I see the latest Leave position is that we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads about economic forecasts because economics is bunk. I suppose that, their having dispensed with geography as a science, we could expect them to work their way through the curriculum. I'm looking forward to the assault on theoretical physics.
Oh dear, you've reverted. I thought the old Alastair might be back.
Shame. Back off to disengaging I go then.
Well I ask you, what do you expect other than mockery for those who decide that long range economic forecasts are to be completely discounted?
Are they going to be super-accurate? Of course not. But it is possible to make loose consensus is wrong.
As someone who has done lots of long-range economic forecasts in my career, I would say the mockery should be reserved for those who think they should be taken too seriously.
Especially when they are produced as part of a propaganda effort.
We are better looking at historic evidence on these kinds of matters. And the evidence there, while clearly incomplete, points towards the Remain side's efforts being bullsh*t.
For example, let's consider the notion that the EU has led to massive inward flows of FDI which in turn have boosted productivity growth. Here are some numbers:
Inward FDI as % of UK GDP, av. p.a Productivity growth, av p.a 1973-1985 2.5 1.9 1986-1996 3.8 2.0 1997-2008 11.2 1.6
spot on.
companies can't forecast much beyond 3 years ( and even then it's usually wrong ) so 14 years out is a nice exercise but shouldn't be taken as fact,
No - I remember in a previous life being asked on a project how the inflation adjusted costs were 3% out from what we'd forecast a year before - fortunately I didn't say the first thing that occurred to me "that close? Its a complete bloody coincidence and little short of a miracle', but instead offered some anodyne response on overhead re-allocation.....all that said, LEAVE would help their case if they could offer some examples of policies to help us outgrow base trend if we left the EU.......
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
It seems the UK is a sort of Islamic wife to the EU. If we stay in we'll get told what to do - as we choose over time to join a (non-democratic) superstate. But if we choose to leave then the full wrath of the faithful will be unleashed on the apostate. The very thought of leaving challenges the orthodoxy and validity of that which shall not be challenged - ever.
@Runnymede I certainly don't take economic forecasting too seriously. That's a different thing from discounting it completely simply because it is inconvenient.
Many Leave campaigners complain that Remain spends a lot of time arguing by appeals to authority, and there is quite a bit of truth in that. However, in response Leavers have started arguing against authority, seeking to discredit evidence simply because it comes from people who they disapprove of. How many times, for example, have careful arguments been dismissed with "didn't they support the UK joining the Euro?" (whether or not it's true, incidentally). You're indulging in that yourself when you say that the Treasury forecast is simply a propaganda effort. It's more than that and you have to do better than that.
I know it is a propaganda effort, that isn't in any doubt.
And I am doing more - I am providing plenty of evidence that the sorts of claims being made by Remain are boll*cks.
Here's another bit. Prior to the 1994 Norwegian referendum on joining the EU the government claimed that 100,000 jobs would be lost in the event of a 'NO'.
That amounted to around 5% of Norwegian employment at the time - sound familiar? 5%? A very bold forecast aimed at chilling the voters.
What actually happened? Here are the numbers for annual employment growth in Norway from 1994-97
1994 +1.5% 1995 +2.2% 1996 +2.5% 1997 +3%
Just look at that apocalyptic trend (!)
I'm afraid you are the one who is seeing what you want to see in these claims, for your own tortured reasons.
'I largely agree with that but I think some of our younger readers may struggle to recall a time when UK inflation was a persistent and serious threat to our economic performance. The peg was sought because the argument was that we could not simply allow our currency to depreciate against the mighty deutschmark indefinitely as this was at least one of the reasons that inflation was so endemic. The irony was that on the back of the boom the government was struggling to control the upward pressure on sterling which was something of a petro-currency at the time.
The Euro is of course a completely different beast.'
It was a flawed analysis. The exchange rate was not the cause of the inflation in the late 80s/early 90s - excessively loose monetary policy was.
And that looseness resulted in large part from the mistaken policy of Deutschemark shadowing that preceded joining the ERM.
So the idea that 'importing' German monetary policy via an exchange rate link could solve the inflation problem was illogical when it was exactly such a link that had contributed to the initial problem. German policy settings might suit the UK sometimes, but at other times they would be quite inappropriate.
The inflation problems of that period were used as a lever to get the UK into the ERM. Politics driving economics again.
I see the latest Leave position is heir way through the curriculum. I'm looking forward to the assault on theoretical physics.
Oh dear, you've reverted. I thought the old Alastair might be back. ears ( and even then it's usually wrong ) so 14 years out is a nice exercise but shouldn't be taken as fact,
No - I remember in a previous life being asked on a project how the inflation adjusted costs were 3% out from what we'd forecast a year before - fortunately I didn't say the first thing that occurred to me "that close? Its a complete bloody coincidence and little short of a miracle', but instead offered some anodyne response on overhead re-allocation.....all that said, LEAVE would help their case if they could offer some examples of policies to help us outgrow base trend if we left the EU.......
Yes - a year. and you were 3% out. Now compound 3% for 14 years. Or look back on the last 14 years and tell me all the things you accurately predicted.
How did you call 2008 ? Me I got it totally wrong and that was a 12 month forecast not a twelve year one.
Really this nonsense that we can predict with certainty is just that. If the guys in HMT could predict that accurately they wouldn't be wasting their time in the day job, they'd be City billionaires. But they're not.
Ultimately the forecast line is to misundertand the use of forecasts. They are there to provide a framework for the management to think about what's coming at them over the next few years. Taking the number in the right hand corner as gospel is just silly.
@Runnymede I certainly don't take economic forecasting too seriously. That's a different thing from discounting it completely simply because it is inconvenient.
Many Leave campaigners complain that Remain spends a lot of time arguing by appeals to authority, and there is quite a bit of truth in that. However, in response Leavers have started arguing against authority, seeking to discredit evidence simply because it comes from people who they disapprove of. How many times, for example, have careful arguments been dismissed with "didn't they support the UK joining the Euro?" (whether or not it's true, incidentally). You're indulging in that yourself when you say that the Treasury forecast is simply a propaganda effort. It's more than that and you have to do better than that.
But then what do you expect ?
Since the bulk of "authority" is controlled by remain to accept "authority's" view is to slit your own throat. So why would they do that ?
As for the Treasury well let's just say Osborne's recent record on forecasting has inspired confidence.
I'll put you down for "la la la I'm not listening".
It simply isn't good enough to say that long range forecasts are fraught with uncertainty. Of course they are. But they provide a useful pointer as to the general direction that we might expect and the public are entitled to weigh them in the balance.
Leave are going to have to do better than offer an alternative vision of unicorns frolicking in sunlight dewy meadows simply because it's more congenial to them. They're going to have to have some answer as to why the more gloomy view is likely to be overdone.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Could it be because Leave is a feel-good fantasy? All those baddies, those unelected faceless bureaucrats in Brussels, the imposition of the EU "agenda", our powerlessness and now the opportunity to Take Control?
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards. As for control, we have previously and will in future be able to opt out of stuff that truly undermines our sovereignty. While to leave would be to impose some kind of cost on us, whatever its true size, that would leave the day to day lives of most of us unchanged, except to bear this cost, and that would potentially inhibit our ability to help define the rules of a market that accounts for nearly half (44%, before someone points this out) of our exports.
But, as per SindyRef, it feels so much better to shout "Cry Freedom".
Yes - a year. and you were 3% out. Now compound 3% for 14 years. Or look back on the last 14 years and tell me all the things you accurately predicted.
How did you call 2008 ? Me I got it totally wrong and that was a 12 month forecast not a twelve year one.
Really this nonsense that we can predict with certainty is just that. If the guys in HMT could predict that accurately they wouldn't be wasting their time in the day job, they'd be City billionaires. But they're not.
Ultimately the forecast line is to misundertand the use of forecasts. They are there to provide a framework for the management to think about what's coming at them over the next few years. Taking the number in the right hand corner as gospel is just silly.
I see the latest Leave position is that we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads about economic forecasts because economics is bunk. I suppose that, their having dispensed with geography as a science, we could expect them to work their way through the curriculum. I'm looking forward to the assault on theoretical physics.
Oh dear, you've reverted. I thought the old Alastair might be back.
Shame. Back off to disengaging I go then.
Well Ing.
That's just not true. Look at Open Europe or Capital Economics forecasts from before this febrile campaign.
They both showed anything from a small negative of -2% GDP to a net positive of +2% GDP depending on what policy approach we adopted post Brexif. Some forecasts from Adam Smith Institue have it even higher.
In the short term there may well be a small economic hit; in the long term it will make little difference but gives us the policy tools to make it an even greater success.
That is at least an argument. Some of your fellow Leavers downthread were heading towards throwing out any inconvenient forecast because who knows what the day after tomorrow will bring. But you have to accept that the Treasury is a serious economic outfit and its arguments need to be addressed seriously.
Any argument that Brexit will be positive in the long term for Britain is based around Britain taking brave long term policy positions in the wake of leaving. Is there anything, anything at all, in the Leave campaign, that gives us any reason to hope that those advocating Leave could construct a coherent politically-brave policy mix geared towards long term success? It's mainly characterised by incoherent and shambolic populism.
Thank you - I think anything published either now or in the next two months by the Treasury, which is accountable for delivering HM Government policy and reports to George Osborne, is highly unlikely to be objective. Perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on this.
Vote Leave has outlined its new deal on its website, which i linked to this morning. Removing ourselves from the common commercial policy and common external tariff, and striking new trade deals, whilst deregulating the most dynamic parts of our economy would be extremely successful IMHO.
@Runnymede I certainly don't take economic forecasting too seriously. That's a different thing from discounting it completely simply because it is inconvenient.
Many Leave campaigners complain that Remain spends a lot of time arguing by appeals to authority, and there is quite a bit of truth in that. However, in response Leavers have started arguing against authority, seeking to discredit evidence simply because it comes from people who they disapprove of. How many times, for example, have careful arguments been dismissed with "didn't they support the UK joining the Euro?" (whether or not it's true, incidentally). You're indulging in that yourself when you say that the Treasury forecast is simply a propaganda effort. It's more than that and you have to do better than that.
But then what do you expect ?
Since the bulk of "authority" is controlled by remain to accept "authority's" view is to slit your own throat. So why would they do that ?
As for the Treasury well let's just say Osborne's recent record on forecasting has inspired confidence.
I'll put you down for "la la la I'm not listening".
It simply isn't good enough to say that long range forecasts are fraught with uncertainty. Of course they are. But they provide a useful pointer as to the general direction that we might expect and the public are entitled to weigh them in the balance.
Leave are going to have to do better than offer an alternative vision of unicorns frolicking in sunlight dewy meadows simply because it's more congenial to them. They're going to have to have some answer as to why the more gloomy view is likely to be overdone.
My view is that the gloomier forecasts don't amount to much of a threat. No one is disputing that Britain would be a prosperous country, inside or outside the EU, in 10-15 years' time.
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards.
Are you watching a different evening news to everyone else ? Greek Financial Crisis ? Merkel's willkommenskultur ? Angry young men pulling down barricades ? Rather more Eastern Europeans around ? Prisoner's Votes ? I think most people have noticed the EU's operation by now.
I see the latest Leave position is that we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads about economic forecasts because economics is bunk. I suppose that, their having dispensed with geography as a science, we could expect them to work their way through the curriculum. I'm looking forward to the assault on theoretical physics.
Oh dear, you've reverted. I thought the old Alastair might be back.
Shame. Back off to disengaging I go then.
That's just not true. Look at Open Europe or Capital Economics forecasts from before this febrile campaign.
They both showed anything from a small negative of -2% GDP to a net positive of +2% GDP depending on what policy approach we adopted post Brexif. Some forecasts from Adam Smith Institue have it even higher.
In the short term there may well be a small economic hit; in the long term it will make little difference but gives us the policy tools to make it an even greater success.
That is at least an argument. Some of your fellow Leavers downthread were heading towards throwing out any inconvenient forecast because who knows what the day after tomorrow will bring. But you have to accept that the Treasury is a serious economic outfit and its arguments need to be addressed seriously.
Any argument that Brexit will be positive in the long term for Britain is based around Britain taking brave long term policy positions in the wake of leaving. Is there anything, anything at all, in the Leave campaign, that gives us any reason to hope that those advocating Leave could construct a coherent politically-brave policy mix geared towards long term success? It's mainly characterised by incoherent and shambolic populism.
'But you have to accept that the Treasury is a serious economic outfit...'
Ha Ha.
If Leave want to respond on the same terms they need to wise up and generate a worst case report for Remaining.
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards.
Are you watching a different evening news to everyone else ? Greek Financial Crisis ? Merkel's willkommenskultur ? Angry young men pulling down barricades ? Rather more Eastern Europeans around ? Prisoner's Votes ? I think most people have noticed the EU by now.
OK to spell it out, the EU is very noticeable. But all those things are happening "somewhere else". In fact if anything that feeds into the fantasy of the EU being this vast, monstrous "other" which needs to be slain, whereas very few people I would wager could define how it affects their daily lives (I could, FWIW).
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards.
Are you watching a different evening news to everyone else ? Greek Financial Crisis ? Merkel's willkommenskultur ? Angry young men pulling down barricades ? Rather more Eastern Europeans around ? Prisoner's Votes ? I think most people have noticed the EU's operation by now.
I thought Prisoners' votes was an ECHR issue.
Something we set up and joined long before the EU.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Could it be because Leave is a feel-good fantasy? All those baddies, those unelected faceless bureaucrats in Brussels, the imposition of the EU "agenda", our powerlessness and now the opportunity to Take Control?
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards. As for control, we have previously and will in future be able to opt out of stuff that truly undermines our sovereignty. While to leave would be to impose some kind of cost on us, whatever its true size, that would leave the day to day lives of most of us unchanged, except to bear this cost, and that would potentially inhibit our ability to help define the rules of a market that accounts for nearly half (44%, before someone points this out) of our exports.
But, as per SindyRef, it feels so much better to shout "Cry Freedom".
How is our inability to define the rules of a global market that accounts for over half (56%, and growing) of our exports inhibiting our success?
Really this nonsense that we can predict with certainty is just that. If the guys in HMT could predict that accurately they wouldn't be wasting their time in the day job, they'd be City billionaires. But they're not.
Anyone who could forecast the economy 14 years in advance wouldn't even share it with anyone else. If the government has that capability it should be a state secret and used to the nation's advantage and they certainly shouldn't publish these forecasts.
I see the latest Leave position is that we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads about economic forecasts because economics is bunk. I suppose that, their having dispensed with geography as a science, we could expect them to work their way through the curriculum. I'm looking forward to the assault on theoretical physics.
Oh dear, you've reverted. I thought the old Alastair might be back.
Shame. Back off to disengaging I go then.
Well Ing.
That's just not true. Look at Open Europe or Capital Economics forecasts from before this febrile campaign.
They both showed anything from a small negative of -2% GDP to a net positive of +2% GDP depending on what policy approach we adopted post Brexif. Some forecasts from Adam Smith Institue have it even higher.
In the short term there may well be a small economic hit; in the long term it will make little difference but gives us the policy tools to make it an even greater success.
That is at least an argument. Some of your fellow Leavers downthread were heading towards throwing out any inconvenient forecast because who knows what the day after tomorrow will bring. But you have to accept that the Treasury is a serious economic outfit and its arguments need to be addressed seriously.
Any argument that Brexit will be positive in the long term for Britain is based around Britain taking brave long term policy positions in the wake of leaving. Is there anything, anything at all, in the Leave campaign, that gives us any reason to hope that those advocating Leave could construct a coherent politically-brave policy mix geared towards long term success? It's mainly characterised by incoherent and shambolic populism.
Thank you - I think anything published either now or in the next two months by the Treasury, which is accountable for delivering HM Government policy and reports to George Osborne, is highly unlikely to be objective. Perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on this.
Vote Leave has outlined its new deal on its website, which i linked to this morning. Removing ourselves from the common commercial policy and common external tariff, and striking new trade deals, whilst deregulating the most dynamic parts of our economy would be extremely successful IMHO.
@tnewtondunn: "Where is a single ally or credible itnl organisation that thinks it's a good idea for GB to leave the EU?" Osborne. Hardest Q for Leave.
Osborne seems to be becoming a sort of bad bank a la Michael Fallon. Indicates he's entirely given up his leadership ambitions now poor lamb.
Osborne and Cameron are busted flushes. They've upset too many grass roots party members.
@Runnymede I certainly don't take economic forecasting too seriously. That's a different thing from discounting it completely simply because it is inconvenient.
Many Leave campaignyou have to do better than that.
But then what do you expect ?
Since the bulk of "authority" is controlled by remain to accept "authority's" view is to slit your own throat. So why would they do that ?
As for the Treasury well let's just say Osborne's recent record on forecasting has inspired confidence.
I'll put you y to be overdone.
Not at all Alistair, I do look at what they say and take a view. I'm on the record for example as saying there will be a disruption cost but I'm quite prepared to pay it as I believe we as a nation will recover it and more over the medium to long term.
However as I pointed out yesterday, what is making PB so tedious atm is the constant yadda yadda from both sides.
It would probably help if we could lay of the remainer scare stories as most of the audience on here manage businesses, aren't stupid and risk management is a daily part of their job. They are comfortable with risk and quite prepared to call it their own way - often that's how they make money.
Likewise the only sensible post I've seen over the weeked from a remainer has been Mr Topping who quite happily accepts the world won't fall off a cliff and that all we're debating is the rate of growth. I happen to agree with him.
Equally I can accept that for yourself who is dependent on financial services and overseas clients that voting remain makes perfect sense - it's in your interest. But equally as a manufacturer I can assess what out suits me best so why shouldn't I vote in my own best interest ?
So for remainers maybe you should try a different approach, the one where you put forward why we'll be better off in 2026 by staying in and leave the scare stories to one side. They achieve nothing but bad humour all round.
"No one is disputing that Britain would be a prosperous country, inside or outside the EU, in 10-15 years' time."
What about the inevitable Zombie Apocalypse if we leave? Without those nice, cuddly Eurocrats to defend us, we'll be left exposed to anything the Remainers can imagine.
Which is the problem with exaggeration, it casts doubt on any sensible predictions.
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards.
Are you watching a different evening news to everyone else ? Greek Financial Crisis ? Merkel's willkommenskultur ? Angry young men pulling down barricades ? Rather more Eastern Europeans around ? Prisoner's Votes ? I think most people have noticed the EU's operation by now.
I thought Prisoners' votes was an ECHR issue.
Something we set up and joined long before the EU.
Us Leavers always have to educate you Remainers
It's an ECJ ruling against the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which we signed up to in the Lisbon Treaty:
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Could it be because Leave is a feel-good fantasy? All those baddies, those unelected faceless bureaucrats in Brussels, the imposition of the EU "agenda", our powerlessness and now the opportunity to Take Control?
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards. As for control, we have previously and will in future be able to opt out of stuff that truly undermines our sovereignty. While to leave would be to impose some kind of cost on us, whatever its true size, that would leave the day to day lives of most of us unchanged, except to bear this cost, and that would potentially inhibit our ability to help define the rules of a market that accounts for nearly half (44%, before someone points this out) of our exports.
But, as per SindyRef, it feels so much better to shout "Cry Freedom".
How is our inability to define the rules of a global market that accounts for over half (56%, and growing) of our exports inhibiting our success?
Oh a lot of negatives in here. One sec.
OK got you (I think). Not being able to define rules for export markets of course inhibits our success. We get round it, we conform, we produce to those rules, although the situation is almost by definition sub-optimal.
But my question is: is it better to have no input into them or is it better to have some input into them?
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Isn't the claim £4,300 per household? On the basis that there are four in a household, that's just over £1,000 per person. The best rebuttal, therefore, is surely that this is not actually very much and can potentially be made up relatively easily. Getting John Redwood on to talk about international conspiracies and the ERM is ridiculous.
Mr. Observer, disagree entirely. Leave taking the figure seriously would add credibility to Remain generally and make people worried about that and other claims.
I see the latest Leave position is that we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads about economic forecasts because economics is bunk. I suppose that, their having dispensed with geography as a science, we could expect them to work their way through the curriculum. I'm looking forward to the assault on theoretical physics.
Oh dear, you've reverted. I thought the old Alastair might be back.
Shame. Back off to disengaging I go then.
Well I ask you, what do you expect other than mockery for those who decide that long range economic forecasts are to be completely discounted?
Are they going to be super-accurate? Of course not. But it is possible to make loose consensus is wrong.
As someone who has done lots of long-range economic forecasts in my career, I would say the mockery should be reserved for those who think they should be taken too seriously.
Especially when they are produced as part of a propaganda effort.
We are better looking at historic evidence on these kinds of matters. And the evidence there, while clearly incomplete, points towards the Remain side's efforts being bullsh*t.
For example, let's consider the notion that the EU has led to massive inward flows of FDI which in turn have boosted productivity growth. Here are some numbers:
Inward FDI as % of UK GDP, av. p.a Productivity growth, av p.a 1973-1985 2.5 1.9 1986-1996 3.8 2.0 1997-2008 11.2 1.6
So as we can see, the modest pick-up in inward FDI from 1973-1985 to 1986-1996 had no discernible impact on productivity growth. And the much bigger pick-up between 1997-2008 coincided with a period of slower productivity growth.
Now of course you can pick your subperiods carefully...so let's just consider the period of strong productivity growth from 1982-1988, where it averaged 2.8% p.a. Surely FDI played a big role here? Well in this period inward flows were not very strong, only 2.1% of GDP per year.
spot on.
companies can't forecast much beyond 3 years ( and even then it's usually wrong ) so 14 years out is a nice exercise but shouldn't be taken as fact,
My view is that the gloomier forecasts don't amount to much of a threat. No one is disputing that Britain would be a prosperous country, inside or outside the EU, in 10-15 years' time.
By my rough calculations a 6% GDP difference over 14 years is the difference between growing at 2.0% rather than at 2.3%. In either case the economy would still be over 30% larger by that time.
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards.
Are you watching a different evening news to everyone else ? Greek Financial Crisis ? Merkel's willkommenskultur ? Angry young men pulling down barricades ? Rather more Eastern Europeans around ? Prisoner's Votes ? I think most people have noticed the EU's operation by now.
I thought Prisoners' votes was an ECHR issue.
Something we set up and joined long before the EU.
Both.
It was ruled against by the ECHR which we largely ignored, but it has now also been taken up by the ECJ which rules on case brought under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Thierry Delvigne v Commune de Lesparre-Médoc and Préfet de la Gironde.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Isn't the claim £4,300 per household? On the basis that there are four in a household, that's just over £1,000. The best rebuttal, therefore, is surely that this is not actually very much and can potentially be made up relatively easily. Getting John Redwood on to talk about international conspiracies and the ERM is ridiculous.
The claim is the aggregate value of the estimated 6% diminution of GDP growth equates to £4,300 per household. It is not that every family is directly debited somehow £4,300.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Could it be because Leave is a feel-good fantasy? All those baddies, those unelected faceless bureaucrats in Brussels, the imposition of the EU "agenda", our powerlessness and now the opportunity to Take Control?
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards. As for control, we have previously and will in future be able to opt out of stuff that truly undermines our sovereignty. While to leave would be to impose some kind of cost on us, whatever its true size, that would leave the day to day lives of most of us unchanged, except to bear this cost, and that would potentially inhibit our ability to help define the rules of a market that accounts for nearly half (44%, before someone points this out) of our exports.
But, as per SindyRef, it feels so much better to shout "Cry Freedom".
How is our inability to define the rules of a global market that accounts for over half (56%, and growing) of our exports inhibiting our success?
Oh a lot of negatives in here. One sec.
OK got you (I think). Not being able to define rules for export markets of course inhibits our success. We get round it, we conform, we produce to those rules, although the situation is almost by definition sub-optimal.
But my question is: is it better to have no input into them or is it better to have some input into them?
My view is that the benefits of inputting into single market rules are not worth the restrictions that EU membership imposes, both politically and economically, and that our ability to influence will deterioate further over time as the eurozone federates.
At the same time I think control over our commercial, trade and regulatory policies will help us take much better advantage of global opportunities in the future.
I understand that you think differently, and respect that.
I see the latest Leave position is that we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads about economic forecasts because economics is bunk. I suppose that, their having dispensed with geography as a science, we could expect them to work their way through the curriculum. I'm looking forward to the assault on theoretical physics.
Oh dear, you've reverted. I thought the old Alastair might be back.
Shame. Back off to disengaging I go then.
Well I ask you, what do you expect other than mockery for those who decide that long range economic forecasts are to be completely discounted?
Are they going to be super-accurate? Of course not. But it is possible to make loose consensus is wrong.
As someone who has done lots of long-range economic forecasts in my career, I would say the mockery should be reserved for those who think they should be taken too seriously.
Especially when they are produced as part of a propaganda effort.
We are better looking at historic evidence on these kinds of matters. And the evidence there, while clearly incomplete, points towards the Remain side's efforts being bullsh*t.
For example, let's consider the notion that the EU has led to massive inward flows of FDI which in turn have boosted productivity growth. Here are some numbers:
Inward FDI as % of UK GDP, av. p.a Productivity growth, av p.a 1973-1985 2.5 1.9 1986-1996 3.8 2.0 1997-2008 11.2 1.6
So as we can see, the modest pick-up in inward FDI from 1973-1985 to 1986-1996 had no discernible impact on productivity growth. And the much bigger pick-up between 1997-2008 coincided with a period of slower productivity growth.
Now of course you can pick your subperiods carefully...so let's just consider the period of strong productivity growth from 1982-1988, where it averaged 2.8% p.a. Surely FDI played a big role here? Well in this period inward flows were not very strong, only 2.1% of GDP per year.
spot on.
companies can't forecast much beyond 3 years ( and even then it's usually wrong ) so 14 years out is a nice exercise but shouldn't be taken as fact,
"No one is disputing that Britain would be a prosperous country, inside or outside the EU, in 10-15 years' time."
What about the inevitable Zombie Apocalypse if we leave? Without those nice, cuddly Eurocrats to defend us, we'll be left exposed to anything the Remainers can imagine.
Which is the problem with exaggeration, it casts doubt on any sensible predictions.
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards.
Are you watching a different evening news to everyone else ? Greek Financial Crisis ? Merkel's willkommenskultur ? Angry young men pulling down barricades ? Rather more Eastern Europeans around ? Prisoner's Votes ? I think most people have noticed the EU's operation by now.
I thought Prisoners' votes was an ECHR issue.
Something we set up and joined long before the EU.
Us Leavers always have to educate you Remainers
It's an ECJ ruling against the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which we signed up to in the Lisbon Treaty:
Not at all Alistair, I do look at what they say and take a view. I'm on the record for example as saying there will be a disruption cost but I'm quite prepared to pay it as I believe we as a nation will recover it and more over the medium to long term.
However as I pointed out yesterday, what is making PB so tedious atm is the constant yadda yadda from both sides.
It would probably help if we could lay of the remainer scare stories as most of the audience on here manage businesses, aren't stupid and risk management is a daily part of their job. They are comfortable with risk and quite prepared to call it their own way - often that's how they make money.
Likewise the only sensible post I've seen over the weeked from a remainer has been Mr Topping who quite happily accepts the world won't fall off a cliff and that all we're debating is the rate of growth. I happen to agree with him.
Equally I can accept that for yourself who is dependent on financial services and overseas clients that voting remain makes perfect sense - it's in your interest. But equally as a manufacturer I can assess what out suits me best so why shouldn't I vote in my own best interest ?
So for remainers maybe you should try a different approach, the one where you put forward why we'll be better off in 2026 by staying in and leave the scare stories to one side. They achieve nothing but bad humour all round.
I would probably be personally better off with a Leave vote. The disruption to the legal system will be a bonanza for UK-based lawyers in the short to medium term, and would no doubt see my career out.
Do I place great credence in long range economic forecasts? No I don't. I don't immediately see how putting any kinds of barriers between yourself and your biggest market is going to assist economic growth but it's my completely non-expert view that the levels of the new barriers are unlikely by themselves to cause massive disruption. The dangers come more from how the country (and, separately, the EU) would develop following such a decision.
My instinct is that if the facile incoherent populist arguments that the Leavers are currently putting forward before the electorate are successful then Britain will not do well in the short term because that same facile incoherent populism will not serve the country well when implemented as policy. In the medium term Britain might come to its senses and, chastened, follow a more considered path. Would that even itself out by 2030? Dunno squire. Probably not.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Isn't the claim £4,300 per household? On the basis that there are four in a household, that's just over £1,000. The best rebuttal, therefore, is surely that this is not actually very much and can potentially be made up relatively easily. Getting John Redwood on to talk about international conspiracies and the ERM is ridiculous.
The claim is the aggregate value of the estimated 6% diminution of GDP growth equates to £4,300 per household. It is not that every family is directly debited somehow £4,300.
So it's basically even more meaningless than I thought. That, surely, was the correct response. Not conspiracies and the ERM.
"No one is disputing that Britain would be a prosperous country, inside or outside the EU, in 10-15 years' time."
What about the inevitable Zombie Apocalypse if we leave? Without those nice, cuddly Eurocrats to defend us, we'll be left exposed to anything the Remainers can imagine.
Which is the problem with exaggeration, it casts doubt on any sensible predictions.
GDP per head is almost $ 40,000 in the UK.
If the gloomiest argument is that in 15 years' time it will $48,000 outside the EU, compared to $51,000 inside it, that's not much to get worried about.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Could it be because Leave is a feel-good fantasy? All those baddies, those unelected faceless bureaucrats in Brussels, the imposition of the EU "agenda", our powerlessness and now the opportunity to Take Control?
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards. As for control, we have previously and will in future be able to opt out of stuff that truly undermines our sovereignty. While to leave would be to impose some kind of cost on us, whatever its true size, that would leave the day to day lives of most of us unchanged, except to bear this cost, and that would potentially inhibit our ability to help define the rules of a market that accounts for nearly half (44%, before someone points this out) of our exports.
But, as per SindyRef, it feels so much better to shout "Cry Freedom".
How is our inability to define the rules of a global market that accounts for over half (56%, and growing) of our exports inhibiting our success?
Oh a lot of negatives in here. One sec.
OK got you (I think). Not being able to define rules for export markets of course inhibits our success. We get round it, we conform, we produce to those rules, although the situation is almost by definition sub-optimal.
But my question is: is it better to have no input into them or is it better to have some input into them?
My view is that the benefits of inputting into single market rules are not worth the restrictions that EU membership imposes, both politically and economically, and that our ability to influence will deterioate further over time as the eurozone federates.
At the same time I think control over our commercial, trade and regulatory policies will help us take much better advantage of global opportunities in the future.
I understand that you think differently, and respect that.
Likewise, and I think those lines are, or should be, how the debate develops more broadly in the country.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Isn't the claim £4,300 per household? On the basis that there are four in a household, that's just over £1,000. The best rebuttal, therefore, is surely that this is not actually very much and can potentially be made up relatively easily. Getting John Redwood on to talk about international conspiracies and the ERM is ridiculous.
The claim is the aggregate value of the estimated 6% diminution of GDP growth equates to £4,300 per household. It is not that every family is directly debited somehow £4,300.
Indeed not. But that is how they will spin it.
btw. based on this analysis will Mr. Osborne now be ringing up PM Trudeau in Canada and telling him Canada needs to join the US as soon as possible?
Mr. Observer, disagree entirely. Leave taking the figure seriously would add credibility to Remain generally and make people worried about that and other claims.
Besides, £1,000 is rather a lot...
Not over such a long time frame. On top of which it is entirely meaningless. The Leave response to this has been pitiful. They need to stop being so angry and they should definitely not be putting up people to comment who want to refight wars that were conducted in the early 90s.
It would probably help if we could lay of the remainer scare stories as most of the audience on here manage businesses, aren't stupid and risk management is a daily part of their job. They are comfortable with risk and quite prepared to call it their own way - often that's how they make money.
Likewise the only sensible post I've seen over the weeked from a remainer has been Mr Topping who quite happily accepts the world won't fall off a cliff and that all we're debating is the rate of growth. I happen to agree with him.
Equally I can accept that for yourself who is dependent on financial services and overseas clients that voting remain makes perfect sense - it's in your interest. But equally as a manufacturer I can assess what out suits me best so why shouldn't I vote in my own best interest ?
So for remainers maybe you should try a different approach, the one where you put forward why we'll be better off in 2026 by staying in and leave the scare stories to one side. They achieve nothing but bad humour all round.
Precisely.
I can't see what all this sledging it trying to prove except being an exercise in comparative dick measurement. It's not going to convince anyone and it creating a bunch of bad humor all around.
Particularly we should stop the idiotic (yes, Scott_P) posting on the lines of "Leaver's should explain XYZ", it's a lot of disingenuous tosh. No one here is either in the cabinet or on the board of the Leave campaign, they are not privy to the machinations of the campaign and will no doubt find out the strategy as it is revealed at the same time as the rest of the public.
Miss Plato, some say the Department of Health will soon release a forecast that, in the event of us leaving the EU, the cordyceps fungus will mutate to affect human beings, leading to a fungal zombie apocalypse, as per The Last of Us.
And the baby Jesus won't love us any more.
I wonder when the last time the incredibly impressive 'deal' Cameron struck was used as a positive argument by the Remain campaign. Remember, if Cameron didn't think he could get a good deal he was prepared to recommend we Leave. So it must've been good...
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Isn't the claim £4,300 per household? On the basis that there are four in a household, that's just over £1,000. The best rebuttal, therefore, is surely that this is not actually very much and can potentially be made up relatively easily. Getting John Redwood on to talk about international conspiracies and the ERM is ridiculous.
The claim is the aggregate value of the estimated 6% diminution of GDP growth equates to £4,300 per household. It is not that every family is directly debited somehow £4,300.
So it's basically even more meaningless than I thought. That, surely, was the correct response. Not conspiracies and the ERM.
I suppose the thinking was that if the debate moves to aggregate or per capita GDP then the country switches off. GO's claim is not strictly incorrect, but to explain how it is inappropriate or sends the wrong message would waste too much political capital.
tbf to George, in an otherwise unremarkable (and, on immigration, very shaky) interview, he explained it pretty clearly on R4.
Incoherent populism is the Remain supporting government who want to reduce immigration, stay in the EU and keep the minimum wage. Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Not at all Alistair, I do look at what they say and take a view. I'm on the record for example as n and leave the scare stories to one side. They achieve nothing but bad humour all round.
I would probably be personally better off with a Leave vote. The disruption to the legal system will be a bonanza for UK-based lawyers in the short to medium term, and would no doubt see my career out.
Do I place great credence in long range economic forecasts? No I don't. I don't immediately see how putting any kinds of barriers between yourself and your biggest market is going to assist economic growth but it's my completely non-expert view that the levels of the new barriers are unlikely by themselves to cause massive disruption. The dangers come more from how the country (and, separately, the EU) would develop following such a decision.
My instinct is that if the facile incoherent populist arguments that the Leavers are currently putting forward before the electorate are successful then Britain will not do well in the short term because that same facile incoherent populism will not serve the country well when implemented as policy. In the medium term Britain might come to its senses and, chastened, follow a more considered path. Would that even itself out by 2030? Dunno squire. Probably not.
Well I don't actually share that view.
I think historically the people of these islands have been a fairly sensible and equitable bunch it's not in our nature to go off to the extremes.
The current difficulties imo are because there is a growing disconnect between large sections of the population and our leaders. This has crept in since the 90s when wages have stagnated for the less well off and roared ahead for the top 20%. the current discontent is largely a rectifying mechanism to remind those at the top that they're meant to drag the rest of society along with them. When UK leadership gets back to remembering that is part of it's job the extremes will simply shrivel away.
Miss Plato, some say the Department of Health will soon release a forecast that, in the event of us leaving the EU, the cordyceps fungus will mutate to affect human beings, leading to a fungal zombie apocalypse, as per The Last of Us.
And the baby Jesus won't love us any more.
I wonder when the last time the incredibly impressive 'deal' Cameron struck was used as a positive argument by the Remain campaign. Remember, if Cameron didn't think he could get a good deal he was prepared to recommend we Leave. So it must've been good...
On trust and Osborne (or Cameron, for that matter), credibility in them has declined significantly, so it'll be interesting to see how seriously floating voters take the £4,300 claim.
Incoherent populism is the Remain supporting government who want to reduce immigration, stay in the EU and keep the minimum wage. Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
I don't think either side is handling the immigration issue very well.
welcome, btw although it doesn't sound like we will be agreeing on the EU issue any time soon!
Incoherent populism is the Remain supporting government who want to reduce immigration, stay in the EU and keep the minimum wage. Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Not at all Alistair, I do look at what they say and take a view. I'm on the record for example as saying there will be a disruption cost but I'm quite prepared to pay it as I believe we as a nation will recover it and more over the medium to long term.
However as I pointed out yesterday, what is making PB so tedious atm is the constant yadda yadda from both sides.
It would probably help if we could lay of the remainer scare stories as most of the audience on here manage businesses, aren't stupid and risk management is a daily part of their job. They are comfortable with risk and quite prepared to call it their own way - often that's how they make money.
Likewise the only sensible post I've seen over the weeked from a remainer has been Mr Topping who quite happily accepts the world won't fall off a cliff and that all we're debating is the rate of growth. I happen to agree with him.
Equally I can accept that for yourself who is dependent on financial services and overseas clients that voting remain makes perfect sense - it's in your interest. But equally as a manufacturer I can assess what out suits me best so why shouldn't I vote in my own best interest ?
So for remainers maybe you should try a different approach, the one where you put forward why we'll be better off in 2026 by staying in and leave the scare stories to one side. They achieve nothing but bad humour all round.
I would probably be personally better off with a Leave vote. The disruption to the legal system will be a bonanza for UK-based lawyers in the short to medium term, and would no doubt see my career out.
Do I place great credence in long range economic forecasts? No I don't. I don't immediately see how putting any kinds of barriers between yourself and your biggest market is going to assist economic growth but it's my completely non-expert view that the levels of the new barriers are unlikely by themselves to cause massive disruption. The dangers come more from how the country (and, separately, the EU) would develop following such a decision.
My instinct is that if the facile incoherent populist arguments that the Leavers are currently putting forward before the electorate are successful then Britain will not do well in the short term because that same facile incoherent populism will not serve the country well when implemented as policy. In the medium term Britain might come to its senses and, chastened, follow a more considered path. Would that even itself out by 2030? Dunno squire. Probably not.
Although I disagree with it, that's the fairest representation I've seen of your position yet.
Miss Plato, some say the Department of Health will soon release a forecast that, in the event of us leaving the EU, the cordyceps fungus will mutate to affect human beings, leading to a fungal zombie apocalypse, as per The Last of Us.
And the baby Jesus won't love us any more.
I wonder when the last time the incredibly impressive 'deal' Cameron struck was used as a positive argument by the Remain campaign. Remember, if Cameron didn't think he could get a good deal he was prepared to recommend we Leave. So it must've been good...
So in 2030 our GDP could be 6% lower out of the EU than inside it according to the Treasury mandarins who had their boss holding a gun to their heads while they wrote the report. Any prediction of GDP that far into the future is not worth anything, if Leave were saying we'd be better of by some amount in 2030 then it would also be complete bullshit. Two years ago everyone was predicting that oil prices could break through $150 by now based on demand and a worsening political situation in oil producing countries in the Middle East. These forecasters that say in 2030 the economic situation will be one way or another are chortling into their coffees this morning watching people argue over this rubbish. Anyone who claims that they can predict what 2030 is going to be like economically is talking out of their arse.
Predictably the Treasury forecast has been rubbished by the Leavers.
I think the problem Leave have is that there is a regular flow of negatives for the consequences of Leave - Treasury forecast today, IMF, Obama, Catholic Church, BOE, G20, and on it goes.
Individually none of these matter and there are grounds to attack the credibility of any of them. However it is a constant drip it all in the same direction. There is practically nothing serious coming in the opposite direction so the diehard Leavers by and large just make fatuous jokes and hurl abuse at anyone that voices a criticism of Brexit.
That's fine for the diehards but all this is aimed at DKs and the waverers.
The economic growth thing here is about the long term trend. Not the reversion to trend which is what is usually meant when the term "growth" is used. Government policies rarely impact the long term trend, which is determined by technological and institutional change. But the subject here IS precisely such a change. Leaving the EU will expose us to tighter constraints in running our own affairs. We will be less mollycoddled and featherbedded with subsidies, less restricted by regulations and less misdirected by alien objectives. Prometheus unbound! The trend growth will be strengthened when our shackles to the moribund EU are loosened.
The disconnect between rulers and ruled is driven by the establishment, for whom the current arrangements (QE and all) are just dandy. The establishment does not want the plebs to muck up their cosy status quo. It's why the City is very happy with things right now. It's why the likes of Cruz or Trump are so shit scary to the GOP establishment. It's why the EU establishment is utterly ruthless in ignoring referendums that go against their religion. The problem is that sooner or later the plebs are going to land a meaningful blow in a major player. It could be us with Brexit. It could be AfD in Germany. It might be Trump. Or Le Pen. But what is clear is that joe blow is angrier than he's been for a long while.
So in 2030 our GDP could be 6% lower out of the EU than inside it according to the Treasury mandarins who had their boss holding a gun to their heads while they wrote the report. Any prediction of GDP that far into the future is not worth anything, if Leave were saying we'd be better of by some amount in 2030 then it would also be complete bullshit. Two years ago everyone was predicting that oil prices could break through $150 by now based on demand and a worsening political situation in oil producing countries in the Middle East. These forecasters that say in 2030 the economic situation will be one way or another are chortling into their coffees this morning watching people argue over this rubbish. Anyone who claims that they can predict what 2030 is going to be like economically is talking out of their arse.
I think you are confusing the forecast with the political impact of the forecast.
Mr. T, you're right that the uncertain floating voters (of whom there appear to be many) are the ones who matter.
I do think the Treasury's over-egged the cake, even in simple terms of messaging. The sum involved is so large that it's likelier to be seen as incredible than a more modest 'loss'.
Not at all Alistair, I do look at what they say and take a view. I'm on the record for example as saying there will be a disruption cost but I'm quite prepared to pay it as I believe we as a nation will recover it and more over the medium to long term.
However as I pointed out yesterday, what is making PB so tedious atm is the constant yadda yadda from both sides.
It would probably help if we could lay of the remainer scare stories as most of the audience on here manage businesses, aren't stupid and risk management is a daily part of their job. They are comfortable with risk and quite prepared to call it their own way - often that's how they make money.
Likewise the only sensible post I've seen over the weeked from a remainer has been Mr Topping who quite happily accepts the world won't fall off a cliff and that all we're debating is the rate of growth. I happen to agree with him.
Equally I can accept that for yourself who is dependent on financial services and overseas clients that voting remain makes perfect sense - it's in your interest. But equally as a manufacturer I can assess what out suits me best so why shouldn't I vote in my own best interest ?
So for remainers maybe you should try a different approach, the one where you put forward why we'll be better off in 2026 by staying in and leave the scare stories to one side. They achieve nothing but bad humour all round.
I would probably be personally better off with a Leave vote. The disruption to the legal system will be a bonanza for UK-based lawyers in the short to medium term, and would no doubt see my career out.
Do I place great credence in long range economic forecasts? No I don't. I don't immediately see how putting any kinds of barriers between yourself and your biggest market is going to assist economic growth but it's my completely non-expert view that the levels of the new barriers are unlikely by themselves to cause massive disruption. The dangers come more from how the country (and, separately, the EU) would develop following such a decision.
My instinct is that if the facile incoherent populist arguments that the Leavers are currently putting forward before the electorate are successful then Britain will not do well in the short term because that same facile incoherent populism will not serve the country well when implemented as policy. In the medium term Britain might come to its senses and, chastened, follow a more considered path. Would that even itself out by 2030? Dunno squire. Probably not.
Although I disagree with it, that's the fairest representation I've seen of your position yet.
Yes, as Alastair has made abundantly clear his reasoning is not based on an objective look at the issues but his personal feelings.
On another note, OPEC have singularly failed to come to an agreement over their quota, Brent is down over 4%. I wonder if there are any people who voted Yes in 2014 who are now looking at the No vote as a huge reprieve.
I've seen comments on Twitter that 'Corbyn has refused to meet Obama' - but can't find any other sources - has anyone else seen this?
The Times have a story.
Jeremy Corbyn’s team are in discussions over whether to meet President Obama this week, raising the prospect that he may turn down the chance to meet the leader of the free world when he visits Britain.
A Labour source confirmed that the possibility of a meeting had been raised internally but that a decision had yet to be made. A second source confirmed that a possible slot was still available on Saturday.
So now we are all someone going to be £4300 poorer by magic by leaving the EU. Jokers - what a load of crap. Where do they get this from? Made up nonsense
BUT - and this is why Remain will win as it stands - there is no coherent rebuttal story from "Leave", no alternative narrative whereby we retain the benefits (or even admit they exist) but lose the bad bits of EU membership.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Leave, and they are making a mess of it. Where is the vision? The Leadership? The hope, the story, the alternative future?
Bah
Could it be because Leave is a feel-good fantasy? All those baddies, those unelected faceless bureaucrats in Brussels, the imposition of the EU "agenda", our powerlessness and now the opportunity to Take Control?
But, as per SindyRef, it feels so much better to shout "Cry Freedom".
How is our inability to define the rules of a global market that accounts for over half (56%, and growing) of our exports inhibiting our success?
Oh a lot of negatives in here. One sec.
OK got you (I think). Not being able to define rules for export markets of course inhibits our success. We get round it, we conform, we produce to those rules, although the situation is almost by definition sub-optimal.
But my question is: is it better to have no input into them or is it better to have some input into them?
My view is that the benefits of inputting into single market rules are not worth the restrictions that EU membership imposes, both politically and economically, and that our ability to influence will deterioate further over time as the eurozone federates.
At the same time I think control over our commercial, trade and regulatory policies will help us take much better advantage of global opportunities in the future.
I understand that you think differently, and respect that.
Likewise, and I think those lines are, or should be, how the debate develops more broadly in the country.
I doubt it will, sadly.
Can I just ask Topping, out of curiosity, are there any circumstances under which you could see yourself supporting a Leave vote either now or in the future?
This is not a trick question. I'm interested in exploring the basis of your views.
Predictably the Treasury forecast has been rubbished by the Leavers.
I think the problem Leave have is that there is a regular flow of negatives for the consequences of Leave - Treasury forecast today, IMF, Obama, Catholic Church, BOE, G20, and on it goes.
Individually none of these matter and there are grounds to attack the credibility of any of them. However it is a constant drip it all in the same direction. There is practically nothing serious coming in the opposite direction so the diehard Leavers by and large just make fatuous jokes and hurl abuse at anyone that voices a criticism of Brexit.
That's fine for the diehards but all this is aimed at DKs and the waverers.
The EU works for a societal elite that prefers a borderless world where cheap labour and ill gotten gains can be moved at will. We should not be surprised that the rich and powerful support it. Leavers must make clear these people care little about things like democracy, national culture and sovereignty.
My instinct is that if the facile incoherent populist arguments that the Leavers are currently putting forward before the electorate are successful then Britain will not do well in the short term because that same facile incoherent populism will not serve the country well when implemented as policy. In the medium term Britain might come to its senses and, chastened, follow a more considered path. Would that even itself out by 2030? Dunno squire. Probably not.
This is an odd argument though, it's rather like the problem with political correctness, it presupposes that if you stop someone from expressing views you don't like, it will stop them from holding them, or worse still bottling them up and expressing them in less visible but more unpleasant ways.
If through fear mongering or distortions of the truth the population are browbeaten into accepting grudgingly something they don't really want, are they going to be happy about that, especially as over the medium term the whoppers and cant is shown up for what it is, and head off into bright new liberal future ? Or are they going to seethe and chaff at the issues that pushed them towards leave in the first place, until it expresses itself as stronger votes for more extreme parties, as the population sees the futility of voting for traditional parties... see Donald Trump.
The disconnect between rulers and ruled is driven by the establishment, for whom the current arrangements (QE and all) are just dandy. The establishment does not want the plebs to muck up their cosy status quo. It's why the City is very happy with things right now. It's why the likes of Cruz or Trump are so shit scary to the GOP establishment. It's why the EU establishment is utterly ruthless in ignoring referendums that go against their religion. The problem is that sooner or later the plebs are going to land a meaningful blow in a major player. It could be us with Brexit. It could be AfD in Germany. It might be Trump. Or Le Pen. But what is clear is that joe blow is angrier than he's been for a long while.
Are we absolutely sure that the country where Joe Blow forms a government is one we would like to be citizens of?
The disconnect between rulers and ruled is driven by the establishment, for whom the current arrangements (QE and all) are just dandy. The establishment does not want the plebs to muck up their cosy status quo. It's why the City is very happy with things right now. It's why the likes of Cruz or Trump are so shit scary to the GOP establishment. It's why the EU establishment is utterly ruthless in ignoring referendums that go against their religion. The problem is that sooner or later the plebs are going to land a meaningful blow in a major player. It could be us with Brexit. It could be AfD in Germany. It might be Trump. Or Le Pen. But what is clear is that joe blow is angrier than he's been for a long while.
Are we absolutely sure that the country where Joe Blow forms a government is one we would like to be citizens of?
God No! But I am absolutely sure that I don't want to be a citizen of a country whose government doesn't give a little tiny shit about what keeps Joe Blow awake at night. The looming EU superstate is just such a place.
On another note, OPEC have singularly failed to come to an agreement over their quota, Brent is down over 4%. I wonder if there are any people who voted Yes in 2014 who are now looking at the No vote as a huge reprieve.
The disconnect between rulers and ruled is driven by the establishment, for whom the current arrangements (QE and all) are just dandy. The establishment does not want the plebs to muck up their cosy status quo. It's why the City is very happy with things right now. It's why the likes of Cruz or Trump are so shit scary to the GOP establishment. It's why the EU establishment is utterly ruthless in ignoring referendums that go against their religion. The problem is that sooner or later the plebs are going to land a meaningful blow in a major player. It could be us with Brexit. It could be AfD in Germany. It might be Trump. Or Le Pen. But what is clear is that joe blow is angrier than he's been for a long while.
Are we absolutely sure that the country where Joe Blow forms a government is one we would like to be citizens of?
I doubt it would, but do you want to keep upping the ante until we get there ?
Predictably the Treasury forecast has been rubbished by the Leavers.
I think the problem Leave have is that there is a regular flow of negatives for the consequences of Leave - Treasury forecast today, IMF, Obama, Catholic Church, BOE, G20, and on it goes.
Individually none of these matter and there are grounds to attack the credibility of any of them. However it is a constant drip it all in the same direction. There is practically nothing serious coming in the opposite direction so the diehard Leavers by and large just make fatuous jokes and hurl abuse at anyone that voices a criticism of Brexit.
That's fine for the diehards but all this is aimed at DKs and the waverers.
This is precisely why I and others advocated taking an EEA/EFTA approach to leaving the EU - getting out first, then looking at the longer term solution via the proper liberalisation of global trade governance.
You might not get all you want in the first few years, but the handcuffs come off immediately politically so that you can then go out into the world with your own voice and start to shape the position you actually want to achieve.
Mark Littlewood @MarkJLittlewood As @George_Osborne knows exact UK GDP in 2030, he should abolish the OBR who alter their short term growth numbers regularly & dramatically.
The disconnect between rulers and ruled is driven by the establishment, for whom the current arrangements (QE and all) are just dandy. The establishment does not want the plebs to muck up their cosy status quo. It's why the City is very happy with things right now. It's why the likes of Cruz or Trump are so shit scary to the GOP establishment. It's why the EU establishment is utterly ruthless in ignoring referendums that go against their religion. The problem is that sooner or later the plebs are going to land a meaningful blow in a major player. It could be us with Brexit. It could be AfD in Germany. It might be Trump. Or Le Pen. But what is clear is that joe blow is angrier than he's been for a long while.
Are we absolutely sure that the country where Joe Blow forms a government is one we would like to be citizens of?
That is beside the point, if you keep pushing people down it will happen. The question is do you want a sensible government that concedes enough to Joe Blow to keep him happy, or do you want to keep benefiting the elite until Joe Blow gets pissed off enough to string them up from the metaphorical lamp post and replaces the government with one more to his liking. At the moment Joe Blow isn't happy, and is getting less so.
Comments
No - I remember in a previous life being asked on a project how the inflation adjusted costs were 3% out from what we'd forecast a year before - fortunately I didn't say the first thing that occurred to me "that close? Its a complete bloody coincidence and little short of a miracle', but instead offered some anodyne response on overhead re-allocation.....all that said, LEAVE would help their case if they could offer some examples of policies to help us outgrow base trend if we left the EU.......
And I am doing more - I am providing plenty of evidence that the sorts of claims being made by Remain are boll*cks.
Here's another bit. Prior to the 1994 Norwegian referendum on joining the EU the government claimed that 100,000 jobs would be lost in the event of a 'NO'.
That amounted to around 5% of Norwegian employment at the time - sound familiar? 5%? A very bold forecast aimed at chilling the voters.
What actually happened? Here are the numbers for annual employment growth in Norway from 1994-97
1994 +1.5%
1995 +2.2%
1996 +2.5%
1997 +3%
Just look at that apocalyptic trend (!)
I'm afraid you are the one who is seeing what you want to see in these claims, for your own tortured reasons.
He's been a hopeless at predictions - too busy trying to be health secretary.
Tonight London’s Greens will vote on whether to endorse Zac, Sadiq or no-one for 2nd preferences.
Well quite.
It simply isn't good enough to say that long range forecasts are fraught with uncertainty. Of course they are. But they provide a useful pointer as to the general direction that we might expect and the public are entitled to weigh them in the balance.
Leave are going to have to do better than offer an alternative vision of unicorns frolicking in sunlight dewy meadows simply because it's more congenial to them. They're going to have to have some answer as to why the more gloomy view is likely to be overdone.
In actual, boring fact, the EU, apart from operating wholly unnoticed by 95% of the UK population, makes things easier in several industrial sectors by harmonising standards. As for control, we have previously and will in future be able to opt out of stuff that truly undermines our sovereignty. While to leave would be to impose some kind of cost on us, whatever its true size, that would leave the day to day lives of most of us unchanged, except to bear this cost, and that would potentially inhibit our ability to help define the rules of a market that accounts for nearly half (44%, before someone points this out) of our exports.
But, as per SindyRef, it feels so much better to shout "Cry Freedom".
@Carlotta Vance
Yes - a year. and you were 3% out. Now compound 3% for 14 years. Or look back on the last 14 years and tell me all the things you accurately predicted.
How did you call 2008 ? Me I got it totally wrong and that was a 12 month forecast not a twelve year one.
Really this nonsense that we can predict with certainty is just that. If the guys in HMT could predict that accurately they wouldn't be wasting their time in the day job, they'd be City billionaires. But they're not.
Ultimately the forecast line is to misundertand the use of forecasts. They are there to provide a framework for the management to think about what's coming at them over the next few years. Taking the number in the right hand corner as gospel is just silly.
But hey - sugar tax !!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2016/jan/07/eu-referendum-in-campaign-ad-pokes-fun-at-rivals-video
Vote Leave has outlined its new deal on its website, which i linked to this morning. Removing ourselves from the common commercial policy and common external tariff, and striking new trade deals, whilst deregulating the most dynamic parts of our economy would be extremely successful IMHO.
Confused?.........So are They....
@BBCNormanS: "They are all in a conspiracy to keep us in the EU" - John Redwood @BBCr4today
Ha Ha.
If Leave want to respond on the same terms they need to wise up and generate a worst case report for Remaining.
Something we set up and joined long before the EU.
But in this 'Their Forecast is silly' argument, LEAVE needs a forecast too, one that will survive the scrutiny HMT gets.....
Where can I apply for my official Vote Leave tinfoil hat to protect me from the Worldwide conspiracy to keep us in the EU?
Thanks
A Concerned Voter.
Case (and mind) closed, m'lud.
However as I pointed out yesterday, what is making PB so tedious atm is the constant yadda yadda from both sides.
It would probably help if we could lay of the remainer scare stories as most of the audience on here manage businesses, aren't stupid and risk management is a daily part of their job. They are comfortable with risk and quite prepared to call it their own way - often that's how they make money.
Likewise the only sensible post I've seen over the weeked from a remainer has been Mr Topping who quite happily accepts the world won't fall off a cliff and that all we're debating is the rate of growth. I happen to agree with him.
Equally I can accept that for yourself who is dependent on financial services and overseas clients that voting remain makes perfect sense - it's in your interest. But equally as a manufacturer I can assess what out suits me best so why shouldn't I vote in my own best interest ?
So for remainers maybe you should try a different approach, the one where you put forward why we'll be better off in 2026 by staying in and leave the scare stories to one side. They achieve nothing but bad humour all round.
"No one is disputing that Britain would be a prosperous country, inside or outside the EU, in 10-15 years' time."
What about the inevitable Zombie Apocalypse if we leave? Without those nice, cuddly Eurocrats to defend us, we'll be left exposed to anything the Remainers can imagine.
Which is the problem with exaggeration, it casts doubt on any sensible predictions.
It's an ECJ ruling against the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which we signed up to in the Lisbon Treaty:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34450879
OK got you (I think). Not being able to define rules for export markets of course inhibits our success. We get round it, we conform, we produce to those rules, although the situation is almost by definition sub-optimal.
But my question is: is it better to have no input into them or is it better to have some input into them?
Besides, £1,000 is rather a lot...
That said such forecasts are still worthless.
It was ruled against by the ECHR which we largely ignored, but it has now also been taken up by the ECJ which rules on case brought under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Thierry Delvigne v Commune de Lesparre-Médoc and Préfet de la Gironde.
See
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2015-10/cp150118en.pdf
At the same time I think control over our commercial, trade and regulatory policies will help us take much better advantage of global opportunities in the future.
I understand that you think differently, and respect that.
Do I place great credence in long range economic forecasts? No I don't. I don't immediately see how putting any kinds of barriers between yourself and your biggest market is going to assist economic growth but it's my completely non-expert view that the levels of the new barriers are unlikely by themselves to cause massive disruption. The dangers come more from how the country (and, separately, the EU) would develop following such a decision.
My instinct is that if the facile incoherent populist arguments that the Leavers are currently putting forward before the electorate are successful then Britain will not do well in the short term because that same facile incoherent populism will not serve the country well when implemented as policy. In the medium term Britain might come to its senses and, chastened, follow a more considered path. Would that even itself out by 2030? Dunno squire. Probably not.
If the gloomiest argument is that in 15 years' time it will $48,000 outside the EU, compared to $51,000 inside it, that's not much to get worried about.
I doubt it will, sadly.
btw. based on this analysis will Mr. Osborne now be ringing up PM Trudeau in Canada and telling him Canada needs to join the US as soon as possible?
Somehow, I doubt it...
I can't see what all this sledging it trying to prove except being an exercise in comparative dick measurement. It's not going to convince anyone and it creating a bunch of bad humor all around.
Particularly we should stop the idiotic (yes, Scott_P) posting on the lines of "Leaver's should explain XYZ", it's a lot of disingenuous tosh. No one here is either in the cabinet or on the board of the Leave campaign, they are not privy to the machinations of the campaign and will no doubt find out the strategy as it is revealed at the same time as the rest of the public.
And the baby Jesus won't love us any more.
I wonder when the last time the incredibly impressive 'deal' Cameron struck was used as a positive argument by the Remain campaign. Remember, if Cameron didn't think he could get a good deal he was prepared to recommend we Leave. So it must've been good...
tbf to George, in an otherwise unremarkable (and, on immigration, very shaky) interview, he explained it pretty clearly on R4.
I think historically the people of these islands have been a fairly sensible and equitable bunch it's not in our nature to go off to the extremes.
The current difficulties imo are because there is a growing disconnect between large sections of the population and our leaders. This has crept in since the 90s when wages have stagnated for the less well off and roared ahead for the top 20%. the current discontent is largely a rectifying mechanism to remind those at the top that they're meant to drag the rest of society along with them. When UK leadership gets back to remembering that is part of it's job the extremes will simply shrivel away.
Ryan Coetzee's 50/50 strategy seems to boil down to Apocalypse and More Apocalypse.
On trust and Osborne (or Cameron, for that matter), credibility in them has declined significantly, so it'll be interesting to see how seriously floating voters take the £4,300 claim.
welcome, btw although it doesn't sound like we will be agreeing on the EU issue any time soon!
pestilence
probably not to be blamed on the eu tho
I think the problem Leave have is that there is a regular flow of negatives for the consequences of Leave - Treasury forecast today, IMF, Obama, Catholic Church, BOE, G20, and on it goes.
Individually none of these matter and there are grounds to attack the credibility of any of them. However it is a constant drip it all in the same direction. There is practically nothing serious coming in the opposite direction so the diehard Leavers by and large just make fatuous jokes and hurl abuse at anyone that voices a criticism of Brexit.
That's fine for the diehards but all this is aimed at DKs and the waverers.
Government policies rarely impact the long term trend, which is determined by technological and institutional change. But the subject here IS precisely such a change. Leaving the EU will expose us to tighter constraints in running our own affairs. We will be less mollycoddled and featherbedded with subsidies, less restricted by regulations and less misdirected by alien objectives. Prometheus unbound! The trend growth will be strengthened when our shackles to the moribund EU are loosened.
To be honest, it's not Osborne people trust; it's Cameron.
I do think the Treasury's over-egged the cake, even in simple terms of messaging. The sum involved is so large that it's likelier to be seen as incredible than a more modest 'loss'.
Jeremy Corbyn’s team are in discussions over whether to meet President Obama this week, raising the prospect that he may turn down the chance to meet the leader of the free world when he visits Britain.
A Labour source confirmed that the possibility of a meeting had been raised internally but that a decision had yet to be made. A second source confirmed that a possible slot was still available on Saturday.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/corbyn-may-buck-tradition-and-refuse-to-meet-obama-2ghnsxmt0
This is not a trick question. I'm interested in exploring the basis of your views.
If through fear mongering or distortions of the truth the population are browbeaten into accepting grudgingly something they don't really want, are they going to be happy about that, especially as over the medium term the whoppers and cant is shown up for what it is, and head off into bright new liberal future ? Or are they going to seethe and chaff at the issues that pushed them towards leave in the first place, until it expresses itself as stronger votes for more extreme parties, as the population sees the futility of voting for traditional parties... see Donald Trump.
".... the sky is falling in ...."
You might not get all you want in the first few years, but the handcuffs come off immediately politically so that you can then go out into the world with your own voice and start to shape the position you actually want to achieve.
As @George_Osborne knows exact UK GDP in 2030, he should abolish the OBR who alter their short term growth numbers regularly & dramatically.