Brexit consequences

[Spinflight]

Can't find the old one, despite a search. Hence a year on...

I started it to compare the doom and gloom predictions from people who should know better, especially the treasury, to actual observable facts.

Thus far the treasury predicted our borrowing costs would soar by over 130 points. In fact they're down about 100.

No trade deals possible before (I forget the date they said, was far in the future though) compared to actual negotiations beginning with the USA later this month with the president firmly behind them. Canada, New Zealand, Australia, India, South Korea and several others I've forgotten have shown a great desire for a deal quickly.

Ftse 100 and 250 are well up, just shy of 7500.

Best of all from a macro economic perspective is inflation touching 3%. When you are £1800 billion in debt rating that away with inflation is far preferable to actually paying it off.

Growth has dropped a bit, though nowhere near the instant recession that was predicted. Bit early to say though this is likely due to the referendum.

External investment is actually nicely up, with several major companies announcing various large commitments.

Things could be rosier, though it would be a struggle to describe them generally as bad, quite contrary to 'informed' opinions. Even the oecd recently ate their pre referendum words.

P.S. Labour were the last government to have a 'Confidence and Supply' arrangement, similar to the current DUP-Conservative arrangement, so WHY were Labour so poisonous about that deal?

• They thought they 'won' the 2017 general election?
• Labour's 2017 coalition math did not add up UNLESS the DUP (who formed the Westminster majority no matter which main party side they were on) voted with Labour?
• Labour's relationship with Sinn Fein meant they could not align themselves with the DUP?
• Labour was jealous that the DUP agreement was far, far, less costly than the SNP price?

Maybe a combo of the above, but carry on attacking me rather than face up to the truth, that there is nothing politically wrong with the current 'Confidence and Supply' deal, that ensures the UK does not grind to a legislative halt - if HM Opposition parties will vote against the government on every policy, just to gain power.

Now didn't we hear Labour were willing to get in bed with any devil including Scotland's like NS, to get into power.
How can you have a got at May when if Labour could have they would have themselves.
You can read all that is printed but your still not all that, you don't work in NO 10, So as said before this is just your own PERSONAL spin on things.
Until you see, read and produce the papers that are being used to deal with the EU, your just as in the dark as the rest of us.
A miss is as good as a mile.

mummy

"Now didn't we hear Labour were willing to get in bed with any devil including Scotland's like NS, to get into power."

The evidence of the SNP looking to get into bed for a price in 2015 and more overtly in 2017 is damning, so officially Labour did not need to publicly ask.

However as there is also strong evidence to show that as Ms Sturgeon didn't see Corbyn as 'a credible alternative PM' in 2017 in any 'progressive alliance' - Labour via Scottish Leader Dugdale and an unofficial post election 'tax south, spend everywhere else' statement, and Corbyn's last week promise to open discussions with Sturgeon on a 2nd Referendum - is more than a 'smoking gun' showing Labour were reaching out to the SNP.

So really, based on the SNP's potential demands of tens of billions of cash for Scotland, the writing of the Westminster Chancellors budget, and the breaking up of the UK union - I would say the DUP's Norther Ireland's demands for a few £billion to spend, in competition with a Republic of Ireland with a 12.5% Corporate Tax rate - was a cheap cut.

But hypocrisy in 'progressive' circles it appears, has no bounds.

Correction... third line down above should say " less overtly in 2017'.

Do you remember when Ed shafted David, Then Ms Sturgeon came alone and said she was going to be in charge...
The one where Shy Tories appeared.

Now Labour seem to change policy as often as they change their panties these days. You can write off the Student Debt as a sort of misunderstand, but this complete U turn.
I wondered how anyone can't see how both party views seem to be lead by public outrage, U turns galore on both sides, makes you wonder why MP's Can't man up and bite the bullet and just say NO, this needs to be the way it is, sorry your upset.
Oh that is Davis saying you gave us a list of what to pay for, now how about ....... how you think our share is made up, so we can talk about it.

U-turns based on public outrage... Do you mean like the Tory Manifesto debacle? Do you recall how the uproar and outrage caused a swift and complete u-turn on the issue of the dementia tax?

Here is what is politically wrong with handing a 2 billion pound taxpayer funded bribe to the DUP. First, it's a blatant brine, and the money will be spent on DUP voting areas and nowhere else because for reasons you apparently neither understand nor want to, and perhaps are not capable of understanding, the NI Assembly is dead in the water right now.

Second, placing the security of the Tory government in the hands of the DUP effectively destroys the GFA. There can be no such dependency if the GFA is to work because the UK government role in the GFA is supposed to be neutral, as is the role of the Irish government.

Third, the DUP is the alt right, and while you and Mummy may see nothing wrong with getting onto bed with associates of South African white supremacists, and who would have been completely at home and very welcome with those brandishing tiki torches in Charlottesville, whose bigotry towards Catholics is an inspiration to the KKK, most civic spirited people would draw a line there and make the honest decision to call another general election.

The alternative to handing money to fascists is asking the electorate to go to the polls again. Theresa May decided to bribe the fascists on order to hold onto power, and she threw the GFA overboard.

Meanwhile, Cornwall has realised that it was EI money that kept it afloat for years and asked the government to replace the funds that are essential to the local economy, but was told to go whistle, because the money is in Belfast.

If you need help understanding the implications of the World Bank suggestions for greater integration of economies, improved labour mobility, etc in the ASEAN community, I am happy to go over the details ad nauseum until the bleeding obvious becomes apparent to you. Basically, the potential of the region would be better exploited with an arrangement among the states that resembles the EU model much more closely than the current arrange does. There is obvious a moral there somewhere that the UK should heed.

Mathsanxiety

I guessing that its your political bias that cannot see the difference between the Conservatives rushed policy looking to make the wealthier in society paying more for their own dementia care, and Labours total inability to respect the people’s democracy?

Firstly NOT ALLOWING Referendums in Scotland and about our membership of the EU, then saying they RESPECT the result of those Referendums – then saying Labour does NOT respect the result of both the Referendums in Scotland and membership of the EU - AFTER stating in their manifesto for the 2017 general election they did?

Not so much a U-Turn, or a flip flop, more of a flip-flop-flip.

The ‘dementia tax’ as Labour disingenuously called it for votes on the doorstep to frighten pensioners etc, if memory serves, was to amend a current system where if anyone with a home goes into care homes, they have to sell their homes to cover their own costs with no FLOOR, in other words the person can leave nothing to loved ones.

Those at home in care would be asked to foot the cost of long term care at home, to be met after they died, but with a decent floor (relative to the average price of homes) to leave to loved ones 9that didn’t exist now), with a costs ‘ceiling’ on what the state can take to be decided on consultation AFTER the election. So badly thought out, badly presented, and now gone.

Labour with all its 2017 spending plans gave no details on the COST of acquiring then running nationalised rail, mail, electricity and gas.

Or where the £250 billion of taxpayers money Labour was ‘to borrow to invest’ was to be spent, when the Labour leadership since the 1980’s had never trusted Corbyn/McDonnell to run a shadow government department, never mind the real thing, and we were to trust where this commercially ignorant pair, increasing our National Debt, until AFTER the general election.

Now on the scale of election policy feckwittery (with details to follow after) between the Tories and Labour, I’d say the latter wins THAT prize hands down, but then again, I’m bias.

mathanxiety
LABOUR IN 2010 TRIED TO FORM ALLIANCE WITH THE DUP.
There does that help.....

Mathsanxiety

"Here is what is politically wrong with handing a 2 billion pound taxpayer funded bribe to the DUP. First, it's a blatant brine, and the money will be spent on DUP voting areas and nowhere else because for reasons you apparently neither understand nor want to, and perhaps are not capable of understanding, the NI Assembly is dead in the water right now. "

The NI assembly is currently dead, because Sinn Fein think they have the right to pick the DUP leader, and based on the deadlines the parties had, it shouldn't be dead before any money passes hands and if Sinn Fein wants input to spending, best it goes back to its day job responsibilities - but excuse me if I don't accept the money will only go to DUP areas - your record on inform predictions, sucks.

Now do you SERIOUSLY think that a £2 billion investment in N Ireland is so bad under the Conservatives, when surely some of Corbyn's £250bil borrowing of taxpayers money to invest, would have gone to Sinn Fein to spend in N Ireland across the region - for old times sake, if nothing else???

EUanxiety

"If you need help understanding the implications of the World Bank suggestions for greater integration of economies, improved labour mobility, etc in the ASEAN community, I am happy to go over the details ad nauseum until the bleeding obvious becomes apparent to you. Basically, the potential of the region would be better exploited with an arrangement among the states that resembles the EU model much more closely than the current arrange does. There is obvious a moral there somewhere that the UK should heed."

You really have caught the EU 'vision' religion. Bless.

ASEAN economies have grown faster than the EU, they don't need mass central bank monetary stimulus several years after the crash, there are no popular uprising against being in the ASEAN common market - and yet the EU model is better?

World Bank 'suggestions' are very cheap, certainly compared to the IMF's suggestions when they have a country by the loans gonads, but where does the World Bank go as far as to say 'like the current EU' - never mind the Federal States of Europe that you have not ONCE denied?

So what is obvious to me is that the 'Common Market' approach, with standardisation where possible, where no Borg Queens sets their Collective debt-to-GDP downward rules to very different sized populations and economies, where no Freedom of Movement rights cause labour distortions and compressed pay rates in some member countries, where no larger members say we have the right to set and amend the rules - and 'banish you to the margins.

Now when you see you of those please let the UK know, especially if it can be called something like 'The Commonwealth', with 52 countries and over 2.3 billion people - as that could be worth a crack, rather than wait for some EU Federal States experiment and a totally impractical Eurozone common currency/interest rate - all go boobs up.

Not sure what raking over Labour records is in aid of here, Thea and Mummy. You are clearly Tory shills with massive bees in your bonnets, but your ideology won't save you when reality really gets biting, i.e. soon.

You seem to think childish party politics remains the name of the game here. This is as big a mistake as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Just because Labour did X or did not do Y does not mean Brexit is not a terrible idea.

The DUP are a party of corrupt bigots, always were and always will be. That £2 billion will indeed be spent on DUP areas and on DUP areas only, and the Assembly is a dead duck because the DUP continues to act in bad faith, blatantly refusing to respect the democratically expressed desire to see the Irish language given official status - an example of sheer bloody-mindedness for its own sake on the part of the DUP - on top of wasting £400 million of taxpayer money on the RHI scandal and refusing to be held accountable for it. That's loyalist and nationalist money combined.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-38301428
FYI, a timeline of arrogance, illustrating a free and easy attitude to other people's money that has clearly become a modus operandi for them.

How do I know the DUP will spend the money in DUP constituencies, and furthermore in DUP areas of constituencies?

• Gerrymandering and voting qualification laws in local and province wide elections from 1922 until direct rule in the 70s,
• policing by loyalist volunteers, police force unabashedly served the interests of the loyalist community,
• discrimination in provision of public services such as housing; this happened thanks to gerrymandering, meaning those left in overcrowded conditions had no representation,
• open discrimination in employment, especially in the civil service and local authority employment (thanks to gerrymandering, oversight or challenge of open discrimination was non-existent) but also in all areas of skilled employment, the shipyards, etc.

www.rte.ie/archives/exhibitions/1031-civil-rights-movement-1968-9/1034-derry-5-october-1968/319387-derry-civil-rights-demonstration/
Billy clubbing of protestors campaigning for civil rights. Note 'One Man One Vote' hand made sign.

There is a long history of bare faced triumphalism in NI Unionism, and a lot of hankering back to the good old days when uppity nationalists could be clubbed without cameras present (i.e. before the Civil Rights movement - it took a while for the NI police to realise the poor impression they were making). Foster's refusal to accept responsibility for the RHI scheme is more of the same, and that happened while there was an Assembly and the scheme could be duly investigated. There is nobody looking over DUP shoulders now.

ASEAN economies have grown faster than the EU, they don't need mass central bank monetary stimulus several years after the crash, there are no popular uprising against being in the ASEAN common market - and yet the EU model is better?

World Bank 'suggestions' are very cheap... but where does the World Bank go as far as to say 'like the current EU' - never mind the Federal States of Europe that you have not ONCE denied?

You really do need to have everything spelled out for you, don't you, painfully slowly, and maybe using short words.

Federal States of Europe?
I don't have to respond to every single asinine comment you make.

The Commonwealth', with 52 countries and over 2.3 billion people - as that could be worth a crack

O
M
G

You are serious, aren't you? Tell me you are not serious.

I am dumbfounded.

Does that mean your going to shut up Maths.
when reality really gets biting, i.e. soon. ............ Would that be when you realize that your stuck with Brexit.

I see you found the new mums net word. Shrill
Also your Titanic joke, you copied that, heard it said the other night as well.
YAWN.. old sad tired views from you, DUP you did read the bit about Labour courting them, first... Such a shame you can't won't don't see what is in front of your nose, and instead try to blind us with your borrowed words...

Oh look Davis now wants to see the Bill, not just get told it's about XXX Billions... Said this would happen, but you were telling me I was wrong....

Mathsanxiety

Firstly for the life of me I cannot understand why any posters similar to yourself, that show totally one-sided opinions i.e. on the negatives within UK, the pro unionist and Brexit DUP, the ‘all roses’ functionality and sustainability of the EU in its present form etc – can then accuse others of ‘childish game playing’, especially when forcing mistruths on others has a far more sinister agenda.

It is an outright lie of yours that the ASEAN economies are similar to the EU economic set up, economic performance, or anything other than a loose structure of economic co-operation but rather than take on my arguments why it isn’t, your only argument is quoting the World Bank mentioning those Far East countries need closer co-operation.

What is wrong with mentioning the ‘Federal States of Europe’; is there not a move towards their own President, a separate Eurozone parliament, Eurozone finance minister, Eurozone budget, harmonising of stuff like taxes etc AND individual members losing the power of veto – as if you challenge it, I can provide quotes/links, so are YOU challenging that EU ‘direction of travel, YES or NO?

When the UK leaves the EU, with the EU selling more goods to the UK than we sell to them in value terms, there is no COMMERCIAL reason why UK trade cannot continue similar to what it is now, the current problem is POLITICAL with crusty old men in the way – but trade is business to business and although those ‘crusties’ don’t democratically answer to EU businesses, their glorious leaders do.

Outside of the EU, who took 7-years to sign a trade deal with Canada, only to be stopped at the last moment as Wallyonian farmers in Belgium had the power of VETO over a 28 country international trade deal, the world is the UKs lobster.

ASEAN countries have a trade co-operation, nothing like the EU or Eurozone structure, over years while still trading with Europe, there are no reasons why the UK cannot have trade co-operation with anyone in the word, including the Commonwealth countries – and for you to challenge that isn’t even possible when trade DID CHANGE with countries like Australia when we joined the EU, that would be a perfected example, of your totally negative UK agenda.

mummmy

I believe that the EU did present a Euro 100 bil bill to the UK, and the UK rep 'dismantled' it today, line by line, leaving EU Negotiators gobsmacked.

It wasn't that long ago that the EU court told them the same thing;

“€100bn Brexit bill is ‘legally impossible’ to enforce, European Commission’s own lawyers admit”

I wonder if getting our Euro 10 billion capital out of the European Investment Bank (EIB) forms part of that 'write off' - as while we might be liable for past loans, but some other EU members will have to put that in otherwise it will be under capitalised.

The EU began this not in a position of mutual respect for a UK staying in Europe, but as an exercise to both publicly penalise us and to sort out their financial problems - and any UK objection to getting shafted by Brussels is either 'unsatisfactory' or 'not having a position'.

Now they know our position, and we need Trade on the table now, lets see what happens.

Mummy - wrt 'Titanic' - firstly, it wasn't a joke, and secondly, I thought the reference was entirely apt in the context of a post in which Northern Ireland featured prominently.
Geddit?

Oh and the phrase 'rearrange the deckchairs on the Titanic' is a very well known metaphor.
It means "to do something pointless or insignificant that will soon be overtaken by events, or that contributes nothing to the solution of a current problem".
Another way of putting it might be "Nero fiddles while Rome burns". That one means "to do nothing or something trivial while knowing that something disastrous is happening".
An example is the childish party political mud slinging that you and Thea find so engaging.

I didn't copy it.
Congratulations on seeing it somewhere just recently. Was this your first encounter with it?

Thea
It is an outright lie of yours that the ASEAN economies are similar to the EU economic set up, economic performance, or anything other than a loose structure of economic co-operation but rather than take on my arguments why it isn’t ... (etc ad nauseum)

You really can't read, can you?
Should I try again to get you to understand that the World Bank would like to see ASEAN take the next logical steps for the sake of economic progress? These next logical steps would mean closer union than the countries of ASEAN have now, and the elements of that would be as quoted more than once. These are the elements that you hate about the EU.

And now I see that you have already started blaming the EU for the disaster that is about to befall the UK. The EU will punish the UK, and business won't go on the way it should because of some political reason. What a curious mix of arrogance and ignorance on the purpose and function of trade agreements, all in the same paragraph.

Outside of the EU, who took 7-years to sign a trade deal with Canada, only to be stopped at the last moment as Wallyonian farmers in Belgium had the power of VETO over a 28 country international trade deal, the world is the UKs lobster.

A veto, you say? Who knew?
And the UK decided not to use this veto power to stop the sinister EU agenda because....?

And no, the world will not be the UK's lobster or even its oyster outside of the EU, as Mrs May's recent painfully humiliating slapdown by Japan amply illustrated.

You are not going to get trade on the table now.
Why the hurry on this? What could talking about trade possibly do for the UK? Surely the world is your lobster...

WorldBankanxiety

So on the ASEAN countries, we agree that there is no similarity between them and the EU/Eurozone countries in their present form, OTHER than being a mature trade organisation between countries - but because the World Bank thinks closer cooperation would be good, and YOUR ‘logical steps’ is for a Far East union – in YOUR mind, it’s on its way to a done deal.

There is no EU blame game, as unless you can confirm otherwise, after the triggering of Article 50 and when a member then leaves the EU, there is no obligation for that state to get shafted 6 ways to Sunday by some EU divorce bill, as any precondition of a continuation of Trade between that leaving nation and the other member states – so as that is the EU’s stance, its not the UK governments fault that has said from Day 1 that for any agreement to be made, trade had to be in the early discussions.

The EU and Canada agreed around 98% of goods traded between Canada and the EU will be free of duty, and similar to the UK and EU going forward, there is no financial services ‘passporting’ agreement, so as a near Tarif Free trade is not an EU fundamental objection (as long as the rules and regs are followed) - there should be no problem de-constructing the current UK 100% deal now, closer to the Canadian deal IF Brussels wants that for its businesses and jobs.

On the power of veto by hick Belgium farmers to stop a 28 country trade deal (with Canada) that had taken 7-years to put together, that YOU compare to the veto of the 2nd largest economy/contributor in the EU – you really do think that the EU can only poop roses, and with that sheer weight of manure, you can keep those farmers happy in visionary shit, for years.

Re Japanese and UK trade, where the UK currently has a small trade surplus, the historically pragmatic Japanese position re both its current trade deal with the EU being negotiated and a future trade deal with the UK, is totally understandable. The UK not being allowed to talk to the EU about a trade deal (where we could get stiffed), while the EU is trying to stiff the UK for Euro 100 billion, means the Japanese are not in a position to agree anything with the UK.

And so it is important for the UK PM May to make a representation to the Japanese government and industry, to both say that the EU deal with Japan (the UK had a lot to do with) could be ‘cut and pasted’ between Japan and the UK after we leave the EU, and further updates on what could be done to keep the UK competitive.

As the EU will be trying to stiff us later on trade with them while trying to poach the likes of Japanese factories/jobs, while pretentiously insisting that the UK don’t lower business taxes to help compensate businesses here after Brexit, in an ‘alls fair in love and war basis’, the prospects of a commercially aware UK government paying a Euro 100 billion divorce bill for the PRIVILEGE of an EU trying to ruin us, must be close to zero.

Continued.

Yet the EU is desperate for significant inflows of funds, not just from the UK, as was clear last November;

“Brexit Threatens to Ignite European Skirmishes Over EU Budget”

”Germany warns that [[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/17/germany-warns-that-britain-faces-decade-of-eu-contributions-afte/ Britain] faces decades of EU contributions after Brexit ahead of Berlin summit”

Recently the European Commissioner has warned members that after the UK leaves there will be an annual Euro 20 billion gap in their funding, requiring tax rises in member countries.

And that would be because after the UK leaves, according to Eurostat below, the then 2nd, 3rd, and 4th largest economies in the EU and national debt basket cases themselves

“European debt crisis: It's not just Greece that's drowning in debt”

Math I watched an interview and about half of your post was LIFTED from it including the quote's.
If it croaks and jumps it's a frog....

You already showed you use in Phrases by calling us a Shrill.
This shows your prone to be easily subconsciously influenced.

You called the DUP evil, now did this happen before or after Labour wanted to use them to save their necks...

Above link should be
”Germany warns that Britain faces decades of EU contributions after Brexit ahead of Berlin summit”

I saw that, funny how saying they want us to pay up and then pay some more, and people say we are not a CASH COW to the EU.

Oh by the way, Mrs May the PM says we are leaving the Single Market, think she might know as she is the PM after all.