RayC

Problem is that there is no evidence to suggest that things will get better. It's nothing but blind faith to suggest otherwise. The UK almost never had to enact any legislation from Brussels that it didn't agree with.

So you were in favour of Brexit for xenophobic reasons?

You have selective amnesia. I have replied directly to you previously about this issue Statistical techniques such as regression analysis allow us to test hypotheses about the effect that Brexit has had on the economy. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regression.asp

Indeed, it is a complex subject which is why Margaret Thatcher (amongst others) was against having an 'In/ Out' referendum on EU membership. She had a point. You are still flogging this erroneous argument - and trying to present it as fact - despite evidence to the contrary having been posted on numerous occasions. In your first paragraph, you casually dismiss the economic effects of Brexit. Here you say that you voted Brexit because because freedom of movement distorted the UK labour market! You can't have it both ways The phrase 'Cutting off the nose ..." comes to mind. But you said that controlling the UK labour market was? Doesn't that fall within a discussion about the economy. I am completely confused by your line of argument and its' logic.

Just gets better and better .... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63687412

If only we could ban the lower classes from such events. They do spoil things for the well-heeled.

Not that I have much sympathy for her but you can hardly say she got off scot-free: 11 years is fair old stretch.

The 1872 Wanderers FA Cup final side. World champions in all but name. Those were the days!

Deleted. Duplicates @placeholder post

Your starter, sir https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/#assumptions

Deleted

Issues that we might both agree fit into that category: Family, friends, health, safety, community off the top of my head. That does appear to be the case for a large majority

I've a Welsh mate who has missed no more than half a dozen Wales' games (home or away) over the past 25 years. He's waited all his life for Wales to qualify for a World Cup: He's not going

Please don't suggest this to the organising committee; they might think that it is a serious proposal.

Re your final paragraph: To date, the over-whelming weight of evidence supports the view that Brexit has damaged the UK economy. Given this, I don't see why it should be a problem to highlight this evidence. As for the rest of your points: There might be some truth in what you say, but equally you could be accused of celebrating negative news about the EU member states.

Something of a myth that the UK is the preferred destination for asylum seekers. The bottom line is that it is a Europe-wide issue. https://www.worlddata.info/refugees-by-country.php

This whole area is a minefield of confusion. I made some voluntary contributions earlier this year and was informed that paying AVCs for years prior to 2016 would not increase my pension. If ever there was a case of caveat emptor it's here. (As an aside, presumably AVCs will increase by the rate of inflation (?) which means that anyone buying extra years from 6 April 23 will probably have to fork out an extra +/-£90 per year).

The opinions may be drawn from construction managers working in different industries but the graph which you published relates to construction not other sectors, and there are separate indices for the manufacturing and service sectors. Therefore, the graph you published cannot be said to be representative of the views of managers throughout all sectors of the economy. In any event, while the S&P indices may be important indicators, where is the evidence to support your categoric contention that they are the "best indicator of economic growth"?

It's certainly not good news that those working in construction in the Eurozone are pessimistic about their immediate future prospects, but why should an index that only covers one sector be the best leading indicator for the economy as a whole?

If you misrepresent my comments and/or post false information as you have done recently, then I will continue to post corrections.

I'm afraid that we have both been slow on the uptake: He's trolling.

I imagine that it will take a few years for the news to filter through to Pai, and a few more years for the hippies to comprehend what they are being told.

Re salaries: Agree completely Depends which is the home country: France, Germany, Benelux - yes. Not in Eastern Europe they wouldn't. (As the Politico link shows this is actually a problem for some of these countries, so you can pocket that as one negative for freedom of movement). Is that not a possibility? For example, Papworth is (was?) world-renowned for its' cardiology expertise.

For any number of reasons: Money; superior working conditions; the opportunity to further their knowledge/ career; opportunity to experience a different country/ culture, etc. On reflection you are probably correct: Why would a qualified doctor from the EU want to come and work in the UK (especially post-Brexit)?

The UK was not an attractive proposition for EU doctors when the UK was a member and it doesn't appear to have become any more attractive since we left. Perhaps it would pertinent to ask why?