Extreme Brexit could be worse than financial crisis for UK: BoE

[talahtnut]

5 minutes ago, aright said:

More like the Seven Dwarves.

[aright]

11 minutes ago, damascase said:

A ridiculous comparison............

Why?

[brexiteer]

14 minutes ago, damascase said:

A ridiculous comparison............

 

 

Try Ukraine and Moscow then...

[aright]

3 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

I don’t have time to research now but my hypothesis is: The EU’s share of the world economy is falling not because the EU’s economy is shrinking but because developing markets are growing faster than developed markets. 

It's true the EU economy has grown in size but unfortunately not in proportion to the market size. Put bluntly they have lost market share. The world economy did not get significantly larger In 24 hours, there were long term signs,  and in business terms no CEO would excuse a Sales Director who lost 5% of market share in a growing market.

 

 

 

[bomber]

6 minutes ago, aright said:

It's true the EU economy has grown in size but unfortunately not in proportion to the market size. Put bluntly they have lost market share. The world economy did not get significantly larger In 24 hours, there were long term signs,  and in business terms no CEO would excuse a Sales Director who lost 5% of market share in a growing market.

 

 

 

china will continue to eat into all nations slice of the cake,they dont need any one nation in particular trade with and certainly wont be desperate for deals with the UK,what could we sell them? 

[CG1 Blue]

5 hours ago, Grouse said:

It is the USA

 

They have state laws and federal law and a common currency. Seems to work?

But also the USA is a country. If you ask an American which country they come from they will not say the name of their state. 

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, damascase said:

5 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

But that's the thing - they don't get it because they're American and not British. I'm pretty sure the Americans wouldn't take kindly to being dictated to by a bunch of bureaucrats in Canada, and having FOM for all North and South Americans. 

A ridiculous comparison............

Why is it ridiculous? It's exactly why Americans shouldn't preach to us Brits about staying in the EU. 

[melvinmelvin]

6 hours ago, billd766 said:

I don't know about the fish but their wine is excellent, far better than that French p1ss, and you can even buy it in Villa and I think I saw some in BigC.

Australian, S African, NZ, Chilean and Portuguese wines are much nicer than Euro plonk.

French piss? Hmm, they do some pretty decent burgundy in France.

Yes, Villa Market sports some wines from Chile.

BigC has some fairly cheap red and white Chilean wines, 399 baht range.

 

Discussing taste is somewhat tricky.

Taste and matters re taste are a bit similar to a bum, split in the middle.

 

Portugal? (whites, greens, fortifieds- yes / reds -a bit so so)

 

Have been several times to Punta Arenas (not a big city) in the very south of Chile (Patagonia),

the seafood - just incredible.

The first time, I almost collapsed when I looked through the wine menu in my hotel.

I was wondering hard how I could possibly do some significant sampling of various wines

during 2-3 days.

 

Trading with Chile isn't a bad idea. Chile is more straight forward and less focused on ass

licking than many other countries in South America.

 

 

 

 

[Chelseafan]

10 hours ago, Grouse said:

I don't. Youtube suggested, sir! Who am I to argue?

 

As for the BBC, they still have pockets of greatness but too few. They need to stop dumbing down everything and stop pandering to yoof. Yoof are a lost cause to television broadcasting anyway.  

And I wish they would stop including womens football on the same page as mens football...who gives a s@@t....

 

[sandyf]

15 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

If there was as much focus on the Remain campaign they'd find just as many wrongdoings on that side. 

I wasn't aware that the remain campaign had been referred to the NCA, source please.

I fully appreciate your point of view, after all human nature being what it is people would be reluctant to consider that they may have been "swayed".

 

The crisis emerged after the Brexit referendum, leading to the finding against Vote Leave which has been referred to the police for busting spending limits

Crucially, the cash was used to pay data firm Aggregate IQ and – a whistleblower and an Oxford professor argue – potentially enabled it to precisely target enough voters on social media to have swayed the Brexit result.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-vote-investigate-law-breaking-influence-manipulation-theresa-may-facebook-a8783746.html

[sandyf]

15 hours ago, Grouse said:

I guess the combination of the Japan trade deal from 2025 and tariffs on car exports from U.K. AND low volumes are the reason why there will be no new model for Swindon 

 

Another factor that has been bubbling for some time but tends to get ignored is investment returns. To many, profit is seen as a dirty word but the reality is that generating profits in GBP is not so lucrative as it once was.

 

A strong yen, however, eats into the repatriated profits of Japanese exporters, weakening their ability to invest and, ultimately, putting the brakes on Japan’s economy, the world’s third biggest. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/15/brexit-is-a-huge-negative-for-japanese-companies-in-the-uk

[sandyf]

16 hours ago, aright said:

I used these graphs to arrive  at my 20% figure

 

Down to 20% from what exactly. If you told us what the real 1980 figure was, rather than just 146 countries, it may mean something.

The only figure that actually means anything is the one stood in front.

[evadgib]

Farage & Rice on form recently ????

 

 

[aright]

23 hours ago, aright said:

Do you mean the reality that in 1973 when the UK joined the EEC the resulting 9 member states accounted for 26% of the world economy. Now with 28 member states it accounts for 20% and forecasts say by 2050 it will be less than 10% (smaller than India).

Do you mean the reality of the EU loosing 5% of its market each year, youth unemployment, 1 trillion euro target2 debts owed to Germany which will never be paid.

Do you mean the reality of loosing the UK contribution, fishing rights, far right political parties and populism.

Do you mean the reality that the EU's market growth has been 2% for the last 10 years, the USA by 76%, China by 132% and Greece by minus 50% and there has been no growth in Italy since they joined the euro.

Do you mean the reality of a high-currency financial strait jacket and...…….sorry, I'm tired of typing.  

 

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

Down to 20% from what exactly. If you told us what the real 1980 figure was, rather than just 146 countries, it may mean something.

The only figure that actually means anything is the one stood in front.

Down from 26% to 20%. In isolation that figure is bad enough but when you consider 26% of world trade was produced by 9 member states and only 20% of world trade was produced by 28 member states...….well I will let you draw your own conclusion.

[tebee]

No-deal effects ‘would dwarf Honda pullout’, says Clark

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/081d41a2-3496-11e9-a129-05a1d4d7c2a2

 

 

Honda’s decision to pull out of manufacturing in Britain would be dwarfed by the economic hit of a no-deal Brexit, the business secretary has warned.

[sandyf]

15 minutes ago, aright said:

 

Down from 26% to 20%. In isolation that figure is bad enough but when you consider 26% of world trade was produced by 9 member states and only 20% of world trade was produced by 28 member states...….well I will let you draw your own conclusion.

When people try and use figures from 40 years ago against those compiled recently, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn, garbage.

 

Currently nearly 1.5 million unemployed, only 1 million in 1972  -  now tell me the number of unemployed has not gone up  -  easy to distort isn't it.

[aright]

27 minutes ago, sandyf said:

When people try and use figures from 40 years ago against those compiled recently, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn, garbage.

 

Currently nearly 1.5 million unemployed, only 1 million in 1972  -  now tell me the number of unemployed has not gone up  -  easy to distort isn't it.

The figures you obviously dislike were generated in 1917 to indicate the state of the market over the last 40 years. Are you saying the figures produced  are incorrect and/or you disagree with the conclusions...……………….

 

"I think two things have really moved on since the referendum 40 years ago. The first is the economic picture. Europe has shrunk as a percentage of the world economy"

Daniel Hannan, BBC Radio 5 Live, 5 June 2015

When measured in terms of Purchasing Power Parity, the EU has shrunk as a proportion of world GDP.

 

The fact is your excuses don't change the published figures. 

[nauseus]

19 minutes ago, sandyf said:

When people try and use figures from 40 years ago against those compiled recently, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn, garbage.

 

Currently nearly 1.5 million unemployed, only 1 million in 1972  -  now tell me the number of unemployed has not gone up  -  easy to distort isn't it.

1) Not garbage. The numbers show a declining trend that will continue.

 

2) No distortion. The actual number of unemployed is higher today but the number in work is much higher now. The are 10 million more people in the UK now than in 1972 (says the ONS at least) and a higher % of the total population is working. With 70% of women (age 16-64) now working as opposed to just 53% in 1971, this 17% increase in the female workforce alone allows for a real net decline in the unemployment rate at the moment. 

 

[CG1 Blue]

7 hours ago, sandyf said:

I wasn't aware that the remain campaign had been referred to the NCA, source please.

I fully appreciate your point of view, after all human nature being what it is people would be reluctant to consider that they may have been "swayed".

 

The crisis emerged after the Brexit referendum, leading to the finding against Vote Leave which has been referred to the police for busting spending limits

Crucially, the cash was used to pay data firm Aggregate IQ and – a whistleblower and an Oxford professor argue – potentially enabled it to precisely target enough voters on social media to have swayed the Brexit result.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-vote-investigate-law-breaking-influence-manipulation-theresa-may-facebook-a8783746.html

And I fully appreciate your point of view, still sore from being on the losing side and still digging up old (and now irrelevant) arguments. Move on! 

 

Just be thankful it wasn't illegal for the government to spend £9m of tax payers money supporting the Remain campaign.  It damn well should have been! 

 

[billd766]

32 minutes ago, sandyf said:

When people try and use figures from 40 years ago against those compiled recently, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn, garbage.

 

Currently nearly 1.5 million unemployed, only 1 million in 1972  -  now tell me the number of unemployed has not gone up  -  easy to distort isn't it.

If you want a storming headache try finding any 2 reports that agree on numbers. It is harder than finding a particular grain of rice in a dark warehouse. Sure I can find a link which proves you wrong just as you can find one that proves me wrong. The most difficult trick is to find the one which is closest to the truth (whatever that really is).

 

Well the population of the UK in 2017 was 66,181,585. http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/uk-population/

 

In 1972 it was 55,953,522.  http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/uk-population/

 

There was an increase in population of 10,228,063 in the period.

 

I have tried to come up with actual numbers of unemployed rather than percentages and I have got so bogged down with links it is giving me a headache.

 

For example there is this link  https://www.businessinsider.com/unemployment-in-the-uk-is-now-so-low-its-in-danger-of-exposing-the-lie-used-to-create-the-numbers-2017-7

 

Jim Edwards

 

Jul. 23, 2017, 5:39 AM

 

Government statistics put unemployment in Britain at just 4.5% — a low not seen since the 1970s.

But the real rate of unemployment is four times that.

We walk you through the evidence that shows why official unemployment numbers are so misleading.

Economist Danny Blanchflower and Richard Clegg of the ONS challenged this article. See more on that debate here.

The ONS also produced household data suggesting that the true rate of unemployment is 3 times greater than the government's preferred statistic.

More data here on the effect of chronic underemployment of the unemployment rate, and the depressing new reality of the gig economy.

 

[aright]

Breaking News!

Sarah Wollaston, Heidi Allen and Anna Soubry have joined eight Labour MPs as a new splinter group.

[vogie]

Three MPs leave the Tory Party, Anna Soubry, Sarah Wollaston and Heidi Allen.

[vogie]

5 minutes ago, aright said:

Breaking News!

Sarah Wollaston, Heidi Allen and Anna Soubry have joined eight Labour MPs as a new splinter group.

Snap. Prime Ministers Questions should be interesting.

[aright]

5 minutes ago, vogie said:

Snap. Prime Ministers Questions should be interesting.

Yes. Can't wait.

[aright]

[nauseus]

Meanwhile back at the CBI:

 

https://www.investing.com/economic-calendar/cbi-industrial-trends-orders-34

 

[samran]

On 2/19/2019 at 5:17 PM, billd766 said:

Quote "What you can achieve in the EU and within the EU in the space of a year trade wise most other nations take 10."

 

Can you remind us all how long the EU/Canada deal took?

 

Surely it wasn't completed in a year.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Economic_and_Trade_Agreement

 

CETA is Canada's biggest bilateral initiative since NAFTA. It was started as a result of a joint study "Assessing the Costs and Benefits of a Closer EU-Canada Economic Partnership",[21] which was released in October 2008. Officials announced the launch of negotiations on 6 May 2009 at the Canada-EU Summit in Prague.[4][22] 

It was a figure of speech. 

 

But thanks for highlighting to us how long trade deals do actually take. Kinda bursts the bubble of brexiter fantasyland that they’ll be able to sign off a plethora of trade deals just as soon as they rid themselves of the shackles of the EU.

 

What I mean though is that with the heft of the EU behind you, you can push through substantive trade arrangements. If you are on your own, you just can’t. 

 

Australia and Thailand have been slugging it out on whether Australian avocados can be sold here.

 

It’s taken a couple of years, and they are still only talking about it. One product, avocado’s F.F.S and all because Thailand won’t recognise a certain procedure in Australia which verifies they are free from a particular pest. 

 

But when the EU red flagged Thailand over slavery in its shrimp supply chain - at the risk of cutting off lucrative EU markets, the Thai government pulled out all stops to address the problem. They changed laws left right and centre for the EU. 

 

That will all be gone for you guys. Get used to squabbling over how many jars of jellied eels the Chinese will let you export tariff free. And that discussion taking 4 years. 

Edited February 20, 2019 by samran

[samran]

On 2/19/2019 at 1:51 PM, dick dasterdly said:

Probably nearly as "flustered" as you and another poster, who seem to think brexiteers care about having a blue passport ????!

Don’t forget you’ll also get your bendy bananas back. No more EU bureaucrats telling you how bendy they need be.

[SheungWan]

On 2/19/2019 at 11:11 AM, wilcopops said:

Well they DID vote LEAVE didn't they? I don't think most Brexiteers realized that's what they meant, though.

They didn't vote to crash the car though.

[billd766]

12 minutes ago, samran said:

It was a figure of speech. 

 

But thanks for highlighting to us how long trade deals do actually take. Kinda bursts the bubble of brexiter fantasyland that they’ll be able to sign off a plethora of trade deals just as soon as they rid themselves of the shackles of the EU.

 

What I mean though is that with the heft of the EU behind you, you can push through substantive trade arrangements. If you are on your own, you just can’t. 

 

Australia and Thailand have been slugging it out on whether Australian avocados can be sold here.

 

It’s taken a couple of years, and they are still only talking about it. One product, avocado’s F.F.S and all because Thailand won’t recognise a certain procedure in Australia which verifies they are free from a particular pest. 

 

But when the EU red flagged Thailand over slavery in its shrimp supply chain - at the risk of cutting off lucrative EU markets, the Thai government pulled out all stops to address the problem. They changed laws left right and centre for the EU. 

 

That will all be gone for you guys. Get used to squabbling over how many jars of jellied eels the Chinese will let you export tariff free. And that discussion taking 4 years. 

But the EU/Canada deal had to be approved by all 28 nations for it to pass. When there are only 2 nations involved surely it will be a lot easier and many years quicker.