Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
GreenDevil

Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, dugsbody said:

We agreed the rules, we voted them in, we shaped the EU.

This didn't happen outside of any control or decisions of the member states.

Brussels is a bogeyman you use to scare people with. You misrepresent the truth. Also known as a liar.

No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

From what I can tell, the biggest issue with schools is the narrow curriculum, and focus on stats. Teachers are disillusioned.

The biggest issue with all public services is politicians meddling and large scale, top down changes every few years. Practitioners don't get time to bed in the current change and to assess how to make incremental improvements, as a result, little is learned about the good and the bad of the old system before a new one is ushered in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zugzwang said:

You have your own biases but they are not commonly shared by professional forecasters and trade organisations.

My bias is that I don't know where we'll be in 40 years and neither do the forecasters. The whole exercise of doing an unconditional macro forecast over 40 years and expecting it to mean anything is nonsensical.

In the short term you can ignore exogenous factors but the further out you go the more important these become and assessing these adds a huge degree of complexity to any feedback loops.

As to the short term I long ago conceded the point that Brexit would be damaging.

Good man that Kurt Godel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zugzwang said:

The UK has attracted millions of EU workers to its shores by leveraging itself unsustainably via a succession of debt bubbles. The cumulative debt burden will push the UK into a sovereign default and national bankruptcy unless it is unwound in an orderly fashion. As it disappears, so too will the short-term employment opportunities it helped create.

I agree with everything you say; in fact I'm amazed it's lasted this long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, crouch said:

Only time can do that - which was rather my point.

You do keep evading the question especially when it is in the here and now.

I was talking about our current negative trajectory that Brexit the slomo car crash is unleashing.

Can you point to a plan that corrects for the 100% guaranteed lost trade with our biggest trading partner? 

If not, then I and others here are behaving reasonably by assuming that the future will be affected by the more negative trading environment that we will face and that this will extend into the future.

Hoping for a magical turnaround is for dreamers and claiming that the future is unknowable is not a defence against negative actions taken today...... it is a stupid position to take.

Edited by IMHAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

You do keep evading the question especially when it is in the here and now.

I never evade questions; I evade impossible questions.

 

7 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Can you point to a plan that corrects for the 100% guaranteed lost trade with our biggest trading partner? 

I've already answered this.

 

8 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

If not, then I and others here are behaving reasonably by assuming that the future will be affected by the more negative trading environment that we will face and that this will extend into the future.

A heroic assumption but, if you want to make it - make it.

 

9 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Hoping for a magical turnaround is for dreamers and claiming that the future is unknowable is not a defence against negative actions taken today...... it is a stupid position to take.

You're really in a tangle aren't you?

To begin with I'm not hoping for anything.

How does not knowing the future prevent you from acting? The two are not mutually exclusive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, crouch said:

I never evade questions; I evade impossible questions.

 

I've already answered this.

 

A heroic assumption but, if you want to make it - make it.

 

You're really in a tangle aren't you?

To begin with I'm not hoping for anything.

How does not knowing the future prevent you from acting? The two are not mutually exclusive. 

Correct - there is no plan to correct for the negative trading environment that is Brexit.

It is reasonable to make assumptions based on trajectories and data that you have today.... how else would you make plans for the future? Of course events and information may change so you change your plan to accomodate. That is perfectly reasonable. The only thing we can control is the present and hope that our positive actions lead to a positive future. Your none arguement 'the future is unknowable' is of no value.

Me in a tangle? Don't think so. We are here talking about our prophecies/predictions/expectations of the future based on data/events/policies and information we have today...... if that is not so then why do you bother contributing to a thread that is called 'Brexit what happens next'.....it seems to me that it is you that is in a tangle.

 

 

Edited by IMHAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Your none arguement 'the future is unknowable' is of no value.

It isn't an argument it's a statement of fact. Now of course you have to make assumptions to act going forward. So do do it! What is stopping you?

 

21 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

 

22 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Me in a tangle? Don't think so. We are here talking about our prophecies/predictions/expectations of the future based on data/events/policies and information we have today...... if that is not so then why do you bother contributing to a thread that is called 'Brexit what happens next'.....it seems to me that it is you that is in a tangle.

 

I'm never in a tangle; it's against my principles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, hurlerontheditch said:

😂

Verhofstadt obviously hasn't heard of an organisation called NATO where Europeans have been working together since 1948. If NATO morphs into something else and we can co-operate in such matters with our many European friends so much the better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

Trigger warning for @GrizzlyDave

 

I would prefer a NATO led protection force.

However this ‘European’ collaboration could be an easy extension of the anti piracy command for the Somalian coast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

What about the Institute of Directors? -1.75% per annum? They are pretty legit.

What about the US International Trade Commission? -0.02% per annum? Also pretty legit.

F6AE6A25-888B-479E-B14C-4F7A70E07E2E.jpeg.63f02f4e586366a3ec439794e8628fd9.jpeg

The truth is pro EU score a net benefit. Whilst Anti EU score a net detriment.

Make of that what you will.

 

The IoD paper is quite old from 2000. The author (Graham Leach) seems to me to be biased, quotes mainly negative opinions and dismiss some positive reports. He supports minimal regulations and welfare and treats this as a base for his comparison. As such it attaches significant costs for regulations and social policies, which we would need to have any way.  I wouldn't say his estimation is very scientific either.

Taking customs union as an example (0.5% gain according to him)

1) his gain estimation is trade with the EU as percentage of UK GDP multiplied by EU average external tariff 

2) no benefit because of the increased trade volumes or removing non-tariff barriers

3) no benefits due to the UK participating in EU FTAs with other countries    

4) he claims he could a get better arrangement with the EU, because they need us more than we them

Funny thing is he repeats many times "we are not saying that the UK should leave the EU". It looks to me some one told him off to make that clear.

image.png.5bc58099c4e2660c4ce01a0fbcf1f6d0.png

Read yourself

http://www.euro-know.org/europages/articles/eumembership.pdf

As for  the US International Trade Commission report,  based on a note below the picture it compares the EU vs NAFTA membership so it is not what we want. This also suggests potential conflict of interest. 

I think we would need agree on a report which is impartial or conduct our own research to get to the bottom. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, slawek said:

I think we would need agree on a report which is impartial or conduct our own research to get to the bottom. 

What the table says is that the "static" costs - the membership fee plus the static costs are 1.75% of GDP, a substantial figure.

However, as the White Paper on EEC entry published in 1970 said, it is the dynamic effects that are difficult to quantify because these rely on the evolution of changed circumstances and the reaction of economic actors to those changed circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IMHAL said:

It is quite simple. Schools get given money and they spend it on supporting pupils. They have to spend the money to deliver the requirements that the government mandates. When the mandate is extended and the costs go up then schools cannot meet that mandate or they overspend trying. If the government is happy to reduce its expectations then you can reduce costs. The result is that schools are struggling to bridge these expectations. 

Is there a better way to spend this money and deliver a better result? Maybe. But schools have no control over this. It's not really a brexit issue. It's another domestic failing.

You cannot look at per pupil spending in isolation.... it's too simplistic. I hope that is clear.

As you can see from your own graph, real term spending is reducing yet the mandate and expectation and most importantly, the costs are increasing. Something has to give.

The graph points out that real term spending might be reducing a little but it's still way, way higher.

You raise various other issues with schools and yes, they're all possibly true. And what should that tell you? It should tell you that the problems lie there, not with the amount of money that schools are getting. Schools don't need more money, they need all that other stuff sorted out.

You're right that it's not a Brexit issue but I wasn't claiming that it was one. I was using it to point out that the "Brexit will make us poorer and schools will suffer!" is ignoring just what the issues are that schools face. Spend per pupil doesn't tell you the whole picture of course but it does demonstrate that schools are not underfunded, and there's a big danger of trying to generate ever-spiralling costs by obsessing over money alone - because you'll always find a reason to spend more money if you try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IMHAL said:

The biggest issue with all public services is politicians meddling and large scale, top down changes every few years. Practitioners don't get time to bed in the current change and to assess how to make incremental improvements, as a result, little is learned about the good and the bad of the old system before a new one is ushered in. 

Amen to that though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

What are house prices like?

Everything is rented out to the peasants. It's a serfdom, like medieval times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The graph points out that real term spending might be reducing a little but it's still way, way higher.

You raise various other issues with schools and yes, they're all possibly true. And what should that tell you? It should tell you that the problems lie there, not with the amount of money that schools are getting. Schools don't need more money, they need all that other stuff sorted out.

You're right that it's not a Brexit issue but I wasn't claiming that it was one. I was using it to point out that the "Brexit will make us poorer and schools will suffer!" is ignoring just what the issues are that schools face. Spend per pupil doesn't tell you the whole picture of course but it does demonstrate that schools are not underfunded, and there's a big danger of trying to generate ever-spiralling costs by obsessing over money alone - because you'll always find a reason to spend more money if you try.

But Brexit will make us poorer and what we have become accustomed to will no longer be as affordable. The question of are we getting value for money with the money we spend currently is separate, but please bear in mind that 'value for money' has been the agenda for the last 10 years. I am not sure that there is much more to be cut without cutting back on those services.

I am not obsessed by money. I am simply stating that with a fall in revenue we will have to cut back in proportion. That may be obvious (or even desirable for you) but it is not obvious to many who voted for Brexit. What do you want to see cut in the NHS or schools or any other service?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

What about the US International Trade Commission? -0.02% per annum? Also pretty legit.

That estimate is based on the UK leaving the EU and joining NAFTA instead, it says so under the graph.

NAFTA countries also lose sovereignty e.g. the US telling Canada to change their intellectual property laws, the US telling Mexico to change their trade union legislation etc.

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, slawek said:

I think we would need agree on a report which is impartial or conduct our own research to get to the bottom. 

I don’t think it’s possible to find an impartial analysis. Even the likes of the IMF, OECD, and world bank are biased towards the EU status quo; and therefore the single market.

I could share with you this, bit you’d just bat it back saying it’s VI.

https://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/mythandparadox.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/

"I don’t want to talk about the likelihood of a recession in the UK, US or Eurozone. Forecasting is a (necessary) mug’s game, where there are just too many variables to make anything like an accurate prediction."

And from an earlier blog post:

"The level of output depends on a huge number of things: demand in the rest of the world, fiscal policy, oil prices etc. It also depends on interest rates. We can distinguish between a conditional and an unconditional forecast. An unconditional forecast says what output will be at some date. A conditional forecast says what will happen to output if interest rates, and only interest rates, change. An unconditional forecast is clearly much more difficult, because you need to get a whole host of things right. A conditional forecast is easier to get right."

Emeritus Professor of Economics and Fellow of Merton College, University of Oxford.

@IMHAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crouch said:

It isn't an argument it's a statement of fact. Now of course you have to make assumptions to act going forward. So do do it! What is stopping you?

 

I'm never in a tangle; it's against my principles.

But you are in a tangle. You have already accepted that Brexit will have a negative effect into the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • 277 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.