I was having a discussion with a friend about a new beauty product business venture he's considering investing in. He wants to tap into an existing distribution network where the sales people are independent and self-employed. They do, however, have to sign a contract containing a 'conflict of interest' clause, forbidding them from selling competing products.
Now these clauses are invariably unenforceable (especially in the self-employed arena), but companies still include them, knowing full well that the signatories will believe they are enforceable by their very presence in the contract. No amount of persuasion will disabuse the signatories of the notion that they are indeed unenforceable - the seed has been sown and the manufacturer has got inside their heads.
There is a large swath of the population that is not very good at doing research. The issue with them is not whether a message is right or wrong, but that a particular message got there first - and is convenient. Once the message has entered the untrained mind and it has made a formal commitment to it, the powers of reason are surprisingly ineffective in changing the believer's mind, especially if the message taps into basic prejudices which the holder may not even be aware of at a conscious level. So basically it's all about who got their message across first.
There are many people in the UK who have been convinced that the EU is a mega conspiracy and the cause of all the UK's ills, from the decimation of our fishing industry to the problems with the NHS, despite even cursory investigation proving this to be palpable nonsense. Such individuals, generally, are either very bad at, or cannot be bothered with, basic research which may contravene a decision in which they've already invested emotional capital or which has triggered a fear response.
They've heard Farage banging on about it for over a decade - he got his Project Fear message in first, especially following the 2015 Syrian refugee crisis; Turks will overrun the country, immigrants are stealing our jobs, the EU's accounts have never been signed off, the EU gives grants to British companies to move elsewhere in the EU, etc. - all nonsense, yet providing evidence has zero effect.
If a hard Brexit happens, it will take 10 to 20 years to get back to the level of prosperity we currently enjoy within the EU - at best. So what do we actually gain when we have to undergo 10 to 20 years of austerity and demolish our manufacturing capability in the process (as even Minford - the doyen economist of Brexiteers - forecasts), just so that Brexit sponsoring, disaster capitalists can go on a buying spree among the ruins?
Now these clauses are invariably unenforceable (especially in the self-employed arena), but companies still include them, knowing full well that the signatories will believe they are enforceable by their very presence in the contract. No amount of persuasion will disabuse the signatories of the notion that they are indeed unenforceable - the seed has been sown and the manufacturer has got inside their heads.
There is a large swath of the population that is not very good at doing research. The issue with them is not whether a message is right or wrong, but that a particular message got there first - and is convenient. Once the message has entered the untrained mind and it has made a formal commitment to it, the powers of reason are surprisingly ineffective in changing the believer's mind, especially if the message taps into basic prejudices which the holder may not even be aware of at a conscious level. So basically it's all about who got their message across first.
There are many people in the UK who have been convinced that the EU is a mega conspiracy and the cause of all the UK's ills, from the decimation of our fishing industry to the problems with the NHS, despite even cursory investigation proving this to be palpable nonsense. Such individuals, generally, are either very bad at, or cannot be bothered with, basic research which may contravene a decision in which they've already invested emotional capital or which has triggered a fear response.
They've heard Farage banging on about it for over a decade - he got his Project Fear message in first, especially following the 2015 Syrian refugee crisis; Turks will overrun the country, immigrants are stealing our jobs, the EU's accounts have never been signed off, the EU gives grants to British companies to move elsewhere in the EU, etc. - all nonsense, yet providing evidence has zero effect.
If a hard Brexit happens, it will take 10 to 20 years to get back to the level of prosperity we currently enjoy within the EU - at best. So what do we actually gain when we have to undergo 10 to 20 years of austerity and demolish our manufacturing capability in the process (as even Minford - the doyen economist of Brexiteers - forecasts), just so that Brexit sponsoring, disaster capitalists can go on a buying spree among the ruins?
No comments:
Post a Comment