Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 115 posts

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#51

Post by Lio »

pjc50 wrote: post #41

> Pearson Engineering's Tom Clark has a good story about how the firm's previous owners used to handle industrial relations. Every time the workforce went on strike, which was often, one of the Pearsons would buy a new Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud and drive through the picket line, waving two fingers at his own staff. That does rather sum up 1970s industrial relations. Can you imagine managers like that implementing the…

I remember one discussion around the Nissan car plant in Sunderland (North East England).

After the Economist Intelligence Unit described it as the most productive car plant in Europe it was pointed out that what had changed compared to other UK plants was not workforce but the management.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#52

Post by myspy »

switch007 wrote: post #40
goatinaboat wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s one possible approach. The one I favour is a total moratorium on new building work in the South East. That’s the only way to force both workers and companies to look to the North. The problem with “tax the rich” is that the numbers of truly rich are tiny and you could swallow their entire fortunes and they’ll be gone in a week. Exercise for the reader, how long would Richard Branson’s entire wealth run the NHS…

Those wanting to "tax the rich", what is their definition of rich? I would hazard a guess it's much less than Richard Branson, and therefore the numbers would be much higher

Single people earning more than 110.000€ p.a. in Germany for example.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#53

Post by Gibbon1 »

blululu wrote: post #12
_iyig wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recall an article (or blog post) from a couple years ago- it made the case that US productivity had been grossly mis-indexed since the 80s, in part due to assumptions about CPU power relating to economic productivity where Moore's Law essentially inflated the numbers. Does anyone happen to remember this same article, and have a link? EDIT: here it is, from 2012. I saw it again in 2016 when it was brought up to expl…

Another source to this thesis: http://www.upjohn.org/MEG/papers/Measuring%20Mfg_Houseman_Ba...

> The extraordinary real GDP growth in these sub-industries, in turn, is a result of the adjustment of price indexes used to deflate computers and semiconductors for improvements in quality.

Gag

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#54

Post by JanSt »

siscia wrote: post #36
coldtea wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...if only that currency was controllable by Britain's government according to Britain's needs, instead of being run according to some other country's interests to propel its own economy (using a number of satellite states to vote in its favor) -- and causing the exact same problem the grandparent described in the periphery countries...

Where this narrative of German driving the EU comes from? Please note that I am not taking any position, I just want to get more informed about the internal EU problems.

It‘s not based on facts but on feelings.

The facts show that GB had way more rights and power to decide than Germany (exlusions from certain EU rules everyone else accepted etc.)

Germany is also by far the single biggest financial contributer to the EU.

The GB politicians used to blame the EU for all their own problems. There will be a hard awakening coming at the end of the year, but I‘m sure the EU will still be their scapegoat somehow.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#55

Post by JanSt »

jason0597 wrote: post #24
achamayou wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only there was some sort of regional currency, less susceptible to a single country’s economic changes, that one could use...

The ECB is not unbiased in the slightest, they always favour the northern states.

QE is made for Southern Europe, the North has argued against it for years (especially Jens Weidmann). Draghi is Italian.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#56

Post by danmaz74 »

achamayou wrote: post #30
goatinaboat wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you suggest? German domination of the Euro has exactly the same effect on Southern Europe, the so-called PIGS.

We’re talking about what would be good for the UK. Countries that never had strong exports definitely wouldn’t benefit.

Italy had very strong industrial export. It's still not bad.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#57

Post by dash2 »

JanSt wrote: post #54
siscia wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where this narrative of German driving the EU comes from? Please note that I am not taking any position, I just want to get more informed about the internal EU problems.

It‘s not based on facts but on feelings. The facts show that GB had way more rights and power to decide than Germany (exlusions from certain EU rules everyone else accepted etc.) Germany is also by far the single biggest financial contributer to the EU. The GB politicians used to blame the EU for all their own problems. There will be a hard awakening coming at the end of the year, but I‘m sure the EU will still be th…

The general point that the Euro will be controlled by the ECB, which must balance the priorities of all member states, is true. It’s also true that this generates some well-known public goods problems. And it is widely accepted among economists that ECB policy has been better suited to Germany than to e.g. the PIIGS countries of the Mediterranean. Hence the anger about European austerity in Italy, Greece....

Seriously, nobody in Britain, Remainer or Brexiteer, is arguing for us to join the Euro. That argument is not currently live.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#58

Post by goodcanadian »

sleavey wrote: post #39
goatinaboat wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s one possible approach. The one I favour is a total moratorium on new building work in the South East. That’s the only way to force both workers and companies to look to the North. The problem with “tax the rich” is that the numbers of truly rich are tiny and you could swallow their entire fortunes and they’ll be gone in a week. Exercise for the reader, how long would Richard Branson’s entire wealth run the NHS…

Why not tax the merely rich too? I'm probably going to be one of them in a few years. I want to pay more tax to help benefit the society that let me get to where I'm going, but I absolutely want everyone else in my position to pay too. Anyway, I agree with your idea about the south east. As the article points out, Thatcher's policies focused on the south east and ignored the "North" (part of the problem being no one…

Ideas like HS2 pushed by the new Tories are also just making it possible to live in the north and yet still work in London . . .

I would also argue that it allows businesses and industry to operate in the north without the location penalty. In other words, it effectively brings the areas served closer together. I won't argue whether it is the best solution, but it isn't as harebrained as some of the detractors try to imply.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#59

Post by julienreszka »

H8crilA wrote: post #4
blackflame7000 wrote: post #2

The United States should study how the lost of manufacturing impacted Britain globally when dealing with China

It's perhaps inevitable. The Chinese, then the Dutch, then the British, now the American. It may simply be that China becomes the next top power. Ray Dalio on the matter: https://youtu.be/Mh0vEaac78U

It can't be a superpower because it is neither military, nor cultural power.

Re: Why doesn't Britain make things any more? (2011)

#60

Post by pjc50 »

neilwilson wrote: post #42
afarrell wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But doesn’t this also mean that as a country, Britain or the US can “tax” the economic growth in an arbitrary country which uses its currency as reserve? As Botswanna’s economy expands, it needs to print more money to conduct all the transactions and take advantage of the increased resources provided by an increasingly-skilled workforce. As that country’s central bank prints more money, it tries to acquire more GBP o…

Largely you are correct. It works like this. If you are a net exporter, you are essentially giving away your own output to a foreign nation in exchange for bits of paper. The reason you can't spend that paper is that it would destroy your exports (your own currency would go sky high as the system tried to eliminate the imbalance) and you'd have to find something else for the people working in exports to do, or you'd…

This is largely nonsense - Botswana is on average net-neutral: https://tradingeconomics.com/botswana/balance-of-trade

The poor countries more or less have to spend the dollars because they need to buy fuel and high tech. It's the rare exceptions that stockpile it, China and Norway, and they can afford to do that because they're oil-producing.

> The poorer country would be better putting people to work creating domestic infrastructure straight away and only exporting what is necessary to get needed goods and services required to create that infrastructure

Generally true, but harder to achieve than it sounds. Worked in east Asian countries, but not in Africa, largely due to corruption. And the amount that has to be imported is high.

> You have to issue liabilities against 'Other Assets' rather than 'US Treasuries'

I can't even work out what this is referring to.

Post reply on HN