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?

Its nothing that I haven't said, and much is fairly easy to explain.

However I still await your comment on how the economists got right, falling real wages, higher inflation, lost growth gdp, lower levels of investment etc.

However I still await your comment on how the economists got right, falling real wages, higher inflation, lost growth gdp, lower levels of investment etc

Right or wrong, change to those parameters were obviously insignificant to the economy. Otherwise the recession and job loses, which were forecast, would have happened.

Now where are your rebuttal arguments for the article in the link that economists have a long track record of poor predictions?

Those parameters were obviously insignificant to the economy? Ok just every other economic indicator other than the unemployment caused by a recession?

The problem you have is that whilst the predictions on the recession were incorrect, for reasons identified, the others were correct. Yet you want to dismiss all expert opinion based on one singular element of the report.

The 2008 crash (whilst some economists did predict this) was very difficult to predict accurately because so much or it was caused by the losses on triple a rated assets on bank balance sheets. Almost impossible to predict that what was certified as triple a rated debt was actually junk or that certain banks were so exposed.

You seem to think that your one article is some kind of kryptonite that means that any point about experts can be dismissed. It isn't.

Ok just every other economic indicator other than the unemployment caused by a recession?

It’s is the effect of those indicators that is important, not whether the were forecast correctly or not. For example, an increase in employment is forecast and it happens, but when measured only one job was created. No significance at all.

Same applies to inflation, wages, GDP growth. If inflation increased from 2.99% to 3.00% who would notice.

Now go through the article line by line and explain why the statements are wrong and why the conclusion that the profession is in crisis and there is long record of economic experts being poor at predictions.

Wow.

You were given an accurate explanation of why economists and others failed to predict 08.

I do love how you are clinging to expert opinion to back up your point. You know these are the people that you claim get everything wrong so should be dismissed. Good bit of circular reasoning there, all experts are wrong, because these experts say so.

However there is one thing the article misses out that actually agrees with you. People tend to only see the errors, as they make the headlines, they don't see the years of broadly accurate forecasts because they don't make the headlines.

Inflation didn't increase by 0.1 percent though did it?

It increased from below 1 percent to 2.9 in 2017, and above 3 in early 2018. As accurately predicted.

People did notice because wages didn't rise at the same rate so their living standards fell.

Oh and that was just CPI, RPI went above 4

Malylis
In the words of Elizabeth Bennett
Keep your breath to cool your porridge
scroll on by

You were given an accurate explanation of why economists and others failed to predict 08

See. Even you are acknowledging that the experts can’t predict the big ticket events.

they don't see the years of broadly accurate forecasts because they don't make the headlines

Can’t have been that impressive if nobody commented.

Most contracts contain a list of definitions at the beginning. Defined terms are alway capitalized and unless you type with the capital the word can be construed differently.

You weren’t listing definitions you were using the terms in a sentence. Just to clarify my terms: I’m not saying I don’t think you’re a lawyer, I’m saying I don’t think you’re employed full stop.

Can't have been that impressive if nobody commented? This coming from someone who keeps the "headlines" points.

However I do seem to remember the period of growth between 94 and 08 being talked about a lot and how the it was the success of economic policy that brought it about.

Anyway, this is boring now, genuinely.

Can't have been that impressive if nobody commented? This coming from someone who keeps the "headlines" points

Stuff you are on about didn’t even make the headlines.

However I do seem to remember the period of growth between 94 and 08 being talked about a lot and how the it was the success of economic policy that brought it about

That period was mostly labour. Aren’t they the ones that produced the famous note “there is no money left”.

That's a running joke between in coming and out going ministers. The Tories made political gains from it though.

See Maudling to Callaghan for another example.

That period was Labour/Democrat and Republican. But the successes were reported.

I’m saying I don’t think you’re employed full stop

Employed as consultant, not as a full stop.

I think Boris reads MN.
Too many of the things we say, are then repeated by him.

Maybe Boris is a poster on MN?