[Glen]

Enlighten yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_Germany

I meant the picture of "Made In European Union" - are my added images not displaying?

foreign manufactures had been falsely marking inferior goods with the marks of renowned British manufacturing companies and importing them into the United Kingdom. Most of these were found to be originating from Germany

I don't understand the complaint. Germany has become a strong advocate of the same policy. Can you please explain why you think it is bad policy to enforce transparency and protect brand identities?

[Glen]

You have understood wrongly. Patent protection is the same in the UK and the EU, in fact there are moves, long overdue, to create a single European patent.

No, you have misunderstood. The EU unified patent is something the UK did not originally want, and it reluctantly participated in the project to protect the UK pharmaceuticals industry and City of London law firms. In fact, Germany-UK had been negotiating a bilateral patent agreement before (and perhaps during) the EU unified patent negotiations.

The UK IPO still does not interpret patents the same as EU.

We have been through this same topic before on this forum and I posted evidence. The UK is stricter than the EU on patents. Many items patented in EU are not worthy of a UK patent. The UK has entered into an agreement to move towards unified patents, which would have removed the differences, but that no longer looks likely.

[noemon]

The UK is stricter in certain licensing items such as Banking(financial services) licenses for example, not on a general level though I would say.

[Glen]

I would say on a fundamental level the UK is stricter.

Business ideas and software cannot be patented in the UK. This is because the British notion of patentable invention is something that changes the physical world in an original way. The Japanese follow the same principle.

The USA has more relaxed definition of Patent, not far from Copyright in the UK. The EU unified patent is a big-tent compromise.

[AFAIK]

Patents are often protectionist or used for rent-seeking by monopolising certain medicines or other technology. It's much more contentious than Atlantis makes out.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

How about conducting an ISLM analysis for an open economy?

The EU has plenty of FTAs with countries around the world. Remind me again how many of those include free movement of people. How about CETA and TIPP?

Anyway, I'm interested to know what benefits remain according to your model if you take into account the different languages in the EU and discount those people which tend to move relatively freely anyway, i.e. the well educated whose skills are sought after and who generally have few problems getting jobs in other countries inside and outside of the EU.

And how does this compare to the disadvantages of the sketchy EU service market? It begs the question why there is dogma on free movement - which cannot be questioned - while there is laxness on services.

[Atlantis]

No, you have misunderstood. ...

Glen, I have only worked in intellectual property for 30 years, but if you don't want to know, I won't waste my time.

What you say is obviously wrong.

[Rugoz]

How about conducting an ISLM analysis for an open economy?

I'm talking about general equilibrium models of trade like Heckscher–Ohlin, Krugman and Melitz.

Open economy in ISLM means perfect capital mobility, not labor mobility.

[Glen]

Glen, I have only worked in intellectual property for 30 years, but if you don't want to know, I won't waste my time.

On the topic of UK patent law, I am repeating Innovation Award Winners 2015 and International Law firm:

The Patents Act says that something cannot be patented if it consists only of a program for a computer. The IPO has historically been stricter in denying software patents than European patent authorities, despite UK law being based on the European Patent Convention, on which the European Patent Office bases its decisions.

As well as the UK Government's Patent Act:

It is hereby declared that the following (among other things) are not inventions for the purposes of this Act, that is to say, anything which consists of -
(a) a discovery, scientific theory or mathematical method;
(b) a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work or any other aesthetic creation whatsoever;
(c) a scheme, rule or method for performing a mental act, playing a game or doing business, or a program for a computer;
(d) the presentation of information;

I mentioned this case in another thread. NOKIA, 2009 was a landmark case because it was the first time the UK allowed any patent involving software. It requires several court appeals, and it was finally permitted on the basis that this specific example of software involved the physical world outside of the computer. Typically, software patents have no hope of being awarded a UK Patent.

The court ruling highlights the challenge of this particular case, and makes clear the hurdles that software-related patents must overcome in the UK:

All those objections were overcome to the examiner‟s satisfaction except for the excluded matter objection, namely that the invention is excluded from patent protection because it relates to a method for performing a mental act and/or a program for a computer, contrary to section 1(2)(c). As no agreement could be reached on this issue, the matter came before me at a hearing
...
the Court of Appeal set out a four step test to be followed in deciding whether an invention is excluded:
(1) properly construe the claim (2) identify the actual contribution (3) ask whether the identified contribution falls solely within the excluded subject matter (4) check whether the actual or alleged contribution is actually technical in nature.
...
The application is concerned with developing the functionality of a mobile phone, particularly the networking functionality – i.e. the network connections – of the phone ... the effect of the instant alleged invention is not merely within the computer programmed with the relevant instructions ... it has the knock-on effect of the computer working better as a matter of practical reality ... To my mind, what the present applicants have contributed is a way of controlling the interaction between a mobile phone and a remote computer in such a way that the functionality of the mobile can be changed whilst avoiding the technical problems inherent in the prior art ... Thus whilst the invention may be implemented in software it provides a technical contribution such that it is more than a program for a computer as such.

What you say is obviously wrong.

Unless clearly stated, I make an effort to avoid posting opinion. The UK IPO has been stricter than its European counterparts despite drawing on the same convention.

[Ombrageux]

I think people have been really, really exaggerating the impact of Brexit, both positive and negative. Even with the euro, I am highly skeptical of the all the economic apocalypse stories, with the EU membership alone it is even more ridiculous: a little less or more trade openness is not the primary cause of economic growth and, anyway, Big Business on both sides want things to be as convenient as possible.

Frankly, I would be surprised if - in the medium term - Brexit has a big impact either way on the British economy. I suppose it's not impossible that the Continentals could conspire to exclude the City of London, but I don't even think that is certain.

The wider story is that of the decline of Europeans and the congenital weakness of multi-state/nation entities like the EU. British exports to the EU fell from 54.8% in 1999 to 44.6% in 2014. That decline will probably continue as the Anglosphere & BRICS continue to grow, while Old Europe dies off and stagnates. The Continental Euro-Weenies have no plan: no plan to address European decline (as though replacing the workforce with uneducated Africans and Mideasterners is a solution) and no plan to actually make the EU an effective force in the world.

The problem with the EU is you've got no one really to negotiate with. It's just 27 or 28 ministers having boring meetings and doing their own thing. But the UK can negotiate with the U.S., China, Canada, South Korea, or anybody else. (Not that I think bilateral trade deals will be a huge boon to the UK, but this will probably compensate for any loss of access to the EU common market.)

I am personally a big fan of European unity: but not the insanity and decline of Merkel and Hollande. I hope we can build a European Union the Brits would want to join. We could soon have a world in which Presidents Putin, Trump, and Orbán join hands with new, patriotic leaders in Continental Europe. I don't think this is wishful thinking

[Atlantis]

I think people have been really, really exaggerating the impact of Brexit, both positive and negative.

The real damage will only become apparent when it is too late. That's why we use economic forecasts to prevent bad decisions.

There will be negative consequences, in particular for the UK. There can be no doubt about that, even if the Brexiteers have always denied this.

From what we can see at this early stage, the damage could be much worse than what was expected.

The weakness of the UK economy is summed up by this quote"the UK depends on the kindness of strangers." In other words, the UK depends on the continued inflow of capital because of its huge current accounts deficit.

As the real estate bubble bursts, the pound plummets, credit rating is cut, the economy turns into recession and the fate of the City is in doubt, the inflow of new capital could drop dramatically and compound problems.

The remedy of the Tory government is obviously: more neo-liberalism, lower corporate taxes, less social services, higher taxes on wage earnings and more debts. The irony is that after reigning in sovereign debt by years of painful austerity, the Tory government will now give up austerity, not to shower money on the people as the anti-austerity crowed has been demanding, but in order to give tax breaks to foreign investors.

Will the EU pamper the UK with even more concessions and allow the UK to grow fat as a tax haven with tax and social dumping at the expense of its own economies? If the EU has a death wish, then, and only then, the answer will be yes.

The West cancels out its own advantages by self-hatred, but I think when it comes to the bread and butter, even the EU can be very hard-nosed in defending its own interests.

[Glen]

The real damage will only become apparent when it is too late. That's why we use economic forecasts to prevent bad decisions.

Forecasting does not work, as evidenced by generations of statisticians speculating on population growth:



What does work is maintaining a diversified set of choices.

P.S. Please don't waste your energy posting how you have X experience thus don't need to provide evidence.

[killim]

I'm talking about general equilibrium models of trade like Heckscher–Ohlin, Krugman and Melitz.

Open economy in ISLM means perfect capital mobility, not labor mobility.

Obviously models like the H-O model do not include free labor (or capital) movement, since this is one of the basic assumptions of those models. You know pretty much what happens once the you allow for free labor movement. The same is true for ISLM. Though the basic model do not include free movement of labor, you can easily use them to look what happens. Thankfully I did not have Profs. who did only the 101. One should always tinker with the basic assumptions, because they do not match reality. In reality there is (at least to some extent) free movement of capital and labor.

Far more important is anyway that it is not an option. There is at best a chance to reach something like the pre-Brexit agreement with some make-up chichi on immigration. At the same time is going to stay connected to the common market access.

[Atlantis]

While it was generally expected that Brexit would have a negative effect on the World economy, the eurozone is doing better than expected:

Eurozone economy shows resilience despite Brexit

The eurozone economy is proving resilient to the fallout from Britain’s decision to leave the EU, new data suggested on Friday, even as signs of a downturn intensified in the UK.

A closely watched poll of purchasing managers for the single currency area showed the pace of recovery slowing only slightly after the June 23 referendum.

A separate European Central Bank survey of private sector forecasts also showed economists expect the British decision to have only a minor impact on the region.

The purchasing managers’ index for the eurozone, compiled by data firm Markit, fell from 53.1 in June to 52.9 in July.

While activity in the eurozone rose at the slowest pace in a year and a half, the decline was less pronounced than some had feared and the figure remains well above the crucial 50 level that marks an expansion in activity.

By contrast, Markit’s comparable figure for the UK plunged from 52.4 per cent in June to 47.7 per cent in July, the lowest reading since early 2009.

“The eurozone economy showed surprising resilience in the face of the UK’s vote to leave the EU and another terrorist attack in France,” said Chris Williamson, chief economist at Markit. He added that the fragility of the region’s recovery left plenty of room for speculation about further stimulus by the ECB next year.

Brexit could dent trade between the eurozone and the UK, while the British vote has also stoked concerns about the EU’s future cohesion, contributing to a steep fall in bank stocks in countries such as Italy and Spain immediately after the referendum.

Some economists expect the eurozone’s monetary policymakers to unveil a fresh round of stimulus at their next policy vote in early September.

The latest edition of the central bank’s quarterly poll of professional forecasters showed that economists expected growth in the single currency area next year to be 0.2 percentage points lower than previously thought and a tenth of a percentage point lower in 2018.

Economists now expect on average growth of 1.4 per cent next year and 1.6 per cent in 2018, a revision that largely reflects the result of the UK referendum, the ECB said.

While only 28 of the 51 economists polled said explicitly that they had taken the UK vote into account, their downgrades were only slightly bigger than those of other forecasters. Longer-term growth expectations remained at 1.7 per cent, while forecasts for this year were also unchanged at 1.5 per cent.

Forecasts for inflation were also slightly lower, at 1.2 per cent for 2017 and 1.5 per cent for 2018 — from 1.3 per cent and 1.6 per cent respectively. Longer-term inflation expectations and forecasts for this year remained at 0.3 per cent and 1.8 per cent.

The forecasts contrast with inflation expectations based on market measures, which fell sharply following Britain’s vote to break ties with the EU.

[Atlantis]

The British wanted their borders controlled, the French gave it to them.

Are the Dover delays revenge for Brexit – or bad news for Theresa May?

The 14-hour traffic jams on approaches to the Channel port have been blamed on French spite, but they have shown up a critical lack of Home Office planning

What goes wrong on holiday can be as memorable for children as what goes right, and not necessarily in a bad way. I well remember how we ran out of petrol on a German autobahn from Berlin in the days of the cold war, or the day the accelerator pedal got stuck as we drove through villages in Slovenia (it all ended well).

And there will doubtless be children today who will recall for many a year the 14 hours their family car was stuck in a traffic jam on the approach to Dover. They may also remember being plied (eventually) with board games and bottled water by volunteers more used to ministering to refugees. Whether memories of a new “Dunkirk spirit” and spontaneous beach volleyball on the verges of the M20 will blot out the discomfort and the frustration, however, is another matter.

For adults looking for reasons, whether immobilised en route to the Channel or not, there was an obvious answer. “The French” had decided to “punish” the Brits for voting for Brexit. “You want tougher border controls,” social media arguments went, “well, we’ve got some.”

In theory, of course, such an explanation falls apart: there have always been border controls between the UK and France, because the UK never signed up to Schengen. So, for all the talk by the leave campaign of “taking back control”, the vote should make no difference to the status or policing of borders.

And yet, and yet… if you were sitting in Paris, with responsibility for ensuring the extended state of emergency following the Bastille Day atrocity in Nice, a shortage of police and security services to enforce it across mainland France, and the start of the continental holiday season thinning out staff still further, where would you choose to economise? The decision would not have to be malevolent, it could be entirely practical. But any redistribution of staff was bound to affect the surge in France-bound Channel traffic as the UK school holidays began.

The UK authorities knew it would be one of the busiest and hottest weekends of the year
It appears to have been this conjunction of forces that created the apocalyptic jams this past weekend. Today, though, the French suggested any blame needed to be shared. Where were the police? asked a French spokesman. The UK authorities knew it would be one of the busiest and hottest weekends of the year, why were contingencies not in place, given the potential risks to the very young, the very old and the ill?

This may not be the whole question, but it is a question. British ability to anticipate such emergencies in the past has left much to be desired. This same weekend last year, the M2 and M20 became gigantic lorry parks as a result of strikes and additional security measures designed to deter migrants on the French side.

Given that any failings on the British side reflect poorly on planning, primarily at the Home Office, and given the reputation of the ex-home secretary, now prime minister, for competence, there is some domestic political capital at stake here. Fortunately for Theresa May, parliament is already in recess.

As to closing the borders to goods, the French can be very imaginative at that game. I remember the time when the French forced all imports of Japanese electronics to pass through Poitier, resulting in very punishing delays for the delivery of Japanese parts.

The Brexit plotters Johnson, Davis et al. keep on talking about tariffs. Are they dumb or do they just pretend? Tariffs aren't the problem. Non-tariff barriers are the real problem.

[Atlantis]

Every industrial country uses domestic infrastructure projects such as nuclear power stations and high speed trains to develop domestic technologies and domestic industries, which are the sole guarantors for well paid jobs in the high-tech fields.

To let the Chinese take over UK infrastructure such as energy and rail without even insisting on an equal market access in China is astonishing. The Chinese would never allow foreign investment in these fields. Has the UK given up as an industrial country? Is the UK giving up technology in key fields? Might as well let the Chinese build Trident too.

And what if the deal falls through because of Brexit? Will the lights go out? I don't suppose they have an alternative plan.

Brexit and the Future of British Nuclear Power

The recent referendum in favor of Britain leaving the EU has prompted much discussion about the future of the British nuclear power industry and how international investors will respond to Brexit. All 15 of Britain’s existing nuclear reactors came under the ownership of Électricité de France S.A. (EDF), the French electric utility that purchased British Energy in 2009. EDF, along with China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN), is involved in developing plans for new nuclear plants in the U.K.

The project that has garnered the most scrutiny is a new reactor planned for Hinkley Point, two-thirds of which is expected to be financed by EDF, with CGN as a minority partner. Supporters of the proposed reactor, known as Hinkley Point C, argue that the project is necessary to meet future electricity demand without increasing British reliance on fossil fuels. Opponents of the project, even those who are pro-nuclear power, argue that the cost is too high, referring to the project as “one of the worst deals ever.” The high cost can be attributed to several factors – the timeline for construction, unproven technology, and generous guarantees on returns for the project’s investors.

A significant percentage of Britain’s current coal and nuclear capacity is scheduled to be retired over the course of the next decade. Thus, to avoid supply shortages without exceeding the country’s ambitious carbon-emission targets, the British government made plans to revamp the country’s nuclear program and push for the first new reactors to come online by 2025. EDF agreed to take on the project despite the abbreviated timeline.

EDF’s current reactor offering, the European Pressurized Reactor (EPR), has passive safety features that mitigate the possibility of a Fukushima-like disaster. Similar EPR construction projects in France, Finland, and China have experienced significant delays and cost overruns. And at the same time, EDF is under pressure to update existing French reactors and to purchase AREVA, the French reactor design firm.

Given these difficulties, the British government has offered a sweetheart deal to EDF that includes a guarantee to pay nearly twice the current wholesale rate for electricity generated by the new plant. Such provisions have led industry expert Peter Atherton to argue that Hinkley Point C, with an estimated price tag of more than $37 billion, would be “most expensive conventional power plant in the world.”

While EDF has claimed that Brexit will not affect Hinkley Point, overwhelming financial stress could result in them backing out of the project altogether. If that were to happen, CGN could possibly take over the project entirely, perhaps even scrapping EDF’s design in favor of Chinese reactor technology. China is building more domestic reactors than any other country, and their involvement in Hinkley Point is part of a broader strategy to establish themselves as an exporter of nuclear technology.

In return for bankrolling nuclear projects such as Hinkley Point, the U.K. has agreed to give CGN the opportunity to take the lead role in building a new reactor at Bradwell Nuclear Power Station in Essex. A contract for CGN to build the reactor in the U.K. would be a signal to the rest of the world that China is able to comply with Western safety standards and compete with other exporters for market share. Such a contract would invariably require a balancing of Britain’s demand for clean, affordable electricity, and China’s desire for increased international esteem. Thus, even if the U.K. follows through with separating themselves from the EU, they will still have to contend with the priorities of other players on the international stage if they are to keep the lights on in a post-Brexit world.

[Rugoz]

Obviously models like the H-O model do not include free labor (or capital) movement, since this is one of the basic assumptions of those models. You know pretty much what happens once the you allow for free labor movement. The same is true for ISLM. Though the basic model do not include free movement of labor, you can easily use them to look what happens. Thankfully I did not have Profs. who did only the 101. One should always tinker with the basic assumptions, because they do not match reality. In reality there is (at least to some extent) free movement of capital and labor.

It is the basic assumption because it is, for the most part, empirical reality and an legitimate simplification.

I was responding to noemon who said that "free-trade by default includes free market of people", which is wrong.

[layman]

I do think it will have a negative impact in the long term.

Probably not as much as Atlantis hopes though. A trade war with tarrifs probably wont be that big an issue. Especially as a weak pound offsets this and german exporters have a lot of say. The big issue is confidence and punishment measures to the financial services industry.

We will just have to wait and see. This thread is premature just like the "germany's assylm policy is working" thread

[Beren]

Brexit will hit the economy of London the most, and London generates approximately 22 per cent of the UK's GDP according to Wikipedia. So if London's economy gets hit by 10% in the long term for example, then the UK economy will get hit by 2.2% directly and who knows how much indirectly, since London's economic shrinkage will seep into or will have a serious impact on the rest of the British economy obviously. And everybody will be hit, not just London, so no wonder experts are afraid of economic recession.

[Atlantis]

I do think it will have a negative impact in the long term.

Probably not as much as Atlantis hopes though. A trade war with tarrifs probably wont be that big an issue. Especially as a weak pound offsets this and german exporters have a lot of say. The big issue is confidence and punishment measures to the financial services industry.

We will just have to wait and see. This thread is premature just like the "germany's assylm policy is working" thread

The refugee policy I referred to already DID work in reducing inflow from the Balkans from 30% to near zero in a matter of months. The question of whether future refugee policies will work depends on future political consensus. Since its impossible to close the external Schengen borders completely, the only other way is by restricting the right to asylum through changes to the refugee policy while staying within the Geneva convention.

The Brexit impact on the UK economy will depend largely on the deal you can get from the EU. "You depend on the kindness of strangers." All that talk about revenge, Baff has been repeating for years, is nonsense. There is no place for such sentiments in politics or business. In this we are just taking a page from the text book of the Brits, who keep on telling us that "nations don't have friends, only interests." The EU will have to defend its own interests.