Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Finnegan]

Just now, Donut said:

And the idea that the EU is a house of cards that's about to fall apart is complete pony too.

 

Holland, France and Austria have all had their far populists beaten, new countries are trying to join the EU for its benefits, and the only country stupid enough to punch themselves in the face was the UK.......and even then it was only 52% of the people who wanted to then. Many of whom thinking it was a good way to put one over on the establishment.

 

 

Tbf I think the Italians pretty genuinely want out but then you can sort of appreciate why. 

 

Their country is a mess, they're all skint and struggling and yet they're also the front line for mass immigration in to Europe. 

 

You don't have to be right wing or racist to see a problem in that. 

[Donut]

Just now, Finnegan said:

 

 

Tbf I think the Italians pretty genuinely want out but then you can sort of appreciate why. 

 

Their country is a mess, they're all skint and struggling and yet they're also the front line for mass immigration in to Europe. 

 

You don't have to be right wing or racist to see a problem in that. 

Yep, ill give you that one

[Buce]

4 minutes ago, Donut said:

And the idea that the EU is a house of cards that's about to fall apart is complete pony too.

 

Holland, France and Austria have all had their populists beaten, new countries are trying to join the EU for its benefits, and the only country stupid enough to punch themselves in the face was the UK.......and even then it was only 52% of the people who wanted to then. Many of whom thinking it was a good way to put one over on the establishment.

 

 

Not even 52%. 

 

17 million - a mere quarter of the population, many of whom will die before the consequences are fully felt. 

 

Finners is right - the younger generations have been betrayed by the narrow minded oldies and the racist Little Englanders. 

Edited 11 June 2018 by Buce

[Guest MattP]

49 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

No, they had a bunch of false promises and unrealistic expectations based on the notion we'd just go and bend the Europeans over and get our own way. 

 

Which nobody really wanted except a partisan voting block of, let's be honest, deny it til you're blue in the face, you won't change anyone's mind, racist bigots (not all of you I concede.) 

 

Now they realise that what was voted for isn't really achievable and isn't really what the majority, especially the young majority, actually want. 

 

Referendum again today and it's remain by a landslide. They know that, everyone knows that.

I think what people in the main voted is still very achievable, the government position still hasn't changed from the Mansion or Lancaster house speech, we leave the single market, we leave the customs union and that then enables to release ourselves from the four pillars of the EU which you'll broadly see are the things stopping us doing the things our vote want - why is that not an achieveable objective at this point?

 

As for the bolded bit, this is complete nonsense and I can't believe someone as bright as you could post it, the last Yougov poll had it about a point or two different from what it was on the day of the referendum- the idea another vote would produce a landslide for Remain is bordering on laughable, I'll concede it might win (just as it might on any other day during the campaign) but it's absolute tosh that it would somehow produce a definitive result, the Tories (still following the hardest Brexit policy using the post-ref terms of it i.e leaving the EEA) are still polling at 44% and performed well in leave voting areas in the recent council elections and last summer's general election.

 

Prominent Remainers are still saying there hasn't been a change yet in public mood, so how you can single handedly declare "everyone knows" it would be a landslide is for the birds. I'd love to know what evidence you can produce to suggest this, because the brightest people in the country who do this for a living can't even find it.

 

15 minutes ago, Donut said:

And the idea that the EU is a house of cards that's about to fall apart is complete pony too.

 

Holland, France and Austria have all had their populists beaten, new countries are trying to join the EU for its benefits, and the only country stupid enough to punch themselves in the face was the UK.......and even then it was only 52% of the people who wanted to then. Many of whom thinking it was a good way to put one over on the establishment. 

 

I notice how you have conviently left out Italy, Sweden and Hungary. Austria also came within a whisker of voting in a fascist. I wouldn't read too much into France either, a Conservative (or even Melenchon) anti-Eurosceptic candidate would poll far better than Le Pen, voting against the far-right doesnt means you are pro-EU.

 

The key thing though is unlike here, it's the old gammons who are pro-EU on the continent, the younger are Eurosceptic.

Edited 11 June 2018 by MattP

[Webbo]

2 hours ago, Donut said:

Whats more realistic, a calculated guess based on past numbers and trends

 

Or a calculated guess based on thin air because no one has a clue whats going to happen and every single voter wants something different.

 

Look at what the Dutch government said last week.....look for suppliers within the EU as there is certainty over customs arrangements and tarrifs for manufacturing. And the fact that we have no idea as yet how to maintain just in time supply chains with customers like those in Holland.

 

Some companies have already moved their manufacturing out there already, to other European countries.

 

We can pretend this sort of stuff doesn't exist by all means. Or we can just say "sovereignty" as if its the answer.

 

Is sovereignty going to bring back the jobs of those laid off when the company relocated? or pay their bills while unemployed. no.

 

 

Well if these people are so right how come they keep getting it wrong? Also it's not unknown, we do more than half our exports outside the EU, 160 countries manage without being in the EU.

[Webbo]

2 hours ago, toddybad said:

Laugh it up next time you meet the workers of a toys r us, mothercare, maplins etc etc etc. Over 10,000 jobs lost just in the last 3/4 days. That's 10,000 families affected by the coming disaster.

 

Give it a rest you tart.  

[Webbo]

2 hours ago, Donut said:

The ECJ thing anyway.....not being under the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

 

We will be under a court of arbitration of some kind. You've got to play by someones rules.

 

You cant just say we are Britian, its our ball and we do what we like

It's like playing Man U and having Mourinho as the referee . It breaks it's own rules on a regular basis it's not going to be fair to non members. 

[SouthStandUpperTier]

World Cup's nearly here guys.

[Webbo]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

 

 

 

Referendum again today and it's remain by a landslide. They know that, everyone knows that. 

 

 

Give over all the polls show that there has been no change in opinions.

[Donut]

3 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Well if these people are so right how come they keep getting it wrong? Also it's not unknown, we do more than half our exports outside the EU, 160 countries manage without being in the EU.

Lets reduce the potential we have to trade with our closest customers without customs in the hope maybe we can sell more to China or maybe India?

 

160 countries aren't about to say nitto to a free trade deal with their biggest customers.

 

Have you seen that Australia and New Zealand who presumably fall into that category have said they will negotiate with the EU before us?

 

What about Trump putting big tariffs on metals, any thoughts?

 

What is it that the forecasts are getting wrong, considering we are already getting worse off and we haven't left yet?

 

What are we going to sell more of that is going to offset the trade we lose to Europe?

 

Whats the point in "taking back control" of the fishing waters, and then reducing your market to sell fish into?

 

As a brexiter, I wouldn't expect you to have any answers to any of this. Blind faith, sovereignty, we will manage and you lost are all you've got, all youll ever have, and you've already shown it many, many times.

 

[Webbo]

10 minutes ago, Donut said:

Lets reduce the potential we have to trade with our closest customers without customs in the hope maybe we can sell more to China or maybe India?

 

160 countries aren't about to say nitto to a free trade deal with their biggest customers.

 

Have you seen that Australia and New Zealand who presumably fall into that category have said they will negotiate with the EU before us?

 

What about Trump putting big tariffs on metals, any thoughts?

 

What is it that the forecasts are getting wrong, considering we are already getting worse off and we haven't left yet?

 

What are we going to sell more of that is going to offset the trade we lose to Europe?

 

Whats the point in "taking back control" of the fishing waters, and then reducing your market to sell fish into?

 

As a brexiter, I wouldn't expect you to have any answers to any of this. Blind faith, sovereignty, we will manage and you lost are all you've got, all youll ever have, and you've already shown it many, many times.

 

Europe has a trade surplus with us, so if trade is reduced they'll lose more than us. anything we buy from there can be bought cheaper elsewhere, which'll be a boost to the economy. We can negotiate with Australia and NZ at the same time and seeing as we don't have to appease 28 different vested interests we'll be able to do a better deal quicker.

 

I'm dead against Trump's tariffs as I've made clear before. what I can't understand is why the Pro EU  crowd are seeing as they believe we need to keep tariffs to protect agricultural jobs in this country and all Trump is doing is protecting American jobs. Surely you must agree with him?

 

As for the fish, there's only a finite supply. Europeans aren't going to stop buying fish so if they want some they'll have to buy it from us. It was in the Telegraph last that according to an SNP report taking back our waters will boost the Scottish economy by £500 million.

 

As a brexiteer I've given you all the answers you wanted and even if we're a bit worse off, which I don't believe we will be, it'll still be worth it.

[Jon the Hat]

Lets reduce the potential we have to trade with our closest customers without customs in the hope maybe we can sell more to China or maybe India?

- The rest of the world trades perfectly well with the EU, no reason why we cannot.

160 countries aren't about to say nitto to a free trade deal with their biggest customers.

- What?

Have you seen that Australia and New Zealand who presumably fall into that category have said they will negotiate with the EU before us?

- They have been talking to the EU for years already and there isn't one - why is that do you think?  What will change exactly?

What about Trump putting big tariffs on metals, any thoughts?

- We don't export cheap steel to the US, we export specialist Alloys, so make sod all difference

What is it that the forecasts are getting wrong, considering we are already getting worse off and we haven't left yet?

- We are worse off because of the uncertainty, not the act of leaving.

What are we going to sell more of that is going to offset the trade we lose to Europe?

- Why would we lose trade to Europe again?  Once things are clear, no reason at all for this to happen.

Whats the point in "taking back control" of the fishing waters, and then reducing your market to sell fish into?

- Protecting fish stocks for the longer term? Reducing the cost of Fish in the UK?

As a brexiter, I wouldn't expect you to have any answers to any of this. Blind faith, sovereignty, we will manage and you lost are all you've got, all youll ever have, and you've already shown it many, many times.

- oops, sorry about that.

[Jon the Hat]

17 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Give over all the polls show that there has been no change in opinions.

Which suggests to me a hardening of most people's views given the negativity around the process.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Europe has a trade surplus with us, so if trade is reduced they'll lose more than us. anything we buy from there can be bought cheaper elsewhere, which'll be a boost to the economy. We can negotiate with Australia and NZ at the same time and seeing as we don't have to appease 28 different vested interests we'll be able to do a better deal quicker.

 

I'm dead against Trump's tariffs as I've made clear before. what I can't understand is why the Pro EU  crowd are seeing as they believe we need to keep tariffs to protect agricultural jobs in this country and all Trump is doing is protecting American jobs. Surely you must agree with him?

 

As for the fish, there's only a finite supply. Europeans aren't going to stop buying fish so if they want some they'll have to buy it from us. It was in the Telegraph last that according to an SNP report taking back our waters will boost the Scottish economy by £500 million.

 

As a brexiteer I've given you all the answers you wanted and even if we're a bit worse off, which I don't believe we will be, it'll still be worth it.

Re the first bit. I want actual examples and prices. Otherwise it's blind faith.

 

Re the second, we reached agreements over carving up fishing rights before we joined the EU and they'll continue to exist long after we've left. 

 

Given you believe we can go elsewhere to get the same goods cheaper, why do you think the EU has to buy its fish from us? 

[Jon the Hat]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

Re the first bit. I want actual examples and prices. Otherwise it's blind faith.

 

Re the second, we reached agreements over carving up fishing rights before we joined the EU and they'll continue to exist long after we've left. 

 

Given you believe we can go elsewhere to get the same goods cheaper, why do you think the EU has to buy its fish from us? 

Our mighty Navy will sink jonny foreigner fishing boats and keep all the fish for us!  Tallyho!

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

Re the first bit. I want actual examples and prices. Otherwise it's blind faith.

 

Re the second, we reached agreements over carving up fishing rights before we joined the EU and they'll continue to exist long after we've left. 

 

Given you believe we can go elsewhere to get the same goods cheaper, why do you think the EU has to buy its fish from us? 

Food, steel from China, that's 2 things off the top of my head.

 

Toddy mate, the fish are in our waters, where else are they going to get it from? Why would they want to buy it from elsewhere when, if they don't impose tariffs, which they won't it won't be any dearer?

[Guest Foxin_mad]

2 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

What absolute nonsense. What on earth are you on about?

What are you on about? 

 

Shops are closing because retail habits are changing. The only thing drivel is that this is to do with Brexit/Tory Scum etc.

 

Was Brexit ivolved with the closing of Woolies, Focus, Tempo, Comet, Alders, etc etc? no it was because they were unprofitable shops for a range of reasons. 

 

If you want Poundland/BHS/Maplin/Toyrus to exist go and shop there.

 

Don't shop at Amazon who pay next to nothing in UK tax and then complain when your local high street is empty.

 

[ealingfox]

10 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

What are you on about? 

 

Shops are closing because retail habits are changing. The only thing drivel is that this is to do with Brexit/Tory Scum etc.

 

Was Brexit ivolved with the closing of Woolies, Focus, Tempo, Comet, Alders, etc etc? no it was because they were unprofitable shops for a range of reasons. 

 

If you want Poundland/BHS/Maplin/Toyrus to exist go and shop there.

 

Don't shop at Amazon who pay next to nothing in UK tax and then complain when your local high street is empty.

 

 

So what does that have to do with 'pseudo socialists'? Why is that Corbyns fault or indeed anything to do with him?

 

What evidence have you got that only Labour voters use Amazon?

 

All you have as usual is paranoid babble and strawman arguments. It's so boring to read and does you no favours at all.

Edited 11 June 2018 by ealingfox

[ealingfox]

15 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

What are you on about? 

 

Shops are closing because retail habits are changing. The only thing drivel is that this is to do with Brexit/Tory Scum etc.

 

Was Brexit ivolved with the closing of Woolies, Focus, Tempo, Comet, Alders, etc etc? no it was because they were unprofitable shops for a range of reasons. 

 

If you want Poundland/BHS/Maplin/Toyrus to exist go and shop there.

 

Don't shop at Amazon who pay next to nothing in UK tax and then complain when your local high street is empty.

 

 

I'll add to that that if you want tax reform that will apparently scare away the likes of Amazon from these shores and protect jobs and businesses here, you know who to vote for.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

3 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

So what does that have to do with 'pseudo socialists'? Why is that Corbyns fault or indeed anything to do with him?

 

What evidence have you got that only Labour voters use Amazon?

 

All you have as usual is paranoid babble and strawman arguments. It's so boring to read and does you no favours at all.

 

I have never said that it was anything to do with Corbyn. Its his voters, the ethos he pedals, fake outrage, rich man strawmen. Pseudo socislists who pretent they care when actually they dont are part of the reason shops fail. If people really want to make a change stop using these multinational organisations.  Of course they dont really care abd arent really bothered when it comes to affect them. There are so many members of socialist worker, momentum and labour who are permanently glued to social media, an iphone, with a coffee in hand. If they really want change start at home. The evidence is that Labour see social media as a key vote winning platform. Many of the people singing Corbyn would hate him if he took away twitter or their iphone- they just dont understand what he stands for.

 

3 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

I'll add to that that if you want tax reform that will apparently scare away the likes of Amazon from these shores and protect jobs and businesses here, you know who to vote for.

There needs to be global tax reform. We can not do this alone.

[Strokes]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Lets reduce the potential we have to trade with our closest customers without customs in the hope maybe we can sell more to China or maybe India?

- The rest of the world trades perfectly well with the EU, no reason why we cannot.

160 countries aren't about to say nitto to a free trade deal with their biggest customers.

- What?

Have you seen that Australia and New Zealand who presumably fall into that category have said they will negotiate with the EU before us?

- They have been talking to the EU for years already and there isn't one - why is that do you think?  What will change exactly?

What about Trump putting big tariffs on metals, any thoughts?

- We don't export cheap steel to the US, we export specialist Alloys, so make sod all difference

What is it that the forecasts are getting wrong, considering we are already getting worse off and we haven't left yet?

- We are worse off because of the uncertainty, not the act of leaving.

What are we going to sell more of that is going to offset the trade we lose to Europe?

- Why would we lose trade to Europe again?  Once things are clear, no reason at all for this to happen.

Whats the point in "taking back control" of the fishing waters, and then reducing your market to sell fish into?

- Protecting fish stocks for the longer term? Reducing the cost of Fish in the UK?

As a brexiter, I wouldn't expect you to have any answers to any of this. Blind faith, sovereignty, we will manage and you lost are all you've got, all youll ever have, and you've already shown it many, many times.

- oops, sorry about that.

Well done Jon,

@Donut will probably disappear for a weeks again now and then come back and repeat the claim ‘non of you brexiteers will answer this’ line. Even though we always do.

[Guest MattP]

Piece from Life, I think I see a lot of this.

 

Quote

 

When historians of the future look back on Britain in our time, they will surely see our row over Brexit as extraordinary.  Not because people disagree and campaign: that is normal and healthy.  But because an influential section of the country, and particularly of its upper classes, are refusing to accept the will of the majority as legitimate or binding.  It is no exaggeration to call this a revolt, even though it rarely hits the streets.  

 

Its unusual nature is shown by the arguments of its hardline supporters – arguments that would undermine any democratic system, and which have rarely been heard in any advanced country since the nineteenth century.  For example: that most voters do not know what they are voting for; that working-class voters are too ignorant to make a choice; that people without advanced education should have their political rights reduced; that older people’s opinions have inferior legitimacy.  

 

Leaving aside ethical questions concerning equal rights – questions that most of us would have thought had been resolved by the end of the 19^th century – these views show astonishing misunderstanding of what democracy is and what it is for.  They lack the slightest degree of historical awareness.  Yet they are put forward with assurance by people who openly regard themselves as superior in education and intelligence.  

 

Up to now, it is those who voted Leave who have been scrutinized as an oddity – poor, old, stupid, ‘left behind’, and so on.  But what of those who are still scrambling to keep us, in one form or another, in the EU, despite the fact that the EU is visibly in crisis, and despite the fact that by resisting the will of the majority they are risking a political and constitutional crisis?  They have been little if at all studied or analysed: so we at the Briefings for Brexit group are publishing a series of articles, mostly by young academics, in the hope of encouraging discussion.  

 

There seem to be three main categories of Remainers: Ideological Remainers, Professional Remainers, and Worried Remainers.  The Ideological Remainers, however vocal, are a small minority: opinion polls suggest about 5 percent of the population.  They include young people, some of whom, our findings suggest, have adopted a kind of Euro-nationalism.  There is also an older generation of Ideological Remainers: I vividly remember at a meeting in London to discuss national identity an elderly middle-class lady, trembling with rage, saying ‘Why are we wasting time discussing this thing, England’.  They have in common a negative image of both our history and our present society, which they convince themselves are tarnished by exploitation, racism and violence.  ‘Europe’, they think, must save the British from themselves, and the other peoples of Europe from being at each other’s throats.  This group provides the flag-wavers for Remain.

 

More formidable in numbers and influence are the Professional Remainers: executives of multinational companies, employees of lobby groups and think tanks (many receiving funding from the EU), academics in receipt of EU grants, politicians representing Remain parties or constituencies, retired politicians who supported or indeed worked for the EU, civil servants and diplomats whose careers have been built round integration with the EU.  For this group, familiarity with EU systems and contacts in Brussels give a major career advantage; conversely, Brexit poses a career risk.  They provide the brain and muscle for the Remainer revolt.  Their arguments for Remain are overwhelmingly technical, such as the cost and complexity of leaving.  They avoid ethical issues, such as democratic sovereignty or socio-economic justice, or indeed the future of the EU itself.  

 

The third and largest category are the Worried Remainers.  Most who voted Remain – a third of the total electorate – said that they did so primarily because they were worried about economic consequences.  Their support for the EU is conditional and negative – as a lesser evil.  This is the only group likely to change its mind if and when ‘Operation Fear’ proves bogus, and which wants the government to ‘get on with it’ and provide leadership.  Worried Remainers deserve to have their fears taken seriously and the effort to reassure them by well based arguments is an urgent political need.  This will be the basis of re-establishing national consensus.  

Do Remainers as a whole share any common assumptions?  One appears to be ‘declinism’: the idea that Britain is a diminished and weak country unable to function economically or politically on its own.  Another is that ‘Europe’ is a guarantor of peace and harmony.  A third – though surely weakening in the face of the facts – is that the EU represents the Future.  Rational discussion of all these issues is desirable. Hard-core Remainers are unlikely to be converted, but might the Ideological Remainers or  those Professional Remainers whose personal interests are at stake be converted? If the latter see those interests changing, they will shift their position without any qualms.

 

 

Edited 11 June 2018 by MattP

[Alf Bentley]

17 hours ago, Webbo said:

Europe has a trade surplus with us, so if trade is reduced they'll lose more than us. anything we buy from there can be bought cheaper elsewhere, which'll be a boost to the economy. We can negotiate with Australia and NZ at the same time and seeing as we don't have to appease 28 different vested interests we'll be able to do a better deal quicker.

 

The EU has more free trade agreements than any nation/bloc in the world, according to this list (and that's not including trade within the EU itself - the world's richest trading bloc):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bilateral_free-trade_agreements

No reason why the UK or EU cannot do a deal with Aus/NZ, but economic size and distance limit their importance. Australia is currently our 27th biggest trading partner (for goods), NZ not in top 50, so even a big increase wouldn't have a big impact:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_United_Kingdom

 

It's true that the EU has a trade surplus with the UK, but it's a red herring. The EU27 economy is several times bigger than the UK economy, so a slightly smaller nominal impact on the UK would have a much bigger comparative impact.

Here's a good neutral source about UK-EU trade: https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

- EU takes 43% of UK exports; Exports to EU comprise 12% of the UK economy

- UK takes 8% of EU27 exports; Exports to UK comprise 3-4% of the EU27 economy

(That 8% becomes 18% if you exclude trade between the EU27 nations....but no reason to think they'll lose that. The potential trade loss is UK-EU trade.....which would harm both, but have a much bigger impact on the UK).

 

17 hours ago, Webbo said:

Food, steel from China, that's 2 things off the top of my head.

 

So that's imports sorted if EU27 imports became unavailable or too expensive.

It still creates problems (e.g. the important dependence of just-in-time production in the car industry). But exports are the big one. Exports have a big impact on employment, growth, our currency, public finances, domestic economy etc.

 

12% of the UK economy by value comprises exports to the EU. You then have all sorts of multipliers to that (domestic suppliers dependent on contracts with big exporters, purely domestic businesses dependent on purchases made by the employees of these exporting firms).

 

Hopefully a good EU-UK trade deal will be done to minimise lost business/trade/employment....we're seriously in the shit if it isn't.

 

We won't lose all that trade, but if we lose a sizable chunk, what will replace it? Global trade agreements might (or might not) be a long-term solution, but not short-term and not easy.

Increasing exports to places like Australia, Africa or South America would be beneficial, but even a massive increase would only have a small impact - and is unlikely for Africa/SAm as they're short of cash.

We'd mainly be reliant on much improved trade with....

- USA: Can't see Trump cutting us a generous deal given US economic power & his America First, tariff-raising policies

- China: Similarly, a big economic power with a strongly protectionist, nationalist outlook

- India: Has expressed willing, but wants increased Indian immigration in exchange

- Canada: Has signed a free trade deal with the EU, so we'd be trading at a disadvantage until such time as we sign a deal

- Japan: Economy fairly stagnant, domestic economy notoriously hard to penetrate, a long way away (affecting goods, not services so much)

- East/SE Asia: Might be some decent options here, though EU already has a trade agreement with South Korea, so again we could be at a disadvantage initially

[Alf Bentley]

20 hours ago, Foxin_mad said:

That's nothing to do with the economy and everything to do with the changing face of the retail market place. Perhaps if the pseudo socialists of the world, stopped using Amazon, stopped drinking at Starbucks, stopped tweeting on twitter, Facebooking on Facebook on their iPhones and went out into the real world, these places could make some profit and they might pay the correct tax too. Of course I am yet to meet a Corbyn voters who doesn't do any of the above. 

 

Whats the disaster then? 

 

When a bunch of clueless middle class whiners elect a clueless middle class socialist and his bunch of halfwits to run the country at the election? Yes you are correct we are yet to see a disaster or calamity like it for ordinary working class people.

 

I am sure the people in the Islington bubble will be ok though. 

 

I'm sure you're right that changes in retail (including the switch to Amazon & online buying) are the main factor in most of these store closures. Is that the case with Poundworld, though? I don't imagine many Poundworld shoppers are switching to Amazon to buy bargain-basement cleaning products, bulk confectionery etc.

 

The analyst on BBC News attributed Poundworld's collapse to a combination of the fall in the pound and their business model. A large proportion of their goods are imports bought in Dollars, apparently, so they cost more now. As their business model is to sell large volumes at a low mark-up, that is obviously a massive problem. Stagnant incomes might be a factor in some other closures, but probably not Poundworld - and online retail the main factor, I agree. 

 

Sorry, but I have to laugh at your description of Starbucks-supping, Twitter-tweeting, Amazon-shopping pseudo-socialists and clueless middle-class whiners...as if the only clueless whiners or users of Amazon and Starbucks were Labour Party members.

Would it be reasonable of me to pretend that all Tories are Bullingdon Club lads trashing posh restaurants, pissing on the homeless and cackling as they stubbed their cigars out in the eyeballs of the poor? 

 

For the record, I'm (usually) a Labour voter, have mixed feelings about Corbyn (some good, some bad), would probably be seen as middle-class, though you'd have to define that - and don't think I whine a lot. I use Facebook  but not Twitter, don't have an I-Phone, use Amazon and High Street shops - and was in Poundworld more recently than any of the big coffee chains (bought my Xmas decorations/stocking fillers at Poundworld - I'm a cheapskate). Probably haven't been in Starbucks for years, though my ex dragged me into Costa a couple of times 1-2 years ago. I'm not keen on the big coffee chains - like a fair few "pseudo-socialists", I think. 

[Innovindil]

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I'm sure you're right that changes in retail (including the switch to Amazon & online buying) are the main factor in most of these store closures. Is that the case with Poundworld, though? I don't imagine many Poundworld shoppers are switching to Amazon to buy bargain-basement cleaning products, bulk confectionery etc.

 

The analyst on BBC News attributed Poundworld's collapse to a combination of the fall in the pound and their business model. A large proportion of their goods are imports bought in Dollars, apparently, so they cost more now. As their business model is to sell large volumes at a low mark-up, that is obviously a massive problem. Stagnant incomes might be a factor in some other closures, but probably not Poundworld - and online retail the main factor, I agree. 

 

Sorry, but I have to laugh at your description of Starbucks-supping, Twitter-tweeting, Amazon-shopping pseudo-socialists and clueless middle-class whiners...as if the only clueless whiners or users of Amazon and Starbucks were Labour Party members.

Would it be reasonable of me to pretend that all Tories are Bullingdon Club lads trashing posh restaurants, pissing on the homeless and cackling as they stubbed their cigars out in the eyeballs of the poor? 

 

For the record, I'm (usually) a Labour voter, have mixed feelings about Corbyn (some good, some bad), would probably be seen as middle-class, though you'd have to define that - and don't think I whine a lot. I use Facebook  but not Twitter, don't have an I-Phone, use Amazon and High Street shops - and was in Poundworld more recently than any of the big coffee chains (bought my Xmas decorations/stocking fillers at Poundworld - I'm a cheapskate). Probably haven't been in Starbucks for years, though my ex dragged me into Costa a couple of times 1-2 years ago. I'm not keen on the big coffee chains - like a fair few "pseudo-socialists", I think. 

The best of all this "it's because of the fall in the pound" is that pound land were running well in the red long before the referendum took place.

 

Undoubtedly, the fall in the pound exacerbated the problem, but these stores were all hearing their death knell's for a while.