Forum menu
The EU has some benefits, and it's stupid to leave, but let's not pretend it's perfect....
Who is pretending it is perfect. I don't think it is that great and if we were not already in it I wouldn't vote to join (as if we were not in it we would have all the things in place - be trading however we traded etc,.)
However, it is so difficult and costly to the economy and people of the UK that I would 100% stay in it (warts and all). Especially based on a projection of taking 30 years to break even.
What the hell happened to chewkw?
Has he been replaced by a functioning communications bot?
Iv’e been suspicious since his dropping of the word “maggots” a year ago... 😲
I should imagine we will put the satellite project out to tender and have it built by Branson.
Then we can pay double trying to get it to work.
... Because let's face it, the vitally important and urgent issue facing the UK right now is a surfeit of people pretending that the EU is perfect.
30 years to break even??
And next in a WTF are you thinking about series - The Horse racing lot
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45301966
<p class="story-body__introduction">Next year's Grand National could look very different if the UK leaves the EU without a deal, the British Horseracing Authority warns.</p>
Crashing out of the EU would potentially have a huge impact on Irish trainers and Irish horses.And it could see the end of the Tripartite Agreement system which allows horses to be easily moved between the UK, France and Ireland.
Eight Irish-trained horses have won the Grand National since 1999.
Still it would stop those bad foreign horses coming over here taking our winnings...
30 years to break even??
Would be interesting to see the report but a quick totting up puts the costs to the UK at over 10x the membership fee we pay, without taking into account trade losses and other little things like screwing up other industries in event of a hard brexit so 30 years seems very plausible if it triggers a recession.
If you think those who were hardest hit under thatcher are bitter just wait for this lot.
Hardest hit???
using the gov’s own numbers, in 15 years time the economy will have grown 24.4% instead of 25% which suggests to me that there will be very little to be bitter about - unless we are trying to make people unnecessarily fearful
but good analogy re Thatcher since most of the praise and vitriol directed her way was massively misplaced in both directions. Thatcherism was a myth that became a convenient excuse for many. You may be right that Brexit is used in the same manner
i actually starting to look forward to it
There is at least the possibility of a silver lining if the Tories get so strongly associated with it that they are unelectable for a few decades. For those of us who are adequately insulated from the effects of it, that would be quite entertaining.
Hardest hit???
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-42977967
15 year forecast, outside SM&CM, no trade deal, growth lower by…
Scotland: 9%
Wales: 9.5%
NE England: 16%
What scenario is that thm and where exactly did you get those numbers from please?
using the gov’s own numbers, in 15 years time the economy will have grown 24.4% instead of 25% which suggests to me that there will be very little to be bitter about – unless we are trying to make people unnecessarily fearful
Well for starters there will be no brexit dividend for at least 10 years which was one of the big claims.
Is that the forecast in event of a hard brexit? Free trade agreement? Bespoke pile of shit agreement?
i actually starting to look forward to it
Well being insulated from any real issues probably helps. When did you last work minimum wage?
I suspect that 24.4% number comes from taking the Government's 2% reduction in growth if we go for the EEA/Norway option.
But that then leaves us in the same situation we are now, except we have zero say in what the EU does - we're "rule takers". That's the option where JRM and Johnson accuse May of "betraying" Brexit, and a lot of people get very gammony asking what exactly it was we voted for.
And if they're going to get angry anyway, we might as well just have a final referendum on the deal ("People's Vote") - it's not like they can be any more angry.
But surely noone with a passing competence in economics could misinterpret the numbers in that way. The reduction in growth is quoted in percentage points, eg a 2% reduction means 23% rather than 25% over that period. The more realistic figures are substantially higher losses.
A billion here, a billion there... Soon we're talking serious money.
And the 2% is just the hit on London. The forecast is a reduction of 16 percentage points in the forecasted growth over the same period following a no-deal Brexit for the north east of England, and nearly as bad for the northwest and midlands.
But John Redwood says the figures are nonsense, and he ought to know.
I too am interested in how THM arrives at his 24.4 figure. Surely he can't really be just taking 2% of 25? Has he got his team of economists sitting next to him?
Indeed the specific example was the EEA. But note how the percentages are misused. What does 11% over 15 years mean?!?
Oh FFS we are back at the patronising teacher approach.
So the simple conclusion is the UK will be worse off out of the EU.
In addition not all of the impacts are fully understood as the government has not really bothered to take the time to produce detailed impact studies.
Stick that on a bus
Misused by you it seems thm. It means a previously anticipated growth of 25% (I'll assume you got that directly from somewhere) is forecast to be 14% instead. This is sort of basic stuff, it would be embarrassing for me to find out I'd been wasting my time "debating" with someone who understood so little about economics so I hope you are just joking.
No. People misuse (as you do) the stats
as above 2% is not 25 to 23.
Is growth lower being out of the EU?
Is that on the best case leave solution that is unpalatable to a significant number of Tory MP's?
Oh FFS stop embarrassing yourself.
30 years to break even??
Yep 2050 - 2020. We can all make numbers up and when estimating what will be happening in 5+ years made up is all they ever are.
Meanwhile Rees-Mogg is keen on bringing back border controls:
Costs so far...
Contraction of economy
https://www.ft.com/content/dfafc806-762d-11e8-a8c4-408cfba4327c
So add in another couple of Billion here and there
(in all this time we are still paid up members)
So we are spending a lot of money while receiving less which means cuts to services etc and more "austerity"
Then we have bills to pay on leaving which roughly equal 5 years of membership so that is 5 years in before any of that pesky brexit dividend can be realised (in simple terms excluding any of the extra spending that is needed)
Next up is the extra spending needed to do the simple things like borders and medicine regulations...
Proper break even is a long way off and projected growth reductions mean less income over a time where more expenditure is required - more borrowing? More cuts?
But hang on didn't the PM promise to be paying more to the NHS while maintaining current EU spending plans for agriculture and development?
Man that is a lot in the spend column and bugger all in the revenue column isn't it.
The grown ups have been working hard though - they've got a plan for some portaloos for the 20 miles of trucks queuing to get into Dover.
Perhaps we could make some cash back with a burger van every 500 yards?
Perhaps we could make some cash back with a burger van every 500 yards?
Or the rejuvenation of some of those sleepy little fishing villages who are about to be decimated by becoming the centre of smuggling for vital medical supplies or fresh tomatoes 😉
If it’s that basic why do you continue to misrepresent this?
and probably the most definitive bit of the Brexit analysis is in the first couple of pages
There is no single model or analysis that can provide a definitive assessment of all potential outcomes
and yet project fear jump on the most extreme and then misquote them to exaggerate the effects further. And then complain about buses.
THM has his maths correct, but he is not looking at those areas "hardest hit", and he is using figures that assume an outcome that this government, and opposition, have ruled out… so pretty unlikely, even if favourable.
Indeed. I merely quoted one of the base assumptions used by the government. Which basically shows minimal economic impact over 15 years.
How many times is the scenario quoted? Several hundreds of pages back we even had people posting that the economy was going to contract by these amounts in one year!!!
Eg we are going to have a -4% recessions. At least the same posters went on to say that people who didn’t understand economics should be banned from voting 😉
So the simple conclusion is the UK will be worse off out of the EU.
Don't over simplify… damage can be reduced by continuing to operate in the Single Market as a non member, EEA style. The alternative ways to Leave all hit certain geographical areas, and social economic groups, far harder. You could argue that it doesn't matter "to the elite" how we Leave… so we shouldn't leave it to them to choose. Lazy and cynical way to frame it perhaps, but that approach seems to be quicker than others… and… tick tock.
Indeed. I merely quoted one of the base assumptions used by the government. Which basically shows minimal economic impact over 15 years.
So economy contracts, revenue raised drops and spending is needed in places it was never needed before.
That means more borrowing or more cuts - or at least none of the promises being met.
Some of the hardest hit implications are massive for those areas and will need serious investment in order to mitigate the impact of them. Again where is all that cash going to come from?
Still no real reason to be even vaguely positive about this self inflicted shit storm being propagated by internal tory bickering.
And that is for an option that would require a guns to the head 3 line whip from the Tories to get through any kind of vote/avoid a revolt.
Don’t over simplify… damage can be reduced by continuing to operate in the Single Market as a non member, EEA style.
I think the simplification still holds, no version of leave makes the UK better off or holds the current trajectory. IE Worse off in all scenarios.
Of course, there is no manner of giving up EU membership that is more popular than keeping it.
Repeat, repeat, repeat.
Choosing to participate in the Single Market, without EU represention, does not have mandate. Damages the country, while ceding control.
Choosing to leave the Single Market, without replacement treaties and agreements, does not have a mandate. Much greater damage to the regions, including Brexit voting ones, long term, and causes shorter term hugely damaging disruption for most of us.
Pick one. Ask the public to accept/back it over continuing to be a member.
Yes it does. Giving up membership of the EU means giving up membership of the SM. The vote result = the mandate
Hence the need to negotiate a new form of “access to” the SM as a non member. Very different questions.
Hence the need to negotiate a new form of “access to” the SM as a non member. Very different questions.
Shame nobody wants to ask us those questions though...
Still now we are into the least worst options if the Tories can stop squabbling and put the country first, seems unlikely though past performance should not be a guarantee of future outcomes.
Next up some honesty from May about the implications of each option, and each SEL from her party who complains gets a slap.
That should help things along with public confidence.I mean she has no credibility whenever the term Brexit Dividend comes out of her mouth.
Indeed many are still fighting the old battle - which we lost- instead and then wonder why the “negotiations” (sic) are going badly.
Yes it does. Giving up membership of the EU means giving up membership of the SM. The vote result = the mandate
No.
You can be in the EEA, and a member of the SM, but not in the EU. It's the "Norway" model.
We've been over this 🙂
yet project fear jump on the most extreme
Which frankly is what we are heading towards unless the bickering children can sort themselves out.
instead and then wonder why the “negotiations” (sic) are going badly.
Unrealistic aims, impossible to achieve contradictory positions and being lead by somebody who is being help to ransom by the extreme side of her party?
Or is it because we don't blindly cheer on brexit?
The vote result = the mandate
Nope. Sorry but you cant claim that.
Daniel Hannan and Owen Paterson both claimed that voting leave would not mean leaving the single market.
Now of course they were lying and that was pointed out at the time. However to try and claim a clear mandate about an issue where the winning side lied about it is somewhat special.
Farage used Norway as an example of an alternative relationship as well.
How are the grownups doing by the way at sorting all this out? Since at the moment it seems the grownups are suffering from dementia, severe drug addiction and other such ailments that is getting in the way of them being all grown up.
When does the 350 million a week start rolling in to the NHS? Surely the UK doesn't have to wait 5 years for that little gem?
THM i get a lot of what you say however there is a problem with the whole Brexit "new markets " vision as follows -
To make it work requires not just a leap of Faith but lots of SMEs (including me) investing their capital and energy into making it work, this in turn places great risk on SMEs.
For me the vast majority who voted to leave will not be investing their capital because they have none, the vast majority who voted to leave dont employ people they are primarily pensioners, working poor, and wealth takers like JRM and possibly your good self.
The Brexiteers are asking the remainers to underwrite there decision with our money and efforts.
Massive generalisation i know but there is more truth in the above than any shit written in a big red bus.
I for one will be taking my capital and effort and ****ing off to warmer climes.
All we have to do is pay the £40bn divorce payment, then all that we have spent so far, then once we have paid for all the other stuff needed and accounted for a reduced economy and tax take and paid all the other things we were going to keep paying for that the EU pays for, we can think about spending that on the NHS. So sometime about 2030/2040 maybe
2030/40..... I can understand why they left that bit off the side of the bus
No one in their right mind would have voted for that.
Oldetc.
On your first post I suggest that you are mixing the two things still as is dissonance
you can still have access to the SM but as before this is separate.
I voted remain BTW
Yes it does. Giving up membership of the EU means giving up membership of the SM. The vote result = the mandate
Giving up membership, yes.
Ruling out operating within, no.
We did this months ago, or maybe even years ago. To death.
You yourself choose just now to use the figures based on us operating in the single market, EEA style, rather than those where we have access to it, via an FTA.
We did this months, or maybe even years ago. To death.
Yes but splitting hairs over the details is a lot better than acknowledging how badly the government is handling all of this. Or how the balance of public opinion is coming down against the whole idea.
It's not splitting hairs over details, it's using language designed to obscure the very real choices that our politicians are making, or need to be making, for us. We can operate within the Single Market, reducing the damage of withdrawal. It is one kind of access… yet quite different to the access an FTA can provide. Our government (opposed by many of their MPs) want to try and get access in the form of being part of the Single Market as regards industrial goods, while being only willing to accept the responsibilities of an FTA… all while allowing future divergence unilaterally decided by one party, us. Not going to happen. At least it's a good starting position to have… if it was what was decided before A50 was triggered… lots of time, and hard decision making, needed to move that towards either an FTA or Single Market arrangement… years I (and real trade negotiators) would say. And then, in the case of the former, years to implement.
I don’t chose any figure. As an economist i am well aware of the uses and limitations of the models involved. Iprefer them for the insights they give to how the variables interact. The end numbers are the least important bit. In this case largely meaningless especially as they ignore many of. The obvious changes that would occur
hence I reject the definitive doomsday BS
I don’t chose any figure.
You chose the figure based on an EEA type relationship, as it flattered your case more than the figure for either an FTA or no deal.
You than said that an EEA type relationship was ruled out by the referendum vote. It wasn't. It was ruled out by the leaders of both main parties.
Someone please develop a block button that works on mobile browsers 😭😭😭
hence I reject the definitive doomsday BS
But you also lump in a lot of negativity as doomsday, it's going to be really really shit for a lot of people even if the only slightly negative predictions come true. There are no positive predictions for post brexit.
No kelvin.
I clarified what the vote was about. You merely chose to obscure this for your own ends.
As for obscuring, I prefer what the experts say as unpopular as this position is now among those who wish to ignore the result.
For the 15th time this is what we were told before the vote
From the outset, it is important that the Government, Parliament and the public are clear about the distinction between ‘access to’ and ‘membership of’ the Single Market. Many countries have ‘access to’ the EU’s Single Market, either through agreed tariffs at the WTO or via a FTA. However, the only countries which have full membership of the Single Market—which entails the liberalised movement of goods, services, people and capital (the ‘Four Freedoms’), secured through common rules interpreted by the European Court of Justice (CJEU)— are EU Member States. The EEA states only enjoy partial membership, because the EEA agreement does not include a customs union. On the other hand, Turkey’s inclusion in a customs union with the EU does not entail the free movement of services, people or capital. Fundamentally, full membership of the Single Market is predicated upon acceptance of all Four Freedoms.
Source the experts
we know or should know what the vote was about and how that differs from what the negotiations (?) are about
unless you are deliberately trying to mislead.
Yes, there is no way we can have "full membership", no one has argued otherwise.
Now, does the referendum result rule out operating in the Single Market, EEA style? Have the EU ruled that out? Or is it not actually the case that the leadership of our two main parties have done so?
Why did you choose to use the figure based on us choosing an EEA style relationship with the EU?
Even the ardent hard Brexiters do not rule out trading with Europe. The only debate is under which terms. I prefer a bespoke FTA others EEA others WTO. These are separate debate to the referendum which was clear. Do you want to be a member of the EU?
I quoted that figure as it is one that the gov has given - among others - that falsifies the hypothesis that giving up membership of the EU must result in significant economic damage.
Popper eat your heart out
Can someone please explain to me why JRM has so much say about Brexit because I thought back benchers were voiceless extras
An example of the unanticipated costs of leaving:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-45314954
We're now looking at spending £2-5billion on a UK only GPS. That's the cost of the system, not counting the need for us to buy UK specific devices if we want to use it.
I'm sure we'll be told "The British public voted for it so we have to do it". No they didn't - and if you want to question that, ask them again now they know what the question means.
We’re now looking at spending £2-5billion on a UK only GPS.
As it is a military system we may not be able to source components, systems and staff from outside of the UK depending on how our security negotiations go. So let’s see how that number moves...
There is a reason why the UK cannot develop military aircraft anymore. When the F-35 was around 50$ million a piece the break even qty was in the region of 700 units (2003 numbers). The RAF will maybe order 125... We do not have the resources to develop and deploy alone so why pretend otherwise
Sigh. Paste still didn't work on Android/Chrome.
Works for me.
Investing money in a British GPS might boost our high tech industry though eh?
Investing money in a British GPS might boost our high tech industry though eh?
Or spending money on stuff we don't need to when we could be spending it on Health, Medicine Research or other High Tech stuff we need that doesn't already exist.
THM is viewing this from a high level ecomomics view and i agree at that level its probably going to be a "relatively" moderate impact but and its a ****ing big but as THM will no doubt understand as an economist that the "moderate" impact on big numbers is multiplied up and down so -
1. Poor people become piss poor
2. Rich people become richer
3. The middle (THMs moderate impact) remains "as is"
There are some horrible outcomes for the poor, however as i have said this needs to happen otherwise poor people will continue believe the utter shite fed to them by JRM and the Daily Mail
The "people" need to suffer......
The “people” need to suffer……
How many deaths will teach them?
3. The middle (THMs moderate impact) remains “as is”
The army of these who voted leave with triple locked pensions and a nice house and a good accountant won't suffer, they won't see a change
I'm not sure how many of the truly poor listen to JRM or read the mail.
Afraid as nasty as it sounds, the pensioners who voted for this can get their pensions cut in line with the scale of any further benefit cuts on the back of brexit austerity.
Investing money in a British GPS might boost our high tech industry though eh?
or potentially just try to recreate existing tech but with a 7 year lag and then lock the uk government to single sourced equipment. It's not high tech 5£bn could be invested in creating new breakthroughs which could allow real gains.
IMO it is not worth copying existing tech because we threw our toys out of the park and then pretending it is a boost to the development of an industry
astrium are a big satellite manufacturer involved with Galileo and in the uk. All this would do is maintain what we he not create new jobs.
Mind you some would say spending the money to stand still is a price worth paying...
pensioners who voted for this can get their pensions cut
as will the pensioners who didn't vote for it but went about telling everybody they could find what a bad idea it was...
as will the pensioners who didn’t vote for it but went about telling everybody they could find what a bad idea it was…
Welcome to partisan politics. If you are not me you can all go to hell...
The “people” need to suffer……
Why do you consider this constructive? Read more history. The blame will still be shifted onto immigrants. Current politicians will lose support because they "did Brexit wrong", but their replacements will be ready… with the likes of Bannon handing them the tools to achieve power.
Investing money in a British GPS might boost our high tech industry though eh?
Much of the investment was going to be in British companies… with a far smaller hit to UK public budgets. Now we look to be on course for having parallel infrastructure, without any additional benefits, and without a sharing of the burden of the cost of setup and running. This isn't the only example of this, of course.
Welcome to partisan politics. If you are not me you can all go to hell…
What's partisan about pointing out an unfair generalisation?
Well I can't leave you lot alone for a couple of days with out the project fear misinformation machine running overtime and you remainering each other off into a frenzied brexit climax. Lets see if I can cut through some of the absurd bull shit thats being bandied around:
I’m. Sure all the diabetics in the house are looking forward to dabbling on the black market. #exciting
Oh purrlease mikewsmith, more project fear bullshit, get past the headlines and you might get somewhere nearer the truth. The insulin producers have already said this is a non issue and the UK does actually have a producer albeit of a certain variant and in small amounts.
I agree that it would be undemocratic now to stay in the EU without it being put to the people.
I don’t.
It would be problematic and arguably unwise, but a publicly elected government making decisions for the good of its electorate is the very definition of a democracy.
Cougar - So if we have a referendum and the government of the day completely ignores the wishes of the people this is the very definition of democracy? I don't even know where to start on this one. In fact I won't, lets see if theres any others that warrant a response...
Yep, Damn right too, `Give me a big stick and a bucket of shit and i’ll really * abuse them, more so than the fat blurt (really fat – so fat she couldn’t sit on a hospital chair yet in 30 mins she ate her way through the contents of a carrier bag of sweets and crisps whist constantly shouting at the staff that she needed her meds now, we had the misfortune of being sat near her in the assessment area when i took my dad up to hospital yesterday for his blood transfusion for MDS, we were waiting 2+ hours to get admitted so i had built up quite a righteous anger by this point. She made the mistake of commenting loudly to her mother “* **** doctors in this hospital” so i let rip into her with every ounce of venom and bile i had built up and i made sure everyone else heard exactly what she had said about Dr Aziz.
A vile and disgusting lump of 25+stone flesh and fat masquerading as human,
Not quite sure where you are going with this but I assume you think all brexiteers are racist, is that the case? I think you'll find most that voted leave have an issue with uncontrolled mass immigration rather than an objection to specific countries, cultures or skin colour, although I don't doubt that there are racists and that they would have voted leave. Personally I'm most definitely not a racist, in fact my best mate is a black, indian, muslim, transgender lesbian.
Mr THM, Sir you have the brains of a rocking horse, oh & also what colour is the sky on your planet.
This is the first and only post orderwingate has posted on the brexit thread and this is his contribution.
Broke Funding rules
mikewsmith - no one gives a shit about this because everyone knows that the remain campaigns broke rules as well, in fact there were two separate fines issued. Then theres the crap leaflet that cameron sent out that cost £9 million of tax payers money which is arguably the greatest scandal.
Next up is the extra spending needed to do the simple things like borders and medicine regulations…
Proper break even is a long way off and projected growth reductions mean less income over a time where more expenditure is required – more borrowing? More cuts?
But hang on didn’t the PM promise to be paying more to the NHS while maintaining current EU spending plans for agriculture and development?
Man that is a lot in the spend column and bugger all in the revenue column isn’t it.
Well we haven't left yet so how can there be anything in the revenue column? I don't expect I'll be on here in 10+ years time but if I am I will look forward to looking you up and telling you to eat humble pie. I think its quite feasible that the UK could overtake Germany in GDP in the next 10-15 years.
Daniel Hannan and Owen Paterson both claimed that voting leave would not mean leaving the single market.
dissonance - more bull shit project fear misinformation. https://medium.com/@jamesforward/a-rebuttal-to-open-britain-vote-leave-never-promised-to-remain-in-the-single-market-85a0778c75a9
On Galileo, we have contributed £1 billion to it. It just shows how weak our politicians are when they are prepared to write this off. What a disgrace. We should sue the EU to either get a portion of that back or get a long term usage agreement.
On Galileo, we have contributed £1 billion to it. It just shows how weak our politicians are when they are prepared to write this off. What a disgrace. We should sue the EU to either get a portion of that back or get a long term usage agreement.
What is the legal basis for suing the EU there? What are you going to sue them for?
The insulin producers have already said this is a non issue and the UK does actually have a producer albeit of a certain variant and in small amounts.
As they don't know the process for that being legal to sell it's a bit ambitious there.
Well we haven’t left yet so how can there be anything in the revenue column? I don’t expect I’ll be on here in 10+ years time but if I am I will look forward to looking you up and telling you to eat humble pie. I think its quite feasible that the UK could overtake Germany in GDP in the next 10-15 years.
True but they will need to exceed what we get now considerably before we break even.
Glad we are looking at over 10 years before we can expect any kind of payback on this shit show #ShouldHavePutThatOnTheBus
UK does actually have a producer albeit of a certain variant and in small amounts.
You have no idea about insulin & managing diabetes then
But keep up with your ignorance Dickens, it reinforces all our remoaner prejudices.
How are we going to sue the EU when we refuse to have anything to do with the ECJ?
Democracy is a process, not an event.
Two and a bit years ago is ancient history to democracy.
You Brexies should have acted faster if you actually wanted to leave. But you couldn’t agree, could you?
Because while you all of course knew exactly what you were voting for, none of you were actually voting for exactly the same thing.
You foolish Brexy snowflakes melting under pressure. Should have agreed what you wanted in advance - but then you’d never have got a (marginal, almost negligible) majority, would you?
We should sue the EU to either get a portion of that back or get a long term usage agreement.
Doesnt that rather fall down because we agreed the rules; that 3rd countries couldn't handle certain aspects of the data?
And now want to make ourselves a 3rd country.
The insulin producers have already said this is a non issue and the UK does actually have a producer albeit of a certain variant and in small amounts.
I believe that solitary company is Wockhardt and they produce enough insulin for approx 2000 users, quite a fair amount short of the 450,000+ users of insulin in this country, how do I know this?......... A good friend works in procurement for the NHS and the medical implements and drug supply issue is a very real and genuine worry for the entire NHS at the moment.
dickens by name d*ck by nature
<span style="display: inline !important; float: none; background-color: transparent; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans'; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 22.4px; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">I think its quite feasible that the UK could overtake Germany in GDP in the next 10-15 years.</span>
On what do you base that?
Also, will we have the same opportunities as the Germans in 2028? Will there be as many British kids working abroad as Germans? Am I ever going to live and work abroad again?
Answer to those is most likely no. Do you care about that, dickens?
The people who voted for this, who were conned by Boris, Nigel, Aaron, JRM et al need to understand the implications first hand.
They wont be able to blame the EU, immigrants etc as they will no longer be an issue.
Hard rain needs to fall then lessons will be learnt and yes they will look for scapegoats but they will be few and far between.
If they dont learn then they and their children will live in shit and misery.
You can lead a horse to water ......
The insulin producers have already said this is a non issue and the UK does actually have a producer
Good news. However, as ever, the devil is in the detail
albeit of a certain variant and in small amounts.