekistan in the next 12 months. Probably need a visa I assume.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,745
    I'm quite sure that Starmer is sounding out leaders in the EU and elsewhere about how to respond to Trump, and that Mandelson is seeking to grease palms in the White House - these two things aren't contradictory.

    Personally, I find it rather refreshing that, as he tiptoes through the minefield, Starmer doesn't give a running commentary to the press, preferring to focus on looking for diplomatic ways forward that are rather more subtle than shouting abuse at Trump or giving knee-jerk responses. Obviously the media gets frustrated because they want soundbites from the PM - he's right to ignore them.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,225
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    I am happy to report that the greatest work of Islamic astronomy, Ulugh Beg’s Zij il-Sultani - an amazing “book of stars”…. is now kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England

    I reassured our Uzbek guide, Bobur, that this is the best place for it

    I'm definitely visiting Uzbekistan in the next 12 months. Probably need a visa I assume.
    Mastercard also accepted :tongue: :

    (Amex probably less popular - I mean, all the payment services are US-based, but Amex shoves it in your face :lol:)
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,814
    edited April 3

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    The productivity cost of Brexit per OBR is 4% of yearly GDP, according with other economists of up to 6% hit, which maps to around £100 billion a year. The potential US tariff savings against the EU is about $6 billion a year, an order of magnitude less. And this implies the EU/UK tariff difference will be permanent, which is unlikely, while the Brexit cost obviously is permanent.

    I'm in favour of the government working to minimise the US tariff hit, as long as it doesn't make concessions that ignore the bigger picture.
    That productivity cost data is BS.

    Taking 2010 as the baseline (so deliberately before Brexit was coined as a term, the referendum, or it's aftermath) the UK has per capita grown by as much/more than the Eurozone.

    The idea that in the counterfactual universe where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown by even more than the Eurozone is just unsubstantiated BS. There is no evidence or reason to believe it.

    Those projections come from the same Garbage In, Garbage Out modelling that forecast immediate recession and millions unemployed if we voted to Leave.
    Brexit was economically illiterate, as your comment here so clearly demonstrates, just as Trump's tariffs are also economically illiterate. The only good thing about the tariffs is that they can be rescinded, as they probably will be eventually, while we're stuck with Brexit permanently.
    It was only economically illiterate based upon flawed modelling that claimed it was. Modelling whose outcome does not match reality.

    Real life data, as I demonstrated, has confounded the modelling.
    If you introduce trade friction and additional costs that inevitably reduces trade and investment, with a consequent real reduction in wealth. What the modelling does is to put a value on the loss of productivity, not that there is one - we know that. Furthermore there modelling shows the reduction in wealth is significant but manageable. So it comes down to, do the upsides whatever they are, which supporters of Brexit are strangely incapable of articulating, outweigh the many costs including the cost to trade?

    Supporters of Brexit would have a lot more credibility if they accepted basic economic realities and the real costs of Brexit, but focused on whatever the advantages are. The bullshit isn't coming from the economists here.
    I've been quite explicit on what the advantage is: democratic accountability.

    Democracy matters and is about more than the mere act of holding elections. We elect a government in the UK and can hold that government to account if it enacts policies we object to.

    The same does not work in the EU, despite the existence of almost entirely meaningless European Elections there is no commensurate European demos, European Government or European accountability.
    That's an argument you can take to people: it's worth being a bit poorer for the sake of democratic accountability. It's not an argument we hear much however.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,925
    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    In replying to Stella Creasy in the Commons just now Jonathan Reynolds said that he feels very strongly it is not a choice between the US and the EU, as they are two key long term trading and security partners

    MRD applies
    Forgive me but what is MRD ?
    @Big_G_NorthWales, "MRDA" = "Mandy Rice-Davies Applies".

    Mandy Rice-Davies was a 1960's model and showgirl famous for saying "well he would say that, wouldn't he" (technically "well he would, wouldn't he") in court. "MRDA" is a shorthand used to point out that the person would say a thing because of his/her bias.
    Thank you
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,306
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    I am happy to report that the greatest work of Islamic astronomy, Ulugh Beg’s Zij il-Sultani - an amazing “book of stars”…. is now kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England

    I reassured our Uzbek guide, Bobur, that this is the best place for it

    I'm definitely visiting Uzbekistan in the next 12 months. Probably need a visa I assume.
    No visa needed for Brits. The Uzbeks are really keen on tourism. They make it as easy as possible. No queue for passports either, and Tashkent is a small efficient airport near the city

    It is one of the fastest smoothest entries to a foreign country I’ve ever experienced
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,745

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    The productivity cost of Brexit per OBR is 4% of yearly GDP, according with other economists of up to 6% hit, which maps to around £100 billion a year. The potential US tariff savings against the EU is about $6 billion a year, an order of magnitude less. And this implies the EU/UK tariff difference will be permanent, which is unlikely, while the Brexit cost obviously is permanent.

    I'm in favour of the government working to minimise the US tariff hit, as long as it doesn't make concessions that ignore the bigger picture.
    That productivity cost data is BS.

    Taking 2010 as the baseline (so deliberately before Brexit was coined as a term, the referendum, or it's aftermath) the UK has per capita grown by as much/more than the Eurozone.

    The idea that in the counterfactual universe where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown by even more than the Eurozone is just unsubstantiated BS. There is no evidence or reason to believe it.

    Those projections come from the same Garbage In, Garbage Out modelling that forecast immediate recession and millions unemployed if we voted to Leave.
    Brexit was economically illiterate, as your comment here so clearly demonstrates, just as Trump's tariffs are also economically illiterate. The only good thing about the tariffs is that they can be rescinded, as they probably will be eventually, while we're stuck with Brexit permanently.
    It was only economically illiterate based upon flawed modelling that claimed it was. Modelling whose outcome does not match reality.

    Real life data, as I demonstrated, has confounded the modelling.
    If you introduce trade friction and additional costs that inevitably reduces trade and investment, with a consequent real reduction in wealth. What the modelling does is to put a value on the loss of productivity, not that there is one - we know that. Furthermore there modelling shows the reduction in wealth is significant but manageable. So it comes down to, do the upsides whatever they are, which supporters of Brexit are strangely incapable of articulating, outweigh the many costs including the cost to trade?

    Supporters of Brexit would have a lot more credibility if they accepted basic economic realities and the real costs of Brexit, but focused on whatever the advantages are. The bullshit isn't coming from the economists here.
    You might have a little more credibility yourself if you acknowledged for a kick off that there was a significant fiscal cost associated with EU membership, which we no longer pay, and which is far more tangible than any perceived loss from trade friction, given that it is entirely visible in the public accounts. The fact you've failed to do so and are farting on about "whatever they are" shows you are not debating in good faith.
    Although I suspect that a fair bit of the money we save from EU membership is being spent on civil servants having to do stuff that we didn't have to do previously.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,393
    edited April 3

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    The subject of trade frictions with the EU is an interesting one, despite having nothing to do with the current topic.

    It is understood, and understandable, that the EU aren't going to give us frictionless trade any more. However, I think it was and is down to our own Government to take steps to ameliorate these issues.

    We had a transition period - did we use it to take every possible measure to ensure British exporters were ready for the new requirements? OK, if they want a biography for every whelk, how do we deliver that? Is there a digital solution? Could we use QR codes? Is Ai now a solution? We should have aimed at becoming a regulation-meeting superpower ‐ which would also have helped companies get ready to export elsewhere.

    Failing those changes, if other issues lay with deliberate or just happenstantial obstructionism on the part of EU customs officials, how could we have supported them? We seem OK with vainly chucking hundreds of millions at the French to fail to deal with boat people. How about buying French customs officials new equipment to speed their import processes?

    Failing ALL that, if it was still impossible for a few companies to export to the EU profitably, how did we/could we support those companies to find alternative markets - possibly by exporting elsewhere but more likely by displacing an import. This would seem particularly helpful in the case of British fish and British lamb ‐ neither of which we eat enough of within our national diet.

    Instead, our authorities, in some cases wilfully in my view, especially in Scotland, just threw their hands up and offered hypocritical tea and sympathy.

    So I don't accept that being an independent country is impossible due to EU trade frictions - indeed it is a return to the status quo. If you disagree, look at how saturated we are in Indian imports ‐ not just in textiles but in foods. They seem to manage and don't wish to join the EU to make their problems go away.

    If you are taking something to the EU that you intend to bring back you are not exporting it. However quite reasonably the EU wants to ensure you really aren't exporting it (unlike when we were in the EU when this was not an issue). The same happens the other way. Now you may not think this is a big issue, but it is. Just about every exporter/importer is taking samples, or demo equipment, or stuff they need for construction or whatever across and it is a nightmare because although it will come back it might not come back in the same form. For example:

    Motor racing teams - Stuff will be very different when it returns, eg tyres, cars, etc and there will be truckloads
    Musicians touring - Big vans full of stuff, that get broken, replaced, filed differently etc

    Pre EU I spent at least an hour going through a carnet with french officials each time for just a car load of equipment for shows

    A friend of mine who built stages for exhibitions and concerts etc in the UK and Europe packed up after Brexit as basically his European work had been removed. He just could not compete with EU companies with the added paperwork.

    Again why don't you explain your expertise in these areas?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,981
    edited April 3
    TimS said:

    In slightly happier news I think we could get close to an all time solar generation record today, despite it only being April.

    Wall to wall across virtually the entire country, and already 9.5gw just under an hour before peak insolation. Yesterday peaked around 10.7 I think.

    And to think less than 5% of homes have them.

    There was an interesting article in the Economist talking about how the benefit of this primarily accrues to richer households who can afford to put panels up (or live in houses in the first place), meaning that poorer households absorb the costs of expensive fossil fuels. That's an inequity we need to keep an eye on as more people move onto fully variable tariffs that track the spot price of electricity (as provided by Octopus, for example).
  • TresTres Posts: 2,782
    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    I am happy to report that the greatest work of Islamic astronomy, Ulugh Beg’s Zij il-Sultani - an amazing “book of stars”…. is now kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England

    I reassured our Uzbek guide, Bobur, that this is the best place for it

    I'm definitely visiting Uzbekistan in the next 12 months. Probably need a visa I assume.
    No visa needed for Brits. The Uzbeks are really keen on tourism. They make it as easy as possible. No queue for passports either, and Tashkent is a small efficient airport near the city

    It is one of the fastest smoothest entries to a foreign country I’ve ever experienced
    The above is a paid for testimonial and should be disregarded.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,965

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Scott_xP said:

    True, but as I've said, the point still stands.

    The point being that Brexit was an economic disaster, and "only 10%" doesn't even begin to make up for it
    No it wasn't Scott. Covid was an economic disaster. The Ukraine war was an economic disaster. Trumponomics might well be an economic disaster, Brexit was an invisible blip by comparison. My expectation is still that it will be a long-term positive, as I think there is a risk of the European economy going through some pretty turbulent times, but either way it is small beer compared to three other economic disasters that have happened since.

    Seeing Brexit in isolation from the Trump tariffs, Covid and the Ukraine war makes no sense. Leaving the EU left us more exposed to the consequences of all three.

    Hm. But I'd argue we dealt with Covid better than the EU - partly because of Brexit - and I'd argue that, partly as a result of Brexit, we were able to respond more decisively to Ukraine: had we still been a member of the EU, it would have been much more difficult to act unilaterally and any EU response would have been hindered by the anchor of Hungary (and then Slovakia). And we're surely in a better place to respond to Trumponomics outside the EU than in it?
    Indeed.

    Far from making us "exposed", Brexit has done what it was supposed to and made us more nimble and able to act independently.

    It has also removed the EU security blanket and ensured fully accountability for the Government of the day. Of whom we've already evicted one and their replacement know they are fully accountable and can be evicted too.

    Had we still been in the EU we'd be facing higher tariffs due to German exports and be expected to have a "unified" rather than individual response.
    They should have put that on the side of the bus.

    "In the event a lunatic starts a global trade war based on a ratio he copied from Wikipedia, massive trade friction with our nearest neighbours will be mitigated somewhat because our trade deficit on goods with the US will continue to be rubbish..."
    Still better than anything Remain could have written by way of a persuasive argument...
    The headline that would have persuaded me ( I didn't need persuading!) was "the EU are a bit corrupt and crap but nowhere near as bad as the shitshow that will transpire if we vote to leave".
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,142
    viewcode said:

    If anybody is wondering why the proposed new air fighter for the USA is called "F-47", the rumour is that it's because Trump II is the 47th POTUS.

    (facepalm)

    Doesn't matter what they call it. No country outside the US is going to buy any now.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    The productivity cost of Brexit per OBR is 4% of yearly GDP, according with other economists of up to 6% hit, which maps to around £100 billion a year. The potential US tariff savings against the EU is about $6 billion a year, an order of magnitude less. And this implies the EU/UK tariff difference will be permanent, which is unlikely, while the Brexit cost obviously is permanent.

    I'm in favour of the government working to minimise the US tariff hit, as long as it doesn't make concessions that ignore the bigger picture.
    That productivity cost data is BS.

    Taking 2010 as the baseline (so deliberately before Brexit was coined as a term, the referendum, or it's aftermath) the UK has per capita grown by as much/more than the Eurozone.

    The idea that in the counterfactual universe where we'd voted Remain we'd have grown by even more than the Eurozone is just unsubstantiated BS. There is no evidence or reason to believe it.

    Those projections come from the same Garbage In, Garbage Out modelling that forecast immediate recession and millions unemployed if we voted to Leave.
    Brexit was economically illiterate, as your comment here so clearly demonstrates, just as Trump's tariffs are also economically illiterate. The only good thing about the tariffs is that they can be rescinded, as they probably will be eventually, while we're stuck with Brexit permanently.
    It was only economically illiterate based upon flawed modelling that claimed it was. Modelling whose outcome does not match reality.

    Real life data, as I demonstrated, has confounded the modelling.
    If you introduce trade friction and additional costs that inevitably reduces trade and investment, with a consequent real reduction in wealth. What the modelling does is to put a value on the loss of productivity, not that there is one - we know that. Furthermore there modelling shows the reduction in wealth is significant but manageable. So it comes down to, do the upsides whatever they are, which supporters of Brexit are strangely incapable of articulating, outweigh the many costs including the cost to trade?

    Supporters of Brexit would have a lot more credibility if they accepted basic economic realities and the real costs of Brexit, but focused on whatever the advantages are. The bullshit isn't coming from the economists here.
    I've been quite explicit on what the advantage is: democratic accountability.

    Democracy matters and is about more than the mere act of holding elections. We elect a government in the UK and can hold that government to account if it enacts policies we object to.

    The same does not work in the EU, despite the existence of almost entirely meaningless European Elections there is no commensurate European demos, European Government or European accountability.
    That's an argument you can take to people: it's worth being a bit poorer for the sake of democratic accountability. It's not an argument we hear much however.
    It is an argument that was taken, in 2016, whether you liked it or not. And it was an argument that won the referendum.

    Overall we might be wealthier for the sake of accountability, not poorer. As already discussed the "frictions" with the EU with our comprehensive zero-tariff agreement are on a macroeconomic level so inconsequential they do not show any variance in our rise in GDP/capita versus the Eurozone from a pre-referendum, pre-debate baseline of 2010. And yet we no longer need to pay the membership fees to the EU anymore which is worth billions of taxpayers money per annum.

    So economically those who have lost out due to frictions may be pissed off, and they have every right to be pissed off, but that doesn't mean that macroeconomically those frictions alone were worth the membership fees.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,955
    When is the state visit ? Trump screwing the UK and coming over to get lauded as his tariffs put some UK workers on the dole !

    Any deal that the UK makes to avert these tariffs is likely to be an abject surrender .
  • My tariff system on work from home employees would be 5% for listening to a podcast, 10% for lying down during office hours, 25% on all civil servants..and 50% on anyone visiting a Gail's..they can certainly afford it.😏
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,306
    Tres said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    I am happy to report that the greatest work of Islamic astronomy, Ulugh Beg’s Zij il-Sultani - an amazing “book of stars”…. is now kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England

    I reassured our Uzbek guide, Bobur, that this is the best place for it

    I'm definitely visiting Uzbekistan in the next 12 months. Probably need a visa I assume.
    No visa needed for Brits. The Uzbeks are really keen on tourism. They make it as easy as possible. No queue for passports either, and Tashkent is a small efficient airport near the city

    It is one of the fastest smoothest entries to a foreign country I’ve ever experienced
    The above is a paid for testimonial and should be disregarded.
    Oh do shut the fuck up

    An Air Uzbek return ticket from Heathrow-Tashkent at peak season (spring or autumn) is £650-£800

    That’s not bad considering the distance

    Once you are here prices are about 1/3 of Western Europe - or less. And that includes hotels and good restaurants. A hearty lunch for FOUR with a few beers costs about £50. The food is not amazing but it’s not terrible

    The sights - Samarkand, Bukhara, Khiva, and all that goes with them - are outstanding. World class. Samarkand is like a kind of Islamic Florence

    Given the cheapness of the destination (once you’ve bought the air ticket) you can have a unique life-long memorable holiday here for about the same price as a week or two in Portugal or Greece, but with far fewer tourists
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,509

    My tariff system on work from home employees would be 5% for listening to a podcast, 10% for lying down during office hours, 25% on all civil servants..and 50% on anyone visiting a Gail's..they can certainly afford it.😏

    How much per PB post?
  • TresTres Posts: 2,782

    My tariff system on work from home employees would be 5% for listening to a podcast, 10% for lying down during office hours, 25% on all civil servants..and 50% on anyone visiting a Gail's..they can certainly afford it.😏

    How much per PB post?
    Benchmarking time is it? ;)
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,485
    kjh said:

    FF43 said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    You shouldn't underestimate how much trade we do with the US:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book/trade-and-investment-core-statistics-book

    Top 10 UK export markets for goods and services in 20231

    1 United States - £179.4bn - 21.2% of total
    2 Germany - £59.4bn - 7.0%
    3 Ireland - £54.0bn - 6.4%
    4 Netherlands - £52.2bn - 6.2%
    5 France - £45.4bn - 5.4%
    So the EU is a lot more important than the US. Thanks for confirming.
    And we have a comprehensive zero tariff, zero quota trade agreement with the EU along with reduced tariffs from USA too.

    Win/win.
    Yet, for some reason, there are loads of British producers who now refuse to sell to the EU, or can't tell you how much the customs officials will charge you for your order when it arrives.

    One British company selling to the EU did refund me the customs charge I had to pay, but they said they couldn't pay it in advance because the system was so complicated.

    You might, of course, believe that the cost of increased trade friction is worth it, but that doesn't mean the cost doesn't exist. And it annoys me not to be able to buy goods from Britain that I would like.
    The subject of trade frictions with the EU is an interesting one, despite having nothing to do with the current topic.

    It is understood, and understandable, that the EU aren't going to give us frictionless trade any more. However, I think it was and is down to our own Government to take steps to ameliorate these issues.

    We had a transition period - did we use it to take every possible measure to ensure British exporters were ready for the new requirements? OK, if they want a biography for every whelk, how do we deliver that? Is there a digital solution? Could we use QR codes? Is Ai now a solution? We should have aimed at becoming a regulation-meeting superpower ‐ which would also have helped companies get ready to export elsewhere.

    Failing those changes, if other issues lay with deliberate or just happenstantial obstructionism on the part of EU customs officials, how could we have supported them? We seem OK with vainly chucking hundreds of millions at the French to fail to deal with boat people. How about buying French customs officials new equipment to speed their import processes?

    Failing ALL that, if it was still impossible for a few companies to export to the EU profitably, how did we/could we support those companies to find alternative markets - possibly by exporting elsewhere but more likely by displacing an import. This would seem particularly helpful in the case of British fish and British lamb ‐ neither of which we eat enough of within our national diet.

    Instead, our authorities, in some cases wilfully in my view, especially in Scotland, just threw their hands up and offered hypocritical tea and sympathy.

    So I don't accept that being an independent country is impossible due to EU trade frictions - indeed it is a return to the status quo. If you disagree, look at how saturated we are in Indian imports ‐ not just in textiles but in foods. They seem to manage and don't wish to join the EU to make their problems go away.

    If you are taking something to the EU that you intend to bring back you are not exporting it. However quite reasonably the EU wants to ensure you really aren't exporting it (unlike when we were in the EU when this was not an issue). The same happens the other way. Now you may not think this is a big issue, but it is. Just about every exporter/importer is taking samples, or demo equipment, or stuff they need for construction or whatever across and it is a nightmare because although it will come back it might not come back in the same form. For example:

    Motor racing teams - Stuff will be very different when it returns, eg tyres, cars, etc and there will be truckloads
    Musicians touring - Big vans full of stuff, that get broken, replaced, filed differently etc

    Pre EU I spent at least an hour going through a carnet with french officials each time for just a car load of equipment for shows

    A friend of mine who built stages for exhibitions and concerts etc in the UK and Europe packed up after Brexit as basically his European work had been removed. He just could not compete with EU companies with the added paperwork.

    Again why don't you explain your expertise in these areas?
    Once again I feel the need to reiterate that I didn't even mention customs issues, it was completely you - I have no idea why we're having this adventure into your brain.

    All I can say is if we're limited to contributing to the debate only on issues where we have a professional background, I look forward to hearing from you a good deal less in future.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,095
    Apparently we're late on an order to our US parent. Looks like we're going to have to pay the Donald a few thousand dollars !
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,637
    @j_g_allen

    Now economists know how scientists felt when he said “inject bleach”

    https://x.com/j_g_allen/status/1907591255279931539
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,848

    Woke up with a terrible thought this morning.

    What if Trump's tariffs work? From a US POV I mean. He'll be given a third term and a landslide.

    They won't. Murica voted Trump to do many things - a key one was make things cheaper.

    This makes everything more expensive.

    I touched on Vietnam. Mega tariff on Nikes makes the Nikes more expensive. Or Nike could invest (as MAGA won't let the government do it) to build factories and train workers and create supply chains to make Nikes in Murica. Which makes Nikes more expensive.

    Any way you cut this, Americans will be paying more. In many cases, a lot more.

    This only works for him if the propaganda ministry persuades Muricans that paying more is patriotic because The Whole World hates them. Or the simpler option which is simply pass an EO removing the need for further meaningful elections in this time of National Emergency.
    Here is where Trump might accidentally have a point, even if it is not the point he thinks he has.

    In traditional Adam Smith capitalism, everyone benefits from free trade. Vietnam gets investment and jobs. America gets cheap trainers.

    But that is not what happens because Nike captures most of the profit. Americans still have to pay hundreds of dollars and Vietnamese workers are paid peanuts. Neither group gets the benefit promised by their economics textbooks.
    Advertising makes capitalism less efficient and should be prohibited. Discuss.
    Branding, certainly.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,297
    Eabhal said:

    TimS said:

    In slightly happier news I think we could get close to an all time solar generation record today, despite it only being April.

    Wall to wall across virtually the entire country, and already 9.5gw just under an hour before peak insolation. Yesterday peaked around 10.7 I think.

    And to think less than 5% of homes have them.

    There was an interesting article in the Economist talking about how the benefit of this primarily accrues to richer households who can afford to put panels up (or live in houses in the first place), meaning that poorer households absorb the costs of expensive fossil fuels. That's an inequity we need to keep an eye on as more people move onto fully variable tariffs that track the spot price of electricity (as provided by Octopus, for example).
    I was musing on this last night. I look after my in-laws solar + battery system, which is on the Octopus variable tariff. At the moment, if you play the system right there are big wins to be had (eg lunch time today their is a half hour slot where you can import at -0.5p a unit, and then around teatime there is a slot where you can export at something like 18.5p a unit).

    But if everyone is at it, the price arbs are going pretty to vanish which is going to in turn make all the fairly expensive gear required redundant and render further installs pointless. It's going to be interesting to see what level of penetration it takes to send the ROI on new installs out to infinity.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,309
    malcolmg said:

    glw said:

    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    That's a very narrow view of what is going on. Starmer can't afford to pick a fight with Trump as he's one of the few leaders who seems to have some influence on Trump when it comes to Ukraine. Europe needs at least one person who can stop Trump throwing in the towel and handing Ukraine to Russia. I think Starmer is doing a pretty good job all things considered.
    Utter bollocks, another idiot with a bad dose of Trumpitis
    Rubbish. I hate Trump but picking a fight with him when he could in extremis force US tech companies to essentially switch-off the UK would be nuts. All those fears about the Chinese companies (Huawei and ZTE) being able to control our mobile networks apply 100 fold with the US. Disengaging from the US and replacing their technology will take a long time and cost a fortune, but we probably have little choice now.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,204
    MattW said:

    Foxy said:

    I have thought for a while that James O'Brexit used PB as source material. He's only gone and ripped off TSE's Ferris Bueller clip.

    Oil! I posted it first...

    https://bsky.app/profile/foxinsoxuk.bsky.social/post/3lluf326xak2d
    If this is James O'Brien, can somebody tell him to start talking about the inaccessible Silvertown Tunnel disabled people bus !
    Alternatively can he just shut up. His show is low rent rage bait where he gets inarticulate people to call up to just be condescending to them. Prick.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,637
    This is an interesting observation

    @SRuhle

    This “formula” used by the WH to set these levels is so out the norm, it tells me one thing - Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is not in the room.

    https://x.com/SRuhle/status/1907760421282447438

    Alternatively he was in the room, and is also a fucking idiot
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,972

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Scott_xP said:

    True, but as I've said, the point still stands.

    The point being that Brexit was an economic disaster, and "only 10%" doesn't even begin to make up for it
    No it wasn't Scott. Covid was an economic disaster. The Ukraine war was an economic disaster. Trumponomics might well be an economic disaster, Brexit was an invisible blip by comparison. My expectation is still that it will be a long-term positive, as I think there is a risk of the European economy going through some pretty turbulent times, but either way it is small beer compared to three other economic disasters that have happened since.

    Seeing Brexit in isolation from the Trump tariffs, Covid and the Ukraine war makes no sense. Leaving the EU left us more exposed to the consequences of all three.

    Hm. But I'd argue we dealt with Covid better than the EU - partly because of Brexit - and I'd argue that, partly as a result of Brexit, we were able to respond more decisively to Ukraine: had we still been a member of the EU, it would have been much more difficult to act unilaterally and any EU response would have been hindered by the anchor of Hungary (and then Slovakia). And we're surely in a better place to respond to Trumponomics outside the EU than in it?
    Indeed.

    Far from making us "exposed", Brexit has done what it was supposed to and made us more nimble and able to act independently.

    It has also removed the EU security blanket and ensured fully accountability for the Government of the day. Of whom we've already evicted one and their replacement know they are fully accountable and can be evicted too.

    Had we still been in the EU we'd be facing higher tariffs due to German exports and be expected to have a "unified" rather than individual response.
    They should have put that on the side of the bus.

    "In the event a lunatic starts a global trade war based on a ratio he copied from Wikipedia, massive trade friction with our nearest neighbours will be mitigated somewhat because our trade deficit on goods with the US will continue to be rubbish..."
    Still better than anything Remain could have written by way of a persuasive argument...
    The headline that would have persuaded me ( I didn't need persuading!) was "the EU are a bit corrupt and crap but nowhere near as bad as the shitshow that will transpire if we vote to leave".
    That was the Remain campaign, wasn't it ?
  • scampi25scampi25 Posts: 76
    Roger said:

    Starmer looks pretty stupid today. He will be seen by voters and the EU as a 'Judas' and in the US and the wider world as Trumps poodle.

    We are prepared to break ranks with the EU who we do 10x as much trade with for a pointless pat on the head from Donald.

    Historically the role of the quisling is one that lives in the memory for a long time. We have been asked to choose between our nearest and dearest or Trump and his clown show and we've gone for the clown show.

    They say Starmer's a lucky general and they're right. If he had any sensible opposition he'd be out on his ear

    The EU response so far is identical to the UK. Calm, measured and hyperbole free
  • glwglw Posts: 10,309


    Julian Jessop
    @julianHjessop
    ·
    1h
    FYI, here's the economic 'justification' for 'reciprocal tariffs' 👇

    TL;DR - the US administration assumes that in the absence of trade barriers, bilateral trade would always balance.

    I would expect someone with GCSE Economics to do better than this 🙄

    https://x.com/julianHjessop

    Basically for Trump to be correct, essentially everybody else who ever studied trade, business, economics, diplomacy, psychology, conflict and more has to be wrong, and not a little wrong but profoundly wrong.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,204
    edited April 3
    A question for @Cleitophon @BlancheLivermore or anyone else who is a home brewer

    If you do not use a heat mat when do you start your brewing ? I use my garage for mine and start in the first week of May once all frost risk has gone. However I am curious if I can start sooner.

    Fruit wine from fresh fruit like rhubarb and bananas and from dried fruit like dates and raisins.

    With brewing and racking I’m working on three to four months prior to bottling.

    Thanks
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,060
    Leon said:

    Tres said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    I am happy to report that the greatest work of Islamic astronomy, Ulugh Beg’s Zij il-Sultani - an amazing “book of stars”…. is now kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England

    I reassured our Uzbek guide, Bobur, that this is the best place for it

    I'm definitely visiting Uzbekistan in the next 12 months. Probably need a visa I assume.
    No visa needed for Brits. The Uzbeks are really keen on tourism. They make it as easy as possible. No queue for passports either, and Tashkent is a small efficient airport near the city

    It is one of the fastest smoothest entries to a foreign country I’ve ever experienced
    The above is a paid for testimonial and should be disregarded.
    Oh do shut the fuck up

    An Air Uzbek return ticket from Heathrow-Tashkent at peak season (spring or autumn) is £650-£800

    That’s not bad considering the distance

    Once you are here prices are about 1/3 of Western Europe - or less. And that includes hotels and good restaurants. A hearty lunch for FOUR with a few beers costs about £50. The food is not amazing but it’s not terrible

    The sights - Samarkand, Bukhara, Khiva, and all that goes with them - are outstanding. World class. Samarkand is like a kind of Islamic Florence

    Given the cheapness of the destination (once you’ve bought the air ticket) you can have a unique life-long memorable holiday here for about the same price as a week or two in Portugal or Greece, but with far fewer tourists
    You mention lunch with beers - I take it it’s quite relaxed re booze? What’s the nightlife like?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,637
    glw said:


    Julian Jessop
    @julianHjessop
    ·
    1h
    FYI, here's the economic 'justification' for 'reciprocal tariffs' 👇

    TL;DR - the US administration assumes that in the absence of trade barriers, bilateral trade would always balance.

    I would expect someone with GCSE Economics to do better than this 🙄

    https://x.com/julianHjessop

    Basically for Trump to be correct, essentially everybody else who ever studied trade, business, economics, diplomacy, psychology, conflict and more has to be wrong, and not a little wrong but profoundly wrong.
    We're about to find out...

    https://x.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1907770021046006026
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,997
    Scott_xP said:

    glw said:


    Julian Jessop
    @julianHjessop
    ·
    1h
    FYI, here's the economic 'justification' for 'reciprocal tariffs' 👇

    TL;DR - the US administration assumes that in the absence of trade barriers, bilateral trade would always balance.

    I would expect someone with GCSE Economics to do better than this 🙄

    https://x.com/julianHjessop

    Basically for Trump to be correct, essentially everybody else who ever studied trade, business, economics, diplomacy, psychology, conflict and more has to be wrong, and not a little wrong but profoundly wrong.
    We're about to find out...

    https://x.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1907770021046006026
    I am sure it wont be catastrophic because a good 40%+ of the US population think the tariffs are a good thing and they own stocks too.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,393
    Dopermean said:

    Tariffs on uninhabited islands but no tariffs on Russia.
    UK public seem realistic, no country is going to be able to handle this well, survival will be a good outcome. It can't be long before he lashes out at Canada again because Carney is popular.

    Uninhabited by people. Why should penguins get away with not respecting the US's economic might?
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,951
    viewcode said:

    If anybody is wondering why the proposed new air fighter for the USA is called "F-47", the rumour is that it's because Trump II is the 47th POTUS.

    (facepalm)

    Peter Zeihan on the "F-47" here. Quite interesting background info.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RfYU9Za5a0
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,204
    Apple, Amazon and Nvidia are getting a battering at the moment.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,267
    glw said:


    Julian Jessop
    @julianHjessop
    ·
    1h
    FYI, here's the economic 'justification' for 'reciprocal tariffs' 👇

    TL;DR - the US administration assumes that in the absence of trade barriers, bilateral trade would always balance.

    I would expect someone with GCSE Economics to do better than this 🙄

    https://x.com/julianHjessop

    Basically for Trump to be correct, essentially everybody else who ever studied trade, business, economics, diplomacy, psychology, conflict and more has to be wrong, and not a little wrong but profoundly wrong.
    To play Devil's Advocate for a minute, economic theory absolutely states that tariffs are harmful.

    Economic theory states that all taxes are harmful, and tariffs are a tax.

    Tariffs, like all taxes, create a deadweight welfare loss.

    There are though many people who react with outrage at the idea of tariffs going up who nonetheless would support other taxes going up - whether that be income tax, national insurance, VAT or anything else. People who argue that the benefits from taxation outweigh the economic harm that taxes cause.

    America has a tremendous budget deficit. It arguably needs to raise taxes to close the deficit, even if those taxes cause economic harm.

    If a different tax had been raised by a different President of a different Party many of those objecting today would be supporting that and many of those today supporting it would be objecting.
Sign In or Register to comment.