BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
What's that equate to if you include 2020 and 2021 if it is recovery from the pandemic that is skewing the figures?TheBigBean said:
In 2023 after having good growth in 2022 due to quicker recovery from the pandemic. In total, UK growth for 2022 and 2023 is behind only US and Canada in the G7.briantrumpet said:Quick, someone find a graph to say it isn't so...
The FT has run with this story too.0 -
Have I missed a whole year?
I’d have sworn we are only in 2022 with reporting for the first quarter.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
Has forecasted growth for 2022 also not been massively down-graded as well?0
-
Page 7kingstongraham said:
What's that equate to if you include 2020 and 2021 if it is recovery from the pandemic that is skewing the figures?TheBigBean said:
In 2023 after having good growth in 2022 due to quicker recovery from the pandemic. In total, UK growth for 2022 and 2023 is behind only US and Canada in the G7.briantrumpet said:Quick, someone find a graph to say it isn't so...
The FT has run with this story too.
https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/WEO/2022/April/English/text.ashx
I extracted them into a pretty table with a total for you. I presume they compound together, so the last column is most accurate.
Finally, note the UK took a different, more conservative, approach to measuring health and education in the pandemic, so some of the figures are not completely comparable.
0 -
I extracted it as well - for the G7.TheBigBean said:
Page 7kingstongraham said:
What's that equate to if you include 2020 and 2021 if it is recovery from the pandemic that is skewing the figures?TheBigBean said:
In 2023 after having good growth in 2022 due to quicker recovery from the pandemic. In total, UK growth for 2022 and 2023 is behind only US and Canada in the G7.briantrumpet said:Quick, someone find a graph to say it isn't so...
The FT has run with this story too.
https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/WEO/2022/April/English/text.ashx
I extracted them into a pretty table with a total for you. I presume they compound together, so the last column is most accurate.
Finally, note the UK took a different, more conservative, approach to measuring health and education in the pandemic, so some of the figures are not completely comparable.
Re: pandemic reporting for health and education - comparisons between 2023 and 2019 should be on a consistent basis surely? What happened in between is irrelevant.
Estimates for difference in GDP from 2019 are:
So not great, but Italy and Japan are terrible.
IMF estimates say we will be doing well in 2025 and 2026. And Japan and Italy will still be doing badly in 2027, with Germany slowing down.
(This is all on the same basis as the Telegraph report.)
0 -
I would have thought your 2023 figures should be the same as mine, but there are some minor differences.kingstongraham said:
I extracted it as well - for the G7.TheBigBean said:
Page 7kingstongraham said:
What's that equate to if you include 2020 and 2021 if it is recovery from the pandemic that is skewing the figures?TheBigBean said:
In 2023 after having good growth in 2022 due to quicker recovery from the pandemic. In total, UK growth for 2022 and 2023 is behind only US and Canada in the G7.briantrumpet said:Quick, someone find a graph to say it isn't so...
The FT has run with this story too.
https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/WEO/2022/April/English/text.ashx
I extracted them into a pretty table with a total for you. I presume they compound together, so the last column is most accurate.
Finally, note the UK took a different, more conservative, approach to measuring health and education in the pandemic, so some of the figures are not completely comparable.
Re: pandemic reporting for health and education - comparisons between 2023 and 2019 should be on a consistent basis surely? What happened in between is irrelevant.
Estimates for difference in GDP from 2019 are:
So not great, but Italy and Japan are terrible.
IMF estimates say we will be doing well in 2025 and 2026. And Japan and Italy will still be doing badly in 2027, with Germany slowing down.
(This is all on the same basis as the Telegraph report.)
In general, I think it is a fool's game to forecast GDP growth that far ahead. However, given the data, the UK's performance is expected to be fairly middling and not in line with the headlines. The complete lack of reliable journalism is far more depressing than a change in GDP growth estimates.0 -
Rounding differences if yours are based on an average of the growth figures - mine are from the GDP numbers in the database (6 significant figures).TheBigBean said:
I would have thought your 2023 figures should be the same as mine, but there are some minor differences.
Agreed, beyond next year it's a bit of a guessing game.
But I also did their year on year estimates against averages and it is literally only in 2023 that they have the UK as below average for the G7. I don't know why The Telegraph hates this country etc etc.
0 -
Yours will be better than mine then. Where did you find that data? I have tried to find that sort of thing before and failed.kingstongraham said:
Rounding differences if yours are based on an average of the growth figures - mine are from the GDP numbers in the database (6 significant figures).TheBigBean said:
I would have thought your 2023 figures should be the same as mine, but there are some minor differences.0 -
I assume for The Telegraph it is all about the "as tax grab bites" part and trying to make it sound like tax rises are bad for the economy. They're proper Tories at The Telegraph not like the Socialists in Government.0
-
I don't think anyone expects reliable coverage from the Telegraph, but some people (not me) think the FT provides reliable coverage.kingstongraham said:I don't know why The Telegraph hates this country etc etc.
0 -
Glad it's not just me. They can be wildly out, either up or down. What were the forecasts in Feb 2020? I view these forecasts as wish lists. Much like children before Christmas.TheBigBean said:
...In general, I think it is a fool's game to forecast GDP growth that far ahead...
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
All here for the April release https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2022/AprilTheBigBean said:
Yours will be better than mine then. Where did you find that data? I have tried to find that sort of thing before and failed.kingstongraham said:
Rounding differences if yours are based on an average of the growth figures - mine are from the GDP numbers in the database (6 significant figures).TheBigBean said:
I would have thought your 2023 figures should be the same as mine, but there are some minor differences.
The 1.2% is based on the data set of "Gross domestic product, constant prices NATIONAL CURRENCY"0 -
All that said, looking at The Telegraph did allow me to see an article by Allison Pearson where she has a go at the Archbishop of Canterbury for being too preachy.0
-
That's an impressive dataset.kingstongraham said:
All here for the April release https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2022/AprilTheBigBean said:
Yours will be better than mine then. Where did you find that data? I have tried to find that sort of thing before and failed.kingstongraham said:
Rounding differences if yours are based on an average of the growth figures - mine are from the GDP numbers in the database (6 significant figures).TheBigBean said:
I would have thought your 2023 figures should be the same as mine, but there are some minor differences.
The 1.2% is based on the data set of "Gross domestic product, constant prices NATIONAL CURRENCY"
The Telegraph missed a trick. If they had reported GDP per capita they would then have been able to moan about growth and immigration at the same time. It's only 0.76% (in 2023 etc.)1 -
-
So if you read the article, you can see where the problem lies.ddraver said:
The article states the need for a ‘practical solution’, what we all know from Brexit is that we only deal in ‘creative solutions’.
Which as we all know, is a synonym for ‘there is no solution’.0 -
...and the good news keeps coming...
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
See headline quoted above. I have little faith in FT reporting.rick_chasey said:0 -
Have you read it?
What's quite nice with the online FT, is when they quote the OBR sayingthe OBR, which estimates that total UK imports and exports will be 15 per cent lower over the medium term than if Britain had remained part of the EU, said Brexit “may have been a factor”
it actually links to the OBR announcement saying exactly that.0 -
No. I haven't read it.rick_chasey said:Have you read it?
What's quite nice with the online FT, is when they quote the OBR sayingthe OBR, which estimates that total UK imports and exports will be 15 per cent lower over the medium term than if Britain had remained part of the EU, said Brexit “may have been a factor”
it actually links to the OBR announcement saying exactly that.0 -
TheBigBean said:
See headline quoted above. I have little faith in FT reporting.rick_chasey said:
The general gist of the twitter thread seems to match with the source: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1847.pdf
If you can't make money as a small company shipping relatively low value products overseas any more, you would just not do that.We do not find evidence of a statistically or economically significant decline in the UK’s trade with the EU relative to the rest of the world prior to the implementation of the TCA. This finding holds for both exports and imports and for both the intensive and extensive margins of trade. As Brexit only affected expectations regarding future trade costs during the Interim period, our results provide novel evidence that trade flows are relatively unresponsive to anticipated, but uncertain, increases in trade barriers.
However, we find that the shift from the transition period to the TCA led to immediate and sizable changes in UK-EU trade relative to UK-rest of the world trade, with notable asymmetries between exports and imports. Although UK exports to the EU fell sharply at the start of 2021, they subsequently rebounded, and our results do not show a persistent negative effect of the TCA on export values. Nonetheless, we do find large negative effects on the extensive margin of exports to the EU relative to the rest of the world. We estimate that the introduction of the TCA reduced the count of product-destination export relationships with EU countries per quarter by around 30% in 2021. The extensive margin effect is concentrated in lower value relationships, which is consistent with the rise in non-tariff barriers under the TCA increasing the fixed costs of trade.0 -
I've been fairly consistently and boringly banging on about the negative implications of exports for small businesses as I am directly affected.
I'll be honest I'm surprised it's not higher.
I wish I could stick my head in the sand and say I have no faith in the FT reporting.
1 -
'The extensive margin effect is concentrated in lower value relationships, which is consistent with the rise in non-tariff barriers under the TCA increasing the fixed costs of trade.'
This is exactly what I have been banging on about. For orders under £150 it's just not worth exporting as the cost of shipping, clearance and duty erode any kind of margin.0 -
It also tallies up exactly with what you would expect to happen. It's not rocket science.skyblueamateur said:'The extensive margin effect is concentrated in lower value relationships, which is consistent with the rise in non-tariff barriers under the TCA increasing the fixed costs of trade.'
This is exactly what I have been banging on about. For orders under £150 it's just not worth exporting as the cost of shipping, clearance and duty erode any kind of margin.0 -
See also the difference between your experience and, say, Stevo's experience - "we just put a team on it for a few months and it was sorted - no significant impact on the business. People who work in Corporateland seem to have no clue how small businesses work (and I'm sure the opposite is also true).skyblueamateur said:I've been fairly consistently and boringly banging on about the negative implications of exports for small businesses as I am directly affected.
I'll be honest I'm surprised it's not higher.
I wish I could stick my head in the sand and say I have no faith in the FT reporting.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition1 -
This is not the case for European businesses selling into the UK
As I can't be ar$ed to type it all up again. The above pretty much sums things up.skyblueamateur said:
Apologies, have only just seen this.surrey_commuter said:@skyblueamateur I think many of us service based desk jockeys would be very interested to hear your story on the impact of Brexit for you and your customers
I think UKCA was covered extensively by @davebradswmb He was absolutely bang on with what he wrote.
With regards to my experience with moving physical product into Europe post Brexit, it's brought some huge issues for us.
Fortunately, post 2016 we set-up a satellite warehouse in the EU. Our orders are mainly between £100-£300 to our European customers. If we didn't have our presence in the EU I think we would have lost the majority of that business. The costs of carriage, clearance charges and duty would make us far too expensive. It would be a lot less hassle for them to buy from a competitor in an EU country.
We've had to resort to bulk shipping but even then the increased costs have trebled our carriage charges.
Pre-Brexit the process would be the same if we were shipping to Birmingham or Berlin, post-Brexit is a different kettle of fish altogether. It would be hard to quantify in monetary terms but it is the largest increase in paper-work and red-tape that I've ever known.
We sell a huge range of products which all have to have commodity codes and weights. We have to produce 3 x CI's, custom clearance forms etc. Last year it was taking the best part of half a day to organise the paperwork whereas we have streamlined things and can now organise in an hour or so.
Previously we could arrange same day pick-up up until 3pm, now it is at least next day. Delivery into Europe would be 48 hours and now is between 4-7 days.
I can't quite tell whether the JRM interview is p1ss-take or not. Johnson wasn't joking when he said 'F**k business'.
We're exploring other markets but geographically, for the value of our orders, it is very difficult because of carriage charges. No amount of trade deals will change that.
Pre-Brexit we could send parcels to France, Germany, Belgium & Holland for a pound more then mainland UK and cheaper then NI or the Highlands.0
