The articles RB referred to used old data and estimates. The Economist article is based on a more recent estimate.
The articles RB referred to used old data and estimates. The Economist article is based on a more recent estimate.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Except that the Economist failed to provide numbers as I said just spin.Originally Posted by Aimless
Indeed based on the same assumptions that mean we'd be in recession and having no trade boost right now even though we're growing fast and have a trade boost. People are projecting a collapse in the future for the same reason they predicted one for now but with no explanation as to why there's not one now but will be in the future.
LOL that was quite funny for a German.And, please, if that's sarcasm then I seriously doubt your English ancestry.*Are you sure there isn't a Hillbilly redneck in there somewhere?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
So I guess that €65bn 'bill' is the entry ticket for a post-Brexit trade deal.
Congratulations America
Even the Grauniad is leading on strong export figures unlike the total bullshit that The Economist are sprouting.
It's a shame that what was meant to be a serious economic magazine has so demeaned and devalued itself lately. When even the Grauniad has more credibility then you have a problem.
What s absolutely adorable is how that idiot Duncan Smith thinks the €65bn is an 'opening bid' where it really is just a calculation of standing liabilities. If the UK renages on those, then it can forget about avoiding the cliff edge.
And you'd have to love how the Breximaniacs think it's a good developement if there are 'cracks opening up in the closed EU front'; they still don't realise that for the most important part of their dealings they have to please literally ALL sides on the EU side or have no deal.
Congratulations America
You should read the whole article and then take a closer look at the report they're both citing, esp. sections 1, 4, 5 and 7:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/natio...ade-statistics
The expectation, of a more positive trade picture due to the drop in the pound, is not clearly being met. It looks a little better when you factor in trade in erratics This is in line with what we saw the last time the pound experienced a sharp decline and we have a plausible explanation for why the expectation should instead be that British exports will prove to be relatively insensitive to price changes. The best you can say about the trade-picture post-referendum is that it seems to be roughly "on trend", a claim that hasn't been based on any real analysis and should amount to damning with faint praise given your bullish stance.
The Economist makes the interesting claim that some of the negative effects are being offset by UK companies spending their foreign currency reserves, which, if true, should lead to noticeable problems when those reserves run out, unless the pound recovers before then. Others have also noted that the growth in GDP seems to be driven primarily by consumer spending, which should be affected by predicted price-increases next year. We have little information on how businesses have decided to invest in the last couple of months and much of their current behavior should reflect decisions made before the referendum rather than after it. These are some of the reasons why one might reasonably expect a downturn later.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
For once IDS is right. It's a farcical calculation of liabilities only without calculating assets. You don't have one without the other.
If you seriously think we're going to sign up to £65bn of liabilities without getting any of the assets in return or a trade deal simultaneously then you've got another thing coming. It would be better to let the clock run out to the cliff edge if need be.
And you are delusional if you think there will be anything but over the cliff for you if you don't pay up. There won't even be talks without a firm commitment to do so.
In the meanwhile for Japanese banks Brexit is Brexit means leaving Britain next year. I guess I have to evaluate what that means for rents in Amsterdam.
Congratulations America
Then so be it, it's the cliff for all of us. You don't get unilateral agreement on payments without something in return.
Meanwhile we will have people more grown up than yourself in the discussions who understand the basis of a quid pro quo. Talks will begin post-A50, those talks reaching a satisfactory conclusion may be conditional on us agreeing to some form of payment but us agreeing to some form of payment will be conditional on getting something we agree to back. We don't write a blank cheque and then start talking - you're not dealing with that imbecile Tony Blair anymore.
Which is a problem of the EU if you ask me. Of course the irony is that people complain both about EU being slow because of that, but at the same time don't want anything their country opposes.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Yes it's very ironic to hear Hazir underline the cause of the EU's sclerosis as a reason we're in trouble from walking away from it.
Not to forget either that one of the sides that has to be pleased or there's no deal is the UK.
Then again, you need us*a lot more than we need you. So, your being pleased*will take a serious downgrade to a third-row seat at best.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
This just in: UK wants Brexit but also wants to determine the EU's fiscal policies regarding tax oasis for the next years (as in: Trying to get Mike Williams onto an important post while vetoing all decisions regarding tax evasion)
Do you guys really want to crash and burn any hopes for cordial relations with the EU for the foreseeable future or are you merely as stupid as we always thought your government is?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
You can keep parroting that old canard but it doesn't make it true.
You should hear yourself. It's almost admirable the extent to which you defend the absurd.
Congratulations America
Next time you say something to me before you click Post Quick Reply imagine you were writing those words to yourself.
It's a problem looking at it from one angle, it's a strength looking at it from the other angle. If you go by majority vote more often (and have a process a bit more open, not necessarily a different process) you get faster and probably rules that are easier to understand. If you go by consensus, you get slower and more complex solutions which are acceptable to all. However the second only stands any chance at all if there is any goodwill between the partners. Which is a reason why it is so wonderful that Brexit is going to happen. Because as we can see from the way the UK has been operating in the EU there was no such good will. They were always in it for their narrow interest only. And they brought the EU down to their level to its own detriment. Now that they are heading for the exit we may try to stop acting as if we're in this just for free trade.
I don't care too much which trade deal there is with the UK once they are out. As long as they are out.
Congratulations America
Suits me. Never claimed to be interested in anything other than trade.
Your ability to miss the actual message in what people say is astounding.
Congratulations America
He does it with articles too
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
There are multiple messages in things including subconscious ones that may never have been intended.
We Brits have made no secret of a desire for trade and no desire for a political union. I have long made no secret about that.
Yes your tone deafness is well known. And given that you are typical for the average brexiteer your country most likely will not get any deals. Simply because you don't understand deal making as such.
Congratulations America
I understand deal making very well.
If we went into negotiations saying yes we will unconditionally pay you £50bn and make regular payments going forwards then the response would be "now be quick about it" not "thank you and we will give you what you want". The art of a deal is to make sure that you secure what you want as part of the condition of giving the other party what they want. Giving away billions in the vain hope of something down the line is a route to failure not success. You're just irritated Britain is not going to be the lame pushover of your imagination.
There's a reason there's no chapter in The Prince about being nice.
You shouldn't read old Italian stuff but Swiss reports about how well their strategy worked. And they had the advantage of having the protection of unanimity in sanctions if it ever would have come to that.
What you brexiteers try to make people believe russian roulette with a fully loaded gun is a winning strategy.
Congratulations America
Their strategy has worked wonders despite being a much smaller nation than we are they already have a better deal than we do. We should of course be seeking an even better deal than the Swiss have though if we have to settle for a Swiss style deal that would be a big improvement on the status quo.
You are really a fucking lunatic. Their 'working strategy' resulted in them having to discard parts of their own constitution in order not to be thrown out of the single market. And for your information; a part of their constitution that was put in by a referendum with the specific goal of limiting migration from the EU to Switzerland. If that doesn't sound familiar all by itself; it is exactly what your PM thinks she has to achieve to execute the outcome of your referendum 2 years later.
The reality of the 'negotiations' were the Swiss desperately looking for a solution that would suit the EU and the EU basically not answering the telephone as 'alternatives to free movement were not what the EU was looking for'. The Swiss claim they have put their constitutional referendum into practise. Not a comma or dot was changed in the agreements between Switzerland and the EU and the Swiss are colouring neatly within the lines set by those agreements.
Congratulations America
Oh you're banging on about migration again.
No. I actually am pointing out to you that you will not get any deal of any kind unless you do exactly what we want.
Congratulations America
Yes you're repeating your bullshit spin. That's not how deal making works.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote