The cost of Brexit (cont)

[BillyStubbsTears]

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?

[SydneyRover]

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.

[drfchound]

You would be assuming wrongly them.

[SydneyRover]

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

[drfchound]

I don’t get bored and certainly don’t spend my life in off topic.

[danumdon]

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 Red]

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.

[SydneyRover]

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

[BillyStubbsTears]

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. 

[Herbert Anchovy]

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.

[Not Now Kato]

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....
 

 
 
Oh how easily the gullible were conned!

[SydneyRover]

''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.

[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

[SydneyRover]

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

[BobG]

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

[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 Red]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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 Red]

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.

[SydneyRover]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[ncRover]

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?

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[ncRover]

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! 

I would guess that the demographics of the NHS workforce has a higher percentage of immigrants compared to that of the general population.

[BillyStubbsTears]

They come over here...

[SydneyRover]

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 ............