Brexit related recession?

[sidicks]

nadger said:

Of course, Britain hasn't benefitted from being part of the EU at all either!

At a cost.

[zygalski]

sidicks said:

nadger said:

Of course, Britain hasn't benefitted from being part of the EU at all either!

At a cost.

Well we are all about to discover the cost of leaving aren't we?
May's snap election is nothing more than a safety net so that she can say "well the British public gave me the mandate for hard Brexit" when things go tits up.
It's all our fault, you see?

[PH XKR]

sidicks said:

nadger said:

Of course, Britain hasn't benefitted from being part of the EU at all either!

At a cost.

A negative cost

Bombadier - Derby, lost contract after Germans secretly funded Simens to run a bid at a loss
Rover - Needed govt intervention for support, illegal under EU rules, Rover bust. BMW, Porsche, VAG, PSA all supported by illegal loans. French never intended to pay loans back.

Britain has applied the EU rules the most rigorously over the years and it has been to our loss.

[768]

sidicks said:

///ajd said:

This is the graph backing up the story in the FT.



Prices falling for ages, them slow turn around to increases matching the forex slump with the referendum.

Too early to say if the dip will become a trend.

May be one reason May wants to rush the election now.

So 'store prices' are still lower than they were between 2011 and 2014?

If it weren't for Brexit prices would have continued falling to zero.

[nadger]

PH XKR said:

sidicks said:

nadger said:

Of course, Britain hasn't benefitted from being part of the EU at all either!

At a cost.

A negative cost

Bombadier - Derby, lost contract after Germans secretly funded Simens to run a bid at a loss
Rover - Needed govt intervention for support, illegal under EU rules, Rover bust. BMW, Porsche, VAG, PSA all supported by illegal loans. French never intended to pay loans back.

Britain has applied the EU rules the most rigorously over the years and it has been to our loss.

[nadger]

PH XKR said:

sidicks said:

nadger said:

Of course, Britain hasn't benefitted from being part of the EU at all either!

At a cost.

A negative cost

Bombadier - Derby, lost contract after Germans secretly funded Simens to run a bid at a loss
Rover - Needed govt intervention for support, illegal under EU rules, Rover bust. BMW, Porsche, VAG, PSA all supported by illegal loans. French never intended to pay loans back.

Britain has applied the EU rules the most rigorously over the years and it has been to our loss.

I fail to see how any of that can be blamed on the EU and not on poor management by the uk.

[loafer123]

steveatesh said:

I thought this might be appropriate for this thread:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/british-economy-head...

These are news sources that I ignore;

Daily Mail (confession: I read the website sometimes for entertainment, not news)
Independent.co.uk (clickbait articles)
Business Insider (Like Moneyweek, the world is always ending tomorrow)
Bloomberg (fervently remoaner - Reuters is much more balanced)

[anonymous-user]

PH XKR said:

A negative cost

Bombadier - Derby, lost contract after Germans secretly funded Simens to run a bid at a loss
Rover - Needed govt intervention for support, illegal under EU rules, Rover bust. BMW, Porsche, VAG, PSA all supported by illegal loans. French never intended to pay loans back.

Britain has applied the EU rules the most rigorously over the years and it has been to our loss.

Do you have any evidence for the Siemens/bombardier thing? A google doesn't throw up anything at all about illegal funding.

Same with the car manufacturer 'illegal' loans. Fancy offering a source to back it up?

[///ajd]

gruffalo said:

They have not announced tax rises after the election, the have however said that they need options so they can react to any changes in the economy and so don't want to be hamstrung by a manifesto pledge that would be irresponsible in light of the changes that are afoot in regards to the UK.

It is reasonable to conclude that the tories were able to make that manifesto pledge based on brexit not happening (their previous policy) - now it is happening, against their intent, they cannot rule out tax rises to compensate.

It is reasonable to link these events - brexit = likely tax rises.

[loafer123]

///ajd said:

gruffalo said:

They have not announced tax rises after the election, the have however said that they need options so they can react to any changes in the economy and so don't want to be hamstrung by a manifesto pledge that would be irresponsible in light of the changes that are afoot in regards to the UK.

It is reasonable to conclude that the tories were able to make that manifesto pledge based on brexit not happening (their previous policy) - now it is happening, against their intent, they cannot rule out tax rises to compensate.

It is reasonable to link these events - brexit = likely tax rises.

You were doing well up until the last line.

Now it is happening, if things don't go according to plan, they need the flexibility to make tax rises.

It does not mean this will happen.

[///ajd]

768 said:

sidicks said:

///ajd said:

This is the graph backing up the story in the FT.



Prices falling for ages, them slow turn around to increases matching the forex slump with the referendum.

Too early to say if the dip will become a trend.

May be one reason May wants to rush the election now.

So 'store prices' are still lower than they were between 2011 and 2014?

If it weren't for Brexit prices would have continued falling to zero.

The scale is an index and the axis does not cut at zero.

The graph is pretty clear cut and the change appears directly linked to forex change and hence brexit vote.

It is too early to say if there is a long term trend, but it is difficult to sweep this aside as "nothing to see". It should be an alarm bell no matter which side of the debate you sit on.

[768]

///ajd said:

768 said:

If it weren't for Brexit prices would have continued falling to zero.

The scale is an index and the axis does not cut at zero.

Sure, prices could never go to zero as the axis on a graph doesn't. You're full of new wisdom.

[///ajd]

768 said:

///ajd said:

768 said:

If it weren't for Brexit prices would have continued falling to zero.

The scale is an index and the axis does not cut at zero.

Sure, prices could never go to zero as the axis on a graph doesn't. You're full of new wisdom.

You gave the impression you either didn't understand the graph or were making a pointless comment.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt.

[don'tbesilly]

///ajd said:

gruffalo said:

They have not announced tax rises after the election, the have however said that they need options so they can react to any changes in the economy and so don't want to be hamstrung by a manifesto pledge that would be irresponsible in light of the changes that are afoot in regards to the UK.

It is reasonable to link these events - brexit = likely tax rises.

Most sensible Brexit voters were expecting some pain with their vote to leave the EU, so most voters (leave) would expect a sensible Government to make contingencies in their forward plans.

May is somewhat more intelligent than the previous incumbent at No 10 who made no contingency for a vote to leave, and simply got on Shank's pony!

There is rarely any gain without some pain, so I don't see some sensible forward planning by the Government as anything other than prudent, hopefully the £ will continue to show gains and future tax rises will be minimum if any at all.

[gruffalo]

don'tbesilly said:

///ajd said:

gruffalo said:

They have not announced tax rises after the election, the have however said that they need options so they can react to any changes in the economy and so don't want to be hamstrung by a manifesto pledge that would be irresponsible in light of the changes that are afoot in regards to the UK.

It is reasonable to link these events - brexit = likely tax rises.

Most sensible Brexit voters were expecting some pain with their vote to leave the EU, so most voters (leave) would expect a sensible Government to make contingencies in their forward plans.

May is somewhat more intelligent than the previous incumbent at No 10 who made no contingency for a vote to leave, and simply got on Shank's pony!

There is rarely any gain without some pain, so I don't see some sensible forward planning by the Government as anything other than prudent, hopefully the £ will continue to show gains and future tax rises will be minimum if any at all.

They may even end up reducing tax to stimulate the economy, a VAT reduction for example may be deemed necessary we don't know.

Sensible to allow yourself options.

[zygalski]

gruffalo said:

don'tbesilly said:

///ajd said:

gruffalo said:

They have not announced tax rises after the election, the have however said that they need options so they can react to any changes in the economy and so don't want to be hamstrung by a manifesto pledge that would be irresponsible in light of the changes that are afoot in regards to the UK.

It is reasonable to link these events - brexit = likely tax rises.

Most sensible Brexit voters were expecting some pain with their vote to leave the EU, so most voters (leave) would expect a sensible Government to make contingencies in their forward plans.

May is somewhat more intelligent than the previous incumbent at No 10 who made no contingency for a vote to leave, and simply got on Shank's pony!

There is rarely any gain without some pain, so I don't see some sensible forward planning by the Government as anything other than prudent, hopefully the £ will continue to show gains and future tax rises will be minimum if any at all.

They may even end up reducing tax to stimulate the economy, a VAT reduction for example may be deemed necessary we don't know.

Sensible to allow yourself options.

Politicians don't tend to rule out tax rises if they've got tax cuts planned. Just out of interest, when was the last time the Tories cut the overall UK tax take?

[///ajd]

gruffalo said:

don'tbesilly said:

///ajd said:

gruffalo said:

They have not announced tax rises after the election, the have however said that they need options so they can react to any changes in the economy and so don't want to be hamstrung by a manifesto pledge that would be irresponsible in light of the changes that are afoot in regards to the UK.

It is reasonable to link these events - brexit = likely tax rises.

Most sensible Brexit voters were expecting some pain with their vote to leave the EU, so most voters (leave) would expect a sensible Government to make contingencies in their forward plans.

May is somewhat more intelligent than the previous incumbent at No 10 who made no contingency for a vote to leave, and simply got on Shank's pony!

There is rarely any gain without some pain, so I don't see some sensible forward planning by the Government as anything other than prudent, hopefully the £ will continue to show gains and future tax rises will be minimum if any at all.

They may even end up reducing tax to stimulate the economy, a VAT reduction for example may be deemed necessary we don't know.

Sensible to allow yourself options.

They might do lots of things, but most have interpreted the change as relating to the need to compensate for brexit related hard times - that all will need to pay for.

[sidicks]

zygalski said:

Politicians don't tend to rule out tax rises if they've got tax cuts planned. Just out of interest, when was the last time the Tories cut the overall UK tax take?

Or, more relevantly, when did the outgoing Labour government leave the incoming Conservative government with the means to cut the overall tax take...

[zygalski]

sidicks said:

Or, more relevantly, when did the outgoing Labour government leave the incoming Conservative government with the means to cut the overall tax take...

Labour governments inherited Tory borrowing issues. It's all about the lag, you see?
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/03/13/the-...

[sidicks]

zygalski said:

Labour government inherited Tory issues. It's all about the lag, you see?

You mean like when the Labour government, led by Blair, inherited an economy that was well-balanced and growing, and managed to massively increase debt despite record growth and record tax receipts? 13 years they had...