0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
MMI replied to BB in a similar theme a couple of days ago. There are certain things that are simply too complicated for economists to predict. Other things are relatively easy. No one predicted the 2007/08 crash. Some people claim they saw something coming but there’s no prediction that really stacks up. That’s because it was due to a fiendishly complex set of circumstances. The key complexity was how the shadow banking system had taken in far more risk than anyone properly understood, and how vulnerable it was to a loss of confidence caused by the collapse of the American housing bubble. Even then, the crash would not have been anything like as severe as it was if the US Govt had bailed out Lehman Brothers. Letting them go bust opened up the trap door under the confidence that was supporting the whole banking system. No one could have predicted the systemic effect of that because the interplay of effects was too poorly understood and too complex. Many people were worried about the housing bubble but there have been many bubbles which have deflated without crippling the global financial system.
The effect of Brexit is totally different. Academic economists understand very well the effect of open or closed trading arrangements on countries’ economies. This is nowhere near as complex an issue or as dimly understood an issue as the factors that led to the Great Crash. So they can relatively accurately model the effect of us choosing to make it harder to trade with 450million generally wealthy people on our doorstep.Here’s an analogy. Trying to predict the outcome of the global economy is like trying to predict the result of a football match between two very well matched sides. Every pundit will have an opinion, but none of them really know. There are too many interacting variables to accurately predict the outcome. Predicting the effect of Brexit is like trying to predict the result of a long distance race between a bunch of well matched runners, but where one of the runners has chosen to hang a 1kg weight round his waist. You can’t predict exactly what time that runner will do, but you can be fairly certain that they’ll be slower than they would have been without the weight. So it is with Brexit. Yes there will be some uncertainty. Yes the models will give different answers. Yes the precise outcome will depend on what arrangements we can get with other trading partners. But even taking all those things into account, pretty much every expert expected and still expects the effect of Brexit to be profoundly negative on our economy. And unfortunately, we’re in the middle of seeing those predictions come true. Believe me, I wish with all my heart that they were wrong because I’m f**ked if I want my kids growing up in the sort of country that we are going to be when we realise what we’ve pissed away and start looking for someone to blame.
MMIt’s all sorted because of the following:1) May, under pressure from Johnson, Fox, Rees-Mogg etc decided back in January that Brexit meant we have to leave the Single Market and Customs Union. (Note: On Liam Fox’s own website there is a blog article written by him before the vote saying that what we need led to do was leave the EU but stay in the SM and CU - your guess is as good as mine why he’s changed his mind.)2) May, Johnson etc all claim that we can do this and still have as easy a trading relationship with the EU as we had before. 3) Nobody actually believes that. Why on earth would the EU allow us alone to drop out of all the obligations and responsibilities of the SM and CU while still keeping all the benefits? It’s infantile to even think that the other EU nations would accept that. One EU negotiator summed it up. He said Davis was acting like someone who wanted to be invited to a wife-swapping party without having to bring his wife. So it’s is US who have decided to make our economic life harder. Or rather it’s a small group of Tory MPs who are all jockeying for the top jobs who are playing with the future of the rest of us. And we’re told this is the Will of the People.
Sproty. Maybe...https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-43414145You’re way off the mark on exports by the way. You really out to read more widely. http://www.worldstopexports.com/denmarks-top-10-exports/
Sproty Right. Fingers out and ready to count on them. You reckon 9% of Denmark’s GDP is made up of exports of food to us? Really? Their total exports of EVERYTHING to EVERYBODY in 2026 was 30% of GDP ($93bn out of a GDP of $306). Exports to the U.K. made up 8.1% of that 30%. So EVERYTHING they exported to us rotted up to 2.5% of their GDP. Of that everything, all foodstuffs totted up to 25%. So their total foodstuff export to the U.K. is about 0.6% of GDP. Even for a Little Englander like you Sproty, that’s a bit of an over estimate of the importance of the U.K.
Yeah but how much bacon do you eat?
Right. Only if bacon exports to us made up 9% of Danish GDP, I reckon that would mean we imported off them about 1500 rashers per year for every man woman and child in the U.K. Now, I like a fry up, but there’s limits. And anyway, everybody knows that half the population here now are Muslims, so summation doesn’t really stack up.
Hoola, I wasn't being rude when I said you'd taken it wrong regarding your suggestion that I get my BBC Brexit bias info from the Mail/Express. I was merely correcting you because, although those tabloids do claim BBC pro-EU bias, I couldn't use their examples in this forum because they would simply be disregarded as lies.It's a pity really that my personal opinion can't be accepted as just that, but it seems that until I can show links as evidence of several other like-minded people who share my observations, my opinion is disrespected, sometimes to the point of ridicule. Rude even!In an attempt at evidence that will be accepted as proof that my personal opinion is shared, here's a link. I won't hold my breath.http://bbccomplaints.com/
HoolaInteresting point regarding your daughter.My daughter is a trained nurse. I'm encouraging her to move to Australia as due to this ridiculous decision this country is f***ed. If I was younger I'd be off too.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on March 15, 2018, 05:35:14 pmSproty. Maybe...https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-43414145You’re way off the mark on exports by the way. You really out to read more widely. http://www.worldstopexports.com/denmarks-top-10-exports/Billy I have conducted my own macro economic study of the Danish economy As through experience I gravely doubt the veracity of the Graphs and figures you pull out of your Top Hat? Food, dairy, meat and fish products make up 18.7% of Denmarks gross National product, half of which goes to the uk.The Danes guestimate the damage to those exports could be in the region of 48%.in particular the Fishing industry could lose 85% of its catch as a worst case scenario and 50% in a best case.Now in my book loosing 9% of your economy and 85% of your fishing catch is a big risk.Particularly when you look to the colossus immediately south of Denmark, which is 24 times larger, counting The German language Countries/regions of Austria, Switzerland,Lichtenstein,and Slovenia.Alsace and Lorraine.I was just wondering why Denmark?
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on March 15, 2018, 09:01:32 pmSproty Right. Fingers out and ready to count on them. You reckon 9% of Denmark’s GDP is made up of exports of food to us? Really? Their total exports of EVERYTHING to EVERYBODY in 2026 was 30% of GDP ($93bn out of a GDP of $306). Exports to the U.K. made up 8.1% of that 30%. So EVERYTHING they exported to us rotted up to 2.5% of their GDP. Of that everything, all foodstuffs totted up to 25%. So their total foodstuff export to the U.K. is about 0.6% of GDP. Even for a Little Englander like you Sproty, that’s a bit of an over estimate of the importance of the U.K. I am a Yorkshireman,British and proud to be so!
Quote from: Bentley Bullet on March 15, 2018, 11:33:25 amHoola, I wasn't being rude when I said you'd taken it wrong regarding your suggestion that I get my BBC Brexit bias info from the Mail/Express. I was merely correcting you because, although those tabloids do claim BBC pro-EU bias, I couldn't use their examples in this forum because they would simply be disregarded as lies.It's a pity really that my personal opinion can't be accepted as just that, but it seems that until I can show links as evidence of several other like-minded people who share my observations, my opinion is disrespected, sometimes to the point of ridicule. Rude even!In an attempt at evidence that will be accepted as proof that my personal opinion is shared, here's a link. I won't hold my breath.http://bbccomplaints.com/Incidentally I accept there was a pro - Remain bias ( apart from the knob from RT) on the panel tonight - and despite this being in a Brexit constituency ( 62% voted for Brexit and a similar % in Kent as a whole ) . However I didn't feel the usual hostility , booing etc as I have witnessed before ......Is the mood changing and what's more is the reality of a possible 29 mile tail- back snaking it's way through Kent sharpening people's brains ? Of course Chris Grayling said that " the UK will wave vehicles through and that won't happen " - don't we want control of our borders any longer ? Moreover he seemed to indicate that similar things would happen between N.ireland and Eire ? It gets stranger by the minute , I was waiting for him to get a far packet out to explain his workings out !!
Billy, I cannot see what all the fuss is over the Irish border, when the Isle of Man and the Channel Isles are not considered as part of the territory of the EU. but have no internal borders, and neither imposes VAT on goods.
No and no.
By the way, this shiws much more clearly what I was ranting on about this afternoon. That the was no clarity whatsoever about the kind of Brexit that was voted for. https://mobile.twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/974373411165270017
Glyn, They are crown dependencies, unlike Gibraltar the C.I & the I.O.M. are not part of the territory of the EU. However protocol 3 of the 1972 treaty of accession provides for their treatment as if they were in the customs union for free movement of industrial goods and agricultural produce, and for equal treatment of all union citizens within their jurisdictions. However,Eu legislation in many other areas, such as free movement of people and services, competition, and taxation policies, and the operation of structural funds does not apply to the IOM and the CI, nor are they represented in the European Parliament. As a result of these arrangements Jersey and Guernsey have chosen not to introduce VAT, the former levying a domestic 3% domestic sales tax , and the latter nothing at all. Which rather makes a nonsense of the EU stance the integrity of the market.