politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Graham Brady – 1922 committee chairman and the only one who kn
Comments
-
Nope because we don't actually save that money. The "best case' includes payments to the EU.SouthamObserver said:
So in the best case scenario, all the money we save by not being in the EU gets spent instead on plugging around 70% of the tax shortfall caused by leaving the EU - and we’ve essentially agreed to leave in name only. Brilliant!!Barnesian said:
Yes very minor. If, after 15 years our growth is 8% less (WTO scenario) that staying in the EU, then with an economy of approx £2,000 billion, we would be £160b a year worse off in terms of size of economy. The Government would have approx £55b less in tax revenue than staying in the EU.Sean_F said:
It all seems to be minor stuff.Scott_P said:@AlbertoNardelli: The main driver for the economic hit under all modelled scenarios are non tariff barriers - EEA or FTAs with the US and others, and divergence, would mitigate but not eliminate the negative impact of leaving the customs union
@AlbertoNardelli: The analysis shines a light on the core of May's challenge: possibility of mitigating the damage of Brexit is in regulatory divergence and FTAs, but the more the UK diverges the greater the barriers with its biggest market and the economic hit
The FTA scenario is that we would be 5% worse off, £100b a year in size of econony and say £35b less tax revenue.
The EEA scenario is the most benign in that we would be 2% worse off, £40b a year in size of economy and say £15b less tax revenue.
But we would have blue passports.
There isn't the incentive for project fear that there was in a referendum campaign. There will be close questioning of the assumptions and methodology by the Cabinet, that there wasn't with Osborne's projections. I think they will take them seriously.0 -
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
-
It is precisely the point.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
Don't ports need to be somewhere near the sea ?David_Evershed said:
ALL CAR ASSEMBLY FACTORY LOCATIONS TO BE MADE FREEPORTS AND EXEMPT FROM IMPORT DUTIES AND CONTROLS - RUMOUR.Scott_P said:
Read the report.Mortimer said:Was it Scott finally realising it isn't all about Lattes and car parts?
Non-tariff barriers. Now, who said that? Repeatedly.
And how does it pertain to car parts?
oh...
0 -
I thought it was the equivalent to remoaner (rather than Brexiter and remainer), but I suppose it might be seen as positive due to the musketeer connection?Nigelb said:0 -
We won't have to sit on any boring ministerial meetings anymore! And the hassle of electing MEPs will be a thing of the past! In the new relationship it will all be seamless and automatic!RoyalBlue said:
I do wish backbenchers wouldn’t sound off like this. That said, once the Brexit subcommittee has agreed on the desired end state, they need to shout the benefits of it from the rooftops.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Have to say I'm really enjoying this descent into all out Brexiteer war in the Tory party. The Brexiteer MP's have just been pushed too far, and the elastic holding the whole lot is snapping, Corbyn not withstanding. The trouble is that everyone has so much dirt on everyone else, that it's a plague on all your houses. I'm glad that I'm out of that particular firing line thank you!Mortimer said:
Remainer Tories are willing to crash the government? yeh, right.Scott_P said:
The whole atmosphere in the Westminster village has been getting more and more unpleasant of recent times with threats and counter threats, and cover ups abound given the mutual dirt that everyone has in their own 'effective dossiers'. The chance of getting good government in this environment, irrespective of who you vote for is precisely nil.0 -
Yep - good point!! The best case scenario is we actually lose decision-making influence and gain almost no sovereignty while having a lower tax take. Rejoice!FF43 said:
Nope because we don't actually save that money. The "best case' includes payments to the EU.SouthamObserver said:
So in the best case scenario, all the money we save by not being in the EU gets spent instead on plugging around 70% of the tax shortfall caused by leaving the EU - and we’ve essentially agreed to leave in name only. Brilliant!!Barnesian said:
Yes very minor. If, after 15 years our growth is 8% less (WTO scenario) that staying in the EU, then with an economy of approx £2,000 billion, we would be £160b a year worse off in terms of size of economy. The Government would have approx £55b less in tax revenue than staying in the EU.Sean_F said:
It all seems to be minor stuff.Scott_P said:@AlbertoNardelli: The main driver for the economic hit under all modelled scenarios are non tariff barriers - EEA or FTAs with the US and others, and divergence, would mitigate but not eliminate the negative impact of leaving the customs union
@AlbertoNardelli: The analysis shines a light on the core of May's challenge: possibility of mitigating the damage of Brexit is in regulatory divergence and FTAs, but the more the UK diverges the greater the barriers with its biggest market and the economic hit
The FTA scenario is that we would be 5% worse off, £100b a year in size of econony and say £35b less tax revenue.
The EEA scenario is the most benign in that we would be 2% worse off, £40b a year in size of economy and say £15b less tax revenue.
But we would have blue passports.
There isn't the incentive for project fear that there was in a referendum campaign. There will be close questioning of the assumptions and methodology by the Cabinet, that there wasn't with Osborne's projections. I think they will take them seriously.
0 -
You are awful, but I like youwilliamglenn said:
We won't have to sit on any boring ministerial meetings anymore! And the hassle of electing MEPs will be a thing of the past! In the new relationship it will all be seamless and automatic!RoyalBlue said:
I do wish backbenchers wouldn’t sound off like this. That said, once the Brexit subcommittee has agreed on the desired end state, they need to shout the benefits of it from the rooftops.TheScreamingEagles said:
0 -
Not necessarily. It's relative to the counterfactual trend. If the next ten years repeats the last ten years we will be poorer, as actually happened to Italy , and as we discussed a couple of days ago.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than we would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
Looks like Dr Fox has seen the forecasts:
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/9581081635422576640 -
Wow.SouthamObserver said:Looks like Dr Fox has seen the forecasts:
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/9581081635422576640 -
Well, actually we will never know. Over the course of 15 years, the government will take all sorts of decisions, and all sorts of events will occur, which bear on economic growth. And, however well our economy performs, you will say it would have performed even better inside the EU.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than they would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
That's a possibility, but economies tend to grow over time, in the absence of war or very bad government.FF43 said:
Not necessarily. It's relative to the counterfactual trend. If the next ten years repeats the last ten years we will be poorer, as actually happened to Italy , and as we discussed a couple of days ago.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
And absolutely no-one is proposing changes to breaks or holiday pay.SouthamObserver said:
Why do people think that scare tactics like this are a decent contribution to debate?0 -
Might be.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than we would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
And then again, might not.
But like me, I'm sure you care more about democracy, right?0 -
Government spending plans are predicated on growth projections. Ours will now have to be reduced and that means less public spending than now and/or a lot more borrowing. This will have the greatest impact on the ordinary Leave voters the wealthy, privileged right wingers who led the Leave campaign pretended to care about.Sean_F said:
That's a possibility, but economies tend to grow over time, in the absence of war or very bad government.FF43 said:
Not necessarily. It's relative to the counterfactual trend. If the next ten years repeats the last ten years we will be poorer, as actually happened to Italy , and as we discussed a couple of days ago.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
0 -
If you would like to submit a list of terms you consider sufficiently positive, you could always post it here. I'm sure such a list would garner the exact amount of respect it deserves...RoyalBlue said:I love how arch Remainers still can’t use the term Brexiteer, because it might have too many positive connotations. Talk about insecurity.
0 -
The Sliding Doors option is not available so you cannot make a certainty of an uncertainty; even in the face of the certainty of that statement, you think that you can. That's delusional,Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than we would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
You're right that we won't be able to use the actual performance in 15 years time to calibrate the model because of the many perturbations there will be in practice between now and then.Sean_F said:
Well, actually we will never know. Over the course of 15 years, the government will take all sorts of decisions, and all sorts of events will occur, which bear on economic growth. And, however well our economy performs, you will say it would have performed even better inside the EU.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than they would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
But at this moment, the Cabinet is tasked with reviewing what the effect will be, relative to staying in the EU, of the various options before them. The analysis will have looked at the differential impact, sector by sector, of the various scenarios to come up with a best estimate
(which will of course be wrong in detail). It would be a dereliction of their duty to just shrug and say well all forecasts are wrong.
0 -
All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.0 -
Yet, tax revenues are rising, and public borrowing is falling. I am pretty confident that real public spending will be much higher in 2032 than it is today, subject to events, of course.SouthamObserver said:
Government spending plans are predicated on growth projections. Ours will now have to be reduced and that means less public spending than now and/or a lot more borrowing. This will have the greatest impact on the ordinary Leave voters the wealthy, privileged right wingers who led the Leave campaign pretended to care about.Sean_F said:
That's a possibility, but economies tend to grow over time, in the absence of war or very bad government.FF43 said:
Not necessarily. It's relative to the counterfactual trend. If the next ten years repeats the last ten years we will be poorer, as actually happened to Italy , and as we discussed a couple of days ago.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
I'm genuinely hating it. The Conservatives used to have a rep for decisive action and a will-to-power, which - for all its sins - had an air of competence. There are many terms you could use to describe the present administration, but competent would not be first on the list.hunchman said:Have to say I'm really enjoying this descent into all out Brexiteer war in the Tory party...
0 -
Because there are gullible idiots that believe them, but they're not the ones on their side of the argument. None of them ever learn. Why do Unions never campaign for hard work?oxfordsimon said:
And absolutely no-one is proposing changes to breaks or holiday pay.SouthamObserver said:
Why do people think that scare tactics like this are a decent contribution to debate?0 -
British voters were told they would be better off as a result of Brexit: wages would rise, public spending would increase, none of the benefits of EU membership would be lost. That will not happen. On the plus side, there is every chance that I will be a big Brexit winner - so it’s not all bad news!rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.
0 -
I care about the future health and wealth of this country and the future for my children and grandchildren and everybody elses. And I hope and believe that most MPs do too.Mortimer said:
Might be.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than we would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
And then again, might not.
But like me, I'm sure you care more about democracy, right?
I also care a great deal about democracy and the lamentable state of democracy in this country (eg 80,000 elderly Tory members choosing the next PM and the direction of this country for decades!) but that is a different issue at this point.0 -
Although given demographic challenges, that isn't that helpful.Sean_F said:
Yet, tax revenues are rising, and public borrowing is falling. I am pretty confident that real public spending will be much higher in 2032 than it is today, subject to events, of course.SouthamObserver said:
Government spending plans are predicated on growth projections. Ours will now have to be reduced and that means less public spending than now and/or a lot more borrowing. This will have the greatest impact on the ordinary Leave voters the wealthy, privileged right wingers who led the Leave campaign pretended to care about.Sean_F said:
That's a possibility, but economies tend to grow over time, in the absence of war or very bad government.FF43 said:
Not necessarily. It's relative to the counterfactual trend. If the next ten years repeats the last ten years we will be poorer, as actually happened to Italy , and as we discussed a couple of days ago.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
+1rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.
And just to add, forecasts will likely have less impact with individuals than their own anecdata.0 -
I was actually thinking racketeer.RoyalBlue said:
0 -
"in detail" is redundant and all recent economic forecasts have been wrong largely because they have been made from a position of partiality, like your posts.Barnesian said:
You're right that we won't be able to use the actual performance in 15 years time to calibrate the model because of the many perturbations there will be in practice between now and then.Sean_F said:
Well, actually we will never know. Over the course of 15 years, the government will take all sorts of decisions, and all sorts of events will occur, which bear on economic growth. And, however well our economy performs, you will say it would have performed even better inside the EU.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than they would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
But at this moment, the Cabinet is tasked with reviewing what the effect will be, relative to staying in the EU, of the various options before them. The analysis will have looked at the differential impact, sector by sector, of the various scenarios to come up with a best estimate
(which will of course be wrong in detail). It would be a dereliction of their duty to just shrug and say well all forecasts are wrong.0 -
Absolutely nobody is talking of threatening our place in the Single Market.oxfordsimon said:And absolutely no-one is proposing changes to breaks or holiday pay.
Oh, wait...0 -
-
The Irish example is relevant. An economy that depended on expatriating anyone who could work wasn't a happy one. I accept there was no serious attempt to reverse independence but if anything slightly similar happened with the Brexit economy, you have to ask whether it was worth it. Currently half the population (and marginally increasing) don't think so.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.
0 -
Economically, I think the good news has outweighed the bad over the past 18 months. I cannot categorically say that this is due to the Brexit vote, or that it will continue in the future, or that the news would not have been better still if the vote had gone the other way. But, it's been a lot better than most forecasters expected.SouthamObserver said:
British voters were told they would be better off as a result of Brexit: wages would rise, public spending would increase, none of the benefits of EU membership would be lost. That will not happen. On the plus side, there is every chance that I will be a big Brexit winner - so it’s not all bad news!rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.0 -
That sounds like a deep philosophical point.ReggieCide said:
The Sliding Doors option is not available so you cannot make a certainty of an uncertainty; even in the face of the certainty of that statement, you think that you can. That's delusional,Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than we would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...0 -
When the next recession comes it won't just be blamed on Brexit, the voters voted for Brexit after all, it will be blamed on the government of the day too. Though even that does not necessarily mean a change of government if the alternative is seen as worse, see 1992rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.0 -
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...
0 -
-
Well it will reverse Blairism and Cameronomics, firstly cutting immigration then hitting big business and the richNigelb said:
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...0 -
Let's put it this way, if we're talking forecasts:Barnesian said:
I care about the future health and wealth of this country and the future for my children and grandchildren and everybody elses. And I hope and believe that most MPs do too.Mortimer said:
Might be.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than we would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
And then again, might not.
But like me, I'm sure you care more about democracy, right?
I also care a great deal about democracy and the lamentable state of democracy in this country (eg 80,000 elderly Tory members choosing the next PM and the direction of this country for decades!) but that is a different issue at this point.
Forecast one:
We leave the EU, as the people decided they want to do. We experience growth over the next 15 years.
Forecast two:
We don't decide to leave the EU, despite the people deciding they wanted to. We experience slightly stronger growth over the next 15 years.
Two will result in more heartache, and, most certainly, a rejection of normal political means by some.
That is not a healthy or wealthy country.0 -
I admit my posts are partial, as are yours. But do you think these latest forecasts are partial? Ministers are going to crawl all over the methods and assumptions. It looks as if Fox might have accepted them (waiting for confirmation of that).ReggieCide said:
"in detail" is redundant and all recent economic forecasts have been wrong largely because they have been made from a position of partiality, like your posts.Barnesian said:
You're right that we won't be able to use the actual performance in 15 years time to calibrate the model because of the many perturbations there will be in practice between now and then.Sean_F said:
Well, actually we will never know. Over the course of 15 years, the government will take all sorts of decisions, and all sorts of events will occur, which bear on economic growth. And, however well our economy performs, you will say it would have performed even better inside the EU.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than they would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
But at this moment, the Cabinet is tasked with reviewing what the effect will be, relative to staying in the EU, of the various options before them. The analysis will have looked at the differential impact, sector by sector, of the various scenarios to come up with a best estimate
(which will of course be wrong in detail). It would be a dereliction of their duty to just shrug and say well all forecasts are wrong.0 -
They didn't complain, they just left the country.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
"In the twentieth century mass emigration reached levels during the 1940s and 1950s that were reminiscent of the 1850s, in the aftermath of the Great Irish Famine."
http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/generationemigration/2011/11/02/traditions-of-emigration-the-irish-habit-of-going-away/
0 -
My nearest port is Heathrow.Nigelb said:
Don't ports need to be somewhere near the sea ?David_Evershed said:
ALL CAR ASSEMBLY FACTORY LOCATIONS TO BE MADE FREEPORTS AND EXEMPT FROM IMPORT DUTIES AND CONTROLS - RUMOUR.Scott_P said:
Read the report.Mortimer said:Was it Scott finally realising it isn't all about Lattes and car parts?
Non-tariff barriers. Now, who said that? Repeatedly.
And how does it pertain to car parts?
oh...0 -
Corbynomics doesn't require any additional ingredient to be nightmarish.Nigelb said:
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...0 -
As I've said before, in a normal climate Corbyn wouldn't stand a cat in hells chance of becoming PM. It is a measure of the incompetence, and ruination of many people's life chances as a result of the powers that be that run this country that Corbyn has any chance at all. Ask the young about the reality of their lives - a massive proportion of their money going out on rent, no realistic prospect of owning a house et etc, and you can see what a fertile seam Corbyn was mining last June, irrespective of the utter ruination that him and his ilk would bring to Britain, were they ever to enter the gates of 10 Downing Street.viewcode said:
I'm genuinely hating it. The Conservatives used to have a rep for decisive action and a will-to-power, which - for all its sins - had an air of competence. There are many terms you could use to describe the present administration, but competent would not be first on the list.hunchman said:Have to say I'm really enjoying this descent into all out Brexiteer war in the Tory party...
0 -
This is surely the only best chance Boris will get to flounce out in the name of pure Brexit?Scott_P said:0 -
Free Trade Zone. If it's a question of removing import barriers on components but subject the completed vehicle to the aggregate duty on release from the compound that would I expect be acceptable to the EU. It would reduce the administrative burden and delay in collecting duties on every component. Any selective reduction of tax rates I suspect would go against any trade agreement with the EU.Nigelb said:
Don't ports need to be somewhere near the sea ?David_Evershed said:
ALL CAR ASSEMBLY FACTORY LOCATIONS TO BE MADE FREEPORTS AND EXEMPT FROM IMPORT DUTIES AND CONTROLS - RUMOUR.Scott_P said:
Read the report.Mortimer said:Was it Scott finally realising it isn't all about Lattes and car parts?
Non-tariff barriers. Now, who said that? Repeatedly.
And how does it pertain to car parts?
oh...0 -
Forecasts don't turn out to be wrong because they are partial, they turn out to be wrong because they are forecasts. It is extraordinary how everyone will assent in principle to the proposition that the future is unknowable, but not act as if that were true.Barnesian said:
I admit my posts are partial, as are yours. But do you think these latest forecasts are partial? Ministers are going to crawl all over the methods and assumptions. It looks as if Fox might have accepted them (waiting for confirmation of that).ReggieCide said:
"in detail" is redundant and all recent economic forecasts have been wrong largely because they have been made from a position of partiality, like your posts.Barnesian said:
You're right that we won't be able to use the actual performance in 15 years time to calibrate the model because of the many perturbations there will be in practice between now and then.Sean_F said:
Well, actually we will never know. Over the course of 15 years, the government will take all sorts of decisions, and all sorts of events will occur, which bear on economic growth. And, however well our economy performs, you will say it would have performed even better inside the EU.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than they would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
But at this moment, the Cabinet is tasked with reviewing what the effect will be, relative to staying in the EU, of the various options before them. The analysis will have looked at the differential impact, sector by sector, of the various scenarios to come up with a best estimate
(which will of course be wrong in detail). It would be a dereliction of their duty to just shrug and say well all forecasts are wrong.0 -
At the end of the day, partiality is unavoidable. It's the combination with constructiveness which is critical and I think that is where you and I (and the forecasts) differ.Barnesian said:
I admit my posts are partial, as are yours. But do you think these latest forecasts are partial? Ministers are going to crawl all over the methods and assumptions. It looks as if Fox might have accepted them (waiting for confirmation of that).ReggieCide said:
"in detail" is redundant and all recent economic forecasts have been wrong largely because they have been made from a position of partiality, like your posts.Barnesian said:
You're right that we won't be able to use the actual performance in 15 years time to calibrate the model because of the many perturbations there will be in practice between now and then.Sean_F said:
Well, actually we will never know. Over the course of 15 years, the government will take all sorts of decisions, and all sorts of events will occur, which bear on economic growth. And, however well our economy performs, you will say it would have performed even better inside the EU.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than they would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
But at this moment, the Cabinet is tasked with reviewing what the effect will be, relative to staying in the EU, of the various options before them. The analysis will have looked at the differential impact, sector by sector, of the various scenarios to come up with a best estimate
(which will of course be wrong in detail). It would be a dereliction of their duty to just shrug and say well all forecasts are wrong.
Fox is not forecasting anything - it is pretty clear that, as things stand at present, a hard Brexit (by virtually any definition I can think of) is unachievable. He still has his partiality but it's (for him) strangely constructive.0 -
much more eruditely put than I managed.Ishmael_Z said:
Forecasts don't turn out to be wrong because they are partial, they turn out to be wrong because they are forecasts. It is extraordinary how everyone will assent in principle to the proposition that the future is unknowable, but not act as if that were true.Barnesian said:
I admit my posts are partial, as are yours. But do you think these latest forecasts are partial? Ministers are going to crawl all over the methods and assumptions. It looks as if Fox might have accepted them (waiting for confirmation of that).ReggieCide said:
"in detail" is redundant and all recent economic forecasts have been wrong largely because they have been made from a position of partiality, like your posts.Barnesian said:
You're right that we won't be able to use the actual performance in 15 years time to calibrate the model because of the many perturbations there will be in practice between now and then.Sean_F said:
Well, actually we will never know. Over the course of 15 years, the government will take all sorts of decisions, and all sorts of events will occur, which bear on economic growth. And, however well our economy performs, you will say it would have performed even better inside the EU.Barnesian said:
Are you trying to spin this or do you really not get the point that we would be considerably worse off than they would be if we stayed in the EU (even though we may be better off than now) and that this really matters.?Mortimer said:
When people throw around the term poorer in relation to predictions, none of which make the country poorer, I think it very much is.Barnesian said:
That isn't the point as you know.Sean_F said:
Fortunately, the situation doesn't arise. Under any scenario, we are likely to be substantially richer in 15 years than we are today.Scott_P said:
I wouldn't vote to be 8% poorer.John_M said:Scott is the kind of person who wouldn't do anything if it reduced the rate at which he became wealthier by 0.33% a year.
YMMV...
But at this moment, the Cabinet is tasked with reviewing what the effect will be, relative to staying in the EU, of the various options before them. The analysis will have looked at the differential impact, sector by sector, of the various scenarios to come up with a best estimate
(which will of course be wrong in detail). It would be a dereliction of their duty to just shrug and say well all forecasts are wrong.0 -
I must have missed the bit where he said we should stay in the EU?Scott_P said:0 -
There is an important point to make about these economic forecasts. The upside prospects, to the extent they exist at all, are all of the "something might turn up" kind. Meanwhile the downside risks are here and now and concrete. If we don't stay in the Single Market, have financial services passports, have freeflow customs points etc etc, there will be quantifiable costs. You won't estimate it perfectly, but if you have more barriers you will have more costs and if you mitigate them, you will have fewer.0
-
Lol @ "cannot categorically say...".Sean_F said:
Economically, I think the good news has outweighed the bad over the past 18 months. I cannot categorically say that this is due to the Brexit vote, or that it will continue in the future, or that the news would not have been better still if the vote had gone the other way. But, it's been a lot better than most forecasters expected.SouthamObserver said:
British voters were told they would be better off as a result of Brexit: wages would rise, public spending would increase, none of the benefits of EU membership would be lost. That will not happen. On the plus side, there is every chance that I will be a big Brexit winner - so it’s not all bad news!rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.
I have yet to hear even the most zealous Brexiter suggest that the unexpected surge in economic performance across the world, most notably in the Eurozone, was down to the Brexit vote! Just a shame Britain is benefiting less than most, eh?0 -
"The new feminist war: young women vs old women
Attempts by older women to moderate youthful anger are often seen as a gross abuse of their power
Jenny McCartney"
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/01/the-metoo-fury-has-spilled-over-into-a-feminist-war/0 -
If only there was a site for wagering money based on forecasting election results...Ishmael_Z said:Forecasts don't turn out to be wrong because they are partial, they turn out to be wrong because they are forecasts. It is extraordinary how everyone will assent in principle to the proposition that the future is unknowable, but not act as if that were true.
0 -
The developed world, and in particular the Eurozone, has put on a significant spurt of growth in the last 18 months.Sean_F said:
Economically, I think the good news has outweighed the bad over the past 18 months. I cannot categorically say that this is due to the Brexit vote, or that it will continue in the future, or that the news would not have been better still if the vote had gone the other way. But, it's been a lot better than most forecasters expected.SouthamObserver said:
British voters were told they would be better off as a result of Brexit: wages would rise, public spending would increase, none of the benefits of EU membership would be lost. That will not happen. On the plus side, there is every chance that I will be a big Brexit winner - so it’s not all bad news!rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.
I don't think that's due to Brexit, more to savings rates across the world now returning to more normal levels after having been elevated for some time.0 -
Savings rates?rcs1000 said:
The developed world, and in particular the Eurozone, has put on a significant spurt of growth in the last 18 months.Sean_F said:
Economically, I think the good news has outweighed the bad over the past 18 months. I cannot categorically say that this is due to the Brexit vote, or that it will continue in the future, or that the news would not have been better still if the vote had gone the other way. But, it's been a lot better than most forecasters expected.SouthamObserver said:
British voters were told they would be better off as a result of Brexit: wages would rise, public spending would increase, none of the benefits of EU membership would be lost. That will not happen. On the plus side, there is every chance that I will be a big Brexit winner - so it’s not all bad news!rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more.
All that being said...
1. There will be Brexit losers, and they will be mad as hell. Even if Brexit is positive economically in the next three years, the losers will be sore, and the winners won't care.
2. When the next recession comes, it will be blamed on Brexit.
I don't think that's due to Brexit, more to savings rates across the world now returning to more normal levels after having been elevated for some time.
How have ours moved compared with other countries?0 -
I think many Britons prefer a Corbyn Brexit to a Hannanite one.Nigelb said:
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...
That is the Nemesis that follows Hubris.0 -
with only 6000 votes between him and Labour's candidate in Altrincham.... Brady will not want to fight a lacklustre election campaign under May.0
-
Like your avatar.kle4 said:Not a fan of Man Utd, Mike?
0 -
Gavin Williamson could be the next PM in a few months' time and I've just realised I don't even know what he sounds like. There have been quite a lot of pictures of him walking around Westminster on the news recently but not many with him actually talking.0
-
Cars tend not to travel by air.Independent_Colin said:
My nearest port is Heathrow.Nigelb said:
Don't ports need to be somewhere near the sea ?David_Evershed said:
ALL CAR ASSEMBLY FACTORY LOCATIONS TO BE MADE FREEPORTS AND EXEMPT FROM IMPORT DUTIES AND CONTROLS - RUMOUR.Scott_P said:
Read the report.Mortimer said:Was it Scott finally realising it isn't all about Lattes and car parts?
Non-tariff barriers. Now, who said that? Repeatedly.
And how does it pertain to car parts?
oh...
And I must have missed Cowley airport.
0 -
Worse tha he looks.AndyJS said:Gavin Williamson could be the next PM in a few months' time and I've just realised I don't even know what he sounds like. There have been quite a lot of pictures of him walking around Westminster on the news recently but not many with him actually talking.
0 -
Turning car plants into free trade zones is going to set an 'interesting' precedent...FF43 said:
Free Trade Zone. If it's a question of removing import barriers on components but subject the completed vehicle to the aggregate duty on release from the compound that would I expect be acceptable to the EU. It would reduce the administrative burden and delay in collecting duties on every component. Any selective reduction of tax rates I suspect would go against any trade agreement with the EU.Nigelb said:
Don't ports need to be somewhere near the sea ?David_Evershed said:
ALL CAR ASSEMBLY FACTORY LOCATIONS TO BE MADE FREEPORTS AND EXEMPT FROM IMPORT DUTIES AND CONTROLS - RUMOUR.Scott_P said:
Read the report.Mortimer said:Was it Scott finally realising it isn't all about Lattes and car parts?
Non-tariff barriers. Now, who said that? Repeatedly.
And how does it pertain to car parts?
oh...
As a thought experiment, a Free Port of Sunderland is actually quite an interesting idea, but as a policy for the UK car industry, I'm not even slightly convinced that this has been thought through. Let alone scrutinised.
0 -
Isn't there some Law of access to the sea treaty. Free port of Cowley would oblige rUK to provide access to a sea port for its goods. I think there is an active dispute between South American nations over this.Nigelb said:
Cars tend not to travel by air.Independent_Colin said:
My nearest port is Heathrow.Nigelb said:
Don't ports need to be somewhere near the sea ?David_Evershed said:
ALL CAR ASSEMBLY FACTORY LOCATIONS TO BE MADE FREEPORTS AND EXEMPT FROM IMPORT DUTIES AND CONTROLS - RUMOUR.Scott_P said:
Read the report.Mortimer said:Was it Scott finally realising it isn't all about Lattes and car parts?
Non-tariff barriers. Now, who said that? Repeatedly.
And how does it pertain to car parts?
oh...
And I must have missed Cowley airport.
I had wondered whether we could invoke it for transit of Irish goods to the EU somehow, despite Ireland obviously having its own sea border.0 -
I think Corbyn has been very lucky to be in the right place at the right time. A lot of arguments the left have been making for a long time are beginning to look quite attractive at last. Even if Brexit collapses - which is looking quite possible - I don't think British politics is going back to where it was.Foxy said:
I think many Britons prefer a Corbyn Brexit to a Hannanite one.Nigelb said:
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...
That is the Nemesis that follows Hubris.0 -
There is a reason for that, I suspect. He simply doesn't have gravitas when talking.AndyJS said:Gavin Williamson could be the next PM in a few months' time and I've just realised I don't even know what he sounds like. There have been quite a lot of pictures of him walking around Westminster on the news recently but not many with him actually talking.
@Richard_Nabavi pointed out his style might be a problem for him months ago. I doubt anything has changed.0 -
It would be the country that is unlucky then because Corbyn is simply not up to high-end administration. As PM he would be a more malevolent, less competent and less charismatic version of May.Recidivist said:
I think Corbyn has been very lucky to be in the right place at the right time. A lot of arguments the left have been making for a long time are beginning to look quite attractive at last. Even if Brexit collapses - which is looking quite possible - I don't think British politics is going back to where it was.
I would be considerably less worried about the takeover by the left if it were led by say Trickett, who may be an invisible idiot but is at least a fairly intelligent invisible idiot.0 -
The "unless" is, unless May can deliver on the agenda she set out in Downing Street upon taking office. Which of course she can't, for myriad reasons that don't need repeating. She did at least see clearly the nature and magnitude of the problem ahead of her party (as indeed she did all those years ago with the Nasty Party comment). It's a shame her analytical skills are so lonely.Recidivist said:
I think Corbyn has been very lucky to be in the right place at the right time. A lot of arguments the left have been making for a long time are beginning to look quite attractive at last. Even if Brexit collapses - which is looking quite possible - I don't think British politics is going back to where it was.Foxy said:
I think many Britons prefer a Corbyn Brexit to a Hannanite one.Nigelb said:
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...
That is the Nemesis that follows Hubris.0 -
The defence secretary came under renewed pressure when three former security chiefs said that a decision to move defence out of a Whitehall-wide review was a “backward step”.
Lord Ricketts, a former national security adviser, said in a veiled swipe at Gavin Williamson that he thought the move was driven by politics.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/gavin-williamson-accused-of-playing-politics-on-defence-spending-07r82mx0m0 -
As a constituent in Altrincham and Sale West, I would consider this seat as safe as houses for the Tories; they retained it even in the Labour landslide of 1997. The 2017 result flatters Labour to deceive; the anti-Tory vote got behind Labour in this pro-Remain area - Brady is a Brexiteer.swing_voter said:with only 6000 votes between him and Labour's candidate in Altrincham.... Brady will not want to fight a lacklustre election campaign under May.
I am assuming that the boundary changes will not go through - if they do, Brady would be challenging McVey (now a cabinet minister) for the new seat of Altrincham and Knutsford.0 -
Morning all,
Finally got to see 'Darkest Hour' last night. Superb from Oldman.0 -
Excuse me.. but playing politics with defence spending has been happening forever, bit of a week attack really.TheScreamingEagles said:The defence secretary came under renewed pressure when three former security chiefs said that a decision to move defence out of a Whitehall-wide review was a “backward step”.
Lord Ricketts, a former national security adviser, said in a veiled swipe at Gavin Williamson that he thought the move was driven by politics.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/gavin-williamson-accused-of-playing-politics-on-defence-spending-07r82mx0m0 -
Where comes this illusion that you can choose your type of Brexit?
The Ben Bradshaw type negotiation ... we can stay in the common market and customs union if we want - is not Brexit, because it means FOM, obeying EU rules and paying the usual subs. I'm sure that can be negotiated. All it means is we lose influence. A bonus for the Europhiles.
The Labour pretend-Brexit is having the common market and customs union without freedom of movement or blind obedience to EU rules and the payments is nonsensical. If the EU agreed to that, they know it would herald the break-up of the EU. Every other country would want that too. And to back down on the four freedoms means they'd be exposed as paper tigers.
We are negotiating within these parameters. Trying to pretend that negotiating harder or better will achieve the Labour party goal is nonsensical and they know it. As for Bradshaw, he's just a lying toad, as usual.
Why don't the media spell this out?
At least, Mrs May was honest at the beginning. She may be incompetent but since when has honesty been a vice?
0 -
Trump apparently planning to stream names of donors for his re-election campaign during the state of the union address:
https://www.business2community.com/government-politics/donald-trump-displaying-names-campaign-donors-state-union-fact-check-02003490
And to think we getting wound up about a photo of party officials outside No.10 recently....0 -
It’s highly annoying to read the overnight threads and see the same voices denying the economic downside of Brexit.
The Irish example is apposite. When you leave a larger market, you suffer - all things being equal. We are already some billions down where we would have been, according to the OBR and the IMF. You can rubbish that if you like but I’d rather take their econometric analysis than your armchair scoffing.
That’s money we could be spending on health, housing, or end-of-life care.
What the new analysis tells us is that any other FTAs will not compensate for the loss of the single market. Even Fox gets it. Time some of the PB Tories did!0 -
This the appeal of Corbynism. Foreign military adventures, a casino banking economy, privatisation of public services, casualisation of the workforce and a life enslaved by debt have all lost their sheen. The consensus over the British and European economic and political settlement has well and truly broken. Corbyn sounds prophetic in times where few other predictions come true.Recidivist said:
I think Corbyn has been very lucky to be in the right place at the right time. A lot of arguments the left have been making for a long time are beginning to look quite attractive at last. Even if Brexit collapses - which is looking quite possible - I don't think British politics is going back to where it was.Foxy said:
I think many Britons prefer a Corbyn Brexit to a Hannanite one.Nigelb said:
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...
That is the Nemesis that follows Hubris.
0 -
I agree.rcs1000 said:
The developed world, and in particular the Eurozone, has put on a significant spurt of growth in the last 18 months.Sean_F said:
Economically, I think the good news has outweighed the bad over the past 18 months. I cannot categorically say that this is due to the Brexit vote, or that it will continue in the future, or that the news would not have been better still if the vote had gone the other way. But, it's been a lot better than most forecasters expected.SouthamObserver said:
I don't think that's due to Brexit, more to savings rates across the world now returning to more normal levels after having been elevated for some time.
It is yet another level of complication for Brexit performance. When Osborne took over in 2010 the policy of "austerity" was substantially overstated compared to the reality. The result was that the UK economy continued to be stimulated by very large government deficits. This could have been offset by very poor wage growth but the Great British consumer dug into their already meagre savings to keep consumption growing. The result was that the UK outperformed the rest of the EU (where the German dominated ECB was imposing a much harsher regime) by a considerable distance.
In more recent times our deficit has in fact fallen to more "normal" levels. At the same time the consumer has found it more difficult to maintain spending after a very prolonged fall in real wages. The BoE has also stopped QE. All of these have resulted in a slow down in the UK economy although they have been offset by the fall in Sterling after the Brexit vote to some extent. In contrast the ECB has relaxed monetary policy somewhat on the continent belatedly taking up QE and the EU consumer has picked up the baton from the UK consumer to some degree. The result is that their growth has accelerated.
This really emphasises Robert's main point. The domestic policies of governments are vastly more important to growth than any possible friction arising in trade. Trying to identify a Brexit effect on growth will be impossible because domestic policy will completely swamp the marginal effects.0 -
"If Britain were led by a chess grandmaster who moonlighted as a Nobel-winning game theorist, it would still face the same choices as Mrs May"
https://www.ft.com/content/a4381078-0295-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b50 -
I think I missed this off ...
Long live Chairman Mogg.
Down with the EU fifth column.
Down with the fascist running dogs to the EU hyena.
Move the capital of the UK to Boston.
0 -
John MajorAndyJS said:Gavin Williamson could be the next PM in a few months' time and I've just realised I don't even know what he sounds like. There have been quite a lot of pictures of him walking around Westminster on the news recently but not many with him actually talking.
0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Mr. CD13, quite. Following all the rules and having no say whatsoever is drunken madness.0 -
Brexit is exactly what the left needed.Foxy said:
This the appeal of Corbynism. Foreign military adventures, a casino banking economy, privatisation of public services, casualisation of the workforce and a life enslaved by debt have all lost their sheen. The consensus over the British and European economic and political settlement has well and truly broken. Corbyn sounds prophetic in times where few other predictions come true.Recidivist said:
I think Corbyn has been very lucky to be in the right place at the right time. A lot of arguments the left have been making for a long time are beginning to look quite attractive at last. Even if Brexit collapses - which is looking quite possible - I don't think British politics is going back to where it was.Foxy said:
I think many Britons prefer a Corbyn Brexit to a Hannanite one.Nigelb said:
Makes sense... but imagine Brexit plus Corbynomics.rcs1000 said:All this stuff about economic forecasts is rubbish.
Let me give two examples, and two warnings.
1. Ireland substantially underperformed the UK economically in the fifty years following independence (and that despite not having an economy destroyed by the second world war). There was no great "Oh my! Independence from the UK was such a mistake!" movement in Ireland.
2. The success, or failure, of Brexit Britain depends far, far more on domestic policy decisions than it does on our future relationship with the EU. This doesn't mean our future relationship isn't important (it is), but the decisions made by our politicians regarding the tax system. welfare policy and education all matter far more...
That is the Nemesis that follows Hubris.0 -
Switzerland has one of the highest number of Freeport's in the worldNigelb said:
Don't ports need to be somewhere near the sea ?David_Evershed said:
ALL CAR ASSEMBLY FACTORY LOCATIONS TO BE MADE FREEPORTS AND EXEMPT FROM IMPORT DUTIES AND CONTROLS - RUMOUR.Scott_P said:
Read the report.Mortimer said:Was it Scott finally realising it isn't all about Lattes and car parts?
Non-tariff barriers. Now, who said that? Repeatedly.
And how does it pertain to car parts?
oh...0 -
I see that Brexit has once again this morning become a holy grail for Leavers, inexpressibly important but unexplainable, visible only to the purest. The quest continues, the costs irrelevant.0
-
If only someone had warned us about the risks of Brexit....Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Mr. CD13, quite. Following all the rules and having no say whatsoever is drunken madness.0 -
Mr. Meeks, that's a paradox I'm not sure you get. The very difficulty of leaving convinces many of those who were worried about the EU getting too much power that that's already the case and, whilst departing is troublesome, we're getting out before the tentacles tighten their grip and escape is impossible.
Things are going to be rocky, but hardcore Remainers need to beware they don't sound like they're siding with the EU against the UK.0 -
Mr Meeks,
"I se that Brexit has once again this morning become a holy grail for Leavers."
It's becoming that way. It's a sign that the ignored still have a say, despite the superior prognostications of the self-elected elite. A beacon for true democracy.
I voted Leave and would vote Leave again, but why should I have to?0 -
fair point. Leavers also need not to equate themselves with the UK.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Meeks, that's a paradox I'm not sure you get. The very difficulty of leaving convinces many of those who were worried about the EU getting too much power that that's already the case and, whilst departing is troublesome, we're getting out before the tentacles tighten their grip and escape is impossible.
Things are going to be rocky, but hardcore Remainers need to beware they don't sound like they're siding with the EU against the UK.0 -
Major beat Heseltine in the final round but I am not sure Williamson would beat Boris, especially with the membershipJonathan said:
John MajorAndyJS said:Gavin Williamson could be the next PM in a few months' time and I've just realised I don't even know what he sounds like. There have been quite a lot of pictures of him walking around Westminster on the news recently but not many with him actually talking.
0 -
All I get is that Leavers are utterly unconcerned how much damage is inflicted on Britain so long as they get the most extreme separation from the EU that they can. They are unhinged.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Meeks, that's a paradox I'm not sure you get. The very difficulty of leaving convinces many of those who were worried about the EU getting too much power that that's already the case and, whilst departing is troublesome, we're getting out before the tentacles tighten their grip and escape is impossible.
Things are going to be rocky, but hardcore Remainers need to beware they don't sound like they're siding with the EU against the UK.0 -
Quite posh despite his northern background, he spoke to Laura Kuenssberg after leaving Cabinet recentlyAndyJS said:Gavin Williamson could be the next PM in a few months' time and I've just realised I don't even know what he sounds like. There have been quite a lot of pictures of him walking around Westminster on the news recently but not many with him actually talking.
0 -
Why do they need to "beware"? Are the Taleaveban going to come round and brick my windows for insufficient patriotism?Morris_Dancer said:
Things are going to be rocky, but hardcore Remainers need to beware they don't sound like they're siding with the EU against the UK.
0
