BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
I for one hope that Brexit goes well.
There you go. The heretic has said it. Stone him.
0 -
Me?ballysmate said:I think that is probably one for the NO column Stevo.
Obviously it would be great if we were flying at 20% higher than everyone else and I was making millions, but if we do really badly then I'll say 'I told you so', because I did.
Again, it's not relevant because A) I can't change anything, and B.) the way you voted depended on your view on risk before the referendum. As per the dog scenario, it might be a 1 in 30 chance it could eat us, pretty good betting odds but I still wouldn't gamble on it. This is also why I don't play Russian Roulette for money either.0 -
He didn't ask if you thought it would be a success. He asked if you hoped it would be.0
-
I'll make more money if it goes well so probably that then. Again, I don't see what the relevance is.ballysmate said:He didn't ask if you thought it would be a success. He asked if you hoped it would be.
0 -
GDP ain't all though is it? It depends who pocket it ends up in.0
-
See. Wasn't difficult was it.haydenm said:
I'll make more money if it goes well so probably that then. Again, I don't see what the relevance is.ballysmate said:He didn't ask if you thought it would be a success. He asked if you hoped it would be.
0 -
The LMS really don't like being called outStevo_666 said:
Do you want Brexit to go well?surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
They told us it would be a disaster economically and this was what the whole remain campaign was based on. They are now being proved wrong again and again. They could not see the economic forecasts were politically motivated and they fell for it hook, line and sinker.
They could be gracious, admit they were wrong, had been deceived, and learn from this experience.
There is a seperate conversation to be had around the economist community needing to rebuild their credibility but that credibility will take many years, if not decades to rebuild.0 -
I'm fairly happy go lucky when it comes to this stuff because at best the economy will grow, and at worst (within reason) asset values in my field will keep rising and I'll make a whole load of cash. What I hope will happen is totally irrelevant.ballysmate said:
See. Wasn't difficult was it.haydenm said:
I'll make more money if it goes well so probably that then. Again, I don't see what the relevance is.ballysmate said:He didn't ask if you thought it would be a success. He asked if you hoped it would be.
0 -
I dislike agreeing with you because you have a way with words which seems to rub everyone up the wrong way but you're probably right provided nothing major happens in the next few yearscoopster_the_1st said:
The LMS really don't like being called outStevo_666 said:
Do you want Brexit to go well?surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
They told us it would be a disaster economically and this was what the whole remain campaign was based on. They are now being proved wrong again and again. They could not see the economic forecasts were politically motivated and they fell for it hook, line and sinker.
They could be gracious, admit they were wrong, had been deceived, and learn from this experience.
There is a seperate conversation to be had around the economist community needing to rebuild their credibility but that credibility will take many years, if not decades to rebuild.
As I said before, the odds of something happening aren't the same as the risk what would happen if the negative predictions came to pass, hence why I voted remain.0 -
Aren't you able to benefit from the one trillion trees thing?haydenm said:
I'll make more money if it goes well so probably that then. Again, I don't see what the relevance is.ballysmate said:He didn't ask if you thought it would be a success. He asked if you hoped it would be.
0 -
Not answering for anyone else but now that it is definitely going to happen I'd much rather it goes well than badly. To turn that on its head though, do you think those who have pushed so hard for it will admit they were wrong if it does turn out badly? Also, how will we assess whether it has gone well or not as you've spent the last 20 pages or so arguing that there is no way of knowing on a 'sliding doors' basis how things would have turned out in a parallel universe.Stevo_666 said:
Do you want Brexit to go well?surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.0 -
What would I gain from it going badly? as said before I think everything else feeds from a strong economyStevo_666 said:
Do you want Brexit to go well?surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
If Corbyn had won the GE would you have wanted to economy to tank?0 -
You are all going to have to get used to a world in which GDP does not rise for ever. For example asking for a 2% increase in GDP every year and seeing that as some sort of success means that every 36-37 years or so the economy would he twice as big. Does anyone believe that can be done in a country with limited resources without either increasing population massively or destroying the planet? Take it to 3% and it is around every 25 years. Follow China's model of 7% growth and it takes a mere 10-11 years. Maybe this is why they currently produce nearly a quarter of all CO2 emissions.0
-
Yeah I do. People were saying what you were saying more or less 2000 years ago, and have said it more or less every generation since.john80 said:You are all going to have to get used to a world in which GDP does not rise for ever. For example asking for a 2% increase in GDP every year and seeing that as some sort of success means that every 36-37 years or so the economy would he twice as big. Does anyone believe that can be done in a country with limited resources without either increasing population massively or destroying the planet? Take it to 3% and it is around every 25 years. Follow China's model of 7% growth and it takes a mere 10-11 years. Maybe this is why they currently produce nearly a quarter of all CO2 emissions.
Doesn't what you're saying count as "LMS" anyway?0 -
Oh well, it turns out that this won't even be happening. What we originally thought was going to be part of an official Government event is actually something organised by some Brexit Party MEPs / Leave Means Leave and they failed to get the right sort of licence for a concert. They are now slotting various musical acts between political speeches (which could be seen as something that creates issues for our charitable status) and wanted us to sit around for 2 hours to sing the chorus on a couple of rousing British tunes at the end before being bussed back to a hotel on the edges of London. Imagine not being given the full facts / details initially by a bunch of politicians, I'm shocked!Pross said:Well there's some positives about this Brexit lark, it looks like I'm going to be singing at Westminster for the festivities on the 31st
I wonder if I need to practice my bongs just in case I need to cover for Big Ben not working?0 -
Maybe but it would depend on how it is set up. How will the land become available, who will own it, who will be allowed to invest, that sort of thing. If it's just a government will then it counts for nothing really. We've had grand aims to plant thousands of hectares for over 20 years but it doesn't happen, a significant element of the new planting which does happen is down to us.TheBigBean said:
Aren't you able to benefit from the one trillion trees thing?haydenm said:
I'll make more money if it goes well so probably that then. Again, I don't see what the relevance is.ballysmate said:He didn't ask if you thought it would be a success. He asked if you hoped it would be.
The two main reasons tree planting doesn't meet current government targets in the UK are lack of available land, and statutory consultees (including government agencies) making it very difficult. The available land element may change as they are apparently linking agricultural grants to environmental benefit post Brexit (potentially very good), but the second element will not change anytime soon.
It's very very difficult to accurately model the IRR of a new planting scheme before purchase when 20% of the predicted area ends up not planted for unpredictable reasons. It's very hard to convince investors to take on huge amounts of risk for returns they can get in existing forestry even when the target area is planted in full. Sticking to buying existing forest is safer in terms of assumptions, once you take a view on long term timber price.
Not optimistic on that front but those are my personal views. If you wanted to give me £15m I'm pretty sure I could get a solid return of 8% ish but I'd have to target it very carefully, which factors back into the available land issue.
The biggest impact will be down to continued low interest rates, inheritance tax changes or agricultural subsidy changes I imagine.0 -
yep with Rick on this onerick_chasey said:
Yeah I do. People were saying what you were saying more or less 2000 years ago, and have said it more or less every generation since.john80 said:You are all going to have to get used to a world in which GDP does not rise for ever. For example asking for a 2% increase in GDP every year and seeing that as some sort of success means that every 36-37 years or so the economy would he twice as big. Does anyone believe that can be done in a country with limited resources without either increasing population massively or destroying the planet? Take it to 3% and it is around every 25 years. Follow China's model of 7% growth and it takes a mere 10-11 years. Maybe this is why they currently produce nearly a quarter of all CO2 emissions.
Doesn't what you're saying count as "LMS" anyway?0 -
Not sure what I have said is a Learning Management System so I have no idea what your on about and neither does the first page abbreviation search on google know either.rick_chasey said:
Yeah I do. People were saying what you were saying more or less 2000 years ago, and have said it more or less every generation since.john80 said:You are all going to have to get used to a world in which GDP does not rise for ever. For example asking for a 2% increase in GDP every year and seeing that as some sort of success means that every 36-37 years or so the economy would he twice as big. Does anyone believe that can be done in a country with limited resources without either increasing population massively or destroying the planet? Take it to 3% and it is around every 25 years. Follow China's model of 7% growth and it takes a mere 10-11 years. Maybe this is why they currently produce nearly a quarter of all CO2 emissions.
Doesn't what you're saying count as "LMS" anyway?1 -
Depends on your sector. Very much have happened in my area of work as a result of the last 3 years of dithering. Average salaries in the industry have fallen for two years in a row.haydenm said:
...Stevo_666 said:
Rolf was honest enough to say a while back that he wanted it to go badly so we would then want to rejoin. And the sentiment of some of you - if not stated explicitly - is that you want to say 'I told you so'. Which requires a bad outcome.briantrumpet said:surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
We've had that sentiment several times before, always without evidence.
Do you want Brexit to go well?
Just because the negatives haven't happened (yet) doesn't mean it wasn't right to consider the risk.
...1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
the economy is 3-3.5% smaller than it otherwise would have been. Success is now measured on "it could have been worse"rjsterry said:
Depends on your sector. Very much have happened in my area of work as a result of the last 3 years of dithering. Average salaries in the industry have fallen for two years in a row.haydenm said:
...Stevo_666 said:
Rolf was honest enough to say a while back that he wanted it to go badly so we would then want to rejoin. And the sentiment of some of you - if not stated explicitly - is that you want to say 'I told you so'. Which requires a bad outcome.briantrumpet said:surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
We've had that sentiment several times before, always without evidence.
Do you want Brexit to go well?
Just because the negatives haven't happened (yet) doesn't mean it wasn't right to consider the risk.
...0 -
We'd need a common definition of what going well means. I don't think it can go well by definition, because it is inherently a move in the wrong direction, but I hope it is as non-disruptive as possible.Stevo_666 said:
Do you want Brexit to go well?surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.0 -
Just to put it in perspective, the 1.4% growth is roughly £40bn; equivalent to half the total NHS outstanding injury claim liability.surrey_commuter said:
the economy is 3-3.5% smaller than it otherwise would have been. Success is now measured on "it could have been worse"rjsterry said:
Depends on your sector. Very much have happened in my area of work as a result of the last 3 years of dithering. Average salaries in the industry have fallen for two years in a row.haydenm said:
...Stevo_666 said:
Rolf was honest enough to say a while back that he wanted it to go badly so we would then want to rejoin. And the sentiment of some of you - if not stated explicitly - is that you want to say 'I told you so'. Which requires a bad outcome.briantrumpet said:surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
We've had that sentiment several times before, always without evidence.
Do you want Brexit to go well?
Just because the negatives haven't happened (yet) doesn't mean it wasn't right to consider the risk.
...1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
surely we could agree that going well is 2-2.5% annual growth overlaid against a basket of other OECD economieskingstongraham said:
We'd need a common definition of what going well means. I don't think it can go well by definition, because it is inherently a move in the wrong direction, but I hope it is as non-disruptive as possible.Stevo_666 said:
Do you want Brexit to go well?surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
all a bit weird as nobody else on the planet is even arguing that Brexit will be beneficial for the UK economy0 -
Malcolm Turnbull was on Newsnight last night. I think a fair summary was, "if that's what you want to do, then good luck to you, but you are leaving a large free market in an era of increasing protectionism and you are going to need to improve on all of your existing trade agreements with the rest of the world, and get a decent deal with the EU just to compensate."surrey_commuter said:
surely we could agree that going well is 2-2.5% annual growth overlaid against a basket of other OECD economieskingstongraham said:
We'd need a common definition of what going well means. I don't think it can go well by definition, because it is inherently a move in the wrong direction, but I hope it is as non-disruptive as possible.Stevo_666 said:
Do you want Brexit to go well?surrey_commuter said:
What a bizarre last sentenceStevo_666 said:
True, but we are still ahead of the EU per that forecast, if only a little. And this is in spite of Brexit. Maybe it's not going to be as bad as many would like it to be....rjsterry said:
Predicted growth is a massive 0.1% behind us. We are all below the predicted average for advanced economies of 1.7%. Really not sure how it's good news for any of us.rick_chasey said:Why what does it say about the EU?
Have a guess what the margin of error in that forecast is.
all a bit weird as nobody else on the planet is even arguing that Brexit will be beneficial for the UK economy1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The major question mark on that model is that it doesn't seem to reflect government policy.Stevo_666 said:
Still forecast to be better than the EU growth rate when many on here said we would suffer in this respect.rjsterry said:
We managed 1.3% last year. 1.4% rising to a blistering 1.5% in 2021 is indeed better than nothing. It being a short term forecast I would imagine the probability of it being accurate is reasonably high.Stevo_666 said:
I expect the IMF did some modelling to come to that conclusion. Wonder what some people will make of good news like this?kingstongraham said:This looked like good news - I wonder if some Brexiters are going to magically change their attitudes to IMF forecasts. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2020-01-20/business/britain-to-grow-faster-than-france-and-germany-next-year-kmhgsntsn
Dependent on “an orderly exit from the European Union at the end of January followed by a gradual transition to a new economic relationship”.
So is it that Brexit maybe won't be as bad as people are saying?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
No. I want it to be an absolute disaster for the country's economy and wealth.Stevo_666 said:Do you want Brexit to go well?
It'll cost me but it'll be worth it to see what BS Coopster can come up with to explain why he wasn't wrong after all.
You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.0 -
UK-US trade deal news: Steve Mnuchin says he is disappointed that the US isn't getting first dibs on negotiations before the EU, and will retaliate against any attempt to tax US tech firms. This while he is sat next to Javid in Davos.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
It was a 'Yes' or 'No' type question so I will categorise accordinglyballysmate said:I think that is probably one for the NO column Stevo.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Although it has been picking up over the last few years and currently exceeds inflation - i.e. there is real wage growth.rick_chasey said:Ja sure but the earnings stagnation is, I would argue, the bigger political issue affecting more people, rather than the overall GDP number, and that shows no sign of abating.
It's basically like Japan for the last decade, albeit with more immigration to make the headline figure look better.
https://ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/kgq2/qna"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
