The EU debate - Part III

True, still dont think the French are that right wing to vote for her

 

My view is that the referendum gave the wrong result at the wrong time. So, pretty much the same as that of Stan, and others.

The effects have taken longer to start to feed through into the general economy. Partly due to all the indecision, and general farting around from this increasingly inept gvt.

The effects will be felt in the future, however. As was clearly illustrated by the chancellor's statement yesterday.

Unless there are any unexpected developments, next year will bring slower growth, rising inflation, a fall in investment in the U.K, and a contraction of the overall economy.

There is no getting away from it. Brexit is going to be very expensive, very protracted, and every average citizen is going to feel the effects in their pockets.

 

It having an impact on the economy is a given. As is the impact of many other global events. They're all only one aspect of wider issues.

The timing is an intetesting one. I've seen a few debates arguing about the timing, and none came up with an alternative that wouldn't have has other factors against them, such as UK and other elections and even the effect of seasonal sea states in the med and its influence on migration.

When would you say a better time would have been?

 

When the economy was on a sounder footing.

We were just getting back on our feet, and starting to grow nicely after the worst recession since WW2. Brexit has brought that to a grinding halt.

Despite any extraneous events, there's not doubt at all that this result has had a directly adverse effect on the economy of the U.K.

 

I guess it could have been part of the next election manifesto (by either side), with a vote within 6 months of a new parliament.
This would have seen a extra couple of years to tackle the UK's debt, which may have put us in a better position to weather the economic downside, which I think we all agree is inevitable.

 

If Cameron had half a brain, he'd have left the fulfilment of his manifesto pledge until close to the end of the 5 year term.

This would have allowed the political landscape to potentially change within the EU due to the French and German elections.

Instead he waded in early, with his arrogance leading him to believe he'd walk it - we all know the rest.

 

The outlook for family finances is a "grim picture" with little respite from measures announced in the Autumn Statement, a think tank has said.
The biggest losers between now and 2020 are lower income families, with the poorest third likely to see incomes drop, the Resolution Foundation said.
That could mean the squeeze on living standards could be worse during this Parliament than between 2010 and 2015.

Lower growth in pay, an accelerating rise in the cost of living, and welfare changes such as a freeze on working age benefits all combine to show that incomes on average will only grow by 0.2% a year, according to the Resolution Foundation.
This compares to a rise of 0.5% during the coalition government years - a period of austerity in the aftermath of the financial crisis.
"Taking all this together we can look at the outlook for family incomes in the coming years, and it paints a grim picture," the think tank said.
Significantly, given the government's focus on "just about managing" families, the data shows that lower income families will be worse off.
The Foundation said the poorest 10% would see an income hit of more than 3% by 2020 as a result of tax and welfare policies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38090977

Who'd have predicted that eh? The poorest in our society are going to bear the brunt of the economic downturn driven by Brexit.....

Just call me Nostradamus......actually don't.....it was ****ing obvious.

Turkeys voting for Christmas. Stupid ****s.

 

As it was part of the platform that this Government got elected on, they can't realistically leave it until the next term.

Having the referendum later, leaves lumbering a future Government with sorting it out, and it needed to be done before the EU initiated other changes and leave time for measures to be progressed as far as possible during this term in office.

The economy is only one element to be considered, and it was liable to change irrespective of a vote. Lumping every negative change on brexit doesn't consider the wider economic picture, and ignores all the other components surrounding the decision.

The other factor worth highlighting, is that simply pointing out any changes is futile. They're happening, so sitting there saying 'I told you so' misses the fact that few disagreed anyway, and doesn't put food in your belly, or achieve anything at all really.

 

After the Hollande disaster I think the chance has increased.

 

Increased yes, but not quite enough, but anything can happen.

 

The weird thing is that the lefties get upset when the Conservatives go slower on tackling the deficit and howl with rage when they go faster on tackling the deficit. The reality is that there's only so much that the government can do on taxing the rich because the more tax goes up the less the government receives because people don't bother working so hard, the rich leave the country and people are less likely to set up businesses here.

 

Only it wasn't, all of the forecasts pre the vote were positive

The OBR's conclusion yesterday clearly stated that the reason for the massive hole in our finances over the next few years will be due to - lower investment and weaker consumer demand - driven by Brexit. It's irrefutable.

In fact the OBR's forecasts are called too optimistic according to Morgan Stanley;

The long and the short of the forecasts is that the Brexit vote is going to provide a substantial drag on UK growth for the next few years, before growth returns to "normal" levels of around 2% by 2019.
However there is a problem with that analysis, Morgan Stanley's UK economics team, led by Jacob Nell say. The OBR is being too optimistic in its forecasts.
"OBR growth and therefore fiscal forecasts look optimistic, for three reasons," the team writes in its "Borrowing for Brexit" note.
The reasons are as follows:

1. "First, the OBR only assumes a mild hit to growth during the Brexit negotiations in 2017 and 2018, where we see a more substantial impact."
2. "Second, the OBR has growth back at a trend 2.1% in 2019 to 2020 in the immediate aftermath of UK exit, while we think that the trade negotiations,and associated uncertainty weighing on growth,are likely to persist for longer."
3. "Third, we think the risks are skewed to a worse outcome (Exhibit 4) – a hard Brexit with restrictions on UK access to the single market – given the UK's insistence on national control,and the EU's view that participation in the single market is dependent on meeting the obligations of membership, including accepting free movement of labour."

http://uk.businessinsider.com/morgan-stanley-brexit-forecasts-autumn-statement-2016-11?r=US&IR=T

 

If every time you didn't explain something it was assumed you knew nothing about it then we'd have to assume you were a complete ******.

A referendum wouldn't end the debate at all. If those for it won and they started killing off people it would intensify the debate if anything.

 

So, your view on the comparison between the EU policies on protectionism and on border control relative to Le Penn's is....?

 

Change will come to the EU. It's both necessary and, I believe, inevitable.

We should have stayed and had a seat at the table pushing for, and driving that change. Instead, we're on the outside peering in and unable to change anything.

As for the so called exit 'strategy', let's not even go there. The EU leaders and negotiators are giggling behind our backs at the sheer level of incompetence

 

Their entire strategy on tackling the deficit has failed miserably.

Our debt has increased by £600BN under this lot, you absolute belter, in addition to that complete failure our spending on investment and infrastructure has fallen from 3.4% of GDP when Labour left power, to 2% in 2016. So we've incurred debt whilst gaining nothing.

2007 -£529 bn
2008 -£561 bn
2009 -£769 bn
2010 -£1004 bn
2011 -£1149 bn
2012 -£1242 bn
2013 -£1352 bn
2014 -£1459 bn
2015 -£1546 bn
2016 -£1590 bn

 

So you would argue that the impact of Italy, Spain, France, Germany, China, Africa, America, the middle east, EU banks etc etc will have zero impact on the economy in the UK.

 

That's meaningless unless you qualify what you're referring to.

What aspect of the French, German, Spanish etc

 

Assuming that the EU still exists in any meaningful form in the near future.

Plenty inside are fearful for its future, particularly economically. The rest of the world is looking like an attractive trading market for countries less encumbered.

Inside the EU is also not where we are, so it's fairly meaningless to consider.

 

Trade, economy, banking system, affinity to the EU, affinity to the UK, links to other markets and trade opportunities.