The economic consequences of Brexit
Poll: The economic consequences of Brexit
Total Members Polled: 732
Discussion
sidicks said:
///ajd said:
We are arguing semantics.
They revised our growth downwards as it will not be as high as forecast pre-brexit. Hence while we will still have growth, it will be slower than it would have been. Less growth = worse off. You can't spin this any other way than being worse off than if we'd stayed, and in this year.
Based on their assumptions - are these reasonable? How accurate have their predictions been in the past?They revised our growth downwards as it will not be as high as forecast pre-brexit. Hence while we will still have growth, it will be slower than it would have been. Less growth = worse off. You can't spin this any other way than being worse off than if we'd stayed, and in this year.
What have they assumed for our future relationship with the EU? How does this change if the assumptions change?
///adj said:
WTO tariffs on our exports into the EU if we left the SM would have a huge impact on our business. You shouldn't trivialise it.
Why would they want to impose tariffs?if we are out of the eu and sm, what trade arrangements will apply to us with the eu? why would wto tariffs not apply if we go to a wto relationship. you can say magic new zero tariff trade deal with eu brokered by davis if you like. just not sm or wto.
the inconsistencies are rife.
///ajd said:
it was a brexiter quoting the imf, rather misleadingly. why avoid now facing up to the fact that they are saying we'll be worse off in year?
I'm not avoiding anything.///adj said:
if we are out of the eu and sm, what trade arrangements will apply to us with the eu? why would wto tariffs not apply if we go to a wto relationship. you can say magic new zero tariff trade deal with eu brokered by davis if you like. just not sm or
the inconsistencies are rife.
The IMF claim is based on future assumptions - to use their claims as meaningful without understand the assumptions behind those claims is meaningless. The same applies to the Treasury projections.the inconsistencies are rife.
sidicks said:
Derek Smith said:
Just gainsaying a post is not an argument. You know this, I assume. It is especially pointless when a quick google will show sources.
I've just done that and I find that although the figure I quoted was from memory, the precise percentage being 6.2, 'over 6%' seems reasonably accurate.
Others might disagree with the amount, but that's not the point of course. I was stating where the £4300 came from.
Correct, but the report made a number of assumptions about the future - some of which were arguably extremely pessimistic. Different assumptions would lead to very different outcomes some worse, some better than the current 'expected' path.I've just done that and I find that although the figure I quoted was from memory, the precise percentage being 6.2, 'over 6%' seems reasonably accurate.
Others might disagree with the amount, but that's not the point of course. I was stating where the £4300 came from.
The figure is justifiable only in the sense that I explained, the bit regarding elephants in a hole.
///ajd said:
sidicks said:
///ajd said:
We are arguing semantics.
They revised our growth downwards as it will not be as high as forecast pre-brexit. Hence while we will still have growth, it will be slower than it would have been. Less growth = worse off. You can't spin this any other way than being worse off than if we'd stayed, and in this year.
Based on their assumptions - are these reasonable? How accurate have their predictions been in the past?They revised our growth downwards as it will not be as high as forecast pre-brexit. Hence while we will still have growth, it will be slower than it would have been. Less growth = worse off. You can't spin this any other way than being worse off than if we'd stayed, and in this year.
What have they assumed for our future relationship with the EU? How does this change if the assumptions change?
///adj said:
WTO tariffs on our exports into the EU if we left the SM would have a huge impact on our business. You shouldn't trivialise it.
Why would they want to impose tariffs?if we are out of the eu and sm, what trade arrangements will apply to us with the eu? why would wto tariffs not apply if we go to a wto relationship. you can say magic new zero tariff trade deal with eu brokered by davis if you like. just not sm or wto.
the inconsistencies are rife.
While you're at it would you be good enough to let Theresa May know.
jsf said:
Derek Smith said:
jsf said:
The UK will not have the Norwegian arrangement with the EU post Brexit.
The UK will have the UK arrangement with the EU post Brexit.
At this stage of the game no one can say what that will look like.
A wee bit contradictory. The UK will have the UK arrangement with the EU post Brexit.
At this stage of the game no one can say what that will look like.
Derek Smith said:
You really don't get it, do you.
Yes I do get it, that's why the first word in my post was Correct I.e. 'You are right', this was the source of the information etc.Derek Smith said:
The explanation was of the figure of £4300. The validity of the 6.2% was from the government figure. Whether it was wrong or not is immaterial. I was merely saying where the figure came from.
I know that is why I stated 'correct' in response.Derek Smith said:
Arguing that you prefer the opinions of others does not render my explanation wrong.
And neither did I suggest that was the case.Derek Smith said:
The figure is justifiable only in the sense that I explained, the bit regarding elephants in a hole.
Please learn to read, and not try to start an argument where there is no initial disagreement. sidicks said:
The IMF claim is based on future assumptions - to use their claims as meaningful without understand the assumptions behind those claims is meaningless. The same applies to the Treasury projections.
You obviously don't agree with the IMF's projections.Do you agree with anyones projections?
PurpleMoonlight said:
sidicks said:
Why would they want to impose tariffs?
There seems little point in having a free trade area if you do not enforce the benefits of it against those that are not members.Derek Smith said:
jsf said:
Derek Smith said:
jsf said:
The UK will not have the Norwegian arrangement with the EU post Brexit.
The UK will have the UK arrangement with the EU post Brexit.
At this stage of the game no one can say what that will look like.
A wee bit contradictory. The UK will have the UK arrangement with the EU post Brexit.
At this stage of the game no one can say what that will look like.
RYH64E said:
sidicks said:
RYH64E said:
Why would they not? Imports from other non-EU contries are subject to tariffs, why would those from the UK be treated differently?
What would we do in response?Interesting to see some now blaming the french for not rolling over and tickling our tummy. They were never going to. They'll do whats best for them.
Don't blame the French for being French. If they frustrate the brexit dream, it was all 100% predictable. They'd love to relegate us to Norway status, thats why they are saying get on with it. Nearly all the money with no veto. Allez allez vite!!!
PurpleMoonlight said:
You obviously don't agree with the IMF's projections.
Obviously? I've said nothing of the sort.I've not reviewed the assumptions they have made to understand whether these are sensible / reasonable. Neither have I seen any analysis of the sensitivity of the results to those key assumptions. I'm therefore not well-placed to judge how credible the projection is. I suspect no-one else has either, they are just clinging on to anything that supports their opinions.
I do know that the credibility of some of the assumptions in the Treasury document was called in to question.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Do you agree with anyones projections?
What a strange question - see above.The trouble us, for the French, the Germans clearly do have a different take on this and, economically and financially, the French are in a relatively weak bargaining position. It will be intriguing to see how this is leveraged, but don't forget the ruthlessness with with Greece was dealt with, seemingly, by Merkel single-handed.
///ajd said:
Exactly. Do all that and then blame the EU. and foreigners. anyone but the brexit vote basically.
Interesting to see some now blaming the french for not rolling over and tickling our tummy. They were never going to. They'll do whats best for them.
Don't blame the French for being French. If they frustrate the brexit dream, it was all 100% predictable. They'd love to relegate us to Norway status, thats why they are saying get on with it. Nearly all the money with no veto. Allez allez vite!!!
I wouldn't be so sure hollande will be around much longer, by the time we have started the negotiations he may well have been replaced. Even he has made some sensible consiliartry noises. Interesting to see some now blaming the french for not rolling over and tickling our tummy. They were never going to. They'll do whats best for them.
Don't blame the French for being French. If they frustrate the brexit dream, it was all 100% predictable. They'd love to relegate us to Norway status, thats why they are saying get on with it. Nearly all the money with no veto. Allez allez vite!!!
sidicks said:
I've not reviewed the assumptions they have made to understand whether these are sensible / reasonable. Neither have I seen any analysis of the sensitivity of the results to those key assumptions. I'm therefore not well-placed to judge how credible the projection is.
And yet you criticise it.PurpleMoonlight said:
Digga said:
Hence why many see the EU as protectionist and regressive in the modern, global economy.
To state the obvious, the global economy is not a level playing field.I think the EU, by its nature, has a tendency toward self importance and agrandisment.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff