Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why a British withdrawal from the EU could be beneficial to Ireland

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,121 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Many retailers in Ireland are foreign owned and of those, the British retailers are by far the most prevalent. Unlike other multinationals, foreign retailers do not bring money into the country because their revenue source is from within the domestic Irish economy. So, these foreign retailers are a net liability and the Irish economy is better off without them.

    If Britain leaves the EU, they will no longer have the protection of the European courts and the Irish revenue can hike taxes on British retailers in order to subsidize tax cuts for small local retailers and this will in turn encourage consumers back to the city/town centers. The result: Swiss style quaintness from Dublin City center to the crossroads of Ballymackey. Furthermore, the city center is generally more accessible (because of its centrality) and this in turn will encourage the use of the bicycle over the car.

    With a little thought and imagination, one will find many more benefits to a UK withdrawal from the EU. Unfortunately, our Taoiseach Enda Kenny lacks the required imagination. Lets face it, he only became leader because the rest of his party were obliterated in a former election.

    This snipe at Kenny, and my ability to see the benefits of life free of British apron strings should not be interpreted as sinn feinism. I am a right wing capitalist - a fact that sets me firmly apart not only from Sinn Fein but also Fine Gael, Fianna Fail and all such left wing bolshevic entities.

    Given Kenny`s aforementioned lack of imagination (a prerequisite in any natural leader), I invite suggestions on how else Ireland could benefit from a withdrawal of Britain from the EU.
    Your whole plan is based on being able to discriminate against British companies - any company operating in Ireland would still have the protection of European law and any external trade deals would be negotiated via the EU.

    Tesco would still have a variety of advantages - buying power, brand, economies of scale etc.

    You're also ignoring the hundreds of Dunnes and SuperValues dotted around the country.

    A right wing capitalist who wants to tax one group to subsidize another...


  • Options
    #33
    Paulzx
    Registered Users Posts: 1,967 ✭✭✭Paulzx


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    I will dumb it down for you so.


    Is that possible?:D


  • Options
    #34
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    Paulzx wrote: »
    Is that possible?:D
    It is necessary. You are confused remember?


  • Options
    #35
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,388 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    Villa05 wrote: »
    Sounds like someone wants protectionism back for the irish retailers so that we can have a return to royally ripping off the irish consumer.

    Self claimed capitalist does not like competition

    Return to? We've never not been ripped off.

    (I agree with the point you're making though)


  • Options
    #36
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Your whole plan is based on being able to discriminate against British companies - any company operating in Ireland would still have the protection of European law and any external trade deals would be negotiated via the EU.

    Tesco would still have a variety of advantages - buying power, brand, economies of scale etc.

    You're also ignoring the hundreds of Dunnes and SuperValues dotted around the country.

    A right wing capitalist who wants to tax one group to subsidize another...
    Well yes, let the Europeans do the discriminating against Britain if it leaves the union and Ireland can fall in with that.

    Your comments about Tesco, Dunnes and Supervalu are incomplete. What points are you making.

    As long as you have private companies competing, you have capitalism. Foreign retailers are not necessary for that. Besides, if Europe prevents Ireland from targeting British retailers directly, there is more than one way to skin a coon. Simply identify something about the British retailers which sets them apart in some way and increase tax on retailers with that variable.

    In any case, why worry about increasing competition in the competitive sector when there is a whole public sector to tear down, de-monopolize and sell off.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Paulzx
    Registered Users Posts: 1,967 ✭✭✭Paulzx


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    It is necessary. You are confused remember?


    I'd be more worried if I understood you:)


  • Options
    #38
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    If Britain leaves the EU, they will no longer have the protection of the European courts and the Irish revenue can hike taxes on British retailers in order to subsidize tax cuts for small local retailers…
    … I am a right wing capitalist...
    No, you’re a left-wing protectionist.
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    If Tesco were taxed in Ireland, it would seem to me that Dunnes and Supervalue would be the main beneficiaries because they offer a similar product but even if the full benefit went to Lidl and Aldi, at least the lower costs would ensure less money is lost to foreign retailers.
    How would less competition result in lower costs?
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Regarding your former point, Lidl and Aldi are cheap for a reason. If they charged more, nobody would shop there
    They would if Lidl and Aldi were still cheaper than the alternatives.
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    2)They would need Irish trade all the more if they left Europe.
    3)Irish produce could in part fill the British trade vacuum in Europe when their exports to the continent are hit with higher taxes.
    Britain and the EU suddenly become heavily dependent on Irish exports in the event of Brexit? So the Brits are going to be clamouring for Irish wine because they can’t get their hands on the good stuff from France, Italy and Spain, while the whole of Europe will be gagging for Irish aerospace components?!?
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Ireland has plenty of competition with the domestic retailers. That said Lidl and Aldi have provided a product that was not available before their arrival.
    No, Lidl and Aldi are cheaper, which kind of undermines your point that Irish retailers provide plenty of competition.


  • Options
    #39
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    djpbarry wrote: »
    No, you’re a left-wing protectionist.
    As already pointed out, competition in the private sector is all that is required to enjoy the benefits of right wing capitalism. Foreign retailers are not necessary unless they are filling an un-catered niche. "Protectionism" would be the targeting of foreign retailers for the express purpose of eliminating competition. It is not protectionism to target those retailers for the exclusive purpose of stemming a net drain on the economy.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    How would less competition result in lower costs?
    Obviously if you buy everything in Lidl or Aldi instead of Tesco, your costs will be lower because Lidl and Aldi are low cost supermarkets.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    They would if Lidl and Aldi were still cheaper than the alternatives.
    No they would not because Lidl and Aldi are low cost supermarkets. Why pay more for something than it is worth. Dunnes and Supervalu are in competion with Tesco for the brand conscious consumer. Lidl and Aldi are not competing for the brand conscious consumer. They are in competition with each other for the cheapskate consumer.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    Britain and the EU suddenly become heavily dependent on Irish exports in the event of Brexit? So the Brits are going to be clamouring for Irish wine because they can’t get their hands on the good stuff from France, Italy and Spain, while the whole of Europe will be gagging for Irish aerospace components?!?
    In the event of a Brexit, Britain would need Ireland more than ever, to sell its own exports. Also, if they left the EU, most Brits would be lucky if they could afford Spanish plonk and by re-reading what I actually wrote you will see that "Irish produce could in part fill the British trade vacuum in Europe" when British exports to the continent are hit with higher taxes.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    No, Lidl and Aldi are cheaper ...
    A fact I affirmed so what is with the "No".
    djpbarry wrote: »
    which kind of undermines your point that Irish retailers provide plenty of competition.
    Irish retailers compete. They just did not cater adequately to the cheapskate consumer. Ideally, new (not yet existing) Irish retailers should enter the cheapskate retail sector. Perhaps government incentives could be devised to those ends, thereby eliminating the necessity for foreign retailers in that sphere.


  • Options
    #40
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,513 ✭✭✭Villa05


    This thread is a waste of Internet space


  • Options
    #41
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    Villa05 wrote: »
    This thread is a waste of Internet space

    Its purpose is to serve a public interest. The aforementioned banshees, who are bewailing a BREXIT need not respond to this thread because they have nothing useful to offer, thereby saving internet space :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    "Protectionism" would be the targeting of foreign retailers for the express purpose of eliminating competition.
    No, protectionism would be the targeting of foreign retailers for the purpose of reducing competition. Just because you’re left with some competition, it does not mean protectionism is not being practiced.
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Obviously if you buy everything in Lidl or Aldi instead of Tesco, your costs will be lower because Lidl and Aldi are low cost supermarkets.
    So everyone who currently shops in Tesco will shop in Lidl or Aldi instead and Lidl and Aldi will not raise their prices to take advantage?

    Again I ask, how does less competition in a market result in lower prices?
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    No they would not because Lidl and Aldi are low cost supermarkets. Why pay more for something than it is worth. Dunnes and Supervalu are in competion with Tesco for the brand conscious consumer. Lidl and Aldi are not competing for the brand conscious consumer. They are in competition with each other for the cheapskate consumer.
    Meanwhile, in the real world, Aldi and Lidl are stealing market share from Dunnes, Super Valu and Tesco:
    Tesco’s market share is continuing to decline with Dunnes Stores, Aldi and Lidl the main beneficiaries.
    http://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/tesco-s-market-share-still-falling-as-aldi-and-lidl-gain-1.1945385
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    In the event of a Brexit, Britain would need Ireland more than ever, to sell its own exports.
    But you want to restrict British access to Irish markets?
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Irish retailers compete. They just did not cater adequately to the cheapskate consumer. Ideally, new (not yet existing) Irish retailers should enter the cheapskate retail sector. Perhaps government incentives could be devised to those ends, thereby eliminating the necessity for foreign retailers in that sphere.
    You want the government to spend taxpayers’ money sponsoring some Irish retailer to undercut Aldi and Lidl? Apart from being mind-bogglingly daft, it would almost certainly violate EU competition legislation.

    The obvious solution to your “non-Irish retailer” problem would be to just leave the EU altogether – I’m sure Ireland would become lovely and quaint in that scenario.


  • Options
    #43
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    djpbarry wrote: »
    No, protectionism would be the targeting of foreign retailers for the purpose of reducing competition.

    The point I was making is that it is not protectionism to target foreign retailers when the exclusive purpose is to stem a net drain on the economy (as opposed to eliminating or reducing competition).
    djpbarry wrote: »
    So everyone who currently shops in Tesco will shop in Lidl or Aldi instead and Lidl and Aldi will not raise their prices to take advantage?
    They would hardly all change to low cost supermarkets for no reason. If a top class restaurant closed down, do you honestly think everyone would go to McDonalds? Even if they did, are you seriously suggesting the local McDonalds would jeopardize their increased footfall with higher prices? Of course not. After all, a hamburger is still just a hamburger. Similarly, Lidl and Aldi would not charge more for selling their merchandise.

    djpbarry wrote: »
    Again I ask, how does less competition in a market result in lower prices?
    You are assuming Tesco would close up their shops instead of absorbing the higher taxes. That would not necessarily happen but lets assume it did. Do you really think their giant premises would simply lie idle? Of course not. Irish or other non British retailers would move in and fill the void therefore competition would remain unaffected.

    djpbarry wrote: »
    Meanwhile, in the real world, Aldi and Lidl are stealing market share from Dunnes, Super Valu and Tesco:

    http://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/tesco-s-market-share-still-falling-as-aldi-and-lidl-gain-1.1945385
    So what? That is just people economizing. At least they spend less at Aldi and Lidl than they do at Tesco and the low cost retailers are encouraging the Tescos, Dunnes and Super values to charge less. In fact, this strengthens my argument that Lidl and Aldi would not charge more. Obviously all the others will charge less.


    djpbarry wrote: »
    You want the government to spend taxpayers’ money sponsoring some Irish retailer to undercut Aldi and Lidl? Apart from being mind-bogglingly daft, it would almost certainly violate EU competition legislation.
    I said nothing of the sort. You (and most other people) seem to think government spending is the answer to everything. There are other ways.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    The obvious solution to your “non-Irish retailer” problem would be to just leave the EU altogether – I’m sure Ireland would become lovely and quaint in that scenario.
    There are other solutions to that problem but one must be creative and imaginative in devising those solutions.

    Anyway, if you are honest with yourself, the reason you and most others are opposed to tackling foreign retailers is because you are thinking of your own wallet whereas I think in terms of what brings the most money into Ireland and what prevents the most money leaving Ireland.

    Unfortunately, when everybody thinks only of themselves, the outlook for the country as a whole (and everyone in it) is extremely bleak. That trade union mentality is self serving and ultimately very destructive. If you ever go to Detroit you will see what I mean.


  • Options
    #44
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    The point I was making is that it is not protectionism to target foreign retailers when the exclusive purpose is to stem a net drain on the economy (as opposed to eliminating or reducing competition).
    It is.

    Why not extend your policy to produce? Retailers are only allowed to supply Irish produce to ensure no drain on the economy.
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    They would hardly all change to low cost supermarkets for no reason. If a top class restaurant closed down, do you honestly think everyone would go to McDonalds?
    You’re comparing Tesco to a top-class restaurant?
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Even if they did, are you seriously suggesting the local McDonalds would jeopardize their increased footfall with higher prices? Of course not. After all, a hamburger is still just a hamburger. Similarly, Lidl and Aldi would not charge more for selling their merchandise.
    Everything is worth what the purchaser is prepared to pay.
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    You are assuming Tesco would close up their shops instead of absorbing the higher taxes. That would not necessarily happen but lets assume it did. Do you really think their giant premises would simply lie idle? Of course not. Irish or other non British retailers would move in and fill the void therefore competition would remain unaffected.
    Which non-British and Irish retailers?

    And why non-British? I thought you wanted to limit the drain on the economy that foreign retailers represent?
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    So what? That is just people economizing. At least they spend less at Aldi and Lidl than they do at Tesco and the low cost retailers are encouraging the Tescos, Dunnes and Super values to charge less. In fact, this strengthens my argument that Lidl and Aldi would not charge more. Obviously all the others will charge less.
    Actually it completely undermines your argument about competition. You earlier claimed that Aldi and Lidl are not in competition with the likes of Tesco – now you admit that they are.
    realitykeeper wrote: »
    ...I think in terms of what brings the most money into Ireland and what prevents the most money leaving Ireland.
    No, you just want to rid Ireland of British retailers for some reason – there is no economic rationale.


  • Options
    #45
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Its purpose is to serve a public interest. The aforementioned banshees, who are bewailing a BREXIT need not respond to this thread because they have nothing useful to offer, thereby saving internet space :)

    Protectionism is a terrible idea and Ireland needs non-Irish companies to thrive, but that been said the danger to Ireland of a brexit is hugely overstated. Its mostly based on weak assertions.


  • Options
    #46
    View
    Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    In the event of a Brexit, Britain would need Ireland more than ever, to sell its own exports.

    British exports to Ireland would face the same tariffs as British exports to every other EU member state. Hence, the above is wrong as they couldn't compensate by increasing exports to Ireland any more than they could by increasing them to France.


  • Options
    #47
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    1. Brexit
    2. ?
    3. Profit for Ireland


  • Options
    #48
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    View wrote: »
    British exports to Ireland would face the same tariffs as British exports to every other EU member state. Hence, the above is wrong as they couldn't compensate by increasing exports to Ireland any more than they could by increasing them to France.
    This point has already been dealt with conclusively. Europe will decide what measures to apply should Britain leave the EU and Ireland will go along with those thereby negating even further the highly improbable possibility of a trade war between Ireland and the UK.

    Of course, trade with the UK may well become less straightforward in the event of a Brexit. Therefore, Ireland will need to trade more with the rest of the EU. This would help Ireland break a bad habit, i.e. over reliance on trade with the UK.


  • Options
    #49
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Why is it a bad habit? I'll bet you find neighbouring countries usually trade more with each other than more distant ones. Makes practical sense I would have thought with shorter routes to market and often a common(ish) language. I'll bet Austria trades more with Germany than Norway and Norway trades more with Sweden than Spain and Spain trades more with Portugal than Poland.....


  • Options
    #50
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    murphaph wrote: »
    Why is it a bad habit? I'll bet you find neighbouring countries usually trade more with each other than more distant ones. Makes practical sense I would have thought with shorter routes to market and often a common(ish) language. I'll bet Austria trades more with Germany than Norway and Norway trades more with Sweden than Spain and Spain trades more with Portugal than Poland.....
    Obviously over reliance on anything is not a good thing, trade with Britain is no exception.
    It should also be said that Ireland should ideally be trading much more with countries and economic blocks which are not subjected to quantitative easing. The BRICS countries and many other emerging markets are QE free so their economies will not implode when QE ends in disaster. Ireland is of course exposed to QE but it would help if Ireland`s trading partners did not suffer the same fate.


  • Options
    #51
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,844 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Villa05 wrote: »
    Out of passing interest, what is your job?

    Eamon de Valera impersonator? :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    micosoft
    Registered Users Posts: 2,359 ✭✭✭micosoft


    murphaph wrote: »
    Why is it a bad habit? I'll bet you find neighbouring countries usually trade more with each other than more distant ones. Makes practical sense I would have thought with shorter routes to market and often a common(ish) language. I'll bet Austria trades more with Germany than Norway and Norway trades more with Sweden than Spain and Spain trades more with Portugal than Poland.....

    Over-dependence on a country that speaks the same language, 1000 years of history, best transport links, similar business attitude, same plugs, shares the island with us, drives on the same side of the road, etc etc is plain daft!
    We need to trade more with ISIS, North Korea and the Penguin King of Antartica who have never heard of QE. You can depend on them!


  • Options
    #53
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    micosoft wrote: »
    Over-dependence on a country that speaks the same language, 1000 years of history, best transport links, similar business attitude, same plugs, shares the island with us, drives on the same side of the road, etc etc is plain daft!
    We need to trade more with ISIS, North Korea and the Penguin King of Antartica who have never heard of QE. You can depend on them!
    It is unfortunate but you are more correct than you know. QE can be stopped temporarily but not permanently, QE4 will eventually be required in the US and it will be bigger than QE 1, 2 & 3 combined. The same will go for the EU, UK and Japan. In short, the state will end up owning everything and communism starts then.
    I think that is when North Korea will follow Cuba in opening up to the free markets which will be mainly in Asia and Africa.


Advertisement