The economic consequences of Brexit
Poll: The economic consequences of Brexit
Total Members Polled: 732
Discussion
B'stard Child said:
bmw535i said:
don4l said:
I moved to Camberley in 1984.
I am :cough: reliably informed that it was possible to do 105 mph from the M25 to Junction 4 of the M3 without using the outside lane.
You would be lucky to do more than 50 today.
I blame Brexit.I am :cough: reliably informed that it was possible to do 105 mph from the M25 to Junction 4 of the M3 without using the outside lane.
You would be lucky to do more than 50 today.
By the way, just to make you feel better, I was 3 in 1984
That doesn't make me feel better!!!
1990 was a great year - nisi and absolute in same year.....
Nisi/Absolute? Brexit terminology?
don'tbesilly said:
B'stard Child said:
bmw535i said:
don4l said:
I moved to Camberley in 1984.
I am :cough: reliably informed that it was possible to do 105 mph from the M25 to Junction 4 of the M3 without using the outside lane.
You would be lucky to do more than 50 today.
I blame Brexit.I am :cough: reliably informed that it was possible to do 105 mph from the M25 to Junction 4 of the M3 without using the outside lane.
You would be lucky to do more than 50 today.
By the way, just to make you feel better, I was 3 in 1984
That doesn't make me feel better!!!
1990 was a great year - nisi and absolute in same year.....
don'tbesilly said:
Nisi/Absolute? Brexit terminology?
What a good idea Nisi - Art. 50 declared
Absolute we've left sometime during the two years after Nisi
You never know it could be a quickie D.I.V.O.R.C.E.
Digga said:
walm said:
Digga said:
Only takes one idiot to de-rail a very constructively debated topic. 
Anyway, back to those OECD figures that Walm kindly dug out - the need for investment in the UK, to get productivity back on track, is what I've been arguing for for some time, because the need and benefit is clear. The derision from some Remainers who think this is tantamount to saying the rest of the economy can somehow replace FS is to ignore the issue, the risks of not addressing it and the benefits of dealing with it properly.
I haven't thought about it very much but how is infrastructure spending linked to Brexit?Anyway, back to those OECD figures that Walm kindly dug out - the need for investment in the UK, to get productivity back on track, is what I've been arguing for for some time, because the need and benefit is clear. The derision from some Remainers who think this is tantamount to saying the rest of the economy can somehow replace FS is to ignore the issue, the risks of not addressing it and the benefits of dealing with it properly.
Because right now I think I am agreeing with you on one but not the other.
What's the connection?
A cursory Google of motorway closures (M6 southbound was such near Middlewich 2 days ago as an example) will highlight just how overcrowded and fragile the road network is.
I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - if we'd remained we would have more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, equipping ourselves for a secure future.
///ajd said:
There is no direct brexit connection.
I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - but if we'd brexited sooner we would have had more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, with a lot less red tape equipping ourselves for a secure future with trade deals from all of the major and minor economys
Edited to make sense . I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - but if we'd brexited sooner we would have had more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, with a lot less red tape equipping ourselves for a secure future with trade deals from all of the major and minor economys
powerstroke said:
///ajd said:
There is no direct brexit connection.
I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - but if we'd brexited sooner we would have had more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, with a lot less red tape equipping ourselves for a secure future with trade deals from all of the major and minor economys
Edited to make sense . I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - but if we'd brexited sooner we would have had more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, with a lot less red tape equipping ourselves for a secure future with trade deals from all of the major and minor economys
How much richer? £350m a week?
Do you still believe in Father Christmas too?
Which red tape are we getting rid of first? Just one example will do
This may give you some ideas:
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
///ajd said:
powerstroke said:
///ajd said:
There is no direct brexit connection.
I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - but if we'd brexited sooner we would have had more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, with a lot less red tape equipping ourselves for a secure future with trade deals from all of the major and minor economys
Edited to make sense . I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - but if we'd brexited sooner we would have had more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, with a lot less red tape equipping ourselves for a secure future with trade deals from all of the major and minor economys
How much richer? £350m a week?
Do you still believe in Father Christmas too?
Which red tape are we getting rid of first? Just one example will do
This may give you some ideas:
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
///ajd said:
Digga said:
walm said:
Digga said:
Only takes one idiot to de-rail a very constructively debated topic.
Anyway, back to those OECD figures that Walm kindly dug out - the need for investment in the UK, to get productivity back on track, is what I've been arguing for for some time, because the need and benefit is clear. The derision from some Remainers who think this is tantamount to saying the rest of the economy can somehow replace FS is to ignore the issue, the risks of not addressing it and the benefits of dealing with it properly.
I haven't thought about it very much but how is infrastructure spending linked to Brexit?Anyway, back to those OECD figures that Walm kindly dug out - the need for investment in the UK, to get productivity back on track, is what I've been arguing for for some time, because the need and benefit is clear. The derision from some Remainers who think this is tantamount to saying the rest of the economy can somehow replace FS is to ignore the issue, the risks of not addressing it and the benefits of dealing with it properly.
Because right now I think I am agreeing with you on one but not the other.
What's the connection?
A cursory Google of motorway closures (M6 southbound was such near Middlewich 2 days ago as an example) will highlight just how overcrowded and fragile the road network is.
I actually agree that there are some benefits to infrastructure investment - it can be a good thing.
We didn't need brexit to do it of course - if we'd remained we would have more money to spend on infrastructure so we could have been an even stronger economy, equipping ourselves for a secure future.
In mine
1. In the UK - always on the edge of what used to be the EU the economy would have continued to migrate to London creating further reliance on "casino" investment and returns
2. Manufacturing would continue to be a dirty word - why make stuff when china can make it cheaper
3. The services sector would be expanded to include Maccy D and Burger King as that was a growth industy (not because anybody liked it but only the unemployed could afford it)
4. The "something for nothing" numbers would continue to rise encouraged by the fact that there was no point in trying to work - people from the other side of Europe were doing all the jobs for less than their benefits and still better off (still sending money home) rather than local economies
In the EU
1. With one last ditch attempt to shore up that sinking ship goes for complete union and single management of all states from each of the original state capitals for one month in each - just over 2 years to move round them all.....
2. The EU continued to print more and more money - the banks continued to lend money based on the fact the EU was a stable place and although Debt as a percentage of GDP was a little high everyone had a stake in it so it's not like they were ever going to default - it's too big to fail
And then the people realised that what they thought were 4 freedoms weren't freedoms at all for them
Freedom of movement was just a way of ensuring those old fashioned national identities were broken up and no one had a loyalty to their birth country because they had to leave it to find work
Freedom of Goods was pointless everything came from China and the trade deal that the EU made with china after 23 years of negotiation only put the prices of everything up by a little and no one liked working in factories anyway
Freedom of Services was no longer applicable - everyone received a living allowance and were told how to spend it.
Freedom of Capital was also pointless it was one big state - no-one really used real money except the very old people - payment cards were all you needed everywhere and there was less chance of illness when you kept hold of your card and waved it above the pay point (that old money was very un-hygenic)
Anyway it was illegal to take currency out of the Schengen Zone.
And then it was the silliest thing that set things in motion - a 70 year old grandmother in what used to be known as Greece went to the benefits and savings dispenser and requested to draw 1000 Euro (a small chunk of her savings to bury her recently deceased husband) but there was insufficient funds - the request was denied
The news of no paper money spread quickly locally faceache, t
tter, snapslap all from friend to friend - everyone tried to draw out 1000 Euro - some people confirmed it was OK the money was there - others cried out that the money wasn't All those people spread far and wide made the communication spread from top and botton of the EuSSR.
The banks unable to cope with the demand for the old fashioned money asked the High Council for some paper money to tide them over
The High Council looked in the safe and there wasn't any - the money printers were based in China on holiday until the following week so they told the Banks to lie to the people - it had always worked before...
The banks assured people that there was plenty of the old money if people didn't try to draw it out all at once.... Now the people remembered being told that years before when it turned out to be a lie and some had lost a lot of money back in the day - they also remembered that the bosses that lied also paid themselves lots of money regardless of the fact that little people lost money and there was definately some connection between the government and the banks because the government used the peoples money to shore up the Banks last time.
That was the straw that broke the camel's back - Banks blamed the High Council - they'd lent all the money to them - in an almost French revolutionary moment the people revolted and all the High Council and CEO's of the banks were rounded up and beheaded underneath the Arc d' triumph
I don't think the last thing will happen but it's a bit like Eurovision being number 273 in my list of reasons to leave - bit of guilty pleasure or my room 101 if you like.
PS no-one is gonna read this.....
Edited by B'stard Child on Wednesday 30th November 22:47
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/29/donald-...
I found this rather interesting. Despite Mr. Tusk and Ms. Merkel saying "absolutely no negotiation before article 50" it looks like our diplomats have been working the back channel hard - two thirds of the EU heads of state wanted a deal, but they've been slapped down.
Sounds a little bit like divide and conquer to me.
I found this rather interesting. Despite Mr. Tusk and Ms. Merkel saying "absolutely no negotiation before article 50" it looks like our diplomats have been working the back channel hard - two thirds of the EU heads of state wanted a deal, but they've been slapped down.
Sounds a little bit like divide and conquer to me.
B'stard Child said:
Your vision
In mine
1. In the UK - always on the edge of what used to be the EU the economy would have continued to migrate to London creating further reliance on "casino" investment and returns
2. Manufacturing would continue to be a dirty word - why make stuff when china can make it cheaper
3. The services sector would be expanded to include Maccy D and Burger King as that was a growth industy (not because anybody liked it but only the unemployed could afford it)
4. The "something for nothing" numbers would continue to rise encouraged by the fact that there was no point in trying to work - people from the other side of Europe were doing all the jobs for less than their benefits and still better off (still sending money home) rather than local economies
In the EU
1. With one last ditch attempt to shore up that sinking ship goes for complete union and single management of all states from each of the original state capitals for one month in each - just over 2 years to move round them all.....
2. The EU continued to print more and more money - the banks continued to lend money based on the fact the EU was a stable place and although Debt as a percentage of GDP was a little high everyone had a stake in it so it's not like they were ever going to default - it's too big to fail
And then the people realised that what they thought were 4 freedoms weren't freedoms at all for them
Freedom of movement was just a way of ensuring those old fashioned national identities were broken up and no one had a loyalty to their birth country because they had to leave it to find work
Freedom of Goods was pointless everything came from China and the trade deal that the EU made with china after 23 years of negotiation only put the prices of everything up by a little and no one liked working in factories anyway
Freedom of Services was no longer applicable - everyone received a living allowance and were told how to spend it.
Freedom of Capital was also pointless it was one big state - no-one really used real money except the very old people - payment cards were all you needed everywhere and there was less chance of illness when you kept hold of your card and waved it above the pay point (that old money was very un-hygenic)
Anyway it was illegal to take currency out of the Schengen Zone.
And then it was the silliest thing that set things in motion - a 70 year old grandmother in what used to be known as Greece went to the benefits and savings dispenser and requested to draw 1000 Euro (a small chunk of her savings to bury her recently deceased husband) but there was insufficient funds - the request was denied
The news of no paper money spread quickly locally faceache, ttter, snapslap all from friend to friend - everyone tried to draw out 1000 Euro - some people confirmed it was OK the money was there - others cried out that the money wasn't
All those people spread far and wide made the communication spread from top and botton of the EuSSR.
The banks unable to cope with the demand for the old fashioned money asked the High Council for some paper money to tide them over
The High Council looked in the safe and there wasn't any - the money printers were based in China on holiday until the following week so they told the Banks to lie to the people - it had always worked before...
The banks assured people that there was plenty of the old money if people didn't try to draw it out all at once.... Now the people remembered being told that years before when it turned out to be a lie and some had lost a lot of money back in the day - they also remembered that the bosses that lied also paid themselves lots of money regardless of the fact that little people lost money and there was definately some connection between the government and the banks because the government used the peoples money to shore up the Banks last time.
That was the straw that broke the camel's back - Banks blamed the High Council - they'd lent all the money to them - in an almost French revolutionary moment the people revolted and all the High Council and CEO's of the banks were rounded up and beheaded underneath the Arc d' triumph
I don't think the last thing will happen but it's a bit like Eurovision being number 273 in my list of reasons to leave - bit of guilty pleasure or my room 101 if you like.
PS no-one is gonna read this.....
I enjoyed that. Sent some thought patterns adrift... In mine
1. In the UK - always on the edge of what used to be the EU the economy would have continued to migrate to London creating further reliance on "casino" investment and returns
2. Manufacturing would continue to be a dirty word - why make stuff when china can make it cheaper
3. The services sector would be expanded to include Maccy D and Burger King as that was a growth industy (not because anybody liked it but only the unemployed could afford it)
4. The "something for nothing" numbers would continue to rise encouraged by the fact that there was no point in trying to work - people from the other side of Europe were doing all the jobs for less than their benefits and still better off (still sending money home) rather than local economies
In the EU
1. With one last ditch attempt to shore up that sinking ship goes for complete union and single management of all states from each of the original state capitals for one month in each - just over 2 years to move round them all.....
2. The EU continued to print more and more money - the banks continued to lend money based on the fact the EU was a stable place and although Debt as a percentage of GDP was a little high everyone had a stake in it so it's not like they were ever going to default - it's too big to fail
And then the people realised that what they thought were 4 freedoms weren't freedoms at all for them
Freedom of movement was just a way of ensuring those old fashioned national identities were broken up and no one had a loyalty to their birth country because they had to leave it to find work
Freedom of Goods was pointless everything came from China and the trade deal that the EU made with china after 23 years of negotiation only put the prices of everything up by a little and no one liked working in factories anyway
Freedom of Services was no longer applicable - everyone received a living allowance and were told how to spend it.
Freedom of Capital was also pointless it was one big state - no-one really used real money except the very old people - payment cards were all you needed everywhere and there was less chance of illness when you kept hold of your card and waved it above the pay point (that old money was very un-hygenic)
Anyway it was illegal to take currency out of the Schengen Zone.
And then it was the silliest thing that set things in motion - a 70 year old grandmother in what used to be known as Greece went to the benefits and savings dispenser and requested to draw 1000 Euro (a small chunk of her savings to bury her recently deceased husband) but there was insufficient funds - the request was denied
The news of no paper money spread quickly locally faceache, t
tter, snapslap all from friend to friend - everyone tried to draw out 1000 Euro - some people confirmed it was OK the money was there - others cried out that the money wasn't All those people spread far and wide made the communication spread from top and botton of the EuSSR.
The banks unable to cope with the demand for the old fashioned money asked the High Council for some paper money to tide them over
The High Council looked in the safe and there wasn't any - the money printers were based in China on holiday until the following week so they told the Banks to lie to the people - it had always worked before...
The banks assured people that there was plenty of the old money if people didn't try to draw it out all at once.... Now the people remembered being told that years before when it turned out to be a lie and some had lost a lot of money back in the day - they also remembered that the bosses that lied also paid themselves lots of money regardless of the fact that little people lost money and there was definately some connection between the government and the banks because the government used the peoples money to shore up the Banks last time.
That was the straw that broke the camel's back - Banks blamed the High Council - they'd lent all the money to them - in an almost French revolutionary moment the people revolted and all the High Council and CEO's of the banks were rounded up and beheaded underneath the Arc d' triumph
I don't think the last thing will happen but it's a bit like Eurovision being number 273 in my list of reasons to leave - bit of guilty pleasure or my room 101 if you like.
PS no-one is gonna read this.....
Edited by B'stard Child on Wednesday 30th November 22:47
davepoth said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/29/donald-...
I found this rather interesting. Despite Mr. Tusk and Ms. Merkel saying "absolutely no negotiation before article 50" it looks like our diplomats have been working the back channel hard - two thirds of the EU heads of state wanted a deal, but they've been slapped down.
Sounds a little bit like divide and conquer to me.
Sounds like a call to arms aganst the bully's !!! that cow is going to be out in a few monthes Oh well never mind ...I found this rather interesting. Despite Mr. Tusk and Ms. Merkel saying "absolutely no negotiation before article 50" it looks like our diplomats have been working the back channel hard - two thirds of the EU heads of state wanted a deal, but they've been slapped down.
Sounds a little bit like divide and conquer to me.
tumble dryer said:
I enjoyed that. Sent some thought patterns adrift...
Glad you did Ties in nicely with my reason number three
Reason number 3 for voting leave - I did not know what a future EU will be like - it started as a common market and in 40 years by gradual creep left what it was and became what it is - on that basis a vote for remain is not a vote for the Status Quo as there will be further gradual creep. I'm not keen on slow gradual creep as I manage change in my work life, I prefer a quicker pace to change
Edited by B'stard Child on Wednesday 30th November 23:34
B'stard Child said:
tumble dryer said:
I enjoyed that. Sent some thought patterns adrift...
Glad you did Ties in nicely with my reason number three
Reason number 3 for voting leave - I did not know what a future EU will be like - it started as a common market and in 40 years by gradual evolution left what it was and became what it is - on that basis a vote for remain is not a vote for the Status Quo as there will be further gradual change. I'm not keen on slow gradual change as I manage change in my work life, I prefer a quicker pace
You used the word evolution above,personally I think it should be 'creep'.
I think quite a few who voted Leave would say the 'creep' would continue just as you do,and for many that would have been their number 1 reason.
don'tbesilly said:
B'stard Child said:
tumble dryer said:
I enjoyed that. Sent some thought patterns adrift...
Glad you did Ties in nicely with my reason number three
Reason number 3 for voting leave - I did not know what a future EU will be like - it started as a common market and in 40 years by gradual evolution left what it was and became what it is - on that basis a vote for remain is not a vote for the Status Quo as there will be further gradual change. I'm not keen on slow gradual change as I manage change in my work life, I prefer a quicker pace
You used the word evolution above,personally I think it should be 'creep'.
I think quite a few who voted Leave would say the 'creep' would continue just as you do,and for many that would have been their number 1 reason.
I used "Evolution" cos I don't do "Evolution", I do "Revolution" - No point (for example if you are losing money as a business*) you need to find the causes and fix them all quick...
* the cause of the losses is frequently a gradual creep
davepoth said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/29/donald-...
I found this rather interesting. Despite Mr. Tusk and Ms. Merkel saying "absolutely no negotiation before article 50" it looks like our diplomats have been working the back channel hard - two thirds of the EU heads of state wanted a deal, but they've been slapped down.
Sounds a little bit like divide and conquer to me.
This is one tactic I suspect - and perhaps it's just too much time spent watching Yes Minister - British politicians and diplomats are exceedingly adept at.I found this rather interesting. Despite Mr. Tusk and Ms. Merkel saying "absolutely no negotiation before article 50" it looks like our diplomats have been working the back channel hard - two thirds of the EU heads of state wanted a deal, but they've been slapped down.
Sounds a little bit like divide and conquer to me.
loafer123 said:
Digga said:
This is one tactic I suspect - and perhaps it's just too much time spent watching Yes Minister - British politicians and diplomats are exceedingly adept at.
You might think so, sir. I couldn't possibly comment.
You don't need to be in the EU to mess it up from the inside.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff