Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: wilts rover on December 21, 2022, 06:39:19 pm
-
According to a new study comparing the performance of the UK economy with others of a similar size Brexit (or to be more accurate Johnson's Brexit Deal) is costing the UK £40 billion per year - or £750 million per week.
The economy is 5.5% smaller than it would have been if we had stayed in the EU with business investment down 11% and trade in goods down 7%.
https://www.bylinesupplement.com/p/brexit-costs-us-750-million-a-week
And that's before Truss & Kwarteng's budget. Still we have more tax dodging billionaires in the country than ever before so at least you got what you voted for (or what they wanted you to vote for).
-
yes continued every year ..............
-
Don't worry.
This t**t who is one of the t**ts who broke Britain is being paid to give a speech on how Britain got broke and how we should fix it...
https://mobile.twitter.com/CISOZ/status/1605344296424673280
So that's all good, eh?
-
See, Hannan said categorically before the Brexit vote that absolutely no-one was talking about us leaving the Single Market.
You'd think after that, he might just have the good grace to STFU for about...the rest of his life?
-
The FT produced a video explainer on the Brexit costs a couple of months ago;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO2lWmgEK1Y
This looks to separate out the Covid and cost of living pressures on top of Brexit.
Trouble is that they will continue to amplify each other into the mid term and beyond the next GE.
Neither party has a clue about how to handle this, other than pretending it is not a clear threat to the UK economy.
-
Well beyond the next election Albie, those whom were shouted down during the 'debates' have been shown to be correct, unfortunately it will take another generation of pollies with no connection to it that will reconnect with Europe, maybe not connected as before but definitely connected economically and most likely militarily and probably accepting some common regulation.
-
Yes. In rhe long run that is absolutely inevitable Sydney. Nobody ever seems to stop to ask themselves 'Why did a Conservative Prime Minister decide that being part of Europe was the best policy for Britain'? Being alone in a world dominated by 3 huge trade and military blocs is never, ever, going to be a sensible choice.
BobG
-
But...but...but!
We're Britain!
-
The biggest problem with Britain is the European loving people that live here and glorify in their own demise, and just moan. I wonder why they stay here when there is a wonder land just a short dingy ride away, they could swop stories mid channel with the boats coming the other way.
-
Just impossible to have any sort of grown up discussion int it?
Who's "glorying in our own demise" here Selby? Some of us are working 50 hours a week to try to sort out the mess that pensioners like you have tipped us into.
-
Just impossible to have any sort of grown up discussion int it?
Who's "glorying in our own demise" here Selby? Some of us are working 50 hours a week to try to sort out the mess that pensioners like you have tipped us into.
... Ahem BST.
One pensioner here who managed to retain a bit of sense, but I personally know many who didn't, including both my siblings.
In fact, I hardly know anyone my age who voted remain, including all the blokes who go to the Rovers with me.
With age comes wisdom... My arse..
More like with age comes intolerance and prejudice
-
Apologies TT. I'm talking about the demographic as an average.
-
Despite what Labour is saying now about not rejoining the EU when they win the next election, I hope this is just a 'let's not rock the boat' tactic, and the first thing they do is apply to rejoin the single market.
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
How do you propose to gain a mandate Billy to rejoin the EU ?
Another Referendum ?
An Election Manifesto ?
Opinion Polls ? ( careful they had remain to win )
Presumably you'd wish to run this one past the electorate ..... Yes ?
Have you also considered what the terms of re-entry to the EU maybe ?
Acceptance of the Euro ?
No rebate perhaps ?
There's more to this than one demographic in the graveyard I'd respectively suggest .
-
The biggest problem with Britain is the European loving people that live here and glorify in their own demise, and just moan. I wonder why they stay here when there is a wonder land just a short dingy ride away, they could swop stories mid channel with the boats coming the other way.
You had years of opportunity to leave Britain when we were in the evil EU but you didn't feck off because you hated it, did you?
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
How do you propose to gain a mandate Billy to rejoin the EU ?
Another Referendum ?
An Election Manifesto ?
Opinion Polls ? ( careful they had remain to win )
Presumably you'd wish to run this one past the electorate ..... Yes ?
Have you also considered what the terms of re-entry to the EU maybe ?
Acceptance of the Euro ?
No rebate perhaps ?
There's more to this than one demographic in the graveyard I'd respectively suggest .
According to all the Brexit lovers on here, that's all it took to give Boris a mandate to do whatever he wanted.
As for the Euro/no rebate bit, that'd be the price we'd have to pay for our own stupidity in the first place.
-
Quite Happy Glyn, always done OK, even now, life's good, only dark cloud at the moment is the Rovers Buddy.
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
How do you propose to gain a mandate Billy to rejoin the EU ?
Another Referendum ?
An Election Manifesto ?
Opinion Polls ? ( careful they had remain to win )
Presumably you'd wish to run this one past the electorate ..... Yes ?
Have you also considered what the terms of re-entry to the EU maybe ?
Acceptance of the Euro ?
No rebate perhaps ?
There's more to this than one demographic in the graveyard I'd respectively suggest .
According to all the Brexit lovers on here, that's all it took to give Boris a mandate to do whatever he wanted.
As for the Euro/no rebate bit, that'd be the price we'd have to pay for our own stupidity in the first place.
If the Labour Party put rejoining the EU in their election manifesto and won an 80 seat majority on that ticket then they'd be nothing more to be said .
I certainly wouldn't expect the four goes at it the remain vote had between 2015 and 2019 and fell short each time .
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
How do you propose to gain a mandate Billy to rejoin the EU ?
Another Referendum ?
An Election Manifesto ?
Opinion Polls ? ( careful they had remain to win )
Presumably you'd wish to run this one past the electorate ..... Yes ?
Have you also considered what the terms of re-entry to the EU maybe ?
Acceptance of the Euro ?
No rebate perhaps ?
There's more to this than one demographic in the graveyard I'd respectively suggest .
There'll be another referendum Tyke. Just be patient. There'll be a change to put right that far-Right Brexit you were mugged into supporting.
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
How do you propose to gain a mandate Billy to rejoin the EU ?
Another Referendum ?
An Election Manifesto ?
Opinion Polls ? ( careful they had remain to win )
Presumably you'd wish to run this one past the electorate ..... Yes ?
Have you also considered what the terms of re-entry to the EU maybe ?
Acceptance of the Euro ?
No rebate perhaps ?
There's more to this than one demographic in the graveyard I'd respectively suggest .
According to all the Brexit lovers on here, that's all it took to give Boris a mandate to do whatever he wanted.
As for the Euro/no rebate bit, that'd be the price we'd have to pay for our own stupidity in the first place.
Let me get this straight, you've whittled about Brexit since forever and about how much it's cost us but you would now be quite happy to "pay the price for our own stupidity" and re-enter with no rebate and the euro to boot.
And you had the temerity to talk about stupid?
-
Very unlikely to be a new referendum on this, BST.
Why would you choose that route rather than a explicit manifesto commitment, as Tyke suggests?
Trying to introduce changes via the back door will go down like a pint of cold sick.
Keith is telling the Guardian that;
"Rejoining the EU’s single market would not boost UK economic growth, Keir Starmer has argued, saying it would create “years of uncertainty” for UK businesses, which would be worse than the closer trade links that would come".
This is complete bollox, as anyone with a basic understanding of economics will know (see the FT link I posted above).
How do you get from thinking there is no trade loss with the current arrangement to a new referendum?
Wake up!
-
Albie.
I'd love to live in your world, where all a politician had to do was to say what they believed in and everything else would fall into.place.
Except...no, hang on, the previous Labour leader did precisely that in Spring 2019 and look how well that turned out.
Starmer does not believe and has never said that Brexit hasn't produced an economic hit. The question is: how do you get to a position where you can address that?
What exactly is to be gained by Starmer screaming from the rooftops that Brexit is damaging the economy and must be reversed? How exactly does that take us one step closer to sorting out the damage to the economy that Brexit's doing?
The one and only chance that the Tories have of winning in 2 years time is by dragging Labour back into a Brexit fight. I know YOU want that because you'd rather Labour lose than a Starmer-led Labour win. But the people in charge of Labour are a bit cannot than that
If you REALLY want to repair the damage done by Brexit, you don't do that by giving a Sunak/Braverman/Badenoch Government a sniff of a chance of winning in 2024. Winning that election is the first step. Everything else is secondary. We're no longer in the Corbyn universe where the most important thing was proving to the 4 Ms that you were still ideologically sound, even if that meant looking unelectable to the rest of your party.
On the bigger stage, I've said for years now that the only way we reverse Brexit is to let enough people who supported it see what a f**king awful decision it was. You have to let the people see for themselves. Then ask them if they want to change their minds. That's why, one day, sometime around 2030, there'll be another referendum.
-
Never mind the waffle about Corbyn and the distraction tactics to avoid the issue, how do you escape from this;
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/keir-starmer-back-eu-make-brexit-work-311956/
to a position of a new referendum?
2030 you say....err, why 2030?
That is beyond the next parliament, and by then the entire economic landscape will have changed as we exceed the 1.5 degree limits for climate change.
Your position makes no sense, but you know that deep down, don't you?
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
How do you propose to gain a mandate Billy to rejoin the EU ?
Another Referendum ?
An Election Manifesto ?
Opinion Polls ? ( careful they had remain to win )
Presumably you'd wish to run this one past the electorate ..... Yes ?
Have you also considered what the terms of re-entry to the EU maybe ?
Acceptance of the Euro ?
No rebate perhaps ?
There's more to this than one demographic in the graveyard I'd respectively suggest .
According to all the Brexit lovers on here, that's all it took to give Boris a mandate to do whatever he wanted.
As for the Euro/no rebate bit, that'd be the price we'd have to pay for our own stupidity in the first place.
If the Labour Party put rejoining the EU in their election manifesto and won an 80 seat majority on that ticket then they'd be nothing more to be said .
I certainly wouldn't expect the four goes at it the remain vote had between 2015 and 2019 and fell short each time .
Did that 80 seat majority give Johnson the mandate to make the pig's ear he did of Northern Ireland? Do you think it's what the British public voted for? He got Brexit done?..ask an Irishman whether they think he did.
-
Starmer is playing it very sensibly.
He knows precisely what damage Brexit is doing.
He also knows that opening up that issue before the next election just plays into the Tories' hands. It allows them to start the whole anti-EU Culture War trope again.
So he says his plan is to not consider rejoining the SM and CU "for now".
That's politics. He closes down the issue "for now". And gives himself the opening to bring the issue back to the boil when politically suitable.
And if the polls carry on like this, the time when things become politically suitable might be a lot sooner than I ever thought.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1605613548792578050?s=20&t=PW9SyhHr-9xxmuvY8ZG7kA
How do you propose to gain a mandate Billy to rejoin the EU ?
Another Referendum ?
An Election Manifesto ?
Opinion Polls ? ( careful they had remain to win )
Presumably you'd wish to run this one past the electorate ..... Yes ?
Have you also considered what the terms of re-entry to the EU maybe ?
Acceptance of the Euro ?
No rebate perhaps ?
There's more to this than one demographic in the graveyard I'd respectively suggest .
According to all the Brexit lovers on here, that's all it took to give Boris a mandate to do whatever he wanted.
As for the Euro/no rebate bit, that'd be the price we'd have to pay for our own stupidity in the first place.
Let me get this straight, you've whittled about Brexit since forever and about how much it's cost us but you would now be quite happy to "pay the price for our own stupidity" and re-enter with no rebate and the euro to boot.
And you had the temerity to talk about stupid?
Yes, because what we lost was worth a lot more. The stupidity was throwing them away in the first place. Why do you think other countries are happy to be in the EU under those terms - it's because they know they're better off than out of it.
And I'm using the word 'we' because the Brexiteers keep yelling us we have to get united so I'm only doing what they keep saying they want remainers to do.
-
Never mind the waffle about Corbyn and the distraction tactics to avoid the issue, how do you escape from this;
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/keir-starmer-back-eu-make-brexit-work-311956/
to a position of a new referendum?
2030 you say....err, why 2030?
That is beyond the next parliament, and by then the entire economic landscape will have changed as we exceed the 1.5 degree limits for climate change.
Your position makes no sense, but you know that deep down, don't you?
Tell me in simple detail how Labour opens up the Brexit wound for the next two years and wins in 2024.
Tell me that and I'll engage..
Ignore that, and all your principles and theories aren't worth zip.
But why do I bother? I've never yet convinced anyone from the far Left that winning an election is a necessary condition to actually implementing any progressive policy.
-
Never mind the waffle about Corbyn and the distraction tactics to avoid the issue, how do you escape from this;
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/keir-starmer-back-eu-make-brexit-work-311956/
to a position of a new referendum?
2030 you say....err, why 2030?
That is beyond the next parliament, and by then the entire economic landscape will have changed as we exceed the 1.5 degree limits for climate change.
Your position makes no sense, but you know that deep down, don't you?
Tell me in simple detail how Labour opens up the Brexit wound for the next two years and wins in 2024.
Tell me that and I'll engage..
Ignore that, and all your principles and theories aren't worth zip.
But why do I bother? I've never yet convinced anyone from the far Left that winning an election is a necessary condition to actually implementing any progressive policy.
The part I'm struggling with is your comment that giving the electorate a longer look at Brexit until possibly around 2030 .
Presumably you are assuming a Labour government to be in it's second term , is that right ?
If so after 6 years in government the electorate at least in my opinion aren't going to buy rejoining the EU because they are going to judge you on your capabilities of running the country outside of the EU , the Tories and the right wing media will eat you alive .
Labour get in to power they own it too , they own it because they've stated they have no plans to rejoin which equates to the electorate this side of a GE they feel they can do better .
Doesn't fly in the face of reality Billy and that's without mentioning accepting the Euro and no rebate .
-
Stay out of Europe or I'll shoot myself ........ in the foot
-
Stay out of Europe or I'll shoot myself ........ in the foot
The point is Sydney is that this is what potentially happens when you throw your core beliefs out of the window in the pursuit of power .
It catches up with you the same as it did when you accepted living inside Thatcherism for 13 years and got burned .
The plan Billy has will see you burned again .
You hitch your wagon to Brexit and doing better if elected to government then that's what you follow through .
-
You have the stage tyke, tell me again why you wanted out, taking into consideration that over half a million people have entered the UK in the last 18 months, the economy is tanking faster than you can type and not even Branton can name those bits of legislation the EU forced upon us that have undermined good old British sovereignty.
Start here:
PS put the flannel down and step away
My apologies Branton, I shouldn't have drawn you back into this and used you to make a point.
-
Albie.
I'm guessing at 2030. But what I do know is that trying to take us back in unless there is an overwhelmingly strong feeling in the country for that would be an absolute disaster. For social cohesion in the country and certainly for any party that espoused it.
My take is simple. The large majority of people have to realise what a disaster this decision was before it can ever be safe to try to overturn it. And, much as I wish it weren't the case, that requires several years of economic pain.
Labour has to do it's damnedest to minimise the economic difficulty, both for its own electoral prospects a d of course for the good of the country. It has to position itself so that in 5-6 years time Labour can say "Look! We have been trying our damnedest to make Brexit work. But the facts are now in. Our economic performance has steadily slipped further and further and it has done ever since 2020."
Or if I'm wrong, do what I invited you to do earlier. Talk me through the mechanism by which Labour, here and now, embraces rejoining the EU and doesn't give the Tories an inside run up the rails to the winning post. I'm genuinely interested because, yes, I think that by far and away the best economic position for us would be if a Labour Govt took us back in on Day 1 in December 2024. So tell us: how does that work?
-
Passions really must be allowed to cool. Data really has to be collected. Information really has to be shared. And economic improvement or disimprovement really has to be felt - by the whole nation irrespective of whether they individually voted for or against leaving the EU. Because then a rational view can be taken; a rational decision made, and, the collapse of tolerant society avoided. For me, whilst leaving the EU was an act of national self harm of historic proportions, the maintenance of a functioning and civilised society is even more important. And for these reasons it'll be 2030 or even later before this subject is once again at the forefront of politics in this country.
BobG
PS. For those of a historical bent we in Britain have been here before. The repeal of the corn laws was an equally divisive, bitter and long lived conflict. The only difference was that it really did split the Tory party in two. They were more honest back in the 1840's.
Robert Peel was a Tory who viewed the well being of the country above the size of his personal bank account. For his principle he was hounded by the rest of the party for the remainder of his life. There's nowt new in politics is there?
-
BST,
You seem to think that you have a disagreement with me, but I am pointing out to you that your real argument is with Keith.
Keith reckons that rejoining the single market is not in the economic interest of the UK, and so has ruled out doing so.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23169962.chump-keir-starmer-slammed-claim-single-market-wouldnt-help-uk/
This is a counterfactual to published Treasury data.
It is clearly not true, and in direct opposition to mainstream economic opinion.
The disadvantage to the UK economy will increase over time.
You do not agree with Keith, as you have been in favour of closer economic ties.
At the same time, you are saying that there will be a new referendum by 2030.
You seem to be saying that Keith is boxing clever, and will move once in power to make a change.
That will look like an act of bad faith, if Labour acts on the sly after misleading voters....the Boris Johnson playbook.
What we are discussing is how any change might come about.
Either Labour include the offer of a referendum in a manifesto, or find another means to a mandate.
It is clearly not going to be in the Labour offer in 2024, as Keith has painted himself into a corner by saying that there would be no economic benefits.
It is very unlikely Keith will still be Labour leader by 2030.
I don't see an easy way to resolve this, as we could have by choosing a "Norway Lite" brexit instead of the hard version to placate the Farage headbangers. Perhaps Scotland rejoining after giving Westminster the boot might shift the balance.
I think a new referendum would be a disaster, as it was when promoted by the "Peoples Vote" campaign in 2019.
I don't understand why you think discussion would be less toxic than the original in 2016.
-
Albie
Starmer has NOT ruled out rejoining the SM.
He's ruled it out FOR NOW.
The fact that you stubbornly insist on ignoring the realpolitik environment and instead choose to interpret Starmer's actions in the most negative way...THAT is the dividing line between you and me.
This is the third time I've asked you: how does Labour openly embrace the policy you want without risking a Sunak/Braverman/Badenoch Govt from 24-29? And if that happened, what good would that policy be?
If you don't address that, you're reverting yo the Corbynistas attitude of "Well everyone I know thinks this is the right policy so let's do that."
-
I also agree that a new referendum would be a disaster. Now.
It won't be in 5-10 years time.
-
BST,
It goes for all political dialogue that it is "for now".....the idea that you can predict what might happen 10 years hence is for soothsayers, those with the gift.
Here is Keith telling the BBC that rejoining would not benefit the economy NOW;
https://youtu.be/EwAY-WpiaJw
This kind of flat earth thinking has caused much amusement and consternation among economists.
If he means what he says, clearly he is a Mars bar short of a full picnic.
I have already answered your question about how Labour can move to change in the mid term.....it can't, because Keith has painted himself into a corner. Scotland could change the context, but that remains to be seen.
You are sounding like the political equivalent of Arsene Wenger, who is looking the other way every time his team commit a foul.
Keith slices wildly into his own net under no pressure, and you look to say he is playing the long game by lulling the opposition into a false sense of security.
Take off the rose tinted, lad!
-
And for the fourth time: How does Labour reopen that debate, NOW, without giving the Tories a lifeline?
Just one response to that will do. No need to extend the discussion. If you can't answer that, your entire approach is meaningless.
-
According to a new study comparing the performance of the UK economy with others of a similar size Brexit (or to be more accurate Johnson's Brexit Deal) is costing the UK £40 billion per year - or £750 million per week.
The economy is 5.5% smaller than it would have been if we had stayed in the EU with business investment down 11% and trade in goods down 7%.
https://www.bylinesupplement.com/p/brexit-costs-us-750-million-a-week
And that's before Truss & Kwarteng's budget. Still we have more tax dodging billionaires in the country than ever before so at least you got what you voted for (or what they wanted you to vote for).
Wilts
This new study was run by the Centre for European Reform. Who per their web site are "devoted to making the EU work better, and strengthening its role in the world. We are pro-European".
They are not in the least bit neutral on the EU or Brexit.
They have produced several similar studies/reports making outlandish claims on the negative impact of Brexit.
For instance here they're claiming the UK is 5.5% smaller now than if we'd stayed in the EU. The OBR estimate the overall hit (i.e. to now and into the future) will be 4%.
I have always agreed that there would be at least a short term negative impact of Brexit.
To assess this impact rationally and fairly we should avoid bias reporting such as this - whether from one side or the other.
-
And for the fourth time: How does Labour reopen that debate, NOW, without giving the Tories a lifeline?
Just one response to that will do. No need to extend the discussion. If you can't answer that, your entire approach is meaningless.
Who is to say there is a debate to open Billy that flies with the broader electorate ?
Based purely on worn down and sick to the back teeth of it .
It's possible most folk want a few years of sustained stability and that hornets nest at the bottom of the garden left well alone .
-
And for the fourth time: How does Labour reopen that debate, NOW, without giving the Tories a lifeline?
Just one response to that will do. No need to extend the discussion. If you can't answer that, your entire approach is meaningless.
For once I agree with Billy on a Brexit thread. Labour are on the verge of winning back all the 60-odd Red Wall seats they lost in 2019 and hence winning the next GE. They will not be jeopardising this by embracing a Remain platform in the Labour manifesto given where public opinion in these seats sits now.
I don't however think this will mean that Labour will just sit on their hands once elected on UK-EU relations.
-
And for the fourth time: How does Labour reopen that debate, NOW, without giving the Tories a lifeline?
Just one response to that will do. No need to extend the discussion. If you can't answer that, your entire approach is meaningless.
Who is to say there is a debate to open Billy that flies with the broader electorate ?
Based purely on worn down and sick to the back teeth of it .
It's possible most folk want a few years of sustained stability and that hornets nest at the bottom of the garden left well alone .
I agree that a few years of a acceptance of the fact of Brexit is required.
What's required of you is to engage with the evidence as the cost of the economic hit of Brexit builds up.
I'll tell you now. Brexit WILL be overturned sometime in the next 20 years. The later it is, the worse the damage will be. The issue that will determine how soon it changes is the willingness of Brexit supporters to hold their hands up and admit they've been duped. You can choose how long you take to do that.
-
And for the fourth time: How does Labour reopen that debate, NOW, without giving the Tories a lifeline?
Just one response to that will do. No need to extend the discussion. If you can't answer that, your entire approach is meaningless.
Who is to say there is a debate to open Billy that flies with the broader electorate ?
Based purely on worn down and sick to the back teeth of it .
It's possible most folk want a few years of sustained stability and that hornets nest at the bottom of the garden left well alone .
I agree that a few years of a acceptance of the fact of Brexit is required.
What's required of you is to engage with the evidence as the cost of the economic hit of Brexit builds up.
I'll tell you now. Brexit WILL be overturned sometime in the next 20 years. The later it is, the worse the damage will be. The issue that will determine how soon it changes is the willingness of Brexit supporters to hold their hands up and admit they've been duped. You can choose how long you take to do that.
Billy in my opinion the Labour Party would be well advised to leave this thing well alone if they want a sustained period in government .
This thing buries everyone who touches it , the casualty list is a mile long .
Who wields the sword doesn't ever wear the crown with this thing .
The play in my opinion is exactly what Blair did in 1997 , we had to live inside the Thatcher tent and in my opinion your going to have to do the same outside of the EU .
That seems to me to be the reality and I don't say that just because I voted the way I did .
If I thought Labour had a shot at rejoining the EU I'd say so .
-
Of course they haven't! That's the point Billy has been making for aeons. Nobody has either the right or the political position to do that. It would hand the Tories the next election on a plate. But that does not mean that the time will not come. Of course it's a guess. But 20 years would be long enough for passions to cool, protagonists to depart and sufficient evidence to be available for a reasoned truth to be widely available.
So stop tilting at windmills that don't exist... very apt that given where I've been and will be for a while!
BobG
-
As I said before, any possible benefits that come from brexit will not materialise till long after the those voters are dead and maybe that's the key to re-joining also.
-
According to a new study comparing the performance of the UK economy with others of a similar size Brexit (or to be more accurate Johnson's Brexit Deal) is costing the UK £40 billion per year - or £750 million per week.
The economy is 5.5% smaller than it would have been if we had stayed in the EU with business investment down 11% and trade in goods down 7%.
https://www.bylinesupplement.com/p/brexit-costs-us-750-million-a-week
And that's before Truss & Kwarteng's budget. Still we have more tax dodging billionaires in the country than ever before so at least you got what you voted for (or what they wanted you to vote for).
Wilts
This new study was run by the Centre for European Reform. Who per their web site are "devoted to making the EU work better, and strengthening its role in the world. We are pro-European".
They are not in the least bit neutral on the EU or Brexit.
They have produced several similar studies/reports making outlandish claims on the negative impact of Brexit.
For instance here they're claiming the UK is 5.5% smaller now than if we'd stayed in the EU. The OBR estimate the overall hit (i.e. to now and into the future) will be 4%.
I have always agreed that there would be at least a short term negative impact of Brexit.
To assess this impact rationally and fairly we should avoid bias reporting such as this - whether from one side or the other.
Branton - but you are quite openly a leave voter. Thus based on your own criteria as stated above - you shouldn't be commenting?
Personally I am more than happy for Brexiteers to show all the positive social and economic benefits you told us it would have. It's not bias - it's just counting.
-
Despite what Labour is saying now about not rejoining the EU when they win the next election, I hope this is just a 'let's not rock the boat' tactic, and the first thing they do is apply to rejoin the single market.
Some sort of Single Market arrangement certainly, but absolutely no chance that the EU would consider full membership for the UK for a while to come yet. Because they know that any future government could once again reverse that - and they aren't going thro that again.
-
Just seen a tweet from Farage
"Britain is broken" mmmmm!
-
According to a new study comparing the performance of the UK economy with others of a similar size Brexit (or to be more accurate Johnson's Brexit Deal) is costing the UK £40 billion per year - or £750 million per week.
The economy is 5.5% smaller than it would have been if we had stayed in the EU with business investment down 11% and trade in goods down 7%.
https://www.bylinesupplement.com/p/brexit-costs-us-750-million-a-week
And that's before Truss & Kwarteng's budget. Still we have more tax dodging billionaires in the country than ever before so at least you got what you voted for (or what they wanted you to vote for).
Wilts
This new study was run by the Centre for European Reform. Who per their web site are "devoted to making the EU work better, and strengthening its role in the world. We are pro-European".
They are not in the least bit neutral on the EU or Brexit.
They have produced several similar studies/reports making outlandish claims on the negative impact of Brexit.
For instance here they're claiming the UK is 5.5% smaller now than if we'd stayed in the EU. The OBR estimate the overall hit (i.e. to now and into the future) will be 4%.
I have always agreed that there would be at least a short term negative impact of Brexit.
To assess this impact rationally and fairly we should avoid bias reporting such as this - whether from one side or the other.
It's not bias - it's just counting.
There is a whole myriad of issues that have impacted UK economic performance recently: Brexit; Covid; Global inflation; Strengthening of the US $; Tax rises; Vaccine rollout; the labour market etc etc. Some are inter-related.
To isolate one of those issues to estimate the economic impact of it alone is not 'just counting'.
Such an assessment needs a whole host of judgements. Which of course are all open to 'bias' when being made.
The Centre for European Reform is quite openly pro-EU and has a clear bias.
It has a recent history of similar outlandish claims on this subject.
The claim you highlight is significantly out compared to other economic estimates e.g. from the nominally neutral OBR as I've highlighted.
-
"There is a whole myriad of issues that have impacted UK economic performance recently: Brexit; Covid; Global inflation; Strengthening of the US $; Tax rises; Vaccine rollout; the labour market etc etc. Some are inter-related."
Barring 1, those factors have affected every economy in Europe.
The CER analysis looks at how our economy has performed over recent years relative to a "doppelganger Britain". The doppelganger is a model of the British economy built of facets of other, closely related economies, predominantly the big European ones.
In pre-Brexit times, the doppelganger has closely matched the real UK performance.
But in recent times, the real British economy has grossly underperformed compared to the doppelganger.
The CER report is simply pointing out what HAS happened. And by far and away the biggest difference between the UK and the economies that make up the doppelganger is that we have had Brexit and they haven't.
I genuinely don't understand the point you're trying to make here.
-
Schhhh, Billy,
What’s that ‘sweet sound’ at your door?
Carol singers perhaps, Angels with all your posts grasped to their chests?
Oh no!
It’s all your protagonist’s on this forum that have ‘crossed swords’ with you throughout 2022!
Should we pour the ready made molten tar on them from the ramparts?
Or perhaps open the door, offer them a mince pie, wish them a Merry Christmas then as they depart shout “And another thing you set of bas***ds……!!”?
-
Just seen a tweet from Farage
"Britain is broken" mmmmm!
that's what he does Raven, he's a broker
-
"There is a whole myriad of issues that have impacted UK economic performance recently: Brexit; Covid; Global inflation; Strengthening of the US $; Tax rises; Vaccine rollout; the labour market etc etc. Some are inter-related."
Barring 1, those factors have affected every economy in Europe.
The CER analysis looks at how our economy has performed over recent years relative to a "doppelganger Britain". The doppelganger is a model of the British economy built of facets of other, closely related economies, predominantly the big European ones.
In pre-Brexit times, the doppelganger has closely matched the real UK performance.
But in recent times, the real British economy has grossly underperformed compared to the doppelganger.
The CER report is simply pointing out what HAS happened. And by far and away the biggest difference between the UK and the economies that make up the doppelganger is that we have had Brexit and they haven't.
I genuinely don't understand the point you're trying to make here.
Added to the fact that the Tories are always bragging about how successful we were in dealing with Covid and the fantastic vaccine roll out that dwarfed the efforts of everywhere else, it makes our Economic performance even more pathetic.
-
For Britain to be a success in or out of the EU, the younger generations have to show more willingness to work than they have of late.
Like picking strawberries and nursing, or is that the perceived type of work most want to be members of the EU for, so someone else does the work while the British get stoned out of their heads.
-
I've tried to tell you selby bashing your younger relatives on here isn't productive if they aren't ever going to read your comments
-
They have been brought up the right way Syd, they are young right wingers who hate the EU.
And they think I am fantastic and I agree with them.
-
that's not what you wrote in comment #53 aye?
-
No Syd,he didn’t. He was generalising in reply 53 then you brought his family into things in reply 54 so selby then told you what his family were doing.
-
No Syd,he didn’t. He was generalising in reply 53 then you brought his family into things in reply 54 so selby then told you what his family were doing.
-
I genuinely don't understand the point you're trying to make here.
You don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to understand my point: the 5.5% figure is a deliberately exaggerated estimation.
I've given Motive (the CER's pro-EU stance) and Evidence (how the 5.5% is significantly higher than the neutral OBR's opinion).
You're questioning Opportunity and Means - bizarrely given the CER have calculated this estimate and have control over it. I'll put meat on the bones for you.
1) You assert this modelling began pre-Brexit and therefore imply the underlying assumptions are historically fixed and therefore unbiased. WRONG.
This modelling was first done post-referendum in 2018 - figures prior to this are retrospective. Therefore Opportunity to skew assumptions exist.
On Means: -
2) The base period for the modelling is 2009-15 i.e. the model essentially is expecting UK comparative economic performance to continue into the future at the level it was in that period.
At first glance this seems an arbitrary and small period of time over which to base this study on.
Except...... in 2009-15 UK comparative economic performance was better than would be expected - as we recovered from the 08 crash which disproportionately impacted the UK due to it's large financial sector.
The choice of this, strangely small, base period was selected to skew the data.
3) You assert the doppelganger refers to closely related economies, predominantly the big European ones when being measured. WRONG.
That's what a neutral economist would do – compare economic performance against similar developed countries who have remained in the EU and are close trading partners.
The doppelganger's performance is based on 22 countries – only 1 of whom is in the Eurozone (Germany) hence ignoring France, Italy et al
Instead they've included as reference points countries whose economic performance may, by coincidence, have matched the UK in 2009-15 but who are developing/faster growing economies over the longer term.
Versus the Eurozone post-Brexit GDP growth is 2.8% down not 5.5% - so again they've skewed the data by the countries selected.
4) The model assumes the whole 5.5% (or 2.8%) shortfall relates to Brexit. Ignoring the UK being hit more by energy inflation due to our reliance on gas; the legacy of having some of the stringest Austerity measures; or being practically the only major economy to be raising taxes in a cost of living crisis.
Most damning though is the model's approach to Covid - the biggest factor impacting the world economy over the last few years. It ignores Covid completely.
Their reasoning "as measured by excess deaths through the pandemic, Britain ranked in mid-table globally" which is a preposterous excuse.
This ignores the fact that the UK was one of the hardest hit countries economically by Covid.
GDP fall Q2 2020: UK: -21.2%; Eurozone: -14.5%.
In short by unquestioningly accepting this frankly preposterous 5.5% claim you've naively allowed yourself to be duped.
-
Branton.
You have this thing where you always assume that information you don't like MUST imply bad faith. You're doing it again here and now.
The OBR PREDICTION (vitally important word) was a view into the future on what the long term effect of Brexit would be on the UK economy. 4% was a CENTRAL forecast, with uncertain either side of it. It isn't some word of God, written in stone.
The CER figure is an assessment of what has actually happened, based on an analysis that worked very well pre-2020.
Your knee jerk assumption that the model has deliberately been calibrated to put Brexit into the very worst light is, frankly, pathetic. It comes from the same mindset that led you into that ridiculous criticism of the BBC Economics Editor. "The EU-loving elite are systematically lying to you and deceiving you over Brexit."
You have the zeal of a religious fanatic. Absolutely convinced of the rightness of your cause and violently reacting against anything that implies your core beliefs are wrong.
I do wonder what it WOULD take for you to accept the damage that Brexit is doing?
PS. 2018 is pre-Brexit.
PPS. How long do you use the "It's not Brexit! It's COVID!" line? You accuse other people of selective choice of data, but your choice of Q2 2020 is the worst, unbalanced one possible. If you're going to do this seriously, you need to look at the overall picture, not one snapshot that says,what you want to hear.
UK did have the worst hit to GDP of the entire G7 in 2020. As you say, that was to a great extent because of our services based economy. But for precisely the same reason, we had the very highest rebound in 2021. And here's the kicker. As the COVID on GDP growth has faded, we've slumped back to having the very worst G7 growth rate in 2022.
Do you realise what you look like when you choose data as selectively as that, then chuck out unfounded accusations of bias at professional researchers?
-
No Syd,he didn’t. He was generalising in reply 53 then you brought his family into things in reply 54 so selby then told you what his family were doing.
I was assuming in his post that he was referring to his own family, outside his own world there appear to be very little understanding.
-
You would be assuming wrongly them.
-
You would be assuming wrongly them.
I would have thought you of all people would be able to spot a bored selby trolling in the off topic hound
-
I don’t get bored and certainly don’t spend my life in off topic.
-
You would be assuming wrongly them.
I would have thought you of all people would be able to spot a bored selby trolling in the off topic hound
Said without a hint of irony!!
-
Branton.
Your knee jerk assumption that the model has deliberately been calibrated to put Brexit into the very worst light is, frankly, pathetic.
You have the zeal of a religious fanatic. Absolutely convinced of the rightness of your cause and violently reacting against anything that implies your core beliefs are wrong.
I do wonder what it WOULD take for you to accept the damage that Brexit is doing?
Billy
Like yesteryear's bested footballer you resort to playing the man not the ball.
I see this 5.5% estimate (key word) as being at the top end of all the estimates I've seen to date and that it's produced by an openly pro-EU thinktank. Naturally I'm sceptical. I do not jump straight in and claim foul. I take the time to research how the estimate was arrived at. Finding the modelling questionable at best I challenge it with reason, rationale and evidential back up. A scientific approach.
You on the other hand on seeing this estimate: -
1) Immediately and unthinkingly defend it and hold it up as Gospel truth whilst clearly not researching at all as to how it was calculated seeing as....
2) You defend it by bearing false witness as to how it was arrived at (it is not predominantly built on the comparative performance of big European economies as you claimed)
3) Like an Apostle after the Ressurection you proclaim this estimate (again key word) is "simply pointing out what HAS happened"
4) Like a Creationist confronted with Darwinism you simply ignore reasoned evidence that the basis behind the estimate is questionable
5) Instead you condemn me for the heresy of questioning your faithfully held opinion at the high alter of your self-certainty
6) Like a jilted Missionary confronting an unconverted heathen you plaintively bewail "I do wonder what it WOULD take for you to accept [my oh so certain world view]?"
Not only do I reject your accusation of zealotry. I view it both as deeply ironical and with profound hilarity.
PS If you have to resort to personal criticism please at least have the good grace to base it on fact. Your last post is a complete misrepresentation of my opinions.
-
You would be assuming wrongly them.
I would have thought you of all people would be able to spot a bored selby trolling in the off topic hound
Said without a hint of irony!!
repeated without a hint of irony
-
Branton
Apologies for the time it's taken to respond. I write out a long response a few days ago then the browser crashed
Firstly, you're absolutely correct that I was wrong to state that the doppelganger was based on EU states. I read up on the CER approach a few years ago, and I know the main concept. But I was wrong in that detail and I should have checked. Despite you're protestations, that isn't a significant issue, as I'll come to.
To address your specific points
1) I didn't hold anything up as gospel. It's very odd that you should reach that conclusion. Like you need a straw man to tilt at. For the record, what I do believe is that this is a strong attempt to build a model of how the UK economy would be expected to perform in the absence of UK-specific major policy changes. It's not perfect. No model ever is. But it should be considered seriously.
2) Addressed above.
3) I meant what has happened in the model.
4) You didn't give ANY reasoned argument as to why the model might be questionable. You said:
"Except...... in 2009-15 UK comparative economic performance was better than would be expected - as we recovered from the 08 crash which disproportionately impacted the UK due to it's large financial sector.
The choice of this, strangely small, base period was selected to skew the data."
A couple of points.
a) We didn't have a better than expected performance after the crash. We had the worst post-recession recovery since the South Sea Bubble. From 1950-2009, our GDP growth was on average about 2.3% per year. From 2009 to 2015 it was about 1.4%. About the same as the EuroZone which also had a shocking recovery.
b) Not that any of that matters. The point was that the CER's doppelganger model matched the UK performance over that period.
c) Your libellous and totally unsupported conclusion is that a group of professional economists deliberately chose a period to train their model over that was unrepresentative. And that they did this deliberately to mislead. You might want to reflect on whether you are losing the plot at this point.
d) The CER researchers actually give a detailed explanation of their methodology here. https://www.cer.eu/insights/cost-brexit-june-2018 Feel free to critique it.
5) I haven't got a Scooby.
6) I stand by what I said. If you are going to knee-jerk reject professional analysis and assume it's all part of a misinformation plot, what WOULD cause you to change your mind.
PS. You said:
"That's what a neutral economist would do – compare economic performance against similar developed countries who have remained in the EU and are close trading partners.
The doppelganger's performance is based on 22 countries – only 1 of whom is in the Eurozone (Germany) hence ignoring France, Italy et al
Instead they've included as reference points countries whose economic performance may, by coincidence, have matched the UK in 2009-15 but who are developing/faster growing economies over the longer term."
Forgive me, but that totally misses the point of the Doppelganger model. The UK economy is not a direct match for ANY other economy. No economy is. We don't sell washing machines like Germany. We don't make wine like Italy. We don't have mass package tourism like Spain. We don't have a single currency like the EuroZone. The Doppelganger attempts to build a model of the UK economy based on facets of many other economies, which, collectively make a whole that more or less matches the UK. Comparing our performance against a single EU country, or even the EU as a whole is fundamentally flawed, specifically because our economy isn't like theirs and so will respond differently to different drivers.
You, coming from your position, take the idea of the Doppelganger as indicating incompetence or a deliberate attempt to mislead.
-
There’s a human cost to Brexit. A pal of mine was informed just before Christmas that the factory he’s worked at for over 10 years in Kent will be closing with work being transferred to Poland and Italy. The CE has been very clear with staff and the Union that Brexit, and the additional complications and costs of trading with the EU as a result of Brexit, is the cause of the closure.
-
There’s a human cost to Brexit. A pal of mine was informed just before Christmas that the factory he’s worked at for over 10 years in Kent will be closing with work being transferred to Poland and Italy. The CE has been very clear with staff and the Union that Brexit, and the additional complications and costs of trading with the EU as a result of Brexit, is the cause of the closure.
But, but but....
(https://i.imgur.com/t3qmYkR.jpg)
Oh how easily the gullible were conned!
-
''The government has signed a £200,000-a-year contract with a disaster response charity established by the former head of Britain’s armed forces to help drivers stuck in lorry queues in Kent.
The year-long contract, which started in November, means that food and water will be supplied to queues of vehicles on approach roads to Dover and the Channel tunnel if drivers are at a standstill for two days''
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/04/disaster-response-charity-enlisted-to-aid-drivers-stuck-in-uk-queues-for-channel
I would have thought that sorting out the reason for the queues would have been a better and longer term fix, but that's just me I guess.
-
A maths question for Rishi Sunak: if you promised to hire 50,000 additional nurses but 40,000 nurses quit last year, how many nurses are you short of your target thanks to your refusal to improve pay and conditions?
It's not original. It was tweeted by the TUC today. But I will add that after 13 years of falling NHS waiting lists under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, we've now almost reached 13 years of consistently rising NHS waiting lists under the Conservatives. The waiting list is now at an all time record high, with all time record staff vacancies too. The waiting list is now considerably more than 3 times what it was when the Conservatives came to power in 2010. Agreed that Covid has played a role in that, but Covid hasn't played any role in the vacancies, the resignation rates of NHS staff or the 200% increase in waiting lists prior to Covid.
As an aside, one does wonder where Rishi thinks 50,000 nurses are going to come from what with the Conservatives having closed down a huge swathe of the training establishment and completely barred the door against recruits from the obvious other source of Europe.
But then, we get what we vote for. None of this is any surprise at all.
BobG
-
A maths question for Rishi Sunak: if you promised to hire 50,000 additional nurses but 40,000 nurses quit last year, how many nurses are you short of your target thanks to your refusal to improve pay and conditions?
It's not original. It was tweeted by the TUC today. But I will add that after 13 years of falling NHS waiting lists under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, we've now almost reached 13 years of consistently rising NHS waiting lists under the Conservatives. The waiting list is now at an all time record high, with all time record staff vacancies too. The waiting list is now considerably more than 3 times what it was when the Conservatives came to power in 2010. Agreed that Covid has played a role in that, but Covid hasn't played any role in the vacancies, the resignation rates of NHS staff or the 200% increase in waiting lists prior to Covid.
As an aside, one does wonder where Rishi thinks 50,000 nurses are going to come from what with the Conservatives having closed down a huge swathe of the training establishment and completely barred the door against recruits from the obvious other source of Europe.
But then, we get what we vote for. None of this is any surprise at all.
BobG
Some more info here Bob ............
''Chart of the week: How has the waiting list changed over the years?
Each week we present analysis of data in chart form to illustrate some key issues and invite discussion. The waiting list in England recently topped six million people, which is the largest figure since the NHS was established in 1948. John Appleby looks back over the years to explore the evolution of waiting list data from the start of the national health service to the current day''
Published: 11/03/2022
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/chart-of-the-week-how-has-the-waiting-list-changed-over-the-years
-
Lol. Perhaps he's planning to import tens of thousands of West Indians, Indians and Pakistanis? He ain't got many other options!
It's not a policy is it? It's a soundbite for Rishi. All it can ever do is kick the problem into the long grass for a bit longer.
BobG
-
Oh! I know! He could privatise it! Let the ever so efficient and effective private sector solve the problem. For a fee of course....
BobG
-
Branton
The choice of this, strangely small, base period was selected to skew the data."
b) Not that any of that matters. The point was that the CER's doppelganger model matched the UK performance over that period.
c) Your libellous and totally unsupported conclusion is that a group of professional economists deliberately chose a period to train their model over that was unrepresentative. And that they did this deliberately to mislead.
Billy
1) Let me take up your point in part b) of your reply ref 2010-15 “the CER's doppelganger model matched the UK performance over that period.”
2010-5 is the base period. The CER's doppelganger is a selection of countries that together performed similarly to the UK in this base period.
They've then followed up the doppelganger's performance in the period of interest i.e. post 2016 referendum to compare with actual UK economic performance in that time.
The doppelganger therefore by definition must have performed similarly to the UK in 2010-15.
2) Therefore my assertion that the base period is too short (equivalent to too small a sample size in a poll) and thereby the countries selected in the doppelganger are inappropriate is a direct and reasoned questioning of the model.
3) Allow me to support this conclusion further with data. In 2010-5 UK avg GDP growth was 2.1%; Eurozone growth 1.0%; US growth 2.2%. tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/full-year-gdp-growth
On this basis the US was included in the doppelganger as closely matching UK growth but most of the Eurozone was not.
However long term over the last 25 years UK GDP avg growth (1.6%) is much more closely aligned with the Eurozone (1.4%) than the US (2.3%). Unsurprising given EU countries share unique trading regulations, trade deals and close trading partnerships
In 2015-7 (pre the CER doppelganger being set in 2018) the Eurozone enjoyed a recovery which supports my view that the 2010-15 UK economic superiority over the EU was short-lived due to specific circumstances.
Since 2015 the US (2.0%) has continued the long term trend of enjoying significantly higher economic growth rates than the Eurozone (1.1%) and UK (0.7%).
Therefore by selecting the US (I could do the same analysis for the other countries selected with similar results) but not the Eurozone for the doppelganger based on a limited base period the CER has chosen countries with significantly higher long term growth records than the UK (and Eurozone).
Hence the 5.5% is an exaggerated estimate.
4) Allow me to give you an analogy. What's the fairest way to assess Rovers' future performance?
a) Based on Rovers comparative performance in 2008-13 and therefore with reference to how Nottingham Forest and Leeds United are performing
or b) Based on Rovers comparative performance over the last 25 years and therefore with reference to how Walsall and Oxford United are performing.
-
Branton
You clearly don't understand how the Doppelganger model works. This is pointless while ever you are labouring under this misapprehension. Can I suggest that, rather than criticise what you think they did, you have a read of the link I posted which shows the painstaking work and reflection that went into the model. Then gives us your critique.
But whether you understood it or not, it's instructive that you haven't withdrawn your accusation that the CER researchers deliberately chose the training period to skew the data. THAT is what I find so reprehensible about your take. The automatic assumption of bad faith.
-
Branton
You clearly don't understand how the Doppelganger model works. This is pointless while ever you are labouring under this misapprehension. Can I suggest that, rather than criticise what you think they did, you have a read of the link I posted which shows the painstaking work and reflection that went into the model. Then gives us your critique.
But whether you understood it or not, it's instructive that you haven't withdrawn your accusation that the CER researchers deliberately chose the training period to skew the data. THAT is what I find so reprehensible about your take. The automatic assumption of bad faith.
Billy
You have this thing when your argument runs out of steam of resorting to name-calling and accusations of ignorance.
With respect you barely deserve it is YOU who does not understand how the model works.
Let me lift the 2 key quotes from the economist behind the model www.cer.eu/insights/cost-brexit-june-2022
"These estimates are based on the ‘doppelgänger’ method, in which an algorithm selects countries whose economic performance closely matches the UK’s before Brexit"
"I use data between the first quarter of 2009 [yes I incorrectly stated 2010 above] and the referendum in the second quarter of 2016 to identify the countries that make up the doppelgänger."
i.e. to spell it out for you simply as clearly you're struggling - The countries in the doppelganger are selected based on having a similar economic performance to the UK in the base 2009-15 period. Exactly as I stated and argued against in my prior post.
Therefore when you tried to legitimise the accuracy of the model by stating “the CER's doppelganger model matched the UK performance over that [2009-2015] period.” YOU are highlighting YOUR ignorance on how the model works.
And I did not automatically assume bad faith. Though, given the comparative size of the estimate vs others I've seen, and it's source I was automatically sceptical. Hence I reviewed how the estimate was arrived at and having found the method questionable outlined as to why this is with reason and back up data.
-
The way to prove the point of course would be to take it to the CER and challenge them. If I find something amiss in public debate I either want to correct it or know why I have misunderstood it.
-
Branton
No!
They don't choose countries that have a similar performance to the UK.
They choose ASPECTS of countries that COLLECTIVELY produce a synthesised whole that matches the UK over a period. And critically, not JUST on GDP growth as you've suggested before - on a whole range of features (including overall size of economy, amount of economy based on industry, years of compulsory schooling, investment record, inflation AND GDP growth rate) such that, overall the expectation is that the Doppelganger model would broadly respond to changes in circumstances as the British economy would. Or, more importantly, that if something major happens to the UK economy, but NOT to the countries that collectively make up the Doppelganger, like Brexit for example, the model and the UK economy would diverge.
And yes, that is not guaranteed to give a perfect fit. But you dismissed it without, apparently understanding it, and you absolutely DID assume bad faith. In your very own words you said "The choice of this, strangely small, base period was selected to skew the data."
Read the link I gave and consider if you want to reflect on that accusation.
-
https://youtu.be/-Q8xM8-XkRA
This advert was bad at the time and has aged even worse.
Was it suggesting immigration was clogging up the health system rather than keeping it going with those who work in it?
-
https://youtu.be/-Q8xM8-XkRA
This advert was bad at the time and has aged even worse.
Was it suggesting immigration was clogging up the health system rather than keeping it going with those who work in it?
Never saw that video at the time, but Christ up above.
The sheer cheek of the right wing of politics in our country - they f**k up the NHS, then use the fact that it's f**ked up to stoke up anti-EU sentiment. t**ts.
-
https://youtu.be/-Q8xM8-XkRA
This advert was bad at the time and has aged even worse.
Was it suggesting immigration was clogging up the health system rather than keeping it going with those who work in it?
Never saw that video at the time, but Christ up above.
The sheer cheek of the right wing of politics in our country - they f**k up the NHS, then use the fact that it's f**ked up to stoke up anti-EU sentiment. t**ts.
Sorry to wind you up! :lol:
I would guess that the demographics of the NHS workforce has a higher percentage of immigrants compared to that of the general population.
-
They come over here...
-
these were not representing a union of workers these were representing around 65-70 million.
https://news.sky.com/video/common-ground-has-brexit-broken-the-economy-12753518
the first few minutes are scintillating ............