Jump to content

The now-enacted will of (some of) the people


blandy

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said:

The statistics were raised in relation to the EU's ability to gain competitive advantage.

So the graph was as a counterpoint to the bit quoted from that guy's article?

57 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said:

...can you provide that the EU has a strong track record of gaining competitive advantage against any other trading blocs?

I'm not even sure that you're sure what you're asking for and why?

Edit: There's obviously many cases to be made to call in to question the claims/forecasts/suggestions in that article. I really don't think merely posting the graph you did with the 'some further evidence...' line was a good one at all.

Edited by snowychap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I'm not even sure that you're sure what you're asking for and why?

 

He wants more filling in his pie regardless of its origin and quality, the proportion doesn't matter as long as the meat came out of the back gate of Spillers and there's more of it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Edit: There's obviously many cases to be made to call in to question the claims/forecasts/suggestions in that article. I really don't think merely posting the graph you did with the 'some further evidence...' line was a good one at all.

I mean I'm not sure that they will take more of an advantage than others may do but just how that works out will depend on the political choices made after leaving the EU.

Tbf, I quoted the article more for his questioning of some of the most extreme portrayals of what might happen in the case of a no WA departure from the EU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May has run out of credibility in Brussels and cashed in whatever goodwill was left for her when she threw her own deal that she had negotiated under the bus.

They aren't going to do her favours any more. And she knows it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

without referencing what the original and final percentages relate to, it is meaningless

Would you like 30% of what's in box A or 15% of what's in box B?

Well, I'd suggest you need to know what's in the boxes before you decide.

No, it really isn't completely devoid of meaning. Your point about knowing what's in the boxes is right...BUT, the graph does show that the EU contribution/percentage of the World's GDP is declining. That in itself doesn't imply competitiveness is declining, but it is an indicator of the way the world economy has been growing at different rates in different places. It doesn't and can't say why, but the basic info has some meaning or utility which can point to other stats and factors to look at.

For example, does the protection of workers rights, the regulatory "burdens" mean that the EU can't compete well with unregulated, low wage, low protection Chinese companies (sweatshops)? well, pretty much yes. In that respect arguning about competition is missing the point. Not having child labour or sweatshops is a societal advance that developed nations of the western model can be glad about. It's not a negative. Outsourcing to China might be, though. And in fact a part of China's relative growth is down to such outsourcing of manufacturing from the EU and US etc. So in GDP terms the EU, US & co. have deliberately aided China's growth. As has the chinese gov't policy of the last couple of decades.

GDP isn't a measure of competitiveness, it's a measure of economic activity, and the currency used (scale) is affected by exchange rates. So it's not quite, meaningless, but it doesn't make the point @WhatAboutTheFinish claims, but it does point to some trends and areas to be looked at in a discussion of EU membership and the advantages etc.

It's worth, in a discussion (as opposed to an argument) considering the comments people make as part of that discussion.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blandy said:

No, it really isn't completely devoid of meaning. Your point about knowing what's in the boxes is right...BUT, the graph does show that the EU contribution/percentage of the World's GDP is declining. That in itself doesn't imply competitiveness is declining, but it is an indicator of the way the world economy has been growing at different rates in different places. It doesn't and can't say why, but the basic info has some meaning or utility which can point to other stats and factors to look at.

For example, does the protection of workers rights, the regulatory "burdens" mean that the EU can't compete well with unregulated, low wage, low protection Chinese companies (sweatshops)? well, pretty much yes. In that respect arguning about competition is missing the point. Not having child labour or sweatshops is a societal advance that developed nations of the western model can be glad about. It's not a negative. Outsourcing to China might be, though. And in fact a part of China's relative growth is down to such outsourcing of manufacturing from the EU and US etc. So in GDP terms the EU, US & co. have deliberately aided China's growth. As has the chinese gov't policy of the last couple of decades.

GDP isn't a measure of competitiveness, it's a measure of economic activity, and the currency used (scale) is affected by exchange rates. So it's not quite, meaningless, but it doesn't make the point @WhatAboutTheFinish claims, but it does point to some trends and areas to be looked at in a discussion of EU membership and the advantages etc.

It's worth, in a discussion (as opposed to an argument) considering the comments people make as part of that discussion.

I think the interesting discussion point is the comparison between the US trend and the EU trend. 

As chrisp65 and others have said, there is a far bigger pie now due to the rise of developing countries but that graph seems to say the US has been doing better at getting a portion of it than the EU. 

As you point out, this may well be because the EU sets a higher standard for its workers, sacrificing competitiveness in the process whilst the US is more willing to drive down worker conditions to compete with developing countries.

That goes to a bigger question of philosophy for how a country (or trading block) wants to operate in a global marketplace 

Edited by LondonLax
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then there's something possibly of more interest to individuals, it's the GDP per person, or what (very crudely) it means to you. That lower but growing share of world GDP that China has, that's then shared by nearly three times as many people as the GDP of the EU. You break it down in to nation states, european states are broadly top 20, China is 77th because their share of world trade is then diluted between 1.4 billion of them.

Unfortunately, none of the dull number crunching and drilling down is quite as impactful as the initial pretty graph with the headline that the EU sucks balls at business.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Then there's something possibly of more interest to individuals, it's the GDP per person

I'm not sure that GDP per capita isn't of interest to people seeking to make comparisons about the relative performance of economies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is being reported that the government's Jonah (Grayling, obvs) has stepped in and asked Thanet District Council (TDC) to postpone their decisions on budgets because no contract has been signed with the Seaborne lot and it looks like TDC would have had to mothball the port.

The basic thing is that TDC haven't a pot to piss in and as a result they need to cut lots of extraneous stuff like a port that loses money hand over fist. Without a firm financial commitment from Seaborne, they're stuffed on the port.

Whether that means that the DoT will step in and actually chuck money at it before anything is signed is another matter.

Edited by snowychap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blandy said:

GDP isn't a measure of competitiveness, it's a measure of economic activity, and the currency used (scale) is affected by exchange rates. So it's not quite, meaningless, but it doesn't make the point @WhatAboutTheFinish claims, but it does point to some trends and areas to be looked at in a discussion of EU membership and the advantages etc. 

Yes, GDP is a pretty poor indicator of anything.  Working in a poisonous sweatshop cutting up diseased meat for resale disguised as something else: contribution to GDP.  Sitting in the sun reading poetry: no GDP.

Drive your car into a wall and kill yourself: contribution to GDP.  Teach your baby a song, no GDP.

Time to wheel ot the old Bobby Kennedy clip again.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, peterms said:

I like the tweet from Unlearning Economics which will appear if you open the thread and click on Cohen's tweet.  That's my view on Nick Cohen, too.

 

Hmm. I think the 'mental health slurs' line is a bit bloody shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â