Mr. Fire, modernised? Or been twisted by the most recent generation growing up on Twitter and Facebook where those with wrong opinions get muted, blocked, banned and censored?
Mr. Herdson, sounds interesting.
Stargate SG-1 had a race (the Tollans, maybe) who were humans minus the Dark Ages. It's an intriguing concept.
Downside - pension deficits. This is a massive issue and just because one can't look it up on Right Move like house prices one that is largely invisible to many sadly ( not suggesting that's you). We have a huge strategic issue that interest rates are too low. I firmly believe it's now actively counterproductive to cut them further and expand QE. However, they still plough on in what I consider to be the wrong direction. That's my issue.
Yes, of course, I absolutely agree with that. However, that is a problem which relates to the longer term, and which preceded the BoE's actions. It will correct itself automatically if and when the current action is reversed.
All measures in economic management are compromises between competing goals; my point was not so much to say that the BoE necessarily got it right, but to address the criticism that because confidence has improved, they got it wrong. That's a bonkers criticism.
As for taffys' point that some of the data preceded the decision, I don't think that's right. The MPC decision was taken on the 4th August.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
It would set a first. No major UK party has (to my knowledge - I'm willing to stand corrected), had three contested leadership elections in three successive years. The closest is Labour in 1960, 1961 and 1963, though that last one was down to the death of the incumbent.
If Labour get rid of Corbyn, then I can’t see them sticking with Smith. Smith may even be less electable than Corbyn.
Smith’s only advantage over Corbyn is that he is much easier to kill off.
As the Labour Party have found out, Corbyn seems nearly indestructible.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
Owen just has such a whiff of casual sexism around him !
Incidentally, if business and consumer confidence is holding up as well as some of the latest figures suggest, then surely shares in housebuilders are a screaming buy? In fact they've fallen by a couple of percent today, which seems odd.
I agree it's too soon to tell. We won't know the entire truth til 2030. If ever. But you can forgive us LEAVERS for being a bit gloaty and vengeful when we were bullied with warnings like this: Brexit means the "end of western political civilization"
I think we can make informed guesses about Brexit outcomes, ie:
- The Brexit operation will be tricky, time-consuming, distracting and expensive as we unravel decades of agreements, laws, contracts and relationships with the least disruption. - The actual deal, once we have decided not to pursue a multilateral approach like the EEA will be minimal. The alternative is that we stay in a exit lounge indefinitely. I think both May and her EU counterparts are keen not to do that. - There's no real reason to believe the eventual arrangement will work better for the UK in economic terms that what we have now. There are good reasons to believe it will be worse. How much worse comes down to damage limitation. - The EU will remain the only show in town in Europe. In this sense it's like the Roman Empire. Nations can join in or they can hold out. As we are no longer joining in, we're presumably holding out. This could either be unsettling for us or we could be a contented backwater. - As none of this adds up to a compelling solution to a real problem, Brexit will be a shedload of spin from the government.
I know you put "contented" before "backwater" but seriously? There is of course an option that we could be much more successful than the EU. There is no guarantee that physically bigger areas are more successful than smaller islands nearby. Quite often the opposite in fact.
I would rather be Taiwanese than Chinese. I would rather be Singaporean than Russian. I would rather be British than European.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
Owen just has such a whiff of casual sexism around him !
I'm generally very relaxed about this stuff, but Owen's really going for gold.
Expect another apology later today. He can't help himself and I presume he's sober. What a nitwit.
Maybe Tusk is right. Maybe Brexit will destroy the CURRENT version of political civilisation. Maybe it will usher in a move away from 'liberal' lefty de-haut-en-bas paternalist contempt for the voter. Maybe nation states will reassert themselves. Maybe elite bureaucracies won't be quite so elite or remote in future.
I do hope so.
During my lifetime we've seen shifts away from unions dominating/nationalisation, centralisation of power - and back again a bit, pretty free speech to hate crimes for wolf whistling or being rude to Tom Daley on Twitter, never hearing a Muslim moaning from one year to the next to it being almost daily, experts everywhere telling us what to eat/think/drink/vote...
It's terribly elitist and divisive.
Or maybe our attitudes to what constitutes acceptable behavior towards each other have modernized.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
Owen just has such a whiff of casual sexism around him !
I'm generally very relaxed about this stuff, but Owen's really going for gold.
Expect another apology later today. He can't help himself and I presume he's sober. What a nitwit.
Mr. Fire, modernised? Or been twisted by the most recent generation growing up on Twitter and Facebook where those with wrong opinions get muted, blocked, banned and censored?
Mr. Herdson, sounds interesting.
Stargate SG-1 had a race (the Tollans, maybe) who were humans minus the Dark Ages. It's an intriguing concept.
The first of her Romanitas books is the best but the whole trilogy is readable, though she does have a penchant for silly (i.e. excessively literary) similies.
Incidentally, if business and consumer confidence is holding up as well as some of the latest figures suggest, then surely shares in housebuilders are a screaming buy? In fact they've fallen by a couple of percent today, which seems odd.
No inside knowledge but.... some wild and hopeful speculation.
May's govt really do have feasible plans to achieve a massive increase in house building which will lower the price per new house?
Incidentally, if business and consumer confidence is holding up as well as some of the latest figures suggest, then surely shares in housebuilders are a screaming buy? In fact they've fallen by a couple of percent today, which seems odd.
I'd guess that the recent positive data reduces the chance of further monetary loosening and therefore reduces the chance of future house price growth.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
It would set a first. No major UK party has (to my knowledge - I'm willing to stand corrected), had three contested leadership elections in three successive years. The closest is Labour in 1960, 1961 and 1963, though that last one was down to the death of the incumbent.
If Labour get rid of Corbyn, then I can’t see them sticking with Smith. Smith may even be less electable than Corbyn.
Smith’s only advantage over Corbyn is that he is much easier to kill off.
As the Labour Party have found out, Corbyn seems nearly indestructible.
Smith is probably more electable, IMO, but only because he is at least trying to play the game of government and as such wouldn't have a party in such disarray. But that's far from being PM material.
I agree it's too soon to tell. We won't know the entire truth til 2030. If ever. But you can forgive us LEAVERS for being a bit gloaty and vengeful when we were bullied with warnings like this: Brexit means the "end of western political civilization"
I think we can make informed guesses about Brexit outcomes, ie:
- The Brexit operation will be tricky, time-consuming, distracting and expensive as we unravel decades of agreements, laws, contracts and relationships with the least disruption. - The actual deal, once we have decided not to pursue a multilateral approach like the EEA will be minimal. The alternative is that we stay in a exit lounge indefinitely. I think both May and her EU counterparts are keen not to do that. - There's no real reason to believe the eventual arrangement will work better for the UK in economic terms that what we have now. There are good reasons to believe it will be worse. How much worse comes down to damage limitation. - The EU will remain the only show in town in Europe. In this sense it's like the Roman Empire. Nations can join in or they can hold out. As we are no longer joining in, we're presumably holding out. This could either be unsettling for us or we could be a contented backwater. - As none of this adds up to a compelling solution to a real problem, Brexit will be a shedload of spin from the government.
"The EU will remain the only show in town" This is a very small, Euro-centric view of the world. The rest of the world has already moved on. Guess what? It's centre is not Europe. The argument is whether it is North America or Asia. Europe does not get a look in.
'No real reason to believe ... will be better for the UK" Sure, there is no certainty that it will and no-one can guess the odds of better/same/worse. But there are clearly several paths where leaving could be better for the UK, including an EU becoming ever more protectionist and regulated to the detriment of its economy, and including the UK shifting the focus of its economy to growing markets rather than Europe's stagnating one.
I think you do a good job of understanding the risks of Brexit, but you are clearly blocking yourself from seeing any of the opportunities it presents.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
It would set a first. No major UK party has (to my knowledge - I'm willing to stand corrected), had three contested leadership elections in three successive years. The closest is Labour in 1960, 1961 and 1963, though that last one was down to the death of the incumbent.
It's the essence of EU in Labour's DNA. They'll keep voting until they get the right result....
Downside - pension deficits. This is a massive issue and just because one can't look it up on Right Move like house prices one that is largely invisible to many sadly ( not suggesting that's you). We have a huge strategic issue that interest rates are too low. I firmly believe it's now actively counterproductive to cut them further and expand QE. However, they still plough on in what I consider to be the wrong direction. That's my issue.
Yes, of course, I absolutely agree with that. However, that is a problem which relates to the longer term, and which preceded the BoE's actions. It will correct itself automatically if and when the current action is reversed.
All measures in economic management are compromises between competing goals; my point was not so much to say that the BoE necessarily got it right, but to address the criticism that because confidence has improved, they got it wrong. That's a bonkers criticism.
As for taffys' point that some of the data preceded the decision, I don't think that's right. The MPC decision was taken on the 4th August.
Fair enough. However, to take my own circumstance I have prudently squirrelled away from my own toil an amount of money that already should've been enough to see me through retirement once I reached 65 or so. How the restauranters and publicans of Cardiff would've rejoiced as I showered even more cash on them than I do now as I would've had little need to save. Sadly for them over the past six years or so and even in the past month my target has grown as interest rates have gone down again and so I am saving even more now ( a lot more )to reach the bigger target. This is my own personal liquidity trap and I'm far from alone. Now in all probability I will still achieve said target, but many won't, and in the meantime the restauranters of Cardiff are having a more meagre time than they would be having.
Multiply this by several million others coming to the same conclusion and you see why I want a change of direction both for me and the general good. I just don't think the old stimulus models are working.
I agree it's too soon to tell. We won't know the entire truth til 2030. If ever. But you can forgive us LEAVERS for being a bit gloaty and vengeful when we were bullied with warnings like this: Brexit means the "end of western political civilization"
I think we can make informed guesses about Brexit outcomes, ie:
- The Brexit operation will be tricky, time-consuming, distracting and expensive as we unravel decades of agreements, laws, contracts and relationships with the least disruption. - The actual deal, once we have decided not to pursue a multilateral approach like the EEA will be minimal. The alternative is that we stay in a exit lounge indefinitely. I think both May and her EU counterparts are keen not to do that. - There's no real reason to believe the eventual arrangement will work better for the UK in economic terms that what we have now. There are good reasons to believe it will be worse. How much worse comes down to damage limitation. - The EU will remain the only show in town in Europe. In this sense it's like the Roman Empire. Nations can join in or they can hold out. As we are no longer joining in, we're presumably holding out. This could either be unsettling for us or we could be a contented backwater. - As none of this adds up to a compelling solution to a real problem, Brexit will be a shedload of spin from the government.
What is most likely is a limited free movement for limited single market access deal, a deal which will also tempt Switzerland which voted in a recent referendum to control free movement. If the UK then joins EFTA, EFTA would switch away from the EEA with its largest member and Switzerland both outside it and could become a rival block to the EU as it was before the UK left it join the EEC in 1973
I agree it's too soon to tell. We won't know the entire truth til 2030. If ever. But you can forgive us LEAVERS for being a bit gloaty and vengeful when we were bullied with warnings like this: Brexit means the "end of western political civilization"
I think we can make informed guesses about Brexit outcomes, ie:
- The Brexit operation will be tricky, time-consuming, distracting and expensive as we unravel decades of agreements, laws, contracts and relationships with the least disruption. - The actual deal, once we have decided not to pursue a multilateral approach like the EEA will be minimal. The alternative is that we stay in a exit lounge indefinitely. I think both May and her EU counterparts are keen not to do that.
"The EU will remain the only show in town" This is a very small, Euro-centric view of the world. The rest of the world has already moved on. Guess what? It's centre is not Europe. The argument is whether it is North America or Asia. Europe does not get a look in.
'No real reason to believe ... will be better for the UK" Sure, there is no certainty that it will and no-one can guess the odds of better/same/worse. But there are clearly several paths where leaving could be better for the UK, including an EU becoming ever more protectionist and regulated to the detriment of its economy, and including the UK shifting the focus of its economy to growing markets rather than Europe's stagnating one.
I think you do a good job of understanding the risks of Brexit, but you are clearly blocking yourself from seeing any of the opportunities it presents.
I think its inarguable that we could end up with a mediocre Brexit. As emotions have cooled, that seems to be the default Remain position as opposed to Armageddon; it's going to be OKish, but still a bit crap. A smaller CIty, a smaller car industry, poorer research and so on.
It really is up to us. From the EU perspective, we're leaving a club. From our perspective, we're getting divorced. We could end up in the proverbial bedsit living off cat food, or we could do very well for ourselves.
I'm optimistic, but that's my default setting, as we've discussed many times.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
It would set a first. No major UK party has (to my knowledge - I'm willing to stand corrected), had three contested leadership elections in three successive years. The closest is Labour in 1960, 1961 and 1963, though that last one was down to the death of the incumbent.
If Labour get rid of Corbyn, then I can’t see them sticking with Smith. Smith may even be less electable than Corbyn.
Smith’s only advantage over Corbyn is that he is much easier to kill off.
As the Labour Party have found out, Corbyn seems nearly indestructible.
Smith is probably more electable, IMO, but only because he is at least trying to play the game of government and as such wouldn't have a party in such disarray. But that's far from being PM material.
I think there are some constituencies in which Corbyn is likely to attract voters (e.g., marginal Cambridge). I agree that Corbyn will not do so well attracting voters in Lab/Tory marginals, like the Nuneatons of this world.
I am not sure there are any constituencies in which Smith is going to do well.
It was a landslide leave vote in Nuneaton & Bedworth, so Owen’s wish to ignore the referendum is not likely to improve the Labour vote there.
Owen’s only advantage seems to be no-one likes him, so he can be killed off with ease.
He is like a marginal character in a soap opera, who can be written out after the end of the first series, and none will miss him.
I think we can make informed guesses about Brexit outcomes, ie:
...
"The EU will remain the only show in town" This is a very small, Euro-centric view of the world. The rest of the world has already moved on. Guess what? It's centre is not Europe. The argument is whether it is North America or Asia. Europe does not get a look in.
'No real reason to believe ... will be better for the UK" Sure, there is no certainty that it will and no-one can guess the odds of better/same/worse. But there are clearly several paths where leaving could be better for the UK, including an EU becoming ever more protectionist and regulated to the detriment of its economy, and including the UK shifting the focus of its economy to growing markets rather than Europe's stagnating one.
I think you do a good job of understanding the risks of Brexit, but you are clearly blocking yourself from seeing any of the opportunities it presents.
I don't block myself off from seeing the opportunities. I just don't think they are there to a great enough extent to offset the downsides. We will take the opportunities partly because we have to. If you are a company with 70% of your business with the EU and 30% outside and looking at a sharp reduction of your EU business because we are no longer in the Single Market, you will definitely aim to boost that 30%. But there is no linkage. We don't sell more Rolls Royce aero engines to China just because we sell fewer financial services products to France. If our trade with Europe is restricted, our overall trade will fall. In any case our EU competitors are already better at selling outside of the EU than we are. It's not the EU that is holding us back.
There is no point in being gloomy however. We're going to Brexit and we will have to make the best of it, even if the best isn't as good as what we have now or would have had if we stayed.
His explanation ... just a bit of a lark, bit of banter, just a joke.
Smith’s snide comments about women are the same thing he complains of when others do it.
Even if Owen wins, I think he won’t last a year, and there’ll be another Labour leadership election in 2017
His bloke-ish jokes about women and his c0ck-size actually remind me more of a loose-cannon UKIP politician than a Labour one, A Labour Godfrey Bloom. The People’s Donald Trump.
He just needs to change his position on Europe, and he could be running simultaneously for UKIP leader.
(He’s changed his position on most things)
Owen just has such a whiff of casual sexism around him !
I'm generally very relaxed about this stuff, but Owen's really going for gold.
Expect another apology later today. He can't help himself and I presume he's sober. What a nitwit.
Corbyn is a dogmatic Marxist but also an incompetent leader.
Owen Smith is just a bit of prat who thinks talking as (more?) left-wing as Corbyn does, but not being him, will be enough to win. And he's wrong.
The members will consider Corbyn vindicated and victimised and go for the real thing.
I think its inarguable that we could end up with a mediocre Brexit. As emotions have cooled, that seems to be the default Remain position as opposed to Armageddon; it's going to be OKish, but still a bit crap. A smaller CIty, a smaller car industry, poorer research and so on.
It really is up to us. From the EU perspective, we're leaving a club. From our perspective, we're getting divorced. We could end up in the proverbial bedsit living off cat food, or we could do very well for ourselves.
I'm optimistic, but that's my default setting, as we've discussed many times.
I think we are generally on the same page, including the eyes wide open optimism. Some thoughts on your thoughts.
If we end up with poorer research, it will be our own fault and no-one else's. For me, there are two things that could decrease our performance in research - loss of funding, and loss of top students/researchers. Given our net funding of the EU, we should at least be able to match EU-level funding post-Brexit. What evidence is there that our universities will actually be less attractive destinations to students and researchers?
Along with the US (and to a far lesser extent the rest of the Anglophone world) we have the advantage not just of a concentration of top level universities and research centres, but also of language. Scientific papers published in English receive far more citations than those of equal quality or discovery in other languages. Of course, researchers in Bielefeld can publish in English, but access to language and publishers is easier for a German/Chinese/Indian researcher in a UK institute than it is from their home countries.
The City will be different, and will certainly lose some European business, but again we shall have it in our own hands to regulate it for optimum performance for business not regulated by the EU. I am agnostic on whether that means a shrunken City.
The car industry I think will shrink, but was probably going to in the longer-term anyway as and when decisions on new model-lines or new factory construction had to be made.
I think its inarguable that we could end up with a mediocre Brexit. As emotions have cooled, that seems to be the default Remain position as opposed to Armageddon; it's going to be OKish, but still a bit crap. A smaller CIty, a smaller car industry, poorer research and so on.
It really is up to us. From the EU perspective, we're leaving a club. From our perspective, we're getting divorced. We could end up in the proverbial bedsit living off cat food, or we could do very well for ourselves.
I'm optimistic, but that's my default setting, as we've discussed many times.
I think we are generally on the same page, including the eyes wide open optimism. Some thoughts on your thoughts.
If we end up with poorer research, it will be our own fault and no-one else's. For me, there are two things that could decrease our performance in research - loss of funding, and loss of top students/researchers. Given our net funding of the EU, we should at least be able to match EU-level funding post-Brexit. What evidence is there that our universities will actually be less attractive destinations to students and researchers?
Along with the US (and to a far lesser extent the rest of the Anglophone world) we have the advantage not just of a concentration of top level universities and research centres, but also of language. Scientific papers published in English receive far more citations than those of equal quality or discovery in other languages. Of course, researchers in Bielefeld can publish in English, but access to language and publishers is easier for a German/Chinese/Indian researcher in a UK institute than it is from their home countries.
The City will be different, and will certainly lose some European business, but again we shall have it in our own hands to regulate it for optimum performance for business not regulated by the EU. I am agnostic on whether that means a shrunken City.
The car industry I think will shrink, but was probably going to in the longer-term anyway as and when decisions on new model-lines or new factory construction had to be made.
The other aspect is the political one - if there was a settled consensus within the Tory Party about our future relationship with Europe, it would be a lot easier to get there and to achieve the best outcome in the process. But the reality is that the Tories contain every view on Europe from "all a mistake, we should have stayed" through every variant of Brexit from ultra soft to ultra hard. This is going to make the whole process fraught and contentious and the arguments won't stop until long after the process has. This is a long way from being optimal; it means there will be lots of politics, game playing and position taking as we go through Brexit, which will surely reduce our chances of making the best of it.
I think we can make informed guesses about Brexit outcomes, ie:
...
"The EU will remain the only show in town" This is a very small, Euro-centric view of the world. The rest of the world has already moved on. Guess what? It's centre is not Europe. The argument is whether it is North America or Asia. Europe does not get a look in.
'No real reason to believe ... will be better for the UK" Sure, there is no certainty that it will and no-one can guess the odds of better/same/worse. But there are clearly several paths where leaving could be better for the UK, including an EU becoming ever more protectionist and regulated to the detriment of its economy, and including the UK shifting the focus of its economy to growing markets rather than Europe's stagnating one.
I think you do a good job of understanding the risks of Brexit, but you are clearly blocking yourself from seeing any of the opportunities it presents.
I don't block myself off from seeing the opportunities. I just don't think they are there to a great enough extent to offset the downsides. We will take the opportunities partly because we have to. If you are a company with 70% of your business with the EU and 30% outside and looking at a sharp reduction of your EU business because we are no longer in the Single Market, you will definitely aim to boost that 30%. But there is no linkage. We don't sell more Rolls Royce aero engines to China just because we sell fewer financial services products to France. If our trade with Europe is restricted, our overall trade will fall. In any case our EU competitors are already better at selling outside of the EU than we are. It's not the EU that is holding us back.
There is no point in being gloomy however. We're going to Brexit and we will have to make the best of it, even if the best isn't as good as what we have now or would have had if we stayed.
Germany maybe we trade more with the rest of the world than all bar them
I think we can make informed guesses about Brexit outcomes, ie:
...
"The EU will remain the only show in town" This is a very small, Euro-centric view of the world. The rest of the world has already moved on. Guess what? It's centre is not Europe. The argument is whether it is North America or Asia. Europe does not get a look in.
'No real reason to believe ... will be better for the UK" Sure, there is no certainty that it will and no-one can guess the odds of better/same/worse. But there are clearly several paths where leaving could be better for the UK, including an EU becoming ever more protectionist and regulated to the detriment of its economy, and including the UK shifting the focus of its economy to growing markets rather than Europe's stagnating one.
I think you do a good job of understanding the risks of Brexit, but you are clearly blocking yourself from seeing any of the opportunities it presents.
I don't block myself off from seeing the opportunities. I just don't think they are there to a great enough extent to offset the downsides. We will take the opportunities partly because we have to. If you are a company with 70% of your business with the EU and 30% outside and looking at a sharp reduction of your EU business because we are no longer in the Single Market, you will definitely aim to boost that 30%. But there is no linkage. We don't sell more Rolls Royce aero engines to China just because we sell fewer financial services products to France. If our trade with Europe is restricted, our overall trade will fall. In any case our EU competitors are already better at selling outside of the EU than we are. It's not the EU that is holding us back.
There is no point in being gloomy however. We're going to Brexit and we will have to make the best of it, even if the best isn't as good as what we have now or would have had if we stayed.
Fair enough. Although I take some issue with the 'no linkage' statement. Where resources are focused does effect outcomes. If they are for historical reasons focused on what has evolved currently to be a less than optimal market, stickiness will keep resources focused in the wrong area. Are there costs to changing focus? Yes. Is it always a zero or worse sum game? No.
Also, risk perceptions affect returns. If we have focused on Europe because perceived risk are lower and match our general risk averseness, then a shock which forces a more risk accepting approach could result in focusing on better opportunities too. Note, I say could.
Just a couple of reasons why I think the 'no linkage' statement is questionable.
.... The car industry I think will shrink, but was probably going to in the longer-term anyway as and when decisions on new model-lines or new factory construction had to be made.
I'm more hopeful on that front. I think we'll be able to agree a deal which provides tariff-free and largely hassle-free trade for manufactured goods, and perhaps special arrangements for the car industry (I understand that Canada and the US have special arrangements to simplify and speed up customs clearance of Canadian parts going to US car manufacturers). It's simply in neither side's interests to disrupt the tight supply chains which operate in both directions.
The main risk to this would be if somehow it got entangled in politics. That could happen, but I think it's fairly unlikely in the particular case of manufactured goods.
The other aspect is the political one - if there was a settled consensus within the Tory Party about our future relationship with Europe, it would be a lot easier to get there and to achieve the best outcome in the process. But the reality is that the Tories contain every view on Europe from "all a mistake, we should have stayed" through every variant of Brexit from ultra soft to ultra hard. This is going to make the whole process fraught and contentious and the arguments won't stop until long after the process has. This is a long way from being optimal; it means there will be lots of politics, game playing and position taking as we go through Brexit, which will surely reduce our chances of making the best of it.
Good points, process is important. That is ultimately up to May's leadership. I think we have too little data at this point to hazard a guess as to how good a leader (and negotiator) she will be.
I think it is unlikely research will be affected, provided the Govt makes good on its promise to match the assisting EU funds. Tables of the top research universities normally have few, if any, EU universities in the top 50.
The best research university on the continent of Europe has always been outside the EU.
@HYUFD "Germany maybe we trade more with the rest of the world than all bar them"
The UK is responsible for 17.6% of EU GDP and 12% of exports from the EU to non-EU countries. If we exclude Germany from the totals we are responsible for 22.2% of EU GDP and 17.8% of non-EU exports.
Eurozone countries also export much more to other EU countries than we do.
Downside - pension deficits. This is a massive issue and just because one can't look it up on Right Move like house prices one that is largely invisible to many sadly ( not suggesting that's you). We have a huge strategic issue that interest rates are too low. I firmly believe it's now actively counterproductive to cut them further and expand QE. However, they still plough on in what I consider to be the wrong direction. That's my issue.
Yes, of course, I absolutely agree with that. However, that is a problem which relates to the longer term, and which preceded the BoE's actions. It will correct itself automatically if and when the current action is reversed.
All measures in economic management are compromises between competing goals; my point was not so much to say that the BoE necessarily got it right, but to address the criticism that because confidence has improved, they got it wrong. That's a bonkers criticism.
As for taffys' point that some of the data preceded the decision, I don't think that's right. The MPC decision was taken on the 4th August.
The problem is cause and effect Richard. Did the cut in interest rates and return to QE indicate strong leadership by the BoE ready to offset any uncertainty caused by Brexit or did it simply smack of panic and increase fears that things were going to become really bad?
As you say there is no parallel world in which no such decisions were taken so we can't really tell but it does seem to me that a quarter per cent cut was very unlikely to affect peoples' real borrowing rates in any material way and diminished further the very limited supply of ammunition left to the Bank.
I also think that it was another demonstration of how simplistic economic thinking is only taking into account first level effects with little or no regard to second level effects such as the concern such steps might cause. But that is a wider argument.
.... The car industry I think will shrink, but was probably going to in the longer-term anyway as and when decisions on new model-lines or new factory construction had to be made.
I'm more hopeful on that front. I think we'll be able to agree a deal which provides tariff-free and largely hassle-free trade for manufactured goods, and perhaps special arrangements for the car industry (I understand that Canada and the US have special arrangements to simplify and speed up customs clearance of Canadian parts going to US car manufacturers). It's simply in neither side's interests to disrupt the tight supply chains which operate in both directions.
The main risk to this would be if somehow it got entangled in politics. That could happen, but I think it's fairly unlikely in the particular case of manufactured goods.
And aviation......lots of Airbus is 'made in Britain' from wings to engines and so on....
Comments
Mr. Herdson, sounds interesting.
Stargate SG-1 had a race (the Tollans, maybe) who were humans minus the Dark Ages. It's an intriguing concept.
All measures in economic management are compromises between competing goals; my point was not so much to say that the BoE necessarily got it right, but to address the criticism that because confidence has improved, they got it wrong. That's a bonkers criticism.
As for taffys' point that some of the data preceded the decision, I don't think that's right. The MPC decision was taken on the 4th August.
Smith’s only advantage over Corbyn is that he is much easier to kill off.
As the Labour Party have found out, Corbyn seems nearly indestructible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th6ts_O7Jno
I know you put "contented" before "backwater" but seriously? There is of course an option that we could be much more successful than the EU. There is no guarantee that physically bigger areas are more successful than smaller islands nearby. Quite often the opposite in fact.
I would rather be Taiwanese than Chinese. I would rather be Singaporean than Russian. I would rather be British than European.
Expect another apology later today. He can't help himself and I presume he's sober. What a nitwit.
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-09-02/jeremy-corbyn-after-work-drinks-discriminate-against-mothers/
The real agenda...??
May's govt really do have feasible plans to achieve a massive increase in house building which will lower the price per new house?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Explorations-Through-Wormhole-Ralph-Kern-ebook/dp/B01LC0JZD4/
Just the one review so far, but nice to have my story mentioned (verve, gusto and a fun romp).
F1: second practice kicks off in about 10 minutes.
Monza's set to stay on the calendar, which has annoyed Imola bosses, apparently.
Anyway, I'll be back later this afternoon.
'No real reason to believe ... will be better for the UK" Sure, there is no certainty that it will and no-one can guess the odds of better/same/worse. But there are clearly several paths where leaving could be better for the UK, including an EU becoming ever more protectionist and regulated to the detriment of its economy, and including the UK shifting the focus of its economy to growing markets rather than Europe's stagnating one.
I think you do a good job of understanding the risks of Brexit, but you are clearly blocking yourself from seeing any of the opportunities it presents.
Stansaid Airport
Our phone shop has an amazing range of accessories for the new Samsung Galaxy Note 7. #Samsung #Note7 https://t.co/utHBIUjOf7
Multiply this by several million others coming to the same conclusion and you see why I want a change of direction both for me and the general good. I just don't think the old stimulus models are working.
Unsure if this has been mentioned yet, but Massa's announced his retirement from F1 at the end of this season.
Button to Williams, and Vandoorne to McLaren?
It really is up to us. From the EU perspective, we're leaving a club. From our perspective, we're getting divorced. We could end up in the proverbial bedsit living off cat food, or we could do very well for ourselves.
I'm optimistic, but that's my default setting, as we've discussed many times.
I am not sure there are any constituencies in which Smith is going to do well.
It was a landslide leave vote in Nuneaton & Bedworth, so Owen’s wish to ignore the referendum is not likely to improve the Labour vote there.
Owen’s only advantage seems to be no-one likes him, so he can be killed off with ease.
He is like a marginal character in a soap opera, who can be written out after the end of the first series, and none will miss him.
There is no point in being gloomy however. We're going to Brexit and we will have to make the best of it, even if the best isn't as good as what we have now or would have had if we stayed.
Owen Smith is just a bit of prat who thinks talking as (more?) left-wing as Corbyn does, but not being him, will be enough to win. And he's wrong.
The members will consider Corbyn vindicated and victimised and go for the real thing.
If we end up with poorer research, it will be our own fault and no-one else's. For me, there are two things that could decrease our performance in research - loss of funding, and loss of top students/researchers. Given our net funding of the EU, we should at least be able to match EU-level funding post-Brexit. What evidence is there that our universities will actually be less attractive destinations to students and researchers?
Along with the US (and to a far lesser extent the rest of the Anglophone world) we have the advantage not just of a concentration of top level universities and research centres, but also of language. Scientific papers published in English receive far more citations than those of equal quality or discovery in other languages. Of course, researchers in Bielefeld can publish in English, but access to language and publishers is easier for a German/Chinese/Indian researcher in a UK institute than it is from their home countries.
The City will be different, and will certainly lose some European business, but again we shall have it in our own hands to regulate it for optimum performance for business not regulated by the EU. I am agnostic on whether that means a shrunken City.
The car industry I think will shrink, but was probably going to in the longer-term anyway as and when decisions on new model-lines or new factory construction had to be made.
Also, risk perceptions affect returns. If we have focused on Europe because perceived risk are lower and match our general risk averseness, then a shock which forces a more risk accepting approach could result in focusing on better opportunities too. Note, I say could.
Just a couple of reasons why I think the 'no linkage' statement is questionable.
The main risk to this would be if somehow it got entangled in politics. That could happen, but I think it's fairly unlikely in the particular case of manufactured goods.
The best research university on the continent of Europe has always been outside the EU.
ETH, Zurich.
https://twitter.com/jamesrbuk/status/771685430118846464
Put some error bars on your data points and we’ll look at it again.
NEW THREAD
The UK is responsible for 17.6% of EU GDP and 12% of exports from the EU to non-EU countries. If we exclude Germany from the totals we are responsible for 22.2% of EU GDP and 17.8% of non-EU exports.
Eurozone countries also export much more to other EU countries than we do.
Sources here and here.
As you say there is no parallel world in which no such decisions were taken so we can't really tell but it does seem to me that a quarter per cent cut was very unlikely to affect peoples' real borrowing rates in any material way and diminished further the very limited supply of ammunition left to the Bank.
I also think that it was another demonstration of how simplistic economic thinking is only taking into account first level effects with little or no regard to second level effects such as the concern such steps might cause. But that is a wider argument.