Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A post Brexit vote recession could cost the Tories the next

SystemSystem Posts: 11,725
edited May 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A post Brexit vote recession could cost the Tories the next election

On one side we have, inter alia, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor, and the great and the good, from the IMF, the OECD, NIESR, The Bank of England, and their Governor, Mark Carney, who the polls suggest is political Kryptonite against Leave, forecasting Brexit as being somewhere from very bad to a visit from the Four Horsemen for the UK economy.

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Curse of the new thread.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited May 2016
    Black Monday or Wednesday?

    And the problem was not Wednesday but the pain for Tory supporters in the years leading up to it -- businesses and homes lost to high interest rates, sacrificed unnecessarily as it turned out.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024
    Third?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Boris compares the EU to Hitler. First Ken, now Boris. Is the London Mayor's office built on an old Nazi burial ground?

    Did Nicholas Ridley get sacked in vain?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Ridley,_Baron_Ridley_of_Liddesdale#Secretary_of_State_for_Trade_and_Industry
    On 14 July 1990 he was forced to resign as Secretary of State for Trade and Industry after an interview published in The Spectator. He had described the proposed Economic and Monetary Union as "a German racket designed to take over the whole of Europe" and said that giving up sovereignty to the European Union was as bad as giving it up to Adolf Hitler.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    Boris compares the EU to Hitler. First Ken, now Boris. Is the London Mayor's office built on an old Nazi burial ground?

    Did Nicholas Ridley get sacked in vain?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Ridley,_Baron_Ridley_of_Liddesdale#Secretary_of_State_for_Trade_and_Industry
    On 14 July 1990 he was forced to resign as Secretary of State for Trade and Industry after an interview published in The Spectator. He had described the proposed Economic and Monetary Union as "a German racket designed to take over the whole of Europe" and said that giving up sovereignty to the European Union was as bad as giving it up to Adolf Hitler.

    Hmmmmm..... for Boris, Ridley: Hitler = A Bad Thing

    For Ken : Hitler = he was misunderstood when it came to the Jews....

    But thanks for bringing it up again.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Morning all

    BBC - Ukraine has won this year's Eurovision Song Contest with its song 1944, about the deportation of Crimean Tatars under Josef Stalin.

    Sounds jolly - bring back Katrina and the Waves…
  • Options
    daodaodaodao Posts: 821

    Boris compares the EU to Hitler. First Ken, now Boris. Is the London Mayor's office built on an old Nazi burial ground?

    Did Nicholas Ridley get sacked in vain?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Ridley,_Baron_Ridley_of_Liddesdale#Secretary_of_State_for_Trade_and_Industry
    On 14 July 1990 he was forced to resign as Secretary of State for Trade and Industry after an interview published in The Spectator. He had described the proposed Economic and Monetary Union as "a German racket designed to take over the whole of Europe" and said that giving up sovereignty to the European Union was as bad as giving it up to Adolf Hitler.

    Hmmmmm..... for Boris, Ridley: Hitler = A Bad Thing

    For Ken : Hitler = he was misunderstood when it came to the Jews....

    But thanks for bringing it up again.
    Boris is spot on, but the Drang nach Osten has been German policy ever since its re-unification, and not specifically that of the 3rd Reich. The EU was conceived as a way for Germany to achieve what it had failed to do previously by more aggressive methods.

    The eminent journalist Peter Hitchens in his MoS column today stated that:

    " The Prime Minister’s daft claim that a British exit from the EU could lead to war is not just panic-mongering, but wrong.

    The real fault-line in Europe lies between Germany and Russia. It’s amazing how many call the EU ‘Europe’ when it excludes Russia, the biggest country in Europe. In fact, the EU is the continuation of Germany by other means, swelling and spreading eastwards, abolishing frontiers and gobbling up territory as it has so many times before.

    Russia, meanwhile, has begun to make it plain – by increasingly spectacular celebrations of its 1945 triumph over Hitler, including a Victory Day parade in Red Square last week – that it will not take much more of this.

    After decades of putting up with Western expansionism, and the scandalous transformation of NATO from a defensive alliance into an aggressive one, Moscow’s had enough. If there is a new war in Europe, the EU will be the cause of it, and all its members will be dragged into it.

    Contrary to what Mr Cameron said, Britain was far safer when it stayed aloof from these continental quarrels. All our present misfortunes began when we foolishly took sides in the great Russo-German war of 1914."

    Europe's choice of winner in the Eurovision song contest is in line with this sentiment.

  • Options
    shiney2shiney2 Posts: 672
    Dave = EU = Mass Uncontrolled Immigration.

    Dave has burnt his bridges behind him.

    He's stuffed.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987
    If Labour has a new leader by then this scenario is very possible. If it doesn't, it isn't. The Tories are currently on course to win in 2020 very easily, despite being at each others' throats and despite this being a very poor government. Corbyn is their get out of jail free card.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,856

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    UK annual government deficit £55.4bn

    A very handy 13% reduction.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    I think any Chancellor would consider an extra £7.1 billion NET every year a very handsome sum. But of course, it is way more than that, because he has the discretion on how to spend the GROSS sum....

    A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon, you're talking real money.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Let's assume Britain votes Leave. Let's also assume that Britain suffers the economic shock that almost every serious economic commentator is expecting. The "price worth paying" attitude of the committed Leavers is then going to sound awful. Since the Conservative party by that stage will be in their hands, TSE's theory looks sound to me.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    Is there some more bad news coming down the line for the SNP that they need a "Look - squirrel!"....?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,856
    First casualty of the SNP's "triumph" of losing their majority - the repeal of:

    “arguably the most authoritarian piece of legislation in modern times in Britain. That you can go to prison for five years for being offensive at a football match is insane.”

    http://m.heraldscotland.com/news/14493682.Opposition_parties_unite_to_repeal_SNP__39_s_anti_sectarianism_law/
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560
    daodao said:

    Boris compares the EU to Hitler. First Ken, now Boris. Is the London Mayor's office built on an old Nazi burial ground?

    Did Nicholas Ridley get sacked in vain?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Ridley,_Baron_Ridley_of_Liddesdale#Secretary_of_State_for_Trade_and_Industry
    On 14 July 1990 he was forced to resign as Secretary of State for Trade and Industry after an interview published in The Spectator. He had described the proposed Economic and Monetary Union as "a German racket designed to take over the whole of Europe" and said that giving up sovereignty to the European Union was as bad as giving it up to Adolf Hitler.

    Hmmmmm..... for Boris, Ridley: Hitler = A Bad Thing

    For Ken : Hitler = he was misunderstood when it came to the Jews....

    But thanks for bringing it up again.
    All our present misfortunes began when we foolishly took sides in the great Russo-German war of 1914."

    Europe's choice of winner in the Eurovision song contest is in line with this sentiment.

    Or alternatively Hitchens is an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about. By 'the Russo German war' I presume he's talking about the war when Germany aggressively attacked three countries whose safety Britain had guaranteed and whose security was a vital sine qua non for both our economy and for our own security? That Russo German war?

    Hitchens is almost as profoundly ignorant/disingenuous/incompetent (delete as appropriate) as his brother - and very fortunately there are very few you can say that about.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987
    If leaving the EU reduces the tax take as a consequence of reduced growth, then the money saved by not contributing to the Brussels wallet will not be additional income for the government but a small plug to mitigate a widening deficit. The only way that doesn't happen is if withdrawal has no effect on GDP.

    This government's economic and fiscal plans - until recently very widely supported on here - are predicated on EU membership and high levels of immigration.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,856

    . The "price worth paying" attitude of the committed Leavers is then going to sound awful.

    To coin a phrase: "It's NOT the Economy stupid. It's Sovereignty"
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,034
    Thunder and lightning
    Dave's getting exciting !

    The economy to be fair to remain is the trump card. But will people still believe Dave after his bonkers war crap ?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987

    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.

    That's only an argument UKIP can make, assuming the major Tory Brexiters are shackled inside the government.

    In normal circumstances a split right would be great news for Labour, of course. But we all know that with the party's current leadership team that isn't going to be the case.

  • Options

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    The bbc economics editor said yesterday on r4 that the net figure is over £9 billion.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,856

    Is there some more bad news coming down the line for the SNP that they need a "Look - squirrel!"....?
    TBH I suspect it's a combination of the imminent arrival of Chilcott and Eck's fondness for the limelight not least of all after that [REDACTED] woman lost his majority in Holyrood. But you may be right - the repeal of OBFA is an embarrassment worth burying.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.

    Nick, which ever side wins, the biggest (only?) growth industry is going to be in "Don't blame me, I voted Remain/Leave" merchandising....
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    I think any Chancellor would consider an extra £7.1 billion NET every year a very handsome sum. But of course, it is way more than that, because he has the discretion on how to spend the GROSS sum....

    A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon, you're talking real money.

    Not if Brexit causes a slowdown in growth or a retraction and the tax take is reduced. Then those billions are not extra amounts, but a small sticking plaster.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,105

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    For what benefit we get it is vast, particular given what we coukd do with that amount.
  • Options
    The real big news is the fact that Boris has a massive lead on Cameron in trust. Having the more effective spokesman is an amazing turnaround.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,352
    Now on to something more important ...

    The Eurovision result.

    From the BBC website, "The new scoring system highlighted the disparity between the preferences of the juries and the public .It allowed Poland, which was in penultimate place with seven points from the jury, to leap to eighth when the public's 227 points were taken into account.

    It also meant the UK, which had been placed 17th after the jury vote with 54 points, was pushed down to 24th out of 26 when the public's mere eight points were added."

    So why ask the so-called "experts" on the jury to judge the songs? Take the 2014 title off that Austrian bloke in a skirt and give it back to those who deserved it - the Polish milkmaids.

    It's the Establishment in a nutshell. They know better even when they clearly don't.

    Mr Eagles, it's why Leave may still sneak a win against the odds.


  • Options
    EstobarEstobar Posts: 558
    pb is becoming pathetic. For goodness sake get some Leave friendly threads up, at the very least to reflect half the populous.
  • Options
    AlasdairAlasdair Posts: 72
    edited May 2016
    There will be another recession at some point and whoever is holding the baby at the time will get the blame. Probably Cameron if remain win, as punters seem to expect.
  • Options
    shiney2shiney2 Posts: 672
    Estobar said:

    pb is becoming pathetic. For goodness sake get some Leave friendly threads up, at the very least to reflect half the populous.

    Here you go..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0pwXLtvt2w&feature=youtu.be

    What's not to like.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,856

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    The bbc economics editor said yesterday on r4 that the net figure is over £9 billion.
    overall we paid in £8.5 billion more than we got back, or £23 million a day.

    The Treasury figures note payments the EU makes directly to the private sector, such as research grants. In 2013, these were worth an estimated £1.4 billion, so including them could reduce our net contribution further still.


    https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/
  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412

    If leaving the EU reduces the tax take as a consequence of reduced growth, then the money saved by not contributing to the Brussels wallet will not be additional income for the government but a small plug to mitigate a widening deficit. The only way that doesn't happen is if withdrawal has no effect on GDP.

    This government's economic and fiscal plans - until recently very widely supported on here - are predicated on EU membership and high levels of immigration.

    How exactly does that square with net immigration being less than 100,000 a year?

    All these economic forecasts coming out (some even from HM Treasury) show that Cameron is a bare-faced liar but, more interestingly, is introducing immigration into the debate in a non-toxic way.

    Vote Remain for higher housing costs, lower wages and more terrorism so that landlords, businessmen and politicians can benefit is hardly an attractive proposition.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,222
    We need to consider time frames here. How long after a vote to leave would it take to actually leave? I suspect what TSE is really saying is that a recession shortly after a vote to leave could be blamed on voting to leave.

    Financially this country is completely f****** whether we stay in the EU or not. At some point our government will have to make some very tough decisions. While I'm happy to see those decisions taken outside the EU - and take any collateral criticism from the told you so brigade - should we vote to stay in, one silver lining will be watching Cameron and Osborne deal with the faltering economy.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,034

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    The bbc economics editor said yesterday on r4 that the net figure is over £9 billion.
    Osborne doesn't care about a billion here or there
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Estobar said:

    pb is becoming pathetic. For goodness sake get some Leave friendly threads up, at the very least to reflect half the populous.

    Why not write one yourself and submit it for consideration?
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Whether Hitler/Germany had the aim of a pan European superstate is missing the point. If they did it wasn't one that included the UK in it. One of the main reasons why many leading politicians previously opposed to joining the EEC changed their minds was because an EU block dominated by Germany was seen as massively detrimental to British interests. British policy for several hundred years has been to seek as balance of power in continental Europe and prevent dominance by one European country. Joining the EEC was ultimately seen as the only way to do that, by acting as one element of the balance. There is an argument that the nature of the British debate on Europe over the last 20-30 years has significantly undermined the basis of that core policy objective by driving away natural allies and too often leaving the UK isolated.

    Leaving and carping from the sidelines will do nothing to aid UK interests, and ultimately politicians will come to remember that being in the EEC/EU was never about idealism, but cold, hard realpolitik.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Estobar said:

    pb is becoming pathetic. For goodness sake get some Leave friendly threads up, at the very least to reflect half the populous.

    You may collect your entry fee at the exit ....
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013

    In TSE's scenario, the Tories might well dodge the blame, because it would be the voters themselves who had chosen Brexit, rather than the Tories' cherished economic policy blowing up in their faces, as per the ERM.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,856
    alex. said:

    Whether Hitler/Germany had the aim of a pan European superstate is missing the point. If they did it wasn't one that included the UK in it. One of the main reasons why many leading politicians previously opposed to joining the EEC changed their minds was because an EU block dominated by Germany was seen as massively detrimental to British interests. British policy for several hundred years has been to seek as balance of power in continental Europe and prevent dominance by one European country. Joining the EEC was ultimately seen as the only way to do that, by acting as one element of the balance. There is an argument that the nature of the British debate on Europe over the last 20-30 years has significantly undermined the basis of that core policy objective by driving away natural allies and too often leaving the UK isolated.

    Leaving and carping from the sidelines will do nothing to aid UK interests, and ultimately politicians will come to remember that being in the EEC/EU was never about idealism, but cold, hard realpolitik.

    Yep. There is the possibility that 300 years worth of British statesmen have been wrong and Nigel Farage and Ian Dubcan Smith are right.....
  • Options
    CD13 said:

    Now on to something more important ...

    The Eurovision result.

    From the BBC website, "The new scoring system highlighted the disparity between the preferences of the juries and the public .It allowed Poland, which was in penultimate place with seven points from the jury, to leap to eighth when the public's 227 points were taken into account.

    It also meant the UK, which had been placed 17th after the jury vote with 54 points, was pushed down to 24th out of 26 when the public's mere eight points were added."

    So why ask the so-called "experts" on the jury to judge the songs? Take the 2014 title off that Austrian bloke in a skirt and give it back to those who deserved it - the Polish milkmaids.

    It's the Establishment in a nutshell. They know better even when they clearly don't.

    Mr Eagles, it's why Leave may still sneak a win against the odds.


    The UK in the bottom 5 was a winning bet for me last night.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987

    If leaving the EU reduces the tax take as a consequence of reduced growth, then the money saved by not contributing to the Brussels wallet will not be additional income for the government but a small plug to mitigate a widening deficit. The only way that doesn't happen is if withdrawal has no effect on GDP.

    This government's economic and fiscal plans - until recently very widely supported on here - are predicated on EU membership and high levels of immigration.

    How exactly does that square with net immigration being less than 100,000 a year?

    All these economic forecasts coming out (some even from HM Treasury) show that Cameron is a bare-faced liar but, more interestingly, is introducing immigration into the debate in a non-toxic way.

    Vote Remain for higher housing costs, lower wages and more terrorism so that landlords, businessmen and politicians can benefit is hardly an attractive proposition.

    Tory economic and fiscal policy has been very clear. It's all there in black and white. It greatly puzzles me that people who a few months ago sung its praises now believe they were lied to. But if that is the case, what are they now proposing? What new policies do they want? A longer timeframe to eliminate the deficit, higher taxes, an even bigger public spending squeeze, or what?

  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412

    Let's assume Britain votes Leave. Let's also assume that Britain suffers the economic shock that almost every serious economic commentator is expecting. The "price worth paying" attitude of the committed Leavers is then going to sound awful. Since the Conservative party by that stage will be in their hands, TSE's theory looks sound to me.

    There is no such thing as a serious economic commentator.

    The failure of economics profession to entertain even the possibility of the Great Crash, let alone predict it, renders everything they say moot.

    HM Queen spotted how are useless they were and so will everyone else.
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Sean_F said:


    In TSE's scenario, the Tories might well dodge the blame, because it would be the voters themselves who had chosen Brexit, rather than the Tories' cherished economic policy blowing up in their faces, as per the ERM.

    Yes, voters have a long history of blaming themselves for their own voting decisions.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,563


    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion

    The two figures are not directly comparable, however, because one is spent outside the UK (and therefore is effectively all gone forever) while the other is spend mostly in the UK. The government gets a good part of its expenditure back in the form of, say, tax receipts on government salaries or on the profits that companies make from government procurement, while it gets basically nothing back on the net money we dish out to the EU, which is a straightforward loss.
  • Options
    peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,875
    edited May 2016
    CD13 said:

    Now on to something more important ...

    The Eurovision result.

    From the BBC website, "The new scoring system highlighted the disparity between the preferences of the juries and the public .It allowed Poland, which was in penultimate place with seven points from the jury, to leap to eighth when the public's 227 points were taken into account.

    It also meant the UK, which had been placed 17th after the jury vote with 54 points, was pushed down to 24th out of 26 when the public's mere eight points were added."

    So why ask the so-called "experts" on the jury to judge the songs? Take the 2014 title off that Austrian bloke in a skirt and give it back to those who deserved it - the Polish milkmaids.

    It's the Establishment in a nutshell. They know better even when they clearly don't.

    Mr Eagles, it's why Leave may still sneak a win against the odds.


    Ah yes, the Polish milkmaids, who could possibly forget them?
    The most notable feature of last night's mega bore show, probably the worst ever Eurovision which is certainly saying something, was the fact that somehow or other the French had been persuaded to declare their winner in English, well at least predominantly so.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Why Everything Is The Fault Of Brexit Part 94. Again.

    In other news - I see that Remain are panicking in a most unseemly fashion all over the pages of the Sunday Times. They're claiming to be 10pts ahead in their secret polls, yet are having a nervous breakdown in the quotes.

    Given we nitpick turnout/sampling to death here - their claim seems very unlikely. Labour voters are regularly oversampled, along with public sector workers - they're keener on Remain. It's the oldies that prove more difficult to find and they're breaking heavily for Leave.

    Still, whatever's true - it's all very entertaining.
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Fishing said:


    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion

    The two figures are not directly comparable, however, because one is spent outside the UK (and therefore is effectively all gone forever) while the other is spend mostly in the UK. The government gets a good part of its expenditure back in the form of, say, tax receipts on government salaries or on the profits that companies make from government procurement, while it gets basically nothing back on the net money we dish out to the EU, which is a straightforward loss.
    Depends whether you think that the UK membership of the EU reduces business costs for companies that trade directly or indirectly with it and therefore increases the tax take through their profits.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,856
    Fishing said:


    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion

    The two figures are not directly comparable, however, because one is spent outside the UK (and therefore is effectively all gone forever) while the other is spend mostly in the UK. The government gets a good part of its expenditure back in the form of, say, tax receipts on government salaries or on the profits that companies make from government procurement, while it gets basically nothing back on the net money we dish out to the EU, which is a straightforward loss.
    No, but they offer a sense of scale.

    How something that's broadly equivalent to 1% of government expenditure can be described as "vast" may be a touch hyperbolic....
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,222
    CD13 said:

    Now on to something more important ...

    The Eurovision result.

    From the BBC website, "The new scoring system highlighted the disparity between the preferences of the juries and the public .It allowed Poland, which was in penultimate place with seven points from the jury, to leap to eighth when the public's 227 points were taken into account.

    It also meant the UK, which had been placed 17th after the jury vote with 54 points, was pushed down to 24th out of 26 when the public's mere eight points were added."

    So why ask the so-called "experts" on the jury to judge the songs? Take the 2014 title off that Austrian bloke in a skirt and give it back to those who deserved it - the Polish milkmaids.

    It's the Establishment in a nutshell. They know better even when they clearly don't.

    Mr Eagles, it's why Leave may still sneak a win against the odds.

    It's a double edged sword. Personally, I thought the Polish entry was awful but their diaspora gave them lots of votes. On the other side, I suspect the juries are naturally put off by any song featuring a pretty girl.

    Check out where Austria got its votes from:

    http://tinyurl.com/hvavl4h

    The 10 from Switzerland can, in part, probably be put down to cross border voting, but the rest look like middling points based on people actually liking the song.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987
    Fishing said:


    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion

    The two figures are not directly comparable, however, because one is spent outside the UK (and therefore is effectively all gone forever) while the other is spend mostly in the UK. The government gets a good part of its expenditure back in the form of, say, tax receipts on government salaries or on the profits that companies make from government procurement, while it gets basically nothing back on the net money we dish out to the EU, which is a straightforward loss.

    You are assuming that there will be no impact on the government's income as a result of Brexit. That's a very big assumption to make.

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    tlg86 said:

    We need to consider time frames here. How long after a vote to leave would it take to actually leave? I suspect what TSE is really saying is that a recession shortly after a vote to leave could be blamed on voting to leave.

    Financially this country is completely f****** whether we stay in the EU or not. At some point our government will have to make some very tough decisions. While I'm happy to see those decisions taken outside the EU - and take any collateral criticism from the told you so brigade - should we vote to stay in, one silver lining will be watching Cameron and Osborne deal with the faltering economy.

    It won't Osborne's problem after July....
  • Options
    volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    TSE has hit the nail on the head.The Tories are so stupid they could hand the next GE to Jezza.
  • Options

    Why Everything Is The Fault Of Brexit Part 94. Again.

    In other news - I see that Remain are panicking in a most unseemly fashion all over the pages of the Sunday Times. They're claiming to be 10pts ahead in their secret polls, yet are having a nervous breakdown in the quotes.

    Given we nitpick turnout/sampling to death here - their claim seems very unlikely. Labour voters are regularly oversampled, along with public sector workers - they're keener on Remain. It's the oldies that prove more difficult to find and they're breaking heavily for Leave.

    Still, whatever's true - it's all very entertaining.

    You are right. The hard to sample are older Conservative voters. The type of voters who lean to LEAVE.
  • Options
    Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    kle4 said:

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    For what benefit we get it is vast, particular given what we coukd do with that amount.
    We could only spend it once.

  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2016
    hasn't Boris spoken out in support of remain and now switched to leave., I wouldn't trust Boris... ever.. completely duplicitous... and its not as though he actually believes what he is saying.,.. its leadership ambition getting in the way of the truth.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,222

    tlg86 said:

    We need to consider time frames here. How long after a vote to leave would it take to actually leave? I suspect what TSE is really saying is that a recession shortly after a vote to leave could be blamed on voting to leave.

    Financially this country is completely f****** whether we stay in the EU or not. At some point our government will have to make some very tough decisions. While I'm happy to see those decisions taken outside the EU - and take any collateral criticism from the told you so brigade - should we vote to stay in, one silver lining will be watching Cameron and Osborne deal with the faltering economy.

    It won't Osborne's problem after July....
    I don't envy whoever follows Osborne. I get that he inherited a pretty dire situation from Labour, bur Osborne's latest budget was a disgrace. I hope whoever takes over from him in June - should that happen - gets on with the business of sorting out the public finances rather than buying off the votes of backbenchers.
  • Options

    tlg86 said:

    We need to consider time frames here. How long after a vote to leave would it take to actually leave? I suspect what TSE is really saying is that a recession shortly after a vote to leave could be blamed on voting to leave.

    Financially this country is completely f****** whether we stay in the EU or not. At some point our government will have to make some very tough decisions. While I'm happy to see those decisions taken outside the EU - and take any collateral criticism from the told you so brigade - should we vote to stay in, one silver lining will be watching Cameron and Osborne deal with the faltering economy.

    It won't Osborne's problem after July....
    Indeed, nor Cameron's either, possibly.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,030
    Good morning, everyone.

    At the risk of sounding like I'm auditioning for the role of Captain Alzheimer's, I can't remember who tipped Ukraine at about 4-5, or even if I backed it, but cheers to that chap.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    TSE has hit the nail on the head.The Tories are so stupid they could hand the next GE to Jezza.

    Nobody is that stupid.
  • Options
    shiney2shiney2 Posts: 672
    edited May 2016
    alex. said:

    Whether Hitler/Germany had the aim of a pan European superstate is missing the point. If they did it wasn't one that included the UK in it. One of the main reasons why many leading politicians previously opposed to joining the EEC changed their minds was because an EU block dominated by Germany was seen as massively detrimental to British interests. British policy for several hundred years has been to seek as balance of power in continental Europe and prevent dominance by one European country. Joining the EEC was ultimately seen as the only way to do that, by acting as one element of the balance. There is an argument that the nature of the British debate on Europe over the last 20-30 years has significantly undermined the basis of that core policy objective by driving away natural allies and too often leaving the UK isolated.

    Leaving and carping from the sidelines will do nothing to aid UK interests, and ultimately politicians will come to remember that being in the EEC/EU was never about idealism, but cold, hard realpolitik.


    Well quite.

    You seem to have glossed over how we did it in most cases: It sure wasn't by allying with the dominant power.

    Who do think actually did the heavy lifting in sorting out Nap and AH? Clue: it wasn't us

    And when the main danger was over we repositioned with a new alliance.

    Sticking with the EU as it achieves continental domination is the anti thesis of that centuries old British policy you mentioned.

    British interest *requires* LEAVE.


  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987

    TSE has hit the nail on the head.The Tories are so stupid they could hand the next GE to Jezza.

    Not to Jezza, but if Labour does get a new leader the Tories will be in very serious trouble. This is a desperately poor government to start with and it's only going to get worse.

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    Why Everything Is The Fault Of Brexit Part 94. Again.

    In other news - I see that Remain are panicking in a most unseemly fashion all over the pages of the Sunday Times. They're claiming to be 10pts ahead in their secret polls, yet are having a nervous breakdown in the quotes.

    Given we nitpick turnout/sampling to death here - their claim seems very unlikely. Labour voters are regularly oversampled, along with public sector workers - they're keener on Remain. It's the oldies that prove more difficult to find and they're breaking heavily for Leave.

    Still, whatever's true - it's all very entertaining.

    You are right. The hard to sample are older Conservative voters. The type of voters who lean to LEAVE.
    Yes, that piece on the private polling cuts across everything that we on pb.com hold to be true.

    Maybe nobody wants to tell the Prime Minister bad news. Maybe he has found himself a bag of Nokias in the Downing Street basement...
  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412

    If leaving the EU reduces the tax take as a consequence of reduced growth, then the money saved by not contributing to the Brussels wallet will not be additional income for the government but a small plug to mitigate a widening deficit. The only way that doesn't happen is if withdrawal has no effect on GDP.

    This government's economic and fiscal plans - until recently very widely supported on here - are predicated on EU membership and high levels of immigration.

    How exactly does that square with net immigration being less than 100,000 a year?

    All these economic forecasts coming out (some even from HM Treasury) show that Cameron is a bare-faced liar but, more interestingly, is introducing immigration into the debate in a non-toxic way.

    Vote Remain for higher housing costs, lower wages and more terrorism so that landlords, businessmen and politicians can benefit is hardly an attractive proposition.

    Tory economic and fiscal policy has been very clear. It's all there in black and white. It greatly puzzles me that people who a few months ago sung its praises now believe they were lied to. But if that is the case, what are they now proposing? What new policies do they want? A longer timeframe to eliminate the deficit, higher taxes, an even bigger public spending squeeze, or what?

    Was it pointed out so regularly that Tory economic policies would smash their immigration pledge?

    The way to square the circle is "points-based immigration system", increasing the quality of immigrants and reducing their quantity. This is impossible while we remain in the EU.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.

    Let me see will this be the 3rd recession or 4th under the Tories since 2010 ( hat tip Surbiton) of a triple dip (Ed Balls) or quadruple dip (anyone?) Hard to keep up with the opposition and their supporters claims sometimes.

    Mmmmmm.....

    If this had been anyone but the left wing then they would be accused of "talking Britain down" (the claim of the entire government front bench when they received warnings their polices would cause as it did the Great Labour recession of 2008/2009.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I'm still chortling over the ComRes last night. Cameron's been banging on and on about *security* for weeks. And Leave are beating him hands down.

    Perhaps he can borrow EdM's other kitchen sink to throw at his campaign.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    Moses_ said:

    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.

    Let me see will this be the 3rd recession or 4th under the Tories since 2010 ( hat tip Surbiton) of a triple dip (Ed Balls) or quadruple dip (anyone?) Hard to keep up with the opposition and their supporters claims sometimes.

    Mmmmmm.....

    If this had been anyone but the left wing then they would be accused of "talking Britain down" (the claim of the entire government front bench when they received warnings their polices would cause as it did the Great Labour recession of 2008/2009.
    I think BenM (late of this parish) was the Holder of the Quadruple Dip.....
  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412

    kle4 said:

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    For what benefit we get it is vast, particular given what we coukd do with that amount.
    We could only spend it once.

    How so? It's an annual fee.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    Moses_ said:

    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.

    Let me see will this be the 3rd recession or 4th under the Tories since 2010 ( hat tip Surbiton) of a triple dip (Ed Balls) or quadruple dip (anyone?) Hard to keep up with the opposition and their supporters claims sometimes.

    Mmmmmm.....

    If this had been anyone but the left wing then they would be accused of "talking Britain down" (the claim of the entire government front bench when they received warnings their polices would cause as it did the Great Labour recession of 2008/2009.
    In all likelihood, there will be a recession at some point prior to 2020, because it's just in the nature of the business cycle.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    TSE has hit the nail on the head.The Tories are so stupid they could hand the next GE to Jezza.

    Not to Jezza, but if Labour does get a new leader the Tories will be in very serious trouble. This is a desperately poor government to start with and it's only going to get worse.

    And who of the Jezzalite candidates will the £3 selectorate chose to place the Tories in "very serious trouble" ?

    Titter ....
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,352
    Mr 86,

    "On the other side, I suspect the juries are naturally put off by any song featuring a pretty girl."

    I prefer to think of Eurovision as an allegory of the Establishment view. We can't allow the plebs to have a direct vote, because they don't understand the finer points like wot we do. We'll put in a jury of reliable chaps and chapesses to pass it on for them.

    It's always a nasty shock when the ugly facts (for them) come out. Why it's nearly as bad as Sun readers looking at topless women - how bizarre ... when they could virtue-signal instead like we do.

    What next? They'll be voting for Leave despite us pointing out the real facts. It's as if they think we're not superior.

  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987

    If leaving the EU reduces the tax take as a consequence of reduced growth, then the money saved by not contributing to the Brussels wallet will not be additional income for the government but a small plug to mitigate a widening deficit. The only way that doesn't happen is if withdrawal has no effect on GDP.

    This government's economic and fiscal plans - until recently very widely supported on here - are predicated on EU membership and high levels of immigration.

    How exactly does that square with net immigration being less than 100,000 a year?

    All these economic forecasts coming out (some even from HM Treasury) show that Cameron is a bare-faced liar but, more interestingly, is introducing immigration into the debate in a non-toxic way.

    Vote Remain for higher housing costs, lower wages and more terrorism so that landlords, businessmen and politicians can benefit is hardly an attractive proposition.

    Tory economic and fiscal policy has been very clear. It's all there in black and white. It greatly puzzles me that people who a few months ago sung its praises now believe they were lied to. But if that is the case, what are they now proposing? What new policies do they want? A longer timeframe to eliminate the deficit, higher taxes, an even bigger public spending squeeze, or what?

    Was it pointed out so regularly that Tory economic policies would smash their immigration pledge?

    The way to square the circle is "points-based immigration system", increasing the quality of immigrants and reducing their quantity. This is impossible while we remain in the EU.

    It was clear from all the stats provided that Tory policy depended on ongoing, high levels of immigration. Whether we have a points system or not, to have a chance of hitting targets that immigration has to continue. If you want to reduce immigration, you need to explain how you are going to make up for the hole in government income that will cause: change the deficit elimination target date, higher taxes, less spending, or what?

  • Options
    Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294

    kle4 said:

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    For what benefit we get it is vast, particular given what we coukd do with that amount.
    We could only spend it once.

    How so? It's an annual fee.
    Do you know, VB, I though of amending my post to say just that, but then I thought, hey, no, these are Peebies, they'll know what I mean. But you don't call yourself VB for nothing, do you?


  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Why Everything Is The Fault Of Brexit Part 94. Again.

    In other news - I see that Remain are panicking in a most unseemly fashion all over the pages of the Sunday Times. They're claiming to be 10pts ahead in their secret polls, yet are having a nervous breakdown in the quotes.

    Given we nitpick turnout/sampling to death here - their claim seems very unlikely. Labour voters are regularly oversampled, along with public sector workers - they're keener on Remain. It's the oldies that prove more difficult to find and they're breaking heavily for Leave.

    Still, whatever's true - it's all very entertaining.

    You are right. The hard to sample are older Conservative voters. The type of voters who lean to LEAVE.
    Yes, that piece on the private polling cuts across everything that we on pb.com hold to be true.

    Maybe nobody wants to tell the Prime Minister bad news. Maybe he has found himself a bag of Nokias in the Downing Street basement...
    Maybe the PM is a firm adherent of my ARSE .... 8-10 point REMAIN lead sounds familiar .... :smile:
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,987
    JackW said:

    TSE has hit the nail on the head.The Tories are so stupid they could hand the next GE to Jezza.

    Not to Jezza, but if Labour does get a new leader the Tories will be in very serious trouble. This is a desperately poor government to start with and it's only going to get worse.

    And who of the Jezzalite candidates will the £3 selectorate chose to place the Tories in "very serious trouble" ?

    Titter ....

    I agree. Labour members and the £3 brigade are very happy to give the Tories a free pass. Given how poor this government is and how much worse it is going to get, they deserve nothing but contempt for this.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,030
    Mr. F, quite. That's why the line, and Kamal Ahmed's question of whether Carney thought we'd have a recession if we left, was ridiculous. We're having a recession, it's just a matter of when.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I bet she does...

    Angela Merkel believes David Cameron’s referendum on membership of the European Union is a “completely unnecessary risk” http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/merkel-brands-referendum-a-needless-risk-6cpbrjc3z
  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    We need to consider time frames here. How long after a vote to leave would it take to actually leave? I suspect what TSE is really saying is that a recession shortly after a vote to leave could be blamed on voting to leave.

    Financially this country is completely f****** whether we stay in the EU or not. At some point our government will have to make some very tough decisions. While I'm happy to see those decisions taken outside the EU - and take any collateral criticism from the told you so brigade - should we vote to stay in, one silver lining will be watching Cameron and Osborne deal with the faltering economy.

    It won't Osborne's problem after July....
    I don't envy whoever follows Osborne. I get that he inherited a pretty dire situation from Labour, bur Osborne's latest budget was a disgrace. I hope whoever takes over from him in June - should that happen - gets on with the business of sorting out the public finances rather than buying off the votes of backbenchers.
    I'd forgotten all about the budget.

    That was full of wheezes that have fallen apart pretty quickly.

    It was another "game-changer" for Remain that's has turned out to be a damp squib.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,222
    CD13 said:

    Mr 86,

    "On the other side, I suspect the juries are naturally put off by any song featuring a pretty girl."

    I prefer to think of Eurovision as an allegory of the Establishment view. We can't allow the plebs to have a direct vote, because they don't understand the finer points like wot we do. We'll put in a jury of reliable chaps and chapesses to pass it on for them.

    It's always a nasty shock when the ugly facts (for them) come out. Why it's nearly as bad as Sun readers looking at topless women - how bizarre ... when they could virtue-signal instead like we do.

    What next? They'll be voting for Leave despite us pointing out the real facts. It's as if they think we're not superior.

    Well it was exclusively a jury vote until 1997. I wonder if the juries of today would vote for Bucks Fizz?
  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412

    kle4 said:

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    For what benefit we get it is vast, particular given what we coukd do with that amount.
    We could only spend it once.

    How so? It's an annual fee.
    Do you know, VB, I though of amending my post to say just that, but then I thought, hey, no, these are Peebies, they'll know what I mean. But you don't call yourself VB for nothing, do you?


    I cannot read other people's minds, as my bets on Eurovision last night proved.

    Stop blaming your own mistakes on other people.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    hasn't Boris spoken out in support of remain and now switched to leave., I wouldn't trust Boris... ever.. completely duplicitous... and its not as though he actually believes what he is saying.,.. its leadership ambition getting in the way of the truth.

    Well, Cameron was a sceptic too at one point but now waves the flag for remain. Guess that's ok though?
    It's all about political positioning at the end of the day.
  • Options
    Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294

    kle4 said:

    Alternatively, stewardship of the economy will be best preserved by Brexit - and stopping those vast membership fees to a club that we will then see has been giving us no net benefits. Choosing how and where we spend this extra resource will deliver growth in the regions and sectors where it is spent. New Prime Minister Boris Johnson will indeed deliver the sunny economic uplands and there will be a statue of him in every market square across the land....

    There's only one way we'll ever know.

    "Vast membership fees"?

    UK net annual contribution to EU = £7.1 billion
    UK annual government expenditure = £772 billion
    For what benefit we get it is vast, particular given what we coukd do with that amount.
    We could only spend it once.

    How so? It's an annual fee.
    Do you know, VB, I though of amending my post to say just that, but then I thought, hey, no, these are Peebies, they'll know what I mean. But you don't call yourself VB for nothing, do you?


    I cannot read other people's minds, as my bets on Eurovision last night proved.

    Stop blaming your own mistakes on other people.
    I promise not to make assumptions about Peebies again. I doubt you'll like me any more, though.

  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    Good morning, everyone.

    At the risk of sounding like I'm auditioning for the role of Captain Alzheimer's, I can't remember who tipped Ukraine at about 4-5, or even if I backed it, but cheers to that chap.

    Mr Morris, that was me a couple of days ago. :smile:
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,352
    As for the Eurovision songs themselves, I thought the top three or four were reasonably good.
    I hadn't heard the British song before but I was disappointed. They sounded nervous and the song was instantly forgettable, but what do I know?

    I think Jackson Pollock was a waste of paint, and Picasso could draw a bit before he forget how many ears a face has. I went to the Liverpool Tate and recognised the contents of my garage when it needs a good tidy.
  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412

    If leaving the EU reduces the tax take as a consequence of reduced growth, then the money saved by not contributing to the Brussels wallet will not be additional income for the government but a small plug to mitigate a widening deficit. The only way that doesn't happen is if withdrawal has no effect on GDP.

    This government's economic and fiscal plans - until recently very widely supported on here - are predicated on EU membership and high levels of immigration.

    How exactly does that square with net immigration being less than 100,000 a year?

    All these economic forecasts coming out (some even from HM Treasury) show that Cameron is a bare-faced liar but, more interestingly, is introducing immigration into the debate in a non-toxic way.

    Vote Remain for higher housing costs, lower wages and more terrorism so that landlords, businessmen and politicians can benefit is hardly an attractive proposition.

    Tory economic and fiscal policy has been very clear. It's all there in black and white. It greatly puzzles me that people who a few months ago sung its praises now believe they were lied to. But if that is the case, what are they now proposing? What new policies do they want? A longer timeframe to eliminate the deficit, higher taxes, an even bigger public spending squeeze, or what?

    Was it pointed out so regularly that Tory economic policies would smash their immigration pledge?

    The way to square the circle is "points-based immigration system", increasing the quality of immigrants and reducing their quantity. This is impossible while we remain in the EU.

    It was clear from all the stats provided that Tory policy depended on ongoing, high levels of immigration. Whether we have a points system or not, to have a chance of hitting targets that immigration has to continue. If you want to reduce immigration, you need to explain how you are going to make up for the hole in government income that will cause: change the deficit elimination target date, higher taxes, less spending, or what?

    All of the above.

    In fact, haven't we had the first two already?

    And, according to Labour, the third.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    Moses_ said:

    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.

    Let me see will this be the 3rd recession or 4th under the Tories since 2010 ( hat tip Surbiton) of a triple dip (Ed Balls) or quadruple dip (anyone?) Hard to keep up with the opposition and their supporters claims sometimes.

    Mmmmmm.....

    If this had been anyone but the left wing then they would be accused of "talking Britain down" (the claim of the entire government front bench when they received warnings their polices would cause as it did the Great Labour recession of 2008/2009.
    I think BenM (late of this parish) was the Holder of the Quadruple Dip.....
    Ahhh...my bad. Whatever happened to the economic genius of BenM? He actually did raise some good points but spoiled them sometimes with some bizarre claims.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited May 2016

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    We need to consider time frames here. How long after a vote to leave would it take to actually leave? I suspect what TSE is really saying is that a recession shortly after a vote to leave could be blamed on voting to leave.

    Financially this country is completely f****** whether we stay in the EU or not. At some point our government will have to make some very tough decisions. While I'm happy to see those decisions taken outside the EU - and take any collateral criticism from the told you so brigade - should we vote to stay in, one silver lining will be waetching Cameron and Osborne deal with the faltering economy.

    It won't Osborne's problem after July....
    I don't envy whoever follows Osborne. I get that he inherited a pretty dire situation from Labour, bur Osborne's latest budget was a disgrace. I hope whoever takes over from him in June - should that happen - gets on with the business of sorting out the public finances rather than buying off the votes of backbenchers.
    I'd forgotten all about the budget.

    That was full of wheezes that have fallen apart pretty quickly.

    It was another "game-changer" for Remain that's has turned out to be a damp squib.
    We still have the Queen's Speech to come next week - that's going to be a load of Remain propaganda masquerading as Brexit-like shiny things. Another empty stab at a Bill of Rights et al hoping to reassure the floating middle. Oh and a complete distraction about space travel. FFS.
    ...The plan – to be included in a new Counter-extremism Bill - is designed to stop radicals infiltrating schools, colleges, charities and care homes, where they could brainwash vulnerable young people or disabled adults into violence...

    New laws expected in Wednesday’s speech include reforms to higher education, allowing top universities to charge higher fees; the promise of a British Bill of Rights to curb the influence of the European Court of Human Rights; and measures to promote driverless cars, commercial drones and the building of a new “space port” to launch satellites and passenger craft into space.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/14/queens-speech-cameron-promises-crackdown-on-extremists/
  • Options
    VapidBilgeVapidBilge Posts: 412

    Why Everything Is The Fault Of Brexit Part 94. Again.

    In other news - I see that Remain are panicking in a most unseemly fashion all over the pages of the Sunday Times. They're claiming to be 10pts ahead in their secret polls, yet are having a nervous breakdown in the quotes.

    Given we nitpick turnout/sampling to death here - their claim seems very unlikely. Labour voters are regularly oversampled, along with public sector workers - they're keener on Remain. It's the oldies that prove more difficult to find and they're breaking heavily for Leave.

    Still, whatever's true - it's all very entertaining.

    You are right. The hard to sample are older Conservative voters. The type of voters who lean to LEAVE.
    Yes, that piece on the private polling cuts across everything that we on pb.com hold to be true.

    Maybe nobody wants to tell the Prime Minister bad news. Maybe he has found himself a bag of Nokias in the Downing Street basement...
    Own up. You are preparing a new Downfall parody, aren't you?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    tlg86 said:

    CD13 said:

    Now on to something more important ...

    The Eurovision result.

    From the BBC website, "The new scoring system highlighted the disparity between the preferences of the juries and the public .It allowed Poland, which was in penultimate place with seven points from the jury, to leap to eighth when the public's 227 points were taken into account.

    It also meant the UK, which had been placed 17th after the jury vote with 54 points, was pushed down to 24th out of 26 when the public's mere eight points were added."

    So why ask the so-called "experts" on the jury to judge the songs? Take the 2014 title off that Austrian bloke in a skirt and give it back to those who deserved it - the Polish milkmaids.

    It's the Establishment in a nutshell. They know better even when they clearly don't.

    Mr Eagles, it's why Leave may still sneak a win against the odds.

    It's a double edged sword. Personally, I thought the Polish entry was awful but their diaspora gave them lots of votes. On the other side, I suspect the juries are naturally put off by any song featuring a pretty girl.

    Check out where Austria got its votes from:

    http://tinyurl.com/hvavl4h

    The 10 from Switzerland can, in part, probably be put down to cross border voting, but the rest look like middling points based on people actually liking the song.
    I had a good return on Eurovision last night £78 returned on £25 staked. I was on Poland, Lithuania and Belgium at good odds for top 10. Lost on Georgia for the same.

    There were big discrepancies between the tele vote and juries, but not just for UK and Poland. Israel and Malta got stuffed by the televote too.

    So off to Kyiv for next year, and a half time show full of Ukranian folkdancing. Marvellous!
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Sean_F said:

    Moses_ said:

    If we assume that a recession is coming - and unwelcome though it is the signs do seem to point that way - then there are risks either way. If Remain wins and we suffer anyway, Brexit supporters will argue that we'd have been better off out and will encourage a false memory that Cameron promised great times if we stayed in.

    Let me see will this be the 3rd recession or 4th under the Tories since 2010 ( hat tip Surbiton) of a triple dip (Ed Balls) or quadruple dip (anyone?) Hard to keep up with the opposition and their supporters claims sometimes.

    Mmmmmm.....

    If this had been anyone but the left wing then they would be accused of "talking Britain down" (the claim of the entire government front bench when they received warnings their polices would cause as it did the Great Labour recession of 2008/2009.
    In all likelihood, there will be a recession at some point prior to 2020, because it's just in the nature of the business cycle.
    Indeed it is I agree and I wasn't disclaiming the possibility. It's just the constant desperation of the left to claim and claim again one is happening when it isn't. Talking Britain down as Labour used to call it pre 2010.
  • Options
    shiney2shiney2 Posts: 672
    edited May 2016

    If leaving the EU reduces the tax take as a consequence of reduced growth, then the money saved by not contributing to the Brussels wallet will not be additional income for the government but a small plug to mitigate a widening deficit. The only way that doesn't happen is if withdrawal has no effect on GDP.

    This government's economic and fiscal plans - until recently very widely supported on here - are predicated on EU membership and high levels of immigration.

    How exactly does that square with net immigration being less than 100,000 a year?

    All these economic forecasts coming out (some even from HM Treasury) show that Cameron is a bare-faced liar but, more interestingly, is introducing immigration into the debate in a non-toxic way.

    Vote Remain for higher housing costs, lower wages and more terrorism so that landlords, businessmen and politicians can benefit is hardly an attractive proposition.

    Tory economic and fiscal policy has been very clear. It's all there in black and white. It greatly puzzles me that people who a few months ago sung its praises now believe they were lied to. But if that is the case, what are they now proposing? What new policies do they want? A longer timeframe to eliminate the deficit, higher taxes, an even bigger public spending squeeze, or what?

    Was it pointed out so regularly that Tory economic policies would smash their immigration pledge?

    The way to square the circle is "points-based immigration system", increasing the quality of immigrants and reducing their quantity. This is impossible while we remain in the EU.

    It was clear from all the stats provided that Tory policy depended on ongoing, high levels of immigration. Whether we have a points system or not, to have a chance of hitting targets that immigration has to continue. If you want to reduce immigration, you need to explain how you are going to make up for the hole in government income that will cause: change the deficit elimination target date, higher taxes, less spending, or what?

    Productivity.

    Stop importing sub-minimum wage earners.

    Start importing high value achievers and their capital.

    Get (gdp per capita) rich.

  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,352
    Mr 86,

    "Well it was exclusively a jury vote until 1997."

    I'd forgotten about that, and I remember "Sing little Birdie." I suspect phone-polling was sci-fi then.

    Still, they were hardly great art at the best of times.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,030
    Mr. Moses, huzzah for your tip :)

    Miss Plato, I have a vague recollection of there being 5-6 sites, the favourite(s) being in Scotland.

    However, the southwest is also a possibility (and has the advantage of building a massive infrastructure project somewhere that won't vote to leave the UK in the foreseeable future).
  • Options
    Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294

    tlg86 said:

    CD13 said:

    Now on to something more important ...

    The Eurovision result.

    From the BBC website, "The new scoring system highlighted the disparity between the preferences of the juries and the public .It allowed Poland, which was in penultimate place with seven points from the jury, to leap to eighth when the public's 227 points were taken into account.

    It also meant the UK, which had been placed 17th after the jury vote with 54 points, was pushed down to 24th out of 26 when the public's mere eight points were added."

    So why ask the so-called "experts" on the jury to judge the songs? Take the 2014 title off that Austrian bloke in a skirt and give it back to those who deserved it - the Polish milkmaids.

    It's the Establishment in a nutshell. They know better even when they clearly don't.

    Mr Eagles, it's why Leave may still sneak a win against the odds.

    It's a double edged sword. Personally, I thought the Polish entry was awful but their diaspora gave them lots of votes. On the other side, I suspect the juries are naturally put off by any song featuring a pretty girl.

    Check out where Austria got its votes from:

    http://tinyurl.com/hvavl4h

    The 10 from Switzerland can, in part, probably be put down to cross border voting, but the rest look like middling points based on people actually liking the song.
    I had a good return on Eurovision last night £78 returned on £25 staked. I was on Poland, Lithuania and Belgium at good odds for top 10. Lost on Georgia for the same.

    There were big discrepancies between the tele vote and juries, but not just for UK and Poland. Israel and Malta got stuffed by the televote too.

    So off to Kyiv for next year, and a half time show full of Ukranian folkdancing. Marvellous!
    Especially for Ukranians.
  • Options

    I'm still chortling over the ComRes last night. Cameron's been banging on and on about *security* for weeks. And Leave are beating him hands down.

    Perhaps he can borrow EdM's other kitchen sink to throw at his campaign.

    Maybe you could write a thread about this failure by REMAIN?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Andrew Rawnsley's take:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/15/nigel-farage-remain-leave-eu-referendum-tories

    "The Out side has taken such a pummelling on the economy that, if this were a boxing match, the referee would be stepping in to stop the fight. When anyone dares to express an opinion about the hazards of Brexit, the Outers now routinely wail that it is somehow “unfair” or “bullying” or even a “conspiracy”. That suggests that some of them wish that there really was a referee who could intervene to spare them any more punches."
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Is there some more bad news coming down the line for the SNP that they need a "Look - squirrel!"....?
    TBH I suspect it's a combination of the imminent arrival of Chilcott and Eck's fondness for the limelight not least of all after that [REDACTED] woman lost his majority in Holyrood. But you may be right - the repeal of OBFA is an embarrassment worth burying.
    I think the SNP will be perfectly fine with a popular piece of legislation amongst the general population being overturned by opposition parties.

    The opposition parties should gang up to force through more trams in Edinburgh next.
This discussion has been closed.