Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

mayonnaise

Economics will dictate if we get a Brexit and what kind.
With the economy now grinding to a halt and living standards increasingly getting squeezed, the calls for a Brexit 'no matter what' will soon die out.

Tromking

Filo25 wrote: »

I think it is highly unlikely that Brexit doesn't happen, the only way I could envisage that it doesn't is that the whole Brexit process is handled so badly that public opinion shifts significantly and a second referendum is required which then delivers a very different result.

As I say highly unlikely to happen and if it is it won't be down to ignoring the will of people, it would be down to promising them the world and failing to deliver it.

The lack of a threshold for the Brexit vote is biting us on the backside as a nation. What we are witnessing is a country divided almost completely down the middle, that's reflected in the streets and in our parliament. I voted to leave and would again tomorrow, alas not enough people agreed with me for the tortuous extraction from the EU to work. Public opinion as you intimated, is now key.

Rinoa

mayonnaise wrote: »

Economics will dictate if we get a Brexit and what kind.
With the economy now grinding to a halt and living standards increasingly getting squeezed, the calls for a Brexit 'no matter what' will soon die out.

Good to see you're still accepting the referendum result.

Rinoa

Filo25 wrote: »

Rees Mogg???

Do you really think that is someone who resonates with the UK at present?

He certainly resonates with me. It's just a question of time.

always_sunny

Rinoa wrote: »

Good to see you're still accepting the referendum result.

The 65M folks in the UK cannot live on referendum results alone, eventually they got to put food on the table. That will drive a lot of decisions.

Herzlos

Rinoa wrote: »

Good to see you're still accepting the referendum result.

There was no result. What Cameron should have said was "The referendum was completely inconclusive, and as such we feel that we should spend some more time investigating the options before returning to a future referendum with some more detail", and commissioned said investigation.

Malthusian

Herzlos wrote: »

It means he's going to work on a Brexit where jobs is the priority - that'd mean (I assume) trade policies that don't affect jobs, and migration as needed.

That's even more meaningless than it sounded. All trade affects jobs. How many politicians are actively in favour of migration that we don't need?

Is Corbyn saying that if there is a potential trade deal that will make 10 basket weavers unemployed but results in 8 jobs being created in basket import and 4 jobs created throughout the economy from the money freed up by cheaper baskets, we should refuse it?

cogito

Filo25 wrote: »

Rees Mogg???

Do you really think that is someone who resonates with the UK at present?.

Yes, I do. He's intelligent, articulate, says what he believes in without being condescending.

Good article about him in The Spectator.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/why-jacob-rees-mogg-should-be-the-next-tory-leader/

Herzlos

Malthusian wrote: »

That's even more meaningless than it sounded. All trade affects jobs. How many politicians are actively in favour of migration that we don't need?

Tories seem keen on reducing the migration that we do need, which is worse.

Like I said, it's a pretty lousy, poorly defined stance that'd be unacceptable if their opposition actually had a stance beyond some sound bites.

Is Corbyn saying that if there is a potential trade deal that will make 10 basket weavers unemployed but results in 8 jobs being created in basket import and 4 jobs created throughout the economy from the money freed up by cheaper baskets, we should refuse it?

I think he's saying that if farmers need migrants to harvest a crop, the migration policy will allow in those migrants. Or any other business with recruitment needs not being satisfied by local resources. So basically he's talking about keeping the same movement rules, actually enforcing them, and spending more on administration than we save.

Contrast that to "Brexit means Brexit" and "Red white and blue Brexit".

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

There was no result. What Cameron should have said was "The referendum was completely inconclusive, and as such we feel that we should spend some more time investigating the options before returning to a future referendum with some more detail", and commissioned said investigation.

We are talking about a seasoned politician here.

If seasoned politicians worry about a particular outcome they build in margins and thresholds *from the outset*, not afterwards.

The truth? It's probably arrogance. Cameron and his smug accomplice Osborne probably didn't imagine for one moment that Team Leave had any sort of chance of winning....so why bother with any 55/45 type rule.

BoJo's introduction was a total game changer.

All the Remainers on here should be angry at how their Remain Team totally failed to understand the nature of the opposition.