–“How Has Brexit Been Going?”–
4% Decline is due to labor shortage.
(1) Fundamentally, the 4% decline is caused by a labor shortage. It’s a labor shortage because wages are too low. Wages will increase. Prices will increase. Inequality will increase.
(2) So, the people obtain greater equality and gain immigration control at the cost of higher prices – which is just the cost of equality. In other words … every advanced country should follow the UK’s example – the USA in particular, whose inequality exists for precisely the same reason, and is exacerbated by export of manufacturing and manufacturing jobs.
(3) in other words, cheap consumption goods lose their value when they lead to inequality at home. Or in other words, comparative advantage has testable limits: whenever it creates any semblance of inequality.
–“So its better to be equally poor than unequally rich?” — Gediminas Kucinskas
See “Black or white fallacy”. Your question presumes that there are infinite marginal differences as wealth increases when the opposite is true. The wealth that consists of returns on productivity differs from income that consists of parasitism, extraction, and rents. The end of marginal difference occurs when inequality limits one’s own wealth to vehicles for parasitism and rent-seeking rather than returns on assisting in cooperation.
So, instead, It’s better to (1) maintain “Reciprocity within the limits of Proportionality” which is the human instinct for group cohesion.
(2) Maintain rule of law of natural law by self-determination by reciprocal insurance of sovereignty, reciprocity, truth before face, duty before self, and the resulting markets in association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war.
(3) (this is the hard part…) Maintain upward redistribution of reproduction in defense against regression to the mean, and the increase in genetic load, that constantly increases drag on the innovation, adaptation, and evolution of the polity under a continuous condition for wealth.
And that’s because (4) the condition of any people is determined by its rate of innovation, adaptation, evolution, by the only means possible: maximization of evolutionary computation, and the minimization of frictions to evolutionary competition, by the maximization of markets for cooperation, and the centralization of proceeds of cooperation in research and development of comparative advantage instead of increasing consumption.
Why? (5) the tendency of all human beings is to limit adaptive neural, behavioral, skill, and physical effort economies to maximize consumption at minimum effort. However, doing so comes at the cost of present gains for future losses.
What’s the problem? (6) this model only works in small homogenous relatively high IQ polities capable of producing a power distribution of law to limit the population to reciprocity, a Pareto distribution of assets to organize the population voluntarily, and a nash equilibrium of returns.
Unfortunately, the problem most groups face is the size of the underclass is sufficiently large to drive down the median IQ which prevents that formation of power, Pareto, and nash equilibriums sufficient to compete in world markets. In other words, there is no difference between mankind’s biological and social determinism, and the physical world’s mechanical physical and chemical determinism other than humans have the capacity we call memory and can seek to outwit the physical world, and because we can cooperate we can divide the labor of outwitting the physical world. …
This may seem difficult to parse but it is the law of biological, conscious, and social life and it is as unavoidable as are the laws of thermodynamics.