politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The money goes on an early exit for Corbyn

GET IN THERE ENGLAND!!!!!

That is all, back to lurking for the rest of my holiday. Until Sunday.

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

In the debate he said 'in the forthcoming election' he will either call it for September or Grieve, Stewart, Lee etc back the opposition and VONC him anyway.

With a majority after that election he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement he voted for at MV3 minus the temporary Customs Union for GB and ignore the DUP

Is he going to extend article 50 in order to facilitate the election??

No, it will be held by October 31st.

If he wins a majority we will leave Deal or No Deal then, even a temporary No Deal before the Withdrawal Agreement is passed

That doesn't work. Once we have left the EU we can't have the Withdrawal Agreement because we become a third party, and treaties between us and the EU require a significantly more tortuous process.

The Withdrawal Agreement is merely a precursor to FTA talks, nothing more

It is an agreement which the EU won't agree to.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The_Taxman said:

HYUFD said:

The_Taxman said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

DavidL said:

HYUFD said:

DavidL said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

IanB2 said:

I am not convinced, either. If there is an election in the wind, he’ll want one more go, and we won’t be clear of possible electoral imminence until Bozo has settled in and until after halloween, and with a likely further extension, probably not until early 2020.

So, if the EU says "yes, we will renegotiate the backstop", then Boris will say:

"Ha! No time, sorry suxxers. We're out we No Deal"?

"

But May brought in the UK customs union because the DUP were adamant that they would not accept a NI one. I don’t think that has changed.

There’s the small detail of the DUP being the government’s majority.

I said 'if he wins a majority.'

Boris needs to win an early autumn general election with a majority, then he will grow the DUP under a bus

Boris also promised no election.

In the debate he said 'in the forthcoming election' he will either call it for September or Grieve, Stewart, Lee etc back the opposition and VONC him anyway.

With a majority after that election he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement he voted for at MV3 minus the temporary Customs Union for GB and ignore the DUP

Optimism is great but unfortunately reality tends never to produce the results we want. The Tories will go backwards in a GE. If May was dreadful . I keep telling you the 70 seat rule but you persist in niave fantasy!

https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1148312432768684032?s=20

Tory majority 36 under Boris

lol - you are incorrigible!

Not really. He is a zealot and is heading for an embarrassing loss of face

I seem to recall I was one of the few people on this blog to predict Boris would be next Tory leader, so while some may be heading for loss of face it will certainly not be me

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

algarkirk said:

rottenborough said:

The Conservative party is morphing into the GOP before our eyes:

https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1149198151414427653

Yes, that's what happens when a large group of people feel, with reason, that powers and independence which they value has been eroded without consent, that parliament has overlooked the importance of getting real consent before sharing and pooling its sovereignty bit by bit and thus limiting its own powers. Then, when we have decided to take those powers back it is obvious that large numbers of people intend to stop it happening by any means they can. The sources of this crisis lie well in the past and cannot be quickly sorted. Both sides are prepared to use any tactics to get their way.

Yes it is all very unConservative, but these sorts of spats are now inevitable.

"Without real consent"

Did we stop having general elections in the 1973 - 2016 period then?

Effectively yes.

Considering the Labour manifesto for the General Election in 2005 said that Lisbon Treaty (then constitution) wouldn't be ratified without a referendum first, then it irreversibly was. Simply kicking out Labour in 2010 wasn't sufficient to undo their duplicity.

Staggering. According to you we "effectively stopped" having General Elections over a 43 year period.

I need to have a lie down. I'm feeling, retrospectively, oppressed.

I'm saying if at an election a party promises one thing then irreversibly changes things to do the complete opposite of what they said at the election then there was no consent.

Had manifesto commitments been honoured there would have been no Lisbon Treaty (or it would have gone through after consent was given at a referendum).

You mean like Boris Johnson ruling out No Deal during the referendum then delivering No Deal?

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

In the debate he said 'in the forthcoming election' he will either call it for September or Grieve, Stewart, Lee etc back the opposition and VONC him anyway.

With a majority after that election he can pass the Withdrawal Agreement he voted for at MV3 minus the temporary Customs Union for GB and ignore the DUP

Is he going to extend article 50 in order to facilitate the election??

No, it will be held by October 31st.

If he wins a majority we will leave Deal or No Deal then, even a temporary No Deal before the Withdrawal Agreement is passed

If he has a majority, why can you not say whether it will be with a deal or without? If we leave with no deal then the treaties will cease to apply. The WA can't be passed retrospectively.

The Withdrawal Agreement simply tidied up citizens' rights, the exit Bill and NI border to enable FTA talks to start, of course it can be passed even during a No Deal period

It ceases to exist after withdrawal! The rights and arrangements it grants cease upon departure! To assume that you can just reaquire them at your leisure is just silly!

(Deep breath)

Please stop saying such silly things. Things are bad enough without telling people you can stand on the quay and the ship will return to pick you up once you have decided how much fare you would like to pay.

Richard_Nabavi said:

rural_voter said:

Is it just me who still finds that comments will not load on the 'normal' website:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/11/the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/#vanilla-comments

but will here:
https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/7769/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/p4?

I greatly prefer the 'normal' website but it's been out of action for quite a while. If it makes any difference, I use Firefox and Windows 7.

I get the same problem with Chrome. I don't get the problem in Opera or Microsoft Edge (and Opera is really rather good).

Yes, the .com site doesn't show comments on this laptop using Firefox. Nor does the ipad using safari. Is there a solution?

rcs1000 said:

I find comments like this staggering. There's no analysis. There's no actual thought about the impact on the UK of imposition of tariffs. There's no measuring of the impact of dropping out of tax treaties. There's no question about what happens at borders and ports, and the rights of Brits in the EU (or vice-versa).

Instead, because Europhiles warned us of bad things in the past, and they didn't happen, then No Deal will be "negligible if not positive".

At the very least, there will be less trade betwee the EU and the UK. That seems an absolute given. (And ignores any other impacts.) As UK firms would not enter into this trade unless it was in their interests to do so, then any dimuntion must affect the UK negatively.

I have ridiculed people who said there might be medicine or food shortages. But the idea that there will be no impact of having tariffs slapped on around half our exports is laughable.

Just because there was no analysis in my retort doesn't mean there was no analysis behind it. There was no analysis in the post I replied to either. Furthermore I think Non-Tariff Barriers are a bigger risk than Tariffs.

But lets look at Tariffs and what follows is an overly-simplistic analysis since you asked for one and there's a character limit.

The WTO average of tariffs is 4%. That sounds significant but can be drowned out by the variance in Sterling.

So on average our goods may cost EU consumers/businesses 4% more, under ceteris paribus. But the likely impact of an immediate no deal scenario will be a fall in pound sterling. Probably at least 10% fall. So British exports will become effectively 10% cheaper in Europe while simultaneously having a 4% tariff applied. Effectively our goods become 6% cheaper net.

But then EU exports to the UK will become 10% more expensive net. And then we will start levying tariffs on certain EU products where we aren't previously. This will be a double-whammy leaving EU goods 14% more expensive net. Even if we don't apply as many tariffs, lets say 12% net.

Which means that overall UK exports to the EU will be 6% cheaper. EU imports to the UK will be 12% more expensive. Our balance of payments should improve.

Furthermore there is the impact on trade to the rest of the world. If Sterling becomes cheaper it becomes cheaper to the rest of the globe too not just Europe. As there will be no new tariffs there, our exporters simply gain there.

The risk is the risk of inflation. But with inflation low, under control and falling recently even that should be manageable.

JohnO said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rural_voter said:

Is it just me who still finds that comments will not load on the 'normal' website:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/11/the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/#vanilla-comments

but will here:
https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/7769/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/p4?

I greatly prefer the 'normal' website but it's been out of action for quite a while. If it makes any difference, I use Firefox and Windows 7.

I get the same problem with Chrome. I don't get the problem in Opera or Microsoft Edge (and Opera is really rather good).

Yes, the .com site doesn't show comments on this laptop using Firefox. Nor does the ipad using safari. Is there a solution?

https://www.opera.com/

OGH: " ... With the talk of an early general election in the air the party doesn’t want to go through a potentially divisive leadership race at the moment."

Absolutely disagree with that theory. By ridding itself of Corbyn including his Marxist cohorts and bringing in a considerably more moderate leader would immediately gives Labour the chance of winning another couple of million votes at least, even the prospect of securing an overall majority at the next GE whenever that might be held.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Quantity of PB complaints about British troops being sent to Syria on America's say so = 0
Quantity of complaints about us handing Assange over to the US on a silver platter = 2?
Quantity of PB complaints about an ambassador resigning = a small warehouse full of servers' worth.

Quantity of Russian trolls on PB - 1

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

I find comments like this staggering. There's no analysis. There's no actual thought about the impact on the UK of imposition of tariffs. There's no measuring of the impact of dropping out of tax treaties. There's no question about what happens at borders and ports, and the rights of Brits in the EU (or vice-versa).

Instead, because Europhiles warned us of bad things in the past, and they didn't happen, then No Deal will be "negligible if not positive".

At the very least, there will be less trade betwee the EU and the UK. That seems an absolute given. (And ignores any other impacts.) As UK firms would not enter into this trade unless it was in their interests to do so, then any dimuntion must affect the UK negatively.

I have ridiculed people who said there might be medicine or food shortages. But the idea that there will be no impact of having tariffs slapped on around half our exports is laughable.

Just because there was no analysis in my retort doesn't mean there was no analysis behind it. There was no analysis in the post I replied to either. Furthermore I think Non-Tariff Barriers are a bigger risk than Tariffs.

But lets look at Tariffs and what follows is an overly-simplistic analysis since you asked for one and there's a character limit.

The WTO average of tariffs is 4%. That sounds significant but can be drowned out by the variance in Sterling.

So on average our goods may cost EU consumers/businesses 4% more, under ceteris paribus. But the likely impact of an immediate no deal scenario will be a fall in pound sterling. Probably at least 10% fall. So British exports will become effectively 10% cheaper in Europe while simultaneously having a 4% tariff applied. Effectively our goods become 6% cheaper net.

But then EU exports to the UK will become 10% more expensive net. And then we will start levying tariffs on certain EU products where we aren't previously. This will be a double-whammy leaving EU goods 14% more expensive net. Even if we don't apply as many tariffs, lets say 12% net.

Which means that overall UK exports to the EU will be 6% cheaper. EU imports to the UK will be 12% more expensive. Our balance of payments should improve.

Furthermore there is the impact on trade to the rest of the world. If Sterling becomes cheaper it becomes cheaper to the rest of the globe too not just Europe. As there will be no new tariffs there, our exporters simply gain there.

The risk is the risk of inflation. But with inflation low, under control and falling recently even that should be manageable.

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

algarkirk said:

rottenborough said:

The Conservative party is morphing into the GOP before our eyes:

https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1149198151414427653

Yes, that's what happens when a large group of people feel, with reason, that powers and independence which they value has been eroded without consent, that parliament has overlooked the importance of getting real consent before sharing and pooling its sovereignty bit by bit and thus limiting its own powers. Then, when we have decided to take those powers back it is obvious that large numbers of people intend to stop it happening by any means they can. The sources of this crisis lie well in the past and cannot be quickly sorted. Both sides are prepared to use any tactics to get their way.

Yes it is all very unConservative, but these sorts of spats are now inevitable.

"Without real consent"

Did we stop having general elections in the 1973 - 2016 period then?

Effectively yes.

Considering the Labour manifesto for the General Election in 2005 said that Lisbon Treaty (then constitution) wouldn't be ratified without a referendum first, then it irreversibly was. Simply kicking out Labour in 2010 wasn't sufficient to undo their duplicity.

Staggering. According to you we "effectively stopped" having General Elections over a 43 year period.

I need to have a lie down. I'm feeling, retrospectively, oppressed.

I'm saying if at an election a party promises one thing then irreversibly changes things to do the complete opposite of what they said at the election then there was no consent.

Had manifesto commitments been honoured there would have been no Lisbon Treaty (or it would have gone through after consent was given at a referendum).

You mean like Boris Johnson ruling out No Deal during the referendum then delivering No Deal?

Yes, exactly like that, though the Tories and DUP won a majority pledging that no deal was better than a bad deal.

I think should the Tories implement No Deal then other parties will be perfectly entitled to seek to reverse that a future election and agree a deal. It should be easier to reverse no deal (whether by agreeing a deal or rejoining) than it is to reverse the Lisbon Treaty and find us back to pre-Lisbon EU members.

Philip_Thompson said:

Yes, exactly like that, though the Tories and DUP won a majority pledging that no deal was better than a bad deal.

I think should the Tories implement No Deal then other parties will be perfectly entitled to seek to reverse that a future election and agree a deal. It should be easier to reverse no deal (whether by agreeing a deal or rejoining) than it is to reverse the Lisbon Treaty and find us back to pre-Lisbon EU members.

That's not what the Tory manifesto said.

Richard_Nabavi said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Read it again and try to understand how it works. If Midsomer leans Labour, then by undercounting the Midsomer electorate, you ensure Midsomer gets fewer constituencies from which to return Labour MPs. It is the same device now adopted by the GOP in America. It does not involve suborning the Boundary Commission. Once you fix the count, the rest is mathematics.

And what exactly did Cameron do to 'undercount' the Midsomer electorate?

Purged the electoral rolls and moved to individual registration, taking advantage of the fact that populations are more mobile in Labour-leaning areas. As a side-effect, it also damaged Remain's chance in the referendum, which is why we had the last-minute registration drive, which was probably then a factor in May's 2017 defeat so a double whammy to his own side from Cameron's attempted gerrymandering. The reduction to 600 seats was not to save money, as claimed, it was to ensure ALL constituencies were redrawn on the "fixed" counts.

JohnO said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

JohnO said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rural_voter said:

Is it just me who still finds that comments will not load on the 'normal' website:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/11/the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/#vanilla-comments

but will here:
https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/7769/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/p4?

I greatly prefer the 'normal' website but it's been out of action for quite a while. If it makes any difference, I use Firefox and Windows 7.

I get the same problem with Chrome. I don't get the problem in Opera or Microsoft Edge (and Opera is really rather good).

Yes, the .com site doesn't show comments on this laptop using Firefox. Nor does the ipad using safari. Is there a solution?

https://www.opera.com/

Thanks and yes, it does work on opera and chrome but I was hoping that normal service could be resumed on Firefox

Not sure that this is what you want to hear but PB.com works fine (inc. comments) on Firefox on my Mac. Firefox v67.0.4.

I generally use Safari tbh and PB.com is working fine with that on my Mac, Macbook, iPad and iPhone. (Still that's Apple for you - boringly reliable.)

PS just restarted to bring in Firefox 68.0 - still works fine.

Benpointer said:

JohnO said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

JohnO said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rural_voter said:

Is it just me who still finds that comments will not load on the 'normal' website:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/11/the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/#vanilla-comments

but will here:
https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/7769/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-the-money-goes-on-an-early-exit-for-corbyn/p4?

I greatly prefer the 'normal' website but it's been out of action for quite a while. If it makes any difference, I use Firefox and Windows 7.

I get the same problem with Chrome. I don't get the problem in Opera or Microsoft Edge (and Opera is really rather good).

Yes, the .com site doesn't show comments on this laptop using Firefox. Nor does the ipad using safari. Is there a solution?

https://www.opera.com/

Thanks and yes, it does work on opera and chrome but I was hoping that normal service could be resumed on Firefox

Not sure that this is what you want to hear but PB.com works fine (inc. comments) on Firefox on my Mac. Firefox v67.0.4.

I generally use Safari tbh and PB.com is working fine with that on my Mac, Macbook, iPad and iPhone. (Still that's Apple for you - boringly reliable.)

PS just restarted to bring in Firefox 68.0 - still works fine.

Mine is 68.0 for Windows and works fine.

Well, that was an interesting day at the Hollies Stand, Edgbaston cricket ground. I wonder if there are any tickets left for Sunday?

I'm glad the WC Final will be on Channel 4. At least I can watch it now.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Read it again and try to understand how it works. If Midsomer leans Labour, then by undercounting the Midsomer electorate, you ensure Midsomer gets fewer constituencies from which to return Labour MPs. It is the same device now adopted by the GOP in America. It does not involve suborning the Boundary Commission. Once you fix the count, the rest is mathematics.

And what exactly did Cameron do to 'undercount' the Midsomer electorate?

Purged the electoral rolls and moved to individual registration, taking advantage of the fact that populations are more mobile in Labour-leaning areas. As a side-effect, it also damaged Remain's chance in the referendum, which is why we had the last-minute registration drive, which was probably then a factor in May's 2017 defeat so a double whammy to his own side from Cameron's attempted gerrymandering. The reduction to 600 seats was not to save money, as claimed, it was to ensure ALL constituencies were redrawn on the "fixed" counts.

There is a last-minute registration drive before EVERY election. I remember there being one before the 2015 election, before 2010, 2005 and for my first election in 2001 which caused me to check I was registered for my first election (I already was, by the university).

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

Philip_Thompson said:

Yes, exactly like that, though the Tories and DUP won a majority pledging that no deal was better than a bad deal.

The manifesto promises "the best possible deal for Britain as we leave the European Union delivered by a smooth, orderly Brexit".

Philip_Thompson said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

Precisely, hence our balance of payments will improve. A freely floating currency acts as a natural shock absorber for the economy. The idea a 10% fall in sterling leads to a 10% increase in inflation is entirely economically illiterate.

How would you describe the idea that one can just keep devaluing the currency with no deleterious effects?

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

What kind of shop will cause you to have 10% less money? As I said every single business in the country has a number of charges due in Sterling.

Absolutely its every import which will help our enormous balance of trade deficit. Plus every export will benefit which will again help our balance of trade deficit. If we had a balance of trade surplus, rampant inflation and then looked at this we could be exasperating existing problems but we don't.

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

What kind of shop will cause you to have 10% less money? As I said every single business in the country has a number of charges due in Sterling.

Absolutely its every import which will help our enormous balance of trade deficit. Plus every export will benefit which will again help our balance of trade deficit. If we had a balance of trade surplus, rampant inflation and then looked at this we could be exasperating existing problems but we don't.

How much impact did the 2016 Brexit devaluation have on our balance of trade figures.

From memory it was remarkably little...

Philip_Thompson said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Read it again and try to understand how it works. If Midsomer leans Labour, then by undercounting the Midsomer electorate, you ensure Midsomer gets fewer constituencies from which to return Labour MPs. It is the same device now adopted by the GOP in America. It does not involve suborning the Boundary Commission. Once you fix the count, the rest is mathematics.

And what exactly did Cameron do to 'undercount' the Midsomer electorate?

Purged the electoral rolls and moved to individual registration, taking advantage of the fact that populations are more mobile in Labour-leaning areas. As a side-effect, it also damaged Remain's chance in the referendum, which is why we had the last-minute registration drive, which was probably then a factor in May's 2017 defeat so a double whammy to his own side from Cameron's attempted gerrymandering. The reduction to 600 seats was not to save money, as claimed, it was to ensure ALL constituencies were redrawn on the "fixed" counts.

There is a last-minute registration drive before EVERY election. I remember there being one before the 2015 election, before 2010, 2005 and for my first election in 2001 which caused me to check I was registered for my first election (I already was, by the university).

The government extended the registration deadline. It was controversial at the time because the Brexiteers could see it was done to favour Remain.

viewcode said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

Precisely, hence our balance of payments will improve. A freely floating currency acts as a natural shock absorber for the economy. The idea a 10% fall in sterling leads to a 10% increase in inflation is entirely economically illiterate.

How would you describe the idea that one can just keep devaluing the currency with no deleterious effects?

The pound in you’re pocket .......

TGOHF said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

I will choose Scottish Strawberries over Spanish oranges or Mexican avocados.

Or spend it on English beer instead.

Or save it.

So less money and less choice. Our Glorious Brexit Future.

I once characterised Brexit as very rich and mobile people telling me that money and travel doesn't matter whilst making me poorer and less mobile. Not so much an economic policy more the GOP version of "120 Days of Sodom"

eek said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

What kind of shop will cause you to have 10% less money? As I said every single business in the country has a number of charges due in Sterling.

Absolutely its every import which will help our enormous balance of trade deficit. Plus every export will benefit which will again help our balance of trade deficit. If we had a balance of trade surplus, rampant inflation and then looked at this we could be exasperating existing problems but we don't.

How much impact did the 2016 Brexit devaluation have on our balance of trade figures.

From memory it was remarkably little...

Just as it was very little impact on inflation.

Just as tariffs will have very little impact.

The 4% that WTO tariffs represent will be swallowed up by the rest of the big picture.

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

I will choose Scottish Strawberries over Spanish oranges or Mexican avocados.

Or spend it on English beer instead.

Or save it.

So less money and less choice. Our Glorious Brexit Future.

I once characterised Brexit as very rich and mobile people telling me that money and travel doesn't matter whilst making me poorer and less mobile. Not so much an economic policy more the GOP version of "120 Days of Sodom"

They want blue passports and to hate foreigners. The idea that people might mind losing choices and being impoverished doesn’t register as a concern.

Philip_Thompson said:

AlastairMeeks said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

I will choose Scottish Strawberries over Spanish oranges or Mexican avocados.

Or spend it on English beer instead.

Or save it.

So less money and less choice. Our Glorious Brexit Future.

I once characterised Brexit as very rich and mobile people telling me that money and travel doesn't matter whilst making me poorer and less mobile. Not so much an economic policy more the GOP version of "120 Days of Sodom"

They want blue passports and to hate foreigners. The idea that people might mind losing choices and being impoverished doesn’t register as a concern.

People won't lose choices or be impoverished though. Which is your concern.

You’ve written a long (mostly bullshit, by the way) justification of your lust for death cult Brexit based on British people finding foreign products more expensive - so they won’t be able to buy what they want and they will be impoverished. It’s bad enough not understanding other people’s posts. You don’t even understand your own.

TGOHF said:

AlastairMeeks said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

I will choose Scottish Strawberries over Spanish oranges or Mexican avocados.

Or spend it on English beer instead.

Or save it.

So less money and less choice. Our Glorious Brexit Future.

I once characterised Brexit as very rich and mobile people telling me that money and travel doesn't matter whilst making me poorer and less mobile. Not so much an economic policy more the GOP version of "120 Days of Sodom"

They want blue passports and to hate foreigners.

Who is "they" ?

Death cult Brexiteers such as yourself.

Don't muddy the waters with your facts @rcs1000. Remember that Boris will take us out by October 31st deal or no deal and everything will be fantastic for ever.

TGOHF said:

AlastairMeeks said:

TGOHF said:

AlastairMeeks said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

I will choose Scottish Strawberries over Spanish oranges or Mexican avocados.

Or spend it on English beer instead.

Or save it.

So less money and less choice. Our Glorious Brexit Future.

I once characterised Brexit as very rich and mobile people telling me that money and travel doesn't matter whilst making me poorer and less mobile. Not so much an economic policy more the GOP version of "120 Days of Sodom"

They want blue passports and to hate foreigners.

Who is "they" ?

Death cult Brexiteers such as yourself.

Do I hate all foreigners or just those called Jeffrey ?

You don’t seem very fond of the ones called Padraig or Aoife. I’m sure you could supply me a longer list if you put your mind to it.

You're very feisty tonight @AlastairMeeks!

Gallowgate said:

Don't muddy the waters with your facts @rcs1000. Remember that Boris will take us out by October 31st deal or no deal and everything will be fantastic for ever.

Not forgetting winning a majority based on a manifesto he will promptly dump in order to agree to the EU’s original draft of the Withdrawal Agreement. His newly elected MPs will bow down to his genius.

williamglenn said:

Gallowgate said:

Don't muddy the waters with your facts @rcs1000. Remember that Boris will take us out by October 31st deal or no deal and everything will be fantastic for ever.

Not forgetting winning a majority based on a manifesto he will promptly dump in order to agree to the EU’s original draft of the Withdrawal Agreement. His newly elected MPs will bow down to his genius.

It's a foolproof plan. If only May had come up with it 2 years ago.

AlastairMeeks said:

Philip_Thompson said:

AlastairMeeks said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

I will choose Scottish Strawberries over Spanish oranges or Mexican avocados.

Or spend it on English beer instead.

Or save it.

So less money and less choice. Our Glorious Brexit Future.

I once characterised Brexit as very rich and mobile people telling me that money and travel doesn't matter whilst making me poorer and less mobile. Not so much an economic policy more the GOP version of "120 Days of Sodom"

They want blue passports and to hate foreigners. The idea that people might mind losing choices and being impoverished doesn’t register as a concern.

People won't lose choices or be impoverished though. Which is your concern.

You’ve written a long (mostly bullshit, by the way) justification of your lust for death cult Brexit based on British people finding foreign products more expensive - so they won’t be able to buy what they want and they will be impoverished. It’s bad enough not understanding other people’s posts. You don’t even understand your own.

I have no lust for 'death cult Brexit', I just have no fear for a no deal Brexit if it happens as I think the warnings over it are bullshit.

As is your claim that imports being slightly more expensive = impoverished. The over 10% fall in Sterling following the 2016 referendum resulted in a very minor and absorbed change in inflation.

TGOHF said:

nichomar said:

TGOHF said:

Gallowgate said:

I'm glad the WC Final will be on Channel 4. At least I can watch it now.

Yep - cricket is back on council tv.

Is it?

Channel 4 for the final.

It’s not in the schedule yet for ch4 currently showing the Grand Prix ok just seen they have done a deal to show on 4 and more 4, thanks

nichomar said:

TGOHF said:

nichomar said:

TGOHF said:

Gallowgate said:

I'm glad the WC Final will be on Channel 4. At least I can watch it now.

Yep - cricket is back on council tv.

Is it?

Channel 4 for the final.

It’s not in the schedule yet for ch4 currently showing the Grand Prix

They announced they'd show the final if England qualified.

rcs1000 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Just because there was no analysis in my retort doesn't mean there was no analysis behind it. There was no analysis in the post I replied to either. Furthermore I think Non-Tariff Barriers are a bigger risk than Tariffs.

But lets look at Tariffs and what follows is an overly-simplistic analysis since you asked for one and there's a character limit.

The WTO average of tariffs is 4%. That sounds significant but can be drowned out by the variance in Sterling.

So on average our goods may cost EU consumers/businesses 4% more, under ceteris paribus. But the likely impact of an immediate no deal scenario will be a fall in pound sterling. Probably at least 10% fall. So British exports will become effectively 10% cheaper in Europe while simultaneously having a 4% tariff applied. Effectively our goods become 6% cheaper net.

But then EU exports to the UK will become 10% more expensive net. And then we will start levying tariffs on certain EU products where we aren't previously. This will be a double-whammy leaving EU goods 14% more expensive net. Even if we don't apply as many tariffs, lets say 12% net.

Which means that overall UK exports to the EU will be 6% cheaper. EU imports to the UK will be 12% more expensive. Our balance of payments should improve.

Furthermore there is the impact on trade to the rest of the world. If Sterling becomes cheaper it becomes cheaper to the rest of the globe too not just Europe. As there will be no new tariffs there, our exporters simply gain there.

The risk is the risk of inflation. But with inflation low, under control and falling recently even that should be manageable.

I'm sorry about the tone of my email. It was unnecessarily abrasive.

Balance of payments is nothing to do with exchange rates, and all to do with household savings rates. If it was about exchange rates, then Switzerland (with the world's most expensive currency) would run a deficit, instead of a massive surplus. If it was about exchange rates, then British exports to the EU would have soared between 2015 and now, as the pound has lost 30% of its value relative to the Euro.

Exports to the EU have increased though:

2015 £225bn
2018 £289bn

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/l7d7/ukea

The UK's problem is that it keeps over-consuming on the imports (and foreign holidays).

I suspect that will keep happening until the trillion quid of borrowed money the government has pumped into the economy works itself out at some point.

rcs1000 said:

The reason that all discussions about exchange rates are wrong is simply that almost all exports have imports associated with them.

Let's look at something simple, like wheat. Export of wheat depends on the import of fertilizers (nitrogen based, so depend on natural gas, and potash imported from Canada). Plus harvesting them requires vehicles (that at the very least require the import of steel and oil), as does getting them to market.

For manufactured products, the issue is 10x greater.

So, while exhange rates can help, ultimately changing the exchange rate only really affects the labour component of exports.

So take a car from Nissan Sunderland.

How much is the Labour component of a £20,000 car?

Well, let's work it out, shall we. Nissan employs 7,000 people. Let's assume an average wage of £50,000 (which is probably a but on the high side, but let's go with it). That means they pay £350m/year in wages.

OK. How many cars does Nissan produce there? 500,000/year. Let's assume that they get £15,000/car. That works out as £7.5bn.

So the labour component is about 4% of the total. A 10% devaluation therefore has an impact - but only a modest one. And, of course, this ignores the fact that Nissan has to import car parts and steel from the EU, which might now be subject to tariffs.

If the link between exports of goods and the exchange rate is weak with services it seems almost non existent. And that is nearly half our exports. Your examples perhaps better explain why an ever rising deutschmark seemed if anything to boost German exports.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Purged the electoral rolls and moved to individual registration, taking advantage of the fact that populations are more mobile in Labour-leaning areas. As a side-effect, it also damaged Remain's chance in the referendum, which is why we had the last-minute registration drive, which was probably then a factor in May's 2017 defeat so a double whammy to his own side from Cameron's attempted gerrymandering. The reduction to 600 seats was not to save money, as claimed, it was to ensure ALL constituencies were redrawn on the "fixed" counts.

Yes, we ended up with a huge, untested experiment in implementing a new electoral registration system that the government chose to put into effect without any pilot in the most important year of the 5 year electoral cycle. The system of seamless transfer of people from the old registers by data matching failed in areas with mobile populations. Cheap privately rented accommodation especially areas with ethnic minorities were particularly vulnerable, and under-resourced local election officials could not turn that around.

Your theory that it took two years to recover after 2015 is interesting because individual registration can explain both why Labour underperformed to expectations in 2015 and then defied the expectation of a repeat underperformance (by then built in to polling models) in 2017. A further factor, in addition to the 2016 referendum, was that the 2017 general election took place a month after local elections on the same register which woke up many people who found they could not vote in May to the fact that they needed urgently to do something to avoid a repeat performance in June.

eek said:

rcs1000 said:

eek said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

TGOHF said:

Philip_Thompson said:

viewcode said:

How do you keep inflation under control when (due to the fall in sterling) you just made every import over 10% more expensive overnight?

Same as we did when Sterling fell by over 10% following the EU referendum. Imports are not the prices paid at the till or by the end user. Every business in the UK, even importers, have a plethora of costs that are denominated in pound sterling. Especially wages etc. That 10% increase in import costs will be undersirable but will not reach the end consumer as a 10% increase unless wages in sterling etc have gone up 10% (and if they have that's a different kettle of fish).

I suspect that if some prices of imports rise, then consumers will switch to locally produced goods - or change their spending habits.

As happens all the time.

Almost like its a market...

What kind of market do you shop in where you still have the same choices with 10% less money?

Import substitution does not happen overnight. And bear in mind it's not just EU imports, it's every import

What kind of shop will cause you to have 10% less money? As I said every single business in the country has a number of charges due in Sterling.

Absolutely its every import which will help our enormous balance of trade deficit. Plus every export will benefit which will again help our balance of trade deficit. If we had a balance of trade surplus, rampant inflation and then looked at this we could be exasperating existing problems but we don't.

How much impact did the 2016 Brexit devaluation have on our balance of trade figures.

From memory it was remarkably little...

There's remarkably little correlation between exhange rate movements and growth in exports. Hence Switzerland is a place with growing quantities of exports, while Argentina is a basketcase.

Which was my point - you would expect the 2016 devaluation to have reduced imports and increased exports but that really wasn't the case and shows that Brexit won't improve our balance of trade issues..

Have you bothered to look at the data ?

Here are UK exports:

2011 £501bn
2012 £505bn
2013 £524bn
2014 £520bn
2015 £520bn
2016 £557bn
2017 £618bn
2018 £634bn

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/ikbh/mret

Gallowgate said:

Foxy said:

Gallowgate said:

Here's something all of PB can agree is a fantastic idea:

https://twitter.com/whatsonne/status/1148998681020043264

Only a 10 minute drive from my house!

And people wonder why obesity and diabetes are epidemic...

You want to take my Pink Jammie's away from me? Over my dead body!

What you wear in bed is your own affair...