Brexit - Post Match Reaction

Interesting legal case began today. A Government QC from David Davis's Brexit Dept has told the court that Article 50 won't/can't be triggered before the end of the year. Which of course contradicts what Davis said only last week.

Does it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-36802756

Does it?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-36802756

Err yes. There's that comprehension thing again Des.

**** me, they've changed their tune...

Pre-referendum, Christine Lagarde (the head of the IMF) said that the impact on the UK economy of a Brexit vote went from "pretty bad to very, very bad" and that there could be a recession.

Now, funnily enough, the IMF no longer predicts a recession, as they are forecasting 1.3% growth in 2017.

[h=2][/h]

**** me, they've changed their tune...

 

Pre-referendum, Christine Lagarde (the head of the IMF) said that the impact on the UK economy of a Brexit vote went from "pretty bad to very, very bad" and that there could be a recession.

 

Now, funnily enough, the IMF no longer predicts a recession, as they are forecasting 1.3% growth in 2017.

 

 

Ah Lagarde, the lady who's in no end of trouble for letting her acolytes hand over 400 odd million to Bernard Tapie over the Adidas sale. A sum which he now has to pay back and of course hasn't got 2 centimes of it to rub together...well so he says.

I'd not take her opinion on anything as gospel really, flawed judgement.

Err yes. There's that comprehension thing again Des.

So David Davis' Department has told the Court that article 50 won't/can't be triggered before the end of the year and David Davis said last week Brexit would be triggered "before or by the start of next year".

So where has the comprehension thing gone awry, Tinny?

So David Davis' Department has told the Court that article 50 won't/can't be triggered before the end of the year and David Davis said last week Brexit would be triggered "before or by the start of next year".

 

So where has the comprehension thing gone awry, Tinny?

Really?

1. When do you think "before or by the start of the year" is? Is it 2016 or 2017?

2. If "article 50 won't/can't be triggered before the end of the year" what year is the earliest it can be triggered?

**** me, they've changed their tune...

 

Pre-referendum, Christine Lagarde (the head of the IMF) said that the impact on the UK economy of a Brexit vote went from "pretty bad to very, very bad" and that there could be a recession.

 

Now, funnily enough, the IMF no longer predicts a recession, as they are forecasting 1.3% growth in 2017.

 

 

[h=2][/h]

The IMF didn't predict a recession. The IMF has virtually halved its forecast for UK growth in 2017. That's more than consistent with "pretty bad" in most people's book.

Really?

1. When do you think "before or by the start of the year" is? Is it 2016 or 2017?

2. If "article 50 won't/can't be triggered before the end of the year" what year is the earliest it can be triggered?

Before the end of 2016, or the start of 2017? We are talking December this year or early 2017, are we not?

The IMF didn't predict a recession. The IMF has virtually halved its forecast for UK growth in 2017. That's more than consistent with "pretty bad" in most people's book.

The Guardian obviously misread what the IMF predicted

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/18/imf-says-brexit-would-trigger-uk-recession-eu-referendum

The IMF used its annual report on the British economy to say Brexit would plunge the UK into recession next year and that it could see no economic advantage in leaving the EU.

Before the end of 2016, or the start of 2017? We are talking December this year or early 2017, are we not?

No. "before or by the start of the year" means 2016. Just as "do this before by 5pm Friday" means 5pm Friday at the very latest, not 5.15pm, 8pm or fairly early Monday or Tuesday.

Its a clear contradiction. Its not a massive issue, but it is very odd you would argue the toss over it.

The Guardian obviously misread what the IMF predicted

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/18/imf-says-brexit-would-trigger-uk-recession-eu-referendum

Yep it did. Did you actually read article? Or too quick jumping to conclusions pal?

The IMF didn't predict a recession. The IMF has virtually halved its forecast for UK growth in 2017. That's more than consistent with "pretty bad" in most people's book.

The IMF said that under an "adverse" scenario, in which the UK left the EU and failed to seal a Norway-style deal, having to fall back on World Trade Organisation rules, the UK would suffer a recession in 2017, with the economy shrinking by 0.8%. The fact that Article 50 may not have been triggered by the start of 2017 and negotiations would probably go on through 2017, then they are talking out of their collective arses, like some other people round here, pal

The IMF said that under an "adverse" scenario, in which the UK left the EU and failed to seal a Norway-style deal, having to fall back on World Trade Organisation rules, the UK would suffer a recession in 2017, with the economy shrinking by 0.8%. The fact that Article 50 may not have been triggered by the start of 2017 and negotiations would probably go on through 2017, then they are talking out of their collective arses, like some other people round here, pal

But that wasnt their central prediction You being thick or dishonest?

The IMF said that under an "adverse" scenario, in which the UK left the EU and failed to seal a Norway-style deal, having to fall back on World Trade Organisation rules, the UK would suffer a recession in 2017, with the economy shrinking by 0.8%. The fact that Article 50 may not have been triggered by the start of 2017 and negotiations would probably go on through 2017, then they are talking out of their collective arses, like some other people round here, pal

It said that a recession could happen, not that it would happen. It modelled a range of scenarios - only under the adverse scenario did it predict a recession. But it never claimed that adverse scenario would materialise -indeed we won't know if it's correct unless the UK fails to secure a Norway-style deal and reverts to WTO rules. As of today, those things are far away. It also modelled a limited uncertainty scenario which is equally plausible. Today's downgrade is perfectly compatible with the range of scenarios it outlined.

That chip on your shoulder sure is a whopper pal.

No. "before or by the start of the year" means 2016. Just as "do this before by 5pm Friday" means 5pm Friday at the very latest, not 5.15pm, 8pm or fairly early Monday or Tuesday.

 

Its a clear contradiction. Its not a massive issue, but it is very odd you would argue the toss over it.

How can it possibly be referring to 2016?

Are you suggesting that we should have triggered Article 50 before we'd voted to leave?

How can it possibly be referring to 2016?

 

Are you suggesting that we should have triggered Article 50 before we'd voted to leave?

What he actually said was the Government will trigger article 50 "before or by the start of next year" Its 2016 now. Therefore he is saying it will happen before or by 12 midnight on 31st December 2016. The Government lawyers have told the court the opposite.

It said that a recession could happen, not that it would happen. It modelled a range of scenarios - only under the adverse scenario did it predict a recession. But it never claimed that adverse scenario would materialise -indeed we won't know if it's correct unless the UK fails to secure a Norway-style deal and reverts to WTO rules. As of today, those things are far away. It also modelled a limited uncertainty scenario which is equally plausible. Today's downgrade is perfectly compatible with the range of scenarios it outlined.

 

That chip on your shoulder sure is a whopper pal.

No chip, just find it amusing that all these so called predictions designed to scare people, arent really coming to fruition. It started with the FTSE 100, but when it recovered, everyone moved to the 250, which is now not far off what it was. Pre referendum, people like the BBC never mentioned the 250. The BBCs scratching around to find anything remotely negative to suit their clearly biased agenda.

its no surprise that confidence is waning when the mainstream media are fueling it.

As fir the chip, It's almost as if the progressives want everything to go pear shaped and want people to suffer, just for some self gratification, pedigree chum

The IMF didn't predict a recession. The IMF has virtually halved its forecast for UK growth in 2017. That's more than consistent with "pretty bad" in most people's book.

But on the BBC this afternoon following the release of this report, the IMF spokesman said that they have very little post referendum information to go on, the downgrade is a result of the current uncertainty and their forecast will probably be amended next month when they have more information.

But on the BBC this afternoon following the release of this report, the IMF spokesman said that they have very little post referendum information to go on, the downgrade is a result of the current uncertainty and their forecast will probably be amended next month when they have more information.

Thats also true. Predicting the future is difficult at the best of times. currently there are so many variables and unknowns its practically impossible to do it with any degree of accuracy. what you can do is lay out what will happen under various scenarios - which is what the IMF have done in the past.

Thumb in the dyke stuff from the Remoaners, If the Government activate Article 50 it's activated. When they decide is up to them as we don't have a constitution. Repealing the 1972 Act would need a vote. An October date has been set but the Judge only indicated displeasure if Article 50 was activated before then and that it would probably have to be up to the Supreme Court to rule on the claim.

The Government has said that it wants to get it's negotiating position set before activating. there is only five month in this year so the beginning of 2017 sounds sensible. Another case of clutching at straws and chucking money at lawyers.

I'm really pleased the IMF has pronounced again, with their record of forecasting being on a par with Cameron and Osborne we are probably set fair for a while.

But on the BBC this afternoon following the release of this report, the IMF spokesman said that they have very little post referendum information to go on, the downgrade is a result of the current uncertainty and their forecast will probably be amended next month when they have more information.

So maybe they'll revise their forecasts upwards or downwards when new information comes to light. Either way, uncertainty can be economically damaging in itself http://www.policyuncertainty.com/index.html

The salient point is Johnny B claimed that the IMF was predicting a recession and today's forecast supposesly blows a hole in that prediction. Then again maybe in Johnny B-Land, the UK is already out of the EU, having failed to negotiate some form of access to the single market and is trading under WTO rules. In the real world, none of those things have happened yet and so it's patently premature to take a position on the accuracy of the IMF's forecast.

So maybe they'll revise their forecasts upwards or downwards when new information comes to light. Either way, uncertainty can be economically damaging in itself http://www.policyuncertainty.com/index.html

 

The salient point is Johnny B claimed that the IMF was predicting a recession and today's forecast supposesly blows a hole in that prediction. Then again maybe in Johnny B-Land, the UK is already out of the EU, having failed to negotiate some form of access to the single market and is trading under WTO rules. In the real world, none of those things have happened and so it's patently premature to take a position on the accuracy of its forecast.

Have no problem with that, but the 'talk' during the referendum campaign, particularly from the IMF and the way in which it was reported, certainly implied that there might be a recession. My issue is not with the numbers per se, but what they were implying.

Anyway, i dont remember you getting your knickers in a twist when the UK GDP growth forecast was reduced to 0.8% in 2011, pedigree chum.

No. "before or by the start of the year" means 2016. Just as "do this before by 5pm Friday" means 5pm Friday at the very latest, not 5.15pm, 8pm or fairly early Monday or Tuesday.

 

Its a clear contradiction. Its not a massive issue, but it is very odd you would argue the toss over it.

Straws are being clutched here in an attempt to save face. How could it possibly mean that Article 50 would be enacted then, when the referendum result was only declared on 24th June? Davis was clearly talking about the end of this year, or the beginning of next year, as was the advisor in his department.

As you say, it is not a big issue, but why do you deem it odd that I would argue the toss about it when you denigrate me as lacking the ability to comprehend such a simple concept again

Have no problem with that, but the 'talk' during the referendum campaign, particularly from the IMF and the way in which it was reported, certainly implied that there might be a recession. My issue is not with the numbers per se, but what they were implying.

 

Anyway, i dont remember you getting your knickers in a twist when the UK GDP growth forecast was reduced to 0.8% in 2011, pedigree chum.

Are you sure pal? No doubt you were banging your drum and berating all the progressives who wanted to see the economy experience a double dip recession, if only to prove how futile Tory spending cuts and austerity were;)

Yep it did. Did you actually read article? Or too quick jumping to conclusions pal?

Of course I read the article, but the Guardian needs to have words with their headline writer, don't they? That clearly stated that a Brexit would trigger a UK recession. Not could, or might, but would.

But then again, it is the Guardian, so one ought to take what they say with a pinch of salt, eh, pal?

Of course I read the article, but the Guardian needs to have words with their headline writer, don't they? That clearly stated that a Brexit would trigger a UK recession. Not could, or might, but would.

 

But then again, it is the Guardian, so one ought to take what they say with a pinch of salt, eh, pal?

Whatever tickles your fancy Les. I treat each article on its merits.

Are you sure pal? No doubt you were banging your drum and berating all the progressives who wanted to see the economy experience a double dip recession, if only to prove how futile Tory spending cuts and austerity were;)

LOL, never a truer word and all that, pedigree chum

Well, it seems we Remainers were wrong all along! The Brexiteers do have a plan! And here it is in full: the Brexit Manifesto (© D. Davis, 2016, all rights reversed).

https://medium.com/@mrjasonmehmet/the-brexit-manifesto-f9a421fa3313#.463anxf7q

It fills me with confidence that our national administration, with its massive contractual successes including PFI, major IT projects, and pretty much every large-scale defence contract - all of which will rob us blind for decades - will be in full command of a process that dwarfs all of those thousands of times over. And it will do it from a standing start of having precisely zero trade negotiators, and zero actual workable ideas from the Three Brexiteers supposedly in charge of it all.

Brilliant!

Not strictly on topic but thought interesting

Of course I read the article, but the Guardian needs to have words with their headline writer, don't they? That clearly stated that a Brexit would trigger a UK recession. Not could, or might, but would.

 

But then again, it is the Guardian, so one ought to take what they say with a pinch of salt, eh, pal?

Still a massive downgrade by IMF by -0.9% for UK in 2017 & probably too optimistic but only time will tell but only a somebody with little economic knowledge would be suggesting things are going well economically hopefully Hammond will do something to boost the economy he cannot leave it all to the BOE

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2016/update/02/pdf/0716.pdf …

We will of course be leaving the EU but if we had an agreed plan we would be in a better position but we can always blame the Tory Government of Cameron and Osborne but that does not help really

Not strictly on topic but thought interesting

 

This still makes for depressing reading.

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx

This still makes for depressing reading.

 

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx

i love academins like Anand Menon, quoted in the article. He's one of those in bed with the monnet bunch, who get their funding from the EU, to do, Guess what?? Promote the EU.

Show me who is getting paid what and by whom, and I can tell you the outcome of their supposed opinion and wisdom.

Carry on taking each article on its merits, pedigree chum

i love academins like Anand Menon, quoted in the article. He's one of those in bed with the monnet bunch, who get their funding from the EU, to do, Guess what?? Promote the EU.

 

Show me who is getting paid what and by whom, and I can tell you the outcome of their supposed opinion and wisdom.

 

Carry on taking each article on its merits, pedigree chum

The poll was conducted by IPSOS MORI - this is just an extension of their widely cited work on misperception in public life.

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3466/Perceptions-are-not-reality-Things-the-world-gets-wrong.aspx

You don't happen to like the staggering levels of ignorance, so it's all a big conspiracy. Then again I could have gauged that from your contributions on these threads pal.

#tiredofexperts

Show me who is getting paid what and by whom, and I can tell you the outcome of their supposed opinion and wisdom.

Good game. I guess you're paid by Paul Daniels.

i love academins like Anand Menon, quoted in the article. He's one of those in bed with the monnet bunch, who get their funding from the EU, to do, Guess what?? Promote the EU.

 

Show me who is getting paid what and by whom, and I can tell you the outcome of their supposed opinion and wisdom.

 

Carry on taking each article on its merits, pedigree chum

From your post I have looked on its merits and decided you are Knob

The poll was conducted by conducted by IPSOS MORI.

 

#tiredofexperts

and anand was quoted by them and his opinion is worthless when he is on the payroll. In other news, a turkey was quoted as saying that Christmas is bad for turkeys. No sh it shurlock!!!!

The EU is the greatest ponzi scheme in history. Set up organisations, fund them, self promotion, brainwash. Simple really... it would be funny if they weren't using our cash to do it, pedigree chum

and anand was quoted by them and his opinion is worthless when he is on the payroll. In other news, a turkey was quoted as saying that Christmas is bad for turkeys. No sh it shurlock!!!!

 

The EU is the greatest ponzi scheme in history. Set up organisations, fund them, self promotion, brainwash. Simple really...

From your post I have looked on its merits and decided you are an even bigger knob than I originally thought.

Have you any idea who IPSO Mori are

From your post I have looked on its merits and decided you are Knob

So just because I choose to promote an alternative brand of dog food, and I am not a regressive (progressive with its positive connotations is completely misdescriptive, being in mind the negativity shown by them, which wont be used going forward), I am a knob?

i can live with that. I've been called a lot worse, bakers

and anand was quoted by them and his opinion is worthless when he is on the payroll. In other news, a turkey was quoted as saying that Christmas is bad for turkeys. No sh it shurlock!!!!

 

The EU is the greatest ponzi scheme in history. Set up organisations, fund them, self promotion, brainwash. Simple really... it would be funny if they weren't using our cash to do it, pedigree chum

As I say this is an extension of their widely cited work on misperception in public life, building on previous work for the Royal Statistical Society.

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3466/Perceptions-are-not-reality-Things-the-world-gets-wrong.aspx

You don't happen to like the staggering levels of ignorance, so it's all a big conspiracy. Then again I could have gauged that from your contributions on these threads pal.

#tiredofexperts

From your post I have looked on its merits and decided you are an even bigger knob than I originally thought.

 

Have you any idea who IPSO Mori are

Yes I do. I work extensively with Gallup. I probably have a better idea than you could possibly imagine, bakers.

Ipsos Mori, quoting someone so biased in their article, does not do them justice, bakers

As I say this is an extension of their widely cited work on misperception in public life, building on previous work for the Royal Statistical Society.

 

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3466/Perceptions-are-not-reality-Things-the-world-gets-wrong.aspx

 

You don't happen to like the staggering levels of ignorance, so it's all a big conspiracy. Then again I could have gauged that from your contributions on these threads pal.

 

#tiredofexperts

One of the reasons for distrust and causes of misconceptions, is the use of funded academics that strangly have an opinion that supports the EU, pedigree chum.

#tiredofeufundedexperts

Anyway dog lovers, I am off for a cat nap. Sweet dreams

One of the reasons for distrust and causes of misconceptions, is the use of funded academics that strangly have an opinion that supports the EU, pedigree chum.

 

#tiredofeufundedexperts

Keep saying that - it doesn't make any more sense. You'll be saying the survey used crisis actors next

Good game. I guess you're paid by Paul Daniels.

Very good, winnalot (see what i did there? Someone who is good at games, dog food brand?)

Very good, but he who pays the piper..

Hey chaps your hashtags don't seem to work for me. #NeedTechnicalSupport

IMF forecasts are always over optimistic. The revisions to figures over the last 5 years alone mean markets take their predictions with a pinch of salt as they are continually downgraded until time catches up with them. In fairness it must be a difficult job to do and they aren't in the business of promoting global instability, but nonetheless, it would be no surprise to see further reductions in these already downgraded figures in the months to come.

As this is the officially 'way forward' thread, could one of you clever Brexiteers answer the question I've now asked several times?

How are we going to square the British government's need to be in the single market with the EU's red line on freedom of movement? Anyone?

I actually felt sorry for Theresa May this afternoon - Merkel was clearly baffled that the British government has not the faintest idea of how to answer that question themselves.

As someone else said, Brexiteers are like a dog catching a bus - it has not a clue what to do next.

No free movement, Trade will happen. We don't want to be part of the single market, that's what we voted to get out of. How the EU especially Germany decides to trade their £100b surplus with the UK is their problem. Tariffs are a two way street. Fishing grounds will be another problem for the EU. I'd just as soon see us run out of time and just be out.

No free movement, Trade will happen. We don't want to be part of the single market, that's what we voted to get out of. How the EU especially Germany decides to trade their £100b surplus with the UK is their problem. Tariffs are a two way street. Fishing grounds will be another problem for the EU. I'd just as soon see us run out of time and just be out.

The Single Market is absolutely essential. Without it there would be trade but nowhere near as freely and easily as now. Where do you get this £100bn figure?

£100bn

No free movement, Trade will happen. We don't want to be part of the single market, that's what we voted to get out of. How the EU especially Germany decides to trade their £100b surplus with the UK is their problem. Tariffs are a two way street. Fishing grounds will be another problem for the EU. I'd just as soon see us run out of time and just be out.

Is this level delusion common among your Brexity friends? We absolutely did not vote to come out of the single market. The vote was about the EU. There are other, non-EU, countries with access to the single market (and all that implies regarding free movement) - and these were referenced as 'models' by leading Brexiteers throughout the referendum campaign.

The government has given no indication that it thinks abandoning the single market is anything other than patently stupid - even Chief Brexiteers like BoJo:

British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down. As the German equivalent of the CBI – the BDI – has very sensibly reminded us, there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.

Which of course means that those entitlements apply to any EU citizens wanting to do the same in the UK. Or, in short, free movement.

I suspect your reply is going to include another blood-curdling threat that UKIP's one MP will be joined by hundreds of other kipper MPs after an election of RAAAGGGEEE!! if you don't get your way on free movement. But the truth is, you can't have what you want, no matter how the Brexit cake is sliced.