politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Theresa May agrees €100 billion Brexit divorce bill with the E

The Leave campaign was keen to use the gross figure to describe how much Brexit could save us to spend on the NHS.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Vince Cable reminds we of that really annoying Harry Enfield character, that whatever anybody did, he would go No No No, now what you should have done is...but when he then has a go, he is totally crap.
FT front page.
We used a split sample – one half of the respondents got a grid of three questions asking about settlements of £5bn, £10bn and £20bn. The other half of the sample got a grid of three questions asking about settlements of £25bn, £50bn and £75bn.
On the first bank of questions 38% thought £5bn would be acceptable, 18% thought £10bn would be acceptable, 11% thought that £20bn would be acceptable. Looking at the other half of the sample, 29% thought that £25bn was acceptable, 9% thought that £50bn was acceptable, 6% thought that £75bn would be acceptable (full tabs are here.)
Taken as a whole we get the rather perverse finding that while support generally falls as the size of the settlement increases, £25 billion is far more acceptable to the public than £20 billion. This is nonsense of course, and the reason is simple enough – people take their cues from the question itself. In the first half of the sample, £5bn was the lowest amount asked about, £20bn the largest amount, and many respondents presumably took this as an implication that £5bn was a low settlement, £20bn a high one. For the second half of the sample £25bn was the lowest figure asked about, so many respondents presumably took the implication that this was a low settlement. Whether people said a sum was acceptable or not was less about the actual number, more about whether the question implied that it was a low or high figure.
The point is that questions about what level of “divorce bill” will be acceptable to the public don’t really tell us much. People don’t have any good way of telling what is a good or bad deal and are really just expressing their unsurprising preference for a smaller settlement. When (or if) Britain and the EU do finally agree on a sum, it won’t be so much the particular figure that determines whether the public see it as a victory or a sell-out, but whether the media and political class present it to them as a good or bad deal.
https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/935625653193453569
Some might jump to a conclusion about resignations on health grounds. Others may not.
The upcoming climbdown on ECJ jurisdiction should be the final nail in the coffin.
If true great news that will be acceptable to the majority, though not the extremes on both sides
Brexiteers are supposed to be happy right now...
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/935600430360514560
Sorry Ireland.
You can log into macOS High Sierra as root with no password. Apple, this is bad – like Windows 95 bad.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/28/root_access_bypass_macos_high_sierra/
Yeah, we had them by the balls, that's why we gave them 100bn, first installment...
https://twitter.com/bendepear/status/935611855707541504
Hmm. Anyway. It was always going to happen. With payments and citizen rights now apparently sorted, the Irish will come under intense pressure not to gum up the move to phase II. They will demand a quid pro quo.
The woman is a complete and total disaster. She'll probably decide to double this latest offer by Christmas... I don't think there is any amount of money she wouldn't pay.
You read it first here.
Our hard-working nurses are forced to use foodbanks to eat but don't worry Juncker here's another £50bn. And there's more to come...
#ToryMeltdownIncoming
Trumpton:
The Mike Flynn story is becoming ever more deadly, for him, by the day.. Bear in mind apart from the corruption what you have to bear in mind is that Flynn was still head of the Defense Intelligence Agency when he had some very odd links to Russian figures. Trump is in that web. Start from the point of view that judges that what matters is appearances and the appearance of being very rich & therefore powerful and you get the idea of the guy's motivations and therefore his weaknesses. As ever, there is more bad news for him to come.
Forget about the old traditional idea of governments spying on governments and stealing state & commercial secrets, the extent of the Russian effort to undermine and destabilise Western democracies is breathtaking. Whilst I voted for Brexit and I believe in the genuine will of the people, the Russian effort to interfere with the democratic process is now best described as concerted. The question then is whether it could be described as decisive. There isn't a rock solid case that it was but the analysts are varied in their assessment, some believe that Russian front work and cash notably influential, others are not so convinced. What you see in the press focusses on online activity through social media but thats not the half of it.
Notable UK figures, some of which you'd expect, have already been flagged, others you'd maybe not think of are in the frame for making poor decisions in who and what they associated with in the support of their particular cause. They are both your typical leftists in Labour & UKIP and figures on the right in the Conservatives.
Looks as if we will be well on our way by Xmas. Then April and May will be a huge royal celebration with a new baby and a wedding in between the Commonwealth Heads of State conference in London with lots of trade deals to discuss
And of course lots of Union Jacks on display
Take contingent liabilities. There is a risk that Ireland does not pay back its bailout. Should Ireland not pay a single Euro of its bailout back, we are on the hook for a theoretical €5bn as our share. But it's (a) completely theoretical, (b) should be netted off against us getting €5bn of Irish debt, and (c) we could hedge our exposure with a CDS for about €150m anyway. That's us assuming €5bn of gross contingent liabilities.
We also need to look at "net" numbers. We sell our share of the EIB and get something between €7 and €14bn. (And to maximise the degree of fudge, they'll probably overpay us for our share in the EIB, and we'll pretend to be paying a higher gross liabilities figure.)
And let's look at pensions. If you have to pay a former MEP €20,000 in 2060 (making up numbers) then that isn't worth €20,000 today. It's perhaps worth €8,000 today. They will quote the undiscounted number, but the real price is a fraction of the headline.
The new feature is that the discount will be applied as each amount becomes due rather calculated in advance. This ambiguity allows the UK government to predict a very large discount and a relatively smaller final figure. By the time it all gets paid off everyone will have lost interest, even if the actual discounts aren't as high as the UK government initially predicted.
Today there's a magic £57 billion to get us out of Europe?
Tells me everything I need to know.
Apparently, the magic money tree only grows money for bribes and stupidity.
Are you worried yet, Jezza?
It's the time value of money that's the issue. Paying €1 in 2017 is very different to paying €1 in 2067.
I'd rather not pay the £57bn but one has to put it in context.
1) the UK signs up to 2019/2020 commitments (which the UK was always against), and .....
2) the UK gets a 15%ish claim on all EU assets (which Germany and plenty others were dead against).
Sell all your other possessions and get a Pixelbook.
My understanding is that Britain's contribution to the EU secretariats remain civil servants.
(i) we're leaving the EU in accordance with the Art. 50 timetable
(ii) there will be an OK trade deal (or the EU don't get our money they have already spent)
(iii) there has been serious shit ongoing in the background - whilst a whole lot of chaff was thrown around to obscure this
(iv) the Remainers thought the chaff was the serious shit. It really wasn't
(v) the price seems high - but ball-park for exiting. Those who complain about the price we'll have to pay should look to those who have silently signed up to those liabiliites to the EU for decades
(vi) Remainers now need to rely on arch Brexiteers derailing Brexit because it is too expensive - and thereby continuing to pay the tens of billions, year after year. Good luck with that.