The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)
Discussion
Jonesy23 said:
Like the sainted Corbyn, some people are only truly happy when they can be campaigning against stuff/'the system' in whatever form, even if it means they are campaigning against stuff they used to support before it became the mainstream. Hence the flipflopping.
There's also the Cassandra bit - they seem to be happy to only ever warn against an ongoing problem or upcoming disaster. When it looked like more EU was the future that was the problem. With Brexit as the (possible) future that has become the problem.
Their material is interesting but I lost most of my respect when they shifted their views.
So there is absolutely no chance he might be right or have some valid points then?There's also the Cassandra bit - they seem to be happy to only ever warn against an ongoing problem or upcoming disaster. When it looked like more EU was the future that was the problem. With Brexit as the (possible) future that has become the problem.
Their material is interesting but I lost most of my respect when they shifted their views.
To be fair the Norths have been pretty consistent in their brexit views.
I have more of an issue with thise who might have promoted flexcit before, but are now saying "hard brexit or bust!". They are the ones who have shifted their views.
Edited by ///ajd on Friday 13th January 19:38
Interesting that previous brexit stars like Hannan and the Norths seem to be out of favour now.
Hannan famously said "no one is talking about threatening our place in the single market" - this did seem to resonate with many leave voters prior to the vote.
Hannan was hugely popular with even the hard core like Don4l.
Hannan famously said "no one is talking about threatening our place in the single market" - this did seem to resonate with many leave voters prior to the vote.
Hannan was hugely popular with even the hard core like Don4l.
don4l said:
We will have to agree to disagree on this.
I don't know where the phrase "orderly exit" comes from. It is language designed to imply that our exit could be "disorderly".
There would be nothing "disorderly" about trading with France under the same terms as we trade with the USA.
The North article worries that lorries could get diverted to Brest. I'd like to know what the hell he is smoking to come up with that idea.
Le Havre, I could understand, but Brest is plain stupid.
Are there ferries between Brest and the UK? I've done a quick Google and I cannot find anything.
God knows why he chose Brest as that is ridiculous. On the other hand the only French BIPs serving the channel, are Dunkirk, Le Havre and Deauville, latter between Le Havre and Caen.I don't know where the phrase "orderly exit" comes from. It is language designed to imply that our exit could be "disorderly".
There would be nothing "disorderly" about trading with France under the same terms as we trade with the USA.
The North article worries that lorries could get diverted to Brest. I'd like to know what the hell he is smoking to come up with that idea.
Le Havre, I could understand, but Brest is plain stupid.
Are there ferries between Brest and the UK? I've done a quick Google and I cannot find anything.
Nothing in the above deals with the actual issue raised, eg, capacity for inspections per year is less, than the current number of shipments per day, or losing mutual recognition agreements not only affects EU trade, but those the EU has with USA, Canada etc etc.
But it's par for the course to ignore the general thrust of an argument, and denigrate the whole of it by picking up on a single issue, lucky he didn't make one of his usual spelling mistakes.
So yes we will have to disagree.
Jonesy23 said:
don4l said:
Peter North strikes me as a bit odd. Christopher Booker seems to be in the same camp. Both of them have been campaigning for us to leave the EU for years. Now that we have actually voted to Leave, they both seem to be in a blind panic.
Like the sainted Corbyn, some people are only truly happy when they can be campaigning against stuff/'the system' in whatever form, even if it means they are campaigning against stuff they used to support before it became the mainstream. Hence the flipflopping.There's also the Cassandra bit - they seem to be happy to only ever warn against an ongoing problem or upcoming disaster. When it looked like more EU was the future that was the problem. With Brexit as the (possible) future that has become the problem.
Their material is interesting but I lost most of my respect when they shifted their views.
///ajd said:
Hannan was hugely popular with even the hard core like Don4l.
It is quite possible to like someone that you disagree with.However, I agree with him on some things. The following video makes me feel like techiedave watching Question Time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94lW6Y4tBXs
Dan Hannan said:
Prime Minister, I see you’ve already mastered the essential craft of the European politician, namely the ability to say one thing in this chamber and a very different thing to your home electorate. You’ve spoken here about free trade, and amen to that. Who would have guessed, listening to you just now, that you were the author of the phrase ‘British jobs for British workers’ and that you have subsidised, where you have not nationalised outright, swathes of our economy, including the car industry and many of the banks? Perhaps you would have more moral authority in this house if your actions matched your words? Perhaps you would have more legitimacy in the councils of the world if the United Kingdom were not going into this recession in the worst condition of any G20 country?
The truth, Prime Minister, is that you have run out of our money. The country as a whole is now in negative equity. Every British child is born owing around £20,000. Servicing the interest on that debt is going to cost more than educating the child. Now, once again today you try to spread the blame around; you spoke about an international recession, international crisis. Well, it is true that we are all sailing together into the squalls. But not every vessel in the convoy is in the same dilapidated condition. Other ships used the good years to caulk their hulls and clear their rigging; in other words – to pay off debt. But you used the good years to raise borrowing yet further. As a consequence, under your captaincy, our hull is pressed deep into the water line under the accumulated weight of your debt We are now running a deficit that touches 10% of GDP, an almost unbelievable figure. More than Pakistan, more than Hungary; countries where the IMF have already been called in. Now, it’s not that you’re not apologising; like everyone else I have long accepted that you’re pathologically incapable of accepting responsibility for these things. It’s that you’re carrying on, wilfully worsening our situation, wantonly spending what little we have left. Last year - in the last twelve months – a hundred thousand private sector jobs have been lost and yet you created thirty thousand public sector jobs.
Prime Minister, you cannot carry on for ever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in order to fund an unprecedented engorgement of the unproductive bit. You cannot spend your way out of recession or borrow your way out of debt. And when you repeat, in that wooden and perfunctory way, that our situation is better than others, that we’re ‘well-placed to weather the storm’, I have to tell you that you sound like a Brezhnev-era apparatchik giving the party line. You know, and we know, and you know that we know that it’s nonsense! Everyone knows that Britain is worse off than any other country as we go into these hard times. The IMF has said so; the European Commission has said so; the markets have said so – which is why our currency has devalued by thirty percent. And soon the voters too will get their chance to say so. They can see what the markets have already seen: that you are the devalued Prime Minister of a devalued government.
The truth, Prime Minister, is that you have run out of our money. The country as a whole is now in negative equity. Every British child is born owing around £20,000. Servicing the interest on that debt is going to cost more than educating the child. Now, once again today you try to spread the blame around; you spoke about an international recession, international crisis. Well, it is true that we are all sailing together into the squalls. But not every vessel in the convoy is in the same dilapidated condition. Other ships used the good years to caulk their hulls and clear their rigging; in other words – to pay off debt. But you used the good years to raise borrowing yet further. As a consequence, under your captaincy, our hull is pressed deep into the water line under the accumulated weight of your debt We are now running a deficit that touches 10% of GDP, an almost unbelievable figure. More than Pakistan, more than Hungary; countries where the IMF have already been called in. Now, it’s not that you’re not apologising; like everyone else I have long accepted that you’re pathologically incapable of accepting responsibility for these things. It’s that you’re carrying on, wilfully worsening our situation, wantonly spending what little we have left. Last year - in the last twelve months – a hundred thousand private sector jobs have been lost and yet you created thirty thousand public sector jobs.
Prime Minister, you cannot carry on for ever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in order to fund an unprecedented engorgement of the unproductive bit. You cannot spend your way out of recession or borrow your way out of debt. And when you repeat, in that wooden and perfunctory way, that our situation is better than others, that we’re ‘well-placed to weather the storm’, I have to tell you that you sound like a Brezhnev-era apparatchik giving the party line. You know, and we know, and you know that we know that it’s nonsense! Everyone knows that Britain is worse off than any other country as we go into these hard times. The IMF has said so; the European Commission has said so; the markets have said so – which is why our currency has devalued by thirty percent. And soon the voters too will get their chance to say so. They can see what the markets have already seen: that you are the devalued Prime Minister of a devalued government.
FiF said:
Jonesy23 said:
don4l said:
Peter North strikes me as a bit odd. Christopher Booker seems to be in the same camp. Both of them have been campaigning for us to leave the EU for years. Now that we have actually voted to Leave, they both seem to be in a blind panic.
Like the sainted Corbyn, some people are only truly happy when they can be campaigning against stuff/'the system' in whatever form, even if it means they are campaigning against stuff they used to support before it became the mainstream. Hence the flipflopping.There's also the Cassandra bit - they seem to be happy to only ever warn against an ongoing problem or upcoming disaster. When it looked like more EU was the future that was the problem. With Brexit as the (possible) future that has become the problem.
Their material is interesting but I lost most of my respect when they shifted their views.
I might be wrong.
While I agree that the Norths have been consistent in their belief that we need a negotiated Brexit, I was very surprised by Booker's (apparent) change of tack after the referendum.
///ajd said:
Interesting that previous brexit stars like Hannan and the Norths seem to be out of favour now.
Hannan famously said "no one is talking about threatening our place in the single market" - this did seem to resonate with many leave voters prior to the vote.
Hannan was hugely popular with even the hard core like Don4l.
He argued that the UK would keep the fullest access to the SM, not membership as it is now. Mainly because his other statements with regard to not being under the jurisdiction of the European Court, being free to sign trade agreements around the world and immigration controls would obviously mean that it couldn't be this. Hannan famously said "no one is talking about threatening our place in the single market" - this did seem to resonate with many leave voters prior to the vote.
Hannan was hugely popular with even the hard core like Don4l.
///ajd said:
Who nicked your forum password ajd?
Mrr T said:
...
2. You refer to the rEU needed the UK to access funding. Sorry that’s just total wrong. If you want to discuss passporting happy to do so.
...
Are you meaning literally in terms of the mechanics/rules on providing finance? 2. You refer to the rEU needed the UK to access funding. Sorry that’s just total wrong. If you want to discuss passporting happy to do so.
...
I wasn't. My belief is that the mechanics of the City are fully leveraged by EU business and they wouldn't want that to stop (certainly not without a bona fide replacement) . Though I do not have any specific data to back that up admittedly, the apparent softening of some in the EU on this topic might give the belief some credence? Unless they're generally just feeling sorry for us now
///ajd said:
There is a wonderful irony here.
Again and again we are told that the UK government will prioritise border control over any economic argument, and will ignore any business or expert who says we should stay in the single market or customs union - in other words we must allow any stupidity in the eyes of some from our government in pursuit of control! We must allow our economy to suffer due to the will of the people!
And yet the hope of the same brexiteers is that the german government will bow to its business and not follow its principles in support of the EU and its single market rules. As I feared before the referendum, in the same way we have opportunties from a hard brexit, the EU also has many things to gain from our loss, as does e.g. the US who have already talked about exploiting the threats we face to our cost.
Roll on Tuesday, though I don't expect much information. What the pound does will be interesting.
I get where you're coming from...but I see there being a fundamental difference (at least one). Possibly just my firm belief in my choice influencing my own mind unreasonably (though arguably it would, wouldn't it Again and again we are told that the UK government will prioritise border control over any economic argument, and will ignore any business or expert who says we should stay in the single market or customs union - in other words we must allow any stupidity in the eyes of some from our government in pursuit of control! We must allow our economy to suffer due to the will of the people!
And yet the hope of the same brexiteers is that the german government will bow to its business and not follow its principles in support of the EU and its single market rules. As I feared before the referendum, in the same way we have opportunties from a hard brexit, the EU also has many things to gain from our loss, as does e.g. the US who have already talked about exploiting the threats we face to our cost.
Roll on Tuesday, though I don't expect much information. What the pound does will be interesting.
).The big factor for me for the UK was the regaining of sovereign control. That was arguably made easier for me due to my firm belief that there is no cast iron economic argument (either way)...so I fundamentally don't think our government will be burning us at the stake (unless they monumentally fq things up. Which cannot be ruled out. But then I also have no faith in the EU political elite not to contiue to fq the EU up. And that will be a bigger mess. So again, not a factor).
Germany. The angle their coalition chap appears to be coming from is that the economy comes 2nd to protecting the EU project. So it's pretty much the exact opposite situation.
Much as the Germans have benefited a lot from the EU, I'm far from convinced their electorate are immune from the negative vibes about it that seem to exist across key EU countries.
Anyway, even in my happiness about the way the referendum went, I'm still not entirely ruling out politicians on both sides being knob jockeys and screwing the whole thing up
Edited by Murph7355 on Saturday 14th January 01:06
///ajd said:
So much for no negotiation before A50! Looks like Barnier has started 'negotiating' with his EU colleagues, at least laying down some issues for them, and starting to declare his hand somewhat before the UK declares its. Long may it continue, might end up somewhere sensible. It even begins to look like the EU might want a transitional period - we seem to be heading for a Cold War style MAD situation if a sensible 'deal' is not achieved.FiF said:
Rubbish, sorry but rubbish. What's needed is an orderly exit with initially as little disturbance as possible. For example the Redwood suggestion of repeal the European Communities Act, flick the V's and walk away will give nothing like an orderly exit for anyone, and is frankly an idea supported only by goons.
Well you at least have been consistent as I remember you calling for EEA membership after Brexit from before the vote.Virtually everyone would prefer an orderly exit, but what you, and North, seem to be missing, is that it MAY NOT be possible. There are two sides to any agreement and we could turn up in good faith and try and negotiate a smooth transition and, perhaps, be willing to keep paying in to the pot to keep access, but the rest of the EU may not be interested.
In those circumstances we have to be willing to walk away as otherwise we have nothing to negotiate we just have to accept whatever cr*p deal the EU offers. Predictions of Armageddon as a result do rather seem far fetched as there are many countries who have significant exports to the EU and rely purely on WTO rules.
There may well be some short term disruption, but, given our large deficit with the rest of the EU, the pain would be shared at the very least.
This therefore seems to be the same scaremongering we had before the vote but this time to force us into accepting a deal which is against Britain's interests.
JagLover said:
Well you at least have been consistent as I remember you calling for EEA membership after Brexit from before the vote.
Virtually everyone would prefer an orderly exit, but what you, and North, seem to be missing, is that it MAY NOT be possible. There are two sides to any agreement and we could turn up in good faith and try and negotiate a smooth transition and, perhaps, be willing to keep paying in to the pot to keep access, but the rest of the EU may not be interested.
In those circumstances we have to be willing to walk away as otherwise we have nothing to negotiate we just have to accept whatever cr*p deal the EU offers. Predictions of Armageddon as a result do rather seem far fetched as there are many countries who have significant exports to the EU and rely purely on WTO rules.
There may well be some short term disruption, but, given our large deficit with the rest of the EU, the pain would be shared at the very least.
This therefore seems to be the same scaremongering we had before the vote but this time to force us into accepting a deal which is against Britain's interests.
I agree that there is the possibility that the EU will just refuse to negotiate or agree any deal that is acceptable. The point that Norths are making, and I do too, is that in the event of inability to sort a deal then the potential problems associated with just walking away need to be recognised. It's clear to me that various factions either don't understand the potential difficulties or don't want to understand. Horses and water.Virtually everyone would prefer an orderly exit, but what you, and North, seem to be missing, is that it MAY NOT be possible. There are two sides to any agreement and we could turn up in good faith and try and negotiate a smooth transition and, perhaps, be willing to keep paying in to the pot to keep access, but the rest of the EU may not be interested.
In those circumstances we have to be willing to walk away as otherwise we have nothing to negotiate we just have to accept whatever cr*p deal the EU offers. Predictions of Armageddon as a result do rather seem far fetched as there are many countries who have significant exports to the EU and rely purely on WTO rules.
There may well be some short term disruption, but, given our large deficit with the rest of the EU, the pain would be shared at the very least.
This therefore seems to be the same scaremongering we had before the vote but this time to force us into accepting a deal which is against Britain's interests.
well, it seems that not only the Remain voters on here are concerned about a lack of Brexit plan, the Germans are as well. Or rather the Germans are concerned at the EU not having a brexit plan.....
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-german...
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-german...
article said:
As Britain is a huge net contributor to EU finances, Brexit could have a major impact on funding of the EU's farming support scheme, called the common agricultural policy (CAP), Joachim Rukwied, the president of the German farming association DBV, said.
"The discussion about the implications of Brexit on the CAP has not yet taken place," Rukwied told Reuters.
Farmers should not face cuts to their EU support payments because of Brexit, he said
perhaps rather than complaining that TM isn't telling the EU what she wants, the EU ought to start telling it's members what they're going to do after we leave "The discussion about the implications of Brexit on the CAP has not yet taken place," Rukwied told Reuters.
Farmers should not face cuts to their EU support payments because of Brexit, he said
b2hbm said:
well, it seems that not only the Remain voters on here are concerned about a lack of Brexit plan, the Germans are as well. Or rather the Germans are concerned at the EU not having a brexit plan.....
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-german...
Sound of 27 agricultural gravy trains hitting the buffers , but they won't do anything they are in denial not fit for purpose otherwise they would have rolled out the red carpet for CMD instead of treating us like something smelly stuck to their shoe ...http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-german...
article said:
As Britain is a huge net contributor to EU finances, Brexit could have a major impact on funding of the EU's farming support scheme, called the common agricultural policy (CAP), Joachim Rukwied, the president of the German farming association DBV, said.
"The discussion about the implications of Brexit on the CAP has not yet taken place," Rukwied told Reuters.
Farmers should not face cuts to their EU support payments because of Brexit, he said
perhaps rather than complaining that TM isn't telling the EU what she wants, the EU ought to start telling it's members what they're going to do after we leave "The discussion about the implications of Brexit on the CAP has not yet taken place," Rukwied told Reuters.
Farmers should not face cuts to their EU support payments because of Brexit, he said
GOOD riddance to them they need us more than we need them ... Brexit rocks
Meanwhile the Dutch are starting to question freedom of movement within the EU....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38613027
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38613027
'Brexit and UK-Based financial and related professional services'
https://www.thecityuk.com/assets/2017/Reports-PDF/...
https://www.thecityuk.com/assets/2017/Reports-PDF/...
powerstroke said:
b2hbm said:
well, it seems that not only the Remain voters on here are concerned about a lack of Brexit plan, the Germans are as well. Or rather the Germans are concerned at the EU not having a brexit plan.....
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-german...
Sound of 27 agricultural gravy trains hitting the buffers , but they won't do anything they are in denial not fit for purpose otherwise they would have rolled out the red carpet for CMD instead of treating us like something smelly stuck to their shoe ...http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-german...
article said:
As Britain is a huge net contributor to EU finances, Brexit could have a major impact on funding of the EU's farming support scheme, called the common agricultural policy (CAP), Joachim Rukwied, the president of the German farming association DBV, said.
"The discussion about the implications of Brexit on the CAP has not yet taken place," Rukwied told Reuters.
Farmers should not face cuts to their EU support payments because of Brexit, he said
perhaps rather than complaining that TM isn't telling the EU what she wants, the EU ought to start telling it's members what they're going to do after we leave "The discussion about the implications of Brexit on the CAP has not yet taken place," Rukwied told Reuters.
Farmers should not face cuts to their EU support payments because of Brexit, he said
GOOD riddance to them they need us more than we need them ... Brexit rocks
The UK pays more into the EU`s coffers than 26 other member states combined.
All those 26 countries which suddenly find they will be required to pay money into the EU`s coffers, instead of getting money out of those coffers every year, are more likely to quit the EU as fast as they can, when they realize it is going to start costing them more than they receive. With any luck the EU wont even be in existence in a few years time.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff