Brexit

[ruffrecords]

Also not quite the whole story, cos not 'incidental'.

At best, Nissan's move is ambiguous -- and as such, very Japanese.

Sure, de Ficchy et al. want to go through with the product. But businesses just hate it when they can't 'calculate' the future.

I find it noteworthy that Nissan has announced its decision only a few days after the framework of the long-discussed free trade deal between Japan and the EU has finally become effective.

Of course it doesn't mean much. But l, for my part, am looking forward to cheaper wine and cheese . Was it cheaper Japanese cars that Europeans get in return?

Turns out it is even simpler than that. It is prompted by the crash in diesel sales across the EU due to more EU legislation we didn't get a chance to vote on.

Cheers

Ian

 

[cyrano]

I find it noteworthy that Nissan has announced its decision only a few days after the framework of the long-discussed free trade deal between Japan and the EU has finally become effective.

Of course it doesn't mean much. But l, for my part, am looking forward to cheaper wine and cheese . Was it cheaper Japanese cars that Europeans get in return?

It's the largest free trade zone in the world. It would benefit Japan's export of cars. Of course, if the UK leaves the EU, they would effectively be outside of that zone.

It would also benefit export of luxury food items like chocolate, cheese, spirits and wine to Japan.

When it comes to electronics, there's not so much export from Japan these days. The Chinese seem to have eaten that market, except for the high end items.

I live in a village that's flooded with car enthusiasts. We have a Chevy club, a 2CV club with over 150 members, a Subaru WRC club and several 4WD clubs. Since Nissan started producing cars in the UK, they seem to have lost pole position for the 4WD part to Toyota. Too many quality problems, delays in getting parts. Toyota always had heavy-duty axles as an option. With Nissan, that was standard.

The largest Nissan dealership in Europe is also right around the corner.

Toyota seems te be achieving higher quality since they started replacing robots with humans in certain production tasks.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Toyota seems te be achieving higher quality since they started replacing robots with humans in certain production tasks.

That is not logical. Robots should be good for consistent execution of manufacturing processes.

Human's get tired, distracted, and make mistakes. In my decades of experience, machine assembly (automation) pretty much always delivers higher build quality.

JR

PS: I always wondered why robot soldiers were such bad shots in old science fiction programs.

 

[cyrano]

That is not logical. Robots should be good for consistent execution of manufacturing processes.

Human's get tired, distracted, and make mistakes. In my decades of experience, machine assembly (automation) pretty much always delivers higher build quality.

JR

PS: I always wonddered why robot soldiers were such bad shots in old science fiction programs.

That's logical, John, but then reality isn't always logical. Robots tend not to detect faults they haven't been programmed for. Hence, unforseeable errors might be picked up by humans, but will be missed by robots.

Besides, I suppose Toyota knows what they're doing...

 

[JohnRoberts]

That's logical, John, but then reality isn't always logical. Robots tend not to detect faults they haven't been programmed for. Hence, unforseeable errors might be picked up by humans, but will be missed by robots.

Did I mention "decades" of manufacturing experience? 

Humans will also make mistakes that robots don't, the far more common occurrence on factory floors. I have seen the occasional but rare example of machine failure (like broken tooling) creating flaws that the customer had to catch. In this case my factory was the customer for an automated component maker (electrolytic capacitors with bad lead/foil swage).

Besides, I suppose Toyota knows what they're doing...

Toyota is well known for quality manufacturing and won the Deming Prize back in the 60s for TQM (total quality management).

JR

 

[[silent:arts]]

More Companies leaving UK

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/09/brexit-uk-companies-discuss-moving-to-netherlands

 

[Script]

-- Amendment to withdrawal bill leading to new referendum ? --

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/09/back-theresa-may-brexit-deal-then-hold-peoples-vote-backbencher-plan

Not sure this is a good idea, as it will most likely piss off the 'No deal is better than a shitty deal (!)' fraction. The options are all there, so why not make it a two-step referendum with an 'if-then'?

(1) Do you back May's deal?
Yes / No
(Proceed to question two)

(2) If it turns out that the majority of voters should have voted 'No' above, then...
(a) ...I want the UK to stay in the EU under the same conditions as before the 2016 referendum.
(b) ...I want the UK to leave the EU effectively without a deal.

Make both parts a simple majority and it should end all deadlock and drama. This would most definitely not be 'holding referendums until you get the desired result' and nobody with a democratic mind could possibly complain afterwards.

 

[ruffrecords]

Trouble is referendums only work with binary choices so part 1 is OK but part 2 is not.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Script]

A technicality.

EITHER make a one-time exception by changing the rules only this time. The still current Japanese emperor for example is going to abdicate soon. The only emperor ever in history and in future who is allowed to do so. They actually wrote that into their constitution, lol. Also, wasn't there a pope recently who resigned? People like these used to die...

OR make it two referendums. Part 1 on Saturday, part 2 on Sunday (of the following week).

Anyway, it could help many British politicians to come out of it all less tainted. Well, not all...  :

 

[JohnRoberts]

A technicality.

EITHER make a one-time exception by changing the rules only this time. The still current Japanese emperor for example is going to abdicate soon. The only emperor ever in history and in future who is allowed to do so. They actually wrote that into their constitution, lol. Also, wasn't there a pope recently who resigned? People like these used to die...

OR make it two referendums. Part 1 on Saturday, part 2 on Sunday (of the following week).

Anyway, it could help many British politicians to come out of it all less tainted. Well, not all...  :

Politics is difficult enough if you don't change the rules, often created with great difficulty after debate.

In the US Maine seems to be experimenting with "ranked choice" voting.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/11/politics/maine-primaries-ranked-choice-voting/index.html

Still an experiment but in the US, the states are incubators for new ideas like that.

JR

 

[e.oelberg]

hei JR !

yes I saw that too and I must say that I was pretty excited to see such an experiment. I believe these are the things we have to come up with if we want to rescue our democracies

n

 

[JohnRoberts]

hei JR !

yes I saw that too and I must say that I was pretty excited to see such an experiment. I believe these are the things we have to come up with if we want to rescue our democracies

n

It is still very much an experiment and I am not smart enough to make any bold predictions other than that it would make political consultants wealthy trying to help the political class game the new ways to win (or lose) elections.  Then there will be a huge problem educating voters so they will trust the new process. They barely (actually don't) understand and trust the current process.

I am in favor of anything that shortens and/or simplifies the political election cycle that has expanded to consume government full time between elections, not to mention wasting vast sums of money campaigning that could be better put to other uses. 

Paul (PRR) lives in Maine perhaps he has an opinion having experienced this at ground level.

JR

 

[ruffrecords]

A technicality.

EITHER make a one-time exception by changing the rules only this time. The still current Japanese emperor for example is going to abdicate soon. The only emperor ever in history and in future who is allowed to do so. They actually wrote that into their constitution, lol. Also, wasn't there a pope recently who resigned? People like these used to die...

OR make it two referendums. Part 1 on Saturday, part 2 on Sunday (of the following week).

Anyway, it could help many British politicians to come out of it all less tainted. Well, not all...  :

No, we already had a referendum. The people have spoken. The MPs just need to implement the wishes of the people which is to leave.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Script]

Thanks for the link to ranked-choice elections. Interesting.

First I was skeptical about the second choice counting like a first choice once one candidate/option is eliminated. But it seems to mimick the process of finding a compromise by identifying the largest intersection of support.

I do see why some politicians wouldn't like it much. It changes the games of campaigning, of purely tactical maneouvering, and even of corporate single-candidate sponsoring. But I do not see why it should cost more... and why people should not understand it easily. They understand casting shows and 'best of...' lists...

 

[JohnRoberts]

Thanks for the link to ranked-choice elections. Interesting.

First I was skeptical about the second choice counting like a first choice once one candidate/option is eliminated. But it seems to mimick the process of finding a compromise by identifying the largest intersection of support.

I do see why some politicians wouldn't like it much. It changes the games of campaigning, of purely tactical maneouvering, and even of corporate single-candidate sponsoring. But I do not see why it should cost more... and why people should not understand it easily. They understand casting shows and 'best of...' lists...

I don't recall saying it would cost more... it should save money by eliminating run-off elections.

I expect the biggest push back from the established major parties who profit from simple either/or elections, where they control both the either and the or.

But again I am not smart enough to predict how this would play out in reality, another grand experiment.

JR 

 

[Script]

Sorry, my bad. I was too focused on the political consultants getting wealthy...

 

[Banzai]

On the other hand Switzerland recently voted NOT to join the EU. I spoke a few weeks ago with a Swiss national who told me their feelings for why they did not want to join are very similar to those of the UK for wanting to leave.

Cheers

Ian

Not sure 1992 can be considered recent. Neither is Switzerland a cosmopolitan country with an old empire that stretched across half the planet, or have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. It's a small isolationist alpine country, that mostly minds its own business – makes it a strange comparison.

Swiss voters did recently reject a populist Switzerland First doctrine by 66%. They have very complicated bilateral agreements in place with the EU that took decades to negotiate, they apply EU laws by default, are a member of Schengen, and have enjoyed huge economic benefits from their trade deals with the EU.

The UK is delusional in thinking they can achieve the same in a matter of months (weeks?)

 

[Script]

Had similar talks with people from Switzerland a couple of years back when the EU was talking about extension to become a fiscal union.

They said they'd absolutely hate it. But what they hated even more was having to react to and comply with all EU regulations when dealing with the EU.  And they said they simply hated it because it kept them ridiculously busy and, more importantly, because they had no say whatsoever in the process.

 

[[silent:arts]]

DHL informed their business customer about their preparation for a Hard Brexit scenario.
Next to a lot of needed customs paperwork (starting March 26th 2019) they announced a "Brexit-Handling-Fee" (up to EUR 10,29) for each package to the UK, Isle of Man and channel Islands (starting 1st of April 2019)

 

[rob_gould]

Here is a link to the government's own report about the impact of no deal brexit, which they attempted to block being made public but was released yesterday.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/781768/Implications_for_Business_and_Trade_of_a_No_Deal_Exit_on_29_March_2019.pdf

There's plenty of worrying data in there, but these two quotes stand out for me :

Based on DExEU survey data from January 2019, 55% of UK
adults did not expect to be affected by a no deal exit.

The Government has already published long term analysis of the impact of a no deal scenario that implicitly assumes a smooth, orderly transition to WTO rules.  This estimates that the UK economy would be 6.3-9% smaller in the long term in a no deal scenario (after around 15 years) than it otherwise would have been when compared with today’s arrangements, assuming no action is taken. There would also be significant variation across the UK (Wales -8.1%, Scotland -8.0%, Northern Ireland -9.1% and the North East of England -10.5%). This analysis does not account for any short term disruptions, which would be likely to have additional short and long run economic impacts in an immediate no deal scenario.

It's worth mentioning just as a point of reference that the 2007/8 economic crisis, which lead to austerity measures like huge reductions in NHS funding, reduced police budgets, the destruction of the welfare system, lead to a 3-4% reduction in the size of the British economy.

So no deal brexit is likely to cause to the UK 1.5 to 3 x the damage that the global financial crisis did.

Food for thought for those who're keen to exit as quickly as possible with little consideration of the consequences.