The Positive Brexit Thread

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

On 20/12/2019 at 09:02, Creative Midfielder said:

An early step that way this morning with the news that the next Bank of England is likely to be a second rater, but of course a compliant second rater as far as the givernment is concerned.

So the BoE will soon be about as 'independent' as the BBC has become  ☹️

FAO @Thirsty Lizard regarding the Gary Lineker thread, to illustrate how the BBC was regularly attacked as I stated in the immigration thread.

[Thirsty Lizard 3,165]

3 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

FAO @Thirsty Lizard regarding the Gary Lineker thread, to illustrate how the BBC was regularly attacked as I stated in the immigration thread.

The BBC was regularly attacked from both sides during the Brexit debate wasn't it? I don't really see your point.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

1 minute ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

The BBC was regularly attacked from both sides during the Brexit debate wasn't it? I don't really see your point.

I'd already made my point on the other thread; this was simply to illustrate that your claim about me on the other thread was false.

[BigFish 1,987]

23 hours ago, ron obvious said:

 

Goodwin is worth listening to, but that doesn't really mean his arguments make sense. They usually don't, but occasionally he hits the nail on the head. In this one he talks of capturing the Conservative Party as a way for those he describes as being without a voice to be heard. This is pretty much what has happened.

But from there his argument pretty much falls apart. The "Elite" he talks is pretty much what would one have been known as the Middle Class. The views they express are pretty standard in modern society for the majority under 50, particularly amongst those with longer in education.

Where his great realignment theory fails is that in capturing the Conservative Party the electorate for this is largely a minority, dominated by older voters, very often pensioners, and those who have spent less time in education. Whether there is enough of these to win an election is debatable. And the more policies are targeted at this group, the more that floating voters, former LibDems, soft/shy Tories take their votes elsewhere.  What was once an election winning machine has been broken by these ideas because it now struggles for support in the centre ground where the majority of the electorate are.

[ron obvious 1,502]

2 hours ago, BigFish said:

The views they express are pretty standard in modern society for the majority under 50, particularly amongst those with longer in education.

I'm not at all sure that's true, or certainly for how long it will last. The consequences of attitudes being promulgated & legislation being proposed at the moment will have serious impacts on the well being of most people &  their families.

You can deny objective reality for a while, but sooner or later it bites you on the bum.

[BigFish 1,987]

13 hours ago, ron obvious said:

I'm not at all sure that's true, or certainly for how long it will last. The consequences of attitudes being promulgated & legislation being proposed at the moment will have serious impacts on the well being of most people &  their families.

You can deny objective reality for a while, but sooner or later it bites you on the bum.

Pollsters have done work in this area and it is clear that the public take a nuanced rather than homogeneous view of the issues. Ben Ansell at Political Calculus uses three questions to measure what he call social social authoritarianism on a twelve point scale. First, agreement with “For some crimes, the death penalty is the most appropriate sentence”. Second, agreement with “Young people today don't have enough respect for traditional British values”. And third, dis-agreement with “It is more important for children to have independence than respect for their elders.” These are five point scales (Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither, Agree, Strongly Agree) he codes from zero to four and then simply add them together. The British public average roughly a 7 out of 12 on this scale meaning there are more really authoritarian people than really liberal people.

This is heavily skewed by age and education. Pensioners, home owners, committed Conservatives and Brexiteers are over represented higher in the scale, while workers, renters, graduates, left leaning remainers are represented lower in the scale. There is no evidence as well that what was once thought to be true, that voters become more Conservative with age, is still true even if it ever was. Millennials are starting to enter their forties and there is no sign that as a cohort they are turning Right. Demographics could be indicating that society is becoming more liberal in general and will adopt attitudes on an issue by issue basis within this trend.

Goodwin's argument is that there is a duallist struggle between the white working class and the metropolitan elite based on cultural values. That the WWC has realigned away from Labour particularly in the Red Wall and over Brexit towards the conservatives. I haven't seen any evidence that class is a determinant factor but there is plenty that age and education is.

[ron obvious 1,502]

None of the above addresses my response.

The terms 'left' & 'right have become increasingly irrelevant. I doubt many of the men on the Jarrow March would have identified with the aims of the Labour Party today, or that many who vote Conservative in the UK would have voted for the National Socialist German Workers' Party in 1930s Germany.

I think the distinction is now really between those who are reasonably affluent, do physically undemanding work in pleasant surroundings, & do not usually come into contact with those in the opposite situation. This group has grown much larger in the last 50 odd years & is now very close to a majority. They work for government funded institutions or large companies which derive their income from government.

I need a name for them. I'll use officianados as a working title (best I can think of off the cuff I'm sure there's better).

These organisations have been captured by pressure groups which desire the shaping of society to improve their own particular situation; they do not care about the well being of the general population, although they frequently frame their arguments as if they do, terming them 'progressive' & therefore 'left wing'. What these groups are really doing is to use feelings of anxiety & guilt experienced by those in comfortable situations (with no real understanding of where their income is derived from) to espouse their cause; officianados' consciences are eased by feeling they are doing something for these poor persecuted souls thus they can continue on in their privileged way & not worry too much. Keep your head down & take the salary.

The really burning question is where this salary is coming from. It is largely coming from borrowing. How long can a nation keep increasing its debt? After covid I for one haven't a clue. It appears to be indefinite. Although I suspect it may in fact be limited by a fairly small group of individuals/organisations who control the major technologies now woven into our everyday lives.

Technology is of course at the root of what is occurring; always has been, always will be. We are now in a situation never seen before, one where there are more than enough material goods to go round without the physical labour needed to produce them. 

This leads to an odd dilemma. The factories producing these goods need to sell them. But there's increasingly fewer people in those factories producing them (it's not just manufactured goods - look at how many people are involved in farming nowadays, yet how much is produced!). So how is the principle of the old system of work/reward going to function? It will struggle. For one thing there'll have to be a complete realignment of how much different jobs are worth.

Another way is to use virtue as a component. To be successful in an officianado career now you must be seen to be virtuous above all else. 'Being seen to be' is the requirement. Otherwise you end up like Matt Hancock when the truth of your real opinions & motivations for you actions are revealed.

So my original opinions are unchanged. As Goodwin says there is a growing dichotomy between different parts of society. It is not as simple as I have described, but I believe it lies at the heart of what is causing the split. I also believe it's a question of how much longer borrowing can continue to keep officianados (& the other businesses/occupations they support) going. 

Of this I have no idea. I am pretty certain, however, that it cannot continue indefinitely. Something will happen, as it always does.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

7 hours ago, ron obvious said:

None of the above addresses my response.

The terms 'left' & 'right have become increasingly irrelevant. I doubt many of the men on the Jarrow March would have identified with the aims of the Labour Party today, or that many who vote Conservative in the UK would have voted for the National Socialist German Workers' Party in 1930s Germany.

I think the distinction is now really between those who are reasonably affluent, do physically undemanding work in pleasant surroundings, & do not usually come into contact with those in the opposite situation. This group has grown much larger in the last 50 odd years & is now very close to a majority. They work for government funded institutions or large companies which derive their income from government.

I need a name for them. I'll use officianados as a working title (best I can think of off the cuff I'm sure there's better).

These organisations have been captured by pressure groups which desire the shaping of society to improve their own particular situation; they do not care about the well being of the general population, although they frequently frame their arguments as if they do, terming them 'progressive' & therefore 'left wing'. What these groups are really doing is to use feelings of anxiety & guilt experienced by those in comfortable situations (with no real understanding of where their income is derived from) to espouse their cause; officianados' consciences are eased by feeling they are doing something for these poor persecuted souls thus they can continue on in their privileged way & not worry too much. Keep your head down & take the salary.

The really burning question is where this salary is coming from. It is largely coming from borrowing. How long can a nation keep increasing its debt? After covid I for one haven't a clue. It appears to be indefinite. Although I suspect it may in fact be limited by a fairly small group of individuals/organisations who control the major technologies now woven into our everyday lives.

Technology is of course at the root of what is occurring; always has been, always will be. We are now in a situation never seen before, one where there are more than enough material goods to go round without the physical labour needed to produce them. 

This leads to an odd dilemma. The factories producing these goods need to sell them. But there's increasingly fewer people in those factories producing them (it's not just manufactured goods - look at how many people are involved in farming nowadays, yet how much is produced!). So how is the principle of the old system of work/reward going to function? It will struggle. For one thing there'll have to be a complete realignment of how much different jobs are worth.

Another way is to use virtue as a component. To be successful in an officianado career now you must be seen to be virtuous above all else. 'Being seen to be' is the requirement. Otherwise you end up like Matt Hancock when the truth of your real opinions & motivations for you actions are revealed.

So my original opinions are unchanged. As Goodwin says there is a growing dichotomy between different parts of society. It is not as simple as I have described, but I believe it lies at the heart of what is causing the split. I also believe it's a question of how much longer borrowing can continue to keep officianados (& the other businesses/occupations they support) going. 

Of this I have no idea. I am pretty certain, however, that it cannot continue indefinitely. Something will happen, as it always does.

 

There's a lot of great thinking in there. Some of the ideas echo my own thoughts during the pandemic as to how it demonstrated that the economic models we have don't reflect the needs of a society where the reality is not everybody needs to work for everybody to survive. We saw everybody fed and heated with a large section of the population doing nothing other than sitting at home. The only difference was a big jump in national debt as a number, which arguably is meaningless unless anyone wants to make an issue of it; arguably so long as debt is bought at cheap rates and countries can print money, you can just carry on forever pretending it makes sense. If some companies are too big to fail , so are national economies, which arguably was demonstrated by the management of the Greek debt crisis.

Your 'officionado' term is quite fun and I think there's something in what you're saying. A good example is how experiments with four-day working weeks extend to advertising executives but not to Amazon delivery drivers; neither do toilet breaks for the latter.

Anyway, back on topic. Sunak and Macron have had a nice chinwag about their investment banking days and cooperating in the Indo-Pacific.

https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-france-emmanuel-macron-rishi-sunak-team-up-indo-pacific/

[BigFish 1,987]

The thing is we have a cohort who believe they are being oppressed despite thinking they are in the majority, but want to silence anyone who disagrees with them.

Really the instituitions haven't been captured, instead they are staffed by employees who largely think like the working age population thinks. Those who think like this cohort are largely economically inactive, they have retired, this is the thinking of the past, of pensioners. They are also disappointed, so are grateful if someone gives them someone to blame for this rather than take responsibility for it e.g. foreigners, immigrants and asylum seekers.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

23 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

There's a lot of great thinking in there. Some of the ideas echo my own thoughts during the pandemic as to how it demonstrated that the economic models we have don't reflect the needs of a society where the reality is not everybody needs to work for everybody to survive. We saw everybody fed and heated with a large section of the population doing nothing other than sitting at home. The only difference was a big jump in national debt as a number, which arguably is meaningless unless anyone wants to make an issue of it; arguably so long as debt is bought at cheap rates and countries can print money, you can just carry on forever pretending it makes sense. If some companies are too big to fail , so are national economies, which arguably was demonstrated by the management of the Greek debt crisis.

Your 'officionado' term is quite fun and I think there's something in what you're saying. A good example is how experiments with four-day working weeks extend to advertising executives but not to Amazon delivery drivers; neither do toilet breaks for the latter.

Anyway, back on topic. Sunak and Macron have had a nice chinwag about their investment banking days and cooperating in the Indo-Pacific.

https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-france-emmanuel-macron-rishi-sunak-team-up-indo-pacific/

But of course, during the Trump regime, measures on stress testing of banks was diluted so that SVB has gone down with some very important tech customers such as Roblox and dragged a couple of others with it. Once again they had overextended on risk. No lessons learnt, and no banking director charged or out of pocket. Well not so far anyway.

So lets hope Rishi and Manny resolved to regulate banking, in Europe anyway, to prevent any misfortune coming our way again.

[Hook's-Walk-Canary 213]

Oh dear, Remoaners - Our actual growth is three times higher than your Remainiac organisations predicted and your beloved EU is having to be downgraded to zero growth...

Must be Brexit eh! 😉

[Herman 9,767]

Can we have some numbers before we congratulate you brexiters?

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

4 hours ago, Herman said:

Can we have some numbers before we congratulate you brexiters?

Think he'll need a little while to make them up 😂

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

17 hours ago, Hook's-Walk-Canary said:

Oh dear, Remoaners - Our actual growth is three times higher than your Remainiac organisations predicted and your beloved EU is having to be downgraded to zero growth...

Must be Brexit eh! 😉

Depends where the negative growth plummeted to before you start calculating. But don't let a lie spoil a statistic. You do know that we use football as part of the economic calculations now. 

Edited March 13, 2023 by keelansgrandad

[horsefly 4,300]

On 12/03/2023 at 16:52, Hook's-Walk-Canary said:

Oh dear, Remoaners - Our actual growth is three times higher than your Remainiac organisations predicted and your beloved EU is having to be downgraded to zero growth...

Must be Brexit eh! 😉

Oh dear! You do realise that we are the only country in the G7 that has yet to regain its pre-pandemic level of economic performance don't you? Fast growth is the easiest thing in the world to achieve when you are starting from an appalling low base. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

On 15/03/2023 at 08:05, horsefly said:

Oh dear! You do realise that we are the only country in the G7 that has yet to regain its pre-pandemic level of economic performance don't you? Fast growth is the easiest thing in the world to achieve when you are starting from an appalling low base. 

Exactly so, and even in yesterdays 'upbeat' (😂😂) budget Hunt predicted that it would still be some time next year before the UK economy recovered to its 2019 level, i.e. years behind most Western economies.

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

Sorry just had to laugh when I saw this today (internally) on the subject of CPTTP.

Malaysian customer wanting to buy our stuff via Japan (yes CPTTP partners).

Japan says much easier (for all sorts of reasons) to come to us direct outside CPTTP (and nothing to do with CPTTP).

The reality vs the myth.

 

  

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

Sorry just had to laugh when I saw this today (internally) on the subject of CPTTP.

Malaysian customer wanting to buy our stuff via Japan (yes CPTTP partners).

Japan says much easier (for all sorts of reasons) to come to us direct outside CPTTP (and nothing to do with CPTTP).

The reality vs the myth.

 

  

That depends on the contents of bilateral trade agreements versus the multilateral terms in CPTPP. In some cases, bilateral terms may be more generous; in others, CPTPP terms may be better.

The point is CPTPP doesn't duplicate all of the bilateral agreements between CPTPP countries nor does it supercede them, so the fact that a bilateral treaty might be a better basis on which to trade between specific CPTPP countries in specific areas doesn't negate the fact that CPTPP is adding value above those bilateral treaties for all members.

Edit: If you're talking about us now, we're not CPTPP members yet, so don't understand the significance of how Malaysia wants to buy our goods via another CPTPP member like Japan instead of us at the moment as to whether CPTPP will have benefits for us or not on trade in goods, but export of services will likely be the biggest benefit for the UK from CPTPP anyway, which is a much bigger part of the UK economy.

At a basic level, if the benefits of CPTPP for members are mythical, why did its members sign up to it?

Edited March 16, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Bobzilla 141]

On 10/03/2023 at 11:46, ron obvious said:

None of the above addresses my response.

The terms 'left' & 'right have become increasingly irrelevant. I doubt many … who vote Conservative in the UK would have voted for the National Socialist German Workers' Party in 1930s Germany.

 

I think that you’d be quite surprised at who would vote Nazi, about who DID vote Nazi.

The Nazi party basically started their life as an anti-immigration and anti-communist anti-trade union party.  It was only later that anti-immigrant turned into genoicidical anti-semitism, and by that time, Hitler was too successful.

[Bobzilla 141]

On 11/03/2023 at 19:28, keelansgrandad said:

But of course, during the Trump regime, measures on stress testing of banks was diluted so that SVB has gone down with some very important tech customers such as Roblox and dragged a couple of others with it. Once again they had overextended on risk. No lessons learnt, and no banking director charged or out of pocket. Well not so far anyway.

SVB is a very nuanced case.  SVB’s issues were how it invested its surplus funds and fluctuations on short term assets where over time the value must trend to par value.  SVB had deposited its money in US Government bonds.  Stable interest returns, fundamentally guaranteed return of principal if you hold to maturity.  

BUT, short term the value fluctuates according to interest rates.  Historically, interest rates have been pretty stable, so government bond prices have been pretty stable. But then increases in interest rates meant that government bonds issued today has a higher yield (i.e. total economic return on investment) than the interest on bonds issued previously.  Which means that the price of those old government bonds had to go down to below the face value.  This is fine when you can hold the bonds to maturity (i.e. repayment by government) but not so fine if you have to sell them.  SVB had a small number of very large clients withdraw all of their funds in pretty quick succession, which meant they had to sell their government bonds to get the cash to give to clients.

The Fed has ‘fixed’ this issue by allowing US government bondholders to borrow against the value of the bond so that they have access to cash without having to sell the bond.

This is not so much a case of overextending on risk, and more a case of economic policy shifting very dramatically and having an unintended commercial consequence.  Don’t forget that regulators like financial institutions to hold government bonds because of how very safe they are as an investment.

 

(Source - I have a back office finance role at an investment bank)

Edited March 16, 2023 by Bobzilla

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

14 minutes ago, Bobzilla said:

I think that you’d be quite surprised at who would vote Nazi, about who DID vote Nazi.

The Nazi party basically started their life as an anti-immigration and anti-communist anti-trade union party.  It was only later that anti-immigrant turned into genoicidical anti-semitism, and by that time, Hitler was too successful.

Were they anti-communist? Anton Drexler's original motivation was more money for workers, which seems pretty socialist to me. They were undoubtedly nationalist and antisemitic, but then so was the Soviet Union, which most characterise as far left.

Edited March 16, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Bobzilla 141]

Just now, littleyellowbirdie said:

Were they anti-communist? Anton Drexler's original motivation was more money for workers, which seems pretty socialist to me. They were undoubtedly nationalist and antisemitic, but then so was the Soviet Union, which most characteris as far left.

Very much so.  Have a listen to/read of William Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.  They were basically the party of big business.  Massive economic stimulus, slashing workers rights, government manufacture and supply contracts for party members (look at how many current successful German businesses have some sort of Nazi affiliation in their history).

True, the DAP was a socialist party, and some of the Nazi laws may have looked like socialist ones, but the German worker did not profit from the Nazi regime.  In fact, quite the opposite.  And whilst capitalism had notionally been abolished by the Nazis, German business and German businessmen profited very nicely.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

4 minutes ago, Bobzilla said:

Very much so.  Have a listen to/read of William Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.  They were basically the party of big business.  Massive economic stimulus, slashing workers rights, government manufacture and supply contracts for party members (look at how many current successful German businesses have some sort of Nazi affiliation in their history).

True, the DAP was a socialist party, and some of the Nazi laws may have looked like socialist ones, but the German worker did not profit from the Nazi regime.  In fact, quite the opposite.  And whilst capitalism had notionally been abolished by the Nazis, German business and German businessmen profited very nicely.

Massive economic stimulus? Isn't that pretty much Keynes big idea, which is strongly linked with socialism?

The word notional there is well-used in this context. A lot of things are notional in authoritarian regimes, where the ideological rhetoric is frequently perverted to fit the desires of the authoritiarian rulers, be they notionally far left or far right. Capitalism is notionally abolished, but there are still rich business leaders; Communist leaders are notionally equal to the wider public, but just happen to have access to great wealth and luxury that the wider public don't have access to, but that's okay because they don't technically own it, much like a businessman with his own private jet will have that jet counted as a company asset rather than his own private property.

I agree with Ron that the notions of left and right are becoming increasingly nonsensical. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, were all strong man leaders who ultimately failed because all of their underlings were too scared to tell them the truth about how their decisions were affecting their country. Putin and Xi Jinping will finish up going the same way. In all the cases, ideology is simply window dressing for megalomaniacs.

 

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That depends on the contents of bilateral trade agreements versus the multilateral terms in CPTPP. In some cases, bilateral terms may be more generous; in others, CPTPP terms may be better.

The point is CPTPP doesn't duplicate all of the bilateral agreements between CPTPP countries nor does it supercede them, so the fact that a bilateral treaty might be a better basis on which to trade between specific CPTPP countries in specific areas doesn't negate the fact that CPTPP is adding value above those bilateral treaties for all members.

Edit: If you're talking about us now, we're not CPTPP members yet, so don't understand the significance of how Malaysia wants to buy our goods via another CPTPP member like Japan instead of us at the moment as to whether CPTPP will have benefits for us or not on trade in goods, but export of services will likely be the biggest benefit for the UK from CPTPP anyway, which is a much bigger part of the UK economy.

At a basic level, if the benefits of CPTPP for members are mythical, why did its members sign up to it?

All I'm pointing out by direct example is that it doesn't (as yet) really work for 2 existing members. All those different standards and whatever (non-tariff barriers). It's simply not a cohesive 'single' market. Maybe, maybe, one day. It seems easier for both to trade directly with us in the UK (now) than with each other !!! 

What it is of course is mainly a political counterbalance to China and RCEP.  Please don't oversell it as some great economic panacea when it's principally a political construct  least of all an equivalent to the 'EU' single market in breadth or depth which is all we've ever really asked of those that champion it.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

9 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

All I'm pointing out by direct example is that it doesn't (as yet) really work for 2 existing members. All those different standards and whatever (non-tariff barriers). It's simply not a cohesive 'single' market. Maybe, maybe, one day. It seems easier for both to trade directly with us in the UK (now) than with each other !!! 

What it is of course is mainly a political counterbalance to China and RCEP.  Please don't oversell it as some great economic panacea when it's principally a political construct  least of all an equivalent to the 'EU' single market in breadth or depth which is all we've ever really asked of those that champion it.

I'm not saying it is and never have done. I see CPTPP as a good platform for damage limitation after a regrettable decision in the short term; in the mid to long term it gives us a good platform to rebuild ties with the EU without anybody losing face on either side of the argument. We've already acknowledged the massive influence Japan has had on our behalf over NI in its efforts to facilitate our accession to CPTPP.

It's worth remembering that a large part of the growth of the EU, especially Eastern expansion, was US support for its growth as a counterbalance to Soviet power. With Russia falling increasingly into China's sphere, it completely makes sense for the EU to want to bolster Pacific-based democracies going forwards.

The EEC was a political construct; its founding aspiration was a peaceful Europe using the economic tools of economic integration as a political tool. CPTPP is very much cut from the same cloth. Indeed, I find it quite humorous that we have a Japanese-German axis at the heart of this coming together.

[Herman 9,767]

You literally can not say that this has nothing to do with brexit.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/03/13/byd-says-yes-to-thailand-no-to-uk-for-new-factories/

[benchwarmer 625]

3 hours ago, Bobzilla said:

I think that you’d be quite surprised at who would vote Nazi, about who DID vote Nazi.

The Nazi party basically started their life as an anti-immigration and anti-communist anti-trade union party.  It was only later that anti-immigrant turned into genoicidical anti-semitism, and by that time, Hitler was too successful.

Quite so.  Hitler didn't come to power by force, he was elected.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

4 hours ago, Herman said:

You literally can not say that this has nothing to do with brexit.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/03/13/byd-says-yes-to-thailand-no-to-uk-for-new-factories/

Current manufacturing locations are India, Brazil, the US. They're adding Thailand to this. Which one of these is aiming at the European market, or is there now a big volte face where trade gravity is now being downplayed in the interests of shoehorning Brexit into the story?

It even quoted regarding the UK "Without Brexit, maybe." Maybe. That doesn't sound like much of a concrete plan to me. Also not sure quoting the Tony Blair Institute's website has the ring of impartiality in the story.

While we're on the subject of electric technology, though, the Britishvolt factory has been taken over by RechargeIndustries.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/australias-recharge-industries-buys-failed-battery-firm-britishvolt-2023-02-27/

 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

4 hours ago, benchwarmer said:

Quite so.  Hitler didn't come to power by force, he was elected.

Even then, it still needed the Reichstag Fire Decree after the fire at the Reichstag for a state of emergency to be declared, and the Enabling Law was passed a matter of weeks after the 1933 elections.

There's a commonly believed myth that the majority of Germans voted for them. The 1933 elections were hardly free and fair, being the last multi-party elections before Germany was rendered a dictatorship, but even then they only got around 44% of the votes.

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

14 hours ago, Herman said:

You literally can not say that this has nothing to do with brexit.

https://cleantechnica.com/2023/03/13/byd-says-yes-to-thailand-no-to-uk-for-new-factories/

 

9 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Current manufacturing locations are India, Brazil, the US. They're adding Thailand to this. Which one of these is aiming at the European market, or is there now a big volte face where trade gravity is now being downplayed in the interests of shoehorning Brexit into the story?

It even quoted regarding the UK "Without Brexit, maybe." Maybe. That doesn't sound like much of a concrete plan to me. Also not sure quoting the Tony Blair Institute's website has the ring of impartiality in the story.

While we're on the subject of electric technology, though, the Britishvolt factory has been taken over by RechargeIndustries.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/australias-recharge-industries-buys-failed-battery-firm-britishvolt-2023-02-27/

 

Read it again LYB. It really couldn't have been clearer.

“As an investor we want a country to be stable. To open a factory . . . is a decision for decades. Without Brexit, maybe. But after Brexit, we don’t understand what happened. The UK doesn’t have a very good solution. Even on the long list we didn’t have the UK.”

Oddly - the view expressed is the one I have seen personally in Asian boardrooms and reported on before  - disbelief that the UK could be so stupid.

Recharge industries is by the way is not now going to build EV batteries (no help to car industry) but mainly those for power storage (far more sensible give the UKs wind power and renewables)

Edited March 17, 2023 by Yellow Fever