The International Monetary Fund singled Britain out as a “notable exception” to an improving global economic outlook on Tuesday, as it confirmed a cut to its long-term forecast for UK growth and said negative effects of Brexit were beginning to show.
The IMF’s latest forecasts are slightly [b]more optimistic[/b] than the current consensus,
https://www.ft.com/content/499115b6-ad90-11e7-beba-5521c713abf4
In our main scenario, we project UK growth to slow from 1.8% in 2016 to around 1.5% in 2017 and 1.4% in 2018.This reflects slower consumer spending growth, offset by some rise in UK exports and public investment. But risks to growth are weighted to the downside due to Brexit.
https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/economics-policy/insights/uk-economic-outlook.html
The UK economy grew by 2% in 2016, with activity having
been unaffected by the EU referendum result. However,
with a weaker pound set to drive up inflation and
squeeze household purchasing power, we expect GDP
growth to slow to 1.6% in 2017 and 1.3% in 2018
Now these 3 organisations are generally agreed to be crediblebut err on the conservative side both with a big and small "c"
all see serious damage to the economy. this is the centre / right of centre view.
I don't expect a cliff-edge, although it's possible. I expect:
1) A gradual decline of the economy in the long term relative to Europe
2) An increase in competitive tax and regulation to counter this, leading to further Torification of the country.
3) A gradual drift of big companies away from the UK as they realise what a bunch of clowns we are and our buying power declines.
Over the next 20 years or so.
The economy is projected to slow in 2017 and 2018, owing to uncertainty about the outcome of the Brexit negotiations. This projection [b]assumes that the United Kingdom's external trade will operate on a most favoured nation basis [/b]from April 2019.
http://www.oecd.org/eco/outlook/united-kingdom-economic-forecast-summary.htm
~So even with favourable and IMO unrealistic assumptions they still see significant damage to the economy
MOlgrips - it won't be a gradual drift of big companies - it will be a rush for the exits as they will not be able to trade succssfully due to lack of access to the EU
Woodfords piece doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. I certainly agree that neither side would be massively happy with a no deal. And I'm quite sure they are right that there is money to be made.
Isn't there always in turmoil?
But seems to me (and I am not pretending to be remotely financially savvy) that there is a great deal of risk too. Which may be fine if you are playing with other people's money or have enough spare that you can take that risk.
So much for the floods of immigrants and bankers away from UK
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/21/almost-10000-eu-health-workers-have-quit-the-nhs-since-brexit-vote ]Almost 10,000 EU health workers have quit NHS since Brexit vote[/url] (up 42% from 2 years ago)
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/12/96-drop-in-eu-nurses-registering-to-work-in-britain-since-brexit-vote ]96% drop in EU nurses registering to work in Britain since Brexit vote[/url]
Yeah, nothing to worry about there.
Didn't mean to, Martin. But I agree that since we don't know what deal we will have you can only work with scenarios (and test the assumptions behind them). But despite the remoaner BS neither current trends not forecast based on hard Brexit suggest the doomsday that they like to claim. Even the Treasury forecasts from project fear had to be misquoted by remoaners on here who tried to claim that they were arguing that GDP was going to fall 4% in one year - perhaps they should be disqualified from voting in future 😉 ?
As for the IMF, the numbers they published yesterday or day before bear no relation to TJ's misrepresentation above. Not that that should be a surprise. Remoaners need to exagerated massively to make their non-points. We are already in the slowdown phase after an extended business cycle. Brexshit increases uncertainty and risk and is a -ve but not even close to the BS that is claimed.
.
:/
Just ignore him del
trying to ignore you both. don't think for a second i'm standing up for you. you're as bad as each other and it's boring.
we might be brought here by a shared enjoyment of riding bikes around in circles in the woods but we're supposed to be grown ups ffs.
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.
thm: your predicted -1% GDP for 2019.
Are you expecting that to just be a blip on the year of leaving, returning to growth in 2020, or part of a longer downturn?
1 in 10 financial services jobs have already gone to other european capitals with much of the rest set to follow according to such biased sources as the ft and PWC
A comparison of the impacts between UK GDP and FS GVA showing that the FS sector is disproportionately impacted by the UK leaving the EU compared to the UK
The UK FS sector will continue to grow under both exit scenarios
An estimated reduction of 70,000-100,000 in UK FS employment (number of people employed) in 2020 relative to the counterfactual
https://www.pwc.co.uk/industries/financial-services/insights/leaving-the-EU-implications-for-the-UK-financial-services-sector.html
That was for 2019 alone based on hard Brexit.
The main news this week re financial services is the evidence emerging of the kind of compromise that will become common. We are moving towards a two-way regulatory system as DD indicated. Not that suits a remoan agenda. But hey, business and banks in particular are adaptable beasts. They get on with dealing with what is in front of them!!
That was for 2019 alone based on hard Brexit.
Source?
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!
