ml1dch Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 (edited) Let's assume we manage to roll over all existing trade deals (we won't). Let's also assume we manage to successfully negotiate new deals with the US, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Brunei, China, India, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain (we won't). Those tiny bits of shading above the line? The benefit of all that to the economy compared to our current arrangements. The big chunks below the line? The detriment to the economy. What a sensible path we're on. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/759762/28_November_EU_Exit_-_Long-term_economic_analysis.pdf Edited November 28, 2018 by ml1dch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 28, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2018 (edited) I'm not following today's activities closely. But I'm just scrolling through twitter and see a BBC story "Government warns that Brexit will make Britain Poorer" Then literally a few tweets up, a video from PMQs of Theresa May saying that the "analysis" shows Brexit WON'T make Britain poorer. Edited November 28, 2018 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 I guess they're coming from different stand points. Hammond: UK will be poorer (versus if we had stay'd in EU) May: We will not be poorer (than today) So we'll be richer than today when we leave in either scenario, but not as rich as we'd be if we remained I guess is the message. But as usual its a confusing message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 28, 2018 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2018 21 minutes ago, Genie said: I guess they're coming from different stand points. Hammond: UK will be poorer (versus if we had stay'd in EU) May: We will not be poorer (than today) So we'll be richer than today when we leave in either scenario, but not as rich as we'd be if we remained I guess is the message. But as usual its a confusing message. Nope Hammond is saying we'll be poorer than now. May is saying we'll be better off than now. Both have now as their starting point, they can't both be right. One of them is lying, my money is on the Prime Minister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 May's Brexit bullshit deconstructed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 McDonnell saying that it's "inevitable" that Labour will back a second referendum if the vote fails. It's a terrible idea and completely impractical logistically, but it's still good to hear him say it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 28, 2018 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2018 6 minutes ago, ml1dch said: McDonnell saying that it's "inevitable" that Labour will back a second referendum if the vote fails. It's a terrible idea and completely impractical logistically, but it's still good to hear him say it. It has been noticeable that the tone has changed amongst many Labour MPs in recent days, mine has started re-tweeting James O'Brien, it's less than two weeks ago I was having a pop at him on twitter for a claim that most of his constituents just wanted us to "get on with it". Re-tweeting JO'B would have been anathema two weeks ago 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 2 hours ago, bickster said: Nope Hammond is saying we'll be poorer than now. May is saying we'll be better off than now. Both have now as their starting point, they can't both be right. One of them is lying, my money is on the Prime Minister It's very unworthy of you to suggest that either could be lying. We will be worse off in a narrow materialistic sense, but better off in a metaphysical sense. So both are correct. Wash your mouth out. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 28, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2018 Those sunlit uplands seem to be a lot more overcast and considerably lower than expected then. Nobody could have seen it coming in fairness. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 2 hours ago, bickster said: It has been noticeable that the tone has changed amongst many Labour MPs in recent days, mine has started re-tweeting James O'Brien, it's less than two weeks ago I was having a pop at him on twitter for a claim that most of his constituents just wanted us to "get on with it". Re-tweeting JO'B would have been anathema two weeks ago Mine is much the same, and if anything I find it more infuriating. I'd rather a Brexiter that stood by their beliefs than the wind cocks we have. With emphasis on the cock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 28, 2018 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2018 3 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Mine is much the same, and if anything I find it more infuriating. I'd rather a Brexiter that stood by their beliefs than the wind cocks we have. With emphasis on the cock. Me too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 Interesting. Looks like the civil servants may have shafted the politicians with forecasts which are quite unrealistic, but which the pols don't have the technical background to challenge. So they will face many interviews where they look like total muppets, even more than usual. Just one more way in which it's all going to get a bit bloody. Wish I had a popcorn stall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 The Bank of England's projections for 'no deal' are in, and they're, umm . . . horrifying. For some reason, Jacob Rees-Mogg wants this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 28, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2018 26 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: The Bank of England's projections for 'no deal' are in, and they're, umm . . . horrifying. For some reason, Jacob Rees-Mogg wants this? Project Fear, they got it wrong last time, they told us all this before, it won't be that bad, etc etc. As for Mogg, he'll be profiting somewhere from it. He's already shifted cash to Ireland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 Just now, Chindie said: Project Fear, they got it wrong last time, they told us all this before, it won't be that bad, etc etc. As for Mogg, he'll be profiting somewhere from it. He's already shifted cash to Ireland. As if on cue, he's already making a fool of himself: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhatAboutTheFinish Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 5 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: MP for Wikipedia North makes reference to story that doesn’t appear on Wikipedia. Great analysis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 29, 2018 Author Moderator Share Posted November 29, 2018 11 hours ago, bickster said: Me too Totally disagree. If people he/she represent get through to them, then they should listen and adapt. Where I agree, I suspect, with you is in your unspoken appraisal that your MP is careering ( in both senses) not because of that, but because cushy life in their party. So twunt 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 2 hours ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: MP for Wikipedia North makes reference to story that doesn’t appear on Wikipedia. Great analysis It's entirely possible he got it from some other website, or that he's just flat-out lying, but whatever the case 'a second tier Canadian politician who failed to get on in Canadian politics' is just factually incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: It's entirely possible he got it from some other website, or that he's just flat-out lying, but whatever the case 'a second tier Canadian politician who failed to get on in Canadian politics' is just factually incorrect. The Wikipedia reference is Quote Department of Finance From November 2004 to October 2007, Carney was Senior Associate Deputy Minister and G7 Deputy at the Canadian Department of Finance. He served under Liberal Finance Minister Ralph Goodale and Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 1 minute ago, peterms said: The Wikipedia reference is Lo and behold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts