Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 29, 2022, 04:21:29 pm

Login with username, password and session length

@vscofficial

Links


FSA logo

Author Topic: Brexit Dividend  (Read 11406 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.




(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

BigH

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 1252
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #571 on June 26, 2022, 01:07:26 pm by BigH »
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/counting-the-cost-of-the-brexit-vote-six-years-on-rd2pns2wp

A very good summary of the economic impact of Brexit from the Sunday Times economist.

I read it and wept.

big fat yorkshire pudding

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 12305
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #572 on June 26, 2022, 01:40:56 pm by big fat yorkshire pudding »
And from the same link above .........

''Last week the chief executive of easyJet, Johan Lundgren, contradicted claims by the aviation minister Robert Courts (and Tyke) that it was “not likely” Brexit had caused staff shortages which have led to disruption at airports. Lundgren countered that 8,000 job applications from EU citizens had been rejected by his firm because candidates did not have permission to work in the UK''





You'd think those staff would have easily got jobs in the EU countries in that sector struggling to get staff wouldn't you? Or they could easily operate the planes from the non UK leg of their airline if it was such an issue (like wizzair do).  I wonder why the issue persists in Europe too then.

SydneyRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 10468
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #573 on June 26, 2022, 01:45:49 pm by SydneyRover »
And from the same link above .........

''Last week the chief executive of easyJet, Johan Lundgren, contradicted claims by the aviation minister Robert Courts (and Tyke) that it was “not likely” Brexit had caused staff shortages which have led to disruption at airports. Lundgren countered that 8,000 job applications from EU citizens had been rejected by his firm because candidates did not have permission to work in the UK''





You'd think those staff would have easily got jobs in the EU countries in that sector struggling to get staff wouldn't you? Or they could easily operate the planes from the non UK leg of their airline if it was such an issue (like wizzair do).  I wonder why the issue persists in Europe too then.

Some airlines are 'wet leasing' plane and staff in Europe.

''Legal Loophole: The UK Airlines Leasing European Aircraft To Avoid Brexit-Related Recruitment Issues''

https://simpleflying.com/uk-airlines-leasing-european-aircraft-avoid-brexit-recruitment-issues/

Not Now Kato

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 2576
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #574 on June 26, 2022, 04:17:31 pm by Not Now Kato »
Kato, there are some things  in your post that I agree with and I have always said that the public at large shouldn’t have been the people responsible for deciding whether we left the EU but I noticed that you didn’t reprimand wilts for mentioning “the vote” in his post that I quoted and responded to.
Maybe because he is on your side?

People should be repremanded for asking questions should they hound?

Well, what can you say...

The question to DD (in response to his question to BST about future Labour policy on trade with Europe) was about what he thinks future Labour Party policy should be. Clearly they have to have one.

Wilts, you have picked up the wrong end of the stick matey.
Read the the opening sentence of Katos volley at me and he says “the vote, as you put it”.
I was explaining to him that you had used the expression (vote) and asked him why he hadn’t jumped on you, rather than me, for calling the vote, the vote, so to speak.
I never suggested that people should be reprimanded for asking questions.

I have picked up exactly on what you wrote hound. I asked a very simple question and you asked Kato why he didn't repremand me for asking it.

If you want to argue with Kato thats between you and him, dont go dragging me into it just for the sake of it - or you will need to justify doing it.

But I am justifying it wilts.
None of my comment was aimed at you.
I simply asked Kato why he jumped on me for saying “the vote”,instead of jumping on you for saying “the vote.”
You are being very sensitive about something that doesn’t exist.

Hound, I haven’t ‘jumped’ on anyone. I simply stated what I believed should have happened given the scenario of the 2016 referendum, and the reason we are in the mess we currently are with respect to leaving the EU. It was you who asked should we honour the result of the referendum, I simply gave my view on that question - or are you suggesting I should be barred from giving my opinion?
 
I stand by my response to your question, wholeheartedly.


Kato, in my previous reply to you I said that I agreed with most of what you had written.
But then you have slightly altered the context of my post.
Your words were “it was you who asked if we should honour the result of the referendum”.
But I didn’t , I simply asked wilts that question, not everyone else, in my direct reply to him after he quoted my post.
I had earlier said that I think we have to honour the result of the referendum because there isn’t anything we can do right now to change that decision.

This is getting really silly and drawn out now.
You wrote the words below and directed them to me:

“The 'vote' as you put it”


You and I have a history on here of not getting along, probably due to you being an avid Labour supporter and me not agreeing with some of the stuff you sometimes write.
I do sometimes agree with what you write by the way.

When you wrote what you did about “the vote” part of a post of mine I had thought how odd it was that you didn’t pick up on wilts using “the vote” but chose to do so to me.

That’s it, that’s all it was.

Oh, and by the way, no I don’t think you should be barred from giving your opinion on stuff.

You have me wrong Hound, I'm not a Labour supporter.  Rather, I'm a supporter of what I believe is best for the, 'majority' - as you can't please everyone - of the people of this country.  I have particular concern for those less well off; and it is them who will suffer the worst effect of Brexit the most.  I am also an advocate of Proportional Representation as a means of achieving better representation for everyone and making each vote count.
 
At this point in time, given our First Past The Post voting system and the lack of depth of parties other than Labour and the Conservatives then I currently see Labour as the better of the two main options to better represent the people of this country.
 
The Tories have been extremely poor in everything other than the vaccine roll-out. The lies, cronyism and deceit are clear for all to see, (though it appears an awful lot of people in the country don't WANT to see it); and I have said many times that if Johnson were to walk up to some of them and kick them in the groin they'd actually thank him for doing so! The final sentence in Oliver Dowden's resignation letter is a classic example of this where he says, without qualification, "I will, as always, remain loyal to the Conservative Party".  So, without any qualification, he's actually saying that it doesn't really matter what the Party do, however corrupt it continues to be, he will always remain loyal to it.  Very 1984, Julia would be proud.
 
Then there's Russia's part in the Brexit 'Vote', (that word again!); the lack of an independent enquiry and report into the subject is very telling, as is the redacted report the Government themselves produced - particularly in light of the amount of money the Tory Party receives from wealthy Russians and the election of a Russian with links to the FSB to the House of Lords!
 
But Labour are not without their issues.  They need a clear policy, or set of policies, that will address all the failings of the Tory Party - and I see no clear sign of that at present, sadly.  They seem to be relying on highlighting the continuing gaffs and failings of Johnson in particular and the Cabinet in general to garner support.  Whilst this is highlighting the problems the country faces and can be seen as 'scoring points', it does nothing to address them.  Starmer's stance on reviewing membership of the EU in some form or other is also disheartening as any form of partnership or move to PR will be fraught with conflict, particularly with the Liberal Democrats and the SNP who are both ardent re-joiners.
 
Hope the above clears up my political leanings.

drfchound

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 25348
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #575 on June 26, 2022, 06:08:42 pm by drfchound »
Kato, there are some things  in your post that I agree with and I have always said that the public at large shouldn’t have been the people responsible for deciding whether we left the EU but I noticed that you didn’t reprimand wilts for mentioning “the vote” in his post that I quoted and responded to.
Maybe because he is on your side?

People should be repremanded for asking questions should they hound?

Well, what can you say...

The question to DD (in response to his question to BST about future Labour policy on trade with Europe) was about what he thinks future Labour Party policy should be. Clearly they have to have one.

Wilts, you have picked up the wrong end of the stick matey.
Read the the opening sentence of Katos volley at me and he says “the vote, as you put it”.
I was explaining to him that you had used the expression (vote) and asked him why he hadn’t jumped on you, rather than me, for calling the vote, the vote, so to speak.
I never suggested that people should be reprimanded for asking questions.

I have picked up exactly on what you wrote hound. I asked a very simple question and you asked Kato why he didn't repremand me for asking it.

If you want to argue with Kato thats between you and him, dont go dragging me into it just for the sake of it - or you will need to justify doing it.

But I am justifying it wilts.
None of my comment was aimed at you.
I simply asked Kato why he jumped on me for saying “the vote”,instead of jumping on you for saying “the vote.”
You are being very sensitive about something that doesn’t exist.

Hound, I haven’t ‘jumped’ on anyone. I simply stated what I believed should have happened given the scenario of the 2016 referendum, and the reason we are in the mess we currently are with respect to leaving the EU. It was you who asked should we honour the result of the referendum, I simply gave my view on that question - or are you suggesting I should be barred from giving my opinion?
 
I stand by my response to your question, wholeheartedly.


Kato, in my previous reply to you I said that I agreed with most of what you had written.
But then you have slightly altered the context of my post.
Your words were “it was you who asked if we should honour the result of the referendum”.
But I didn’t , I simply asked wilts that question, not everyone else, in my direct reply to him after he quoted my post.
I had earlier said that I think we have to honour the result of the referendum because there isn’t anything we can do right now to change that decision.

This is getting really silly and drawn out now.
You wrote the words below and directed them to me:

“The 'vote' as you put it”


You and I have a history on here of not getting along, probably due to you being an avid Labour supporter and me not agreeing with some of the stuff you sometimes write.
I do sometimes agree with what you write by the way.

When you wrote what you did about “the vote” part of a post of mine I had thought how odd it was that you didn’t pick up on wilts using “the vote” but chose to do so to me.

That’s it, that’s all it was.

Oh, and by the way, no I don’t think you should be barred from giving your opinion on stuff.

You have me wrong Hound, I'm not a Labour supporter.  Rather, I'm a supporter of what I believe is best for the, 'majority' - as you can't please everyone - of the people of this country.  I have particular concern for those less well off; and it is them who will suffer the worst effect of Brexit the most.  I am also an advocate of Proportional Representation as a means of achieving better representation for everyone and making each vote count.
 
At this point in time, given our First Past The Post voting system and the lack of depth of parties other than Labour and the Conservatives then I currently see Labour as the better of the two main options to better represent the people of this country.
 
The Tories have been extremely poor in everything other than the vaccine roll-out. The lies, cronyism and deceit are clear for all to see, (though it appears an awful lot of people in the country don't WANT to see it); and I have said many times that if Johnson were to walk up to some of them and kick them in the groin they'd actually thank him for doing so! The final sentence in Oliver Dowden's resignation letter is a classic example of this where he says, without qualification, "I will, as always, remain loyal to the Conservative Party".  So, without any qualification, he's actually saying that it doesn't really matter what the Party do, however corrupt it continues to be, he will always remain loyal to it.  Very 1984, Julia would be proud.
 
Then there's Russia's part in the Brexit 'Vote', (that word again!); the lack of an independent enquiry and report into the subject is very telling, as is the redacted report the Government themselves produced - particularly in light of the amount of money the Tory Party receives from wealthy Russians and the election of a Russian with links to the FSB to the House of Lords!
 
But Labour are not without their issues.  They need a clear policy, or set of policies, that will address all the failings of the Tory Party - and I see no clear sign of that at present, sadly.  They seem to be relying on highlighting the continuing gaffs and failings of Johnson in particular and the Cabinet in general to garner support.  Whilst this is highlighting the problems the country faces and can be seen as 'scoring points', it does nothing to address them.  Starmer's stance on reviewing membership of the EU in some form or other is also disheartening as any form of partnership or move to PR will be fraught with conflict, particularly with the Liberal Democrats and the SNP who are both ardent re-joiners.
 
Hope the above clears up my political leanings.

Kato, thanks for that honest and well made response to me.
You may be surprised to hear that I agree with most of that but perhaps not surprised to hear that FPTP or PR don’t enter my thoughts as I am not particularly interested in politics.
I know a bit about it but certainly don’t allow it to dominate my day as appears to be the case with some of our posters.
I am with you all the way on Johnson’s failings and think he has to go if the Conservatives want to have a chance of winning the GE, which I think is what will happen because I can’t see a split Labour support getting behind the Party in their current guise.
Just a point on Oliver Dowdens words that you highlight, I read it as him saying that he backs the Party but not Johnson.
I may be wrong of course.
Anyway, I’m glad we appear to have ended what was a daft argument and hope we can get on better in the future.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2022, 07:51:22 pm by drfchound »

Branton Red

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 278
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #576 on June 26, 2022, 07:21:54 pm by Branton Red »
Back a little on topic. The best way of assessing the Brexit dividend/cost is to compare UK economic performance against similar sized economies who stayed in the EU. Now European economies have fully opened up after Covid we can assess how Brexit Britain has performed comparatively over 2020-21/early 22. Here goes: -

GDP growth 1/1/20 to 31/3/22: - UK 0.7%; France 1.0%; Germany -1.0%; Italy -0.4%; Eurozone 0.5%

So following on from 2019, which showed the same trends, the UK is performing marginally better than the rest of Western Europe as a whole, marginally worse than France and fairly significantly better than Germany and Italy.

www.oecd.org/newsroom/gdp-growth-first-quarter-2022-oecd.htm


wilts rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 8714
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #577 on June 26, 2022, 07:40:25 pm by wilts rover »
Interesting thanks Branton.

Meanwhile taking the figures back to 2016

https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/06/uk-economy-fallen-behind-eu-since-brexit

SydneyRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 10468
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #578 on June 27, 2022, 01:21:07 am by SydneyRover »
''These laws that you want changed, abolished or written, can you tell me what they are so I have an idea how far you are willing to go, you must have an idea if they are so abhorrent that you would  impoverish the UK 'to get it done' show me your list Branton, surely you had an idea when you voted for something so central to your belief in brexit''

Still looking?

SydneyRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 10468
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #579 on June 27, 2022, 03:07:30 am by SydneyRover »
Kato, did I ever mention I'm not interested in politics either? I just happened upon this political thread and made a gazillion posts is all.

big fat yorkshire pudding

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 12305
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #580 on June 27, 2022, 08:59:12 am by big fat yorkshire pudding »
And from the same link above .........

''Last week the chief executive of easyJet, Johan Lundgren, contradicted claims by the aviation minister Robert Courts (and Tyke) that it was “not likely” Brexit had caused staff shortages which have led to disruption at airports. Lundgren countered that 8,000 job applications from EU citizens had been rejected by his firm because candidates did not have permission to work in the UK''





You'd think those staff would have easily got jobs in the EU countries in that sector struggling to get staff wouldn't you? Or they could easily operate the planes from the non UK leg of their airline if it was such an issue (like wizzair do).  I wonder why the issue persists in Europe too then.

Some airlines are 'wet leasing' plane and staff in Europe.

''Legal Loophole: The UK Airlines Leasing European Aircraft To Avoid Brexit-Related Recruitment Issues''

https://simpleflying.com/uk-airlines-leasing-european-aircraft-avoid-brexit-recruitment-issues/

You are aware this is not a new thing and has happened for years?

As I say if it was a brexit issue why does it persist in Europe?

I flew a week and half ago and it was fairly simple. No queues at security or passport control either side.  The only issue was the French security staff stealing something from us, bas**rds!

SydneyRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 10468
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #581 on June 27, 2022, 09:25:49 am by SydneyRover »
Brexit is a contributing factor as it is with inflation pud, it's inescapable that brexit is affecting all parts of the economy. It's part of the billions of pounds that the UK is missing every year from the economy, it's all these bits added together, the truck queues the 50000 extra customs staff required, the delays, the businesses that have lost money, the businesses that have moved to the EU zone the money that has been lost to treasury it just goes on and on.

Here's data on labour shortages up to around Dec last year, you may have something more up to date. The government has repeated told various industries to get used and only relent when public opinion forces their hand.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2021/12/15/labour-shortages-have-become-widespread-this-is-how-firms-are-responding/
« Last Edit: June 27, 2022, 10:04:21 am by SydneyRover »

Not Now Kato

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 2576
Re: Brexit Dividend
« Reply #582 on June 27, 2022, 08:08:44 pm by Not Now Kato »
Kato, there are some things  in your post that I agree with and I have always said that the public at large shouldn’t have been the people responsible for deciding whether we left the EU but I noticed that you didn’t reprimand wilts for mentioning “the vote” in his post that I quoted and responded to.
Maybe because he is on your side?

People should be repremanded for asking questions should they hound?

Well, what can you say...

The question to DD (in response to his question to BST about future Labour policy on trade with Europe) was about what he thinks future Labour Party policy should be. Clearly they have to have one.

Wilts, you have picked up the wrong end of the stick matey.
Read the the opening sentence of Katos volley at me and he says “the vote, as you put it”.
I was explaining to him that you had used the expression (vote) and asked him why he hadn’t jumped on you, rather than me, for calling the vote, the vote, so to speak.
I never suggested that people should be reprimanded for asking questions.

I have picked up exactly on what you wrote hound. I asked a very simple question and you asked Kato why he didn't repremand me for asking it.

If you want to argue with Kato thats between you and him, dont go dragging me into it just for the sake of it - or you will need to justify doing it.

But I am justifying it wilts.
None of my comment was aimed at you.
I simply asked Kato why he jumped on me for saying “the vote”,instead of jumping on you for saying “the vote.”
You are being very sensitive about something that doesn’t exist.

Hound, I haven’t ‘jumped’ on anyone. I simply stated what I believed should have happened given the scenario of the 2016 referendum, and the reason we are in the mess we currently are with respect to leaving the EU. It was you who asked should we honour the result of the referendum, I simply gave my view on that question - or are you suggesting I should be barred from giving my opinion?
 
I stand by my response to your question, wholeheartedly.


Kato, in my previous reply to you I said that I agreed with most of what you had written.
But then you have slightly altered the context of my post.
Your words were “it was you who asked if we should honour the result of the referendum”.
But I didn’t , I simply asked wilts that question, not everyone else, in my direct reply to him after he quoted my post.
I had earlier said that I think we have to honour the result of the referendum because there isn’t anything we can do right now to change that decision.

This is getting really silly and drawn out now.
You wrote the words below and directed them to me:

“The 'vote' as you put it”


You and I have a history on here of not getting along, probably due to you being an avid Labour supporter and me not agreeing with some of the stuff you sometimes write.
I do sometimes agree with what you write by the way.

When you wrote what you did about “the vote” part of a post of mine I had thought how odd it was that you didn’t pick up on wilts using “the vote” but chose to do so to me.

That’s it, that’s all it was.

Oh, and by the way, no I don’t think you should be barred from giving your opinion on stuff.

You have me wrong Hound, I'm not a Labour supporter.  Rather, I'm a supporter of what I believe is best for the, 'majority' - as you can't please everyone - of the people of this country.  I have particular concern for those less well off; and it is them who will suffer the worst effect of Brexit the most.  I am also an advocate of Proportional Representation as a means of achieving better representation for everyone and making each vote count.
 
At this point in time, given our First Past The Post voting system and the lack of depth of parties other than Labour and the Conservatives then I currently see Labour as the better of the two main options to better represent the people of this country.
 
The Tories have been extremely poor in everything other than the vaccine roll-out. The lies, cronyism and deceit are clear for all to see, (though it appears an awful lot of people in the country don't WANT to see it); and I have said many times that if Johnson were to walk up to some of them and kick them in the groin they'd actually thank him for doing so! The final sentence in Oliver Dowden's resignation letter is a classic example of this where he says, without qualification, "I will, as always, remain loyal to the Conservative Party".  So, without any qualification, he's actually saying that it doesn't really matter what the Party do, however corrupt it continues to be, he will always remain loyal to it.  Very 1984, Julia would be proud.
 
Then there's Russia's part in the Brexit 'Vote', (that word again!); the lack of an independent enquiry and report into the subject is very telling, as is the redacted report the Government themselves produced - particularly in light of the amount of money the Tory Party receives from wealthy Russians and the election of a Russian with links to the FSB to the House of Lords!
 
But Labour are not without their issues.  They need a clear policy, or set of policies, that will address all the failings of the Tory Party - and I see no clear sign of that at present, sadly.  They seem to be relying on highlighting the continuing gaffs and failings of Johnson in particular and the Cabinet in general to garner support.  Whilst this is highlighting the problems the country faces and can be seen as 'scoring points', it does nothing to address them.  Starmer's stance on reviewing membership of the EU in some form or other is also disheartening as any form of partnership or move to PR will be fraught with conflict, particularly with the Liberal Democrats and the SNP who are both ardent re-joiners.
 
Hope the above clears up my political leanings.

Kato, thanks for that honest and well made response to me.
You may be surprised to hear that I agree with most of that but perhaps not surprised to hear that FPTP or PR don’t enter my thoughts as I am not particularly interested in politics.
I know a bit about it but certainly don’t allow it to dominate my day as appears to be the case with some of our posters.
I am with you all the way on Johnson’s failings and think he has to go if the Conservatives want to have a chance of winning the GE, which I think is what will happen because I can’t see a split Labour support getting behind the Party in their current guise.
Just a point on Oliver Dowdens words that you highlight, I read it as him saying that he backs the Party but not Johnson.
I may be wrong of course.
Anyway, I’m glad we appear to have ended what was a daft argument and hope we can get on better in the future.

And thank you for your words also Hound, appreciated. I have had an interest in politics since I was a teenager - I was reading one of the daily's, (as I did every day at the time), when my Dad asked me what I was doing.  I responded that I was trying to keep up with what was happening in the world.  Dad simply asked me "Do you not stop to question why only so many things happen in the world to fill the same number of pages every day? If you reject that impossibility then do you not wonder what they are not telling you? And do you not question why they are telling you what they do?"  Since that day I learned to question and not accept things at face value, it seems to have stood me well.
 
In respect of Oliver Dowden's final sentence though, I was questioning the lack of any form of qualification re his support, for without such qualification it can be interpreted as I read it or as you read it, which is fine; unless you question it, and when you do, in the light of his whole resignation letter, IMO, it can only be interpreted as 'I don't like what Johnson is doing to the party but I'm happy to turn a blind eye to all the other current failings of the Party.  Far better to remove any ambiguity by qualifying his support with terms such words as 'so long as the Party returns to traditional Conservative values', or such like - then it becomes completely unambiguous.
 
Oh, and I didn't see it as an argument, rather a discussion; and I certainly agree we should all try to get on better.
 

tyke1962

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2502

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012