MrMickS
Member
- Messages
- 3,961
Confirmation bias is not new. In the past people tended to seek out a paper that supported their views and stuck with it, dismissing anything in papers with different political views. Its just easier to immerse oneself in a single side these days.
There are exaggerations on both sides of the debate, and they do neither side any favours. The reality is that Brexit is resulting in job losses across a wide range on industry, just as "Project Fear" predicted.
Not all of the jobs are directly related to Brexit. Multi-national companies have decisions to make regards development and location all the time. Brexit has focused the mind and the uncertainty around it has been a factor in some of those decisions. Some are edging their bets, others going for wholesale movement out of the UK. Some of these may have been on the cards anyway, but to deny that Brexit paid a factor in the decision making is delusional.
Looking at some in particular:
Dyson: This is just what multi-national companies do to maximise the return for their shareholders. It may have happened anyway it just sticks in the craw that a man who emphasised the opportunities for Brexit is moving all but his R&D outside the country. If he finds that it's cheaper, or he gets better staff/grants, to move that too he will.
Nissan/Honda: This is EU related rather than Brexit, though its easy to conflate the two. A drop in demand combined with an FTA with the EU means that both are free to retrench manufacturing back to their home country. Something no one should really criticise them for, we would do the same if we had a car industry.
The latter raises concerns when you listen to the most ardent Brexiteers who suggest that the way to prevent shortages is to drop tariffs to zero. Under WTO terms this would have to be to all countries. If that happens what incentive is there to invest in UK manufacturing or production? What would the impact be on UK jobs and industry?
Final thing that's bouncing around my head about this is the key issue of immigration. Even with free movement we have record employment and lower unemployment than 1971 which is the earliest comparisons can be made (https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan...es/bulletins/uklabourmarket/february2019).The UK birth rate is, and has been for the last 30+ years, between the 1.8 and 2 rate. This means that without immigration we have a contracting, and ageing, labour force. Who is going to do the work to take advantage of the Brexit opportunities? Given that the published proposals around post Brexit immigration put a £30k minimum income on people coming into the country doesn't that mean that the bosses and skilled workers will come from outside and the British population will be used for low paid work?
There are exaggerations on both sides of the debate, and they do neither side any favours. The reality is that Brexit is resulting in job losses across a wide range on industry, just as "Project Fear" predicted.
Not all of the jobs are directly related to Brexit. Multi-national companies have decisions to make regards development and location all the time. Brexit has focused the mind and the uncertainty around it has been a factor in some of those decisions. Some are edging their bets, others going for wholesale movement out of the UK. Some of these may have been on the cards anyway, but to deny that Brexit paid a factor in the decision making is delusional.
Looking at some in particular:
Dyson: This is just what multi-national companies do to maximise the return for their shareholders. It may have happened anyway it just sticks in the craw that a man who emphasised the opportunities for Brexit is moving all but his R&D outside the country. If he finds that it's cheaper, or he gets better staff/grants, to move that too he will.
Nissan/Honda: This is EU related rather than Brexit, though its easy to conflate the two. A drop in demand combined with an FTA with the EU means that both are free to retrench manufacturing back to their home country. Something no one should really criticise them for, we would do the same if we had a car industry.
The latter raises concerns when you listen to the most ardent Brexiteers who suggest that the way to prevent shortages is to drop tariffs to zero. Under WTO terms this would have to be to all countries. If that happens what incentive is there to invest in UK manufacturing or production? What would the impact be on UK jobs and industry?
Final thing that's bouncing around my head about this is the key issue of immigration. Even with free movement we have record employment and lower unemployment than 1971 which is the earliest comparisons can be made (https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan...es/bulletins/uklabourmarket/february2019).The UK birth rate is, and has been for the last 30+ years, between the 1.8 and 2 rate. This means that without immigration we have a contracting, and ageing, labour force. Who is going to do the work to take advantage of the Brexit opportunities? Given that the published proposals around post Brexit immigration put a £30k minimum income on people coming into the country doesn't that mean that the bosses and skilled workers will come from outside and the British population will be used for low paid work?
