Forum menu
That was for 2019 alone based on hard Brexit.
So return to growth in 2020 you reckon THM?
zokes: it was his opinion/view as a financial person (as requested by oldmanmtb) which is fine. He doesn't need to source an opinion.
it was his opinion/view as a financial person (as requested by oldmanmtb) which is fine. He doesn't need to source an opinion.
Does that mean we have to respect his opinion as fact, or just dismiss it in the same way he treats anyone else's?
zokes - Still not a customer
Del - Memberzokes can't you give it a rest?
Nope. When he starts answering the questions put to him, and stops accusing others of BS whilst wading in his own, I might. But until then, I'll happily carry on holding him to account.
I admire your zeal but aren't you wasting your time? We have all seen thru him except the credulous and you won't change their minds
It is amusing tho the bully calling others bullies and the bullshitter calling others bullshitters. He is best just ignored IMO as he brings nothing of value to any debate he enters
zokes: Of course not, you can challenge his opinion with counter-facts.
But you can't really have a got at him for offering an unsourced opinion when he was directly asked for one.
But you can't really have a got at him for offering an unsourced opinion when he was directly asked for one.
It's never stopped him.
He is best just ignored IMO as he brings nothing of value to any debate he enters
This much is true. Killfile back on I guess.
Actually my economists’ forecasts not mine. But we work closely together.
They/we wimped on official 2020- hard brexit forecasts!!
The longer term forecasts are only interesting to the sense that they show the sensitivity of outcomes to various inputs. I give very little credence to the actual end number when it comes to HB forecasts.
Much better to plan around how the variables work eg £ and rates etc
Graham. Ignore it. The posse need their daily fix and target.
zokes: Of course not, you can challenge his opinion with counter-facts.
Counter-opinions surely?
But then when anyone does that he just calls BS, then complains about bullying.
They/we wimped on official 2020- hard brexit forecasts!!
Wise. I don't envy you having a go at 2019 forecasts to be honest with you.
The longer term forecasts are only interesting to the sense that they show the sensitivity of outcomes to various inputs. I give very little credence to the actual end number when it comes to HB forecasts.
Fair enough - not easy to model something that is pretty much unprecedented and has so many unknowns still floating around.
Which is why I am a little surprised you are so hard on the original gloomy "Project Fear" models for the worst case scenarios.
Granted, using hyperbole to counter hyperbole may not have been the best campaign move, especially when it is obviously reported without qualification, but I do think it was important to outline the [i]potential[/i] consequences - which is what you say you are planning for now.
I'm not. I found them very interesting and went through them in detail
I was hard on the way they were interpreted and used which was a MILE away from what they actually said. That is the difference.
Hence "project fear" - they actual results didn't not support the exagerated doomsday claims. But as ^ that doesn't stop people misrepresenting the facts
So thm, lets take it that we won't fall down a cliff, I agree generally, much like SI people will just get on with it.
So really the main question then becomes a question of democracy.
Given that the ref was predicated on bullshit, from all sides, as more facts become known, questions of do they people still want to go ahead with this are really the only valid questions needing asked.
Is it valid that democracy should be predicated on bullshit, or should the question be put back to the people once the facts are known?
Is it valid that democracy should be predicated on bullshit, or should the question be put back to the people once the facts are known?
As stated by many others, the latter, obviously.
lets take it that we won't fall down a cliff
Doesn't this beg the question? Are the consequences of Brexit only to be judged by some macroeconomic indices? Or are there maybe some other impacts that we might consider (and discuss) when weighing up the future?
Indeed Dr, a lot of leavers simply don't/didn't want to be part of Europe, even our arms length version. Economics etc means little, it's a wider issue. The same thing happened with some gNats.
Joe, loaded questions there but take the point. Have to shoot to meeting now, but will respond later. But the second vote be it a wider referendum or a Parliament vote ignores the fact that it will end up as a take it or leave it vote. There won't be - I don't think - the option of sorry, EU, we have now decided 51:49 that the deal isn't going to work now that we have the details so can you just hang on a minute?!?!
If we reject the deal at 23:59, we default to no deal and WTO.
We don't start the whole process again, at least not how I understand it.
Does it not strike you as a democratic fudge that there's no 3rd option?
If we reject the deal at 23:59, we default to no deal and WTO.
...if the WTO will have us...
There won't be - [b]I don't think[/b] - the option of sorry, EU, we have now decided 51:49 that the deal isn't going to work now that we have the details so can you just hang on a minute?!?!
Not quite so unequivocal now?
Noel Gallagher on his usual good form
“In England, the Brexit thing, it’s like, I can’t believe there’s so much noise about it… It was put to the people as a vote, the people voted. That’s democracy. F***ing get over it.”
Aye, a renowned deep thinker is Noel...
It was put to the people as a vote, the people voted. That’s democracy.
As would be a further vote. If he's such a fan of democracy, why not support that idea?
It's not as if it'll exactly affect him either way. Couldn't even be bothered to turn up to the One Love Manchester gig, which shows just how much he cares for "his" city and the people therein.
even the sun changing its tune & now saying that an exit bill of £40bn is fine,
does that mean Murdoch has told May she can offer more now?
the option of sorry, EU, we have now decided 51:49 that the deal isn't going to work now that we have the details so can you just hang on a minute?!?!If we reject the deal at 23:59, we default to no deal and WTO.
Yep, that's why those "traitors" that wanted parliamentary scrutiny were dismissing the "deal or no deal" vote as completely meaningless.
Obviously the government don't want an [i]"accept it or decide to abandon Brexit"[/i] vote as they worry what the result might be.
And they don't want a more sensible [i]"accept it or reject it, extend the deadline and continue negotiating"[/i] vote, because that could go on forever.
[i]Perhaps[/i] a solution would be to try to negotiate in stages and debate, vote and agree on aspects separately as they are negotiated? That feels democratic and properly scrutinised.
Not sure if it is possible though as they'd argue that too many aspects are interdependent - we can't agree on FoM terms without knowing the terms for citizens rights etc etc
I think the tory remainers are actually pursuing deep strategy for long-term EU membership as follows:
- UK exits EU
- UK gets really poor
- UK rejoins EU as a net recipient of funds
Downside is that all our young folk then bugger off to Poland, but hey.
Aye, a renowned deep thinker is Noel..
That's why his views fit in so well on this thread.
mefty - Member
Aye, a renowned deep thinker is Noel..
That's why his views fit in so well on this thread.
only you seem to think so.
The longer term forecasts are only interesting to the sense that they show the sensitivity of outcomes to various inputs. I give very little credence to the actual end number when it comes to HB forecasts.
Yes, well, that's obvious isn't it? If you estimate something for one year then forecast forwards as iterations of that year, any 'error' is compounded.
So why believe one over the other? The 'brilliance' of the compiler? Confirmation bias? (insert any other wordy synonym for 'opinion' here).
To pick up the Grimsby point from the previous page - tough. Well, of course Grimsby is 'special'. But so is Doncaster, Wakefield, Harrogate, Hartlepool.........
Shooting yourself in the foot hurts. At least when conscripts did it in wars it was to [u]avoid[/u] a more terrible future event, not to [u]cause[/u] it.
Satire is dead, you can't make absurdist stuff up for a laugh any more - it is just a reflection of another day at Downing Street.
So THM (and others) the UK voted to join, why are you so stuck behind a vote that contradicts another vote? Principles say respect democracy which was to join... Why should we be able to vote to leave and not re vote to remain?
serious answers please, got a one liner please send it to Jimmy Carr
only you seem to think so.
One gets the feeling that post-important meetings, someone might be along to blow smoke up meftys arse and tell him what a clever sneer it was.
So THM (and others) the UK voted to join
It didn't.
Vote was in respect it.
if hard brexit is averted will £ rise?
Im thinking purely about ordering some stuff from novyparts in france!
we (well the oldies that voted for it) were told what we were getting in the EU
someone might be along to blow smoke up meftys arse and tell him what a clever sneer it was
I can assure you, my arse is a smoke free zone, don't want to put off those people in need of kissing it.
DD as much as I enjoy the nuances of your "sneering" - more a delicate flick of the testicle than a ful set of studs down the shin - I fear the new subtlety may be lost on your target audience. But funny nonetheless. Thank you.
Kimbers - yes
Joe - not sure what you suggestion involves. Don't forget that our representatives have already voted on our behalf to leave the EU at the end of the negotiation period - they triggered A50. So we have had a referendum and a government vote already done and dusted and moving in one direction. We know that they will get a final vote too.
But the farce of the whole thing is that any subsequent vote can only be on the deal that the EU finally offers. There is nothing else to vote on. It would be silly to have a vote on something that we may like or may not like - that's irrelevant. The final vote will be on the deal that is on the table. And then, it will be a simply choice - a binomial one - accept or move on without a deal. What else do your envisage? Whether it is a referendum or a gov vote the basic issues don't change.
So the focus now should be on strengthening our negotiation position to ensure that the deal is as good as it gets. The rest is simply noise and largely irrelevant. Other than selling newspapers and media space.
Mefty 😉
There won't be - I don't think - the option of sorry, EU, we have now decided 51:49 that the deal isn't going to work now that we have the details so can you just hang on a minute?!?!If we reject the deal at 23:59, we default to no deal and WTO.
We don't start the whole process again, at least not how I understand it.
Well it’s one of the options. One of the options various Europeans keep mentioning.
So I wouldn’t discount it yet kid.
Ok grandpa 😉
Don’t. Just did an hour on the rolling dry ski slope at Xscape. First time on skis in 20 years and I feel knackered.
Anyway I know you’ve just thrown me that hope so you can dash it again, but what did your reports say for that option?
And how about the variation of that option where we stay in but lose the rebate?
I ski a lot but only four times on dreaded dry slopes - three broken thumbs in four visits 😉
Snowboarder converting (a little) to skiing. Boys both ski and my wife just got ski boots to go with her snowboard boots.
Snowboarder converting (a little) to skiing.
Traitor! Enemy of the People! Put his head on a spike 😉
No, no. I am a true believer in snowboarding*, I’m just infiltrating the enemy camp.
*particularly when it’s fresh and deep
2 votes. whether in parliament or another ref, i'm not too fussed tbh, I would put it back to the people, but a free vote in parliament should suffice.And then, it will be a simply choice - a binomial one - accept or move on without a deal. What else do your envisage?
Vote 1. Do you accept this deal, yes or no?
If no, Vote 2. Should we renegotiate or abandon discussions and remain? ( this should probably be put to the people).
how far the negotiation have gone is irrelevant to the democratic principle.
Anything else is anti democratic imo.
if we leave with out this, the illusion of democracy is over imo.
If no, Vote 2. Should we renegotiate or abandon discussions and remain?
?
Just remain
what's the question?teamhurtmore - Member
If no, Vote 2. Should we renegotiate or abandon discussions and remain?
?
[b]?[/b]
[i][I have nothing to add, but thought I'd join in the game of throwing question marks around to make it look like I have something to contribute, but deliberately holding back, hoping that you'll beg me to impart my wisdom.][/i]
?
[i][ insert meaningless winky smiley - let's keep this obtuse ][/i]
?
I just had to look up what phytosanitary controls were.
¿?
The EU-Canada deal slashes tariffs but trade in food is restricted by quotas and phytosanitary controls. There is also no additional access to the single market for financial services based in Canada.One senior EU official said that the British cabinet was still in “cuckoo land” if it believed that the EU would offer anything more.
I guess you are going with the debated ? re whether A50 is binding from our side or not?
I am not convinced that we have an option, but accept that both Barnier and Junker have indicated that there is some room for manoeuvre but just checked with our legal expert who claims it's not clear cut legally.
I assume that we have a lawyer in our midst so will defer to his, her, zees judgement
We don't have an option purely cause may and davis aren't considering it. Hence, democratic fudge.
but just checked with our legal expert who claims it's not clear cut legally.
If the concerned parties (UK gov and EU27) say it can be retracted though, is it even a legal matter, as theres no dissagreement?
I'd guess a document would need to be signed by all agreeing but that would just be a formallity.
I'd guess a document would need to be signed by all agreeing but that would just be a formallity.
Not if it constitutes a treaty change, you then have to worry about all the constitutional paraphernalia that goes with that in the EU27 - automatic referendums?
Well, 'till the new bill is passed, and then a UK subject could challenge the moving, or cancelling, of our exit date in the UK courts. Maybe. Who really knows how that would pan out.
[b]¿[/b]
Hence all the "huffing and puffing" surrounding the amendment writing a date and time on the bill, completely seperate from the existing and more flexible EU A50 process.
The other conundrum that people also aren't considering is, say the Uk parliament approves the deal. Then the EU parliament then rejects it.
What happens there, out on yer ear, extended negotion or an offer to stay in?
Out on yer ear … or delay and amend the deal… again… flexibility needed that our government wants done away with.
The most fun will be when the wallonians(*) reject it, or fail to reach any sort of final decision, by the due date.
*insert other random minor parliamentary body to taste
Not if it constitutes a treaty change
But it doesn't. Just unanimity in the council. That is, agreement from all the national governments. Even that might be a tough call though, if we act up even more in the next year or so.
Not if it constitutes a treaty change, you then have to worry about all the constitutional paraphernalia that goes with that in the EU27 - automatic referendums?
Just a clarification of a clause so if both sides agree it should be interpreted in a particular way then no change is necessary.
It may not even need a formal document above and beyond the UK formally retracting A50 and the EU saying received understood and agreed.
But it doesn't. Just unanimity in the council.
For an extension that would be fine - but I am not sure we are talking about an extension.
*insert other random minor parliamentary body to taste
Scotland?
[i][ does a runner … ][/i]
Just a clarification of a clause so if both sides agree it should be interpreted in a particular way then no change is necessary.
But it is not a clarification if it changes its meaning, so what it means at present is what matters.
And another shot below the water line. As I have been saying all along there is zero chance of a bespoke deal
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/16/leaked-eu-paper-dents-mays-hopes-for-bespoke-brexit-trade-deal
All along the tories / pro leavers on here have been parrotting this rubbish about a bespoke deal. You know - cake and eat it. Its been obvious right from the beginning that this was never going to happen. They have to take something off the shelf. Mays stupid redlines have made a Norway or Switzerland type deal or remaining in efta impossible.
The chances of any sort of deal are now remote tho finally looks like some movement from Mays team on money - but still nothing on citizens that would be remotely acceptable to the EU and of course nothing on NI
Any deal that breaches the good friday agreement will be vetoed by Ireland. Any deal that does not breach it has been ruled out by May and the three numpties
Therefore the chances of any deal are slim to none
The boss of Goldman Sachs has suggested a second EU referendum to confirm there is a consensus in the UK on the “monumental and irreversible” Brexit decision.
Lloyd Blankfein, in his latest intervention via Twitter on Brexit, said there was “lots of handwringing” from chief executives about Brexit and the “tough and risky road ahead”.
“Reluctant to say, but many wish for a confirming vote on a decision so monumental and irreversible. So much at stake, why not make sure consensus still there?”
We shall see. Given that none of the current options satisfy either sides needs its obvious that a new approach is needed. And guess what? The first signs - financial services - already appearing....others will follow.
The EU are past masters at (1) bullying first, (2) compromising in the end unless you are a small periphery nation, then they shit on you from a great height.
tjagain - MemberAny deal that breaches the good friday agreement will be vetoed by Ireland. Any deal that does not breach it has been ruled out by May and the three numpties
Therefore the chances of any deal are slim to none
As a practical aside I've recently noticed that on two local border crossings (one major one) the former HMRC customs sites have been sold and private houses built in their place.
Wonder what happens to the people who's houses will need to be leveled.
but just checked with our legal expert who claims it's not clear cut legally.
But how can this be? You were absolutely unequivocal about this the other day when you lost your rag.
The EU are past masters at (1) bullying first, (2) compromising in the end [u]unless you are a small periphery nation[/u], then they shit on you from a great height.
Well, that's us stuffed then
Why the hell would the EU cut a sweet deal to the UK for leaving? There's there's no ethical or indeed logical motivation for them to do so. They are responsible for the interests of 27, we are only one.
Apparently that's what the the noble brexiters are expecting.. There's a serious logic failure here.
There's a serious logic failure here.
Not exactly going to blame themselves
😆Well, that's us stuffed then
True but some folk still think we are the power house we once were.
David the massive cock Davies calls for cooperation in the name of mutual prosperity.
German journalist: “...why are you leaving?”
😆
You couldn’t make this shit up.
Oh...from Kuenssberg:
Davis warns German audience not to put EU politics ahead of getting a trade deal - 'putting politics above prosperity is never a smart choice.'
No really... 😆
😆
Oh. My. Word.
Davis warns German audience
Was the 'audience', in reality, a glass of sherry? That I could believe.
I have no words....