Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[StreetCowboy]

47 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

This is getting beyond silly. In my post which linked the relevant article, I ran with the humorous fact that the random number generator beat the IMF's prediction. It might not beat it all the time, but beat it, it indeed did, as stated at the end of the article.

 

Your brief summary jumps from a point at the start of the article to a different point at the end of the article, and tries to use the first point to try to contradict the different last point. I would suggest that I'm not the one who needs to do the finger-tracing and word-sounding. Though I do admire the eloquent way you present your bad logic. It adds a touch of pseudo-class to the discussion.

I think you might almost be starting to understand this.  The article points out that various economic predictions are more accurate than a random number generator, and that those predictions get better the sorter the time span ahead that they are made. 

 

However, they are not good at predicting the timing of downturns.  I would expect that there are other tools which are effective at predicting the timing of downturns to within a greater or lesser period, but those tools were not the models under test.   The models under test were models for predicting future economic growth, not the timing of downturns.

 

SC

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

I think you misunderstand what leaving the EU means. It doesn't mean cutting off all diplomatic ties with the EU or it's member states.

 

This isn't a matter of diplomatic ties, it is a matter of the UK seeking a combined EU response as a member of the EU.

Post Brexit and out of the EU, the UK will not have the support of the EU. 

 

There is no misunderstanding.

 

Well, not on my part anyway.

[CG1 Blue]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

This isn't a matter of diplomatic ties, it is a matter of the UK seeking a combined EU response as a member of the EU.

Post Brexit and out of the EU, the UK will not have the support of the EU. 

 

There is no misunderstanding.

 

Well, not on my part anyway.

So are you suggesting the EU would not be supportive of a western country, a member of NATO if they have left the EU? That doesn't make the EU sound like a great organisation to me.

 

I think you're wrong by the way. They are petty, but not that petty.

[StreetCowboy]

5 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

So are you suggesting the EU would not be supportive of a western country, a member of NATO if they have left the EU? That doesn't make the EU sound like a great organisation to me.

 

I think you're wrong by the way. They are petty, but not that petty.

I think that if we were out of the EU, the EU might say it’s not a matter of EU policy, so it’s up to individual countries.  I would hope our fellow NATO members would look adversely at an attack on UK residents using nerve gas, but as far as I know, the EU does not have a defined position on disputes between two third parties.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, StreetCowboy said:

I think that if we were out of the EU, the EU might say it’s not a matter of EU policy, so it’s up to individual countries.  I would hope our fellow NATO members would look adversely at an attack on UK residents using nerve gas, but as far as I know, the EU does not have a defined position on disputes between two third parties.

Maybe the EU would support the UK for a fee then? 

[evadgib]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/rocketing-to-success-space-industry-act-to-unlock-billions-for-the-uk-economy

[StreetCowboy]

3 minutes ago, evadgib said:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/rocketing-to-success-space-industry-act-to-unlock-billions-for-the-uk-economy

Excellent.  That will be so much easier if we don't have to work as part of a team with the French, Germans, and dozens of other supporting countries.  

 

I'm surprised that the French, the Germans and the rest of them have allowed themselves to be so left behind and not set something up - maybe a European Space Agency, or something like that.

 

SC

[evadgib]

4 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

Excellent.  That will be so much easier if we don't have to work as part of a team with the French, Germans, and dozens of other supporting countries.  

 

I'm surprised that the French, the Germans and the rest of them have allowed themselves to be so left behind and not set something up - maybe a European Space Agency, or something like that.

 

SC

Adding billions to the economy casts my mind back to Maggie. 

"Rejoice in that news"

[Khun Han]

8 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

I think you might almost be starting to understand this.  The article points out that various economic predictions are more accurate than a random number generator, and that those predictions get better the sorter the time span ahead that they are made. 

 

However, they are not good at predicting the timing of downturns.  I would expect that there are other tools which are effective at predicting the timing of downturns to within a greater or lesser period, but those tools were not the models under test.   The models under test were models for predicting future economic growth, not the timing of downturns.

 

SC

 

 

 

The article points out lots of things, including data which supports economists and their predictions. That's because it's balanced and well-written. But the overall tone of the article makes fun of the track record of economic forecasting, as can be read in the prologue. Strangely, yourself and simoh1490 only selected the 'balanced' parts of the article, and did your level best to ridicule the points that I took from it, though simoh1490's major response was such a garbled mish-mash, that unless one glided through it, ignoring the contradictions, it was impossible to interpret.

 

Could you provide an example of an economic body (with examples) which fairly consistently gets medium-to-long-term forecasts right?

[Khun Han]

3 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

This isn't a matter of diplomatic ties, it is a matter of the UK seeking a combined EU response as a member of the EU.

Post Brexit and out of the EU, the UK will not have the support of the EU. 

 

There is no misunderstanding.

 

Well, not on my part anyway.

So are you suggesting the EU would not be supportive of a western country, a member of NATO if they have left the EU? That doesn't make the EU sound like a great organisation to me.

 

I think you're wrong by the way. They are petty, but not that petty.

 

You only had to see the responses from the EU's leaders last year, when PM May dropped the hint about withdrawing security co-operation, to understand that it's simply not an option for the EU.

[Scott]

Baiting post reported and removed.  

[simoh1490]

6 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

The article points out lots of things, including data which supports economists and their predictions. That's because it's balanced and well-written. But the overall tone of the article makes fun of the track record of economic forecasting, as can be read in the prologue. Strangely, yourself and simoh1490 only selected the 'balanced' parts of the article, and did your level best to ridicule the points that I took from it, though simoh1490's major response was such a garbled mish-mash, that unless one glided through it, ignoring the contradictions, it was impossible to interpret.

 

Could you provide an example of an economic body (with examples) which fairly consistently gets medium-to-long-term forecasts right?

 

Let's cut to the quick on this and try to bring closure to this ping-pong regarding economic models because it's all a bit of a red herring, well, it's fishy at least!

 

Every government department, multinational company, central bank, small business, everyone draws up and uses forecasts. They use them to report past performance, announce future intentions, to raise capital and to obtain loans; they are a part of the fabric of business globally YET you don’t believe them or think they’re accurate and should be dismissed. And when a forecast is seen to be less than 100% accurate in every respect you cry foul, they got it wrong you whine! On this point you can’t be helped, it’s your choice to use or ignore what’s given to you and you chose to ignore.

 

But your ignorance of economic forecasting doesn’t make those forecasts or models go away, they are still out there for everyone to see and most sensible people are paying attention to them, governments are, business are and they’re all making decisions based in part on them. So if you think that trying to trash the concept of economic modelling is going to invalidate any past or future anti-Brexit argument, just because you don’t think models are useful, you're going to need to rewrite the laws of economics and business before anyone is going to pay attention to what you have to say on this subject.

 

 

[Grouse]

The Economist is correct 

 

https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21738901-governments-own-economic-analysis-finds-brexit-will-damage-economy-how-bad-could-it

[simoh1490]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

The Economist is correct 

 

https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21738901-governments-own-economic-analysis-finds-brexit-will-damage-economy-how-bad-could-it

"Sir John Major, a former Tory prime minister, has said he knows of no precedent for a government enacting a policy that makes the country poorer. Those talking up Project Fear would be more honest if they conceded that Brexit will do this, but argued it is a price worth paying". 

 

Exactly, the time is past where people can hide behind "no negative impact" statements, it's difficult to support or respect an argument in favour of a principle when the argument itself is shrouded in falsehoods, lies and deception.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

"Sir John Major, a former Tory prime minister, has said he knows of no precedent for a government enacting a policy that makes the country poorer. Those talking up Project Fear would be more honest if they conceded that Brexit will do this, but argued it is a price worth paying". 

 

Exactly, the time is past where people can hide behind "no negative impact" statements, it's difficult to support or respect an argument in favour of a principle when the argument itself is shrouded in falsehoods, lies and deception.

From which side....?   

[Grouse]

18 minutes ago, transam said:

From which side....?   

It's not only you who seems to have difficulty in differentiating between forecasts which turned out to be off target and outright lies and deception. Would you like me to provide examples of each? Surely that's unnecessary?

[Grouse]

Artificial neural networks ( a form of AI) have long been used to replace credit scoring algorithms, forecast bond prices and various types of futures. I wonder if they are now being used for economic forecasting? Of course, these are "black boxes": there is no logical backtracking. I'll bet they would provide better forecasts! I guess the level of complexity is similar to that of meteorology. 

 

BTW, Any Questions last night was good. Ken Clarke was on form!

[simoh1490]

1 hour ago, transam said:

From which side....?   

Both! But I wrote that with "no negative economic impact of Brexit", in mind.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Both! But I wrote that with "no negative economic impact of Brexit", in mind.

Perhaps the UK already has a negative economic impact being in the EU..

 

It seems the UK police are spending a lot of their financial resources dealing with EU folk walking in and out of the UK being naughty..

[simoh1490]

2 minutes ago, transam said:

Perhaps the UK already has a negative economic impact being in the EU..

 

It seems the UK police are spending a lot of their financial resources dealing with EU folk walking in and out of the UK being naughty..

Perhaps, in which case deal with that aspect without throwing the baby out with the bathwater....where there's a will etc.

[Khun Han]

8 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

 

Let's cut to the quick on this and try to bring closure to this ping-pong regarding economic models because it's all a bit of a red herring, well, it's fishy at least!

 

Every government department, multinational company, central bank, small business, everyone draws up and uses forecasts. They use them to report past performance, announce future intentions, to raise capital and to obtain loans; they are a part of the fabric of business globally YET you don’t believe them or think they’re accurate and should be dismissed. And when a forecast is seen to be less than 100% accurate in every respect you cry foul, they got it wrong you whine! On this point you can’t be helped, it’s your choice to use or ignore what’s given to you and you chose to ignore.

 

But your ignorance of economic forecasting doesn’t make those forecasts or models go away, they are still out there for everyone to see and most sensible people are paying attention to them, governments are, business are and they’re all making decisions based in part on them. So if you think that trying to trash the concept of economic modelling is going to invalidate any past or future anti-Brexit argument, just because you don’t think models are useful, you're going to need to rewrite the laws of economics and business before anyone is going to pay attention to what you have to say on this subject.

 

 

 

Mainstream economists are headed toward a major turning point. They freely admit that their current models are inadequate. But, so far, all they are able to do is keep modifying those models slightly, and still those models don't work properly. The problem is one of conditioning: education and peer environment. And anyone coming up with alternative models is dismissed out-of-hand. It's going to take a genius, who can think outside the box, to get economic theory up to speed. An historic example of this is Ludwig Erhard in post-WW2 Germany. Ridiculed by mainstream economists, he managed to gain traction with the US occupiers due to his longstanding and brave stance against the Nazis. He turned out to be an economic genius, who was largely responsible for Germany's economic recovery.

[Grouse]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-remain-leave-voters-twitter-referendum-boris-johnson-europe-latest-a8260726.html

 

The times, they are a changin' !

Edited March 17, 2018 by Grouse

[vogie]

9 minutes ago, Grouse said:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-remain-leave-voters-twitter-referendum-boris-johnson-europe-latest-a8260726.html

 

The times, they are a changin' !

Don't critisise what you don't understand!

[StreetCowboy]

22 minutes ago, vogie said:

Don't critisise what you don't understand!

Don’t jump to conclusions

Always be polite

 

Good advice is always appreciated, whether relevant or not

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-remain-leave-voters-twitter-referendum-boris-johnson-europe-latest-a8260726.html

 

The times, they are a changin' !

Not really. Interesting that the word bile is used prominently in the first paragraph; it describes all this garbage quite aptly.

 

[vogie]

1 hour ago, StreetCowboy said:

Don’t jump to conclusions

Always be polite

 

Good advice is always appreciated, whether relevant or not

Are you conversant with Dylan, Bob, not Thomas SC.

[StreetCowboy]

37 minutes ago, vogie said:

Are you conversant with Dylan, Bob, not Thomas SC.

Sorry - I read your quote with the wrong accent

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

Are you conversant with Dylan, Bob, not Thomas SC.

You're such an intellectual Vogie!

[evadgib]

Blimey!

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=iuRL_1521299732

[billd766]

3 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

Don’t jump to conclusions

Always be polite

 

Good advice is always appreciated, whether relevant or not

 

Good advice from the biased Independent newspaper?

 

Never going to happen.