|
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Millhouse
(Post 12515044)
Why would you want to? Our exports are either high end machine tools, financial services or weapons. Anything else would be a re-export, you'd be better off sourcing it directly from China?
Unless you are considering becoming an arms dealer, in which case I am interested in any vacancies. |
Re: Brexit outcome
To get back to the the OP's original question of a prediction on what we are going to wake up to on 30th March 2019, what I find most worrying is that it is literally impossible to predict. Not in general terms or details, not nationally or in foreign policy, not economically, socially, culturally or ethically. Not in imports or exports, not in jobs, incomes, economic and social divides. Not in the rejuvenation of the neglected parts of UK, not in migration both professional and humanitarian. Not in anything.
The only thing predictable about 30th March 2019 is that we were always going to be in the position of having no idea what was going to happen. Brexit was never about voting in favour of a definite, quantifiable future, it was about rejecting a perceived past. |
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Alianco
(Post 12515155)
To get back to the the OP's original question of a prediction on what we are going to wake up to on 30th March 2019, what I find most worrying is that it is literally impossible to predict. Not in general terms or details, not nationally or in foreign policy, not economically, socially, culturally or ethically. Not in imports or exports, not in jobs, incomes, economic and social divides. Not in the rejuvenation of the neglected parts of UK, not in migration both professional and humanitarian. Not in anything.
The only thing predictable about 30th March 2019 is that we were always going to be in the position of having no idea what was going to happen. Brexit was never about voting in favour of a definite, quantifiable future, it was about rejecting a perceived past. |
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Scamp
(Post 12515667)
But we'll have 350m quid more a week for the NHS and we'll be taking back control. I mean, it can't fail just on those points alone. It's got to work, morons said so.
|
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Johnnyboy11
(Post 12517153)
And we'll have three less layers of bureaucracy: European Parliament, European Commission and European Council. Really looking forward to April :)
|
Re: Brexit outcome
Good to see the headlines that all the EU savings are going to the NHS as promised.... |
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Millhouse
(Post 12517423)
Good to see the headlines that all the EU savings are going to the NHS as promised.... |
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by mikelincs
(Post 12517497)
Of course the caveat to that is that there will be NO savings after the loss of earnings by industry, the extra costs of imports, the loss of the value of the pound, the loss of many of the EU workers etc.
Pessimist |
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Millhouse
(Post 12517514)
Pessimist |
Re: Brexit outcome
Now we know that they really will spend a squillion ponds on the NHS it is all hunkey-dorey. Excuse me now, I have to report back to the State Hospital for the criminally insane.
|
Re: Brexit outcome
NHS is in desperate need of reform anyways. Any extra budget will be swallowed without any necessary improvements to the frontline (more just middle management inflation and non-jobs like 'diversity and inclusion managers'.
|
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by ExpatAl
(Post 12517866)
NHS is in desperate need of reform anyways. Any extra budget will be swallowed without any necessary improvements to the frontline (more just middle management inflation and non-jobs like 'diversity and inclusion managers'.
|
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Scamp
(Post 12517868)
So diversity is a bad thing?
|
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by ExpatAl
(Post 12517876)
Not what I said however such jobs to remain politically correct are a waste of resources IMO.
Actually, instead of being costly, hiring someone to increase levels of diversity probably offers a greater ROI than lots of other 'support' or 'admin' or 'HR' type roles. McKinsey have done enough studies to show that boards with greater diversity perform best and also that boards with greater diversity generate more revenue. Credit Suisse even demosntrated through research that more money made by diverse boards wasn't linked to the pre-existing strength of the company. Perhaps if the NHS, which is already diverse by nature of being such a large employer, promoted it even more, they generate greater efficiencies to stop wasting resources? Just a thought. |
Re: Brexit outcome
Originally Posted by Scamp
(Post 12517920)
You said that it's a non-job and now that it's a waste of resources, so logic dictates it can't be a good thing in your mind.
Actually, instead of being costly, hiring someone to increase levels of diversity probably offers a greater ROI than lots of other 'support' or 'admin' or 'HR' type roles. McKinsey have done enough studies to show that boards with greater diversity perform best and also that boards with greater diversity generate more revenue. Credit Suisse even demosntrated through research that more money made by diverse boards wasn't linked to the pre-existing strength of the company. Perhaps if the NHS, which is already diverse by nature of being such a large employer, promoted it even more, they generate greater efficiencies to stop wasting resources? Just a thought. Oh, and I don’t believe for a minute that you believe what you wrote. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 1:06 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.