Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: I have no idea either. The story Awol posts makes no sense. How can one eat 'humble pie' about a post-anything forecast, before the anything has even happened. It would be like an employer having concerns about a employee they've hired, and then saying 'actually I was wrong about him' before he's even started work. Poor journalism by Business Insider I think mate. The paper is referring to post referendum and not post Brexit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 7, 2017 Author Moderator Share Posted January 7, 2017 15 minutes ago, Morley_crosses_to_Withe said: I guess what I don't understand is why they've released a follow up paper to admit "eating humble pie" if their original research was simply incorrect because they factored in an immediate triggering of A50. Because, I suspect, of the 2 years thing. There are essentially 3 phases. 1. Vote leave wins 2. PM Instigates A50 3. End of 2 year A50 negotiations. So while Cameron lied about triggering A50 straight away, and various predictions based on a A50 being started right from the vote are kind of null and void, based on it not happening yet, parts of their forecasts will also have been based on the outlook over the 2 years of negotiations, and then the following period. They've recognised that a number of their assumptions were a bit awry (and the article says which ones), that they didn't recognise that for example the BoE would also share their views and actually take action to prevent damage, which it was able to do, in part because of the delay in A50. I suppose in order to revise their predictions, they first have to lay the ground to say "this is why we need to revise them, this is what's different, this is where we got stuff wrong..." but not go all political about it, saying "the Gov't (of the time) lied to everyone. There's a bunch of stuff happened in the gap between vote result and A50 which simply wasn't included in the predictions. It's only short term and may well be cancelled out (or not) in due course. That's my guess. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, Morley_crosses_to_Withe said: Poor journalism by Business Insider I think mate. The paper is referring to post referendum and not post Brexit. Even still, in the pre-ref world, everyone had accepted that post-referendum meant immediate triggering of article 50 based on the words of the PM. It's messy either way. I personally (and probably wrongly as I know naff all about economics) that certain people are starting to panic and are rushing out statements. 4 minutes ago, Morley_crosses_to_Withe said: Poor journalism by Business Insider I think mate. Quoted again but this paragraph is **** shocking journalism. Quote So there we have it, Morgan Stanley did something that most major organisations are pretty reluctant to do — admitted they were wrong. Brexit is undoubtedly going to cause some sort of slowdown in the UK economy, but Nell and Baker overestimated how much. They aren't wrong yet because we haven't left yet. Proper shit that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, blandy said: Because, I suspect, of the 2 years thing. There are essentially 3 phases. 1. Vote leave wins 2. PM Instigates A50 3. End of 2 year A50 negotiations. So while Cameron lied about triggering A50 straight away, and various predictions based on a A50 being started right from the vote are kind of null and void, based on it not happening yet, parts of their forecasts will also have been based on the outlook over the 2 years of negotiations, and then the following period. They've recognised that a number of their assumptions were a bit awry (and the article says which ones), that they didn't recognise that for example the BoE would also share their views and actually take action to prevent damage, which it was able to do, in part because of the delay in A50. I suppose in order to revise their predictions, they first have to lay the ground to say "this is why we need to revise them, this is what's different, this is where we got stuff wrong..." but not go all political about it, saying "the Gov't (of the time) lied to everyone. That's my guess. Pete you are much more intelligent than me and my chicken-shit guessing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 "In contrast to our expectation (and that of many others) the consumer didn't slow down in the immediate wake of the Brexit vote" - Morgan Stanley economists. No mention of A50, just the actual vote itself triggering Armageddon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 7, 2017 Author Moderator Share Posted January 7, 2017 1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said: Pete you are much more intelligent than me That'll be my BSc* in economics coming to the fore *Bronze Swimming Certificate ps, I haven't got a bronze swimming certificate or a proper BSC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 7, 2017 Author Moderator Share Posted January 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Awol said: "In contrast to our expectation (and that of many others) the consumer didn't slow down in the immediate wake of the Brexit vote" - Morgan Stanley economists. No mention of A50, just the actual vote itself triggering Armageddon. That's right - though they assumed/believed Cameron, that the two would occur together, not sequentially. The delay has been beneficial, and ultimately it exposes yet another Cameron bit of stupidity/lie in the remain "case". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Awol said: "In contrast to our expectation (and that of many others) the consumer didn't slow down in the immediate wake of the Brexit vote" - Morgan Stanley economists. No mention of A50, just the actual vote itself triggering Armageddon. But the vote and the triggering of article 50 go hand in hand when the PM is saying one will immediately lead to the other. EDIT: You beat me this time @blandy Edited January 7, 2017 by StefanAVFC 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Just now, StefanAVFC said: But the vote and the triggering of article 50 go hand in hand when the PM is saying one will immediately lead to the other. So explain to me why they are saying they got it wrong when, if you're right, they have no cause to say they were wrong? Seems to me you are simply unwilling to accept what they are saying about their own mistakes, by explaining how they weren't actually wrong at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) To be fair, the only thing they've backtracked based on that (quite awful) article is that the UK will go into a mild recession based on a Leave vote. Quote In the immediate aftermath of Britain's vote to leave the European Union, things looked very troubling for the British economy. Many predicted a coming recession, with several banks and economic research houses arguing we'd see the first recession in the UK since the end of the financial crisis. However, two major banks have now rowed back on those predictions, and while they see a substantial slowdown in the next couple of years, both Credit Suisse and Morgan Stanley expect Britain to skirt around a so-called 'Brecession.' In a note entitled "Resisting Recession," economists Melanie Baker and Jacob Nell, and strategist Anton Hesse, argued that British growth will be subdued in 2016 and 2017, but will avoid the recession they had previously predicted. Here's the bank (emphasis ours): "After the vote to Leave, we, and consensus, forecast a mild 2H recession and cut our 2017 forecast by almost 2pp. But, 2Q data has come in stronger than expected,and we see elements of strength in 3Q data, including July retail sales (1.5%M) and August composite PMI (53.6). In response, we've 'marked-to-market' our growth forecast from a sharp slowdown and Brecession, to a lesser slowdown, which narrowly avoids a technical recession, and delayed the next tranche of QE to Feb-17." Even then, they seem to be divorcing A50 and the Leave vote, which totally baffles me. They've clearly made their predictions based on Leave/A50 together. To not do so, when the PM is saying that's what would happen, would be nonsensical. The linked article ends with: Quote It may be that Britain will avoid a recession, but as both CS and MS argue, we're still heading for a painful slowdown in the economy. Here's more from Morgan Stanley: "Why we still think Brexit drives a slowdown: We have three reasons. First, the EU and the associated trading arrangements are of crucial importance for the UK economy, since the EU accounts for about half of the UK's international trade and investment. Second, we expect high and protracted uncertainty over the future arrangements, with the negotiations set to last a long time and a wide spectrum of possible outcomes. Third, we think the risks are tilted towards a hard exit, with significantly reduced UK access to EU markets,given the UK political objective of increased national control over borders and laws." They seem to be only eating 'humble pie' based on recession forecasts, not on their entire prediction model. The original BI was absolutely rubbish for many reasons really. And even still, we still have two major events to come in the next 2/3 years which will shape how our economy looks far more than the vote itself, A50 and our actual leaving. If the experts are still wrong after both of those events, then I'll be the first to put my hand up and say I was wrong too and leaving is a good idea. Edited January 7, 2017 by StefanAVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enda Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 On my phone so this has to be quick/dirty. To do these forecasts you build models of the economy: consumption depends on interest rates, employment levels, confidence; employment depends on consumption, investment, minimum wage laws; investment depends on expectations of future consumption, future inflation, and all the rest. Then you get estimates from data on the magnitudes of these relationships. Models differ because of how many variables you include, etc. When you have a model built, you can then 'shock it', and see what the effects are. So a "severe shock scenario" might be a 25-point drop in consumer sentiment, see how that effects consumption, investment, and so on. The models were poor at predictions because there was no drop in consumer sentiment. They just didn't really react. It's no great conspiracy, but might help explain why the government doesn't want you to fear there will be any consequences. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 52 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: And even still, we still have two major events to come in the next 2/3 years which will shape how our economy looks far more than the vote itself, A50 and our actual leaving. If the experts are still wrong after both of those events, then I'll be the first to put my hand up and say I was wrong too and leaving is a good idea. That will be too soon to make a judgement. The economy is not likely to simply fall apart the day after we leave. I have no doubt leaving will hurt the economy, but that is likely to be the result of thousands of cumulative hiring/firing and investment decisions over the subsequent years. Economists are simply setting more trouble for themselves if they talk about the impact of Brexit as if it were a bomb going off. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: That will be too soon to make a judgement. The economy is not likely to simply fall apart the day after we leave. I have no doubt leaving will hurt the economy, but that is likely to be the result of thousands of cumulative hiring/firing and investment decisions over the subsequent years. Economists are simply setting more trouble for themselves if they talk about the impact of Brexit as if it were a bomb going off. The point I was making is that even though I am a staunch 'remainer' if, down the stretch, that we're fine in whatever time frame that is realistic and measurable, then I will put my hands up and say, fair enough. However, I'm still gutted at the loss of my European citizenship and it isn't something that will ever subside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, brommy said: Yep. At the moment it's like we're trying to predict the outcome of a 90 minute game after the first couple of minutes when no one has even put a tackle in. The game has not even kicked off yet. The lineups have not even been announced. At this point in your football scenario all that has happened is the draw numbers have been pulled out of the pot and everyone is speculating based on that Edited January 7, 2017 by LondonLax 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 43 minutes ago, LondonLax said: The game has not even kicked off yet. The lineups have not even been announced. At this point in your football scenario all that has happened is the draw numbers have been pulled out of the pot and everyone is speculating based on that We don't even know what teams are involved. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 1 hour ago, PompeyVillan said: We don't even know what teams are involved. Well whichever one has Westwood loses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, blandy said: So while Cameron lied about triggering A50 straight away, Is there any quotes where he says this ? I mean I was sure he had and thought I'd be tripping over search results on google but surprisingly they are all but non existent ( unless I'm using the wrong key phrase) best i could find was from the TV debate where he was answering a question and constantly be talked over the top of by Faisal and Cameron appears to say "we should trigger it" ( Islam had suggested the 28th June ) but it's hard to be sure as Islam was too busy trying to make a name for himself as the new Paxman that Cameron may not have been sure what question he was answering Edited January 8, 2017 by tonyh29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 5 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: best i could find was from the TV debate where he was answering a question and constantly be talked over the top of by Faisal and Cameron appears to say "we should trigger it" ( Islam had suggested the 28th June ) but it's hard to be sure as Islam was too busy trying to make a name for himself as the new Paxman that Cameron may not have been sure what question he was answering Really Tony? That's a very interesting interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 4 hours ago, StefanAVFC said: However, I'm still gutted at the loss of my European citizenship and it isn't something that will ever subside. I've no doubt I'll be proven wrong by other posters but you're the first person I think I've ever "met" who has referred to themselves as being a European Citizen . i know my passport has the EU flag on it but I've never really thought is myself as a citizen of Europe , any more than my visit to Kilburn where I drunk Guinness made me think I was Irish . i mean you are right , it's just not something I'd ever really thought of and certainly not something I'm going to lose any sleep over once we finally get divorced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 7 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Really Tony? That's a very interesting interpretation. you've quoted the very same example I gave but what I asked for was some examples of where he lied , as Blandy suggested , as they don't seem to be that easy to find Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts