The economic consequences of Brexit

[paulrockliffe]

SilverSixer said:

AC43 said:

ATG said:

powerstroke said:

RYH64E said:

It's worth remembering that we haven't left yet, we haven't even begun to leave and there's no proposal as to what our post-Brexit relationship with the EU will be. It's a bit early to draw any conclusions about the economic consequences of Brexit, this will play out over the next few years.

I dont really care, there is a big world out there the EU is just another possible trading partner not the be all and end all
We don't need to kiss their arses we really don't , why people go on about the single market as if it was some magic money tree, its not there companys want to sell us trucks vans and cars , heavy and light equipment etc etc,,,
carrot and stick!! we have a carrot ...

Edited by powerstroke on Monday 29th August 22:16

The "big world out there" is not unexplored territory. We're already trading with them. The EU is also a very big slice of the world beyond our borders. We've never been myopically focussed on EU trade while ignoring opportunities in the rest of the world. The "big world out there" narrative is a fairy story.

The single market is a customs union; that means for goods, and quite a lot of services, trading with an EU counterparty is no more difficult that someone in Arbroath trading with someone next door or in Carlisle, Bristol or anywhere else in the UK. It's a genuinely common market. Most trade deals give nothing like that degree of seamless, unbureaucratic access.

Once we leave the EU, the best we can hope for in terms of access to EU markets is that we continue to be members of the EU customs union. Any other arrangement with the EU will make trading with EU companies less efficient. Some seem to think we will be able to negotiate trade deals with countries outside the EU that will offset any damage caused to our EU trade and leave us in a net better position. I haven't seen any evidence put forward to support that view. (And by evidence I mean a suggested, credible negotiating stance, or economic projections.) And in the meantime we have a high degree of uncertainty which is already damaging the economy and will continue to do so for the next few years until the outcome of the exit negotiations takes real shape.

As has been said many times, if you want to leave the EU for purely political reasons, fine. If it means so much to people that the small amount of decision making that currently takes place in Brussels (and it is fking tiny in the grand scheme of things) is repatriated to Westminster (home of the politicians we all love and respect), so be it. If you want to repatriate the tiny amount of public spending decisions from Brussels to Westminster, fine. But don't pretend this won't come with a fairly hefty price tag. Will our economy collapse? No, of course not. Will it grow more slowly and possibly shrink a bit in the short-term? Yes. Is this a great time to be risking some growth? No, it's a bloody awful time to be doing it. The public finances are still in a mess. We need to cut government spending, but we can only do that when private sector growth will offset the reduction in government spending, otherwise the economy will just shrink and the public finances will continue to deteriorate. The very last thing we needed right now is Brexit undermining growth. No wonder the first thing the new govt did was start loosening the fiscal position.

This x 1000.

x 100000. Brilliantly put.

This is just a re-hash of the opinions that were rejected on the 23rd of June. What's the point in continuing to bang that drum? It's no more right or wrong now than it was then, it's time to accept that it's a minority opinion and focus on any new areas for discussion rather than repeating the same old tedium.

What you're missing from all this is that, regardless of all the other 'stuff' it's clear as day that the Euro and the lack of full European integration is going to wreck the EU in the short-medium term and that whatever the Brexit effect, it won't be as bad as what will happen when the ship finally sinks.

[anonymous-user]

SilverSixer said:

...
We will only get a say on whether we "Leave the EU but remain in the single market" if we can pull off a successful national negotiation and if it then gets offered in a second referendum, and apparently that would be undemocratic.

That makes no sense at all. All the referendum means is that you will most likely be leaving the EU, it certainly doesn't preclude joining a customs union on the same or different terms to what you 'enjoy' now or any other kind of agreement for that matter. There won't be a second referendum; any exit negotiation would be impossible if a second referendum were on the cards for obvious reasons. And yes, repeatedly holding a referendum until you get the answer you want is undemocratic.

[RYH64E]

paulrockliffe said:

This is just a re-hash of the opinions that were rejected on the 23rd of June. What's the point in continuing to bang that drum? It's no more right or wrong now than it was then, it's time to accept that it's a minority opinion and focus on any new areas for discussion rather than repeating the same old tedium.

What you're missing from all this is that, regardless of all the other 'stuff' it's clear as day that the Euro and the lack of full European integration is going to wreck the EU in the short-medium term and that whatever the Brexit effect, it won't be as bad as what will happen when the ship finally sinks.

There was a narrow majority in favour of leaving the EU, for better or worse that's been decided, but the terms of any such exit are far from clear, there's certainly no mandate for giving up access to the single market.

[SilverSixer]

fblm said:

SilverSixer said:

...
We will only get a say on whether we "Leave the EU but remain in the single market" if we can pull off a successful national negotiation and if it then gets offered in a second referendum, and apparently that would be undemocratic.

That makes no sense at all. All the referendum means is that you will most likely be leaving the EU, it certainly doesn't preclude joining a customs union on the same or different terms to what you 'enjoy' now or any other kind of agreement for that matter. There won't be a second referendum; any exit negotiation would be impossible if a second referendum were on the cards for obvious reasons. And yes, repeatedly holding a referendum until you get the answer you want is undemocratic.

I don't see how it doesn't make sense unless you just don't want it to.

No, of course it doesn't preclude joining a customs union, but it also does not guarantee it nor even give any indication as to the likelihood of being able to do so, and if so at what cost and on what terms. You voted for one thing and one thing only - out of EU. You don't then get to say yeah but that's fine coz we can stay in the bits which suit us innit.

Let's say the negotiation produces a result which leaves us EU members in all but name only, such as the Norway option. Want a say on that?

Edited by SilverSixer on Tuesday 30th August 16:15

[Fittster]

paulrockliffe said:

This is just a re-hash of the opinions that were rejected on the 23rd of June. What's the point in continuing to bang that drum? It's no more right or wrong now than it was then, it's time to accept that it's a minority opinion and focus on any new areas for discussion rather than repeating the same old tedium.

If the majority disagree with you then you should move on. Try posting that in the climate change thread.

[CaptainSlow]

If the 28 member states agreed to rename the European Union to the European Federation et voila referendum result is non-applicable as the EU no longer exists. Onward march!

[anonymous-user]

SilverSixer said:

...that's fine coz we can stay in the bits which suit us innit.

Innit? People who voted exit are thick chavs, is that it? Perhaps if you had engaged in the debate in the first place without all the name calling you wouldn't have lost. We'll see won't we; IMO you'll exit the EU and remain in a customs union. And for what it's worth I didn't vote so you can drop telling me what I voted for.

[ATG]

paulrockliffe said:

SilverSixer said:

AC43 said:

ATG said:

powerstroke said:

RYH64E said:

It's worth remembering that we haven't left yet, we haven't even begun to leave and there's no proposal as to what our post-Brexit relationship with the EU will be. It's a bit early to draw any conclusions about the economic consequences of Brexit, this will play out over the next few years.

I dont really care, there is a big world out there the EU is just another possible trading partner not the be all and end all
We don't need to kiss their arses we really don't , why people go on about the single market as if it was some magic money tree, its not there companys want to sell us trucks vans and cars , heavy and light equipment etc etc,,,
carrot and stick!! we have a carrot ...

Edited by powerstroke on Monday 29th August 22:16

The "big world out there" is not unexplored territory. We're already trading with them. The EU is also a very big slice of the world beyond our borders. We've never been myopically focussed on EU trade while ignoring opportunities in the rest of the world. The "big world out there" narrative is a fairy story.

The single market is a customs union; that means for goods, and quite a lot of services, trading with an EU counterparty is no more difficult that someone in Arbroath trading with someone next door or in Carlisle, Bristol or anywhere else in the UK. It's a genuinely common market. Most trade deals give nothing like that degree of seamless, unbureaucratic access.

Once we leave the EU, the best we can hope for in terms of access to EU markets is that we continue to be members of the EU customs union. Any other arrangement with the EU will make trading with EU companies less efficient. Some seem to think we will be able to negotiate trade deals with countries outside the EU that will offset any damage caused to our EU trade and leave us in a net better position. I haven't seen any evidence put forward to support that view. (And by evidence I mean a suggested, credible negotiating stance, or economic projections.) And in the meantime we have a high degree of uncertainty which is already damaging the economy and will continue to do so for the next few years until the outcome of the exit negotiations takes real shape.

As has been said many times, if you want to leave the EU for purely political reasons, fine. If it means so much to people that the small amount of decision making that currently takes place in Brussels (and it is fking tiny in the grand scheme of things) is repatriated to Westminster (home of the politicians we all love and respect), so be it. If you want to repatriate the tiny amount of public spending decisions from Brussels to Westminster, fine. But don't pretend this won't come with a fairly hefty price tag. Will our economy collapse? No, of course not. Will it grow more slowly and possibly shrink a bit in the short-term? Yes. Is this a great time to be risking some growth? No, it's a bloody awful time to be doing it. The public finances are still in a mess. We need to cut government spending, but we can only do that when private sector growth will offset the reduction in government spending, otherwise the economy will just shrink and the public finances will continue to deteriorate. The very last thing we needed right now is Brexit undermining growth. No wonder the first thing the new govt did was start loosening the fiscal position.

This x 1000.

x 100000. Brilliantly put.

This is just a re-hash of the opinions that were rejected on the 23rd of June. What's the point in continuing to bang that drum? It's no more right or wrong now than it was then, it's time to accept that it's a minority opinion and focus on any new areas for discussion rather than repeating the same old tedium.

What you're missing from all this is that, regardless of all the other 'stuff' it's clear as day that the Euro and the lack of full European integration is going to wreck the EU in the short-medium term and that whatever the Brexit effect, it won't be as bad as what will happen when the ship finally sinks.

Paul, I was responding to a poster who said "now that we're in this position, we should do X". I was pointing out that "X" will not work. That is entirely relevant and has nothing whatsoever to do with the referendum outcome.

People try to use the referendum outcome as a card to close down and trump discussion. It doesn't work. If we'd held a referendum on whether 2+2 equals 4 or 5, and the country had voted "5", it'd be perfectly reasonable to discuss why people had made that decision. If someone said, "it's because it is the obvious arithmetic solution" you could quite reasonably tell them they were wrong. If they said "just because I wanted it to be", then you'd at least have been given a defensible position.

As for your last paragraph, even if the EU does go on to collapse, we're no better off for leaving early. We're still always better off trading as efficiently as possible with whoever we can find to trade with, even if their trousers are on fire, even if they're in a state of civil war. I suppose the key point is that being in the EU as it unravelled as far as the UK is concerned would be no more difficult than withdrawing from the EU while it is still functioning.

[SilverSixer]

fblm said:

SilverSixer said:

...that's fine coz we can stay in the bits which suit us innit.

Innit? People who voted exit are thick chavs, is that it? Perhaps if you had engaged in the debate in the first place without all the name calling you wouldn't have lost. We'll see won't we; IMO you'll exit the EU and remain in a customs union. And for what it's worth I didn't vote so you can drop telling me what I voted for.

Well that's the whole point. Nobody knows what you voted for. Not even you. And we're to get no further say on developments, however the negotiations turn out (actually I think we will, even if it's in a GE, but of course you do rightly point out it would now be non-sensible for the government to commit to a second referendum before the negotiation - politics is a game and it's quite plausible that we're being played with the "no second referendum" line). I think I'm always going to struggle seeing this a sensible choice to be frank.

And as for name calling, well I got fed up with being called a bedwetter/traitor during the debate, so name-calling can not have had much of an effect on the outcome - and even if it did are you really saying that deciding to vote in a certain way because someone called you a nasty name is an intelligent choice?

[anonymous-user]

SilverSixer said:

Nobody knows what you voted for. Not even you.

I'm very confident I voted for nothing because, as I said in the post you were apparently replying to, I didn't vote.

SilverSixer said:

...so name-calling can not have had much of an effect on the outcome...

If you don't think the dismissal of vast swathes of the country with concerns about immigration as thick/racist/little englanders had no effect on the outcome then I'd suggest you really have no idea what just happened.

[Digga]

SilverSixer said:

even if it did are you really saying that deciding to vote in a certain way because someone called you a nasty name is an intelligent choice?

I think the key issue WRT immigration, is that a great many people of different ages, races and backgrounds did have huge concerns about immigration. Many of these concerns were genuine and valid. Clearly some were nothing but thinly veiled racism, I am sure.

However, the way parts of the Remain campaign attempted to paint immigration concerns as racist was hugely counterproductive; it effectively said to all those voters, "We you are wrong. We think we are right and we will not listen to you. End of". Shutting the debate down was idiotic and instrumental in the outcome.

I think that's what Fblm means.

[ATG]

fblm said:

ATG said:

...the best we can hope for in terms of access to EU markets is that we continue to be members of the EU customs union...

I'll wager thats exactly what you get; it's in everyones interest and the EU clowns will do what Germany tells them.

I hope so too, but I don't see how that can be achieved without us remaining in the EU in all but name, and that looks like a challenging thing to deliver. A large chunk of the "exit" voters would see it as a betrayal. And could the rest of the EU stomach us remaining in the Council? If we're not in the Council but are still bound by EU conventions, we'd have put ourselves in the very position that the exit campaign (IMO fallaciously) complained we were in prior to Brexit. We really would have created a real democratic deficit. Dunno. Interesting times.

[fido]

RYH64E said:

Gravy train? What makes you think that manufacturing goods in the UK and selling to customers in the EU single market somehow constitutes being on a 'gravy train'?

But you don't need to be IN the single market to sell to the single market - that's what your 'dependency mindset' can't seem to work around.

[anonymous-user]

Digga said:

I think that's what Fblm means.

Exactly. It was prevalent in every discussion and for millions turned the vote into a simple choice of 'Remain in the EU' or 'Fvck you'.

[Fittster]

fido said:

RYH64E said:

Gravy train? What makes you think that manufacturing goods in the UK and selling to customers in the EU single market somehow constitutes being on a 'gravy train'?

But you don't need to be IN the single market to sell to the single market - that's what your 'dependency mindset' can't seem to work around.

But it is more expensive / complicated to do.

If you don't think a single market makes trade easier why sign trade deals with other countries? You can sell to pretty much anywhere even without a trade deal.

[///ajd]

SilverSixer said:

AC43 said:

ATG said:

powerstroke said:

RYH64E said:

It's worth remembering that we haven't left yet, we haven't even begun to leave and there's no proposal as to what our post-Brexit relationship with the EU will be. It's a bit early to draw any conclusions about the economic consequences of Brexit, this will play out over the next few years.

I dont really care, there is a big world out there the EU is just another possible trading partner not the be all and end all
We don't need to kiss their arses we really don't , why people go on about the single market as if it was some magic money tree, its not there companys want to sell us trucks vans and cars , heavy and light equipment etc etc,,,
carrot and stick!! we have a carrot ...

Edited by powerstroke on Monday 29th August 22:16

The "big world out there" is not unexplored territory. We're already trading with them. The EU is also a very big slice of the world beyond our borders. We've never been myopically focussed on EU trade while ignoring opportunities in the rest of the world. The "big world out there" narrative is a fairy story.

The single market is a customs union; that means for goods, and quite a lot of services, trading with an EU counterparty is no more difficult that someone in Arbroath trading with someone next door or in Carlisle, Bristol or anywhere else in the UK. It's a genuinely common market. Most trade deals give nothing like that degree of seamless, unbureaucratic access.

Once we leave the EU, the best we can hope for in terms of access to EU markets is that we continue to be members of the EU customs union. Any other arrangement with the EU will make trading with EU companies less efficient. Some seem to think we will be able to negotiate trade deals with countries outside the EU that will offset any damage caused to our EU trade and leave us in a net better position. I haven't seen any evidence put forward to support that view. (And by evidence I mean a suggested, credible negotiating stance, or economic projections.) And in the meantime we have a high degree of uncertainty which is already damaging the economy and will continue to do so for the next few years until the outcome of the exit negotiations takes real shape.

As has been said many times, if you want to leave the EU for purely political reasons, fine. If it means so much to people that the small amount of decision making that currently takes place in Brussels (and it is fking tiny in the grand scheme of things) is repatriated to Westminster (home of the politicians we all love and respect), so be it. If you want to repatriate the tiny amount of public spending decisions from Brussels to Westminster, fine. But don't pretend this won't come with a fairly hefty price tag. Will our economy collapse? No, of course not. Will it grow more slowly and possibly shrink a bit in the short-term? Yes. Is this a great time to be risking some growth? No, it's a bloody awful time to be doing it. The public finances are still in a mess. We need to cut government spending, but we can only do that when private sector growth will offset the reduction in government spending, otherwise the economy will just shrink and the public finances will continue to deteriorate. The very last thing we needed right now is Brexit undermining growth. No wonder the first thing the new govt did was start loosening the fiscal position.

This x 1000.

x 100000. Brilliantly put.

Very well put.

[powerstroke]

powerstroke said:

AC43 said:

ATG said:

powerstroke said:

RYH64E said:

It's worth remembering that we haven't left yet, we haven't even begun to leave and there's no proposal as to what our post-Brexit relationship with the EU will be. It's a bit early to draw any conclusions about the economic consequences of Brexit, this will play out over the next few years.

I dont really care, there is a big world out there the EU is just another possible trading partner not the be all and end all
We don't need to kiss their arses we really don't , why people go on about the single market as if it was some magic money tree, its not there companys want to sell us trucks vans and cars , heavy and light equipment etc etc,,,
carrot and stick!! we have a carrot ...

Edited by powerstroke on Monday 29th August 22:16

The "big world out there" is not unexplored territory. We're already trading with them. The EU is also a very big slice of the world beyond our borders. We've never been myopically focussed on EU trade while ignoring opportunities in the rest of the world. The "big world out there" narrative is a fairy story.

The single market is a customs union; that means for goods, and quite a lot of services, trading with an EU counterparty is no more difficult that someone in Arbroath trading with someone next door or in Carlisle, Bristol or anywhere else in the UK. It's a genuinely common market. Most trade deals give nothing like that degree of seamless, unbureaucratic access.

Once we leave the EU, the best we can hope for in terms of access to EU markets is that we continue to be members of the EU customs union. Any other arrangement with the EU will make trading with EU companies less efficient. Some seem to think we will be able to negotiate trade deals with countries outside the EU that will offset any damage caused to our EU trade and leave us in a net better position. I haven't seen any evidence put forward to support that view. (And by evidence I mean a suggested, credible negotiating stance, or economic projections.) And in the meantime we have a high degree of uncertainty which is already damaging the economy and will continue to do so for the next few years until the outcome of the exit negotiations takes real shape.

As has been said many times, if you want to leave the EU for purely political reasons, fine. If it means so much to people that the small amount of decision making that currently takes place in Brussels (and it is fking tiny in the grand scheme of things) is repatriated to Westminster (home of the politicians we all love and respect), so be it. If you want to repatriate the tiny amount of public spending decisions from Brussels to Westminster, fine. But don't pretend this won't come with a fairly hefty price tag. Will our economy collapse? No, of course not. Will it grow more slowly and possibly shrink a bit in the short-term? Yes. Is this a great time to be risking some growth? No, it's a bloody awful time to be doing it. The public finances are still in a mess. We need to cut government spending, but we can only do that when private sector growth will offset the reduction in government spending, otherwise the economy will just shrink and the public finances will continue to deteriorate. The very last thing we needed right now is Brexit undermining growth. No wonder the first thing the new govt did was start loosening the fiscal position.

This x 1000.

Um yes!!! assuming the EU is flexable and acts in a sensible and measured way to problems Not the all in the garden is rosy move along nothing to see !!!!!

[limpsfield]

powerstroke said:

Um yes!!! assuming the EU is flexable and acts in a sensible and measured way to problems Not the , all in the garden is rosy move along nothing to see !!!!!

Wat?

[Carl_Manchester]

///ajd said:

SilverSixer said:

AC43 said:

ATG said:

powerstroke said:

RYH64E said:

It's worth remembering that we haven't left yet, we haven't even begun to leave and there's no proposal as to what our post-Brexit relationship with the EU will be. It's a bit early to draw any conclusions about the economic consequences of Brexit, this will play out over the next few years.

I dont really care, there is a big world out there the EU is just another possible trading partner not the be all and end all
We don't need to kiss their arses we really don't , why people go on about the single market as if it was some magic money tree, its not there companys want to sell us trucks vans and cars , heavy and light equipment etc etc,,,
carrot and stick!! we have a carrot ...

Edited by powerstroke on Monday 29th August 22:16

The "big world out there" is not unexplored territory. We're already trading with them. The EU is also a very big slice of the world beyond our borders. We've never been myopically focussed on EU trade while ignoring opportunities in the rest of the world. The "big world out there" narrative is a fairy story.

The single market is a customs union; that means for goods, and quite a lot of services, trading with an EU counterparty is no more difficult that someone in Arbroath trading with someone next door or in Carlisle, Bristol or anywhere else in the UK. It's a genuinely common market. Most trade deals give nothing like that degree of seamless, unbureaucratic access.

Once we leave the EU, the best we can hope for in terms of access to EU markets is that we continue to be members of the EU customs union. Any other arrangement with the EU will make trading with EU companies less efficient. Some seem to think we will be able to negotiate trade deals with countries outside the EU that will offset any damage caused to our EU trade and leave us in a net better position. I haven't seen any evidence put forward to support that view. (And by evidence I mean a suggested, credible negotiating stance, or economic projections.) And in the meantime we have a high degree of uncertainty which is already damaging the economy and will continue to do so for the next few years until the outcome of the exit negotiations takes real shape.

As has been said many times, if you want to leave the EU for purely political reasons, fine. If it means so much to people that the small amount of decision making that currently takes place in Brussels (and it is fking tiny in the grand scheme of things) is repatriated to Westminster (home of the politicians we all love and respect), so be it. If you want to repatriate the tiny amount of public spending decisions from Brussels to Westminster, fine. But don't pretend this won't come with a fairly hefty price tag. Will our economy collapse? No, of course not. Will it grow more slowly and possibly shrink a bit in the short-term? Yes. Is this a great time to be risking some growth? No, it's a bloody awful time to be doing it. The public finances are still in a mess. We need to cut government spending, but we can only do that when private sector growth will offset the reduction in government spending, otherwise the economy will just shrink and the public finances will continue to deteriorate. The very last thing we needed right now is Brexit undermining growth. No wonder the first thing the new govt did was start loosening the fiscal position.

This x 1000.

x 100000. Brilliantly put.

Very well put.

Money, money, money, money. The above explains why the vote was lost - tunnel vision. If an argument other than just financially driven was made the vote to remain would have been won. It's the avoidance of non financial topics which buried the remain campaign.

[CaptainSlow]

Carl_Manchester said:

Money, money, money, money. The above explains why the vote was lost - tunnel vision. If an argument other than just financially driven was made the vote to remain would have been won. It's the avoidance of non financial topics which buried the remain campaign.

Quite, and when the new low cost workforce takes your job the economic reasons soon start to disappear.