The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[Spinal]

	Quote:	autopoiesis
	Trick would be deciding what the question would be. A) Bojo deal ; B) No deal A) Bojo deal ; B) No Brexit A) No deal ; B) No Brexit [etc ad nauseam]

Are we limited to two choices?

A) Bojo deal, B) No Deal, C) No brexit

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	'That' i.e. money is what it is all about

pathetic, I do feel sorry for you, for sure.

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	I doubt prices will change much, it comes out of manufactures margin as commodity goods are sold for what the market will bear, nothing to do with the cost of goods.

It's surely partly to do with the cost of goods. Or the notions of incurred costs and raw materials sort of go through the window.

[autopoiesis]

	Quote:	Spinal
	Are we limited to two choices? A) Bojo deal, B) No Deal, C) No brexit

Yes, because if the above three (or more), could have:


36% Bojo deal
35% No Deal
29% No brexit


Bojo deal would then 'pass' because it had most votes, even though >>50% of voters explicitly rejected it. Any 'win' under those conditions would be untenable.


That's assuming a one-voter-one-vote principle of course. I'm sure there are dozens of potential schemes that could be used (proportional/weighted/ordered...), but none with (AFAIK) any precedence in UK politics.


IIRC, debate on proportional representation went on for decades. Getting an alternative Brexit referendum mechanism in place in weeks/months highly unlikely, even if anyone could agree on which one. We'd probably need a prior referendum just for that and end up in an eternal recursive referendum loop!


Perhaps it's doable in 2 votes:
Ref 1. Continue with Brexit?: Yes|No.


If No -> revoke art 50. Done.


If 'Yes' ->

Ref 2: Decide: bojo deal | No deal; implement result.



Nah.

[autopoiesis]

BTW I have to say I'm impressed with Michel Barnier - he has the patience of a saint.


Leo Varadkar's comments this afternoon also significant. Overall, much-maligned EU institutions and people have - from my perspective - come out of this with their integrity in way better shape than anyone from the north side of the Channel.


cheers,
auto (not an EU fanboi)

Surely the Bojo /EU "agreed deal" is akin to agreeing, in principal, that you're wanting to have an affair... as long as your spouse agrees you can.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ut-dup-backing

Hahahahahaha

Omnishambles.

[22 yards]

	Quote:
	Whatcha talkin' 'bout Willis?

Take away Northern Ireland and there is no United Kingdom; just Great Britain.



They'll have to redesign the British passport yet again.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:
	It's surely partly to do with the cost of goods. Or the notions of incurred costs and raw materials sort of go through the window.

Whilst you might believe that to be true, it's a fallacy , a company like Unilever will produce for £4 & sell for £10. They sell for the max price the market will bear, it's as simple as that. The £ has dropped roughly 25% since the referendum yet inflation is a mere 1.7%. There are huge margins throughout the supply chain.

We all know prices of many items are far higher. in CH than in France or Germany. Swiss prices did not change when the Euro / CHF rate went from 1.00 / 1.60 to more recent 1.00 / 1.10.

[22 yards]

	Quote:	autopoiesis
	Perhaps it's doable in 2 votes: Ref 1. Continue with Brexit?: Yes|No. If No -> revoke art 50. Done. If 'Yes' -> Ref 2: Decide: ; implement result. Nah.

Yeah, not bad. But it might be fairer to put it the other way around:

Ref. 1: If Brexit were to occur, waddya want: Bojo deal | No deal;

Ref. 2: Now you know what Brexit would look like, do you want to continue with it?*

If 'No' -> revoke Art 50. Done.

If 'Yes' -> implement result of Ref. 1











*This is a trick question. By now there's probably no good answer.

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Whilst you might believe that to be true, it's a fallacy , a company like Unilever will produce for £4 & sell for £10. They sell for the max price the market will bear, it's as simple as that. The £ has dropped roughly 25% since the referendum yet inflation is a mere 1.7%. There are huge margins throughout the supply chain.

Yep. But costs - raw materials - have a base cost. How on earth is it a fallacy? Something costs a fiver to make, however the market will bear my charging 45 quid for it. Two separate things. You said costs weren't a factor in deciding the price of product. I disagree.


And could you be any more patronising? Were you born with that sense of superiority or have you honed it over the years ?

[marton]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Whilst you might believe that to be true, it's a fallacy , a company like Unilever will produce for £4 & sell for £10. They sell for the max price the market will bear, it's as simple as that. The £ has dropped roughly 25% since the referendum yet inflation is a mere 1.7%. There are huge margins throughout the supply chain.

True, one time I was responsible for pricing at a biggish international firm and the cost of the articles was never part of the equation. We just looked at the costs at the end to check it made sense to offer the product in the market, if not, changing the price was not one of the solutions considered.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:
	Yep. But costs - raw materials - have a base cost. How on earth is it a fallacy? Something costs a fiver to make, however the market will bear my charging 45 quid for it. Two separate things. You said costs weren't a factor in deciding the price of product. I disagree. And could you be any more patronising? Were you born with that sense of superiority or have you honed it over the years ?

It's just how successful business's work, Capitalism you either love it or hate it
If raw costs go up 10%, you need to increase sales or cut other expenses to reduce cost per widget to maintain your margin. If you increase price competition will reduce your market, very clearly happening with UK supermarkets.

Easyjet profits fell because fuel prices increased, they were unable to fill the planes at a higher price per ticket, ticket prices actually fell. Then the Airline industry as a whole is yet to make a profit in over 100 years, which is why I would not invest in an airline.

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	It's just how successful business's work, Capitalism you either love it or hate it If raw costs go up 10%, you need to increase sales or cut other expenses to reduce cost per widget to maintain your margin. If you increase price competition will reduce your market, very clearly happening with UK supermarkets. Easyjet profits fell because fuel prices increased, they were unable to fill the planes at a higher price per ticket, ticket prices actually fell. Then the Airline industry as a whole is yet to make a profit in over 100 years, which is why I would not invest in an airline.

Except that profits are not just due to good old capitalism. Corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, write offs, yada yada yada increases profit - it’s not just selling more X or selling X at a higher price.

Kind of like top down socialism, innit?

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	It's just how successful business's work, Capitalism you either love it or hate it If raw costs go up 10%, you need to increase sales or cut other expenses to reduce cost per widget to maintain your margin. If you increase price competition will reduce your market, very clearly happening with UK supermarkets. Easyjet profits fell because fuel prices increased, they were unable to fill the planes at a higher price per ticket, ticket prices actually fell. Then the Airline industry as a whole is yet to make a profit in over 100 years, which is why I would not invest in an airline.

So costs are a factor or they aren't a factor? Make up your mind sunshine.

I used to work for a very well established national logistics company... costs were definitely a factor there. OH works in international pharma. Likewise.

	Quote:
	Except that profits are not just due to good old capitalism. Corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, write offs, yada yada yada increases profit - it’s not just selling more X or selling X at a higher price. Kind of like top down socialism, innit?

That's one of the things that stinks about conservatism. It's built on a bed of lies. There's nothing "free" about the free market. The whole thing is bullshit.

Time to sharpen those guillotine blades, I say. Let the lying tongues flap in rolling heads.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:
	So costs are a factor or they aren't a factor? Make up your mind sunshine. I used to work for a very well established national logistics company... costs were definitely a factor there.

Then the margins were too slim, it was a bad business to be in & will ultimately go bankrupt. Thomas Cook springs to mind.

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Then the margins were too slim, it was a bad business to be in & will ultimately go bankrupt. Thomas Cook springs to mind.

You're answering a question I haven't asked.

In one post you say raw costs not relevant. In another they are. Which is it?

[Dinivan]

	Quote:	marton
	True, one time I was responsible for pricing at a biggish international firm and the cost of the articles was never part of the equation. We just looked at the costs at the end to check it made sense to offer the product in the market, if not, changing the price was not one of the solutions considered.

This is just one method of pricing. Some companies do use costs as a base, notably cost-plus pricing. Retailers often use this method.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:
	Except that profits are not just due to good old capitalism. Corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, write offs, yada yada yada increases profit - it’s not just selling more X or selling X at a higher price. Kind of like top down socialism, innit?

All that is telling you is tax rates are too high, tax competition exists just as competition exists between companies.
I believe all subsidies should be illegal, unviable business's should fail, real capitalism.
The Banks should never have been rescued & depositors need to realise the risk they are taking chasing higher interest rates.

Switzerland is an amazing example of tax competition......... Seems to work rather well.