[Politics] Brexit

[WATFORD zero]

Apologies, it wasn't meant to be a pop at you, I just remembered having the same conversation about forecasts not being facts. Interesting you say we haven't left the EU yet and sure, all those organisations, IOD, CBI, ECB, World Bank, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, BoE etc etc etc have predicted dire consequences for the UK on leaving the EU but all of them, and I do mean all of them, also predicted an immediate heavy recession and huge liquidity problems for the Bank of England in the wake of the vote and they all got it completely wrong.

I've said it before but this worries me greatly on a more general point. The whole thing about forecasts is that the further into the future you go, the more variables are at play and so you should always place a lot more reliance on short term forecasts. All these people that got it wrong are the world experts in their field and paid astronomical salaries for their opinions. These people, hundreds of them, couldn't even predict with any accuracy what would happen 6 weeks ahead for a major, stable, first world economy.

And once again apologies. I didn't intend it to be as it looked by quoting you.

The only thing I would point out is that all these forecasts were made when Cameron had announced that Article 50 would be triggered the day after the vote. So they were based on us leaving 24th June 2018. We are currently talking about membership of the single market ceasing on 31st December 2020 (and I wouldn't bet against further extensions).

We are further away today from leaving the EU than we were on the day of the vote. Talk about moving the goalposts

I think that may have a slight effect on the forecasts ?

 

[WATFORD zero]

yep ,why haven't we left this shoddy EU set up , it's what the vote was for .
regards
DR

Ah bless. I've explained in the post above, but go back to your crayons and I'll PM your helper when it happens

 

[Hampster Gull]

The only thing I would point out is that all these forecasts were made when Cameron had announced that Article 50 would be triggered the day after the vote. So they were based on us leaving 24th June 2018. We are currently talking about membership of the single market ceasing on 31st December 2020 (and I wouldn't bet against further extensions).

We are further away today from leaving the EU than on the day of the vote. Talk about moving the goalposts

I think that may have a slight effect on the forecasts ?

Th rumour is we are going to grovel to the EU to get an extension. Who knows but the sharpest brains in the country, May, Davis etc. What we do know is that no one can claim we are nailing this exit. Even Trump said he would have done it better

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Thinking of Freedom of Movement, at the moment, EU doctors and nurses can move between the 28 countries and work. Once we've left, EU doctors and nurses will have to apply for visas, and according to the Home Office regulations, the NHS salaries aren't enough to qualify.

https://news.sky.com/story/doctors-blocked-by-arbitrary-visa-rules-from-taking-up-nhs-jobs-11222690

 

[nicko31]

So. Today’s posts in summary: No one, experts, lay people, anyone, has a clue where this is heading. The great unknown: what a ****ing diabolical situation to put a country, and real peoples lives, in. Lovely.

The UK has already gone from G7 Champions to relegation candidates in 2 years. Where are we heading next?

 

[A1X]

Thinking of Freedom of Movement, at the moment, EU doctors and nurses can move between the 28 countries and work. Once we've left, EU doctors and nurses will have to apply for visas, and according to the Home Office regulations, the NHS salaries aren't enough to qualify.

https://news.sky.com/story/doctors-blocked-by-arbitrary-visa-rules-from-taking-up-nhs-jobs-11222690

But...but...blue passports!

 

[Buzzer]

So if the Department for Exiting the European Union commissioned this EU Exit Analysis, they were never going to read it or speak it to anyone?

Sorry but I've no idea if it was a strictly in-house commission or for wider public consumption.

But the accusation was that Brexiteers don't make forecasts. If they don't make forecasts why was David Davis commissioning forecasts to be made?

I think we're going round in circles here. David Davis isn't making any forecasts, the people doing the commission are. Davis' department then either reject it or act upon it.

On your basis you could equally say Remainers don't make Bexit related forecasts.

And you'd be right. Most Remainers and most Brexiteers haven't made forecasts. Some Remainers such as Mark Carney did and his reputation took a massive dent because of it. Likewise all those other financial institutions that predicted Armageddon. Some Brexiteers such as Prof Minford called it more or less right and other Brexiteers like Boris Johnson just made stuff up as he went along.

 

[Buzzer]

The only thing I would point out is that all these forecasts were made when Cameron had announced that Article 50 would be triggered the day after the vote. So they were based on us leaving 24th June 2018. We are currently talking about membership of the single market ceasing on 31st December 2020 (and I wouldn't bet against further extensions).

We are further away today from leaving the EU than we were on the day of the vote. Talk about moving the goalposts

I think that may have a slight effect on the forecasts ?

Nah. I think this is a pitiful excuse for such a shoddy job at predicting what would happen.

Triggering Article 50 is NOT the same as leaving the EU, in effect the UK is in exactly the same position right now than if we had declared Article 50 the day after, when we actually did or if we'd declared it yesterday. We are still in the EU, we're just at a slightly diffrent stage down the negotiating line. Triggering Article 50 did not change a single financial instrument or legal ruling. This only happens when we leave.

If all those dire predictions were predicated on the fact that triggering Article 50 is the tipping point then why was there no collapse of the UK economy when we actually did trigger it? What is it about triggering Article 50 that they believed would cause a catastrophe?

 

[larus]

Sorry but I've no idea if it was a strictly in-house commission or for wider public consumption.



I think we're going round in circles here. David Davis isn't making any forecasts, the people doing the commission are. Davis' department then either reject it or act upon it.



And you'd be right. Most Remainers and most Brexiteers haven't made forecasts. Some Remainers such as Mark Carney did and his reputation took a massive dent because of it. Likewise all those other financial institutions that predicted Armageddon. Some Brexiteers such as Prof Minford called it more or less right and other Brexiteers like Boris Johnson just made stuff up as he went along.

And this is the guy who was widely attacked by lots of ‘expert economists’ in the 1980’s when he advised Thatcher to deregulate the economy/City of London and cut taxes. This was said to be suicide for the UK public finances and would cause a huge recession.

Well, all of the ‘expert economists’ were wrong and Minford was right. We had a boom (and actually overheated), but these changes laid the foundation for the City of London as it is now. Yes, it causes a huge imbalance in the economy as we are so dependent upon financial services, but the sheer size and scale will make them attractive even outside the single market. Even now there are noises from lots of companies to EU governments that the need access to the City.

 

[Two Professors]

Nothing to do with Brexit, though I can understand your desire to change when the subject of Brexit economic impact is discussed. Why not have a go at Channel 4, the facts from them must be painful too?

Of course it's to do with the Brexit discussion.I have been questioning the competence of people writing reports on financial matters.If a top company like PwC makes such a hash of gender pay in one corporation by ignoring inputs,they are incompetent or lazy.So why should we trust their pronouncements?

 

[Buzzer]

And this is the guy who was widely attacked by lots of ‘expert economists’ in the 1980’s when he advised Thatcher to deregulate the economy/City of London and cut taxes. This was said to be suicide for the UK public finances and would cause a huge recession.

Well, all of the ‘expert economists’ were wrong and Minford was right. .

364 expert economists to be precise. This was the total number of signatories to that infamous letter to The Times in the 80s warning that Prof Minford's plans would ruin the UK forever. It included numerous Nobel Prize winners too.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Nah. I think this is a pitiful excuse for such a shoddy job at predicting what would happen.

Triggering Article 50 is NOT the same as leaving the EU, in effect the UK is in exactly the same position right now than if we had declared Article 50 the day after, when we actually did or if we'd declared it yesterday. We are still in the EU, we're just at a slightly diffrent stage down the negotiating line. Triggering Article 50 did not change a single financial instrument or legal ruling. This only happens when we leave.

If all those dire predictions were predicated on the fact that triggering Article 50 is the tipping point then why was there no collapse of the UK economy when we actually did trigger it? What is it about triggering Article 50 that they believed would cause a catastrophe?

If Article 50 had been triggered when Cameron said it would we would be out of the EU in under 6 months. As it is by delaying it and then extending our membership we are in the EU for a further 3 years. Are you really saying that a 2 year leaving period and a 5 year leaving period would have the same economic impact over initial 18 months ?

 

[pb21]

Sorry but I've no idea if it was a strictly in-house commission or for wider public consumption.



I think we're going round in circles here. David Davis isn't making any forecasts, the people doing the commission are. Davis' department then either reject it or act upon it.



And you'd be right. Most Remainers and most Brexiteers haven't made forecasts. Some Remainers such as Mark Carney did and his reputation took a massive dent because of it. Likewise all those other financial institutions that predicted Armageddon. Some Brexiteers such as Prof Minford called it more or less right and other Brexiteers like Boris Johnson just made stuff up as he went along.

So if I say that we will be worse of post Brexit, I haven't made a forecast, even if I say those words on the basis of something I have read that someone else wrote?

And I doubt Carney or Minford did the donkey work themselves, they got their employees/associates/underlings to do it for them, so they actually didn't make forecasts either.

I just don't buy the line that Brexiteers don't make forecasts.

 

[nicko31]

Of course it's to do with the Brexit discussion.I have been questioning the competence of people writing reports on financial matters.If a top company like PwC makes such a hash of gender pay in one corporation by ignoring inputs,they are incompetent or lazy.So why should we trust their pronouncements?

Well it could all be just fake news. But if you turn your back on the world's biggest trade block.....well just do the maths.

 

[Two Professors]

Nothing really, other than I really don’t like bullshitters...which you have done twice to my knowledge now. Although one could be considered economical or seriously misleading as opposed to out and out bullshit.

Your knowledge,or lack of it,is a matter of some amusement to me,and not relevant to anything.I thought you had found your mobile,you have forgotten to like your own post again!Getting too much for you to keep track of now,is it?Ah diddums.

 

[Two Professors]

The only thing I would point out is that all these forecasts were made when Cameron had announced that Article 50 would be triggered the day after the vote. So they were based on us leaving 24th June 2018. We are currently talking about membership of the single market ceasing on 31st December 2020 (and I wouldn't bet against further extensions).

We are further away today from leaving the EU than we were on the day of the vote. Talk about moving the goalposts

I think that may have a slight effect on the forecasts ?

If they were that expert,why didn't they forecast the delay?Oh wait,they did.Cameron's shiny mail-shot said it could take up to 10 years to escape from the EU's greasy clutches.

 

[Buzzer]

If Article 50 had been triggered when Cameron said it would we would be out of the EU in under 6 months. As it is by delaying it and then extending our membership we are in the EU for a further 3 years. Are you really saying that a 2 year leaving period and a 5 year leaving period would have the same economic impact over initial 18 months ?

6 months? That's a new one on me. Excuse my ignorance but why would triggering Article 50 in July 2016 mean a timetable of just 6 months whereas triggering it 8 months later would mean a 2 year timeframe?

Sorry but even a layman can see that 6 months to negotiate a treaty with the EU, agree all outstanding debts, the UK and EU Parliaments to debate the negotiations, to negotiate the withdrawal of UK waters from EU fishing control, for the UK and EU to adjust all its legal and financial treaties etc etc etc is completely unworkable.

So basically what you're saying is that all those experts who got it wrong did so because they were working to a 6 month timescale? No wonder they f*cked it up then.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

If Article 50 had been triggered when Cameron said it would we would be out of the EU in under 6 months. As it is by delaying it and then extending our membership we are in the EU for a further 3 years. Are you really saying that a 2 year leaving period and a 5 year leaving period would have the same economic impact over initial 18 months ?

Errr .... the rules state 2 years FROM triggering A50 .... so it's always going to be two years !

 

[portslade seagull]

If Article 50 had been triggered when Cameron said it would we would be out of the EU in under 6 months. As it is by delaying it and then extending our membership we are in the EU for a further 3 years. Are you really saying that a 2 year leaving period and a 5 year leaving period would have the same economic impact over initial 18 months ?

Its not what you and your friends were predicting though. It was instant Armageddon the day after the vote. The goalposts are now moved on a daily basis by remainers as they are proved incorrect time and again. A bit like yourself who now wants a 5yr window to impending doom

 

[WATFORD zero]

6 months? That's a new one on me. Excuse my ignorance but why would triggering Article 50 in July 2016 mean a timetable of just 6 months whereas triggering it 8 months later would mean a 2 year timeframe?

Sorry but even a layman can see that 6 months to negotiate a treaty with the EU, agree all outstanding debts, the UK and EU Parliaments to debate the negotiations, to negotiate the withdrawal of UK waters from EU fishing control, for the UK and EU to adjust all its legal and financial treaties etc etc etc is completely unworkable.

So basically what you're saying is that all those experts who got it wrong did so because they were working to a 6 month timescale? No wonder they f*cked it up then.

As I pointed out in my earlier post, IF he had triggered Article 50 the day after the vote we would be leaving in June 26th this year (6 months time). That was the timescale when the forecasts were made.

Since then, TM delayed triggering Article 50, called a GE, and requested a further 2 years membership of the EU.

The end result of which is that instead of leaving in 6 months (June 2018), we are still in the EU for another 3 years (Dec 2020) moving the timescale to 5 years. And you expect the effect on the economy to be the same over the initial 18 months.

I can't believe that you didn't understand that. After all, we've both been on here long enough for me to know you're not Ppf or Two Profs