[Politics] Brexit

[Baldseagull]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42315280

I struggle to keep up with this thread.

But assuming some of you have been posting about this report. What a load of BBC biased nonsense. The headline is totally deceiving.

"Fears grow across the Atlantic over Brexit fallout"

The reality is the report actually says that even with no deal the country will only be 4.9% poorer by 2029.

Then says:

Other trade scenarios could be better for the UK than WTO rules but still lead to economic losses compared with EU membership. These include ‘hard Brexit’ scenarios, such as a UK-EU free trade agreement (net UK GDP decline of 1.9 per cent 10 years after Brexit), UK-US free trade agreement (2.5 per cent decline) or UK-EU transitional zero-tariff agreement (2.1 per cent decline), and ‘soft Brexit’ scenarios, such as the Norway option (1.7 per cent decline), Switzerland option (2.4 per cent decline) or remaining part of the Customs Union (1.8 per cent decline)."

The headline could actually have said, "American think tank predicts little problem for UK post Brexit!"

Who at the BBC is accountable for this kind of scaremongering nonsense?

The report says Brexit will be bad for the US, that is why it is fair to say "fears grow across the Atlantic over Brexit fallout" Unless there are other reports on how the US would be affected that are more pessimistic, I think the headline is accurate.

 

[Berty23]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42315280

I struggle to keep up with this thread.

But assuming some of you have been posting about this report. What a load of BBC biased nonsense. The headline is totally deceiving.

"Fears grow across the Atlantic over Brexit fallout"

The reality is the report actually says that even with no deal the country will only be 4.9% poorer by 2029.

Then says:

Other trade scenarios could be better for the UK than WTO rules but still lead to economic losses compared with EU membership. These include ‘hard Brexit’ scenarios, such as a UK-EU free trade agreement (net UK GDP decline of 1.9 per cent 10 years after Brexit), UK-US free trade agreement (2.5 per cent decline) or UK-EU transitional zero-tariff agreement (2.1 per cent decline), and ‘soft Brexit’ scenarios, such as the Norway option (1.7 per cent decline), Switzerland option (2.4 per cent decline) or remaining part of the Customs Union (1.8 per cent decline)."

The headline could actually have said, "American think tank predicts little problem for UK post Brexit!"

Who at the BBC is accountable for this kind of scaremongering nonsense?

Only 5% poorer by 2029 is not too bad?

Our GDP is 2.6 trillion. I believe this is written 2,600,000,000,000

So one percent is 26,000,000,000

So 5 per cent is 130 billion.

Brexit was sold as an extra 350 million a week for the NHS. This "not losing much" is more than the entire current Nhs budget. Should have put that on a bus.

 

[vegster]

Soylent Green?

Yes! Now THAT'S a marketing opportunity!

 

[beorhthelm]

How do you read "No borders and alignment with all EU Directives and Regulations" ?

i was refering to 5ways/Giraffe. if you want i can argue about your interpretation of the agreement, seems rather pointless as we wont agree.

though i do wonder how you read the phrases "Both Parties have reached agreement in principle", "nothing is agreed until it is agreed" and "This does not prejudge any adaptations that might be appropriate in case transitional arrangements were to be agreed in the second phase of the negotiations". to me they mean there's no current final agreement in place, your view may be different

 

[nicko31]

Only 5% poorer by 2029 is not too bad?

Our GDP is 2.6 trillion. I believe this is written 2,600,000,000,000

So one percent is 26,000,000,000

So 5 per cent is 130 billion.

Brexit was sold as an extra 350 million a week for the NHS. This "not losing much" is more than the entire current Nhs budget. Should have put that on a bus.

We're about £22BN short so far and haven't left yet, so quite an optimistic forecast for a no deal Brexit. 4.9% decline versus EU is more likely if we do get a deal

 

[beorhthelm]

Only 5% poorer by 2029 is not too bad?

no, its 5% less richer. so if GDP is forecast to grow by say 25% over that period, the report predicts worse case impact would be growth of 20%. the predictions are always incorrect anyway, and are the mid-point of a range of possible futures.

 

[Berty23]

no, its 5% less richer. so if GDP is forecast to grow by say 25% over that period, the report predicts worse case impact would be growth of 20%. the predictions are always incorrect anyway, and are the mid-point of a range of possible futures.

Ah right. I will read and digest properly over a sarnie.

Meanwhile...EU don't appear to have been impressed with DD https://amp.ft.com/content/674623ac...?platform=hootsuite&__twitter_impression=true

 

[ManOfSussex]

Meanwhile...EU don't appear to have been impressed with DD https://amp.ft.com/content/674623ac...?platform=hootsuite&__twitter_impression=true

Which is why Redwood, Bone et al are so buoyant now - they want us to walk away in March and have a no deal Brexit the year after.

 

[nicko31]

Looks like Davis's big mouth has got the EU concerned about trust

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...tent-summit-european-parliament-a8105126.html

The Brexit agreement struck by Theresa May last week must be turned into a legally binding treaty if the UK wants to progress to trade talks...

 

[nicko31]

no, its 5% less richer. so if GDP is forecast to grow by say 25% over that period, the report predicts worse case impact would be growth of 20%. the predictions are always incorrect anyway, and are the mid-point of a range of possible futures.

5% less richer, sounds better doesn't it. Do you think the JAMS that were stitched up by Farage, Banks etc will buy it?

 

[Ernest]

Looks like Davis's big mouth has got the EU concerned about trust

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...tent-summit-european-parliament-a8105126.html

The Brexit agreement struck by Theresa May last week must be turned into a legally binding treaty if the UK wants to progress to trade talks...

Don't blame them, I wouldn't trust them if I was negotiating

 

[Ernest]

[tweet]940531473609830401[/tweet]

 

[Ernest]

[tweet]940540781684719616[/tweet]

 

[daveinprague]

The man is a walking fecking car crash

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

comedy gold from the frothing mouth grizzlers on here , we're doomed I tell you we're doomed
regards
DR

 

[Seasidesage]

Whatever people think of leaving the EU. David Davis is incapable of delivering it. The man is a liability.

 

[nicko31]

The man is a walking fecking car crash

First DD said its not legally binding, then he said it is, then the EU said it isn't and now the EU say it WILL BE

Comedy GOLD SPECIAL

 

[Mellotron]

David Davis is such a ****ing moron.

 

[Buzzer]

As I have said before, there would need to be a referendum if there were any new treaty or amendment to an existing one, it is in UK law. So you really did not have to take a preemptive vote to leave. On that basis, would you like to remain now, and leave if the Federal thing ever comes to fruition?

Leave now thankyou.

 

[Buzzer]

Yes if you voted for Brexit because you didn't want to be in the EU because you don't like it, fair enough,not flawed. But voting for Brexit "purely in the belief that having ultimate rule of law and government", when we already have the ultimate rule of law and government doesn't make sense to me.

Likewise, I still don't get why you can't see that this vote has been the only way to get back that rule of law. I suspect we are going around in circles with this so I'm going to bow out of this now.