Hacker News Reader

Comment by zeroname | Hacker News Reader

Where exactly is the hypocrisy? Singapore has been touted as a model on how to organize trade after Brexit.

Of course you want a trade deal with the EU after Brexit. One major problem with being in the EU is that it forces the UK to uphold tariffs and tariff-like restrictions on imports from non-EU countries. Singapore itself has little to no tariffs.

With a hard Brexit, those deals simply won't exist yet, so it's wise to move to place where they do exist.

View on HN

The hypocrisy is based on the fact he loudly supported Brexit saying that we would be better off outside the EU because of how awesome the UK could do by itself, before moving everything to Singapore.

He clearly cares not in the least about the UK. I will never buy any of his products ever again.

If he didn't care about the UK then why would he vocally support a Brexit? That's a clear contradiction.

To put it another way, I can argue for a better business environment in my home country while simultaneously having all my business in a country that actually has such an environment.

Your argument proves my point. He's doing it entirely for his own selfish reasons and not for the good of the country.

Virtually anybody who runs a successful business believes that a good business environment is also good for the country.

you've got your sequence of events wrong there:

- 2003: moves his manufacturing base of the UK/EU

- 2016: says we'd be better off outside (like his manufacturing base is currently)

- 2019: moves legal HQ (and two jobs) outside of the UK

So if he's basically based in Singapore, why get involved in the Brexit argument at all? Or at least if he did, why wasn't his argument, "I had to move all my manufacturing out of the UK because it's not like Singapore". Don't remember him saying that during the campaign.

he's been upset for a while at the EU's regulatory standards on vacuum cleaners, which he said were mostly written by his German competitors

he contested them in court and was ultimately victorious, but it took 5 years (and presumably millions of pounds) to win that victory

to me that seems like a valid reason to be upset

It's a reason to be upset, it's not a reason to back a brexit campaign.

presumably you have little problem with the majority of the UK business establishment expressing their view that leaving will disadvantage their businesses

Mr Dyson's business has been systematically disadvantaged for years by corruption that seems to be endemic to the political institution that's membership is currently under debate

so why is it acceptable for the UK business establishment to campaign for what their believe to be in their best interests, but not for Mr Dyson to campaign for his?

It's fine for him to campaign for his own company, as long as he's clear it's all about his self-interest in the world of vacuum cleaner regulation.

It's not ok to say that Brexit will be great for all the other companies in the UK, whilst clearly demonstrating he couldn't care less. It's immoral. That's what I'm complaining about.

> Mr Dyson's business has been systematically disadvantaged for years by corruption that seems to be endemic to the political institution that's membership is currently under debate

You're going to have provide substantial evidence of that "corruption" vs Mr Dyson not get his own way and getting all upset.

> It's not ok to say that Brexit will be great for all the other companies in the UK, whilst clearly demonstrating he couldn't care less. It's immoral. That's what I'm complaining about.

did he say that though?

Googled "brexit dyson quotes":

http://www.cityam.com/265756/james-dyson-car-makers-complain...

where did he specifically say exactly what you've accused him of saying?

because it's not on that page

Oh come on this is getting ridiculous. On that page he said,

"Taxes or delays at the customs, it is not important compared to the manufacturing costs. Car manufacturers complain all the time. But there is no problem without [a] solution."

So he reckons it's all going to be unicorns and roses despite all warnings to the contrary. And you still haven't provided evidence of the much stronger allegation of EU corruption.

that's not what you accused him of saying, and you've appeared to have gone back and edited your previous posts after I responded

I'm done here

It seems like he first ensured chaos for his competitors, and then executed well on that chaos by having a backup plan. Seems like a great capitalist. Lacking in ethics, as a human, but a great capitalist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com