Page 121 of 121 FirstFirst ... 2171111117118119120121
Results 3,601 to 3,619 of 3619

Thread: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

  1. #3601
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,523
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    The question I was implying was, if the guy wants the conditions within the EU that much, why did he campaign to get us out of it? It was Furunculus who raised racism as the issue, when the issue I was highlighting was the stupidity of shooting himself in the foot, then wondering why it was bleeding.
    Yes, I get that.

    I can't read his mind. Perhaps even though he looses out on workers are more difficult for his business, personally he wanted out for other reasons. I've worked for companies I've hated because I need the money more than I need to uphold my principles. Perhaps he's rich enough that he's the luxury of the other way around.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  2. #3602
    Member Member Xantan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    TW Org
    Posts
    231

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Isn't this convenient... and a serious double standard?

    U.K. Pushes for Finance Exemption From Global Taxation Deal

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...lobal-tax-deal

    U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer is pressing for the City of London to be exempt from a plan by global leaders to make multinationals pay more tax to the countries where they operate.

    Finance ministers from the Group of Seven advanced economies struck a historic deal last weekend that could force the world’s biggest companies to pay a minimum corporate tax rate of 15%.

    Chancellor is expected to make the case that financial services, including global banks with head offices in London, should be exempt from the plan when talks move to the G-20 next month.

  3. #3603
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Xantan View Post
    Isn't this convenient... and a serious double standard?

    U.K. Pushes for Finance Exemption From Global Taxation Deal

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...lobal-tax-deal
    A justification I have seen elsewhere:

    "There are 2 key proposed changes, (i) tax should be paid where the customers are based, as opposed to where value is created (i.e. Amazon argues their value is concentrated in the US and lower tax jurisdictions like Ireland where their patents and servers are held/based, rather than where their warehouses are based as these are "low value" assets for an intangible business like theirs); (ii) every jurisdiction should levy a minimum tax so places like the Cayman Islands can't set their tax rate at 0 (i.e. tax havens).

    These are sensible solutions for a world where increasingly intangible businesses can very easily move their assets (since they are no longer fixed like a factory) to lower tax jurisdictions, and force countries to reduce tax rates in order to lure their business in.

    The second of these two principles is not appropriate for Financial Services (FS), and by this I mean asset management and banking, where the core of their business is intermediary. And this is the one they are seeking an exemption from (to be more accurate, the exemption is for the funds, not for the firms themselves, see below).

    For example, if your work pays you £100 which you then invest for retirement saving, which will likely be serviced by a FS firm to invest in a fund which invests in a diversified portfolio of assets, with the intention of the value of the £100 increasing over time such that when you are older you can draw on this for retirement, the introduction of the second principle would render this business impossible due to tax leakage, and subject the income to multiple levels of taxation which is unjust.

    To follow this, when your work pays £100, you have already paid taxes on this (PAYE and national insurance), you give this say to Hargreaves Lansdown to invest into a fund, currently that fund is likely based in a nil tax jurisdiction or is able to obtain a special deal with places like Luxembourg or Ireland to have nil tax such that the fund itself (an intermediary like a bank account) is not subject to tax. Let's say the money is invested in a UK business, the investment is successful and in one year the £100 becomes £150, again the increase of the £50 is post tax because the UK business would have already paid corporation tax. The fund is then able to return the full £150 back to you on which you will be paying tax on the £50 (capital gains, dividend, interest, whatever the form of the return might be).

    If however the location in which the fund is based now also levies a tax (minimum tax rate principle), then your money will be taxed twice, as the fund will now have to pay tax on the £50 return before you receive the return. Even worse if your money is diversified through multiple funds as certain investments (e.g. real property) requires actual presence in the country where the assets are held, the return may be subject to multiple layers of taxation such that when the money eventually goes back to you a large chunk would be taken as tax.

    It would be like if you put money in a bank, not only you have to pay tax on the interest the bank now also has to pay tax on your interest. If this was the case you'd start to question why a bank is necessary, maybe you just put your money under the bed since at a bank any return is being absorbed through taxes, this would have a damaging impact on the allocation of investment, alternatively it may force the FS firms to take even greater risk in the hope of higher returns to attract customers.

    Hence the exemption request, and is not just the UK this is something most of the countries involved in the discussion agree on."
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  4. #3604
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Why Brexit?

    To regulate business and society based on "demonstrable-harm" rather than the "precautionary-principle".

    Or, as the TIGGR report puts it "The Proportionality Principle:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...fuel-economic/

    From the report:
    "Our proposed new ‘ Proportionality Principle ’, is absolutely central to the new framework we are proposing:by making regulation proportionate to both the scale of the risk being mitigated, and the capacity of the organisation being regulated, we believe this new UK framework will boost both UK economic competitiveness and UK regulatory leadership."

    "46.It is not just the code-based approach that had an insidious effect on the UK’s regulation. The way the ‘Precautionary Principle’ has been applied by the EU hasmeant some innovations have been stifled due to an excessive caution that is often disproportionate to the associated risk."

    "63.A central driving force, with a clear lead Minister and appropriate Cabinet oversight, will be needed to overhaul the regulatory landscape and ensure that an agile regulatory strategy is adhered to. 64.Some of these functions already exist. The National Economic and Recovery Taskforce (NERT) Cabinet sub-committee on Better Regulation (BRC) was set up in early 2021 to drive growth across the economy by placing competition and innovation at the heart of regulatory decision making. But the UK does not yet have a clear regulatory strategy; it should develop one as soon as possible. Proportionality in implementation: a framework based on risk and outcomes not “tick-box” compliance"

    "65.The ‘Proportionality Principle’ is absolutely vital to the new framework we are proposing. One of the longstanding issues with traditional regulation is that it has a disproportionate negative impact on smaller businesses (and creative ‘third sectors’ like social enterprise). 66.Our proposed proportionality principle is designed to operate in two key ways: a.Risk: ensuring the design and implementation of regulations, including their cost, is proportionate with the level of risk. b.Reaching the right outcome: regulation should be based on outcomes rather than assessing mechanistic “tick-box” compliance with rules. Remediation and penalties where a bad outcome (such as a harmful data breach) occurs should be proportionate to the harm caused as well as the size and ability to pay of the business involved"

    "1.4.Mandate a new “Proportionality Principle” at the heart of all UK regulation."
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  5. #3605
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,628

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    Why Brexit?

    To regulate business and society based on "demonstrable-harm" rather than the "precautionary-principle".

    Or, as the TIGGR report puts it "The Proportionality Principle:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...fuel-economic/

    From the report:
    What concrete examples of this theorising are there?

    Meanwhile, here's a concrete example of deregulation meaning that products with lower standards than we deem acceptable have now been allowed in. And if you don't like the RSPCA as a source, here's the Australian perspective.

  6. #3606
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Biotech/Medicines
    AgriSci/GM
    Energy/Fracking
    AI/Data https://www.itpro.co.uk/policy-legis...ing-gdpr-rules
    Finance/Fin-tech https://www.ft.com/content/ed2d0a61-...5-873e61754ec6


    All tech growth industries of the future that the EU seems to fear, and thus suffocate in regulation based on the precautionary principle.
    Last edited by Furunculus; 06-19-2021 at 09:33.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  7. #3607
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,628

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    Biotech/Medicines
    AgriSci/GM
    Energy/Fracking
    AI/Data https://www.itpro.co.uk/policy-legis...ing-gdpr-rules
    Finance/Fin-tech https://www.ft.com/content/ed2d0a61-...5-873e61754ec6


    All tech growth industries of the future that the EU seems to fear, and thus suffocate in regulation based on the precautionary principle.
    Why have much of the financial industry moved to the EU if what the industry really wants is what an extra-EU Britain offers them?

  8. #3608
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Why have much of the financial industry moved to the EU if what the industry really wants is what an extra-EU Britain offers them?
    They haven't.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  9. #3609
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,628

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    They haven't.
    Bankers quit London as Brexit relocations to EU step up

    LONDON/PARIS, May 12 (Reuters) - Investment banks are shifting more rainmakers out of London to financial centres across the European Union, accelerating the pace of moves after the pandemic and uncertainty over Britain’s access to the bloc slowed relocations.

    Morgan Stanley (MS.N), Barclays (BARC.L) and Goldman Sachs (GS.N) are among those moving senior bankers, according to sources at the lenders, as European regulators push banks to better staff their EU offices and travel restrictions ease. Local hiring has also increased.
    Nearly half of finance firms have moved jobs to the EU after Brexit

    Almost 8,000 jobs in the financial sector have moved abroad because of Brexit, a report suggests.

    EY, the professional services company, said another 100 jobs have been relocated since October, taking the total to 7,600. It found that 43 per cent of businesses in the sector have moved or plan to move some of their operations or staff to the European Union.

    EY has been monitoring public statements made by 222 of the largest financial services firms, including investment banks, brokerages, wealth and asset managers, retail banks, private equity houses, insurers and insurance brokers, and financial technology businesses.
    Last edited by Pannonian; 06-20-2021 at 12:01.

  10. #3610
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    "Why have much of the financial industry moved to the EU if what the industry really wants is what an extra-EU Britain offers them?"

    Quite literally; they haven't.

    The New Financial report has to be requested:
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...g-city-london/

    Not so the New Financial survey. It boils everything down to brass tacks and focuses on the only thing that really matters: financial activity. And it shows that London is so far ahead of the likes of Frankfurt, Paris, Dublin, Amsterdam and Luxembourg that it can’t even see them in its rearview mirror. Nothing short of a biblical cataclysm will alter the top rankings between now and next year or, indeed, for a generation...

    The index analyses 65 countries on more than 40 metrics so as to capture the relative scale of activity in each market. The US is easily the biggest financial centre in the world with a score of 84 out of 100 but the UK’s overall score of 35 out of 100 makes it by far the largest financial centre in Europe, roughly three times bigger than its nearest rivals France (13) and Germany (12)...

    I got the researchers to crunch some additional numbers for me and they found that if the UK was still in the EU, it would have a 42pc share of all financial activity in the bloc. In nine out of 21 sectors, it hosts twice as much activity as the whole of the EU27 put together!...

    So, do the New Financial rankings, the eternal craftiness of bankers and the increasing desperation of EU watchdogs mean that the warnings about a Brexit exodus from the City were wide of the mark and we can all relax?

    Well, yes and no. “If the UK lost 10pc of all of its international activity (a huge and very unlikely “if”) it would still be many times bigger than any EU financial centre and would therefore retain the kind of conglomeration effect that attracts so many businesses,” says William Wright of New Financial. “That said, the loss of 10pc of activity would still mean a big hit to the Treasury’s tax receipts...

    Some activity has already gone. Most trading of EU securities has relocated (Amsterdam has been the big beneficiary of this) and non-UK banks have moved more than £700bn in assets out of the country. New Financial believes more will go. None of this is fatal, but the constant drip-drip-drip of business leaking out of the UK is far from ideal.

    In other words, just because the City’s position as the preeminent financial centre is pretty much impregnable doesn’t mean that the UK doesn’t have plenty to lose. Complacency has already been costly.

    New Financial’s survey measures the change in activity since 2016 which also presents a mixed picture. Domestic activity in the UK has basically flatlined since the referendum. Over the same time it has grown 14pc in the EU and 16pc globally. That said, international activity grew faster in the UK than in EU27 (19pc vs 14pc) but lost market share to financial centres in Asia (international activity increased in both Hong Kong and Singapore by more than 50pc)...
    I have a copy of the report if you would like quotes?
    Last edited by Furunculus; 06-20-2021 at 13:40.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  11. #3611
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    From the report:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    "A steady state?
    Probably the best way to measure London and
    the UK as a financial centre and to see how its
    position has or hasn’t changed since 2016 is to
    look at metrics of international financial activity –
    those sectors where market participants have
    more choice over where to locate and conduct
    their business.
    Fig.19 shows the change across 20 metrics of
    international financial activity in the UK since
    2016. Overall, the UK has performed much
    better than in domestic financial activity metrics.
    Its global share of international activity has
    declined but only slightly: international activity in
    the UK has grown by 19% since 2016 compared
    to 21% globally (and would have performed
    better were it not for the depreciation of
    sterling since the Brexit referendum).
    International activity in the UK has grown at a
    faster rate than the global average in 10 of the
    total 20 metrics we analysed. Overall activity has
    grown in 15 metrics since 2016, and in 13
    metrics the growth in activity has been well
    above 10% compared to just five domestic
    metrics.
    The UK recorded its highest growth in foreign
    ESG bonds issuance and interest rate derivatives.
    Other sectors where growth has been
    particularly strong include private equity
    fundraising, foreign exchange spot and
    derivatives trading, foreign IPOs, and clearing.
    However, international activity in the UK has
    shrunk in five metrics: the value of financial
    services exports, foreign corporate bond
    issuance, foreign bank assets, foreign equity
    trading and the number of foreign companies
    listed in London. It is too early to assess the full
    impact of Brexit, but the decline in these five
    sectors is concerning and we know that in some
    sectors (foreign equity trading, exports and bank
    assets) the UK’s lead has already been dented by
    Brexit. Other sectors that are exposed and will
    most likely see an impact once the dust of Brexit
    settles down include FDI in financial services,
    derivatives trading, clearing, and investment
    funds"

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    A broader view
    The combination of factors of the wider
    environment and metrics of financial activity
    gives a broader picture on the performance of
    different financial centres around the world
    (although we think this ranking is the least useful
    of any in this report). Fig.21 shows the average
    score for each country taking into account all 60
    metrics of domestic financial activity,
    international financial activity, and the wider
    environment.
    The rankings confirm the dominance of the US
    and the UK as the top two financial centres in
    the world and the extent of their lead compared
    to other countries. The US is by far the top
    financial centre. Its score of 82 is nearly double
    that of the UK and more than double the scores
    for China, Japan and Hong Kong.
    The UK ranks second in the world and is well
    ahead of other European countries. Its score of
    46 is nearly 60% higher than Luxembourg, two
    thirds bigger than that of Germany and France,
    and roughly double that of the Netherlands and
    Switzerland.
    The performance of big European economies is
    mixed. On the one hand Germany (7th), France
    (8th) and the Netherlands (11th) perform
    relatively well. On the other hand, Spain (18th)
    and Italy (25th) are further down, towards the
    middle of the table and their overall scores are
    lower than smaller European economies such as
    Switzerland, Ireland, and Denmark.
    Four of the top 10 financial centres are in Asia:
    China is third overall, just ahead of Japan and
    Hong Kong, with Singapore in 9th place. China’s
    high score in domestic activity (driven largely by
    its huge banking system) partially offsets its low
    scores in international financial activity and wider
    environment. With the exception of China, the
    rest of the world’s largest developing economies
    perform poorly: Russia, Brazil and India are all
    towards the bottom of the rankings, due to low
    levels of international activity and poor
    performance in metrics of the wider
    environment.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Detailed_Metrics_Financial_Markets.PNG 
Views:	4 
Size:	245.3 KB 
ID:	24938

    Ooh, another day, another report. This time EY:

    https://www.ey.com/en_uk/financial-s...investment-hub

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    The UK continues unchallenged as Europe’s top location for financial services (FS) investment and is expected to keep outperforming the rest of Europe post-pandemic.
    In brief

    Foreign direct investment (FDI) in financial services fell across Europe by 23% in 2020 as COVID-19 impacted business confidence and travel.
    The UK attracted 56 financial services FDI projects in 2020; still the highest in Europe but 43 projects lower than in 2019.
    Investor sentiment on the future of UK FS is positive; the UK remains the most attractive European country and London the leading city for such investment.

    It was with a degree of apprehension - post-Brexit deal and 15 months on from the first pandemic lockdown - that I reviewed the data from EY’s latest UK Attractiveness Survey for financial services, which combines analysis of 2020 foreign direct investment into the UK and a global investor sentiment survey conducted in Spring 2021.



    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    The positive, headline news is that the UK has maintained its position as the most attractive destination in Europe for FS FDI - a position it has held since EY started tracking FDI levels and market attractiveness over 20 years ago. Although the country’s position has been particularly challenged over the last few years, it has remained the continent’s most established financial services ecosystem throughout, and investor sentiment suggests this will continue.

    Overall, across Europe, FS FDI fell by almost a quarter as the pandemic impacted business confidence and travel. The UK market mirrors this picture and also saw a decline (albeit more dramatic at 43%), from 99 global projects to 56 last year, which is the largest year-on-year fall this decade. Other leading markets including Germany, Spain, Switzerland and Ireland similarly saw drops in FS FDI last year, with one outlier - France’s FDI activity increased, placing it in second position and narrowing the gap with the UK market.

    In 2019, the UK recorded more than double the FS projects of the then second placed country, Germany. However, in 2020, whilst the gap has widened with Germany, FS projects into France increased by almost a third, overtaking Germany for second place, and meaning the UK’s lead over France is now a much more modest 14%.

    But even though the UK’s lead has narrowed in 2020, this is quite possibly just a short-term response to pandemic-related business disruption and the completion of the Brexit deal. We shouldn’t forget that the year after the UK’s vote to leave the European Union, UK financial services FDI projects fell by 26%, before bouncing back to a record high of 112 projects the following year. Investment has now levelled off for many markets that saw a ‘Brexit uplift,’ with just France sustaining strong FDI in 2020.
    The UK market is well-positioned for continued growth in FS FDI

    Whilst the FDI data evidences past year performance, there is good news as we look ahead. Our survey shows that global investor sentiment for UK FS has increased. Half of global FS investors said they plan to establish or extend operations in the UK over the next year. This is a sharp increase from 10% in September and higher than the 45% in April last year. As an important indicator of future investment, these sentiment survey results suggest the UK is looking to a strong future and will continue to outperform the rest of Europe in attracting post-pandemic financial services investment.


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	EY_Financial_Markets.PNG 
Views:	3 
Size:	119.2 KB 
ID:	24940
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	All_Metrics_Financial_Markets.PNG 
Views:	4 
Size:	48.6 KB 
ID:	24937  
    Last edited by Furunculus; 06-21-2021 at 09:16.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  12. #3612

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    "Demonstrable harm" has as a practical matter been a generational corporate giveaway leading, with grim un-irony, to demonstrable harm. Endless offloaded externalities. As I have said before, the "precautionary principle" doesn't exist except as a rhetorical device against which communal thieves can detract from all concrete, well-founded, prudential measures that are known or expected to limit industry-specific and case-specific harms (but also limit the ceiling of profit-taking).

    The Sordid Reality of Demonstrable Harm



    What assurance do we have that the "Proportionality Principle" isn't just a cynical rebranding by the same sociopaths? Why should we trust them?
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  13. #3613
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    does sound like you'll be hard to please, either way.

    i don't imagine this will reassure you:

    https://www.iainduncansmith.org.uk/s...R%20REPORT.pdf
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  14. #3614

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    does sound like you'll be hard to please, either way.

    i don't imagine this will reassure you:

    https://www.iainduncansmith.org.uk/s...R%20REPORT.pdf

    The mere principles outlined in this sort of consultant language are rarely objectionable in themselves - who could possibly derogate "proportionality," right? But how would the authors' printed philosophy, in their own practical vision, deal with such myriad examples as J&J and asbestos, polymers in food product plastic packaging, and commodity extraction versus bankruptcy for profit?

    Or the current national headline of the condominium management that was aware of fatal structural flaws in one of its buildings, but waited so long to organize repairs that the building collapsed with dramatic loss of life and property (Miami Surfside collapse). The city was aware too - did they lack will or authority to kick developers' asses into gear?

    According to "demonstrable harm" in the real world, the companies get to run rampant while telling us to 'get f****d', and then when injured parties or the government try to collect on the demonstrated harm, the companies and their principals evade most or all account and leave us double f****d.

    The bottom line is that risk-taking actors must carry the burden of proof that they are not operating in a deleterious fashion, with robust monitoring of their operations to ensure compliance on concrete regulations and known risk factors, and liability attendant to violation of the public good and trust (with the caveat that the first priority is preventing and mitigating harm more than adjudicating over it after the fact, as necessary as such backstops may be). They must have this burden and oversight because we know exactly the price of allowing otherwise. Do you have an idea of how the Proportionality Principle would achieve alignment of corporate incentives with the public good in practice? Or how would it change policymaking from the status quo?

    Here's a gesture at the underlying conflict from the linked oil bankruptcy article:

    Looking at it only at the tail end ignores the whole chain of events that created that situation and the risks that were compounded
    One of my own guiding principles would be rapid expropriation of prime assets and strict nullification of limited liability for persons with ownership or management stakes whenever a company is found to flout clear-cut and longstanding regulatory and fiduciary obligations, but as I said carrots are preferable to sticks. Stakeholders should want to keep the bearers of their investment disciplined; then the market can decide how it wants to price risk.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  15. #3615
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    All very reasonable I suppose, but, my issue here is more that you appear to deeply mistrust [all] regulatory models, the precautionary principle as much as anything else.
    Which would suggest you recognize a deeper problem than any regulatory model can really address - perhaps the fundamental problem of profit directing economic activity?
    In which case no model will satisfy, as none of them are deemed capable of mitigating deleterious affects in the face of the overriding principle driving the investment.
    Is that a fair summary?
    --------------
    In other news:
    UK gets its 100th Unicorn.
    More than the rest of the EU combined, and amusingly enough in AI (where europe as a whole is a bit-part player besides the US, China and Israel):

    https://twitter.com/CityAM/status/1409183809057210375
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  16. #3616
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    EUrope's Fin-Tech problem:-

    A poor venue for decision making - indecisive, lowest-common-denominator solutions, risk averse:
    https://techcrunch.com/2021/06/25/de...to-get-a-grip/ (written by a blistering lefty)

    What this looks like in practice:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1_EuropeanFintech_Intro.PNG 
Views:	15 
Size:	1.33 MB 
ID:	24950Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2_EuropeanFintech_CountryRank_1-20.PNG 
Views:	12 
Size:	272.0 KB 
ID:	24951Click image for larger version. 

Name:	3_EuropeanFintech_CountryRank_21-83.PNG 
Views:	12 
Size:	243.1 KB 
ID:	24952Click image for larger version. 

Name:	4_EuropeanFintech_RegionalRanking.PNG 
Views:	13 
Size:	219.1 KB 
ID:	24953Click image for larger version. 

Name:	5_EuropeanFintech_CityRanking_1-50.PNG 
Views:	12 
Size:	228.9 KB 
ID:	24954Click image for larger version. 

Name:	6_EuropeanFintech_CityRanking_51-100.PNG 
Views:	13 
Size:	229.2 KB 
ID:	24955Click image for larger version. 

Name:	7_EuropeanFintech_CityRanking_101-170.PNG 
Views:	12 
Size:	290.1 KB 
ID:	24956Click image for larger version. 

Name:	8_EuropeanFintech_RegionalRanking_Tables.PNG 
Views:	12 
Size:	317.2 KB 
ID:	24957
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  17. #3617
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    the precautionary principle in action:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...e-astrazeneca/
    Last edited by Furunculus; 07-02-2021 at 07:39.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  18. #3618

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    All very reasonable I suppose, but, my issue here is more that you appear to deeply mistrust [all] regulatory models, the precautionary principle as much as anything else.
    Which would suggest you recognize a deeper problem than any regulatory model can really address - perhaps the fundamental problem of profit directing economic activity?
    In which case no model will satisfy, as none of them are deemed capable of mitigating deleterious affects in the face of the overriding principle driving the investment.
    Is that a fair summary?
    --------------
    In other news:
    UK gets its 100th Unicorn.
    More than the rest of the EU combined, and amusingly enough in AI (where europe as a whole is a bit-part player besides the US, China and Israel):

    https://twitter.com/CityAM/status/1409183809057210375
    That's incomplete - my concerns are much more grounded and concrete. There are specific things governments and laws can do to restrain worst practices and negative externalities, which to some extent does require the humans behind the institutional actors to have some interest and expertise in accomplishing the task. I'm simply not convinced that "proportionality principle" will improve what needs improvement, that it isn't another buzzword stalking horse, a pleasing cover for practices that are in continuity of at-least-implicit opposition to the above, as has often been the case in the corporate world, down the line from "free labor and free markets" to "responsible stakeholders" and "sustainable capitalism."

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    the precautionary principle in action:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...e-astrazeneca/
    Haven't I already explained that labeling any precaution as constitutive of a "precautionary principle" places every person as a follower of such a principle? And the EMA isn't even following precautions, 'just' Eurocentrism:

    There is no suggestion that the Indian manufactured doses are in any way substandard. The EMA has not authorised the vaccine only because the Indian manufacturers have not yet sought a licence for the product in Europe, as the SII intend to predominantly supply low and middle income countries.

    British travellers face a similar issue in the United States where no version of the AstraZeneca shot has yet been licensed.

    For example, vaccine certificates were a requirement for entry to a Bruce Springsteen show on Broadway in New York last month – but only shots approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were accepted.
    (Note that no vaccines are approved by the FDA, AFAIK all vaccines distributed in the USA up to now have only held "emergency use authorization.")

    But anyway:

    But only vaccines approved by the EMA are included, though individual member states are free to accept other vaccines if they choose.

    [...]

    An analysis by former BA strategy chief Robert Boyle suggests that more than 20 amber countries including France, Italy and Austria are on track to join the UK’s green list and open to British holidaymakers this month.

    The 22 nations – primarily in Europe – all meet the threshold for inclusion on the Government’s quarantine-free green list, according to the analysis. All have infection rates below 20 cases per 100,000 of the population, far lower than current rates in Britain.
    Incoherent on-and-off travel restrictions are truly one of those ridiculous and arbitrary measures that almost every country seems to have engaged in. Either shut it all down or obtain extensive assurances with every traveler (preferable, though it's even better - at this stage of the pandemic - just to ban non-vaccinated travelers outright); heuristics to the national or regional level lack spatial and temporal resolution even when rationally formulated.

    Tangentially, I have to admit I was mal-persuaded by all the takes late last year and early this one that vaccine passports were too difficult and discriminatory to reliably implement, so we shouldn't pursue them - actually, they're very straightforward!!!

    The disease of Fucking Stupid in the world is right up there with greed and sadism as prime threats to human survival.
    Last edited by Montmorency; 07-04-2021 at 01:40.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  19. #3619
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,738

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Haven't I already explained that labeling any precaution as constitutive of a "precautionary principle" places every person as a follower of such a principle? And the EMA isn't even following precautions, 'just' Eurocentrism:
    Yes, and that actually is a further criticism I have of the precautionary principle; that it allows a veneer of respectability for what would otherwise be understood as v-poor decision making. Whether that is naked self-interest, low sectarian politics, lack of moral courage, etc.
    Last edited by Furunculus; 07-04-2021 at 08:19.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

Page 121 of 121 FirstFirst ... 2171111117118119120121

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO