Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The People Will Speak

24567

Comments

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    Cicero said:

    moonshine said:

    DougSeal said:

    Charles said:

    I put money on a December GE last night. I cannot see how Corbyn can continue to resist once No Deal is taken off the table.

    .

    Can you give examples of the Tory “lurch to the right”? It seems a fairly moderate, fiscally expansionist government - some silly rhetoric from Patel but not much action
    Patel is without a majority at the moment. Many shudder to think what would happen if she got her hands on one. I see this as an authoritarian nationalist government in waiting.
    You sound a bit like those American politicians in the 50s that saw a Red hiding behind every corner. It's absurd to think Boris will be leading an "authoritarian nationalist" government.
    Boris is an incompetant figurehead.

    Dominic Cummings is the actual leader, and he certainly is authoritarian and at least a Russian nationalist.
    Cummings is of course also totally incompetant (sic) which is one of the reasons we’re in this mess.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Stephen Kinnock seems to be full of it.

    After all his blustering about a Deal he wasn’t one of the 19 Labour rebels and voted against it at second reading.

    The Labour 19, or at least those not planning to retire, are in the same boat. They represent Leave areas, but are very unlikely to pick up enough Leave voters to make up for the Remain voters they will lose.
    We had all this in 2017. All this talk of Mrs May winning hitherto 'unthinkable' seats in Labour heartlands.

    It's rubbish, in my opinion.

    Once Labour remind their voters of the slouching JRM and the Bullingdon club Boris together with issues that they really care about, there will be very little movement in Labour leave areas. And any that really do want to ditch Labour won't vote tory. They will vote BXP.
    The fabled images of the Tory battle bus driving past the angel of the north are an amusing memory
    Well Johnson isn't going to rock up in Leeds fucking East !!!

    Some of the May targeting was ridiculous
    Will he turn up in Leeds fucking Arcuri instead?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Nigelb said:

    Flanner said:

    I’ll go on the record to say one FTA I *don’t* want is one with China.
    .

    I'll go on the record to say anyone deluding themselves they've got an FTA with China should be confined to an asylum.

    Starting with the deranged former Australian PM, Tony Abbott. - who clearly can't tell the difference between real free trade (such as the UK enjoys with our 27 nearest neighbours) and the perpetual economic vassalage to with Xi Jinping he lumbered his country with.
    Western policy (overall) will be increasingly focussed on containing China, i think, which, if smart, will pull India into its orbit as well.

    Xi Jinping is taking China to a very dark place. We can help by stopping buying (currently on WTO rules) their pointless plastic shite.
    India and China are likely to remain avowed competitors; I don’t see much of a route to China pulling India ‘into its orbit’.
    And containing China is going to be exceptionally difficult. They are no longer dependent of plastic shite, increasingly focused on their domestic market, and aside from a handful of technologies pretty well up with the best the west of western science.

    Learning how to live with a wholly undemocratic one of two world superpowers is the challenge.
    Sorry, I meant the West pulling India into *its* orbit.

    India is very concerned about the rise of China too and, for all its faults, is actually a democracy.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Scott_P said:
    Surely there would only be a November/December election if Brexit hasn't happened.
  • I hope Boris continues with the bill but if a customs union or referendum get attached take down the bill and seek an election

    Of course no 10 may have decided the HOC is too polarised to pass anything and a GE on 'lets get this done and we leave on the 31st December' with a deal so no deal is gone is a very powerful message alongside a manifesto based on the QS

    The next few days will be interesting
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    I think the deal goes through even if a few Labour MPs drop support . However it’s what the bill ends up looking like that maybe an issue for Johnson .

    Even if he says in an election don’t worry give me a majority and I’ll remove the bits I don’t like will that message get through and what will the Brexit Party do .

  • AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:
    Surely there would only be a November/December election if Brexit hasn't happened.
    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:
    Surely there would only be a November/December election if Brexit hasn't happened.
    While publicly tories say then want an election privately many tory MPs don’t. In Scotland the headline has not changed. The country thinks brexit is a shambles and blames the tories. Don’t see how this will change before next election. I was trying to think under what scenario I might vote Tory and came up with none. If I don’t vote Tory as a party member then who will.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    Nigelb said:

    Flanner said:

    I’ll go on the record to say one FTA I *don’t* want is one with China.
    .

    I'll go on the record to say anyone deluding themselves they've got an FTA with China should be confined to an asylum.

    Starting with the deranged former Australian PM, Tony Abbott. - who clearly can't tell the difference between real free trade (such as the UK enjoys with our 27 nearest neighbours) and the perpetual economic vassalage to with Xi Jinping he lumbered his country with.
    Western policy (overall) will be increasingly focussed on containing China, i think, which, if smart, will pull India into its orbit as well.

    Xi Jinping is taking China to a very dark place. We can help by stopping buying (currently on WTO rules) their pointless plastic shite.
    India and China are likely to remain avowed competitors; I don’t see much of a route to China pulling India ‘into its orbit’.
    And containing China is going to be exceptionally difficult. They are no longer dependent of plastic shite, increasingly focused on their domestic market, and aside from a handful of technologies pretty well up with the best the west of western science.

    Learning how to live with a wholly undemocratic one of two world superpowers is the challenge.
    Sorry, I meant the West pulling India into *its* orbit.

    India is very concerned about the rise of China too and, for all its faults, is actually a democracy.
    Agreed.
    China is a problem the west hasn't really started to figure out - which is not helped by having the current incumbent in the White House.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    Scott_P said:
    That thread is very interesting, and well referenced. We know BoZo doesn't do detail, but possibly he simply doesn't understand what he is pushing through.

    Watching him bluster and fail over this during an election campaign could be quite amusing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Scott_P said:
    That's a decent thread, which demonstrates the line that 'we've discussed all this ad nauseam and therefore everyone knows what's in the bill' is simply untrue.

    As was also clear from ministerial contributions during the debate, the government doesn't appear fully cognisant of the bill's implications either.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Foxy said:

    Watching him bluster and fail over this during an election campaign could be quite amusing.

    Well, yes, and then again no...

    He undoubtedly has no idea what he is proposing, but apparently that doesn't matter.

    He is a serial, congenital liar, and his fans don't care.

    He was picked as leader because of his winning record, and has lost every contest since.

    And they love him for it.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    AndyKS: that article looks like misinformation to me. Tories want as early a GE as possible surely?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    I`m confused over talk about a bill to circumvent FTPA.

    I assumed that they would go for a FTPA 2/3 majority (same as when they tried this twice already, but this time LAB/LD/SNP pledge to support).
  • eekeek Posts: 28,077
    Stocky said:

    I`m confused over talk about a bill to circumvent FTPA.

    I assumed that they would go for a FTPA 2/3 majority (same as when they tried this twice already, but this time LAB/LD/SNP pledge to support).

    It is believed that Labour don't want an election - as they can make the changes they want in the Brexit bill as it is.

    Now I don't know how much mileage there is in that logic but its possible they could add a custom unions amendment and try to force it through.

    As for the Tories in Scotland - they are likely to retain 1 seat at most - so delaying the election keeps them in work.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Scott_P said:
    Does the electoral register have information on those under 17? I thought it only held details of those who would become 18 during the term of the next register? Can 16 and 17 year olds actually get a vote in December even if that law is passed?
  • Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    That thread is very interesting, and well referenced. We know BoZo doesn't do detail, but possibly he simply doesn't understand what he is pushing through.

    Watching him bluster and fail over this during an election campaign could be quite amusing.
    We know a bit of what that will looks like from that mad week in September when he thought he'd engineered an election. He's going to have to up his game a lot to survive a full campaign.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    Roll on a GE. I don't like Boris , but I want to see Corbyn's idea of Labour destroyed .

    Labour will squeeze the vote hard as they did before. Even more that 2017 this will be the Brexit election. I shall probably vote LD but it's a safe seat and doesn't matter, whereas a lot of people will know if they dont back labour Tories win and we definitely brexit. This time thered be no second chance.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257
    I see Javid has “delayed” tax cuts because the Brexit-driven downturn means the government budget is now under pressure.
  • timpletimple Posts: 123

    Great thread CycleFree - while much has been made of the Leaver's failure to coalesce around a plan, I wonder if history will be unkind too to Remainers who rather than try to reverse the result could have built a consensus for the post-Brexit relationship. Now all we have is a dialogue of the deaf.

    Completely OT - browsing Canadian media - two stories stood out - the British family which "accidentally" drove into the US had $16,000 in cash on them:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/world/we-have-been-treated-like-criminals-british-family-who-accidentally-drove-into-u-s-detained-with-infant

    And the Trans-Activist who sued ethnic minority Home Beauty salon owners for failing to provide a 'full Brazilian" had her case chucked out and was ordered to pay costs:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/trans-activist-jessica-yaniv-filed-genital-wax-complaints-as-means-of-extortion-rights-tribunal-rules

    Gaslighting. Yes there probably could have been a Norway style compromise but Mrs May chose party unity over national unity.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    nico67 said:

    I think the deal goes through even if a few Labour MPs drop support . However it’s what the bill ends up looking like that maybe an issue for Johnson .

    Even if he says in an election don’t worry give me a majority and I’ll remove the bits I don’t like will that message get through and what will the Brexit Party do .

    Hence the pause. The man is spooked, and loss after loss in the house has left him lacking in confidence of eking it out. Theres 10-12 who are not firm yes votes who he needs without alienating his freshly United side.

    He knows that's tough and needed the pressure of a lack of time to force them. Seems like hed rather takes gamble on the polls. May redux.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    moonshine said:

    DougSeal said:

    Charles said:

    I put money on a December GE last night. I cannot see how Corbyn can continue to resist once No Deal is taken off the table.

    .

    Can you give examples of the Tory “lurch to the right”? It seems a fairly moderate, fiscally expansionist government - some silly rhetoric from Patel but not much action
    Patel is without a majority at the moment. Many shudder to think what would happen if she got her hands on one. I see this as an authoritarian nationalist government in waiting.
    You sound a bit like those American politicians in the 50s that saw a Red hiding behind every corner. It's absurd to think Boris will be leading an "authoritarian nationalist" government.
    Why?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257
    That thread posted earlier shows that this Agreement is an absolute dog.

    And a Union-trasher to boot.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Scott_P said:
    Does the electoral register have information on those under 17? I thought it only held details of those who would become 18 during the term of the next register? Can 16 and 17 year olds actually get a vote in December even if that law is passed?
    It's not hard. https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,428
    I’d rather the election bill wasn’t amended to be honest.

    The Tory rage would make it good though.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    kle4 said:

    The man is spooked, and loss after loss in the house has left him lacking in confidence of eking it out.

    Again, yes, but maybe no...

    He always makes grand claims, and they are always bluster and bullshit.

    It's not at all clear that this latest failure to deliver on one of his grand promises has dented his confidence at all.

    He said he wouldn't send the letter, but he did, because he couldn't defeat the law.

    He said we were leaving next week, but we're not because he can't defeat the parliamentary numbers.

    I expect him to make another wild claim today, and for his fanbois to cheer him to the echo
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279
    edited October 2019
    Boris is pursuing the right strategy to keep the Leaver coalition together, deliver Brexit and get a Deal that ends free movement and enables us to pursue our own free trade deals first.

    Then pursue a populist agenda easing back on the austerity of the Cameron years with more money for the NHS and the police and a higher minimum wage and Priti Patel talking tougher on crime than the Coalition did to please working class voters while still having a more pro tax cut agenda thsn May did to appease middle class voters
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    eek said:

    Stocky said:

    I`m confused over talk about a bill to circumvent FTPA.

    I assumed that they would go for a FTPA 2/3 majority (same as when they tried this twice already, but this time LAB/LD/SNP pledge to support).

    It is believed that Labour don't want an election - as they can make the changes they want in the Brexit bill as it is.

    Now I don't know how much mileage there is in that logic but its possible they could add a custom unions amendment and try to force it through.

    As for the Tories in Scotland - they are likely to retain 1 seat at most - so delaying the election keeps them in work.
    I think it would be hilarious if we end up in a situation where Labour are the ones trying to enforce the Brexit deal (amended) and the Conservatives are blocking Brexit.

    We're not that far away from that scenario.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279
    edited October 2019
    Scott_P said:
    Except Boris leads Corbyn as best PM even with 18 to 24s in the latest polling
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 437



    Maybe FTAs with any country or grouping that is bigger than the UK would be likely to result in a better deal for the larger player simply because they have more clout. So don't you feel the same way about the US and the EU?

    This brings us to the nub of the whole Brexit problem.

    If we're in the EU, we're the second biggest player, may well be the biggest (both by pop and by economy) in 20 years, and in any case will be one of the six (GB, F, D, I, PL, ES) that drive the Union.

    If we're out of the EU, we risk getting shafted by it as much as by the Americans and Chinese and by as much as the Indians and Russians would like to if they could.

    Which is why, for all its faults, it's infinitely better to be in the EU's tent pissing out at the rest than outside getting pissed on by it and the other fuckers.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279
    Scott_P said:
    If it was an English nationalist project it would be straight to No Deal with troops sent to Northern Ireland to enforce a hard border with the Republic and to Scotland to enforce a ban on indyref2
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Nigelb said:

    I know this comes as a shock to the ERG types but the EU was never of interest to most people in this country. We had an occasional laugh at their expense, often about over-zealous protection of rights or butter mountains and bureaucracy or apparently inebriated commissioners. But generally it was of little or no interest.

    Brexit has vexed people but that's mainly because it has dragged on and on and on....

    It might come as as a shock to you, but that all applies to politics in general.
    very true!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    OT... This is hugely damaging to Trump, and makes impeachment now quite likely:
    https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/22/william-taylor-ukraine-testimony-trump-054259

    Whether the Senate has the independence to convict, however damning the evidence might become, is an open question.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279
    Scott_P said:
    What about 'Leaver rage' If there is further extension and we are still in the EU?
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    Foxy said:

    Stephen Kinnock seems to be full of it.

    After all his blustering about a Deal he wasn’t one of the 19 Labour rebels and voted against it at second reading.

    The Labour 19, or at least those not planning to retire, are in the same boat. They represent Leave areas, but are very unlikely to pick up enough Leave voters to make up for the Remain voters they will lose.
    We had all this in 2017. All this talk of Mrs May winning hitherto 'unthinkable' seats in Labour heartlands.

    It's rubbish, in my opinion.

    Once Labour remind their voters of the slouching JRM and the Bullingdon club Boris together with issues that they really care about, there will be very little movement in Labour leave areas. And any that really do want to ditch Labour won't vote tory. They will vote BXP.
    The fabled images of the Tory battle bus driving past the angel of the north are an amusing memory
    :smiley::smiley:
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480

    I see Javid has “delayed” tax cuts because the Brexit-driven downturn means the government budget is now under pressure.

    Reduced Corporation tax receipts in conjunction with a slew of profit warnings is quite economically worrying.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    Scott_P said:
    Does the electoral register have information on those under 17? I thought it only held details of those who would become 18 during the term of the next register? Can 16 and 17 year olds actually get a vote in December even if that law is passed?
    It's not hard. https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote
    Trying to alter the voting qualifications at such short notice is wrong, IMO.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,428
    @HYUFD how are you going to increase spending and lower taxes without increasing the deficit?

    Please answer without using the phrase “laffer curve”.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    The man is spooked, and loss after loss in the house has left him lacking in confidence of eking it out.

    Again, yes, but maybe no...

    He always makes grand claims, and they are always bluster and bullshit.

    It's not at all clear that this latest failure to deliver on one of his grand promises has dented his confidence at all.

    He said he wouldn't send the letter, but he did, because he couldn't defeat the law.

    He said we were leaving next week, but we're not because he can't defeat the parliamentary numbers.

    I expect him to make another wild claim today, and for his fanbois to cheer him to the echo
    Point taken, but its hard to spin things here - either he goes for a GE, succeeds and the bill awaits the outcome, or he tries for a GE and fails, or hes lying about trying for a GE. Either way the bill is no easier pass.

    I think he knows this week was its last chance ahead if an election. The ex cons and a few of the labour backers will find something that will justify reversal.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279
    Foxy said:

    Good Article @Cyclefree, it is hard to see how Conservatives can keep the Brexit coalition together. It seems obvious to me that it is the free trading Atlanticists that control the party, and it is the small c conservatives in Shires and old coalfields that are going to get shafted again.

    Rubbish, otherwise there would be more austerity from.Boris and we would be staying in the Single Market with free movement
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 437

    Scott_P said:
    Can 16 and 17 year olds actually get a vote in December even if that law is passed?
    Yes - if we pass a law at the same time allowing them to register. Hopelessly impractical, of course - but even discussing it will add another few weeks to the debate. And that's the point of Clark's "amendment" argument.

    If you're a minority government, the idea you can get your way by one-line bills is as deluded as fantasising that the sexpest is a competent politician.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    edited October 2019
    The problem with this sort of analysis is that it massively overstates the impact of Brexit. The sad truth, despite all the sound, fury and division of the last 3 years is that we will barely notice.

    So what will Britain look like if it achieves Brexit (and its still an if)? Pretty much as it is now. 115 pages of legislation sounds significant but in fact all it is really doing is ensuring that our current laws continue as they do now with UK institutions taking the place of EU ones where necessary. Neither the structure nor the substance of our regulation is being changed.

    If we achieve Brexit we will also achieve a FTA with the EU. Nothing else makes sense for either party. There will be no tariffs. Will we be in a CU with the EU? Possibly, but probably not. Will there be any difference in our travel plans? Almost certainly not. Why would countries that rely so heavily on tourism want to discourage trade? It will be slightly harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa but only slightly, almost certainly nowhere near as hard as we find it to get to America or for Americans to come and work in London (which, with the right skills, is not very hard at all).

    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    In some areas, such as Financial Services, regulation will remain equivalent. In others there might be a slight drift but the scope of that will be fixed by the FTA.

    In short I see a world where absolutely none of the doom prophecies of remainers have come true and most of the fantasies of the leavers have come to naught as well. Our politicians will be a little more accountable for what they do. They will spend a little less time in Brussels although they will go often enough. They will also spend more time in the wider world with which we will be more engaged, not less. My guess is that within 5 years we will wonder what the hell all the fuss was about.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    edited October 2019
    Scott_P said:
    They really dont want to consider the bill again this week at the least it seems. If they reverse position it wint be until next week I'd guess.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    I’m pretty relaxed about things .

    My worst fear of no deal is off the table . Johnson now owns this deal , says it’s a great deal so can hardly say now he’s going to go into an election on no deal .

    And I think he keeps a swathe of Tory Remainers who might be more worried about Corbyn than Brexit but who might have been spooked by no deal .

    Not sure what happens with the Brexit Party , they might still take a small chunk of Leave voters but perhaps the people one would hope would be twigging onto the fact that bar the UK severing all contact with the EU and becoming a European Pariah State nothing would be good enough for them.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    edited October 2019
    IDS on radio 4 suggesting the gov may need to VONC in itself. This seems very possible to me, with agreement from SNP and LibDems (who want an election) will produce 50% + for it to pass.

    If this happens, this needs an additional 14 days and assuming no alternative gov is formed we are into a 2020 election. Too late for 12/19, which is good for my bets!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Good Article @Cyclefree, it is hard to see how Conservatives can keep the Brexit coalition together. It seems obvious to me that it is the free trading Atlanticists that control the party, and it is the small c conservatives in Shires and old coalfields that are going to get shafted again.

    Rubbish, otherwise there would be more austerity from.Boris and we would be staying in the Single Market with free movement
    The shafting is post Brexit, not before. Obviously.
  • NorthstarNorthstar Posts: 140
    DavidL said:

    The problem with this sort of analysis is that it massively overstates the impact of Brexit. The sad truth, despite all the sound, fury and division of the last 3 years is that we will barely notice.

    So what will Britain look like if it achieves Brexit (and its still an if)? Pretty much as it is now. 115 pages of legislation sounds significant but in fact all it is really doing is ensuring that our current laws continue as they do now with UK institutions taking the place of EU ones where necessary. Neither the structure nor the substance of our regulation is being changed.

    If we achieve Brexit we will also achieve a FTA with the EU. Nothing else makes sense for either party. There will be no tariffs. Will we be in a CU with the EU? Possibly, but probably not. Will there be any difference in our travel plans? Almost certainly not. Why would countries that rely so heavily on tourism want to discourage trade? It will be slightly harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa but only slightly, almost certainly nowhere near as hard as we find it to get to America or for Americans to come and work in London (which, with the right skills, is not very hard at all).

    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    In some areas, such as Financial Services, regulation will remain equivalent. In others there might be a slight drift but the scope of that will be fixed by the FTA.

    In short I see a world where absolutely none of the doom prophecies of remainers have come true and most of the fantasies of the leavers have come to naught as well. Our politicians will be a little more accountable for what they do. They will spend a little less time in Brussels although they will go often enough. They will also spend more time in the wider world with which we will be more engaged, not less. My guess is that within 5 years we will wonder what the hell all the fuss was about.

    In terms of economics, yes. I wonder though if the damage to political trust and realignment around ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ will leave longer lasting scars.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279

    @HYUFD how are you going to increase spending and lower taxes without increasing the deficit?

    Please answer without using the phrase “laffer curve”.

    By the laffer curve of course but Boris does not care about deficits, he is a Reagan or Berlusconi or George W Bush populist conservative anyway. Plus Corbyn does not care about deficits either anyway

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Stocky said:

    IDS on radio 4 suggesting the gov may need to VONC in itself. This seems very possible to me, with agreement from SNP and LibDems (who want al election) will produce 50% + for it to pass.

    If this happens, this needs an additional 14 days and assuming no alternative gov is formed we are into a 2020 election. Too late for 12/19, which is good for my bets!

    The campaign wouldn't really be able to begin until the second week of January, which means polling day would have to be in February.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    Wrapping the EU issue into a General Election is perhaps the only feasible way Corbyn could end up as PM, given current polling.

    He performed well in campaigns last time (admittedly aided by press 'questioning' such as "Will you give up your allotment if you win?").

    What a wretched situation.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    Northstar said:

    DavidL said:

    The problem with this sort of analysis is that it massively overstates the impact of Brexit. The sad truth, despite all the sound, fury and division of the last 3 years is that we will barely notice.

    So what will Britain look like if it achieves Brexit (and its still an if)? Pretty much as it is now. 115 pages of legislation sounds significant but in fact all it is really doing is ensuring that our current laws continue as they do now with UK institutions taking the place of EU ones where necessary. Neither the structure nor the substance of our regulation is being changed.

    If we achieve Brexit we will also achieve a FTA with the EU. Nothing else makes sense for either party. There will be no tariffs. Will we be in a CU with the EU? Possibly, but probably not. Will there be any difference in our travel plans? Almost certainly not. Why would countries that rely so heavily on tourism want to discourage trade? It will be slightly harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa but only slightly, almost certainly nowhere near as hard as we find it to get to America or for Americans to come and work in London (which, with the right skills, is not very hard at all).

    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    In some areas, such as Financial Services, regulation will remain equivalent. In others there might be a slight drift but the scope of that will be fixed by the FTA.

    In short I see a world where absolutely none of the doom prophecies of remainers have come true and most of the fantasies of the leavers have come to naught as well. Our politicians will be a little more accountable for what they do. They will spend a little less time in Brussels although they will go often enough. They will also spend more time in the wider world with which we will be more engaged, not less. My guess is that within 5 years we will wonder what the hell all the fuss was about.

    In terms of economics, yes. I wonder though if the damage to political trust and realignment around ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ will leave longer lasting scars.
    That is a concern. This has been divisive, no question and idiots on both sides have played fast and loose with our institutions and conventions. Healing will take time.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,898
    DavidL said:

    The problem with this sort of analysis is that it massively overstates the impact of Brexit. The sad truth, despite all the sound, fury and division of the last 3 years is that we will barely notice.

    So what will Britain look like if it achieves Brexit (and its still an if)? Pretty much as it is now. 115 pages of legislation sounds significant but in fact all it is really doing is ensuring that our current laws continue as they do now with UK institutions taking the place of EU ones where necessary. Neither the structure nor the substance of our regulation is being changed.

    If we achieve Brexit we will also achieve a FTA with the EU. Nothing else makes sense for either party. There will be no tariffs. Will we be in a CU with the EU? Possibly, but probably not. Will there be any difference in our travel plans? Almost certainly not. Why would countries that rely so heavily on tourism want to discourage trade? It will be slightly harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa but only slightly, almost certainly nowhere near as hard as we find it to get to America or for Americans to come and work in London (which, with the right skills, is not very hard at all).

    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    In some areas, such as Financial Services, regulation will remain equivalent. In others there might be a slight drift but the scope of that will be fixed by the FTA.

    In short I see a world where absolutely none of the doom prophecies of remainers have come true and most of the fantasies of the leavers have come to naught as well. Our politicians will be a little more accountable for what they do. They will spend a little less time in Brussels although they will go often enough. They will also spend more time in the wider world with which we will be more engaged, not less. My guess is that within 5 years we will wonder what the hell all the fuss was about.

    "harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa"
    Freudian slip?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Flanner said:

    Scott_P said:
    Can 16 and 17 year olds actually get a vote in December even if that law is passed?
    Yes - if we pass a law at the same time allowing them to register. Hopelessly impractical, of course - but even discussing it will add another few weeks to the debate. And that's the point of Clark's "amendment" argument.

    If you're a minority government, the idea you can get your way by one-line bills is as deluded as fantasising that the sexpest is a competent politician.
    Yet again to all the Baldricks ...

    I'm no fan of Boris, but it is deluded to think that all these cunning plans are not having an effect.

    The wrong effect. Look at the polls.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,898
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Except Boris leads Corbyn as best PM even with 18 to 24s in the latest polling
    ... at the moment.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    DavidL said:

    The problem with this sort of analysis is that it massively overstates the impact of Brexit. The sad truth, despite all the sound, fury and division of the last 3 years is that we will barely notice.

    So what will Britain look like if it achieves Brexit (and its still an if)? Pretty much as it is now. 115 pages of legislation sounds significant but in fact all it is really doing is ensuring that our current laws continue as they do now with UK institutions taking the place of EU ones where necessary. Neither the structure nor the substance of our regulation is being changed.

    If we achieve Brexit we will also achieve a FTA with the EU. Nothing else makes sense for either party. There will be no tariffs. Will we be in a CU with the EU? Possibly, but probably not. Will there be any difference in our travel plans? Almost certainly not. Why would countries that rely so heavily on tourism want to discourage trade? It will be slightly harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa but only slightly, almost certainly nowhere near as hard as we find it to get to America or for Americans to come and work in London (which, with the right skills, is not very hard at all).

    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    In some areas, such as Financial Services, regulation will remain equivalent. In others there might be a slight drift but the scope of that will be fixed by the FTA.

    In short I see a world where absolutely none of the doom prophecies of remainers have come true and most of the fantasies of the leavers have come to naught as well. Our politicians will be a little more accountable for what they do. They will spend a little less time in Brussels although they will go often enough. They will also spend more time in the wider world with which we will be more engaged, not less. My guess is that within 5 years we will wonder what the hell all the fuss was about.

    In general, I agree, things are rarely as bad as they seem or as good as they seem.

    The damage from Brexit will be a slow corrosion and rusting rather than explosion, with HMS UK progressively less sea worthy.

    I think @Cyclefree is making the point that failure to deliver sunlit uplands has electoral consequences.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    AndyJS said:

    Stocky said:

    IDS on radio 4 suggesting the gov may need to VONC in itself. This seems very possible to me, with agreement from SNP and LibDems (who want al election) will produce 50% + for it to pass.

    If this happens, this needs an additional 14 days and assuming no alternative gov is formed we are into a 2020 election. Too late for 12/19, which is good for my bets!

    The campaign wouldn't really be able to begin until the second week of January, which means polling day would have to be in February.
    The VONC route is fraught. If the Conservatives do it to themselves then Corbyn might be PM of his own minority Gov't.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    edited October 2019

    DavidL said:

    The problem with this sort of analysis is that it massively overstates the impact of Brexit. The sad truth, despite all the sound, fury and division of the last 3 years is that we will barely notice.

    So what will Britain look like if it achieves Brexit (and its still an if)? Pretty much as it is now. 115 pages of legislation sounds significant but in fact all it is really doing is ensuring that our current laws continue as they do now with UK institutions taking the place of EU ones where necessary. Neither the structure nor the substance of our regulation is being changed.

    If we achieve Brexit we will also achieve a FTA with the EU. Nothing else makes sense for either party. There will be no tariffs. Will we be in a CU with the EU? Possibly, but probably not. Will there be any difference in our travel plans? Almost certainly not. Why would countries that rely so heavily on tourism want to discourage trade? It will be slightly harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa but only slightly, almost certainly nowhere near as hard as we find it to get to America or for Americans to come and work in London (which, with the right skills, is not very hard at all).

    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    In some areas, such as Financial Services, regulation will remain equivalent. In others there might be a slight drift but the scope of that will be fixed by the FTA.

    In short I see a world where absolutely none of the doom prophecies of remainers have come true and most of the fantasies of the leavers have come to naught as well. Our politicians will be a little more accountable for what they do. They will spend a little less time in Brussels although they will go often enough. They will also spend more time in the wider world with which we will be more engaged, not less. My guess is that within 5 years we will wonder what the hell all the fuss was about.

    "harder for EU citizens to come here to work and visa versa"
    Freudian slip?
    You're going to have to explain that one. I simply mean it will be slightly harder for Brits to work in the EU too.
    Oh got it now. Sorry a bit slow this morning.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,364
    edited October 2019
    Ms Cyclefree,

    Nicely argued header, but the problem is the MPs. Why an extension? Nothing will be passed because a majority of MPs are against the whole concept. They need more time to read it? They don't. The people who matter in the parties were commenting on it within minutes.

    Most will only skim read it as they will vote as ordered - whatever it said. It is a delay as a show of strength only. They will push through a series of amendments and the EU will only accept them if it becomes BINO.

    The worst aspect Is they aren't really pretending any more. The voters will have to put up with it because they are powerless, and they're stupid anyway. The MPs have stopped making excuses for their actions. Too busy whining that no one likes them.

    Their cunning plan. Pretend to accept the result, but delay and prevaricate at every opportunity. Vote against everything. Complain about the uncertainty. Then when enough time has passed, claim everyone's changed their mind. If the polls don't move, rinse and repeat.

    I ask again. Why keep extending? No one answers but soon they will. The next stage is to admit their cunning plan and justify it by saying "We know better." or "We told you so."

    Why then, ever have a referendum? Sorry, Scots, your missed the boat.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279
    timple said:

    Great thread CycleFree - while much has been made of the Leaver's failure to coalesce around a plan, I wonder if history will be unkind too to Remainers who rather than try to reverse the result could have built a consensus for the post-Brexit relationship. Now all we have is a dialogue of the deaf.

    Completely OT - browsing Canadian media - two stories stood out - the British family which "accidentally" drove into the US had $16,000 in cash on them:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/world/we-have-been-treated-like-criminals-british-family-who-accidentally-drove-into-u-s-detained-with-infant

    And the Trans-Activist who sued ethnic minority Home Beauty salon owners for failing to provide a 'full Brazilian" had her case chucked out and was ordered to pay costs:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/trans-activist-jessica-yaniv-filed-genital-wax-complaints-as-means-of-extortion-rights-tribunal-rules

    Gaslighting. Yes there probably could have been a Norway style compromise but Mrs May chose party unity over national unity.
    Wrong, Eustice and Boles EEA options lost the indicative votes heavily
  • I know this comes as a shock to the ERG types but the EU was never of interest to most people in this country. We had an occasional laugh at their expense, often about over-zealous protection of rights or butter mountains and bureaucracy or apparently inebriated commissioners. But generally it was of little or no interest.

    Brexit has vexed people but that's mainly because it has dragged on and on and on.

    Corbyn won't talk much about Brexit. It bores him. I think in this regard he will really hit a spot.

    In Scotland, x10.
    It'll be interesting to see how SCons going full Brexitloon will go down with punters.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited October 2019
    nico67 said:

    I’m pretty relaxed about things .

    Johnson now owns this deal

    Only for as long as it's off the Parliamentary agenda. If it comes back, which Labour might very well see as their wisest course of action, then Johnson owns neither the content nor the timing.

    I think Labour could play a very astute game here by SO24-ing the bill back into committee stage and tabling their amendments. It would stymie the idea of them blocking Brexit. If they played a full hand they might even attach their PV at the end of it.

    p.s. Ken Clarke and Jeremy Corbyn last night were more-or-less saying the same thing on this.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,321
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    If it was an English nationalist project it would be straight to No Deal with troops sent to Northern Ireland to enforce a hard border with the Republic and to Scotland to enforce a ban on indyref2
    That’s a revealing comment given those are your own views.
  • @HYUFD how are you going to increase spending and lower taxes without increasing the deficit?

    Please answer without using the phrase “laffer curve”.

    That's like saying what is two plus two?

    Please answer without using the number "four".
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,364
    BoJo's cunning plan was to set MPs against Parliament and have an election on who runs the country. Is it working? Around here it's working with a vengeance. and looking at the national polls, it is working.

    You can blame the MPs for collaborating.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257

    nico67 said:

    I’m pretty relaxed about things .

    Johnson now owns this deal

    Only for as long as it's off the Parliamentary agenda. If it comes back, which Labour might very well see as their wisest course of action, then Johnson owns neither the content nor the timing.

    I think Labour could play a very astute game here by SO24-ing the bill back into committee stage and tabling their amendments. It would stymie the idea of them blocking Brexit. If they played a full hand they might even attach their PV at the end of it.

    p.s. Ken Clarke and Jeremy Corbyn last night were more-or-less saying the same thing on this.
    This is actually the most democratic route, from the perspective of parliamentary democracy.
  • XtrainXtrain Posts: 341
    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:
    Does the electoral register have information on those under 17? I thought it only held details of those who would become 18 during the term of the next register? Can 16 and 17 year olds actually get a vote in December even if that law is passed?
    It's not hard. https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote
    Trying to alter the voting qualifications at such short notice is wrong, IMO.
    I agree. It should be a manifest commitment to be implemented after winning a GE.
  • timpletimple Posts: 123
    edited October 2019
    Good article. Strikes me that when you appreciate the disparate nature of the leave coalition then the Remain position is actually the national compromise.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    @HYUFD how are you going to increase spending and lower taxes without increasing the deficit?

    Please answer without using the phrase “laffer curve”.

    Nobody, least of all Boris and his dick riders, gives a fuck about how anything is going to be paid for any more. Any politician that shows the slightest signs of giving such fuck will be on the losing end of an election.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257
    Swinson needs to start hammering the Brexit austerity message. Brexit means we can not reduce taxes. This is happening *now*, let alone later.

    I doubt Scottish independence and Irish unification will be cost free for Britain either, despite the brainless claims oft repeated on here that “we are subsidising the jocks” etc.

    The upheaval alone will cost billions.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    CycleFree articles really are a highlight for me. Thanks again.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    Mr. Timple, I strongly suspect Remain would win a second referendum.

    Of course, that requires MPs to go down that route instead of just saying no to everything. And then wondering why their reputation with the public is so poor.
  • XtrainXtrain Posts: 341
    HYUFD said:

    @HYUFD how are you going to increase spending and lower taxes without increasing the deficit?

    Please answer without using the phrase “laffer curve”.

    By the laffer curve of course but Boris does not care about deficits, he is a Reagan or Berlusconi or George W Bush populist conservative anyway. Plus Corbyn does not care about deficits either anyway

    Do you think Corbyn will worry about such trivialities when making his offer to the people?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Dura_Ace said:

    @HYUFD how are you going to increase spending and lower taxes without increasing the deficit?

    Please answer without using the phrase “laffer curve”.

    Nobody, least of all Boris and his dick riders, gives a fuck about how anything is going to be paid for any more. Any politician that shows the slightest signs of giving such fuck will be on the losing end of an election.
    That is for sure true.

    We are going to be inundated with Xmas gifts from the politicians. I have sent in my request for some early editions of Newtoniana.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,898
    CD13 said:

    BoJo's cunning plan was to set MPs against Parliament and have an election on who runs the country. Is it working? Around here it's working with a vengeance. and looking at the national polls, it is working.

    You can blame the MPs for collaborating.

    Can anyone think of a previous election called on 'Who Governs Britain?' - and what the result was?
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Stocky said:

    IDS on radio 4 suggesting the gov may need to VONC in itself. This seems very possible to me, with agreement from SNP and LibDems (who want an election) will produce 50% + for it to pass.

    If this happens, this needs an additional 14 days and assuming no alternative gov is formed we are into a 2020 election. Too late for 12/19, which is good for my bets!

    The SNP want an election soon. The Lib Dems do not.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,214

    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
    It's 7% after 10 years. That's the equivalent of shaving off 0.68% of growth a year.
    If our growth is normally around 2% year, we would lose one third of it. That's significant, but it's not a severe recession.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
    It's 7% after 10 years. That's the equivalent of shaving off 0.68% of growth a year.
    If our growth is normally around 2% year, we would lose one third of it. That's significant, but it's not a severe recession.
    Why do you think Britain's growth rate is around 2% a year?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257
    edited October 2019

    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
    That is a figure out out by a Remainer-looking lobby group —- BUT it is not actually far off the government’s own forecasts.

    Of course we will not “feel” a cumulative 5-7% decline against run rate — except in deferred tax cuts and a general feeling of poverty when travelling abroad.

    Although it is often said that the poorest areas in the UK will be hardest hit, I actually think it is young people in general who will “pay” through job opportunities that do not turn up and ongoing repression of their ability to “rise up the ranks” in their career.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    kamski said:

    "those enraged by FoM for Turks or Syrians with German nationality", struggling to understand what this means - is it code for racists?

    It's a reference to the two Leave posters during the campaign: one showing Turks arriving in Britain and the other the "Breaking Point" poster showing refugees travelling from Syria through Europe into Germany.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
    It's 7% after 10 years. That's the equivalent of shaving off 0.68% of growth a year.
    If our growth is normally around 2% year, we would lose one third of it. That's significant, but it's not a severe recession.
    Someone else who doesn’t understand the power of compound interest.

    0.68% here, 0.68% there - pretty soon one forfeits one’s position in the prosperity leagues.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,753
    Good article.

    Except as has been mentioned, people won't understand or care. An extra 2p on beer and fags? All comes out in the wash when set against the phone, Range Rover Evoque, monthly payments.

    The only thing I can see cutting through might be one clause or another in some trade deal we are about to do which is particularly shocking and is all over the front of the Mail Online.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480

    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
    It's 7% after 10 years. That's the equivalent of shaving off 0.68% of growth a year.
    If our growth is normally around 2% year, we would lose one third of it. That's significant, but it's not a severe recession.
    Why do you think Britain's growth rate is around 2% a year?
    I think that trend growth in the UK and EZ has substantially slowed below that, independent of Brexit, for a bunch of demographic and macro economic reasons. Perhaps 1.3% over all, so knocking off half of that is quite a hit.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
    It's 7% after 10 years. That's the equivalent of shaving off 0.68% of growth a year.
    If our growth is normally around 2% year, we would lose one third of it. That's significant, but it's not a severe recession.
    Starting with a value of 100
    Ten years of 2% growth = 102.0000 104.0400 106.1208 108.2432 110.4081 112.6162 114.8686 117.1659 119.5093 121.8994
    Ten years of 1.32% growth = 101.3200 102.6574 104.0125 105.3855 106.7766 108.1860 109.6141 111.0610 112.5270 114.0123
    Two years of 1.5% contraction followed by eight years of 2% growth = 98.50000 97.02250 98.96295 100.94221 102.96105 105.02027 107.12068 109.26309 111.44836 113.67732

    So yes, in fact, a 0.68% reduction in growth over ten years is pretty similar to a severe recession followed by 8 years of "normal" growth.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    What about 'Leaver rage' If there is further extension and we are still in the EU?
    What about recent reassurances vaguely attributed to Number 10 or Boris proving completely unreliable?
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    Noo said:

    Stocky said:

    IDS on radio 4 suggesting the gov may need to VONC in itself. This seems very possible to me, with agreement from SNP and LibDems (who want an election) will produce 50% + for it to pass.

    If this happens, this needs an additional 14 days and assuming no alternative gov is formed we are into a 2020 election. Too late for 12/19, which is good for my bets!

    The SNP want an election soon. The Lib Dems do not.
    Have they both said as much, or is this just a bit more Tory spin?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,364
    I may be in an echo chamber (as we all may be), but what I've noticed is the slow corrosion in the trust of MPs. When Brexit dies a slow death (as I've said will happen on here a few times), the remaining feeling will be the that MPs aren't on our side at all. They have their own agenda and will only pay lip service to the voters' wishes.

    when they say "we need more time to go through the deal and make amendments", they mean "Oh, goody, another chance to delay and leave a few people to pick out bits they don't like and complain. We can keep these extensions going for another year or two until the voters lose interest."

    It may have begun to bore the Remainers, but the machinations are now irritating many Leave voters. I accept having my vote ignored, I'm used to that, but the transparent lies are another matter.


  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279
    Xtrain said:

    HYUFD said:

    @HYUFD how are you going to increase spending and lower taxes without increasing the deficit?

    Please answer without using the phrase “laffer curve”.

    By the laffer curve of course but Boris does not care about deficits, he is a Reagan or Berlusconi or George W Bush populist conservative anyway. Plus Corbyn does not care about deficits either anyway

    Do you think Corbyn will worry about such trivialities when making his offer to the people?
    His people are already behind him anyway, Boris will make the populist message to his people May did not.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,897
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:
    Seems like the Corbynite wing is rather more confident than the moderates :)

    To play devil's advocate with general thinking

    Corbyn led GE campaign … 40%
    Sort of remain Alliancers 25%...…

    Corbyn needs to take back control :D:D:D
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,279

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    If it was an English nationalist project it would be straight to No Deal with troops sent to Northern Ireland to enforce a hard border with the Republic and to Scotland to enforce a ban on indyref2
    That’s a revealing comment given those are your own views.
    No I back the Boris Deal not No Deal
  • Rich Burgon is becoming a national treasure.... he should get his own Saturday night TV series and follow in the great footsteps of his true forebears - Les Dennis, Dustin Gee, Bobby Davro and Mr Blobby.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:
    If it was an English nationalist project it would be straight to No Deal with troops sent to Northern Ireland to enforce a hard border with the Republic and to Scotland to enforce a ban on indyref2
    Nationalism is not only enforced through military strength, soft power can be nationalist as well. To turn around and suggest that we haven't gone English Nationalist until we literally send troops to quell the other nations of the Union is missing the point on purpose.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257
    edited October 2019
    CD13 said:

    I may be in an echo chamber (as we all may be), but what I've noticed is the slow corrosion in the trust of MPs. When Brexit dies a slow death (as I've said will happen on here a few times), the remaining feeling will be the that MPs aren't on our side at all. They have their own agenda and will only pay lip service to the voters' wishes.

    when they say "we need more time to go through the deal and make amendments", they mean "Oh, goody, another chance to delay and leave a few people to pick out bits they don't like and complain. We can keep these extensions going for another year or two until the voters lose interest."

    It may have begun to bore the Remainers, but the machinations are now irritating many Leave voters. I accept having my vote ignored, I'm used to that, but the transparent lies are another matter.

    Which lies are those, precisely?

    Parliament has voted to Exercise A50, and indeed has now voted to progress the Withdrawal Act.

    This, despite the fact May failed to win a majority and Boris has conspired to make his worse.

    The lie - and I accept that it is causing widespread corrosion of trust - is that Brexit would be immediate and easy.

    No pro-Brexiter in the public eye has ever had the balls or honesty to say it by necessity must be long and difficult.
  • timpletimple Posts: 123
    HYUFD said:

    timple said:

    Great thread CycleFree - while much has been made of the Leaver's failure to coalesce around a plan, I wonder if history will be unkind too to Remainers who rather than try to reverse the result could have built a consensus for the post-Brexit relationship. Now all we have is a dialogue of the deaf.

    Completely OT - browsing Canadian media - two stories stood out - the British family which "accidentally" drove into the US had $16,000 in cash on them:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/world/we-have-been-treated-like-criminals-british-family-who-accidentally-drove-into-u-s-detained-with-infant

    And the Trans-Activist who sued ethnic minority Home Beauty salon owners for failing to provide a 'full Brazilian" had her case chucked out and was ordered to pay costs:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/trans-activist-jessica-yaniv-filed-genital-wax-complaints-as-means-of-extortion-rights-tribunal-rules

    Gaslighting. Yes there probably could have been a Norway style compromise but Mrs May chose party unity over national unity.
    Wrong, Eustice and Boles EEA options lost the indicative votes heavily
    That was after a LOT of water had passed under the bridge.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,214

    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:


    No doubt economic models will tell us that the economy is a percent or so smaller than it might have been but as the comparator does not exist in the real world none of us will really notice that either.

    The impact of the latest Boris Johnson deal is projected to be a cumulative 7% or so - nearly as bad as no deal.

    https://www.ft.com/content/a6f991ba-eda8-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

    That's the equivalent of a very severe recession that the Conservatives are going to inflict on us. Nor is there any reason to expect Britain to rebound from that, since Britain is weighing itself down with more anti-competitiveness by distancing itself and putting barriers in the way of trading with its biggest market. Fuck business, as our Prime Minister said.

    As a bonus, the Conservatives have sought to trash the constitution along the way at every stage.

    The whole thing is a complete disaster anyway you care to look at it.
    It's 7% after 10 years. That's the equivalent of shaving off 0.68% of growth a year.
    If our growth is normally around 2% year, we would lose one third of it. That's significant, but it's not a severe recession.
    Why do you think Britain's growth rate is around 2% a year?
    2% is about the long-term trend, maybe a little higher depending on how far back you look. E.g. https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/economics-policy/insights/uk-economic-outlook.html
This discussion has been closed.