Charting our nemesis

[lonelyplanetmum]

Which chart encapsulates this nightmare for you?

This is the pie chart that I showed my FIL when he was repeating Farage’s drivel. The government’s own 2016 figures showed how statistically insignificant our EU budget percentage contribution always was.

Only three of these are MPs. They are not leading economists

If leading economists can predict the future with certainty why are they not the richest people on the planet? Surely they would know when the economy was going to go up or down and place their money accordingly? How many leading economists forecast the Stock Market crash in October 1987? Where were the warnings about the 2007 world financial crisis? Where were the warnings about property crashes in the UK? The list could go on and on.

As posted earlier may be those who voted leave did so for reasons other than money? Freedom to choose might be considered to be richer than what is in their bank accounts?

As for going through OBS and ONS data do you really think the voters did that before 23 June 2016? No chance. They will have voted on the arguments presented by both leave and remain and their own interpretation of whether being in the EU is good or bad.

The entire argument can be summarized as follows:

Those that voted leave think UK will be better off after leaving EU.

Those that voted remain think the UK will be worse off after leaving the EU.

However, which way people voted they are not entitled to say to those who voted differently:

"My understanding is superior to yours therefore you voted incorrectly and therefore must change your vote in the future"

The WA is like quicksand. The UK put itself into it by triggering A50 and what the UK does not appreciate is that ONLY the EU can get the UK out (by signing the WA).

{As posted earlier may be those who voted leave did so for reasons other than money? Freedom to choose might be considered to be richer than what is in their bank accounts?}

Unfortunately money is rather important in modern life, especially if you want to eat and have a roof over your head. NOTHING so far spouted by any politicians will significantly improve the lives of the vast majority in the UK.

{My understanding is superior to yours therefore you voted incorrectly and therefore must change your vote in the future}.

I am happy that leavers did not vote in a sensible way, It is democratic, but in return for this they lose the right to bellyache when the UK heads towards a depression, which will have the knock on effect of making life harder for everyone, especially the less well off.

To make this boiled down position accurate the words in italics^^ must be added:

Those that voted remain think the UK will be worse off after leaving the EU.

Those that voted leave either think UK will be better off after leaving the EU )against the majority of evidence) or they are prepared to accept that being worse off is a price worth paying.

I am happy that leavers did not vote in a sensible way

In their eyes they did vote sensible. I stand by my point that everyone has the right choose how they vote and they do not have to explain it to others. Nobody has the right to think their reasons for their choice of vote are superior to those who voted differently.

but in return for this they lose the right to bellyache when the UK heads towards a depression, which will have the knock on effect of making life harder for everyone, especially the less well off

If people decide they voted wrongly in the past they are entitled to vote differently in the future as happens in General Elections. UK has been alternating between Conservative and Labour for as long as I can remember.

against the^ majority of evidence) or they are prepared to accept that being worse off is a price worth paying

Can't add caveats. The ballot paper was a simple Leave or Remain choice.

I don't remember the ballot paper saying

"only choose leave if you have read all the OBS and ONS reports an all other reports by leading economists. Also be aware that if you choose leave you are guaranteed to be worse off than if you choose remain"

The booklet that was sent to every UK household was meant to explain to people the disadvantages of voting leave, but it did not work. Obviously many dismissed it as Project Fear. Maybe on the basis that "if the Government thinks is best to remain then there is something in it for them, but not the average person in the street. So let's vote leave?

People voted how they felt on the day based on what they had seen and heard before 23 June 2016. All these alleged expert reports that say UK is doomed are likely been dismissed as more Project Fear being spread by those who dislike the result, even though it was a majority all be it small.

LeaveOrRemain

More typical 'weasel words' from a 'leave' promoter.
If you voted leave you have DELIBERATELY buggered up my families life. That is unforgivable.
In a normal election, yes things can be reviewed after 4 years and a change of government perhaps, but the process of leaving and possibly rejoining the EU will take 15 to 20 years at least.
What is even worse is that NO ONE is going to get what they voted for.

Yes Leaveor I agree.

I also don't remember the ballot paper saying "only choose leave if you have read all the OBS and ONS reports an all other reports by leading economists. Also be aware that if you choose leave you are guaranteed to be worse off than if you choose remain"

It should have said this.
The reports weren't available then of course. Neither were the studies available when Art 50 was triggered.

But hey ho - we voted for a pig in a poke, and on we go, albeit a little more slowly.

If you voted leave you have DELIBERATELY buggered up my families life

In can vote whichever way I wish based on what I think is best for myself and my family. As can you.

What is even worse is that NO ONE is going to get what they voted for

That’s correct as it is not possible to please everyone at same time. Trying to do so is a waste of time which is why UK is floundering around jumping from one extension to another.

Would a second referendum improve the situation? I think not as likely to be close like the previous referendum.

My best guess is that EU will not be prepared to grant extensions forever and a no deal will happen by default.

Oh and Leavor the material I linked to aren't alleged reports.. It is the government's own studies endorsed by the vast majority of experienced economists. You can dismiss experts if you like but I'd prefer experienced economists insights based on data over the rhetoric of JRM, Raab and Farage who you preferred upthread.

I have linked to at least 10 links about the government figures. It is disingenuous of anyone to say these calculations are merely alleged.

As I've pointed out - it as a far better argument to state that despite the damage to the economy for you leaving the trading bloc is a price worth paying.

People like LeClerc who are personally affected and those reliant on food banks,social care, And the NHS will have a different view about the price they are prepared to pay.

Please don't bring food banks into it. Poverty for working people is due to the very low wages that employers have been able to get away with thanks to the ability to recruit from extremely low wage economies like Hungary. Google "Greencore Northampton Hungary" for an egregious example of a common strategy.

This is why Farage's slogan "the minimum wage has become the maximise wage" resonated with so many people. You call him a disaster capitalist. What would you call Mr Coveney at Greencore?

The reports weren't available then of course. Neither were the studies available when Art 50 was triggered

Why not? Surely when Cameron promised a referendum if he won the 2015 election he would have sought advice from the leading economists? Or was he sufficiently arrogant to assume that the vote would be a remain landslide?

Vote was 23 June 2016. Article 50 triggered 29 March 2017, 9 months later. Could T May not have tasked the leading economists to prepare reports that forecast with certainty that Brexit guaranteed UK would be worse off? Remember T May is a remain supporter. Would have thought she would have jumped at any opportunity to say that Article 50 should not be triggered?

In can vote whichever way I wish based on what I think is best for myself and my family. As can you

Of course you can. However, the result of your vote was to bugger up someone's family life.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Surely when Cameron promised a referendum if he won the 2015 election he would have sought advice from the leading economists?

Yes he could.

Or was he sufficiently arrogant to assume that the vote would be a remain landslide?

Yes he was.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

{The Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK.Protecting jobs A stronger economy Providing security The EU referendum is a once in a generation decision. The Government believes it is in you and your family’s best interests that the UK remains in the European Union. Vote on Thursday, 23rd June 2016.}

So which part of this government leaflet was too difficult to understand?
In the 3 years since this was sent out, the economy has faltered, thousands of jobs have been lost and the benefits of being in the EU are about to be lost.
Further, foodbank use has ballooned, the NHS has gone deeper into crisis and there is no sign of any recovery apart from the 'blip' being caused by stockpiling.

The two are not mutually exclusive

That’s correct as it is another example of equilibrium. For every advantage there is a corresponding equal disadvantage. For every winner there has to be a loser.

During the times Labour was in power I was worse off than had conservatives remained in power, but as an individual I had to accept the result.

Poverty for working people is due to the very low wages that employers have been able to get away with thanks to the ability to recruit from extremely low wage economies like Hungary

No - this is a myth.

The available research is very complex

The predominant finding is that that there is little effect on the wages of the UK-born resulting from migration.

Any declines in wages if any are greatest for resident workers who are themselves migrants.

There are some studies that suggested immigration affected the lowest-waged workers negatively. But the reports vary on whether EU immigration has been good or bad for wages across the country overall.

In some areas migrants increase wages as they are spending money and boost the economy.

Most studies show that the negative effect on wages is small,short-term and effects other migrants.

However all studies are clear that looking at the economy as a whole EU migrants contribute far more than native born people and more than non EU migrants.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1542-4774.2011.01049.x

I can vote whichever way I wish based on what I think is best for myself and my family. As can you

Or we can vote for what is best for the country as a whole including others less fortunate than ourselves.

Or we can vote for what is best for the country as a whole including others less fortunate than ourselves

Not possible to please everyone. The majority vote was to leave (all be it a small majority) so that is the way forward.

If someone can produce a law or statute or a case law that states minority opinion takes priority overt majority opinion I would be curious to read it.

If someone can produce a law or statute or a case law that states minority opinion takes priority overt majority opinion I would be curious to read it

Minority rights and how to protect them are a big deal in political science. Several political thinkers are concerned that we are seeing what is referred to as the tyranny of the majority. This is an inherent weakness in most democracies so checks and balances are unusually in place to prevent this happening.

However, due to the uncodified nature of our constitution it has happened.

Democracy, or good democracy, is much more complicated and nuanced than biggest always wins.

Not possible to please everyone.

The majority view has now shifted ..

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/has-there-been-a-shift-in-support-for-brexit/

There was some discussion of the economic models of Brexit scenarios upthread. This made me realise that not many graphic depiction of the outcomes have been posted. Here's one:

And another containing the original Chequers agreement which can be ignored but the other percentages remain valid.

A company like Greencore that hires Hungarians to work nightshifts in a freezing factory in Northampton increases UK GDP.
If they close down there will be job losses and UK GDP will go down. But I won't lament. The CEO gets 3.6 million and the workers get minimum wage subsidised by in work benefits paid for by ordinary taxpayers. Greencore is an influential company. The CEO is brother to a senior Irish politician. His data will be in those lovely bar charts ... which are pure speculation. They refer to an unknown future.
Sorry to bang on about Greencore by the way. It's just that it epitomises everything I loath about the rapacious EU multinationals that contribute to the data in your charts.

I like the comment from Theresa May on the red chart. What does she know about trade or economics or prosperity?

Those charts are frightening to you. To me they are meaningless speculation. The future is unknown and full of change. All I know is that we will be more agile outside of the EU.