Most of the EU would have thought that level of growth was fantastic over the past few years when they trailed well behind the UK.
I am not trading figures with you SH. it would be pointless as the success of a nation, or enterprise, is not measured by growth. Why do people always think in those terms ? There is a natural limit to all growth (which economists appear to have forgotten) - I cannot decide (at 1,90 metres) that I want to grow further. There is a natural limit. Countries are measured by the quality of life they can offer to their citizens, and how well they can share their existing wealth to include all of those citizens. A country where about a third have been left behind is not a successfull country - I do not want to be at the bottom end of any society, but if I were, I would rather it to be in Scandinavia, Switzerland or the Netherlands than in the UK. or the USA - and so I would classify them as being the World's most successfull countries. The highest standards of living are found in the EU. The best education systems, the best health systems and the most equitable distributions of wealth (at least within some EU. countries). Is there another country in Western Europe with food banks, as in the UK. ? We need to be looking at post growth societies in the future, because the environment cannot accomodate the idea of further growth - we are producing too much as it is, and what is needed is to redistribute more fairly.
In the context of Brexit and the financial well being of the UK using growth figures is a good barometer. We have had plenty of doom and gloom, especially on this forum, this growth is extremely good news considering the obvious turbulence the Brexit process with endure. Quality of life and wealth distribution is entirely a different matter.
All I know is personally I cannot stand the UK winters. I am looking forward to spending future winters in Spain, thankfully they will welcome me with open arms.
Don't panic. The inflation rate is set to drop and the UK's growth has been forecast to return again to it's superiority over the EU by 2019.
Clutching at straws again. It would be more to the point to discuss why Davis and Hammond feel it necessary to go to Germany with the begging bowl. We have always known that leaving the customs union would mean losing passporting rights, and now it suddenly seems to have dawned on the government. Unbelievable!
I think you would be wise not to place any real confidence in these type of figures, as they are prone to change on the one hand. On the other Britain's growth rate is ranked as the 18th strongest in the EU. below Rumania, Bulgaria, Poland and Spain.
It is funny the remoaners are actually talking about growth, something you steered well clear of for many years. Fitch are correct that the UK will outgrow the EU again very soon.
It is correct for the UK's representatives to find a solution which protects investment in the UK and the EU. Hopefully they will get a clear message so a decision can be made by the UK government a.s.a.p. If the EU's priority is protecting the 'project' over jobs and investment then they should make a firm statement.
Unlike the UK you can go to the EU website and read what the guidelines are for all of the negotiations. These have been available for 18 months, so everyone, including government, who wish to be properly informed can be so. The real question is does the UK wish to safeguard investment and jobs that could go across the Channel. There is no deal available as described by David Davis." It will be exactly what we have now."
It has been well documented if the EU limit the scope of the CoL it will suffer huge financial consequences including a disruption to necessary funding sources. It does really depend on how much self harm the EU is willing to inflict on itself.
Any fragmentation of not just banking but many other things such as medicines will have detrimental effects on not just the EU, but the UK. It makes no sense to form dozens of agencies to replicate the work already being done on a shared cost basis. These agencies, often set up for sound economic reasons, were often formed with the UK input leading the way. If it made sense then it still makes sense, or does the UK have a limitless money tree?
I'm sure the UK will cooperate with the EU in many areas where it makes sense for both parties. I would have thought this was fairly obvious.
Yes it will, and continue to pay towards the costs. It will also have to accept that many of the agency regulations come under the jurisdiction of the ECJ. That shouldn't be a problem now the government has accepted that the ECJ will still have a say.
The UK government have only agreed a very limited timeframe and involvement of the ECJ. Most of the problems you are desperate to find will be easily solved given a reasonable attitude from the EU. If the 'project' dogma dominates, all will suffer.
Ten years down the line no one will notice that we are still paying and accepting ECJ rulings. You still don't quite seem to grasp that it is the UK that says it is leaving, not the other way round. It is the UK that is looking more desperate by the day because it still has to agree what it wants.
I fully understand the UK is leaving the EU because I was one of the majority that voted to exercise our escape route from this ever evolving European superstate. I'm quite happy if they fail to reach agreement and we leave without paying the ransom.
