Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Interesting that I've read today that he also said that a no-deal Brexit would not be the end of the world!!😉

He did. But nothing would actually be the end of the world in respect of trade - though I don't recall us being told by Leave that things would/could be difficult for quite some time. Remember - whatever Remain said about things post-Brexit was all Project Fear and to be dismissed or taken with a pinch of salt - and I suspect most Leave voters did take it that way and did not believe the warnings and concerns.

And let's not forget Brexit isn't all about trade - it's also very much about such as the expectations of Leave voters in respect of public service provision, funding and accessibility. And while trade and the economy are in transition there may be further tightening of belts around that. And that will not be what was expected. Oh what fun will be had.

And just to wind up JR-M and his ERG chums - David Lidington is telling us that No Deal will be v bad for the UK. He best watch out - drifting 'off-ERG message' is not good - see also P Hammond.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Interesting that I've read today that he also said that a no-deal Brexit would not be the end of the world!!😉

Not the end of the world but most likely a massive financial hit for the average UK family for the next two decades. It could also cause public unrest when it is added onto the last 10 years of an enforced austerity.

One of those occasions where I would love to be proved wrong.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Not the end of the world but most likely a massive financial hit for the average UK family for the next two decades. It could also cause public unrest when it is added onto the last 10 years of an enforced austerity.

One of those occasions where I would love to be proved wrong.

Ach - you shouldn't perpetuate Project Fear warnings!

Hold on though - I'm thinking that that public unrest is forecast if there is a referendum on the Deal - and that all hell breaks loose if the deal is rejected and we remain.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

But do you believe it or are you still sitting on the fence and blaming everyone else for saying it.

Every thread you seem to participate in on politics it's all he said she said. Time for you to say what's going to happen.

I do not understand your challenging in this way.

I can form no detailed opinion as a result of an analysis of his rationale as I do not know about the detail lof how the WTO operates and what is required for the UK to move to trading under auspices of the WTO.

I can only try and understand what I read and if what I read comes from an authoritative source - and in this case it is a very authoritative source who has no axe to grind in the Brexit debate - then I am inclined to believe what I read. I have no grounds, evidence or understanding to disagree and refute his assertions.

So tell me. Do you believe him?

 

[bobmac]

Not the end of the world but most likely a massive financial hit for the average UK family for the next two decades. It could also cause public unrest when it is added onto the last 10 years of an enforced austerity.

One of those occasions where I would love to be proved wrong.

As I'm sure you well know, SILH only quoted the phrase he could use to support his agenda ie Brexit is a disaster and we're all doomed. He missed out out the phrase ''it's not the end of the world'' which suggests we're not all doomed. And when he gets caught cherry picking, he moves the goal posts to ''It's not all about trade''

Then you come along and suggest that ''not the end of the world'' means ''massive financial hit for Uk families for the next 20 years'' when in actual fact the phrase used by Roberto Azevedo - WTO Director General was ''it won't be a walk in the park''

So to sum up.....

According the head man at the World Trade Organization...........

''No deal won't be the end of the world but it won't be a walk in the park either''

Just saying

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

As I'm sure you well know, SILH only quoted the phrase he could use to support his agenda ie Brexit is a disaster and we're all doomed. He missed out out the phrase ''it's not the end of the world'' which suggests we're not all doomed. And when he gets caught cherry picking, he moves the goal posts to ''It's not all about trade''

Then you come along and suggest that ''not the end of the world'' means ''massive financial hit for Uk families for the next 20 years'' when in actual fact the phrase used by Roberto Azevedo - WTO Director General was ''it won't be a walk in the park''

So to sum up.....

According the head man at the World Trade Organization...........

''No deal won't be the end of the world but it won't be a walk in the park either''

Just saying

Well it would have be nice if Leave had been clear about that before the vote. But they weren't. And when Remain raised issues - Project Fear Fear Fear - and still it continues as 'it won't be a walk in the park' seems to contradict all who say that leaving and going to WTO rules will be straightforward. When it simply will not be.

And for some time we will be the only country in the world operating solely under the auspices of the WTO with no ytrade deals in place - having lost all 60 of our existing non-EU country trade and regulatory agreements as well as that with the EU and those with the EU27 countries. Well I suppose that'll satisfy those who see the UK as being unique in the world - well we will be.

 

[Hobbit]

Well it would have be nice if Leave had been clear about that before the vote. But they weren't. And when Remain raised issues - Project Fear Fear Fear - and still it continues as 'it won't be a walk in the park' seems to contradict all who say that leaving and going to WTO rules will be straightforward. When it simply will not be.

And for some time we will be the only country in the world operating solely under the auspices of the WTO with no ytrade deals in place - having lost all 60 of our existing non-EU country trade and regulatory agreements as well as that with the EU and those with the EU27 countries. Well I suppose that'll satisfy those who see the UK as being unique in the world - well we will be.

C'mon Hugh, you don't honestly believe that the rubbish George Osbourne put out before the vote was anything other than Project Fear. Even the House of Commons standards committee and the Treasury told him he was going too far. Don't forget, he said the would be an immediate budget, a £4.2k loss to each family in the first year and unemployment would sky rocket. None of those have come to pass.

What happens in the next few years might be different but Osbourne lied and lied and lied to try and 'buy' votes. Both sides had their version of Project Fear, not just the Leave side.

 

[SocketRocket]

Oooh, this sounds interesting. Please tell me why the Euro will be such a failure... genuine question...

There's a wealth of information out there explaining why the Euro is and will continue to be a mitigated disaster. I am away at the moment and only have access with my phone but here is a starter for you to read, it explains some of the many flaws in the I'll thought through project. Can supply more if needed.

https://braveneweurope.com/jorg-bibow-and-heiner-flassbeck-the-euro-disaster

 

[bluewolf]

There's a wealth of information out there explaining why the Euro is and will continue to be a mitigated disaster. I am away at the moment and only have access with my phone but here is a starter for you to read, it explains some of the many flaws in the I'll thought through project. Can supply more if needed.

https://braveneweurope.com/jorg-bibow-and-heiner-flassbeck-the-euro-disaster

Some interesting stuff. Does make you wonder why the pound is performing so poorly against it!!

 

[Doon frae Troon]

What happens in the next few years might be different but Osbourne lied and lied and lied to try and 'buy' votes. Both sides had their version of Project Fear, not just the Leave side.

Hang on...but....but.....when he lied and lied to try and 'buy' votes in 2014 you agreed with him.

 

[MegaSteve]

Some interesting stuff. Does make you wonder why the pound is performing so poorly against it!!

Speculators playing silly buggers as they are wont to do...

 

[Hobbit]

Hang on...but....but.....when he lied and lied to try and 'buy' votes in 2014 you agreed with him.

Of course I did Doon. Now here's a nice mug of cocoa...

 

[ColchesterFC]

Some interesting stuff. Does make you wonder why the pound is performing so poorly against it!!

Speculators playing silly buggers as they are wont to do...

Possibly the billions of Euros being pumped in to the system by the European Central Bank to prop up the Euro might also have something to do with it. Just the trivial amount of 2.5 trillion Euros that they have injected into the system - or at least will have done by the end of 2018.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Of course I did Doon. Now here's a nice mug of cocoa...

Which one of your two faces said that. :lol:

 

[bluewolf]

Possibly the billions of Euros being pumped in to the system by the European Central Bank to prop up the Euro might also have something to do with it. Just the trivial amount of 2.5 trillion Euros that they have injected into the system - or at least will have done by the end of 2018.

Yes, but it's a program that will end later this year, and despite the massive injection of cash they still seem to have control of inflation (just under 2% I believe). The Euro seems to be holding relatively steady whilst Sterling appears a lot more reactive.

Might buy my Euros now for next summer 😂

 

[Old Skier]

I can only try and understand what I read and if what I read comes from an authoritative source - and in this case it is a very authoritative source who has no axe to grind in the Brexit debate - then I am inclined to believe what I read. I have no grounds, evidence or understanding to disagree and refute his assertions.

So tell me. Do you believe him?

I have said before, I only try and deal with facts. As there are to many he said, she said quotes I don't believe anyone knows, as many on here have tried to point out to you.

Some are easily influenced by what they read, others aren't, the way of the world.

 

[Mudball]

Finally we have a solution to the Irish border issue.. Rees Mog has suggeted that we have a border just like we did during the Troubles. We can keep an eye on it and not everyone has to use it daily ... ( wasn’t it something like 30k users daily?)


https://twitter.com/stephen_rth/status/1033033628303941638?s=21

 

[MegaSteve]

Yes, but it's a program that will end later this year, and despite the massive injection of cash they still seem to have control of inflation (just under 2% I believe). The Euro seems to be holding relatively steady whilst Sterling appears a lot more reactive.

Might buy my Euros now for next summer 😂

Seem possibly being the key word...

Plus we have the likes of Carney and Hammond who appear to be positively revelling in talking down sterling...
Perhaps they should be giving some consideration to adopting the old adage of...
If thy haven't got something positive to say its probably better to keep ones gob shut...

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I have said before, I only try and deal with facts. As there are to many he said, she said quotes I don't believe anyone knows, as many on here have tried to point out to you.

Some are easily influenced by what they read, others aren't, the way of the world.

But in respect of the future there are certain known facts (such as what para 3 of Art50 says) and there are predictions.

The whole basis of the Leave campaign's economic/trade case was predicated on assumptions about what the UK might be able to agree in the future, after all we have in place now is gone. The only fact about trade agreements with the EU was that which para 3 of Art50 made clear. With a No Deal we will have none - all will be ended. And the fact stated by Leave in respect of moving seamlessly onto trading under the auspices of the WTO was misrepresented - as we now hear clearly stated by the head of that organisation. It won't happen like that.

The facts of Remain and trading with the EU and 3rd party countries were very clear and incontrovertible. The UK would remain part of the EU, and would continue to trade with the EU and trade with 60 third party countries via EU agreements exactly as we do today. Straight forward fact with no assumptions or prediction.

I don't see how a Leave vote in respect of trade was made on anything other than prediction and assertion.

And of what I read. I read my university text books. As they were written by authoritative experts I tended to believe what was written.

If I was only reading or listening to the views of a single economic forecaster - I don't recall pre-vote too many economists other than Minford bigging up Leave - then I would agree. But I read and listen to the views of very many. And not just forecasters - but also such as the head of the WTO stating facts - and the words of Article 50 - fact.

 

[drdel]

But in respect of the future there are certain known facts (such as what para 3 of Art50 says) and there are predictions.

The whole basis of the Leave campaign's economic/trade case was predicated on assumptions about what the UK might be able to agree in the future, after all we have in place now is gone. The only fact about trade agreements with the EU was that which para 3 of Art50 made clear. With a No Deal we will have none - all will be ended. And the fact stated by Leave in respect of moving seamlessly onto trading under the auspices of the WTO was misrepresented - as we now hear clearly stated by the head of that organisation. It won't happen like that.

The facts of Remain and trading with the EU and 3rd party countries were very clear and incontrovertible. The UK would remain part of the EU, and would continue to trade with the EU and trade with 60 third party countries via EU agreements exactly as we do today. Straight forward fact with no assumptions or prediction.

I don't see how a Leave vote in respect of trade was made on anything other than prediction and assertion.

And of what I read. I read my university text books. As they were written by authoritative experts I tended to believe what was written.

If I was only reading or listening to the views of a single economic forecaster - I don't recall pre-vote too many economists other than Minford bigging up Leave - then I would agree. But I read and listen to the views of very many. And not just forecasters - but also such as the head of the WTO stating facts - and the words of Article 50 - fact.[/QUOTE

Books can be written by anyone and are not necessarily refereed: those that are, frequently use a 'panel' of friends/cohorts of the author (Just take a look at the many conflicting health and diet advice published by the academic world!). I suspect your University texts were written several decades ago and prior to Electronic trading, AI influenced currency speculation and many, many international trade and financial agreements.

If you really want to understand the economics and econometrics of modern international finance and trade you'd best join the Royal Society and study the refereed articles in their Journal.


If you do that you may find that the 'political' joining of disparate economic entities generally forces the members to trend towards the lowest common denominator of performance. When the EEC started to exercise 'control' to manage this race to the bottom it had to give cash to the poorer members to buy stuff from richer members (whose trade out of the bloc was the regulated) maintain the flow of money around the gang of members. Naturally the richer end up paying for the poorer and before long demand a great say over how their money is spent. Consequently the 'central' management grows bigger as the demands for control increase (at a huge cost). The EU then has to add further levels of controls and centralise more functions - hence the ECB etc.

You'll note that Germany as a (if not, the) major economic engine of the EU exercises more influence, with the likes of Greece saddled with a debt that can never hope to repay. The Greece situation is called a 'success' which a clear lie by the EU. the EU can lie because there is no downside for any of the decision makers - and so the EU's model of integration has to increase because of the original basic economic fault which the EEC initiated. The independent member nations must be centrally controlled which is fundamentally against democratic decision making. The EU's future must be at the expense of citizens of the less power members.

The EU has no major natural resources and its population and internal market has now matured so the 'gangs' ability to keep enough cash flowing between members is insufficient. The 'new' source of money is within developing nations but the EU's management and regulation is too slow and cumbersome so it is not agile enough to capitalise and compete for these new economies against China (looks at its African/South American investments and purchase of rare metal mining etc) et al. The 'poor' subsidised EU members are anchor. The UK has trading opportunities outside the gang. If it does not separate from the EU, UK citizens will always have a standard of living which progressively worsens as the subsidies have to increase.

In the modern world of electronic communication, using data quickly is key to agilit0y Self governed nation states are more agile and the long term health and prosperity of the UK is based on its ability to trade nation to nation worldwide.

QED, naturally IMO - its raining too heavy for me and buddies so not playing this morning !!