Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Plastic]

Speaking of Andrew Neil earlier, this really is excellent:-

 

I can't deny his ability as an interviewer, but that discussion is very worrying. Neither labour nor Tory showed any sign that they had the first clue how to proceed...

[adrian lord]

Andrew Neil utterly destroys floundering Remoaner in a beautiful, brutal, forensic cross-examination:

 

 

Brillo towers above his BBC colleagues, who are for the most part simpering sycophants and incapable of such intelligent, skilled examination of a witness or interviewee.

Edited 20 November, 2016 by adrian lord

[Lord Duckhunter]

Andrew Neil utterly destroys floundering Remoaner in a beautiful, brutal, forensic cross-examination:

 

 

Brillo towers above his BBC colleagues, who are for the most part simpering sycophants and incapable of such intelligent, skilled examination of a witness or interviewee.

 

 

McGrory was Cleggys Alister Campbell, so he's used to lying and distortions .

[CB Fry]

Andrew Neil utterly destroys floundering Remoaner in a beautiful, brutal, forensic cross-examination:

 

 

Brillo towers above his BBC colleagues, who are for the most part simpering sycophants and incapable of such intelligent, skilled examination of a witness or interviewee.

It's a forensic cross examination of absolutely nothing of substance, though. I like Andrew Neil but that was an utterly futile interview.

[John B]

But I didn't suggest that you disapproved of Andrew Neil. I suggested that you disapproved of a mention of him. He is a very effective commentator and interviewer, but it seems that if one references something he says more than a couple of times, one must be besotted with him (just like Shorluck must be with Wittgenstein if he mentions him one more time. But if he were, then surely he would have spelled his name correctly in his last post )

 

Regarding the labelling, I have never attached those labels to you. I have only used Remoaners to those collectively who opposed the referendum decision. As it was a bilateral decision, posters on here fall into one or the other camp, as I do not recall any posts from people purporting to be fence sitters.

 

According to the Guardian:

 

The government’s independent economic watchdog will tear up its previous forecasts for the UK’s growth prospects as it gives its first official verdict on the outlook for post-Brexit Britain this week.

 

The Office for Budget Responsibility is expected to paint a gloomy picture of lower growth, higher inflation and a larger-than-expected deficit as the UK negotiates its way out of the EU.

 

Now the OBR has a well founded reputation for getting its forecasts wrong: they are always too optimistic. In this case that is no comfort: expect things to be worse than they say.

 

And what this shows is how resoundingly fickle people are. They bought the austerity narrative until they bought the EU / migration narrative. And then they voted to make themselves worse off.

 

All that can be concluded is that politics is no longer just about the economy. Or that people can be conned, and are.

[Wes Tender]

John B According to the Guardian:

 

The government’s independent economic watchdog will tear up its previous forecasts for the UK’s growth prospects as it gives its first official verdict on the outlook for post-Brexit Britain this week.

 

The Office for Budget Responsibility is expected to paint a gloomy picture of lower growth, higher inflation and a larger-than-expected deficit as the UK negotiates its way out of the EU.

 

Now the OBR has a well founded reputation for getting its forecasts wrong: they are always too optimistic. In this case that is no comfort: expect things to be worse than they say.

 

And what this shows is how resoundingly fickle people are. They bought the austerity narrative until they bought the EU / migration narrative. And then they voted to make themselves worse off.

 

All that can be concluded is that politics is no longer just about the economy. Or that people can be conned, and are.

 

Thanks for bringing this part of the article below to my notice. It helps to debunk the first gloomy part of the article that you no doubt lapped up, showing that these so-called economic experts are often not infallible when it comes to crystal ball gazing.

 

The more downbeat assessment from the OBR will follow an unexpected show of resilience from the UK economy in the months immediately after the referendum, as consumers appeared to shrug off any uncertainty caused by the Brexit vote.

 

The Office for National Statistics is expected to confirm the economy grew by 0.5% in the third quarter when it publishes its second estimate of gross domestic product on Friday. It was a stronger-than-expected performance, and ruled out the possibility of a recession in the second half of 2016.

 

The IMF believes the UK will be the fastest growing of the G7 leading industrial countries in 2016, with growth of 1.8%.

[Wes Tender]

It's a forensic cross examination of absolutely nothing of substance, though. I like Andrew Neil but that was an utterly futile interview.

 

Is it ever futile exposing these sorts of lies and one-sided propaganda? The assertions made by the Open Britain group which were based on quotations taken completely out of context are really quite scandalous and perhaps the threat of legal action against them by those who have been grossly misrepresented would rein them in. What is futile, is the main thrust of Open Britain's campaign, that we should remain a member of the Single Market, when it was made abundantly clear during the referendum campaign that the EU's insistence on freedom of movement of people as a condition of that membership made that unacceptable.

[John B]

Thanks for bringing this part of the article below to my notice. It helps to debunk the first gloomy part of the article that you no doubt lapped up, showing that these so-called economic experts are often not infallible when it comes to crystal ball gazing.

 

Very true but BREXIT is the the most econimically stupid thing has happened to the UK as inflation grows growth and investment reduce and we all get poorer

 

Things only appear OK at the moment because consumer debt is increasing as real wages are significantly less than in 2008

[moonraker]

Is it ever futile exposing these sorts of lies and one-sided propaganda? .

Whilst there has certainly been lies on both sides it isd a bit rich Brexiteers complaining when by any measure the lies of the leading Brexiteers and the Right Wing Rags take all the nonours. As for one sided popaganda that is the nature politics. The British political system is an outdated system, it maintains a simple Left - Right two party system that does not the reflect thr views of a large part of the electorate. A governemnt elected on under 37%, an opposition with 30% and 32% for anything but failed Tory and Labour. 62% of the electorate dont want the Tories but we are stuck with them and the mess they have now got us into because they were running scared of one sided UKIP propaganda.

[hutch]

... real wages are significantly less than in 2008

Is 8 years somehow statistically significant for such comparisons? What about in 2007? Or 2006, 2009 or 2010 or lots of other years. It is obviously significant in that it was the unsustainable high point that immediately preceeded the biggest financial meltdown in my 60 years. But is it significant n any other way?

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Very true but BREXIT is the the most econimically stupid thing has happened to the UK as inflation grows growth and investment reduce and we all get poorer

 

Things only appear OK at the moment because consumer debt is increasing as real wages are significantly less than in 2008

 

It may have caused economically uncertainty but the good economic news keeps coming.

 

I expect inflation will rise and their may be an upheaval when we do trigger clause 50 but the more the commission behave like some sort of sinister religious cult scheming to punish somebody who dares leave I think it is great that we are out.

[Wes Tender]

Very true but BREXIT is the the most econimically stupid thing has happened to the UK as inflation grows growth and investment reduce and we all get poorer

 

Things only appear OK at the moment because consumer debt is increasing as real wages are significantly less than in 2008

 

You're entitled to believe that if you want, of course. No doubt you also believed that us not joining the Eurozone was the most stupid decision economically too.

 

My belief is that after a short term reversal economically when we trigger Article 50, we will then negotiate as good a deal as we can with the EU regarding access to the single market and then begin to reap the benefits of bilateral free trade deals with the more dynamic countries in the rest of the World. The time will probably come within the next few years when even you will admit that it was the best thing that we had done in our recent history to turn around our countries economic fortunes.

[buctootim]

Is 8 years somehow statistically significant for such comparisons? What about in 2007? Or 2006, 2009 or 2010 or lots of other years. It is obviously significant in that it was the unsustainable high point that immediately preceeded the biggest financial meltdown in my 60 years. But is it significant n any other way?

 

Almost everybody born in the West since WW2 has grown up on the premise that there will be trend growth in wages. Thats probably not true anymore for the richest countries. You can certainly see why Americans are disaffected - GDP has increased but median wages have not - but the rich have got richer.

 

[John B]

Is 8 years somehow statistically significant for such comparisons? What about in 2007? Or 2006, 2009 or 2010 or lots of other years. It is obviously significant in that it was the unsustainable high point that immediately preceeded the biggest financial meltdown in my 60 years. But is it significant n any other way?

 

There has been almost zero British wage growth since global financial crisis which is shown in the graph in the post above.

 

Figures from recruitment giant Korn Ferry underlines weakness of UK average pay since fall of Lehman Brothers

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/zero-british-wage-growth-since-global-financial-crisis-new-data-shows-a7226961.html

 

mostly because of Tory Policies which advantage the wealthy

 

In fact the UK joins Greece at bottom of wage growth league

 

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/jul/27/uk-joins-greece-at-bottom-of-wage-growth-league-tuc-oecd

 

How people think the Tories are economically competent beats me.

 

Taking us into BREXIT makes it even worse

[John B]

You're entitled to believe that if you want, of course. No doubt you also believed that us not joining the Eurozone was the most stupid decision economically too.

 

My belief is that after a short term reversal economically when we trigger Article 50, we will then negotiate as good a deal as we can with the EU regarding access to the single market and then begin to reap the benefits of bilateral free trade deals with the more dynamic countries in the rest of the World. The time will probably come within the next few years when even you will admit that it was the best thing that we had done in our recent history to turn around our countries economic fortunes.

 

I think I will take notice of people with a little more economics knowledge than some so called pompous bloke on a football forum who seems to think that whatever he believes is right

 

especially as Brexit vote wiped £1.2tn off UK household wealth in 2016

[ecuk268]

And the government is going to hire an additional 30,000 civil servants just to cope with Brexit issues. The EU employs just 24,000 in total.

 

Interesting number that. The leavers are always moaning about bloated EU bureaucracies. 24000 to administer 28 countries with a population of just over 500 million.

 

Hampshire County Council employ 37000.

[Johnny Bognor]

Interesting number that. The leavers are always moaning about bloated EU bureaucracies. 24000 to administer 28 countries with a population of just over 500 million.

 

Hampshire County Council employ 37000.

Bugger me. I didn't realise these EU officials swept the streets and emptied the bins a well???

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[ecuk268]

Bugger me. I didn't realise these EU officials swept the streets and emptied the bins a well???

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

Someone sweeps your streets?

[Johnny Bognor]

Someone sweeps your streets?

I live in Chichester sweetheart

 

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[sandwichsaint]

Bugger me. I didn't realise these EU officials swept the streets and emptied the bins a well???

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

Keep up, I doubt Hants CC has employed a binman or a roadsweeper for 20 years, it's all privatised, the council commissions the contract, the contractor employs the staff. Not sure where the figure of 34k came from? I've just had a look and I found a figure of 9,500 FTE employees, mainly employed in children's services and in adult care. In Dorset (a smaller county/population) the number of FTE employees has fallen from 5400 to 4200 between June 2015 and June 2016 according to their online documentation. Numbers of people employed by councils has fallen drastically due to privatisation, 'cuts', and not least acadamisation of schools.

 

Not sure where the EU angle is in all this but a council like Hants prob employs fewer than 200 full-on beauacrats/administrators (to oversee local taxation, public spending, public health, civil defence, planning, what's left of education, adult care, children's services, waste disposal/re-cycling etc.) so the EU figure of 24000 to administer 28 countries is probably not excessive.

[whelk]

Pretty sure HCC does not do bins but have over 500 schools. How dare they employ so many teachers!

And social care - nothing for anyone to be bothered about and shouldn't need any staff. And roads - who uses them?

[whelk]

and did anyone see this and the seeming waste of money on private contracts and consultancy?

expires tonight: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0803b0s/whos-spending-britains-billions

[Wes Tender]

I think I will take notice of people with a little more economics knowledge than some so called pompous bloke on a football forum who seems to think that whatever he believes is right

 

especially as Brexit vote wiped £1.2tn off UK household wealth in 2016

 

So you're entitled to come out with shrill, completely over the top statements and claim that you base them on what some economists predict, even though those same economists had not only been wrong about the consequences of our not joining the Eurozone, but also about the immediate consequences of a Referendum vote to leave the EU. It is really quite ironic that you recognise that this is just a football forum, a place for expressing opinions, but whenever somebody dares to question yours, they are labelled as pompous and self-righteous. I have already acknowledged that you are entitled to hold the belief that voting to leave the EU will turn out to be a financial disaster, so why am I not entitled to believe that it won't be, without you jumping down my throat?

 

As for the claim by Credit Suisse about this £1.2 trillion wiped off household wealth, even Guardian readers in their comments column are bemused by it and point out several glaring errors in the basis of the conclusions drawn by CS. The stock market post Brexit is doing just fine. The pound has fallen 18% or so, but that has its upsides too. This statement about the fall in the number of millionaires seems to be based on the fall in property values at the top of the market. Do you therefore feel some real sympathy for them? Ordinary people have seen the value of their properties rise.

 

But I'm sure that you lapped up this report in order to justify your position.

[badgerx16]

Numbers of people employed by councils has fallen drastically due to privatisation, 'cuts', and not least acadamisation of schools.

 

Ain't that the truth.

Edited 22 November, 2016 by badgerx16

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

You're entitled to believe that if you want, of course. No doubt you also believed that us not joining the Eurozone was the most stupid decision economically too.

 

My belief is that after a short term reversal economically when we trigger Article 50, we will then negotiate as good a deal as we can with the EU regarding access to the single market and then begin to reap the benefits of bilateral free trade deals with the more dynamic countries in the rest of the World. The time will probably come within the next few years when even you will admit that it was the best thing that we had done in our recent history to turn around our countries economic fortunes.

 

I wonder if you know which current EU nation state was leading the way in stalling a potential EU - INDIA trade deal because it didn't much like the terms on offer from New Delhi? I'll give you a clue Wes - it's capital is known as London and its Head of State is a elderly lady called Elizabeth. Tearing up our current trading arrangements and attempting to replace them with something else will I believe be a exceptionally long and difficult process, the sheer complexity of which you clearly haven't grasped.

 

The so-called 'Hard-Brexit' option, an extremist idea that British industry abhors but is nevertheless gaining favour now among hard-line eurosceptics, amounts to us deliberately choosing to damage what are still UNDENIABLY our primary trading relationships with continental Europe. Yet you persist in telling anyone on here who will listen to you that we can somehow escape any adverse long/medium term consequences of that move by forming new trading arrangements with more distant nations elsewhere in the world. Such a policy runs counter to common sense - it is in the nature of things that nations nearly always trade most heavily with neighbouring states - and constitutes I think a dangerous gamble with the welfare of both the British economy and the many millions of people it supports.

 

When nations build any type of wall between themselves and their neighbours - be it a simple physical structure or a trade barrier - then history shows us we end up impoverishing people on BOTH sides of that divide we have constructed. The distant future is not ours to see of course, but in the long term we are all dead and there is very little doubt that our departure from the vast EU Single Market area will for years (or even decades) to come make millions of your fellow citizens poorer then they would otherwise have been. Your eurosceptic triumph is in reality a kind of tragedy in the making.

 

Now you of course are at liberty to deny that truth and peddle recycled Bretix propaganda instead from now to 'Kingdom Come' if you will. You can trot-out your customary 'shrill', 'arrogant' and 'pompous'' retorts as often as you care to. You can even spend your retirement resorting to the tactic of criticising spelling mistakes if all else fails - that is if you really think that kind of behaviour impresses people on here. But none of that stuff is going to change anything.

[Wes Tender]

I wonder if you know which current EU nation state was leading the way in stalling a potential EU - INDIA trade deal because it didn't much like the terms on offer from New Delhi? I'll give you a clue Wes - it's capital is known as London and its Head of State is a elderly lady called Elizabeth. Tearing up our current trading arrangements and attempting to replace them with something else will I believe be a exceptionally long and difficult process, the sheer complexity of which you clearly haven't grasped.

 

The so-called 'Hard-Brexit' option, an extremist idea that British industry abhors but is nevertheless gaining favour now among hard-line eurosceptics, amounts to us deliberately choosing to damage what are still UNDENIABLY our primary trading relationships with continental Europe. Yet you persist in telling anyone on here who will listen to you that we can somehow escape any adverse long/medium term consequences of that move by forming new trading arrangements with more distant nations elsewhere in the world. Such a policy runs counter to common sense - it is in the nature of things that nations nearly always trade most heavily with neighbouring states - and constitutes I think a dangerous gamble with the welfare of both the British economy and the many millions of people it supports.

 

When nations build any type of wall between themselves and their neighbours - be it a simple physical structure or a trade barrier - then history shows us we end up impoverishing people on BOTH sides of that divide we have constructed. The distant future is not ours to see of course, but in the long term we are all dead and there is very little doubt that our departure from the vast EU Single Market area will for years (or even decades) to come make millions of your fellow citizens poorer then they would otherwise have been. Your eurosceptic triumph is in reality a kind of tragedy in the making.

 

Now you of course are at liberty to deny that truth and peddle recycled Bretix propaganda instead from now to 'Kingdom Come' if you will. You can trot-out your customary 'shrill', 'arrogant' and 'pompous'' retorts as often as you care to. You can even spend your retirement resorting to the tactic of criticising spelling mistakes if all else fails - that is if you really think that kind of behaviour impresses people on here. But none of that stuff is going to change anything.

 

Thanks for providing your usual diatribe in response to my post.

 

I presume that you are aware that we are not permitted to arrange trade deals with external countries to the EU until we have left? I suggest that that will be the time to worry about whether India's position is just posturing, or whether there are more serious concerns.

 

I'm afraid that in common with most Remainians, you just love to paint the blackest picture regarding our future trading relationship and are fond of a bit of hyperbole.

 

The so-called 'Hard-Brexit' option, an extremist idea that British industry abhors but is nevertheless gaining favour now among hard-line eurosceptics, amounts to us deliberately choosing to damage what are still UNDENIABLY our primary trading relationships with continental Europe.

 

What you are talking about here is 6-8% of British companies that export to the EU, not "British industry" as a whole. And even then, anybody who wished to be seen as balanced in their arguments will acknowledge that there are many faults with that trading arrangement, faults that have been discussed many times but which you will happily gloss over in your sweeping generalisations.

 

You point out that it is sensible to trade with our closest neighbours, but nobody has suggested that we will cease trading with the EU, have they? Naturally we will continue to trade with them, but via the access to the EU single market that is enjoyed by everybody else who is not a member of it.

 

You rightly point out that any barriers to free trade suit neither trading partner, but your argument suggests that the EU will cut off it's nose to spite its face by risking having reciprocal tariffs placed on their goods if they impose them on us. Your dismissal of trade with the rest of the World as making little sense due to the distances involved is a poor one, as containerisation and air freight both offer the same easy transportation solutions that are employed by us and the EU to export our products to the rest of the World currently.

 

As for the rest of your post, it is the usual hot air deriding anybody who dares to challenge the doom-laden prophecies of the Remain position. Arrogant? Of course it all is. One only has to look at the language you have employed in this post.

I wonder if you know... I'll give you a clue... You haven't grasped... an extremist idea... deliberately choosing to damage... a tragedy in the making... deny that truth... peddle recycled Bretex (sic) propaganda.

[moonraker]

Thanks for providing your usual diatribe in response to my post.

 

I presume that you are aware that we are not permitted to arrange trade deals with external countries to the EU until we have left? I suggest that that will be the time to worry about whether India's position is just posturing, or whether there are more serious concerns.

 

I'm afraid that in common with most Remainians, you just love to paint the blackest picture regarding our future trading relationship and are fond of a bit of hyperbole.

 

 

 

What you are talking about here is 6-8% of British companies that export to the EU, not "British industry" as a whole. And even then, anybody who wished to be seen as balanced in their arguments will acknowledge that there are many faults with that trading arrangement, faults that have been discussed many times but which you will happily gloss over in your sweeping generalisations.

 

You point out that it is sensible to trade with our closest neighbours, but nobody has suggested that we will cease trading with the EU, have they? Naturally we will continue to trade with them, but via the access to the EU single market that is enjoyed by everybody else who is not a member of it.

 

You rightly point out that any barriers to free trade suit neither trading partner, but your argument suggests that the EU will cut off it's nose to spite its face by risking having reciprocal tariffs placed on their goods if they impose them on us. Your dismissal of trade with the rest of the World as making little sense due to the distances involved is a poor one, as containerisation and air freight both offer the same easy transportation solutions that are employed by us and the EU to export our products to the rest of the World currently.

 

As for the rest of your post, it is the usual hot air deriding anybody who dares to challenge the doom-laden prophecies of the Remain position. Arrogant? Of course it all is. One only has to look at the language you have employed in this post.

 

As usual you open with a pathetic dismissive remark, and then spout the same unfounded repetitive speculative claims. The most arrogant and unfounded claims on here are from leavers who continue to make light of the difficulty and the time it will take to agree trade deals, you never acknowledge the cost, the lack of sufficient experienced negotiators, instead you infer that the world is queuing up to deal with us.

[shurlock]

Thanks for providing your usual diatribe in response to my post.

 

I presume that you are aware that we are not permitted to arrange trade deals with external countries to the EU until we have left? I suggest that that will be the time to worry about whether India's position is just posturing, or whether there are more serious concerns.

 

I'm afraid that in common with most Remainians, you just love to paint the blackest picture regarding our future trading relationship and are fond of a bit of hyperbole.

 

 

 

What you are talking about here is 6-8% of British companies that export to the EU, not "British industry" as a whole. And even then, anybody who wished to be seen as balanced in their arguments will acknowledge that there are many faults with that trading arrangement, faults that have been discussed many times but which you will happily gloss over in your sweeping generalisations.

 

You point out that it is sensible to trade with our closest neighbours, but nobody has suggested that we will cease trading with the EU, have they? Naturally we will continue to trade with them, but via the access to the EU single market that is enjoyed by everybody else who is not a member of it.

 

You rightly point out that any barriers to free trade suit neither trading partner, but your argument suggests that the EU will cut off it's nose to spite its face by risking having reciprocal tariffs placed on their goods if they impose them on us. Your dismissal of trade with the rest of the World as making little sense due to the distances involved is a poor one, as containerisation and air freight both offer the same easy transportation solutions that are employed by us and the EU to export our products to the rest of the World currently.

 

As for the rest of your post, it is the usual hot air deriding anybody who dares to challenge the doom-laden prophecies of the Remain position. Arrogant? Of course it all is. One only has to look at the language you have employed in this post.

 

Even by your staggeringly ignorant levels Les, this is a whopper. Remind me how the UK will secure and enjoy the same access it currently does to the EU services market? So are you accepting that sonething will have to give on free movement?

 

And no Les, the importance of distance has not diminished, particularly with respect to services (never mind that global trade outside the EU has been slowing). The role of proximity is as a close to a 'scientific' law as you'll find in economics. Rather than repeating platitudes about air freight (which betrays a lack of understanding how modern trade works and the nature of UK's comparative advantage), why not engage with the evidence for once.

 

Google gravity trade model, if you need some assistance pal. Then again you made a tit out of yourself over productivity, so you may want to look for the Peter and Jane version

 

https://app.ft.com/cms/s/964afa06-8f0b-11e6-8df8-d3778b55a923.html?sectionid=world

 

And as far as negotiating positions are concerned, the EU has more leverage than the UK and has the integrity of the entire EU project to think about. Sorry if that offends your quaint romantic sensibilities about the UK's place in the world.

Edited 23 November, 2016 by shurlock

[Wes Tender]

Even by your staggeringly ignorant levels Les, this is a whopper. Remind me how the UK will secure and enjoy the same access it currently does to the EU services market?

 

And no Les, the importance of distance has not diminished, particularly with respect to services (never mind that global trade outside the EU has been slowing). The role of proximity is as a close to a 'scientific' law as you'll find in economics. Rather than repeating platitudes about air freight (which betrays a lack of understanding how modern trade works), why not engage with the evidence for once.

 

Google gravity trade model, if you need some assistance pal. Then again you made a tit out of yourself over productivity, so you may want to look for the Peter and Jane version

 

https://app.ft.com/cms/s/964afa06-8f0b-11e6-8df8-d3778b55a923.html?sectionid=world

 

And as far as negotiating positions are concerned, the EU has more leverage than the UK and has the integrity of the entire EU project to think about. Sorry if that offends your quaint patriotic sensibilities.

 

As usual, you never cease to disappoint, Shorluck, me old mucker. Where did I suggest that we would enjoy the same access we currently do? That is something that will only become clear once the horse trading begins next year and nobody knows for certain what will transpire. I never even mentioned the EU services market, as CEC was talking about British Industry, not Services. And you have the temerity to suggest that it is I who needs to have the Peter and Jane version in order to comprehend simple English.

 

Our trade with the rest of the World has increased in recent years whilst decreasing with Europe, (the figures of the EU trade being distorted a little by the Rotterdam effect). That appears to be despite these logistical obstacles that you make a fuss about.

 

Regarding our negotiating position, I am quite aware that those who advocated our remaining in the EU choose to argue that the EU has greater leverage than us, whereas the counter argument was taken by the Leave campaign. Some of those arguments regarding the leverage we hold are articulated here:- http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/27/nevermind-the-brexit-uk-will-emerge-with-a-good-trade-deal.html but I'm sure that you have heard them all before, even though you choose to dismiss them. Sorry if these arguments put a dent in your egotistical opinion of yourself as some sort of super intelligent expert.

[moonraker]

As usual, you never cease to disappoint, Shorluck, me old mucker. Where did I suggest that we would enjoy the same access we currently do? That is something that will only become clear once the horse trading begins next year and nobody knows for certain what will transpire. I never even mentioned the EU services market, as CEC was talking about British Industry, not Services. And you have the temerity to suggest that it is I who needs to have the Peter and Jane version in order to comprehend simple English.

 

Our trade with the rest of the World has increased in recent years whilst decreasing with Europe, (the figures of the EU trade being distorted a little by the Rotterdam effect). That appears to be despite these logistical obstacles that you make a fuss about.

 

Regarding our negotiating position, I am quite aware that those who advocated our remaining in the EU choose to argue that the EU has greater leverage than us, whereas the counter argument was taken by the Leave campaign. Some of those arguments regarding the leverage we hold are articulated here:- http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/27/nevermind-the-brexit-uk-will-emerge-with-a-good-trade-deal.html but I'm sure that you have heard them all before, even though you choose to dismiss them. Sorry if these arguments put a dent in your egotistical opinion of yourself as some sort of super intelligent expert.

 

Wait a minute I thought expert analyst forecast were poppycock, for every one of theseopinion pieces supporting Bexit there are ten by equally worthy individuals damming Brexit. the reference article is an opinion of what might happen and as you keep pointing out we need to wait and see, since this was published the direction of travel hasn't been in favour of this gentlemans forecast.

[shurlock]

As usual, you never cease to disappoint, Shorluck, me old mucker. Where did I suggest that we would enjoy the same access we currently do? That is something that will only become clear once the horse trading begins next year and nobody knows for certain what will transpire. I never even mentioned the EU services market, as CEC was talking about British Industry, not Services. And you have the temerity to suggest that it is I who needs to have the Peter and Jane version in order to comprehend simple English.

 

Our trade with the rest of the World has increased in recent years whilst decreasing with Europe, (the figures of the EU trade being distorted a little by the Rotterdam effect). That appears to be despite these logistical obstacles that you make a fuss about.

 

Regarding our negotiating position, I am quite aware that those who advocated our remaining in the EU choose to argue that the EU has greater leverage than us, whereas the counter argument was taken by the Leave campaign. Some of those arguments regarding the leverage we hold are articulated here:- http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/27/nevermind-the-brexit-uk-will-emerge-with-a-good-trade-deal.html but I'm sure that you have heard them all before, even though you choose to dismiss them. Sorry if these arguments put a dent in your egotistical opinion of yourself as some sort of super intelligent expert.

 

Again with your desperate and self-defeating obfuscation Les. You're only making yourself look sillier.

 

Never mind the substantive point that we're discussing the fortunes of the UK economy and British business, industry is an open-ended concept and includes services. Does the CBI only represent manufacturing/goods-producing firms? Does the SIC, the main classification system, exclude service-based activities? In case you're in doubt (I take nothing for granted with you), those are rhetorical questions and the answer to both is no. When you're out of your depth, usually it's best not to say anything at all

 

The only reason that export growth has been faster is that growth in emerging economies has been faster. It has little to do with the UK's unique economic or trade strengths. Invariably this will slow as China and other emerging economies converge with advanced economies (never mind the heightened risk of shocks that might derail growth). This is another basic fact of economic life to which you appear utterly oblivious. Indeed there is evidence that this is already happening in countries like China and is seen as both desirable and necessary.

 

Notwithstanding this UK's trade with emerging markets is small relative to that with the EU. Even under the most optimistic assumptions, it will continue to be so in 2030. The share of UK exports going to Germany alone is still projected to be higher than exports going to China.

 

Above all, distance matters. Any attempt to deny its importance to trade is economically illiterate. Do explain why decades of literature on the subject is wrong. Sorry Les if it disturbs the serenity to which you and other fawning Brexiters believe you are entitled.

Edited 23 November, 2016 by shurlock

[buctootim]

What you are talking about here is 6-8% of British companies that export to the EU, not "British industry" as a whole.

 

Misleading as ever Wes. 95% of British companies employ fewer than 10 people and most of them are one man bands. The "6-8% of companies that export to the EU" account for the large bulk of employment, GDP and exports.

[Wes Tender]

Again with your desperate and self-defeating obfuscation Les. You're only making yourself look sillier.

 

Never mind the substantive point that we're discussing the fortunes of the UK economy and British business, industry is an open-ended concept and includes services. Does the CBI only represent manufacturing/goods-producing firms? Does the SIC, the main classification system, exclude service-based activities? In case you're in doubt (I take nothing for granted with you), those are rhetorical questions and the answer to both is no. When you're out of your depth, usually it's best not to say anything at all

 

The only reason that export growth has been faster is that growth in emerging economies has been faster. It has little to do with the UK's unique economic or trade strengths. Invariably this will slow as China and other emerging economies converge with advanced economies (never mind the heightened risk of shocks that might derail growth). This is another basic fact of economic life to which you appear utterly oblivious. Indeed there is evidence that this is already happening in countries like China and is seen as both desirable and necessary.

 

Notwithstanding this UK's trade with emerging markets is small relative to that with the EU. Even under the most optimistic assumptions, it will continue to be so in 2030. The share of UK exports going to Germany alone is still projected to be higher than exports going to China.

 

Above all, distance matters. Any attempt to deny its importance to trade is economically illiterate. Do explain why decades of literature on the subject is wrong. Sorry Les if it disturbs the serenity to which you and other fawning Brexiters believe you are entitled.

 

Are you and the moonraker one and the same, Shorluck? He responds to my posts first with his one or two line waffle and then you come on here with your usual ad hominem diatribe, often shooting off in tangents to try and widen the debate into other areas where you believe that you can make yourself look clever.

 

Yes, emerging economies have encouraged export growth, but the EU's trade arrangements with these emerging economies is pathetic, because of the sclerotic pace that it can progress trying to drag all member states into agreements when the national interests of some member states is compromised. Many believe that we will be able to negotiate trade deals with these countries before the EU can. Sorry if that concept is something that could undermine your position.

 

Good of you to mention Germany and our trade with them, as had you read that link, it makes the case that we are far more important to them as a trading partner than China is, but I don't see any argument from you against the case that they make that our leverage is greater than the EU's. I'm surprised that you don't accuse the author of being ignorant, out of his depth, a non-entity.

 

I am also amused that you defend your stance on the logistical problems of trading further afield, citing decades of literature. No doubt closer inspection of that literature would increasingly acknowledge that these logistical problems have eased with the passage of time and the development of even bigger container ships carrying larger cargoes more efficiently and there then being the most modern port facilities to handle the containers and utilise the much improved onward transportation infrastructure.

 

Don't worry about my serenity, me old mucker. I'm totally at ease with the situation and confident of our future. I suspect that judging by your posts, you could do with taking some chill pills.

[Wes Tender]

Misleading as ever Wes. 95% of British companies employ fewer than 10 people and most of them are one man bands. The "6-8% of companies that export to the EU" account for the large bulk of employment, GDP and exports.

 

Did I make any suggestion that this was not so? No, I didn't. But these 6-8% of British companies that export around about £220 billion of goods and services to other EU countries were worth about 12% of the value of the British economy in 2015.

[buctootim]

Did I make any suggestion that this was not so? No, I didn't. But these 6-8% of British companies that export around about £220 billion of goods and services to other EU countries were worth about 12% of the value of the British economy in 2015.

You mislead with selective use of facts and implication. tbf this is probably because you have swallowed it whole from some half baked agenda led source and haven't questioned it.

 

The 12% claim shows another failure to understand / intention to mislead. Thats is the value of the exports not the total contribution to British GDP by these companies. You have left out their main contribution - employment of two thirds of the UK workforce.

[Wes Tender]

You mislead with selective use of facts and implication. tbf this is probably because you have swallowed it whole from some half baked agenda led source and haven't questioned it.

 

The 12% claim shows another failure to understand / intention to mislead. Thats is the value of the exports not the total contribution to British GDP by these companies. You have left out their main contribution - employment of two thirds of the UK workforce.

 

This will be that well known half baked agenda led source https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/ The self styled "THE UK’S INDEPENDENT FACT CHECKING CHARITY"

[shurlock]

Are you and the moonraker one and the same, Shorluck? He responds to my posts first with his one or two line waffle and then you come on here with your usual ad hominem diatribe, often shooting off in tangents to try and widen the debate into other areas where you believe that you can make yourself look clever.

 

Yes, emerging economies have encouraged export growth, but the EU's trade arrangements with these emerging economies is pathetic, because of the sclerotic pace that it can progress trying to drag all member states into agreements when the national interests of some member states is compromised. Many believe that we will be able to negotiate trade deals with these countries before the EU can. Sorry if that concept is something that could undermine your position.

 

Good of you to mention Germany and our trade with them, as had you read that link, it makes the case that we are far more important to them as a trading partner than China is, but I don't see any argument from you against the case that they make that our leverage is greater than the EU's. I'm surprised that you don't accuse the author of being ignorant, out of his depth, a non-entity.

 

I am also amused that you defend your stance on the logistical problems of trading further afield, citing decades of literature. No doubt closer inspection of that literature would increasingly acknowledge that these logistical problems have eased with the passage of time and the development of even bigger container ships carrying larger cargoes more efficiently and there then being the most modern port facilities to handle the containers and utilise the much improved onward transportation infrastructure.

 

Don't worry about my serenity, me old mucker. I'm totally at ease with the situation and confident of our future. I suspect that judging by your posts, you could do with taking some chill pills.

 

Les, it's difficult to discuss matters when you're so clueless about first principles and basic economic facts. That -not the fact that we disagree (which is healthy) is why you repeatedly come out of these exchanges looking so silly.

 

Did I deny that technology has reduced some of the constraints of distance? No I didn't. Note distance encompasses more than geography; but lets park that for now lest I tax you too much. What I said is that even with technological advance, distance remains a significant handicap, casting into doubt many of Brexiters cheery, childish assumptions.

 

Not sure what your obsession is with container ships. An even simpler example is services. In principle, ICT and digitisation should mean that services (many of which are information-based) can be sent instantaneously and at zero transport cost (relative to goods). And yet there is evidence that the impact of distance on service trade is greater than for goods.

 

Go have a read Les and when you're ready, perhaps come back and have a chat about British industry (whoops ).

[Verbal]

One Brexiter murder trial down, one to go.

 

Brexit campaigners were claiming that a remain vote would result in “swarms” of immigrants entering the UK, that it could trigger mass sexual attacks. Just hours before the murder, Ukip unveiled its infamous “breaking point” anti-immigration poster. Mair came to regard Cox as one of “the collaborators”, a traitor to his race. The passionate defender of immigration and the remain campaign was a legitimate target in his eyes.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/nov/23/thomas-mair-slow-burning-hatred-led-to-jo-cox-murder

[buctootim]

This will be that well known half baked agenda led source https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/ The self styled "THE UK’S INDEPENDENT FACT CHECKING CHARITY"

 

Another attempt to mislead / failure to keep up . "half baked agenda led source" was in reference to your previous point about 6-8% of companies.

 

Its a fail for you on this one as well. The source is fine, you have simply not understood that the value of the exports is not the only, or indeed biggest contribution to British GDP. The wages and taxes they pay for c18 million employees fuel consumption and pay for employment of public sector employees.

[John B]

Hammond’s statement was a chance to make a first big assessment of the impact of Brexit on the UK economy.

 

The verdict is, without question, bleak. Growth is down, borrowing has to rise, and the dream of a surplus has been deferred to “as soon as practicable”, ie never

[Wes Tender]

You mislead with selective use of facts and implication. tbf this is probably because you have swallowed it whole from some half baked agenda led source and haven't questioned it.

 

The 12% claim shows another failure to understand / intention to mislead. Thats is the value of the exports not the total contribution to British GDP by these companies. You have left out their main contribution - employment of two thirds of the UK workforce.

 

Caught out by the source of that info and trying to deflect it onto something else? I'd love to know where your two thirds of the UK workforce comes from. From what I can glean, we have around 32 million in work in the UK, 23 million in full time employment. Of those, 3.3 million to 4.2 million by a generous estimate are tied in with exports to the EU, so two thirds seems a tad overstated to me.

[Wes Tender]

Les, it's difficult to discuss matters when you're so clueless about first principles and basic economic facts. That -not the fact that we disagree (which is healthy) is why you repeatedly come out of these exchanges looking so silly.

 

Did I deny that technology has reduced some of the constraints of distance? No I didn't. Note distance encompasses more than geography; but lets park that for now lest I tax you too much. What I said is that even with technological advance, distance remains a significant handicap, casting into doubt many of Brexiters cheery, childish assumptions.

 

Not sure what your obsession is with container ships. An even simpler example is services. In principle, ICT and digitisation should mean that services (many of which are information-based) can be sent instantaneously and at zero transport cost (relative to goods). And yet there is evidence that the impact of distance on service trade is greater than for goods.

 

Go have a read Les and when you're ready, perhaps come back and have a chat about British industry (whoops ).

 

The more that I show up some of your arguments as implausible, the more you attempt to massage your ego by insults. You're shown up on the transportation of exported and imported goods, citing decades old literature on problems with it that have largely been overcome and so you go off on a tangent about services. Because a significant amount of these imported/exported goods is via container ships, you accuse me of being obsessed with it. Try and debate the points raised instead of making yourself look ridiculous by your usual obfuscation tactics and petty insults.

[shurlock]

The more that I show up some of your arguments as implausible, the more you attempt to massage your ego by insults. You're shown up on the transportation of exported and imported goods, citing decades old literature on problems with it that have largely been overcome and so you go off on a tangent about services. Because a significant amount of these imported/exported goods is via container ships, you accuse me of being obsessed with it. Try and debate the points raised instead of making yourself look ridiculous by your usual obfuscation tactics and petty insults.

 

Les - wrong again. Distance continues to matter. I guess youve not read anything. You're having an utter mare today.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Hammond’s statement was a chance to make a first big assessment of the impact of Brexit on the UK economy.

 

The verdict is, without question, bleak. Growth is down, borrowing has to rise, and the dream of a surplus has been deferred to “as soon as practicable”, ie never

 

Pony

 

George Osborne's mismanagement of the economy is the issue not Brexit. There was never any chance of a surplus, he failed to hit every target he ever set. If you're going to blame Brexit for everything, you're going to let incompetent politicians off the hook.

[John B]

Pony

 

George Osborne's mismanagement of the economy is the issue not Brexit. There was never any chance of a surplus, he failed to hit every target he ever set. If you're going to blame Brexit for everything, you're going to let incompetent politicians off the hook.

 

You are as usual wrong I agree George Osborne's has mismanaged the economy but Brexit has compounded the situation so £220bn has been added to the Debt.

 

£78bn of that is due to the expected post-referendum slowdown in the economy, £16bn is from government spending and tax decisions, and most of the rest is the result of measures taken by the Bank of England in August to avert recession (its initiatives to help banks lend and to purchase bonds).

 

So it's reasonable to suggest that £220bn increase in the national debt is the financial cost of Brexit and in all likelihood this amount will increase.

 

 

I agree Osborne has ruined the economy but Brexit has made it even worse

 

I know you will not admit it but if you think you are right perhaps you tell me in figures why Brexit has not caused a major problem with the economy

 

 

Here are the details of how much Britain now has to borrow.

 

2016-2017: £68.2bn deficit, up from £55.5bn in the Budget in March

2017-2018: £59bn, up from £38.8bn

2018-2019: £46.5bn up from £21.4bn

2019-2020: £21.9bn compared with a surplus of £10.4bn

2020-2021: £20.7bn compared with a surplus of £11bn

[buctootim]

George Osborne's mismanagement of the economy is the issue not Brexit. There was never any chance of a surplus, he failed to hit every target he ever set. If you're going to blame Brexit for everything, you're going to let incompetent politicians off the hook.

 

Both things have an effect. Osborne was incompetent and his forecasts over optimistic so agreed more realistic forecasts will show a comparative decline. You cant dismiss the Brexit effect though. Regardless of whether you think Brexit is good or bad its undeniable that uncertainty about the future puts people off making long term expensive decisions like investment in companies or buying a house.

[aintforever]

Both things have an effect. Osborne was incompetent and his forecasts over optimistic so agreed more realistic forecasts will show a comparative decline. You cant dismiss the Brexit effect though. Regardless of whether you think Brexit is good or bad its undeniable that uncertainty about the future puts people off making long term expensive decisions like investment in companies or buying a house.

 

Not much you can do about the uncertainty, especially with all the remoaners predicting the end of the world.

[John B]

Not much you can do about the uncertainty, especially with all the remoaners predicting the end of the world.

 

So are we in in or out of the single market.

 

Are we in or out of the customs union

 

 

If we have to trade with WTO rules what will be the levels of tariffs these things are leading to uncertainty I cannot see many companies wanting to invest in the UK if they dont know what the rules are .

[Wes Tender]

Les - wrong again. Distance continues to matter. I guess youve not read anything. You're having an utter mare today.

 

Show me where I said that distance didn't matter. But it matters less than it did decades ago and will matter even less as our trade with the rest of the World increases and economies of scale further reduce costs. For somebody as bright as you think you are, this concept is taking a long to penetrate.

[aintforever]

So are we in in or out of the single market.

 

Are we in or out of the customs union

 

 

If we have to trade with WTO rules what will be the levels of tariffs these things are leading to uncertainty I cannot see many companies wanting to invest in the UK if they dont know what the rules are .

 

But if we are going to change things for the better there has to be a period of uncertainty. They are just going to have to deal with it. The sooner we just crack on the better.