Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

wanman

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That same IMF study showed the loss to the UK would be 4% of GDP annually...

Where do you see that? The quoted link specifically states "The IMF did not estimate the costs of Brexit for Britain in this paper"

Ballard

wanman wrote: »

Where do you see that? The quoted link specifically states "The IMF did not estimate the costs of Brexit for Britain in this paper"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-no-deal-uk-economy-suffer-more-eu-imf-warning-a8454916.html?amp

gfplux

Today Britain is to hear what the EU27 think of the white paper plan.
Below is a quote from Politico and it will be interesting to know later in the day if they have called Barniers attitude correctly.

What I am sure will amaze Brexiters is the off the record comment in the second paragraph that says many Brexiters in Britain think they can bargain with the four principles of the EU. Surely no Brexiter thinks the EU27 would do that. If they do then they have and continue to totally misunderstand the EU.

QUOTE
BARNIER GIVES HIS VERDICT: Michel Barnier will this morning brief EU27 European affairs ministers on the current state of the Brexit talks in the first major Brussels summit since the Chequers plan was published. Todays General Affairs Council meeting is a biggie and will involve a two-hour discussion of the withdrawal treaty, the unresolved Irish border issue and Theresa Mays white paper on the future relationship. Barnier will then deliver his verdict in a press conference when the meeting breaks up at around noon U.K. time. We already have a fair idea what he thinks of Mays plan the only question is how hard he decides to turn the screw today.

Incoming: The expectation this week has been that Barnier may pull his punches, in a bid to avoid piling too much pressure on Theresa May. EU diplomats are much blunter in their private conversations, however. One source tells the Times today that Barnier is;unimpressed; with the Chequers plan and views it as an attempt to cherry-pick parts of the single market.;This goes to the integrity of the single market and the incompatibility of white paper ideas with that,a senior EU source says. ;It seems that there is deep misunderstanding in some parts of the U.K. that the EU could bargain on its founding principles. Member states feel strongly about the U.K. asking for changes to the way in which the single market works. There cannot be give and take on that. Which doesnt exactly bode well.
END QUOTE

Herzlos

PDQ wrote: »

Even assuming that the plucked-out-of-thin-air guesstimates are anywhere near accurate, tell us please which is the largest sum: 4% of $2.9 trillion or 1.5% of $20.9 trillion (2017 figures, widely available).

But we're talking about percentages here, surely?


The 1.5% loss to the EU is bigger in absolute terms, but the EU is also bigger in absolute terms thus better able to absorb it.


For example; 2 employees in a company, one on £10k/year and one on £100k/year, the first takes a 4% pay cut (down £400 to £9.6k) and the other a 1.5% pay cut (down £1500 to £98.5k). The latter has lost more money, but which one will hurt the most? Assuming they both pay no tax.




That said; I do find it amusing that the IMF is accurate when it's a pro brexit slant, and plucked out of the air when anti-brexit.

ben501

Herzlos wrote: »

The 1.5% loss to the EU is bigger in absolute terms, but the EU is also bigger in absolute terms thus better able to absorb it.

I haven't had more than a quick look so don't know if the answer's there, but has it been suggested how this 1.5% would be distributed?

If it's evenly over the EU then not so bad, but I suspect some countries will take a far bigger hit than others, maybe even raising the percentage for some individual countries to more than the UK's 4%.

Herzlos

ben501 wrote: »

I haven't had more than a quick look so don't know if the answer's there, but has it been suggested how this 1.5% would be distributed?

If it's evenly over the EU then not so bad, but I suspect some countries will take a far bigger hit than others, maybe even raising the percentage for some individual countries to more than the UK's 4%.

It won't be evenly distributed, just like the UK's 4% loss isn't distributed. The countries/counties most affected will be the ones with the closest trade links and manufacturing.


But just as the EU can't do a deal with Cornwall direct, we can't do a deal with Holland direct.

Rinoa

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That same IMF study showed the loss to the UK would be 4% of GDP annually...



Last time I checked 4% was more than 1.5%... :wall:

Also interesting was the IMF's assessment of the damage that would be caused if we leave the Single Market and CU then only agree a Free Trade Agreement similar to Canada's.

Under that scenario the IMF said GDP would fall by 0.5% for the EU, while the UK would suffer a loss of 2% of GDP.

Delving a little deeper it appears the 1.5% and 4% refer to the loss of growth between now and 2030. So UK GDP will suffer 0.3% less growth per year than it would have done had we stayed in the EU.

I'm happy to be out of the EU for a paltry 0.3% loss of growth.

And of course we can only guess at the boost to the economy through future trade deals and being able to manage our own affairs.

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

It won't be evenly distributed, just like the UK's 4% loss isn't distributed. The countries/counties most affected will be the ones with the closest trade links and manufacturing.


But just as the EU can't do a deal with Cornwall direct, we can't do a deal with Holland direct.

Is that not one of problem off being in EU, let's say the effect on a couple of countries is -10% but accepting UKs proposals would prevent that but in effect they have no say on whether to accept deal as all countries have to agree.

Herzlos

An interesting article in the Guardian today that will upset a lot on here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/20/brexiteers-betrayal-britain-america

ukcarper wrote: »

Is that not one of problem off being in EU, let's say the effect on a couple of countries is -10% but accepting UKs proposals would prevent that but in effect they have no say on whether to accept deal as all countries have to agree.

It is. But it's also a massive benefit in that we don't need to run 27 different trade deals and have ~27x more bargaining power. Any group dynamic will likely favour some more than others at differen


t points in the group, but it's usually worthwhile.

Rinoa wrote: »

I'm happy to be out of the EU for a paltry 0.3% loss of growth.

And of course we can only guess at the boost to the economy through future trade deals and being able to manage our own affairs.

I would, if we can provide any tangible boost through future trade deals and our own affairs. No-one has been able to provide any, though?

Herzlos

PDQ wrote: »

The words "IMF" and "accurate" have never really gone together Herzlos, ever since the IMF was conceived.
...

Will you ever get the idea or like so many remainers will you just deny any forecasts that aren't purely to the detriment of the UK?

So are you going to lambast the original claim that the EU will be worse off than us, based on these flawed IMF reports?


I haven't denied a single forecast that shows Brexit as a good things. Alas, there haven't actually been any, unless you could Reese Moggs victoriana .