[Politics] Brexit

[Two Professors]

Germany's finance ministry has named three serious threats to the country's prosperity.
1.The diesel emissions scandal.
2.US trade policy under President Trump.
3.A bad trade deal over Brexit.

I hope for their sake that Verhofstadt and Barmier read newspapers,but they probably only read articles that mention them!

 

[Hamilton]

Or not...

The Economist has a research and analysis division which claims to be a world leader in global business intelligence – the grandly named Economist Intelligence Unit or the “EIU”. As well as offering subscribers research updates it also does consultancy for corporations who want to know what is going on in the world. The EIU says “our knowledge of economics, politics and socio-demographics is second to none. If you need to see into the future, we can help.” Using “bespoke modelling and scenario analysis” the EIU “can provide country, industry or market scenarios based on expert judgement, modelling” so, “if you need to understand how a country or industry will respond to an event… we can model that too.” Corporations pay good money for the research and expect it to be reality-based rather than just journalists’ wishful thinking…

Guido has got hold of the EIU report for Britain dated June 28, 2016, five days after the referendum result. On politics it forecast:

• Our baseline forecast is that Boris Johnson—the former mayor of London and one of the leaders of the “leave” campaign—will succeed David Cameron as the Conservative Party leader and prime minister… Theresa May won.
• This process will commence with the triggering of Article 50 of the EU treaties to begin the exit process; we expect this to happen by the end of 2016. It was triggered in March 2017.
• The Labour Party is mired in an acrimonious leadership crisis. We expect that the party’s hard-left leader, Jeremy Corbyn, will be ousted, and/or that there will be a formal split. Jezza’s not going anywhere. Labour isn’t splitting.
• They also predict a second referendum will lead to a “jump in support for UKIP.” That remains to be seen.

On the economy EIU forecast:

• They expected a contraction of 1% in 2017 (compared with 1.8% growth previously) as a slump in domestic demand pulls the economy into recession. UK GDP is on course to grow 1.9% in 2017. No contraction. No recession.
• They forecast the number of those in work to fall by hundreds of thousands. More people are in work than ever…
• They gloomily forecast a rapid deterioration in the fiscal position, falling tax revenues, increasing unemployment. None of which happened…
• They predicted the US Federal Reserve would have to hold interest rates. The Fed raised rates.
• The EIU predicted anxiety-driven declines in world stock markets, “When an event promises to strip 6% of GDP from the fifth-biggest economy in the world, it is harder for the rest of the global economy to grow as quickly.” Brexit “will ensure that the global economy continues to underperform its potential for at least another two years”. World stock markets have rallied strongly post-Brexit.

https://order-order.com/2017/06/23/the-economist-lack-of-intelligence-unit/

Perhaps http://www.astrologyweekly.com/ would be a better bet?

And that's where it all falls to pieces for you doesn't it? You quote an opinion piece from Guido Fawkes, whereas in fact you can just pick up The Economist, turn to the back pages and read the market data. It's not an opinion piece, it's just data.

I'm not campaigning for some second referendum or anything, but I do wish you Brexiteers would stop blowing smoke up your own ar$es so that we could get on with some realistic decision making.

 

[Hamilton]

Germany's finance ministry has named three serious threats to the country's prosperity.
1.The diesel emissions scandal.
2.US trade policy under President Trump.
3.A bad trade deal over Brexit.

I hope for their sake that Verhofstadt and Barmier read newspapers,but they probably only read articles that mention them!

And in context you'll find the report says that if the UK government and the EU fail to reach a decision that protects the UK economy, then Germany will be hurt. But, whilst that would affect their economy, it would not ruin it. It would be a factor in play. I don't think it means that Germany is about to put pressure on the EU to go easy in negotiations. Unsurprisingly, there aren't going to be a tonne of winners in this change.

 

[BigGully]

And that's where it all falls to pieces for you doesn't it? You quote an opinion piece from Guido Fawkes, whereas in fact you can just pick up The Economist, turn to the back pages and read the market data. It's not an opinion piece, it's just data.

I'm not campaigning for some second referendum or anything, but I do wish you Brexiteers would stop blowing smoke up your own ar$es so that we could get on with some realistic decision making.

Why would you subscribe to a publication just to look at the data set when its freely and easily accessible online, The Economist is a pro Remain publication, that isnt up for debate, nothing particularly wrong with that but it doesnt qualify it to become the unbias voice of NSC either, it was quite vocal ramping up imminent economic armegeddon that never materialised, take a look at some of your back issues ??

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Germany's finance ministry has named three serious threats to the country's prosperity.
1.The diesel emissions scandal.
2.US trade policy under President Trump.
3.A bad trade deal over Brexit.

I hope for their sake that Verhofstadt and Barmier read newspapers,but they probably only read articles that mention them!

Were they in that order? I'm surprised the WC doesn't feature though. I'd put that 3rd, Brexit 4th.

 

[Two Professors]

And in context you'll find the report says that if the UK government and the EU fail to reach a decision that protects the UK economy, then Germany will be hurt. But, whilst that would affect their economy, it would not ruin it. It would be a factor in play. I don't think it means that Germany is about to put pressure on the EU to go easy in negotiations. Unsurprisingly, there aren't going to be a tonne of winners in this change.

I don't suppose Germany would put pressure on the EU,but if Barmier carries on with his intransigence to any deal without us coughing up a fortune,they are going to have to cover our contributions to the EU budget,as they are the only member state with spare cash.I would imagine a vote against that budget would have Junker et al squealing like pigs!

 

[Hamilton]

Why would you subscribe to a publication just to look at the data set when its freely and easily accessible online, The Economist is a pro Remain publication, that isnt up for debate, nothing particularly wrong with that but it doesnt qualify it to become the unbias voice of NSC either, it was quite vocal ramping up imminent economic armegeddon that never materialised, take a look at some of your back issues ??

It's data!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Two Professors]

Were they in that order? I'm surprised the WC doesn't feature though. I'd put that 3rd, Brexit 4th.

The Brexit deal was their main worry,but I thought I would tone it down a bit-might seem a bit triumphalist (if that's a word) otherwise.

 

[5ways]

Or not...

The Economist has a research and analysis division which claims to be a world leader in global business intelligence – the grandly named Economist Intelligence Unit or the “EIU”. As well as offering subscribers research updates it also does consultancy for corporations who want to know what is going on in the world. The EIU says “our knowledge of economics, politics and socio-demographics is second to none. If you need to see into the future, we can help.” Using “bespoke modelling and scenario analysis” the EIU “can provide country, industry or market scenarios based on expert judgement, modelling” so, “if you need to understand how a country or industry will respond to an event… we can model that too.” Corporations pay good money for the research and expect it to be reality-based rather than just journalists’ wishful thinking…

Guido has got hold of the EIU report for Britain dated June 28, 2016, five days after the referendum result. On politics it forecast:

• Our baseline forecast is that Boris Johnson—the former mayor of London and one of the leaders of the “leave” campaign—will succeed David Cameron as the Conservative Party leader and prime minister… Theresa May won.
• This process will commence with the triggering of Article 50 of the EU treaties to begin the exit process; we expect this to happen by the end of 2016. It was triggered in March 2017.
• The Labour Party is mired in an acrimonious leadership crisis. We expect that the party’s hard-left leader, Jeremy Corbyn, will be ousted, and/or that there will be a formal split. Jezza’s not going anywhere. Labour isn’t splitting.
• They also predict a second referendum will lead to a “jump in support for UKIP.” That remains to be seen.

On the economy EIU forecast:

• They expected a contraction of 1% in 2017 (compared with 1.8% growth previously) as a slump in domestic demand pulls the economy into recession. UK GDP is on course to grow 1.9% in 2017. No contraction. No recession.
• They forecast the number of those in work to fall by hundreds of thousands. More people are in work than ever…
• They gloomily forecast a rapid deterioration in the fiscal position, falling tax revenues, increasing unemployment. None of which happened…
• They predicted the US Federal Reserve would have to hold interest rates. The Fed raised rates.
• The EIU predicted anxiety-driven declines in world stock markets, “When an event promises to strip 6% of GDP from the fifth-biggest economy in the world, it is harder for the rest of the global economy to grow as quickly.” Brexit “will ensure that the global economy continues to underperform its potential for at least another two years”. World stock markets have rallied strongly post-Brexit.

https://order-order.com/2017/06/23/the-economist-lack-of-intelligence-unit/

Perhaps http://www.astrologyweekly.com/ would be a better bet?

Last time you posted this I asked you if you could tell me if that forecast was based on an immediate hard brexit or otherwise and you couldn't say.

 

[nicko31]

I don't suppose Germany would put pressure on the EU,but if Barmier carries on with his intransigence to any deal without us coughing up a fortune,they are going to have to cover our contributions to the EU budget,as they are the only member state with spare cash.I would imagine a vote against that budget would have Junker et al squealing like pigs!

There's a lot of bed wetting about what the circa 1% we send to Europe (which actually has increased by 25% because our currency has crashed), much of this will need to be spent again when we leave, and re-invent the wheel.

To put it in perspective we spend 20 times that on pensions that desperately need to be reformed, it won't happen in this zombie parliament

 

[Lincoln Imp]

You said it over and over again.I'm sure if you look back through your unedited posts you will find it easily,if you remember to look through Lincoln Imp's stuff.

Unfortunately, and I really hate to point this out, you seem to be lying. The only other possibility I can think of is that you are completely confused. I do hope it is the latter.

(If you really think you are telling the truth, all you have to do is come up with just one example of me saying what you claim. If you can't, we will all know where we stand.)

 

[Two Professors]

Last time you posted this I asked you if you could tell me if that forecast was based on an immediate hard brexit or otherwise and you couldn't say.

Coo,does JC work for the Economist,then?Or are you asking him to use his astrology skills?

 

[Two Professors]

Unfortunately, and I really hate to point this out, you seem to be lying. The only other possibility I can think of is that you are completely confused. I do hope it is the latter.

(If you really think you are telling the truth, all you have to do is come up with just one example of me saying what you claim. If you can't, we will all know where we stand.)

Oh dear!Have you been back and edited/deleted all those posts.No wonder it took so long for you to reply!I'm lying on a sunbed if that helps .

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Oh dear!Have you been back and edited/deleted all those posts.No wonder it took so long for you to reply!I'm lying on a sunbed if that helps .

OK. Fair enough. You have been lying. We understand.

 

[Berty23]

Lol at people saying they won't subscribe to something that disagrees with their view. It is fascinating how how people form echo chambers. Try to read one article a day that you disagree with and get to the end and then think about it. I am not going to go into this again but I mentioned cognitive dissonance in this thread about a month ago. This applies so strongly here. Basically it can take someone being spectacularly wrong to admit they were and even then it might actually make them feel more strongly they were right all along.

It is all about who owns a truth whether people listen or not.

 

[Two Professors]

OK. Fair enough. You have been lying. We understand.

As you appear to be having some sort of issues at the moment,I will forgive the insults.If you didn't argue about the EU border,then why have you raised it again after all this time?Please seek help.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

And that's where it all falls to pieces for you doesn't it? You quote an opinion piece from Guido Fawkes, whereas in fact you can just pick up The Economist, turn to the back pages and read the market data. It's not an opinion piece, it's just data.

I'm not campaigning for some second referendum or anything, but I do wish you Brexiteers would stop blowing smoke up your own ar$es so that we could get on with some realistic decision making.

Triggered! Of course you were just suggesting the Economist subscription for accessing data that is freely available ....

Last time you posted this I asked you if you could tell me if that forecast was based on an immediate hard brexit or otherwise and you couldn't say.

The forecast/report was June 28, 2016, five days after the referendum result. Remainers hadn't made up the term Hard Brexit yet (still in shock). As for immediate, the same report mentions triggering article Article 50 at the end of 2016 they would know that two years of negotiation follow. Can I assume you still have a high regard for all these expert publications and organisations predictive powers?

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Lol at people saying they won't subscribe to something that disagrees with their view. It is fascinating how how people form echo chambers. Try to read one article a day that you disagree with and get to the end and then think about it. I am not going to go into this again but I mentioned cognitive dissonance in this thread about a month ago. This applies so strongly here. Basically it can take someone being spectacularly wrong to admit they were and even then it might actually make them feel more strongly they were right all along.

It is all about who owns a truth whether people listen or not.

Do you subscribe to the Telegraph or the Spectator? Agree about the echo chamber point which is why so many people were shocked by the result, 'but all my friends/family voted Remain'. Perhaps if they varied their social circle a bit more or accessed sources other than the Guardian, Independent , FT etc they might have a better understanding of alternative opinions and be more accepting of the result. Agree again about people admitting they were wrong. Still waiting for the numerous Project Fear merchants to admit as much .. instead they seem intent on doubling down.

 

[Hamilton]

Triggered! Of course you were just suggesting the Economist subscription for accessing data that is freely available ....

I'm not sure what part of my suggestion you don't understand. Nor do I get why accessing data compiled from numbers sources and aggregated by The Economist should require an eye roll. Nevermind. Whether you choose to purchase the Economist or look at the data online, it makes little difference - just as long as you are.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

As you appear to be having some sort of issues at the moment,I will forgive the insults.If you didn't argue about the EU border,then why have you raised it again after all this time?Please seek help.

I mentioned in passing your bizarre inability to understand a simple point about a possible change in the south eastern border of the EU. You still seem unable to grasp it. But carry on.