BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Whatever format the stats are given, people will moan.

This is the one thing I have learned on this forum, that to even mention a stat is to draw the discussion away from the argument the stats are there to support ( or not), and instead to the approach of measurement.

People like to see the trees to avoid looking at the wood.

If you're going to make or retweet bullsh1t claims, be prepared to have them demolished.

rick_chasey

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

Genuinely cannot be bothered. It’s their line not mine. It’s their job to opine on this. Makes not a difference if I think it or not.

You could be bothered when thought you were right.

I still think he’s right.

Sterling really has fallen a long way.

Stevo_666

More data from the World Bank which shows what a load cr@p Carney's claim is.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=DE-GB

(Just change the start year to 2016). From 2016 to 2019, GDP growth rates in the 2 countries were pretty much identical: in 2020 Germany did better but in 2021 the UK did better by roughly the same amount.

Can someone explain how this alleged 20% gap appeared?

N0bodyOfTheGoat

The tabloids might be starting to admit Brexit was bad, but Sunak has double downed with this cabinet.

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

More data from the World Bank which shows what a load cr@p Carney's claim is.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=DE-GB

(Just change the start year to 2016). From 2016 to 2019, GDP growth rates in the 2 countries were pretty much identical: in 2020 Germany did better but in 2021 the UK did better by roughly the same amount.

Can someone explain how this alleged 20% gap appeared?

Sterling to GBP from 1.41 to 1.15 accounts for 18 percentage points of the 20% of the drop.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

More data from the World Bank which shows what a load cr@p Carney's claim is.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=DE-GB

(Just change the start year to 2016). From 2016 to 2019, GDP growth rates in the 2 countries were pretty much identical: in 2020 Germany did better but in 2021 the UK did better by roughly the same amount.

Can someone explain how this alleged 20% gap appeared?

Sterling to GBP from 1.41 to 1.15 accounts for 18 percentage points of the 20% of the drop.

So pretty much nothing to do with actual economic performance then.

wallace_and_gromit

rick_chasey said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

Genuinely cannot be bothered. It’s their line not mine. It’s their job to opine on this. Makes not a difference if I think it or not.

You could be bothered when thought you were right.

I still think he’s right.

Sterling really has fallen a long way.

That wasn’t his point though. If it was then he’s six years late with his stunning insight as the rest of the world spotted the exchange rate impact in June 2016.

rick_chasey

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

Genuinely cannot be bothered. It’s their line not mine. It’s their job to opine on this. Makes not a difference if I think it or not.

You could be bothered when thought you were right.

I still think he’s right.

Sterling really has fallen a long way.

That wasn’t his point though. If it was then he’s six years late with his stunning insight as the rest of the world spotted the exchange rate impact in June 2016.

Ok so let’s be clear, if you currency drops by 20% against another currency, all other things being equal your economy is 20% smaller against the economy of that other currency.

So he’s not wrong. Devaluations do matter. They’re are a sign of weakness not strength.

rick_chasey

Glad we cleared that up ✌🏻

Cherry picking just the gdp figures without accounting for the currency devaluation eh? Who’d have thought that from you guys.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

Genuinely cannot be bothered. It’s their line not mine. It’s their job to opine on this. Makes not a difference if I think it or not.

You could be bothered when thought you were right.

I still think he’s right.

Sterling really has fallen a long way.

That wasn’t his point though. If it was then he’s six years late with his stunning insight as the rest of the world spotted the exchange rate impact in June 2016.

Ok so let’s be clear, if you currency drops by 20% against another currency, all other things being equal your economy is 20% smaller against the economy of that other currency.

So he’s not wrong. Devaluations do matter. They’re are a sign of weakness not strength.

Wrong. If you measure GDP in a currency other than the domestic currency of the countries involved to get a % change over a given period, then you will not be comparing apples with apples.

rick_chasey

Ok so you’re not arguing the stat anymore?

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

Glad we cleared that up ✌🏻

Cherry picking just the gdp figures without accounting for the currency devaluation eh? Who’d have thought that from you guys.

If you are going to measure a currency in a different currency it is standard to use the $

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Glad we cleared that up ✌🏻

Cherry picking just the gdp figures without accounting for the currency devaluation eh? Who’d have thought that from you guys.

If you are going to measure a currency in a different currency it is standard to use the $

Stat isn’t wrong though is it?

Stevo_666

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Glad we cleared that up ✌🏻

Cherry picking just the gdp figures without accounting for the currency devaluation eh? Who’d have thought that from you guys.

If you are going to measure a currency in a different currency it is standard to use the $

Based on the USD based stats that I linked above (I.e. the first set of stats), the change was way less than 20%

rick_chasey

So your issue is the perspective he’s chosen?

Because his tweet is indeed accurate. In Sterling, the German economy is 20% bigger than the UK’s than it was pre Brexit vote.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

So your issue is the perspective he’s chosen?

Because his tweet is indeed accurate. In Sterling, the German economy is 20% bigger than it was pre Brexit vote.

I've already posted the evidence to demonstrate why that is wrong and mainly down to the fx distortions. Go read again.

rick_chasey

Bold to say currency devaluation is nothing to do with economic performance. On what basis?

Stevo_666

So to recap, the comparison of a

rick_chasey said:

Bold to say currency devaluation is nothing to do with economic performance. On what basis?

Stop trying to deflect and look at the stats I posted.

The first set is in USD (as mentioned this is the standard way of measuring these stats) and shows a shift of around 3%, not 20%.

The second set of stats from World Bank were expressed in constsnt currency (again USD) to eliminate fx distortions in the GDP figures. Again, no material difference in % GDP growth.

Please explain specifically how both of those sets of data are wrong.

rick_chasey

Haha I’ll look at your stats if you take back that Carney’s claim is “cr@p” as it’s actually accurate.

Not least as he’s talking about the size of the economy and not growth.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Haha I’ll look at your stats if you take back that Carney’s claim is “cr@p” as it’s actually accurate.

Not least as he’s talking about the size of the economy and not growth.

Given that they make exactly that point point about Carneys claims, you need to look anyway. Suspect you are trying to stick your head in the sand now. Wonder why?

Also, do you really understand the point about growth? If you apply the percentage growth figures to GDP at the start of the relevant period and for each year over the period, you will arrive at the relevant GDP figures at the end of that period. I am simply showing you another way of demonstrating that Carneys claims are wrong.

Stevo_666

Double post.

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Haha I’ll look at your stats if you take back that Carney’s claim is “cr@p” as it’s actually accurate.

Not least as he’s talking about the size of the economy and not growth.

Given that they make exactly that point point about Carneys claims, you need to look anyway. Suspect you are trying to stick your head in the sand now. Wonder why?

Also, do you really understand the point about growth? If you apply the percentage growth figures to GDP at the start of the relevant period and for each year over the period, you will arrive at the relevant GDP figures at the end of that period. I am simply showing you another way of demonstrating that Carneys claims are wrong.

In the context of international comparisons comparing growth and not currency’s misses half the picture.

In exactly the same scenario but instead Britain couldn’t devalue, it’d have a massive recession.

wallace_and_gromit

rick_chasey said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

rick_chasey said:

Genuinely cannot be bothered. It’s their line not mine. It’s their job to opine on this. Makes not a difference if I think it or not.

You could be bothered when thought you were right.

I still think he’s right.

Sterling really has fallen a long way.

That wasn’t his point though. If it was then he’s six years late with his stunning insight as the rest of the world spotted the exchange rate impact in June 2016.

Ok so let’s be clear, if you currency drops by 20% against another currency, all other things being equal your economy is 20% smaller against the economy of that other currency.

So he’s not wrong. Devaluations do matter. They’re are a sign of weakness not strength.

I’m not one to say “I told you so” but I highlighted the exchange rate issue several hours ago. Spare me the lectures. I have access through work to experts on these subjects who are even more expert that you are. Such a thing is possible, however fanciful it will sound to you.

But there are other things that are dodgy about Carney’s data such as the size of the U.K. economy he’s quoted in the two years. The increase in size is much less than that which would derive from the ONS’s GDP growth stats and inflation/gdp deflator. So it’s legitimate to question the basis and the motivation for publishing the info in the form he did.

My guess on motivation is that arch-remainer Carney picks the exchange rate basis that presents the least favourable presentation of the UK’s performance since Brexit became a thing, in the confident expectation that Twitter doesn’t lend itself to proper analysis due to space constraints. Nothing wrong in this morally. It’s what I’d do if I had any incentive to do make that particular point about Brexit. But let’s be honest about what’s going on!

rick_chasey

Forgive the former BoE guy seeing the world through a sterling lens eh?

But for the record, the stat isn’t wrong.

pangolin

Lol my experts are more expert than your experts

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

He said it twice, first in the lunch for the FT and doubled down in the tweet.

So ignoring the % change do you think it is plausible that the UK economy was 90% of the size of Germany's?

Would you accept that their population is 25% bigger than ours?

Do youthink SteveO and other Brexiteers would have mentioned it if their favourite destination for manufacturing cars had GDP per capita significantly below the UK?

Yes I do think it's plausible and no I don't think Germany's population is 25% bigger. It's more like 20%, and a good third of Germany spent 45 years under the Soviets in living memory, so yes, entirely plausible.

If the economies were identical UK GDP would be 80% DE. A number of different datasets put the figure at around 79% in 2016, which seems consistent with other observations (UK had some of the poorest bits of the EU in Wales and Cornwall). It's also consistent with the thesis that UK austerity policies acted as a brake on recovery from 2008.

Not sure why you are digging in on this.

It’s the same story I hear from other professional economists I speak to. They too say this, just not in the FT.

So I suspect they’re right and the bike forum people aren’t ✌🏻

Saying that our GDP has had somewhat less growth post-covid than other G7 economies is fine. Various datasets support this. Claiming a higher differential than the numbers support just makes it easier for those with a counter view to dismiss the case. That is why accuracy is important. Frankly 4 or 5% less growth than our competitors is bad enough.

Alternatively find the data to that which backs Carney's claim. If you think it's down to the exchange rate then show the workings.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

He said it twice, first in the lunch for the FT and doubled down in the tweet.

So ignoring the % change do you think it is plausible that the UK economy was 90% of the size of Germany's?

Would you accept that their population is 25% bigger than ours?

Do youthink SteveO and other Brexiteers would have mentioned it if their favourite destination for manufacturing cars had GDP per capita significantly below the UK?

Yes I do think it's plausible and no I don't think Germany's population is 25% bigger. It's more like 20%, and a good third of Germany spent 45 years under the Soviets in living memory, so yes, entirely plausible.

If the economies were identical UK GDP would be 80% DE. A number of different datasets put the figure at around 79% in 2016, which seems consistent with other observations (UK had some of the poorest bits of the EU in Wales and Cornwall). It's also consistent with the thesis that UK austerity policies acted as a brake on recovery from 2008.

Not sure why you are digging in on this.

It’s the same story I hear from other professional economists I speak to. They too say this, just not in the FT.

So I suspect they’re right and the bike forum people aren’t ✌🏻

Saying that our GDP has had somewhat less growth post-covid than other G7 economies is fine. Various datasets support this. Claiming a higher differential than the numbers support just makes it easier for those with a counter view to dismiss the case. That is why accuracy is important. Frankly 4 or 5% less growth than our competitors is bad enough.

Alternatively find the data to that which backs Carney's claim. If you think it's down to the exchange rate then show the workings.

If Sterling falls by 18% (1.41 high in mid 2015 to 1.15 when the tweet was made) against the Euro then in Sterling, any economy in Euros is 18% bigger.

Right?

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Glad we cleared that up ✌🏻

Cherry picking just the gdp figures without accounting for the currency devaluation eh? Who’d have thought that from you guys.

If you are going to measure a currency in a different currency it is standard to use the $

Stat isn’t wrong though is it?

How can we tell? There's no data in Carney's tweet nor have you provided any. All we have is the tweet and 'the people I work with saysay it's true'.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

OK.

Here is where Carney is quoting from, I think.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.PP.CD?locations=GB-DE



Still not sure how he gets from there to the figures in his tweet.

This (2015, third figure in) is about as close as I can see to the 90%.

Here's a graph of UK GDP as a percent of German GDP.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

OK.

Here is where Carney is quoting from, I think.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.PP.CD?locations=GB-DE



Still not sure how he gets from there to the figures in his tweet.

This (2015, third figure in) is about as close as I can see to the 90%.

Here's a graph of UK GDP as a percent of German GDP.

You might have to explain to me how a massive Sterling devaluation doesn’t remotely impact that?

I’m not making the 18% vs euros up?