The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)
Discussion
London424 said:
Cambridge is the 'tech centre' not London.crankedup said:
London424 said:
Cambridge is the 'tech centre' not London.If car manufacturers leave the UK, it won't be to France. Helicopters are currently being used to extract parts at one factory for Peugot, Citroen due to an employee blockade...
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/07/06/world/...
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/07/06/world/...
hyphen said:
If car manufacturers leave the UK, it won't be to France. Helicopters are currently being used to extract parts at one factory for Peugot, Citroen due to an employee blockade...
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/07/06/world/...
If Macron is actually serious about pushing his reforms, I wouldn't be so sure. Some casualties will be inevitable.https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/07/06/world/...
crankedup said:
London424 said:
Cambridge is the 'tech centre' not London.This Is FT so sorry about that for those who can't see it.
https://www.ft.com/content/3131b416-b60d-11e5-b147...
turbobloke said:
crankedup said:
London424 said:
Cambridge is the 'tech centre' not London.This Is FT so sorry about that for those who can't see it.
https://www.ft.com/content/3131b416-b60d-11e5-b147...
BioTech and Embedded - Cambridge
Automotive - Northampton(?)
There's quite a strong link now from Kings Cross to Cambridge, but overall we do have a fairly diffuse tech environment with a number of focal points.
jjlynn27 said:
If Macron is actually serious about pushing his reforms, I wouldn't be so sure. Some casualties will be inevitable.
Every single new French President has grand plans then they try some of them, the entire country grinds to a standstill and then they drop the whole idea and spend the next 4.5 years doing nothing before losing the next election or retiring.Will Macron be any different? Time will tell.
confused_buyer said:
Every single new French President has grand plans then they try some of them, the entire country grinds to a standstill and then they drop the whole idea and spend the next 4.5 years doing nothing before losing the next election or retiring.
Will Macron be any different? Time will tell.
For the sake of France, I hope so, but it will be a miracle if he achieves it.Will Macron be any different? Time will tell.
Beeb reporting that Trump at the G20 is saying a US-UK trade deal to happen quickly after Brexit.
Why does this not fill me with optimism? Trump has a strong preference for one sided (ain't his favour) deals. A "quick" deal post Brexit brings to mind wandering onto a garage forecourt and saying "my old car has just broken down and I need to buy a replacement urgently. What have you got?".
Why does this not fill me with optimism? Trump has a strong preference for one sided (ain't his favour) deals. A "quick" deal post Brexit brings to mind wandering onto a garage forecourt and saying "my old car has just broken down and I need to buy a replacement urgently. What have you got?".
Greg66 said:
Beeb reporting that Trump at the G20 is saying a US-UK trade deal to happen quickly after Brexit.
Why does this not fill me with optimism? Trump has a strong preference for one sided (ain't his favour) deals. A "quick" deal post Brexit brings to mind wandering onto a garage forecourt and saying "my old car has just broken down and I need to buy a replacement urgently. What have you got?".
But does Trump understand what's in his favour and what isn't? Most politicians have trouble grasping that lifting tariffs benefits the importer more than the exporter, and Trump doesn't seem terribly bright even by politician standards.Why does this not fill me with optimism? Trump has a strong preference for one sided (ain't his favour) deals. A "quick" deal post Brexit brings to mind wandering onto a garage forecourt and saying "my old car has just broken down and I need to buy a replacement urgently. What have you got?".
Going over old ground, I know, but the National Audit office has just confirmed that George Osborne's Project Fear warnings were just plain wrong and a flat out complete set of bollards.
Osborne commissioned two analyses one based on a "shock scenario" and the second a "severe shock scenario", the assumptions and modelling were, to put it politely, twaddle, apparently.
Some of us knew that then but were roundly derided, and they expect us still to take notice of their twittering over a year later.
Osborne commissioned two analyses one based on a "shock scenario" and the second a "severe shock scenario", the assumptions and modelling were, to put it politely, twaddle, apparently.
Some of us knew that then but were roundly derided, and they expect us still to take notice of their twittering over a year later.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Both sides lied.
In which case the Brexiteers lied better, conned the population more assuredly, beat the Remainers hands down at their own game and won!We are leaving so can we stop looking backwards and look to the future as this thread is about the economic consequences of Brexit, not how the hell did we get here!
I've been reading the recent speeches made by Barnier to his EU colleagues and they are quite sensible and measured. They give some confidence that an equitable solution is being sought. However, he is quite right in that UK cannot have all the same 'advantages' of the EU when it becomes a third country on exit. Of course, some of the advantages the EU protect are not necessarily seen as advantages by UK e.g. ECHR and FMoL!
Now we are in the throes of negotiation the economic consequences will, over the next 18 months or so, begin to crystallise and the real size of the economic hit, at least in the short term, begin to become apparent. The jury is still out on the size/depth of the 'hit' but there will undoubtedly be one and the trick is how to overcome it, or at least mitigate its effects, and quickly.
i suppose the first question is will there be a recession or just a slow down in the economy and if so, why and for how long?
Garvin said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Both sides lied.
In which case the Brexiteers lied better, conned the population more assuredly, beat the Remainers hands down at their own game and won!Remain defeated itself to a significant degree thanks to the two nouveau clowns above,
Garvin said:
We are leaving so can we stop looking backwards and look to the future as this thread is about the economic consequences of Brexit, not how the hell did we get here!
Quite right!turbobloke said:
Garvin said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Both sides lied.
In which case the Brexiteers lied better, conned the population more assuredly, beat the Remainers hands down at their own game and won!Remain defeated itself to a significant degree thanks to the two nouveau clowns above,
Garvin said:
We are leaving so can we stop looking backwards and look to the future as this thread is about the economic consequences of Brexit, not how the hell did we get here!
Quite right!However it's gratifying to note the report from NAO, and move on to ignore the same arguments that are still being presented.
FiF said:
Correct, and considering the utter disarray of the Leave side, let's be honest about that, and failure of that side to focus on any one single or set of similar options for execution of a Leave decision, then it makes their failure even more prominent.
At the moment, the Remain 'side' has it easy - remaing involves no changes, assumes nothing 'bad' is going to happen and has the benefit of the last five years being economically surprisingly benign. Remainers are no-longer being questioned on what it would mean to remain in a changing EU for the long term (and let's be clear, there are quite a few in the political sphere who are still either actively pursuing that agenda, or wish to punish their colleagues who took the other 'side' - George Osborne, I'm looking at you).Against that, people are expecting that having chosen to leave, that the Leave 'side' will be able to make a magic prediction about the exact shape of the final arrangement we reach. That's not possible, but it's still being demanded: "What does Leave mean?". Not surprisingly there are different opinions as to the best or most likely outcome. Remainers are seizing on those different opinions and treating it as bitter infighting or confusion.
It's a negotiation that has never been done before - no-one knows, but the direction of travel (freedom to set out internal policies and make trade arrangements with RoTW etc.) is pretty clear. As it involves a lot of different parties, there isn't going to be a completely orderly sequence of events, even with Barnier and Davis running through a timetable. Claiming it's a failure because it's not a simple A-B-C process is nonsense.
Tuna said:
At the moment, the Remain 'side' has it easy -
They had it easy prior to the vote, all they had to do was present some sensible constructive and realistic arguments in favour of the EU and they would have swung the vote result. I have no particular hard evidence for that, simply my opinion.However they chose not to present any positive arguments for Remain, but simply went fully negative against Leave, their arguments were at times so ridiculous and soninsulting that they turned an easy open goal into a defeat, a close defeat admittedly.
Essentially some still continue this approach and cannot understand why it is simply hardening opinion outside the bubble.
FiF said:
Tuna said:
At the moment, the Remain 'side' has it easy -
They had it easy prior to the vote, all they had to do was present some sensible constructive and realistic arguments in favour of the EU and they would have swung the vote result. I have no particular hard evidence for that, simply my opinion.However they chose not to present any positive arguments for Remain, but simply went fully negative against Leave, their arguments were at times so ridiculous and soninsulting that they turned an easy open goal into a defeat, a close defeat admittedly.
Essentially some still continue this approach and cannot understand why it is simply hardening opinion outside the bubble.
jjlynn27 said:
...
Hard to argue with that part.
As for immigration, one is the exit poll, one is a conclusion reached after big data analysis. I know which one I'd weight more.
...
The first line is the ONLY one that matters in the Ashcroft or any other assessment. Whether anyone believes it was racism first and foremost that prompted that first line, whether people on the losing side were more intelligent, better looking, affluent etc etc...none of it really matters.Hard to argue with that part.
As for immigration, one is the exit poll, one is a conclusion reached after big data analysis. I know which one I'd weight more.
...
You'd have thought Remain could have put up better arguments to persuade the older, more stupid of the country. Or found better ways to combat the huge proportion of racists in this country. How does it reflect on them that they couldn't?
But really, all you had to do was state the bit in bold and I would have conceded to you. After all, if "big data analysis" was involved it MUST have all been true. Big data analysis can never be wrong or skewed to say what you want. GO's analysis of the immediate post vote aftermath. The green agenda etc. "Big Data Analysis" so must be on the money. Hard to argue with that sort of logic jj
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff