2,063 comments posted · 6 followers · following 0

169 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Ashley Fox: A General ... · 1 reply · +1 points

You can't do a deal on the Irish Border without agreement on the framework /outline of the future trade agreement.

They are attempting to rewrite A50(2) & it doesn't stack up.

179 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Iain Dale: Jon Snow ma... · 0 replies · +1 points

You shouldn't stop coming here: just use the actual arguments that North makes to respond to the point other people make. If you think his arguments are strong, then make them yourself rather than just post links to His Nibs.

p.s. An acronym for a magnetic resonance technique is very probably the odd one out, although I wouldn't put it past the EU to have a matching term there too.

179 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Iain Dale: Jon Snow ma... · 3 replies · +1 points

Mike, this is the third one of these I've seen in just this set of comments - it is what one might expect if there was a Northbot operating on this site.

You wouldn't want to get branded as a troll would you?

179 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Iain Dale: Jon Snow ma... · 0 replies · +1 points

Haven't got the clip of Hannan, but here are just some of the people saying Leave meant leaving the Single Market::

(Clips of leavers from 1'02" in)

179 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Iain Dale: Jon Snow ma... · 0 replies · +1 points

Hannan was pretty much alone on this, all the major spokesmen on both side were clear:

Dan is a free market fundamentalist who doesn't believe in any controls on trade or on migration so he would say that.

179 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Iain Dale: Jon Snow ma... · 0 replies · +1 points

Yes, of course they understood all those doom scenarios: Remain had been banging on about nothing else for months. And the voters didn't believe them then and they don't believe them now.
And given the "shock" element of a vote to leave on the economy didn't materialise at all, I'd say they have more economic sense than most fanatical Remainers.

180 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - How Brexit could end t... · 0 replies · +1 points

Regarding agricultural tariffs. It should be possible to zero rate unilaterally those products important to Ireland, ie dairy, beef ....

MFN rules mean we would have to offer the same zero rate tariffs to every other WTO country in respect of the products we apply it to. In the case of beef, it is likely that some of those countries would then undercut the Irish produce.
It is in the interests of Ireland (not to mention the UK and the rest of the EU) to reach agreement on a proper free trade agreement as quickly as possible.

180 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - WATCH: Ici Londres - T... · 1 reply · +1 points

I suspect we actually agree on the central issue. As I said originally, I do believe free trade is a good thing. Indeed, in broad terms, I've always considered myself to be an economic liberal.
My problem is more with Dan Hannan's specific outlook, in that he comes across as something of a free market fundamentalist / ideologue and expounds views seemingly lacking in the pragmatic compromises required to make them work in the real world. As it is the understanding of the need for trade-offs that define conservatism for me, his almost religious belief in a theory does bother me.

180 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - WATCH: Ici Londres - T... · 3 replies · +1 points

I think we perhaps see the "rule" element of the "rule of comparative advantage" differently. For me It would seem to operate more as a rule of thumb / heuristic indicator than a hard and fast rule that operates in isolation and that will always overwhelm any other forces in operation. The global economy is a hugely complex system, not one where simple rules always apply.

Sure Chinese goods have made (most) people in the west better off (so far) although many Americans would want to disagree. But China hasn't played by the same rules as everyone else. It has controlled capital flows, fixed exchange rates, subsidized whole industries, required firms to use local content, ignored rules on intellectual property rights / trade secrets.and used state ownership to protect employment. In short, gamed the system. So you can be sure that they will be creating obstacles to imports where the Politburo think it will benefit their objectives.
The pressures that would make capital be reallocated to areas where they have the greatest advantage simply won't operate: it isn't really a capitalist entity at all.

180 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - WATCH: Ici Londres - T... · 5 replies · +1 points

I wouldn't disagree fundamentally with any of that.
However, the attractiveness of the basic model is its simplicity, yet economics has to describe an enormously complex "ecosystem" that now encompasses politics and even human psychology. It doesn't take much imagination to see how a state-managed economy like China could game the system because many of the assumptions implied by Ricardo will simply do not apply on their side. That they make everyone worse off (the corollary of Ricardo's idea), I doubt not. I am unconvinced that everyone will still be better off when the inherent assumptions of the rule aren't applied by one side or the other.