PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   BREXIT (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/619673-brexit.html)

pug 11th Apr 2019 18:58

Exrigger, if we left without a deal we would have a hard border, that is a fact. So how can you operate to a just in time production model with a hard border? How could you be in a position to avoid stockpiling? Evidence based is listening to industry, not talking to people who service your car. Ever thought that nobody has done it because it’s so unpalatable as to make it unworkable? Are you seriously advocating an experiment? You are talking in philosophies, my argument remains. You cannot provide a solid argument for why we would definitely be better off outside, that is your job as a leave advocate to do. It is the leave argument that is in essence talking in maybes, we’re currently in the EU, I’m basing my argument on our current membership if the EU. I merely want things to remain the same.

pug 11th Apr 2019 19:04


Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator (Post 10445395)
This is a reasonable argument, sadly it is one that Cameron et al might have spelt out but like many they chose to declare the sky would fall in on Exit Friday.

Where we can largely be laid at his door for not preparing the remain argument on evidence based facts.
​​​

Agree entirely that remain fought a poor campaign. However, facts such as those are not sexy. People wanted change in the face of years of austerity. They voted leave, with the hope of a better future. Unfortunately it is U.K. Gvt. who implemented austerity, not the EU. I refer to my original post, they have been subtly scapegoated, which is why I believe leave won.

Pontius Navigator 11th Apr 2019 19:16

Pug, there is no reason that JIT cannot work through a hard border. If that was true then JIT would be limited to countries within the EU.

JIT though a hard border could undoubtedly be longer than no border, just as it is longer between the continent and within the continent today. The difference is simply factoring in the longer/slower supply chain.

It is Brexit uncertainty that requires stockpiling and diversion of capital to stock. This is essentially a short term issue until the new delivery times are established and new JIT is in place. A stockpile buffer may be maintained, with a tie up of capital, or the stock pile may be drawn down. This would obviously have an effect on primary producers.

NoelEvans 11th Apr 2019 19:17


Originally Posted by pug (Post 10445413)
.., Iím basing my argument on our current membership if the EU. I merely want things to remain the same.

But they won't remain the same. The EU is on the brink of very big changes itself and may 'remainers' are going to become rather horrified at what their 'darling' EU is likely to become. Expect some shocks at the EU Parliament elections. With or without Britain participating.


People wanted change in the face of years of austerity.
I never ever heard 'austerity' used as a reason to vote either way.

They voted leave, with the hope of a better future.
Correct.

The 'disaster' forecast by the remain campaign for the day after a 'leave' vote all turned out to be hot air. Why believe similar forecasts now?

NoelEvans 11th Apr 2019 19:24

Regarding 'just in time': I know a company that had its output come to a grinding halt as a result of that unpronounceable Icelandic volcano. Their vital supplies were coming (by air) from Malaysia. Last I checked Malaysia isn't in the EU.

Regarding motor manufacturing where 'supply of parts', etc. and then 'exporting to the EU' would be a 'problem' if Britain was not in the EU: There have been two German (VW) cars in our family over the last several years that were manufactured in South Africa. Last I checked South Africa isn't in the EU.

pug 11th Apr 2019 19:25


But they won't remain the same. The EU is on the brink of very big changes itself and may 'remainers' are going to become rather horrified at what their 'darling' EU is likely to become. Expect some shocks at the EU Parliament elections. With or without Britain participating.
What are these changes you allude to? Genuinely interested to know.

Exrigger 11th Apr 2019 19:31


Originally Posted by pug (Post 10445413)
Exrigger, if we left without a deal we would have a hard border, that is a fact. So how can you operate to a just in time production model with a hard border? How could you not be in a position to avoid stockpiling? Evidence based is listening to industry, not talking to people who service your car. Ever thought that nobody has done it because it’s so unpalatable as to make it unworkable? Are you seriously advocating an experiment? You are talking in philosophies, my argument remains. You cannot provide a solid argument for why we would definitely be better off outside, that is your job as a leave advocate to do. It is the leave argument that is in essence talking in maybes, we’re currently in the EU, I’m basing my argument on our current membership if the EU. I merely want things to remain the same.


So how can you operate to a just in time production model with a hard border?
How do other countries with a hard border operate their just in time production model, by planning possibly?


How could you not be in a position to avoid stockpiling?
Maybe by forward planning.


Evidence based is listening to industry, not talking to people who service your car.
So you assumed I was just talking to the mechanic, who obviously would not know anything even if he was a remain voter, however, you think that the management, who I also talk to are not part of industry, I also listen to industry across various business media sites.


Ever thought that nobody has done it because it’s so unpalatable as to make it unworkable?
No, I have never thought that and believe had we the right sort of people in Westminster and some better business management in some industries it is more than workable.


Are you seriously advocating an experiment?
Don’t think it is advocating an experiment just because it does not fit in with your needs/opinions.

I do believe we would be better out of the EU given the economic issues the main contributors are currently having, or are shortly forecasted to be having, and do not want to see the UK economy falling because of that, I also do not think that the unified EU dream which is so far from the original common market the UK joined is actually compatible with the UK population, or for that matter, going by the rumblings in other European countries, they don’t either.


I’m basing my argument on our current membership if the EU. I merely want things to remain the same.
That is fair enough, it is your considered opinion. but like Pace, Sprogget and Parapunter before you we will obviously never be able to agree, especially as it would appear I could not possibly be correct whatever I put forward.

jindabyne 11th Apr 2019 19:34

Noel and Others

LEAVE - NOW. NO DEAL. Get on with it. But, oh, sorry, she scuppered that.

Time for Boris.

wiggy 11th Apr 2019 19:35


Originally Posted by NoelEvans (Post 10445429)
I never ever heard 'austerity' used as a reason to vote either way...

Not sure what or who you've been listening to but there is a sizeable body of opinion ( political and/or academic) that is of the opinion that at least some people were so fed up with "austerity" and the situation they were in, as they saw it imposed from Westminster, that they voted whichever way they did at the referendum as a means of simply giving Westminster/the established ruling classes a kicking.....

If you don't believe me Googling something like...oh, "Austerity and the Brexit Vote" and take a look at the results..(beware of confirmation bias :)


pug 11th Apr 2019 19:44

Regarding JIT;

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-s...me-production/

Im not sure where you take your car to get serviced, but middle management positions will be just as informed as anyone else. I know of one leave voter whoís very business relies solely on funding from the EU. His argument? The Government will take on the funding. That is a managing director on the automotive training industry.

No i I most certainly do not want your experiment to have a very real threat to my way of life, and the way of life for many others. To use an analogy, if I were to walk into a bank asking for a mortgage, the bank would means test me. They would want some certainty that I would be able to make my payments. They most certainly not lend me the money if I were to tell them I was leaving my job but may be able to get a better job in future. This is why business wants certainty, and why there are great strives to take no deal off the table.

We are are not going to agree on this subject, i know that now and I knew it when I first posted. Iíve made the point a number of times now, in order to sway a remain voter you must be able to convince them that the change you are proposing is going to in all probability improve the current situation. You canít, and nobody has yet made a compelling argument for leaving, rather you try to pick apart my argument with suppositions.

NoelEvans 11th Apr 2019 19:54


Originally Posted by wiggy (Post 10445440)
... they voted whichever way they did at the referendum as a means of simply giving Westminster/the established ruling classes a kicking.....

I think we are in full agreement on that one. Just their reasons for wanting to give that kicking is where we may differ somewhat. But if they wanted to give them a kicking then, watch next time!!!

Steepclimb 11th Apr 2019 21:19

You know what I like about this forum is that it pretty much represents British reasonableness. I confess that I've deliberately been provocative, well to extent that I feel isn't too provocative. I hold back.
But disappointingly British no English reasonableness is absent in the real world.
Yes the EU is flawed. We all know that.

But Brexit is also flawed.

Which is worse?

yellowtriumph 12th Apr 2019 00:26


Originally Posted by pug (Post 10445416)


Agree entirely that remain fought a poor campaign. However, facts such as those are not sexy. People wanted change in the face of years of austerity. They voted leave, with the hope of a better future. Unfortunately it is U.K. Gvt. who implemented austerity, not the EU. I refer to my original post, they have been subtly scapegoated, which is why I believe leave won.


You make some valid points, You ask for valid reasons why leaving the EU would be better than staying in for example. I look at it like this, from a leavers perspective we do not know what leaving will look like in the longer term, from a remainers perspective we know that by remaining ‘things’ will stay as they are and in the longer term there will be more of the same. I believe it is simply the future prospect of more of the same that convinced 17m+ people to vote to leave. 17m+ people do not want more of the same, they yearn for something different, completely different, they ache for it. What that might be no-one knows, but it will be different for sure. I strongly suspect a good majority of those 17m+ don’t know what they want, they just don’t want what we currently have. Just my take on it of course. Speaking personally I believe we should make a clean break of it and start with a clean sheet of paper with regard to our future relationship. Alternatively, we should stay in and fully embrace membership and use it to our best advantage and no holding back, ever. What looks on offer currently is neither fish nor fowl and is, frankly, the very worst of all outcomes and we can firmly blame 600+ wimps in the HoC in London for that. They need to ‘man up’ and make a decision one way or the other (fully in or fully out) and take the inevitable flak on the chin.

Edited to add, isn’t the EU ultimately responsible for the current austerity measures in Greece for example? They have form, even if they try and cover their tracks and by this I mean an ECB politically controlled by the EU.

Krystal n chips 12th Apr 2019 05:45


Originally Posted by jindabyne (Post 10445438)
Noel and Others

LEAVE - NOW. NO DEAL. Get on with it. But, oh, sorry, she scuppered that.

Time for Boris.

Would this be the same Boris who had two speeches prepared for the result of the referendum, who is universally ( politically ) acknowledged as the worst Foreign Sec ever, who has openly challenged Treeza's policies and who has never made any secret of his wish to install his podgy frame into Downing St then ?

" JIT through a hard border would undoubtedly be longer "

Love it !........ another in the infinite series of being clueless as to how the real world works. The principle of JIT is to reduce stockholdings and maximise production as a result....so once delays start to be incurred , you may be astounded to learn these have an impact on suppliers, distributors, retailers, consumers, repairs to name but a few....


Pontius Navigator 12th Apr 2019 07:47

As I found out yesterday, the plastic bag charge was not a Government 'good idea' but a measure to comply with an EU directive.

It is true that when Out we will be free to make our own rules but do you think for one moment that will be the end of 'good ideas'? We will be able to pick and chose, or decide our own rules, but penny to a Euro, I bet we follow the EU.

We certainly won't abandon metric measures. We will consider miles per gallon but that is no different from the French quoting prices in Francs.

The Government has already promised farmers to maintain subsidies. Paradoxically that is a 'bribe to sustain' a leave vote.

Dr Jekyll 12th Apr 2019 07:50


Originally Posted by pug (Post 10445453)

To use an analogy, if I were to walk into a bank asking for a mortgage, the bank would means test me. They would want some certainty that I would be able to make my payments. They most certainly not lend me the money if I were to tell them I was leaving my job but may be able to get a better job in future. This is why business wants certainty, and why there are great strives to take no deal off the table.


A better analogy I'm self employed with a set of regular clients. A trade association incorporating a significant minority of my clients and suppliers insists on restricting my access to suppliers outside their organisation in order to protect their overpriced producers, and demands restrictive working practices even when I'm working for clients outside their club in order to restrict my competitiveness. If I leave I can save a fortune in subscriptions and still trade with members of the organisation, while being able to trade with the majority of my suppliers and clients without the previous restrictions. The bank manager wonders why I haven't already left.

Krystal n chips 12th Apr 2019 08:19


Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator (Post 10445740)
As

We certainly won't abandon metric measures. We will consider miles per gallon but that is no different from the French quoting prices in Francs.

The Government has already promised farmers to maintain subsidies. Paradoxically that is a 'bribe to sustain' a leave vote.

As the UK has never, regrettably, fully embraced metrication and, as usual, prefers a cobbled together mix of Imperial and Metric, then this inane state of affairs will doubtless blissfully continue.......at least until the demographic who are nostalgic for all the coinage in use pre-decimalisation .....and probably the groat as well.... are no longer present.

Give the "promises " were made by Gove then it's inevitable they will be reneged on ....as soon as it's convenient to do so.

Grayfly 12th Apr 2019 08:55


Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator (Post 10445740)
As I found out yesterday, the plastic bag charge was not a Government 'good idea' but a measure to comply with an EU directive.

.

The UK is consulted on issues like this before it becomes a directive. In order for it to become a directive, the UK must also have thought it was a good idea.
In my industry sector, the professional institutions also ask their members for opinions on proposed directives. I am not aware of anything in my industry sector ever having been imposed on us without prior consultation.

virginblue 12th Apr 2019 09:33


Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator (Post 10445740)
As I found out yesterday, the plastic bag charge was not a Government 'good idea' but a measure to comply with an EU directive.

There is a legislative process for enacting directives and guess what, folks, the majority requirements in the European Council are stricter than they were for the Brexit referendum (qualified majority, not a simple majority). These majority requirements guarantee, among other things, that the smaller member states cannot gang up on the big member states such as the UK.

Strictly speaking, the plastic bag charge was, however, a government idea. Because Directive 2015/720 only requires member states to reduce single-use plastic bag use by 50% by 2017 and 80% by 2019. It does not say
anything about how it has to be done or stipulates a plastic bag charge.

Pontius Navigator 12th Apr 2019 09:34


Originally Posted by Grayfly (Post 10445800)
The UK is consulted on issues like this before it becomes a directive. In order for it to become a directive, the UK must also have thought it was a good idea.
In my industry sector, the professional institutions also ask their members for opinions on proposed directives. I am not aware of anything in my industry sector ever having been imposed on us without prior consultation.

No argument there.I see the key words as good idea, consultation, and impose. It does not follow that industry as a whole agreed the idea is good or agreed with its imposition, but of course that is democracy.

In or out our Government is still going to adopt 'good ideas'.


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:14.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.