The EU: IN or OUT?

Ballard

Dird wrote: »

Do you normally say you make x per month or y per month (x - NI - tax)

I'm trying to see how that's even remotely relevant but am struggling. My employer pays me x but I have an obligation to pay tax and national insurance on this income. Being as I'm paye my employer pays it on my behalf.

I'm not getting involved in the finance any more on here as the two sides are never going to agree and we're just going to go round in circles. All that can possibly happen is that we annoy each other.

masonic

EnglishMohican wrote: »

masonic wrote: »

The effect of Brexit in terms of inflation is not yet known, but will become apparent over the next year or two. I doubt inflation will be as high as 10%, though, if that's what you thought I was trying to imply.

No, I did not think that.

Good.

The comments on Ermine's blog echo mine and are suggesting 1% (extra) inflation is all that will be seen and Ermine is not contradicting that. Also they suggest it is not the percentage devaluation in the pound that matters but the actual inflation level and the link is not straight forward. The government would like inflation to be higher than it is - so they have succeeded. Conspiracy theories anyone?

What matters is highly subjective. As is inflation. The most recent ONS published consensus forecast for inflation for 2017 was CPI at 1.9% and RPI at 2.9%. Your suggestion of 1% extra, taking the figures to 2.9% and 3.9% respectively does not seem unreasonable, but it is worth remembering that is just a guess, as are the published forecasts. Historically, published inflation forecasts have been wildly inaccurate. They have also been criticised for not representing the actual rises in the cost of living people experience, leading to calculations of people's 'personal inflation rate' often coming out higher. So couching the concept of a currency devaluation in terms of a predicted inflation rate is not satisfactory in my view.

If you have flogged through my other posts, you may have concluded that I like accurate statements - pedantic some would say. There has been a discussion higher up about whether anyone would believe the "We could give £350M to the NHS" placard (or whatever it actually said). Remainers have made a great fuss about that placard and the dishonesty of it. I agree it is a crass placard but the same sort of argument applies to Ermine's quote. Some/many people might believe it and think Brexit will bring on 10% inflation. Ermine making it in the first place and you repeating it here could mislead the public just as the Remainers claim the placard does.
I believe that all sides should stick to rational, thoughful discussion rather than trying to build a false impression through deliberately deceitful or sloppily worded statements. I try to stick to that philosophy myself but I am sure others can find places I have erred.

There is a huge difference. The £350m statement is factually incorrect, whereas the statement about currency devaluation is factually correct, but you are just concerned that it could be misinterpreted. You didn't misinterpret it according to what you wrote above. I think the following discussion (which I welcomed) will clarify the situation for anyone who might have misinterpreted it.

I stand by my original assertion that the immediate price we have paid for Brexit can be measured through currency devaluation. In fact, I'd go further to say that it is the only useful measure of the cost. Future rates of inflation, economic growth, employment, living standards, etc etc are useless without knowing what they would have been if the vote went the other way - and nobody knows what they would have been. So, estimating that the 10% currency devaluation will translate into a 1% increase in inflation is a pretty safe claim, because it is unfalsifiable, but it isn't meaningful for the same reason.

masonic

Dird wrote: »

Do you normally say you make x per month or y per month (x - NI - tax)

I normally state the net figure unless I am specifically asked for my income before tax. The last few times I was asked for the information, it was specifically my income after tax.

JohnRo

masonic wrote: »

The £350m statement is factually incorrect

It is indeed a fiction, as is the argument that the UK will 'save' that amount, or any other amount, if by leaving we are not paying it to the EU.

If the UK economy is going to be impacted in the way most competent economists are predicting, and it certainly looks inevitable in the short and medium term, then it seems far more likely brexit is going to cost the UK.

Although I wouldn't dare to claim that the net cost of this stupidity will ultimately exceed £350 million a week.

blutto

moneyfoolish wrote: »

I think you are going to be very disappointed, then!

:mad: Yep your probably right she will get it but 'God' she is the wrong choice believe me!:rotfl:

As said do not know if your a Tory party member and you want her or you want her regardless but she is 'NO' Thatcher!:(

Theresa will be a walkover and i just feel she should not get it for her cowardly ways of saying she was for 'remain' but really is a soft 'brexiteer'! I certainly will not vote Tory if she gets it!

I am not against having a female PM i just do not want her as i feel she will be 'bent over' if you get my drift!:eek:
Andrea i would rather have as i thought she held her own in the debates VERY well and looks a calm and thoughtful candidate for the job! Also she is not Toxic and has no previous governmental baggage like Theresa has! So please any Tory MP's or MEP's on here or members reading this >> Anyone but her!:T

Gove looks the ticket also ! A statesman ,intellectual ability too match , alas is not particuarly liked in the country as not media savy/charisma!Also i feel his wife made him go for it as she wants the 'power' just like Mrs.Clinton did with her Hubby! For that reason i feel he may loose out as Tories like a winner! Though for me Theresa may is no winner,she will loose i am sure and not go down well with EU negotiations!:eek:

blutto

Ballard wrote: »

Vote leave have be banging on about giving £350m per week to the NHS since they started campaigning. In fact it formed a central part of their campaign. To my knowledge they never mentioned how they'd make up the shortfall each week. I can't see anything other than this being a downright lie.

Forget this !!!!!!!! about the 'Big red bus and the NHS slogan' it was just an idea of what it could be spent on that would appeal to some!

The fact is if were are out that means we do not have to send the £350 million bill each week and spend that new money on what the Government of the day wishes too!

Yes a large sum could be given to the NHS as a bonus supply, though some of it must be spent on other things like <regeneration,social housing,infrustructure building ,Higher education fees lower'd,Agricultural issues etc.

Ok, we get back half each week but the additional half that is 'lost' could be put towards peoples concerns and wants!'

I keep hearing like you lies made by 'Leave' ,yes there was but 'Remain' did a HELL of alot more and used every trick and scare tatics in the book,so for that reason i am glad they lost !;)

NO feeling sorry for Mr.Cameron as Mr.Ego himself just thought he could win it off the back of a General Election win by using threats and lies and most important a piece of paper worth nothing from the EU that reminded me alot of PM Neville Chamberlain coming back from Adolf Hitler with appeasement! The PM took the gamble on a whimper cause and lost so over and done with!

The real looser is Mr.Osborne as he is blown out of the water by using dirty tricks of threats and now his backbenchers do not trust him and his chances of ever being PM are probably finished! Only thing left for him is either the new PM appoints him as the new Foreign secretary as that would not be seen as a demotion and may consider the role or head of the 'Brexit negotiations team '.

We will have to wait and see but he looks disheveled character now as he knows he backed the wrong horse and may go down with the PM.

uk1

What was much more of a "fiction" than the £350m weekly was the suggestion that we could change the EU if we stayed in.



Jeff

Ballard

uk1 wrote: »

What was much more of a "fiction" than the £350m weekly was the suggestion that we could change the EU if we stayed in.



Jeff

What is a fact is that the remaining members of the EU are currently claiming that we will not be able to obtain trade agreements without accepting free movement of EU citizens. They may change this position during the negotiations but if they stick to their guns then we will eventually have to accept it.

Another fact is that we will no longer have the veto on Turkey joining.

Fact three is that Vote Leave say that Turkey will be joining soon. Logically this would mean that we will 'soon' have up to 70 million Turks pouring into the UK.

We will have to hope that Vote Leave are correct in that we will be able to negotiate better or incorrect in their claim that Turkey will soon become part of the EU.

uk1

Ballard wrote: »

What is a fact is that the remaining members of the EU are currently claiming that we will not be able to obtain trade agreements without accepting free movement of EU citizens. They may change this position during the negotiations but if they stick to their guns then we will eventually have to accept it.

Another fact is that we will no longer have the veto on Turkey joining.

Fact three is that Vote Leave say that Turkey will be joining soon. Logically this would mean that we will 'soon' have up to 70 million Turks pouring into the UK.

We will have to hope that Vote Leave are correct in that we will be able to negotiate better or incorrect in their claim that Turkey will soon become part of the EU.

There's no rush to trigger article 50. Quite the reverse.

Whilst we are still members we can veto anything the EU wishes to do until they stop behaving like petulant schoolchildren and bullies.

The longer we leave it to trigger artcile 50, and the closer we get to another state having an in/out referendum, the more cooperative the EU will become.



Jeff

Ballard

uk1 wrote: »

There's no rush to trigger article 50. Quite the reverse.

Whilst we are still members we can veto anything the EU wishes to do until they stop behaving like petulant schoolchildren and bullies.

The longer we leave it to trigger artcile 50, and the closer we get to another state having an in/out referendum, the more cooperative the EU will become.



Jeff

I admire your optimism.