3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

You didn't understand what I said .

I didn't say that it would be better in 50 years time .

True, you said we need 50 years to judge it. So after 50 years if it is still a mess or we are still behind our regional competitors then you would admit is was a failure and we have lost 50 years of progress right?  I don't know how old you are but I don't expect to live to 100 to hear your verdict. So assuming you would still be alive please email it to my kids, I am sure they would be thankful.

3 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

True, you said we need 50 years to judge it. So after 50 years if it is still a mess or we are still behind our regional competitors then you would admit is was a failure and we have lost 50 years of progress right?  I don't know how old you are but I don't expect to live to 100 to hear your verdict. So assuming you would still be alive please email it to my kids, I am sure they would be thankful.

IMO opinion, Brexit has been a success , the U.K got its independence and taken back control of our own Country.

   In 50 years time they can look back and judge whether it was economically beneficial or not .

  Those are two different issues though 

2 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

Oh dear. You must have been sitting at the back of the class looking out of the window.

 

Let me start again, just for you.

 

One poster posted facts. Figures that have been confirmed as correct. You attempted to counter those claims and debunk the figures using forecasts. 

 

I pointed out what you were doing and questioned this,as facts are facts and cannot be disproved by forecasts. The clues are in the words.

I'll help you out as you clearly find it difficult to follow a discussion.

 

On p.18 (+/-13 hours as I write), JohnnyF referenced the IMF revised FORECAST.

 

Candide replied to this post (p.18, 10 hrs)

 

Johnny F (p.18, 9 hrs) replied with the following:

"Better than many EU countries. Meaning that leaving the EU is not the cause of low growth, but rather the worldwide economic slowdown caused by Covid lockdowns and the war in Ukraine.

 

Project Fear has been proved to be a lie."

 

I disagreed with JohnnyF about this, and referenced the OBR report (p.18, 8hrs)

 

You then either deliberately - or, more likely, simply because you are incapable of following an argument  (maybe a combination of both?) - suggested that I was comparing 'actual' data with forecasts which was clearly not the case.

 

In hindsight, I should have made this post immediately following that post of yours. Ho hum.

 

The only line of argument that you seem capable of presenting is either based on misinterpretation, or one based on an overly simplistic, pedantic semantics.

 

Perhaps you should have actually attended school instead of playing truant!?

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

Brexit happened several years ago.. Remainers were told repeatedly "It is done, you lost, get over it". But now it isn't over so we can't judge. Of course if the economy was booming and we were all basking in the sunlit uplands and dancing with unicorns then I am sure you would be saying it was a success and not "it is ongoing, we can't judge yet".

Pretty hilarious argument really. So when can we judge it? Any time soon? How many years do you need exactly?

On the contrary. I'm not looking at this as a remainer or a leaver. Just someone who understands the situation.

 

Right now it is obvious there are issues that need sorting. It would be difficult to argue that things are not going as expected and some aspects are not going well.

 

If it were the opposite, I would agree that thngs are going well but would still not declare that Brexit was a success. Why would I? It's not finished.

Brexit is already dead in the water.

 

Sunak (the first actual Brexiteer PM) negotiated and signed the Windsor Framework, which is in direct conflict with the demands of the Brexit extremists of the ERG.

 

The ERG’s response was zilch, well a lot of whinging, but they were unable  to challenge Sunak.

 

Since then Sunak has binned the ERG plan (Rees Mogg’s idiot idea) to remove 4000 so called ‘EU laws’.

 

Once again the ERG and Brexiteers were unable to challenge Sunak.

 

Brexit has past its zenith, the inflection point was the signing of the Windsor Framework.

 

The next election is almost certainly going to see the end of Tory Government, non of the Progressive Parties are promoting Brexit or any policy that is remotely Brexit.

 

Brexit is dead in the water.

 

Farage knows Brexit is dead in the water, he’s simply stating the obvious while trying to blame the failure on anyone except Brexit itself.

 

 

https://www.centrefortheunion.co.uk/post/the-erg-response-to-the-windsor-framework

 

54 minutes ago, RayC said:

I'll help you out as you clearly find it difficult to follow a discussion.

 

On p.18 (+/-13 hours as I write), JohnnyF referenced the IMF revised FORECAST.

 

Candide replied to this post (p.18, 10 hrs)

 

Johnny F (p.18, 9 hrs) replied with the following:

"Better than many EU countries. Meaning that leaving the EU is not the cause of low growth, but rather the worldwide economic slowdown caused by Covid lockdowns and the war in Ukraine.

 

Project Fear has been proved to be a lie."

 

I disagreed with JohnnyF about this, and referenced the OBR report (p.18, 8hrs)

 

You then either deliberately - or, more likely, simply because you are incapable of following an argument  (maybe a combination of both?) - suggested that I was comparing 'actual' data with forecasts which was clearly not the case.

 

In hindsight, I should have made this post immediately following that post of yours. Ho hum.

 

The only line of argument that you seem capable of presenting is either based on misinterpretation, or one based on an overly simplistic, pedantic semantics.

 

Perhaps you should have actually attended school instead of playing truant!?

Incorrect. I was referring to JonnyF's post 9 hours ago. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Brexit is already dead in the water.

 

Sunak (the first actual Brexiteer PM) negotiated and signed the Windsor Framework, which is in direct conflict with the demands of the Brexit extremists of the ERG.

 

The ERG’s response was zilch, well a lot of whinging, but they were unable  to challenge Sunak.

 

Since then Sunak has binned the ERG plan (Rees Mogg’s idiot idea) to remove 4000 so called ‘EU laws’.

 

Once again the ERG and Brexiteers were unable to challenge Sunak.

 

Brexit has past its zenith, the inflection point was the signing of the Windsor Framework.

 

The next election is almost certainly going to see the end of Tory Government, non of the Progressive Parties are promoting Brexit or any policy that is remotely Brexit.

 

Brexit is dead in the water.

 

Farage knows Brexit is dead in the water, he’s simply stating the obvious while trying to blame the failure on anyone except Brexit itself.

 

 

https://www.centrefortheunion.co.uk/post/the-erg-response-to-the-windsor-framework

 

The report I read said some laws will be removed (your words) by the end of the year, others later.

 

I don't recall reading that the idea to remove (your words) 4000 laws had been binned. Maybe you could share the article that states this.

 

Unless, of course, you were exaggerating for effect again.

8 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

The report I read said some laws will be removed (your words) by the end of the year, others later.

 

I don't recall reading that the idea to remove (your words) 4000 laws had been binned. Maybe you could share the article that states this.

 

Unless, of course, you were exaggerating for effect again.

If it’s not happening during this parliamentary session it’s not happening.

 

Next parliamentary session is the run up to the election.

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/uk-government-scraps-plan-to-replace-all-eu-laws-by-the-end-of-2023-12877854

 

D

33 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Incorrect. I was referring to JonnyF's post 9 hours ago. 

 

 

Which is outdated (from 13 April) as the ONS has now more recent data (12 May). According to the ONS report on 12 May (quote):

"The first quarterly estimate of UK real gross domestic product (GDP) shows that the economy increased by 0.1% in Quarter 1 (Jan to Mar) 2023 (Figure 1). This follows growth of 0.1% in the previous quarter. The level of quarterly GDP in Quarter 1 2023 is now 0.5% below its pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) level (Quarter 4 2019).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/bulletins/gdpfirstquarterlyestimateuk/januarytomarch2023

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If it’s not happening during this parliamentary session it’s not happening.

 

Next parliamentary session is the run up to the election.

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/uk-government-scraps-plan-to-replace-all-eu-laws-by-the-end-of-2023-12877854

 

D

So not binned then. As I thought. Possibly delayed. Not binned. Glad we got that cleared up.

1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:

So not binned then. As I thought. Possibly delayed. Not binned. Glad we got that cleared up.

Let’s get back to this when we get to the election and no more than a handful of irrelevant regulations have been removed.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let’s get back to this when we get to the election and no more than a handful of irrelevant regulations have been removed.

Thanks for confirming we'll wait to see.

 

Not binned then. 

9 minutes ago, candide said:

Which is outdated (from 13 April) as the ONS has now more recent data (12 May). According to the ONS report on 12 May (quote):

"The first quarterly estimate of UK real gross domestic product (GDP) shows that the economy increased by 0.1% in Quarter 1 (Jan to Mar) 2023 (Figure 1). This follows growth of 0.1% in the previous quarter. The level of quarterly GDP in Quarter 1 2023 is now 0.5% below its pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) level (Quarter 4 2019).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/bulletins/gdpfirstquarterlyestimateuk/januarytomarch2023

I love the link. Especially the bit that says figures may need to be revised again. 

 

The ONS are so sure of their calculations they put in a disclaimer. Excellent. 

12 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

So not binned then. As I thought. Possibly delayed. Not binned. Glad we got that cleared up.

From the article I linked:

 

“The Retained EU Law (REUL) Bill was introduced under Liz Truss and Jacob Rees-Mogg with the intention of removing all EU legislation from the UK by the end of 2023”

 

It ain’t happening in 2023 and the next parliamentary session is the run up to the election.

 

It ain’t happening.

 

More to the point, Brexit supporters within the Government and Parliament are in no position to do anything about it.

 

Yet another Brexit fail.

 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

From the article I linked:

 

“The Retained EU Law (REUL) Bill was introduced under Liz Truss and Jacob Rees-Mogg with the intention of removing all EU legislation from the UK by the end of 2023”

 

It ain’t happening in 3023 and the next parliamentary session is the run up to the election.

 

It ain’t happening.

 

More to the point, Brexit supporters within the Government and Parliament are in no position to do anything about it.

 

Yet another Brexit fail.

 

 

3023 is a long way off.

 

Besides, the plan has not been "binned". Adjusted, delayed maybe. Not binned.

 

Interesting to see you know when the next election is going to be.

18 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

3023 is a long way off.

 

Besides, the plan has not been "binned". Adjusted, delayed maybe. Not binned.

 

Interesting to see you know when the next election is going to be.

The benefit of me making a typo is it gives you the chance to pick it up and be right about something.

 

 

36 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

I love the link. Especially the bit that says figures may need to be revised again. 

 

The ONS are so sure of their calculations they put in a disclaimer. Excellent. 

That's the correct scientific attitude. That's why It's important to get the latest estimate as it includes a higher share of confirmed data.

The next estimate next month will be even more reliable.

10 minutes ago, candide said:

That's the correct scientific attitude. That's why It's important to get the latest estimate as it includes a higher share of confirmed data.

The next estimate next month will be even more reliable.

However, facts still trump estimates. Chomper will tell you, varifiable data is much better. I don't believe estimates come under the banner of varifiable data.

17 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The benefit of me making a typo is it gives you the chance to pick it up and be right about something.

 

 

I'm right that the plan of removal of 4000 EU laws has not been binned. At least as far as my request for you to prove it is concerned.

1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

Incorrect. I was referring to JonnyF's post 9 hours ago. 

 

 

There is nothing incorrect in my previous post.

 

You may well have been referring to that particular post of JohnnyF; I was not, as was clear in my previous post outlining the chain of events: It is simply a case of you misinterpreting matters. Only you know whether this is deliberate or inadvertent.

 

Your post to which I am replying is yet another attempt to muddy the waters in order to avoid admitting that you are wrong.

1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

So not binned then. As I thought. Possibly delayed. Not binned. Glad we got that cleared up.

Seems like everything is "ongoing"!

1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

I love the link. Especially the bit that says figures may need to be revised again. 

 

The ONS are so sure of their calculations they put in a disclaimer. Excellent. 

You do realise that the ONS, which you now ridicule, is the very same ONS who produced the data that - up to now -you have been so keen to champion as fact?

30 minutes ago, RayC said:

You do realise that the ONS, which you now ridicule, is the very same ONS who produced the data that - up to now -you have been so keen to champion as fact?

Yet again, incorrect. 

 

It's all here to see. Look back at previous posts. Try to disconnect your selective reading before you do.

43 minutes ago, RayC said:

There is nothing incorrect in my previous post.

 

You may well have been referring to that particular post of JohnnyF; I was not, as was clear in my previous post outlining the chain of events: It is simply a case of you misinterpreting matters. Only you know whether this is deliberate or inadvertent.

 

Your post to which I am replying is yet another attempt to muddy the waters in order to avoid admitting that you are wrong.

No. I quoted a post of yours, at the same time referring to another post. All accurate and straightforward to follow. You misinterpreted. Not me. It's all there on P18. You cannot deny it.

 

It's so simple just to read, follow and reply accordingly. 

1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

However, facts still trump estimates. Chomper will tell you, varifiable data is much better. I don't believe estimates come under the banner of varifiable data.

An estimate of past growth is partly based on verified data. It's an estimate because the verified data set is not yet complete, so the other part is estimated. It's the latest estimate, which means there is no other more reliable estimate.

The FT article your refer to was based on ONS estimates made one month before.

5 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

No. I quoted a post of yours, at the same time referring to another post. All accurate and straightforward to follow. You misinterpreted. Not me. It's all there on P18. You cannot deny it.

 

It's so simple just to read, follow and reply accordingly. 

So easy that you are not able to explain how previous ONS estimates could be more reliable than more recent ONS estimates....

24 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yet again, incorrect. 

Yet again. No elaboration. Nothing to support the statement.

 

24 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

 

It's all here to see.

Then you shouldn't have any trouble referring to the post(s). No time like the present.

 

24 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Look back at previous posts.

Done it far too often. I suggest that you give it a go.

 

24 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Try to disconnect your selective reading before you do.

Your counselling is about as good as your reasoning.

 

You going to tire of trolling any time soon?

34 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

No. I quoted a post of yours, at the same time referring to another post. All accurate and straightforward to follow. You misinterpreted. Not me. It's all there on P18. You cannot deny it.

 

It's so simple just to read, follow and reply accordingly. 

My last word on the matter which, no doubt, will be a blessed relief to other posters 

 

You are either trolling or delusional. Again, only you know which it is (or maybe not if it's the latter, in which case you have my sympathy).

Germany goes into recession  , the U.K avoids recession 

 

Germany falls into recession as consumers in Europe’s biggest economy spend less

 

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/25/economy/germany-recession-q1-2023/index.html

 

6 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Germany goes into recession  , the U.K avoids recession 

 

Germany falls into recession as consumers in Europe’s biggest economy spend less

 

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/25/economy/germany-recession-q1-2023/index.html

 

According to your brethren, it's a prediction and it's from the IMF, therefore double worthless.