The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)

[CaptainSlow]

///ajd said:

So when DEFRA predict the opposite, what does that mean - are they remoaning EU shills out to sabotage Brexit? Bloody experts!

Where have they predicted the opposite?

[s2art]

///ajd said:

The Thatcher rebate was a lot to do with precisely not doing that.

I'm sure you knew that.

But I agree, a big chuck of the brexit saving will end up with our farmers, just as the EU pay them now.

So staying the same.

So it won't make our food cheaper.

So what was your point again?

What? The saving is approx 11billion . We pay more than that and get back the amount the farmers get from CAP.(amongst other things). We could maintain the CAP without having any impact on the 11 billion saving.

[don'tbesilly]

///ajd said:

I also noticed that DEFRA are withholding their internal assessment about how food pricing will change in the run up to and after brexit.

http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Regulation/Food-p...

Do you think the predicted change is positive or negative? Yep, DExEU withholding predicted falls in food prices seems likely - can't have too much positive brexit news all at once......

Unite are claiming that's the case, and reading the article, DEFRA give a robust and reasoned response to the FOI request from Unite as to why certain information was not being released.

Yet again ///ajd notices something that doesn't read as he suggests it does.

Few will be surprised.

[CaptainSlow]

Slasher doesn't let fact get in the way of his bks.

[Tuna]

cookie118 said:

The majority of newspapers and newspaper articles in the leadup to the referendum were pro-Brexit.

https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/risj-re...

Of the articles focused on the referendum, 41% were pro-Leave, while 27% were pro-Remain, creating a dominant pro-Leave presence. (See Fig 4.1) After factoring in the reach of different newspapers, the pro-Brexit dominance is further accentuated, with 48% of all referendum-focused articles pro-Leave and just 22% pro-Remain.

The Leave campaign did many things right-but creating the illusion of 'sticking it to the establishment' was one of their greatest accomplishments.

How dishonest is that? I talk about media and you quote a report on the press. Care to find an equivalent report that includes BBC, Channel 4, ITV and Sky coverage?

Let's look at the reporting by Nick Robinson, Robert Preston and Faisal Islam.. probably the three most visible political commentators in the country.

Sentiment analysis on their twitter feed shows 1908 tweets about Brexit, of which only 93 were positive - just 5%.

Are you going to claim that the combined output of all uk television somehow didn't contribute towards the public view? Or that *media* coverage overall wasn't hugely influenced by television and radio?

[alfie2244]

CaptainSlow said:

Slasher doesn't let fact get in the way of his bks.

Do we actually know for certain Slasher is a man?

[don'tbesilly]

alfie2244 said:

CaptainSlow said:

Slasher doesn't let fact get in the way of his bks.

Do we actually know for certain Slasher is a man?

Yes

[alfie2244]

don'tbesilly said:

alfie2244 said:

CaptainSlow said:

Slasher doesn't let fact get in the way of his bks.

Do we actually know for certain Slasher is a man?

Yes

Has he got bks?

[Deptford Draylons]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Deptford Draylons said:

Only you could call someone repetitive while doing the same big red bus arguments for over a year now. Keep fighting that result, Eddie.

Wut? You're still ignoring Boris repeating his lie which is what kicked all this off again. Is comprehending simple news stories something that's troubled you for all of your 17 years?

I actually commented on the idea that the £350m was some massive vote winner, a big fat lie and a reason for trying to suggest the vote outcome isn't legit, which was really the meaning some were getting even if they wouldn't fully say it.

I know it may have got a bit complex for you when suggesting the actual headline part of it ( the NHS funding ) wasn't really what attracted people and why the only people still moaning about it, is you.

So Boris kinda repeating it with a carefully worded twist. I don't much care.

I wish you wannabe funny remainers would stick to one consistent insult line. I keep getting told I'm an old git stealing some kids future, but with you I'm now 17.

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

Hmmm. This chap is not too optimistic:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/brexit-...

I also noticed that DEFRA are withholding their internal assessment about how food pricing will change in the run up to and after brexit.

http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Regulation/Food-p...

Do you think the predicted change is positive or negative? Yep, DExEU withholding predicted falls in food prices seems likely - can't have too much positive brexit news all at once......

Do you recall above that a poster above was actually hoping their monthly payments on their 10% tariff increased 318d would be offset by cheaper oranges. And several cheered the "well informed" post.

So you have managed to come out of your bunker after the German elections then. Shame to see you are still hunting down doom and gloom, everything in the world is in balance. phew.

[JagLover]

Breadvan72 said:

One of London's greatest failures is to fail to make the rest of the UK more like London. I do not mean big and crowded and sometimes grumpy, but I do mean affluent and enlightened. Parts of the UK are economic and cultural deserts, and that is partly (mainly) the fault of London. Il faux partager, they say in parts of West Africa. London has not done enough sharing.

You encapsulate in one paragraph why we seem to be heading for similar culture wars to those in the US and why bitter political division is likely to increase. Most of us don't want to live in London, a number of us don't even want to visit London.

When my sister got married she decided to do so in the centre of London for some reason. None of the aunts and uncles from the midlands wanted to come as a result, two couples did in the end reluctantly come, but the third couple didn't. So you have a place, that you hold up as the shining model to be imposed by benevolent Londoners upon the peasantry, that people wont even visit for their Niece's wedding.

We don't want to live in London nor do we want to live in a miniature sized facsimile of it. London is a world city that succeeds partly because it has a hinterland to which all those who don't want to live in such a place can be driven. All the old tight knit working class communities of London are long gone and my dad (an old Bermondsey lad) often meets fellow members of the diaspora away from London.

But there is no "live and let live" with people like you. The London way must be imposed on all the provincial towns and cities of the UK and you use your control of the establishment to drive this agenda. Perhaps one day the Metropolitan elite will realise that living within the boundaries of the M25 doesn't make you the equivalent of Plato's Philosopher Kings, and that you have not been appointed to lead the great unwashed into a more enlightened future.

[///ajd]

Good work guys, got to love the playground ad homs - have you noticed none of you seem to have the balls to discuss the economics of Brexit & the food price issue? The irony is sweet. The blind trust in the experts at DEFRA withholding the FOI request is quite touching. Experts that are keeping the bad news away are clearly OK.

And still defending the bus. Boris knew his audience. Great stuff!

[anonymous-user]

Tuna said:

cookie118 said:

The majority of newspapers and newspaper articles in the leadup to the referendum were pro-Brexit.

https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/risj-re...

Of the articles focused on the referendum, 41% were pro-Leave, while 27% were pro-Remain, creating a dominant pro-Leave presence. (See Fig 4.1) After factoring in the reach of different newspapers, the pro-Brexit dominance is further accentuated, with 48% of all referendum-focused articles pro-Leave and just 22% pro-Remain.

The Leave campaign did many things right-but creating the illusion of 'sticking it to the establishment' was one of their greatest accomplishments.

How dishonest is that? I talk about media and you quote a report on the press. Care to find an equivalent report that includes BBC, Channel 4, ITV and Sky coverage?

Try table 4.1 of this report then:
It shows a remain bias but 80+% of the coverage being balanced. (82% balanced, 12% in, 6% out).

I don’t think it’s dishonest to talk about the press if you’ve mentioned media. You mentioned it to try and prove a point-that the election and current coverage is biased towards remain. But if you leave out the press from that coverage is that not a false position to take?

Are you going to claim that the output of British newspapers had no influence on the vote either?

[anonymous-user]

alfie2244 said:

don'tbesilly said:

alfie2244 said:

CaptainSlow said:

Slasher doesn't let fact get in the way of his bks.

Do we actually know for certain Slasher is a man?

Yes

Has he got bks?

Top debating lads!

[Sway]

///ajd said:

Good work guys, got to love the playground ad homs - have you noticed none of you seem to have the balls to discuss the economics of Brexit & the food price issue? The irony is sweet. The blind trust in the experts at DEFRA withholding the FOI request is quite touching. Experts that are keeping the bad news away are clearly OK.

No ad homs here...

You didn't have the balls to discuss food prices when I've posted before, however as soon as there's an article that might support your pessimism then you're straight back on it.

Much like on Ghosn, you're over-reaching. Unite haven't got a clue, DEFRA are absolutely correct in their response.

Now, given you have no rebuttal to my points about world prices and the protectionist regime we are currently in, then it can be assumed that you do actually understand the reasoning that food prices could very easily be cheaper?

On that basis and remembering that we're in negotiations with the aforementioned protectionist regime, do you really think it would be a good idea for DEFRA to point that out to Unite? After all, Unite are hardly known for keeping things quiet that may influence public perception or the course of the negotiations...

[///ajd]

Roman Rhodes said:

alfie2244 said:

don'tbesilly said:

alfie2244 said:

CaptainSlow said:

Slasher doesn't let fact get in the way of his bks.

Do we actually know for certain Slasher is a man?

Yes

Has he got bks?

Top debating lads!

They should be on Question Time. Just imagine that.

[Eddie Strohacker]

Sway said:

No ad homs here...

You didn't have the balls

This is not how denying ad hominem works.

[anonymous-user]

JagLover said:

Breadvan72 said:

One of London's greatest failures is to fail to make the rest of the UK more like London. I do not mean big and crowded and sometimes grumpy, but I do mean affluent and enlightened. Parts of the UK are economic and cultural deserts, and that is partly (mainly) the fault of London. Il faux partager, they say in parts of West Africa. London has not done enough sharing.

You encapsulate in one paragraph why we seem to be heading for similar culture wars to those in the US and why bitter political division is likely to increase. Most of us don't want to live in London, a number of us don't even want to visit London.

When my sister got married she decided to do so in the centre of London for some reason. None of the aunts and uncles from the midlands wanted to come as a result, two couples did in the end reluctantly come, but the third couple didn't. So you have a place, that you hold up as the shining model to be imposed by benevolent Londoners upon the peasantry, that people wont even visit for their Niece's wedding.

We don't want to live in London nor do we want to live in a miniature sized facsimile of it. London is a world city that succeeds partly because it has a hinterland to which all those who don't want to live in such a place can be driven. All the old tight knit working class communities of London are long gone and my dad (an old Bermondsey lad) often meets fellow members of the diaspora away from London.

But there is no "live and let live" with people like you. The London way must be imposed on all the provincial towns and cities of the UK and you use your control of the establishment to drive this agenda. Perhaps one day the Metropolitan elite will realise that living within the boundaries of the M25 doesn't make you the equivalent of Plato's Philosopher Kings, and that you have not been appointed to lead the great unwashed into a more enlightened future.

So you are saying that the aunts and uncles didn't want to come to London because it is affluent and enlightened? How odd.

Alternatively, you are deliberately misrepresenting what was said so that you can shoehorn in a few tired cliches about the "Metropolitan elite". Aunts and uncles not liking big crowded and grumpy I can understand. Not liking affluent and enlightened seems weird.

You say "live and let live". Can we take it that you are happy with the lack of jobs, investment, opportunities, infrastructure etc. away from London and the South East? The 'North/South divide' doesn't bother you? Boarded up shops, whole streets for sale at less than the price of a 3 bed semi in North London - this is what you want to preserve?

Compare and contrast with our European equivalents, France and Germany. There simply aren't the wild variations of quality of life between the capitals and the provinces. The vast majority of small French towns look well cared for and are examples of cultural and civic success.

Why don't you want to share success? Or is it just that you want to make a few cheap shots by wilfully misrepresenting what was actually said.

[Sway]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Sway said:

No ad homs here...

You didn't have the balls

This is not how denying ad hominem works.

Ad hominems within a debate are defined as using the person stating the opposing case as the basis for your own argument. Please feel free to attempt to show where i have done so...

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ad-hominem

[JagLover]

Roman Rhodes said:

So you are saying that the aunts and uncles didn't want to come to London because it is affluent and enlightened? How odd.

Alternatively, you are deliberately misrepresenting what was said so that you can shoehorn in a few tired cliches about the "Metropolitan elite". Aunts and uncles not liking big crowded and grumpy I can understand. Not liking affluent and enlightened seems weird.

You say "live and let live". Can we take it that you are happy with the lack of jobs, investment, opportunities, infrastructure etc. away from London and the South East? The 'North/South divide' doesn't bother you? Boarded up shops, whole streets for sale at less than the price of a 3 bed semi in North London - this is what you want to preserve?

Compare and contrast with our European equivalents, France and Germany. There simply aren't the wild variations of quality of life between the capitals and the provinces. The vast majority of small French towns look well cared for and are examples of cultural and civic success.

Why don't you want to share success? Or is it just that you want to make a few cheap shots by wilfully misrepresenting what was actually said.

Affluent I have no issue with, though it shouldn't come at the expense of quality of life. Once housing costs are adjusted for how many Londoners have a better quality of life than elsewhere in the country?. I certainly improved my quality of life by getting out, so in fact making us more like London will make us poorer.

"Enlightened" is the big issue as it means that anyone who doesn't share the world view of the Metropolitan set is ignorant and needs their views changed to the "correct" viewpoint. Modern Liberalism, all for diversity, except for diversity of opinion.