Well said Mr. Meeks - excellent thread. It will be dissed however because the 'greta garbos' seem happy to accept the price.
Meanwhile the chickens want to hold on to nurse because the nasty world might hurt them. The timidity of our once great country isn't so much a disgrace as an embarrassment.
exactly what date did we stop being great?
Well said. This country is greater than it has ever been.
We might be passing the zenith right now. If we choose to retreat into reactionary isolation, it is hard to see how that is Britain getting greater.
Ah, you're a managed decliner? Explains the fear of Brexit.
This country right now is better than it ever has been before. It has created more jobs for more people and is uniquely well placed to manage the challenges of the age.
And yet too many are left behind. Leave is the one nation argument - and even if it does cost a few % points of growth, we'll survive.
To be honest, Remain have to accept the culpability for undermining real expertise in DC's deciding to throw the weight of his government and the odd 'bomb' or world war suggestions into the mix. Public trust figures suggest he might have done more harm to the institution of the Prime Ministers office than almost any who have gone before him - perhaps excepting Blair.
The risks of Leave are borne by the young and the poor who will have to pay for the economic shock. If Leave wins, it will be voted through by the old and the rich. Not very one nation.
The price of Remain is already being borne by them and it doesn't seem to worry you that much.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
Well said Mr. Meeks - excellent thread. It will be dissed however because the 'greta garbos' seem happy to accept the price.
.
?
.
.
And you think leaving the EU is retreating into reactionary isolation?!
Isolation is permanently entrenching yourself into an inward-looking regional bloc of countries that are in decline.
Isolation is throwing up your hands and deciding not to engage meaningfully with your closest neighbours because it's all too difficult, barring the door and drawing the curtains. That is how Leave is campaigning.
Leave is simply recognising that most of our neighbours wish to travel in a different direction to the direction we wish to travel in.
Most people in the UK would settle for an EU that was prepared to return powers back to national governments, but that isn't what most of our neighbours desire.
Well they can't. As they have a single currency they need much greater fiscal integration. Greece demonstrated ter ceases to apply to most important government decisions or a new supra-national polis needs to be created to give the people some sort of say, however remote.
The only sensible option available for such a supra-national polis is EU institutions such as the European Parliament. At the moment we are blocking that and if we remain this will be an increasing source of tension as those in the EZ feel their democratic rights being stripped away by budgetary control from the ECB. I agree with Indigo and others that this will eventually result in a choice: join the Euro or leave.
We're not blocking it. We just negotiated a deal whereby they can crack on with it and we can say no thank you.
The power of that simple "no ever closer union" clause has I think been underestimated. Anything we don't like? "Ever Closer Union." And a No from us.
That is pretty powerful. You might almost call it Associate Member status..
Except it is a myth. The opt out has no legal standing in the EU at the moment and won't have unless and until.it is written into a treaty.
If there is a Remain vote, we shall both of us await with interest to see if it is written into a treaty.
If it was, why do you think it wouldn't give the UK sufficient safeguards against ever closer union?
It's become pretty clear now that, come the 24th, whatever the result, the EU will continue to be a major issue for the public and future governments.
Indeed. This is how I see things developing
1. There will be a narrow remain vote 2. Dave is loyal to his mates and attempts to prise Osborne into No.10. 3. Some of the wheels coming off the renegotiation, the chance of the immigration handbrake lasting through the first year is remote, most EU lawyers seem to see that as extremely vulnerable to the ECJ. 4. Dave/Osborne will attempt to handwave these away as details that don't matter because we have voted to Remain now. 5. The hat will be passed around for more money to support the migrant crisis, the government will tell everyone it won't pay, and then quietly will 6. UKIP landslide in 2019 EU elections 7. McDonnell takes over from Corbyn who steps back claiming health issues 8. Hung parliament in 2020 with kippers, snp and LDs all having 30-40 seats.
I don't think the LibDems will get 30-40 seats - 10-14 is more likely IMHO. I also suspect (and I could be wrong) that George Osborne doesn't want the crown.
Other than that, a scarily believable scenario.
3 4 and 5 especially. The argument will be that as supporters of Leave never supported Cameron's "renegotiation" we've no right to complain as it unravels.
What are the odds on Cameron saying he's off on June 24th? As far as I can see he needs a good Remain win to be sure of being able to stay if he wants (55%+?), a narrow win is a very tricky situation for him, and Leave surely means he's gone as soon as they can set the lectern up in Downing St and Bolton and Kuensberg have a microphone to hand.
He's going sometime in the next three and a half years tops anyway might he just say "sod this for a game of marbles" even if he wins by 10% after this experience?
Well said Mr. Meeks - excellent thread. It will be dissed however because the 'greta garbos' seem happy to accept the price.
.
?
.
.
And you think leaving the EU is retreating into reactionary isolation?!
Isolation is permanently entrenching yourself into an inward-looking regional bloc of countries that are in decline.
Isolation is throwing up your hands and deciding not to engage meaningfully with your closest neighbours because it's all too difficult, barring the door and drawing the curtains. That is how Leave is campaigning.
Leave is simply recognising that most of our neighbours wish to travel in a different direction to the direction we wish to travel in.
Most people in the UK would settle for an EU that was prepared to return powers back to national governments, but that isn't what most of our neighbours desire.
Well they can't. As they have a single currency they need much greater fiscal integration. Greece demonstrated ter ceases to apply to most important government decisions or a new supra-national polis needs to be created to give the people some sort of say, however remote.
The only sensible option available for such a supra-national polis is EU institutions such as the European Parliament. At the moment we are blocking that and if we remain this will be an increasing source of tension as those in the EZ feel their democratic rights being stripped away by budgetary control from the ECB. I agree with Indigo and others that this will eventually result in a choice: join the Euro or leave.
We're not blocking it. We just negotiated a deal whereby they can crack on with it and we can say no thank you.
The power of that simple "no ever closer union" clause has I think been underestimated. Anything we don't like? "Ever Closer Union." And a No from us.
That is pretty powerful. You might almost call it Associate Member status..
Except it is a myth. The opt out has no legal standing in the EU at the moment and won't have unless and until.it is written into a treaty.
If there is a Remain vote, we shall both of us await with interest to see if it is written into a treaty.
If it was, why do you think it wouldn't give the UK sufficient safeguards against ever closer union?
The ability to leave is all the safeguard we need.
If there is a Remain vote, we shall both of us await with interest to see if it is written into a treaty.
If it was, why do you think it wouldn't give the UK sufficient safeguards against ever closer union?
Yes, however many of the great and the good have already said they dont see the need for another treaty, now that Lisbon made the treaties self-amending. I would be very surprised if we say another treaty within the next decade.
It's become pretty clear now that, come the 24th, whatever the result, the EU will continue to be a major issue for the public and future governments.
Indeed. This is how I see things developing
1. There will be a narrow remain vote 2. Dave is loyal to his mates and attempts to prise Osborne into No.10. 3. Some of the wheels coming off the renegotiation, the chance of the immigration handbrake lasting through the first year is remote, most EU lawyers seem to see that as extremely vulnerable to the ECJ. 4. Dave/Osborne will attempt to handwave these away as details that don't matter because we have voted to Remain now. 5. The hat will be passed around for more money to support the migrant crisis, the government will tell everyone it won't pay, and then quietly will 6. UKIP landslide in 2019 EU elections 7. McDonnell takes over from Corbyn who steps back claiming health issues 8. Hung parliament in 2020 with kippers, snp and LDs all having 30-40 seats.
I don't think the LibDems will get 30-40 seats - 10-14 is more likely IMHO. I also suspect (and I could be wrong) that George Osborne doesn't want the crown.
Other than that, a scarily believable scenario.
3 4 and 5 especially. The argument will be that as supporters of Leave never supported Cameron's "renegotiation" we've no right to complain as it unravels.
An amusing thing will be seeing how quickly certain PBers switch from "Cameron has got a veto on that" to "By voting Remain we were agreeing to it".
Mr. Glenn, saying the ability to leave is the only safeguard we need is the political equivalent of abolishing the entire armed forces except for the nuclear deterrent.
welsh EU poll "A new Welsh poll on voting intention in the June 23 EU referendum shows how tight the result could be with both Remain and Leave on 41%, and the remaining 18% saying they don’t know how they will vote.
The poll was carried out by YouGov for ITV Wales and Cardiff University’s Wales Governance Centre."
It's become pretty clear now that, come the 24th, whatever the result, the EU will continue to be a major issue for the public and future governments.
Indeed. This is how I see things developing
1. There will be a narrow remain vote 2. Dave is loyal to his mates and attempts to prise Osborne into No.10. 3. Some of the wheels coming off the renegotiation, the chance of the immigration handbrake lasting through the first year is remote, most EU lawyers seem to see that as extremely vulnerable to the ECJ. 4. Dave/Osborne will attempt to handwave these away as details that don't matter because we have voted to Remain now. 5. The hat will be passed around for more money to support the migrant crisis, the government will tell everyone it won't pay, and then quietly will 6. UKIP landslide in 2019 EU elections 7. McDonnell takes over from Corbyn who steps back claiming health issues 8. Hung parliament in 2020 with kippers, snp and LDs all having 30-40 seats.
I don't think the LibDems will get 30-40 seats - 10-14 is more likely IMHO. I also suspect (and I could be wrong) that George Osborne doesn't want the crown.
Other than that, a scarily believable scenario.
I agree re the Lib Dems. They're practically invisible at the moment and while there might be ground work going on where they had seats, the loss of an MP and the MPs office, plus the establishment of an opposition MP and office, combined in places with the loss of local councillors means that the road back is not a simple one. And as long as UKIP or the SNP are capturing the anti-Westminster vote, it'll be hard for the Lib Dems to capitalise on being 'not the others'.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
It's become pretty clear now that, come the 24th, whatever the result, the EU will continue to be a major issue for the public and future governments.
Indeed. This is how I see things developing
1. There will be a narrow remain vote 2. Dave is loyal to his mates and attempts to prise Osborne into No.10. 3. Some of the wheels coming off the renegotiation, the chance of the immigration handbrake lasting through the first year is remote, most EU lawyers seem to see that as extremely vulnerable to the ECJ. 4. Dave/Osborne will attempt to handwave these away as details that don't matter because we have voted to Remain now. 5. The hat will be passed around for more money to support the migrant crisis, the government will tell everyone it won't pay, and then quietly will 6. UKIP landslide in 2019 EU elections 7. McDonnell takes over from Corbyn who steps back claiming health issues 8. Hung parliament in 2020 with kippers, snp and LDs all having 30-40 seats.
6 probably happens anyway:
narrow remain= frustration
leave, and nothing much happens to immigration= frustration
Mr. Glenn, saying the ability to leave is the only safeguard we need is the political equivalent of abolishing the entire armed forces except for the nuclear deterrent.
That depends on what you see as the purpose and scope of the armed forces.
Prematurely withdrawing from the institutions of the EU would be 'political disarmament' of a kind. We'd be giving up our share in the sovereignty of 27 other countries.
I don't know if this is a good site or not - http://www.shadowstats.com/ - if it is accurate it explains why people don't see any personal advantage in increases in GDP. The temptation for the government to manipulate GDP and the employmernt rate - the only two statistics with cut through to the public - must be enormous. If I was Gove or whoever the economic spokeman for Leave is, I would hit hard on this.
To follow from my earlier comment, this chart is what John Williams thinks real inflation is, as opposed to the headline number:
If he is correct, a can of coke should cost around $7 today, rather than less than a $1.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
For christ's sake are you still banging that cheap drum ?
1) will happen, then after a small number of years 2) will happen, its not complicated except when you are willfully trying to misunderstand.
My goodness, if Leave Wins, what's to become of all those fancy European Studies Institutes set up at UK universities in the last 20 years?
They'll be even more important. As we will no longer be able to visit the continent, all our knowledge will have to come through academics who can tell us about what "France" is like.
The real economy doesn't need politicians, still less does it need 'experts'. It needs traders.
Traders will cope with, and adjust to, whatever is thrown at them.
An immediate benefit of Brexit will be the change in atmosphere.
All the traders I know are fanatical readers of research (whether about the likely pricing for electrical components, or about inflation outlooks), and constant quizzers of experts. In other words, they use the insights of experts to help them interpret data.
But the problem is the public see these as the same experts that thought it would be a disaster not to join the Euro, the same experts that thought we should stay in the ERM at all costs, and the same experts that saw economic plan sailing through 2008.
It's become pretty clear now that, come the 24th, whatever the result, the EU will continue to be a major issue for the public and future governments.
Indeed. This is how I see things developing
1. There will be a narrow remain vote 2. Dave is loyal to his mates and attempts to prise Osborne into No.10. 3. Some of the wheels coming off the renegotiation, the chance of the immigration handbrake lasting through the first year is remote, most EU lawyers seem to see that as extremely vulnerable to the ECJ. 4. Dave/Osborne will attempt to handwave these away as details that don't matter because we have voted to Remain now. 5. The hat will be passed around for more money to support the migrant crisis, the government will tell everyone it won't pay, and then quietly will 6. UKIP landslide in 2019 EU elections 7. McDonnell takes over from Corbyn who steps back claiming health issues 8. Hung parliament in 2020 with kippers, snp and LDs all having 30-40 seats.
I don't think the LibDems will get 30-40 seats - 10-14 is more likely IMHO. I also suspect (and I could be wrong) that George Osborne doesn't want the crown.
Other than that, a scarily believable scenario.
3 4 and 5 especially. The argument will be that as supporters of Leave never supported Cameron's "renegotiation" we've no right to complain as it unravels.
An amusing thing will be seeing how quickly certain PBers switch from "Cameron has got a veto on that" to "By voting Remain we were agreeing to it".
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
Those two statements, and this is not an endorsement of either, are not even marginally contradictory. You've really gone to pieces over this referendum - you've been aggressively pro-Cameron for as long as I've been reading, but the laughable dross you've been forced to peddle over the past few weeks has been truly sad to see.
The real economy doesn't need politicians, still less does it need 'experts'. It needs traders.
Traders will cope with, and adjust to, whatever is thrown at them.
An immediate benefit of Brexit will be the change in atmosphere.
All the traders I know are fanatical readers of research (whether about the likely pricing for electrical components, or about inflation outlooks), and constant quizzers of experts. In other words, they use the insights of experts to help them interpret data.
'Traders' was meant to include businessmen, plumbers, surgeons, pension lawyers, property developers, gardeners....anybody trading his skills. I intended it to be a broader description than 'entrepreneurs', or the self-employed.
Very few will be disadvantged by Brexit, to nobody's particular suprise.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
For christ's sake are you still banging that cheap drum ?
1) will happen, then after a small number of years 2) will happen, its not complicated except when you are willfully trying to misunderstand.
LOL.
That would make for quite an interesting payoff diagram. I'd like you to price up the option for it.
You are saying that the economy will do one thing first for an unspecified period of time, and then another thing at some point in the future for another unspecified period of time (presumably into perpetuity).
welsh EU poll "A new Welsh poll on voting intention in the June 23 EU referendum shows how tight the result could be with both Remain and Leave on 41%, and the remaining 18% saying they don’t know how they will vote.
The poll was carried out by YouGov for ITV Wales and Cardiff University’s Wales Governance Centre."
My goodness, if Leave Wins, what's to become of all those fancy European Studies Institutes set up at UK universities in the last 20 years?
Hmm. I think you'll find that Europe still exists to be studied even if we aren't in the EU. Whether they'll find any funding is another matter.
We might suddenly find out what all sorts of organisation on the hook for an EU handout if they behave like good little Europeans really think.
I think it's in Hannan's book - I read that of 200 organisations that applied for EU funding, 200 of them got it. It's a tentacles approach - you buy the souls of *experts* and *interest groups* and then eh voila, they're more inclined to sing your songs.
Mr. Glenn, and we'd be regaining our own sovereignty.
And why should we seek to have sovereignty over others? Where's the democracy, the accountability, in that?
Democracy is also about how you protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority, how you maximise the freedom of action of the individual, how you prevent the individual from being subject to arbitrary power from wherever it is exercised.
All of this presupposes constraints on elected governments. That governments should also be constitutionally constrained by having to be good neighbours is no bad thing.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
Those two statements, and this is not an endorsement of either, are not even marginally contradictory. You've really gone to pieces over this referendum - you've been aggressively pro-Cameron for as long as I've been reading, but the laughable dross you've been forced to peddle over the past few weeks has been truly sad to see.
Don't be sad; be happy! It's a beautiful sunny day out there (in the UK for all our foreign contributors).
I have criticised Dave many times and often (pre your arrival presumably).
My point still stands, will the UK be better off outside the EU, or is an economic hit a price worth paying for our freedom?
I don't know if this is a good site or not - http://www.shadowstats.com/ - if it is accurate it explains why people don't see any personal advantage in increases in GDP. The temptation for the government to manipulate GDP and the employmernt rate - the only two statistics with cut through to the public - must be enormous. If I was Gove or whoever the economic spokeman for Leave is, I would hit hard on this.
To follow from my earlier comment, this chart is what John Williams thinks real inflation is, as opposed to the headline number:
If he is correct, a can of coke should cost around $7 today, rather than less than a $1.
And a semi in Wandsworth ?
Better to look at rents than prices (because it's much easier to look at aggregate data), and - yes - that have gone up more than consumer prices. But again, the difference is 2x rather than 7x.
Hugely amusing to see the Remainers once again going into battle for the little people. Heart-warming how much they care about the little people and the dangers posed to them by Brexit. Odd how it was only yesterday when they were baring their little chiuwawa fangs about 'yokels' and the 'lumpen British' and about how they wanted cosmopolitan London to be independent from the rest of the UK. Not being a medical professional, I'll refrain from making a diagnosis.
Sounds like Farage is planning to pitch tonight's big debate speech as being primarily about anti-elite, anti-politics, give the buggers a bloody nose, only the rich will suffer if we leave, type of thing.
Could well work. Certainly seems aimed at non-metropolitan labour voters
What this site needs is an Abuse-ometer. Then we can all nominate and vote upon the Most Abusive Post each day, and in the Dead Days between Xmas and New Year create an award for the Year's Most Abusive Poster.
Alastair. A very good article indeed. You could call it the 'Leavers' dilemma. If they win they're going to be seen carrying a very smelly baby for a long time (I too have been listening to experts) and if they lose their leaders will never be forgiven for laying down their party for their ambition.
The only politician likely to emerge a winner is Farage and he knows it.
Any honest leaver will admit that the uncertainty caused by us voting to leave will inevitably lead to a short term economic penalty in terms of GDP. But I do not think this in any way equates to a loss of reputation on economic matters.
If Remainers main reason for voting Remain is merely a few quarters slightly better GDP figures, that is frankly pathetic! That is not what this vote is about - it is much bigger than that.
(And anyway it's not all bad - an end to the housing market bubble would also be a long term good thing)
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
Those two statements, and this is not an endorsement of either, are not even marginally contradictory. You've really gone to pieces over this referendum - you've been aggressively pro-Cameron for as long as I've been reading, but the laughable dross you've been forced to peddle over the past few weeks has been truly sad to see.
Don't be sad; be happy! It's a beautiful sunny day out there (in the UK for all our foreign contributors).
I have criticised Dave many times and often (pre your arrival presumably).
My point still stands, will the UK be better off outside the EU, or is an economic hit a price worth paying for our freedom?
Um, this could get embarrassing for you. Let me try again.
The two statements. Are not. Contradictory. It's entirely possible. To take an economic hit. And end up better off. Look up 'investment' in the dictionary as an example.
Mr. Glenn, you're arguing it's democratic for us to have laws imposed upon us by foreign judges, politicians and bureaucrats.
I wouldn't use the word 'impose' but in the broadest sense, yes. I'm saying that pure national self-determination is a more imperfect version of democracy than what we currently have.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
For christ's sake are you still banging that cheap drum ?
1) will happen, then after a small number of years 2) will happen, its not complicated except when you are willfully trying to misunderstand.
LOL.
That would make for quite an interesting payoff diagram. I'd like you to price up the option for it.
You are saying that the economy will do one thing first for an unspecified period of time, and then another thing at some point in the future for another unspecified period of time (presumably into perpetuity).
And you criticise Remain for making forecasts!
Jesus wept you are losing it. That is will cost us something to leave the EU is not controversial, most predictions are fairly modest, none of them are worse than a couple of bad years of Gordon Brown, which we managed to survive and get to where we are now.
That the EU has economically stagnated over the last decade and has in effect not grown at all, is a fact. Countries like India, China and even African countries like Ethiopia have doubled the size of their economy in the same period, and yet you feel our business will be served better being locked into a single market with the former, and imposing tariffs (from which we hardly profit) on the later. You also feel that if we open ourselves to trading with these new expanding markets more freely, we are some how going to be worse of in the long term.
No I am not going to get into the game of predicting exactly how many years are going to be leaner, and exactly by how much, and when we will be better off and buy how much, even the Treasury is making those numbers up as it goes along.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
Those two statements, and this is not an endorsement of either, are not even marginally contradictory. You've really gone to pieces over this referendum - you've been aggressively pro-Cameron for as long as I've been reading, but the laughable dross you've been forced to peddle over the past few weeks has been truly sad to see.
Don't be sad; be happy! It's a beautiful sunny day out there (in the UK for all our foreign contributors).
I have criticised Dave many times and often (pre your arrival presumably).
My point still stands, will the UK be better off outside the EU, or is an economic hit a price worth paying for our freedom?
Um, this could get embarrassing for you. Let me try again.
The two statements. Are not. Contradictory. It's entirely possible. To take an economic hit. And end up better off. Look up 'investment' in the dictionary as an example.
You criticise Remain for making one forecast, and then you have a multi-leg forecast of first this, then that for an open economy over the next indeterminate number of years and I'm the one that's supposed to be embarrassed?
- Last thread - several posters read my light-hearted post about the perceived ghastliness of High Wycombe as a serious comment on immigration. It wasn't intended to be.
- Switzerland - Lowlander thinks correctly that the Swiss were warned of serious problems if they voted to reject free movement. They did so vote (albeit narrowly), and as a result all the bilateral agreements pending with the EU have been suspended. Everything has been put on ice until after June 23, but the Swiss government and industry are extremely concerned. There are three plausible outcomes:
- The Swiss agree some sort of fudge with the EU. That is likely if Britain votes Remain, less so in the short term if we go Brexit, as the EU doesn't want to offer precedents for a deal if they're about to negotiate with Britain. But the EU is world fudge champion so it's always a possibility.
- The Government tells voters that the feared consequences are coming to pass, and are they sure this is what they want? It's likely that a revote in those circumstances would go the other way (a straw in the wind is the 2-1 referendum vote last Sunday for more flexible asylum rules).
- The Swiss put up with the loss of deals with the EU. Least likely but you never know!
I don't know if this is a good site or not - http://www.shadowstats.com/ - if it is accurate it explains why people don't see any personal advantage in increases in GDP. The temptation for the government to manipulate GDP and the employmernt rate - the only two statistics with cut through to the public - must be enormous. If I was Gove or whoever the economic spokeman for Leave is, I would hit hard on this.
To follow from my earlier comment, this chart is what John Williams thinks real inflation is, as opposed to the headline number:
If he is correct, a can of coke should cost around $7 today, rather than less than a $1.
And a semi in Wandsworth ?
Better to look at rents than prices (because it's much easier to look at aggregate data), and - yes - that have gone up more than consumer prices. But again, the difference is 2x rather than 7x.
You can send him $175 a year to get more "shadow stats". There are people out there who will send it too.
What are the odds on Cameron saying he's off on June 24th? As far as I can see he needs a good Remain win to be sure of being able to stay if he wants (55%+?), a narrow win is a very tricky situation for him, and Leave surely means he's gone as soon as they can set the lectern up in Downing St and Bolton and Kuensberg have a microphone to hand.
He's going sometime in the next three and a half years tops anyway might he just say "sod this for a game of marbles" even if he wins by 10% after this experience?
Greater than the odds (7/4 for a 2016 departure) imply, I'd say.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
Those two statements, and this is not an endorsement of either, are not even marginally contradictory. You've really gone to pieces over this referendum - you've been aggressively pro-Cameron for as long as I've been reading, but the laughable dross you've been forced to peddle over the past few weeks has been truly sad to see.
Don't be sad; be happy! It's a beautiful sunny day out there (in the UK for all our foreign contributors).
I have criticised Dave many times and often (pre your arrival presumably).
My point still stands, will the UK be better off outside the EU, or is an economic hit a price worth paying for our freedom?
Um, this could get embarrassing for you. Let me try again.
The two statements. Are not. Contradictory. It's entirely possible. To take an economic hit. And end up better off. Look up 'investment' in the dictionary as an example.
You criticise Remain for making one forecast, and then you have a multi-leg forecast of first this, then that for an open economy over the next indeterminate number of years and I'm the one that's supposed to be embarrassed.
Nope. I'm not debating the merits of either statement with you - much as I'd love to do that when I have more time. I merely pointed out, as was pretty obvious to anyone over the age of about 10 I'd say, that the two statements you obviously thought were some sort of zinger, were in fact not just a not contradictory, but a fundamental principle of western economics.
But hey, it's early, I'll let you have your coffee.
Mr. Glenn, you're arguing it's democratic for us to have laws imposed upon us by foreign judges, politicians and bureaucrats.
I wouldn't use the word 'impose' but in the broadest sense, yes. I'm saying that pure national self-determination is a more imperfect version of democracy than what we currently have.
How bizarre, in what we currently have, strategic direction is given by a meeting of heads of state in a selection of smoke filled rooms and a selection of un minuted bilaterals. The implementation of this is handed to a self-important bureaucracy who isn't elected by anyone (and mostly lost elections to get their jobs), who design and initiate the actual laws. These laws then get to the directly elected bit, who have no power to actually initiate any laws irrespective of the number of them that support it, who then have limited powers to amend those laws, and whose amendments can in many cases be overridden by the aforementioned unelected bureaucrats. Even the elected members are elected using the party list system so you can't get rid of a particular member if they appear to be underperforming or not representing you appropriately. Very democratic.
I do not understand why the 2015 GE election is regarded as a triumph for the Tories over Labour; Labout won more seats from the Tories than they lost to them (10:8). However the Tories gained 27 from the LibDems. Labour’s failure was largely due to their catastrophic defeat in Scotland, where they lost 40 seats and saw trheir total vote fall equally catastrophically, thereby reducung the overall percentage.
Nothing to do with the Tories vs Labour; more likely either the public deciding they didn’t like the way Nick Clegg had led the Lib Dems (although he managed to hold onto his seat) or the targeting of LibDem seats in the south by the Tories. Or both! Plus the SNP surge.
It’s rather like 1951 regarded as a success for the Tories whereas it was actually the electoral system which gave the Tories a majority. More people voted Labour than ever before and Labour had almost 49% of the vote as against the Tories and allies 48.
I don't know whether anyone missed this yesterday but well worth reading from William Hague. There now seems to be a consensus that whatever the benefits of Leave we are certain to take an economic hit. That varies from relatively minor to catastrophic. The median seems to be 'quite severe'.
Nothing to do with the Tories vs Labour; more likely either the public deciding they didn’t like the way Nick Clegg had led the Lib Dems (although he managed to hold onto his seat) or the targeting of LibDem seats in the south by the Tories. Or both! Plus the SNP surge
Or they decided that since the Tories and the Lib Dems were almost indistinguishable on policy you might as well vote for the larger party that hadn't been telling whoppers about tuition fees.
Canary Wharf absolutely saturated this morning with electronic Vote Remain adverts.
They are everywhere. Like something out of the minority report.
Our employer sent out an email to the whole firm (worldwide) this morning re the EU referendum and how it would have a negative impact on our firm in particular and the economy of the country and the EU as a whole. There are about 4,000 UK employees.
I don't know whether anyone missed this yesterday but well worth reading from William Hague. There now seems to be a consensus that whatever the benefits of Leave we are certain to take an economic hit. That varies from relatively minor to catastrophic. The median seems to be 'quite severe'.
In this context "quite severe" means less bad that a couple of middling years under the stewardship of G. Brown Esq, and yet we got from where he left us to the current booming economy in five years.
Hell we got from the bottom of the Sub Prime Crisis to the current economy in eight years, the suggestion that any fall out from Leave is going to go on for a decade is frankly for the birds.
Sounds like Farage is planning to pitch tonight's big debate speech as being primarily about anti-elite, anti-politics, give the buggers a bloody nose, only the rich will suffer if we leave, type of thing.
Could well work. Certainly seems aimed at non-metropolitan labour voters
I am extremely nervous about Farage.
He's quite good, until he starts talking about AIDS, rape and Putin. And will he be sober?
I'm still not 100% sure if he wants to win this referendum, or throw it.
Sounds like Farage is planning to pitch tonight's big debate speech as being primarily about anti-elite, anti-politics, give the buggers a bloody nose, only the rich will suffer if we leave, type of thing.
Could well work. Certainly seems aimed at non-metropolitan labour voters
I am extremely nervous about Farage.
He's quite good, until he starts talking about AIDS, rape and Putin. And will he be sober?
I'm still not 100% sure if he wants to win this referendum, or throw it.
It a ticklish one, but if remain want to wrap up their lead they need to motivate the WWC and other Labour voters to get out and vote, and Boris and Gove can't do that.
Noted that £20bn of pain is at the modest end, a little over 1% of the economy. And it is plenty to wipe out the £9bn/yr, £250 m/wk paid to the EU by the public sector. And note that a one time only reduction followed by perfectly respectable growth (equivalent to being in the EU and running British economic policy - as we do now) wipes out any public purse advantage, not just in the short-term but in the longer run too.
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
They have not quite decided on which of the following they mean:
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or 2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
Those two statements, and this is not an endorsemhe past few weeks has been truly sad to see.
Don't be sad; be happy! It's a beautiful sunny day out there (in the UK for all our foreign contributors).
I have criticised Dave many times and often (pre your arrival presumably).
My point still stands, will the UK be better off outside the EU, or is an economic hit a price worth paying for our freedom?
Um, this could get embarrassing for you. Let me try again.
The two statements. Are not. Contradictory. It's entirely possible. To take an economic hit. And end up better off. Look up 'investment' in the dictionary as an example.
You criticise Remain for making one forecast, and then you have a multi-leg forecast of first this, then that for an open economy over the next indeterminate number of years and I'm the one that's supposed to be embarrassed.
Nope. I'm not debating the merits of either statement with you - much as I'd love to do that when I have more time. I merely pointed out, as was pretty obvious to anyone over the age of about 10 I'd say, that the two statements you obviously thought were some sort of zinger, were in fact not just a not contradictory, but a fundamental principle of western economics.
But hey, it's early, I'll let you have your coffee.
not a zinger, just promoting those theories is deeply illogical.
Quite why you invoke investment as your killing argument I have no idea, but I suppose skim-reading wiki for your responses does have its challenges. Especially as it's early.
I don't think I understand what is happening with the EU Referendum, especially the polling which seems to be saying that Remain has a chance of winning the vote. This is problematic because it doesn't seem to add up. Maybe my memory is wrong but as I recollect, there have been quite a number of votes in a lot of different countries over the last 30 years where a pro-EU side has faced off against an anti-EU side. And in all the examples I can think of the pro-EU side has been absolutely demolished, often by huge margins.
Am i not understanding something? Have there been referenda where the pro-EU side has won (other than in impoverished prospective members waiting for hand outs) ? I'm thinking of votes like the recent Swiss slap in the face to the EU, the Norway vote, the iceland vote, the various countries who all slapped the EU in the face over the EU Constitution. I can't come up with examples where a pro-EU side beat an anti-EU side anywhere.
What is it I am missing?
Actually leaving is a bigger step than slapping the eu in the face. Other votes coukd express dissatisfaction without real risk. Personally I think the dislike is high enough people will take the risk now, but even as a leaver I've had moments of doubt about taking the leap.
Was it not the case that the Swiss were warned of dire economic consequences if they voted to end free movement? Since they did vote that way the consequences have been virtually nil. From the outside the warnings to the Swiss appear to have been meaningless and the EU has looked (and continues to look) very weak on their ability to do anything of consequence.
The Swiss decision has not yet been implemented. Discussions continue with the E.U.
Sterling falls - good for exporters, and tourism. But I doubt it will amoount to much frankly House prices fall - good for more or less everyone in the long run, given current insanity City of London suffers - boo-hoo, how sad
Yeah it will be a bit worse for a bit. But it has the chance to be better in the long run. The main argument against Leave seems to be that we can;t be sure what will happen. Riiiiight 'cos if we stay it's all certain isn't it? We're certain about Greece are we? Italy? The bond markets, economic growth, a China slowdown...? FFS
Nothing to do with the Tories vs Labour; more likely either the public deciding they didn’t like the way Nick Clegg had led the Lib Dems (although he managed to hold onto his seat) or the targeting of LibDem seats in the south by the Tories. Or both! Plus the SNP surge
Or they decided that since the Tories and the Lib Dems were almost indistinguishable on policy you might as well vote for the larger party that hadn't been telling whoppers about tuition fees.
Yup. As opposed to the party which told lies about immigration, although I suppose that one expects the Tories to lie, and the LibDems had been describing themselves as different.
What always surprises me..... shouldn’t, I know, given his track record ...... is that Cameron never thanks Nicola Sturgeon (at least in public) for ensuring he kept his job.
Sounds like Farage is planning to pitch tonight's big debate speech as being primarily about anti-elite, anti-politics, give the buggers a bloody nose, only the rich will suffer if we leave, type of thing.
Could well work. Certainly seems aimed at non-metropolitan labour voters
I am extremely nervous about Farage.
He's quite good, until he starts talking about AIDS, rape and Putin. And will he be sober?
I'm still not 100% sure if he wants to win this referendum, or throw it.
But the same could be said of all Leave's leading lights. Each one has their own agenda (I'm not condemining this, I'm stating it as a fact), whether it's to further their own careers, promote their own particular brand of politics, etc. Not all of these agendas, if any, depend on Brexit, and some would be best served without it.
Canary Wharf absolutely saturated this morning with electronic Vote Remain adverts.
They are everywhere. Like something out of the minority report.
Apparently, you've been identified as a key decision maker. You're being tracked by your cellphone, and will see Remain advertising wherever you. Your TV, your browser will show you nought but Remain propaganda. They hope to wear you down, so that eventually you say... Enough!
Alistair Meeks article is bang on the nail. Brexit will have an economic shock which is difficult to forecast but which will impact negatively on the government. It will be a self-inflicted wound and a free gift to Labour.
Canary Wharf absolutely saturated this morning with electronic Vote Remain adverts.
They are everywhere. Like something out of the minority report.
Apparently, you've been identified as a key decision maker. You're being tracked by your cellphone, and will see Remain advertising wherever you. Your TV, your browser will show you nought but Remain propaganda. They hope to wear you down, so that eventually you say... Enough!
So that eventually you say....Not Enough! I'm Remaining!
What always surprises me..... shouldn’t, I know, given his track record ...... is that Cameron never thanks Nicola Sturgeon (at least in public) for ensuring he kept his job.
It is well known that I have never been a fan of Cameron and think he is massively overrated, which his behaviour in this referendum tends to support.
The main difference between 2010 and 2015 is Ed not Gordon, and Alex Salmond, Dave and George are the constants.
A recession is in any event, likely at some point between now and 2020, because that's just the nature of the business cycle. The government will have to own that, regardless of the outcome on June 23rd.
If we vote Brexit, the nature of British politics will have changed so much that forecasting becomes very difficult. A cock up like the ERM fiasco can very easily be blamed on the government of the day. Difficulties caused by a majority of the public voting to Leave are much less easily blamed on the government of the day.
You don't think the public are likely to blame the advocates of that decision for its consequences?
The argument would become about where it was a consequence of if it was going to happen anyway, since a recession is expected before 2020 irrespective of the referendum result.
You may be right in terms of there being a recession anyway but I am pretty sure the public will blame Brexit.
In past years eurosceptics, particularly papers like the Mail & Express have blamed everything on the EU regardless of where the fault really lies. If we Brexit the reverse will be case and everyone will blame Brexit for everything. The public are very fickle and Remainers & experts have been warning that would happen very strongly. People will remember that even if they voted to Leave.
Politically the right /UKIP have a lot riding on this. If they win there will be euphoria for a while certainly but if it goes tits up, or is perceived to have been a huge mistake the right/UKIP will be politically dead for years. There is always a silver lining!
Great post from Alastair, which I suspect is on-the-money. Add in the likely massive political turbulence - a Tory leadership election, uncertainty over future PM, and a likely rapid falling-out amongst the Brexit camp on both process and substance of what they should do next, and its a potentially toxic cocktail. It is hard to see the Tories not getting most of the blame, since the electorate is unlikely to blame itself, people having short memories and all...
A potential counter as to why Labour may not be sitting as prettily as he suggests is the argument that the Referendum might see a final break between Corbyn and Labour's traditional WWC vote. I don't have a feel for whether this is likely or not.
What always surprises me..... shouldn’t, I know, given his track record ...... is that Cameron never thanks Nicola Sturgeon (at least in public) for ensuring he kept his job.
I it is well known that I have never been a fan of Cameron and think he is massively overrated, which his behaviour in this referendum tends to support.
The main difference between 2010 and 2015 is Ed not Gordon, and Alex Salmond, Dave and George are the constants.
Are you saying that Gordon would have done better than Ed? I suppose that could be argued, especially in Scotland.
Sounds like Farage is planning to pitch tonight's big debate speech as being primarily about anti-elite, anti-politics, give the buggers a bloody nose, only the rich will suffer if we leave, type of thing.
Could well work. Certainly seems aimed at non-metropolitan labour voters
I am extremely nervous about Farage.
He's quite good, until he starts talking about AIDS, rape and Putin. And will he be sober?
I'm still not 100% sure if he wants to win this referendum, or throw it.
Tipstr: as discussed briefly yesterday, I thought I'd try something and put together a Twitter list called Tipstr. Because I tend not to use Twitter for gambling much [I'll see about changing that, in certain circumstances*] I don't know that many of PB's tipsters usernames off the top of my head (added Mr. Pulpstar, Mr. Eagles, and Mr. Smithson).
So, if you're on Twitter and want to be added or know of others who should be, just let me know here or there. NB this is only for those who may offer tips, so it'll be an easy place to check for (particularly short-term) betting opportunities.
A potential counter as to why Labour may not be sitting as prettily as he suggests is the argument that the Referendum might see a final break between Corbyn and Labour's traditional WWC vote. I don't have a feel for whether this is likely or not.
Labour is also going to be quite surprised at the number of its minority voters that are voting for Leave as well.
Mr. Glenn, you're arguing it's democratic for us to have laws imposed upon us by foreign judges, politicians and bureaucrats.
I wouldn't use the word 'impose' but in the broadest sense, yes. I'm saying that pure national self-determination is a more imperfect version of democracy than what we currently have.
How bizarre, in what we currently have, strategic direction is given by a meeting of heads of state in a selection of smoke filled rooms and a selection of un minuted bilaterals. The implementation of this is handed to a self-important bureaucracy who isn't elected by anyone (and mostly lost elections to get their jobs), who design and initiate the actual laws. These laws then get to the directly elected bit, who have no power to actually initiate any laws irrespective of the number of them that support it, who then have limited powers to amend those laws, and whose amendments can in many cases be overridden by the aforementioned unelected bureaucrats. Even the elected members are elected using the party list system so you can't get rid of a particular member if they appear to be underperforming or not representing you appropriately. Very democratic.
The heads of state are, of course, all democratically elected.
Sounds like Farage is planning to pitch tonight's big debate speech as being primarily about anti-elite, anti-politics, give the buggers a bloody nose, only the rich will suffer if we leave, type of thing.
Could well work. Certainly seems aimed at non-metropolitan labour voters
I saw him take that angle at a LabourLeave event - it went down really well.
The chair of LabourLeave, Brendan Chilton is very good at making the case - well worth watching, this is an amateur video but captures it well.
Canary Wharf absolutely saturated this morning with electronic Vote Remain adverts.
They are everywhere. Like something out of the minority report.
Apparently, you've been identified as a key decision maker. You're being tracked by your cellphone, and will see Remain advertising wherever you. Your TV, your browser will show you nought but Remain propaganda. They hope to wear you down, so that eventually you say... Enough!
It's more likely i just go postal and just smash them all!
There are so many things that deeply frustrate me about this referendum.
What always surprises me..... shouldn’t, I know, given his track record ...... is that Cameron never thanks Nicola Sturgeon (at least in public) for ensuring he kept his job.
I it is well known that I have never been a fan of Cameron and think he is massively overrated, which his behaviour in this referendum tends to support.
The main difference between 2010 and 2015 is Ed not Gordon, and Alex Salmond, Dave and George are the constants.
Are you saying that Gordon would have done better than Ed? I suppose that could be argued, especially in Scotland.
I think Gordon would have done a fair bit better than Ed by 2015, especially in Scotland, I think a lot of people would have forgotten about some of his bigger idiocies and there is little doubt that he has far more gravitas and substance that Miliband can ever dream of. Gordon's problem might have been that he would have been even more susceptible to the "in the pocket of the SNP" attack line than Ed was.
Brexit will unleash a wave of "democracy" (sic) across the EU. Other countries might vote to leave and the Eurozone would collapse.
Q: What happened when we exited the ERM? A: It unleashed one of our strongest and long lasting periods of economic growth.
Therefore the evidence of what happens to a country that exits in modern times a european common currency system is indicative of an upside. If I was a REMAINer I would dress that up as a fact and predict it was a certainty with a mass of spreadsheets extrapolating it all. Instead I just say that the past lesson from history was positive. Because I am a cautious and reasonable person.....
A potential counter as to why Labour may not be sitting as prettily as he suggests is the argument that the Referendum might see a final break between Corbyn and Labour's traditional WWC vote. I don't have a feel for whether this is likely or not.
Unlikely that there'll be a break over Europe between Corbyn - who has been largely anonymous during the EURef campaign - and the WWC Labour vote. It's not as if Labour's been in tune with its base on that issue since the 2004 expansion. Those who might have been lost over the issue are already gone and I doubt there'll be many more who'd go based on what Corbyn has said on it.
On the other hand, there's plenty of potential for more to defect through the rest of the parliament over other matters, cultural, social and economic.
Canary Wharf absolutely saturated this morning with electronic Vote Remain adverts.
They are everywhere. Like something out of the minority report.
London's dominance as Europe's finance centre will be a price of Brexit. The Dutch, French and Irish governments have been coveting London's wealth for their capitals for some time. It will be easy for EU governments to enact a discriminatory tax and legal regime that will keep EU-related business within the EU. They don't need to negotiate anything with Britain, it will happen by default. It will also compensate them for any downsides if they don't do a deal with Britain on trade.
There will still be a role for London as a financial centre but it will be diminished.
What always surprises me..... shouldn’t, I know, given his track record ...... is that Cameron never thanks Nicola Sturgeon (at least in public) for ensuring he kept his job.
I it is well known that I have never been a fan of Cameron and think he is massively overrated, which his behaviour in this referendum tends to support.
The main difference between 2010 and 2015 is Ed not Gordon, and Alex Salmond, Dave and George are the constants.
Are you saying that Gordon would have done better than Ed? I suppose that could be argued, especially in Scotland.
Are you saying Scottish people are racist, and anti English?
not a zinger, just promoting those theories is deeply illogical.
Quite why you invoke investment as your killing argument I have no idea, but I suppose skim-reading wiki for your responses does have its challenges. Especially as it's early.
And still you limp on.
Wikipedia? Do I even want to ask?
There is no illogicality. There never was. You can question the long term benefits. You can question the short term costs. What you can't do, is imply any incompatibility between the two. Not on a forum where adults are posting.
A recession is in any event, likely at some point between now and 2020, because that's just the nature of the business cycle. The government will have to own that, regardless of the outcome on June 23rd.
If we vote Brexit, the nature of British politics will have changed so much that forecasting becomes very difficult. A cock up like the ERM fiasco can very easily be blamed on the government of the day. Difficulties caused by a majority of the public voting to Leave are much less easily blamed on the government of the day.
You don't think the public are likely to blame the advocates of that decision for its consequences?
The argument would become about where it was a consequence of if it was going to happen anyway, since a recession is expected before 2020 irrespective of the referendum result.
Politically the right /UKIP have a lot riding on this. If they win there will be euphoria for a while certainly but if it goes tits up, or is perceived to have been a huge mistake the right/UKIP will be politically dead for years. There is always a silver lining!
If we vote LEAVE UKIP are probably finished as a party unless they reinvent themselves as a nationalist party for the working class.
Brexit will unleash a wave of "democracy" (sic) across the EU. Other countries might vote to leave and the Eurozone would collapse.
Q: What happened when we exited the ERM? A: It unleashed one of our strongest and long lasting periods of economic growth.
Therefore the evidence of what happens to a country that exits in modern times a european common currency system is indicative of an upside. If I was a REMAINer I would dress that up as a fact and predict it was a certainty with a mass of spreadsheets extrapolating it all. Instead I just say that the past lesson from history was positive. Because I am a cautious and reasonable person.....
Although it's worth remembering that the mid to late 1990s saw fabulous economic growth in the US, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Finland, and Sweden. (And pretty poor growth in Germany, Canada and Australia. Those countries were then among the best performing the subsequent 15 years. Don't understimate the power of the economic cycle.)
Mr. Glenn, you're arguing it's democratic for us to have laws imposed upon us by foreign judges, politicians and bureaucrats.
I wouldn't use the word 'impose' but in the broadest sense, yes. I'm saying that pure national self-determination is a more imperfect version of democracy than what we currently have.
How bizarre, in what we currently have, strategic direction is given by a meeting of heads of state in a selection of smoke filled rooms and a selection of un minuted bilaterals. The implementation of this is handed to a self-important bureaucracy who isn't elected by anyone (and mostly lost elections to get their jobs), who design and initiate the actual laws. These laws then get to the directly elected bit, who have no power to actually initiate any laws irrespective of the number of them that support it, who then have limited powers to amend those laws, and whose amendments can in many cases be overridden by the aforementioned unelected bureaucrats. Even the elected members are elected using the party list system so you can't get rid of a particular member if they appear to be underperforming or not representing you appropriately. Very democratic.
The heads of state are, of course, all democratically elected.
How would you do it differently?
Heads of state are in most cases indirectly elected to that job even if directly elected to their legislature. If the EU was going to be a real democracy then the Council of Europe (heads of state) has to go, and legislation has to be proposed and developed by elected people not the Commission, so the largest coalition would have to form a cabinet, and the EU Parliament's word on the legislation has to be final, not subject to second guessing by the Commission and the CoE.
Before any of that could be considered the EU needs a demos, and it doesn't have one, and I dont think will get one, the French and the Germans don't want to give up their national identity any more than we do.
Comments
Frankly, if outers now accept that some pain is going to happen but is worth it, it is a plain admission that all this extra for the NHS that they bang on about is either substantially or totally gut rot.
If it was, why do you think it wouldn't give the UK sufficient safeguards against ever closer union?
He's going sometime in the next three and a half years tops anyway might he just say "sod this for a game of marbles" even if he wins by 10% after this experience?
"A new Welsh poll on voting intention in the June 23 EU referendum shows how tight the result could be with both Remain and Leave on 41%, and the remaining 18% saying they don’t know how they will vote.
The poll was carried out by YouGov for ITV Wales and Cardiff University’s Wales Governance Centre."
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/latest-poll-puts-leave-remain-11436219
1) there will be pain but it is a price worth paying; or
2) the UK will thrive outside the EU.
and use both interchangeably, often in the same post.
narrow remain= frustration
leave, and nothing much happens to immigration= frustration
Prematurely withdrawing from the institutions of the EU would be 'political disarmament' of a kind. We'd be giving up our share in the sovereignty of 27 other countries.
1) will happen, then after a small number of years 2) will happen, its not complicated except when you are willfully trying to misunderstand.
And why should we seek to have sovereignty over others? Where's the democracy, the accountability, in that?
Very few will be disadvantged by Brexit, to nobody's particular suprise.
That would make for quite an interesting payoff diagram. I'd like you to price up the option for it.
You are saying that the economy will do one thing first for an unspecified period of time, and then another thing at some point in the future for another unspecified period of time (presumably into perpetuity).
And you criticise Remain for making forecasts!
All of this presupposes constraints on elected governments. That governments should also be constitutionally constrained by having to be good neighbours is no bad thing.
I have criticised Dave many times and often (pre your arrival presumably).
My point still stands, will the UK be better off outside the EU, or is an economic hit a price worth paying for our freedom?
Given their actual accuracy in Wales, they claim reasonably claim to be experts on polling that region.
Could well work. Certainly seems aimed at non-metropolitan labour voters
The only politician likely to emerge a winner is Farage and he knows it.
If Remainers main reason for voting Remain is merely a few quarters slightly better GDP figures, that is frankly pathetic! That is not what this vote is about - it is much bigger than that.
(And anyway it's not all bad - an end to the housing market bubble would also be a long term good thing)
The two statements. Are not. Contradictory. It's entirely possible. To take an economic hit. And end up better off. Look up 'investment' in the dictionary as an example.
That the EU has economically stagnated over the last decade and has in effect not grown at all, is a fact. Countries like India, China and even African countries like Ethiopia have doubled the size of their economy in the same period, and yet you feel our business will be served better being locked into a single market with the former, and imposing tariffs (from which we hardly profit) on the later. You also feel that if we open ourselves to trading with these new expanding markets more freely, we are some how going to be worse of in the long term.
No I am not going to get into the game of predicting exactly how many years are going to be leaner, and exactly by how much, and when we will be better off and buy how much, even the Treasury is making those numbers up as it goes along.
LOL
- Last thread - several posters read my light-hearted post about the perceived ghastliness of High Wycombe as a serious comment on immigration. It wasn't intended to be.
- Switzerland - Lowlander thinks correctly that the Swiss were warned of serious problems if they voted to reject free movement. They did so vote (albeit narrowly), and as a result all the bilateral agreements pending with the EU have been suspended. Everything has been put on ice until after June 23, but the Swiss government and industry are extremely concerned. There are three plausible outcomes:
- The Swiss agree some sort of fudge with the EU. That is likely if Britain votes Remain, less so in the short term if we go Brexit, as the EU doesn't want to offer precedents for a deal if they're about to negotiate with Britain. But the EU is world fudge champion so it's always a possibility.
- The Government tells voters that the feared consequences are coming to pass, and are they sure this is what they want? It's likely that a revote in those circumstances would go the other way (a straw in the wind is the 2-1 referendum vote last Sunday for more flexible asylum rules).
- The Swiss put up with the loss of deals with the EU. Least likely but you never know!
But hey, it's early, I'll let you have your coffee.
They are everywhere. Like something out of the minority report.
Nothing to do with the Tories vs Labour; more likely either the public deciding they didn’t like the way Nick Clegg had led the Lib Dems (although he managed to hold onto his seat) or the targeting of LibDem seats in the south by the Tories. Or both! Plus the SNP surge.
It’s rather like 1951 regarded as a success for the Tories whereas it was actually the electoral system which gave the Tories a majority. More people voted Labour than ever before and Labour had almost 49% of the vote as against the Tories and allies 48.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/06/the-leave-campaign-cant-keep-dodging-the-biggest-question/
Hell we got from the bottom of the Sub Prime Crisis to the current economy in eight years, the suggestion that any fall out from Leave is going to go on for a decade is frankly for the birds.
He's quite good, until he starts talking about AIDS, rape and Putin. And will he be sober?
I'm still not 100% sure if he wants to win this referendum, or throw it.
I'm looking forward to seeing how many of these "experts" start squealing when their EU funding is cut. It'll be quite an eye-opener.
Quite why you invoke investment as your killing argument I have no idea, but I suppose skim-reading wiki for your responses does have its challenges. Especially as it's early.
Sterling falls - good for exporters, and tourism. But I doubt it will amoount to much frankly
House prices fall - good for more or less everyone in the long run, given current insanity
City of London suffers - boo-hoo, how sad
Yeah it will be a bit worse for a bit. But it has the chance to be better in the long run. The main argument against Leave seems to be that we can;t be sure what will happen. Riiiiight 'cos if we stay it's all certain isn't it? We're certain about Greece are we? Italy? The bond markets, economic growth, a China slowdown...? FFS
Remain is the coward's choice!
What always surprises me..... shouldn’t, I know, given his track record ...... is that Cameron never thanks Nicola Sturgeon (at least in public) for ensuring he kept his job.
But I do share your worry!
Minor economic blip then everything goes back to normal only better.
Brexit will unleash a wave of "democracy" (sic) across the EU. Other countries might vote to leave and the Eurozone would collapse.
The main difference between 2010 and 2015 is Ed not Gordon, and Alex Salmond, Dave and George are the constants.
In past years eurosceptics, particularly papers like the Mail & Express have blamed everything on the EU regardless of where the fault really lies. If we Brexit the reverse will be case and everyone will blame Brexit for everything. The public are very fickle and Remainers & experts have been warning that would happen very strongly. People will remember that even if they voted to Leave.
Politically the right /UKIP have a lot riding on this. If they win there will be euphoria for a while certainly but if it goes tits up, or is perceived to have been a huge mistake the right/UKIP will be politically dead for years. There is always a silver lining!
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/740100061208694784
A potential counter as to why Labour may not be sitting as prettily as he suggests is the argument that the Referendum might see a final break between Corbyn and Labour's traditional WWC vote. I don't have a feel for whether this is likely or not.
So, if you're on Twitter and want to be added or know of others who should be, just let me know here or there. NB this is only for those who may offer tips, so it'll be an easy place to check for (particularly short-term) betting opportunities.
https://twitter.com/MorrisF1/lists/tipstr
Anyway, we'll see how it goes. Might be very useful (especially with the hashtag).
*What I might do is use my Sir Edric (HeroofHornska) account for tips, as that's both in character and means I can add him to the list.
How would you do it differently?
The chair of LabourLeave, Brendan Chilton is very good at making the case - well worth watching, this is an amateur video but captures it well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KMk0kdO5i8
There are so many things that deeply frustrate me about this referendum.
A: It unleashed one of our strongest and long lasting periods of economic growth.
Therefore the evidence of what happens to a country that exits in modern times a european common currency system is indicative of an upside. If I was a REMAINer I would dress that up as a fact and predict it was a certainty with a mass of spreadsheets extrapolating it all. Instead I just say that the past lesson from history was positive.
Because I am a cautious and reasonable person.....
@AlbertoNardelli: Scotland's First Minister @NicolaSturgeon to join Cameron in BuzzFeed-Facebook #EURef town hall on Friday https://t.co/pJI9EuhUT3
@janinegibson: First minister. Prime Minister. Audience of BuzzFeed readers. Facebook Live. I say again, what could go wrong? https://t.co/jufTzdcslR
However, many local parties, especially Conservative, will be organising on behalf of LEAVE.
Party organisation makes a big difference, particularly for finding out who your supporters are and getting out the vote on the day.
Does anyone have front line knowledge of how well organisation of central and local parties on behalf of LEAVE/REMAIN is going?
On the other hand, there's plenty of potential for more to defect through the rest of the parliament over other matters, cultural, social and economic.
There will still be a role for London as a financial centre but it will be diminished.
Are you saying Scottish people are racist, and anti English?
Wikipedia? Do I even want to ask?
There is no illogicality. There never was. You can question the long term benefits. You can question the short term costs. What you can't do, is imply any incompatibility between the two. Not on a forum where adults are posting.
Remain has really ruined you. Do run along now.
Before any of that could be considered the EU needs a demos, and it doesn't have one, and I dont think will get one, the French and the Germans don't want to give up their national identity any more than we do.