Please can leavers please tell me how Brexit will benefit us?

[DaveGrohlsMuse]

Whenever this is asked mid-thread, it's never answered. There's plenty of information out there about how the UK had benefited from membership, but I really struggle to find info on how it's had a negative impact.
So in Jan 2021, once the transition period is over and we actually start to see the impact of the decision, what will improve? How will yours, and mine, and the general population's lives improve?

The EU wasn't planning to stay as it was in 2016 and never change.

No, but we could have had a strong voice in it. Instead from Cameron onwards the behaviour has been more akin to a toddler having a tantrum.

Link is

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/brexit-treasury-jobs-recession_uk_5742d2dde4b00006e9aed9f1/

Experts forecast that based on a number of assumptions. The forecast you cite is for a shock scenario. Have you read the report? It predicts all the other effects of brexit vote accurately but the shock scenario (which was one possible out come highlighted not the only one
) did not account for a number of variables.

1. That Cameron would declare article 50 immediately as he said he would. When this didn't occur it lessened the impact of the leave vote and averted either shock scenario. (500,000 shock, 800, 000 severe shock).

1. They did not anticipate the BOE intervention which again lessens the impact of the shock in 1. Not just the QE but also the guarentees to banks of liquidity (as a lender of last resort). This kept credit lines open and meant that no second credit crunch occurred.

The fact that the shock was mitigated by the delay to brexit but all the other impacts (big fall in he value of sterling, higher inflation, lower investment because of uncertainty,lower than forecast GDP).
were in fact correct.

Another rote learned point which shows a poor understanding of the material, the basis of the methodology, or the actual outcomes.

The EU wasn't planning to stay as it was in 2016 and never change.

Annnnd we could have vetoed any changes we didn't like. Honestly this is getting boring, wake me up when you have some decent points to debate.

@AuldAlliance

Don't get me wrong, I didn't say it was faultless. I agree that transparency is an issue. But to be honest, it will be fucking obvious to everyone what does and doesn't work. The government is still required to publish stuff, still required to respond to FOI requests, etc. If it doesn't prove it does some good stuff, it will get voted out eventually (assuming labour pull their finger out). And it won't be able to blame someone else. Selecting which journalists you speak to is stupid, weak and not best practice, but we are not turning into China - we still have a free press and live in a democracy (even if you don't like FTPT etc). Don't get me wrong, it wasn't a reason to vote for brexit, but it might be a slight silver lining that now it is just that bit clearer whether politicians have made trade offs or perhaps don't care about an issue.

How close to 16 million is it?

Don’t know, but remainers in these threads are certain UK will be poorer after Brexit.

@malylis

Tap dance as much as you wish. The headline of the treasury report were up to 800,000 job losses.

big fall in he value of sterling, higher inflation, lower investment because of uncertainty,lower than forecast GDP) were in fact correct

I will repeat previous question which you didn’t answer:

Which will have caught people’s eye the most:

The upto 800,000 loses or GDP and inflation figures?

We are pretty certain because at the moment we have a huge amount of negotiating to do, and have a government led by a liar and a cheat backed up by some light weight people, like Raab who was too stupid to know how much trade came via the Calais - Dover route and didn't even realise that it was such basic knowledge that admitting to such ignorance made him look a fool. Then there is a list of areas as long as your arm or longer which ought to be on the negotiating list, but Johnson is still willy waving.

I will make a prediction though, that he will be another Tory PM destroyed by the Eurosceptics in his party.

The headline used the severe shock scenario.

There is no tap dancing just your constant reduction of everything to the most simplistic points.

Another rote learned point which shows a poor understanding of the material, the basis of the methodology, or the actual outcomes

The actual outcome was unemployment decreased since 2016 referendum. The exact opposite of the so called expert treasury.

The headline used the severe shock scenario

Even the best case scenario of 500,000 job losses was wrong by more than 500,000 as unemployment decreased.

There is no tap dancing just your constant reduction of everything to the most simplistic points

Simplistic points are those which are most noticed. Do you really think people spend months, weeks, days or even hours researching economics reports, ONS data before they vote?

The forecast of upto 800,000 job loses will have caught the eye first.

Don’t know, but remainers in these threads are certain UK will be poorer after Brexit.

Well the pound has resolutely stayed below the levels it was prior to the referendum, so I am thinking that so far things aren't looking particularly promising.

Well the pound has resolutely stayed below the levels it was prior to the referendum, so I am thinking that so far things aren't looking particularly promising

Pound was almost parity with the US$ once

thats just ridiculous.

You can't play the "experts were wrong" point, but then say, well actually people just saw the most simple point and went with that.

Your arguments reduce everything to the simplistic, when you can't address a point.

I noted with some satisfaction that after I corrected your previous points about Article 50 and the EU (who you claimed didn't follow the tiles) you are now citing it correctly.

Maybe you could learn a thing or two if you paid attention

I don't know if anyone's noticed but there's only one poster here that's countering every other poster - of course you've noticed.

Seems a bit pointless to me but if it makes y'all happy, carry on.

Pound was almost parity with the US$ once
January 1985
caused by Mrs Thatcher bollocksing up a policy announcement
and followed by the USA being forced to devalue its currency.
The trend since the 70's is not pretty for the UK
www.macrotrends.net/2549/pound-dollar-exchange-rate-historical-chart

You can't play the "experts were wrong" point, but then say, well actually people just saw the most simple point and went with that

Experts forecast in advance prospectively of the vote that between 500,000 and 800,000 jobs would be lost by a leave vote. Some believed the experts and voted remain in case they were one of those job losses.

Retrospectively the experts were nowhere near, but that fact was established after the vote.

@MysteryTripAgain you did almost one hundred posts yesterday.

Is this your job

No question mark needed

Fed up of reading your ranty nonsense, could you stop drowning out these threads please

So what turned out to be an over-inflated claim vs lots of proven lies. What a pickle.

I noted with some satisfaction that after I corrected your previous points about Article 50 and the EU (who you claimed didn't follow the tiles) you are now citing it correctly

Read the wording of the posts carefully. The word apparently is used when saying Article 50 prevents discussion on new trade deals being negotiated before UK had left the EU as per your interpretation. Never once said it was my interpretation.

Lonely
He only goes away when everybody ignores everything he says
scroll on by
do not react

Your points to others today have been the interpretation of article 50 that I (and everyone else had).

Your original interpretation was that the EU had chosen not to follow the rules by refusing to negotiate a trade deal whilst negotiating leaving.That was utterly incorrect!

Experts were no where near.

Accurate on inflation and fall in value of the pound, accurate on cumulative GDP fall.

Inaccurate on shock or extreme shock scenario because the parameters under which the projections were made were not fully met.

Dismissing the expert view based on this is ridicilous. However as you can produce no experts that think Brexit will be a success (except Minford please come up with him) you attempt to dismiss them all.

Its also hilarious that you attempt to cling to any expertise if you think it backs your point.