Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

wunferall

Ballard wrote: »

I don!!!8217;t recall seeing a single post by anyone suggesting that the EU won!!!8217;t be worse off. Of course the total cost to the EU will be higher in a monetary value but that divided by more people.

It comes to something when losing less that the EU is counted as a positive.

It comes to something when you still can't accept that some parts of the EU would suffer far more than the UK you mean.
Ignore too that it is the EU being intransigent and thus the source of any loss.

Meanwhile the UK powers ahead.
Growth is up, employment is up and our deficit is the lowest since before the financial crisis.
It's getting more difficult to maintain your pro-EU stance, isn't it?
The desperation is evident in so many remainer posts.

Ballard

wunferall wrote: »

It comes to something when you still can't accept that some parts of the EU would suffer far more than the UK you mean.
Ignore too that it is the EU being intransigent and thus the source of any loss.

Meanwhile the UK powers ahead.
Growth is up, employment is up and our deficit is the lowest since before the financial crisis.
It's getting more difficult to maintain your pro-EU stance, isn't it?
The desperation is evident in so many remainer posts.

Why should I care whether or not the EU loses out financially? My prime concern is that the U.K. is predicted to lose out. It was a remainer who first posted that the EU is expected to be worse off so I was responding to that.

It’s hardly desperation. Desperation is doing something like posting that ‘the enemy’ will be worse off whilst ignoring that so will we. Rather a Pyrrhic victory if you ask me.

wunferall

Ballard wrote: »

Why should I care whether or not the EU loses out financially? My prime concern is that the U.K. is predicted to lose out. It was a remainer who first posted that the EU is expected to be worse off so I was responding to that.

It’s hardly desperation. Desperation is doing something like posting that ‘the enemy’ will be worse off whilst ignoring that so will we. Rather a Pyrrhic victory if you ask me.

Oh dear.
This reminds me of "It's a puppet!".

They are predictions.
Now it might be better if you took the time to look at how many anti-Brexit predictions over these past three years or so have come true versus how many have been proven totally false.

Without wishing to appear rude, it's very obvious that some posters here really need to get off their keyboards more often and take a peek at what's happening in the big wide world.

Placing reliance on doom-laden predictions rather than what is actually happening so that your anti-Brexit POV is upheld is indeed a sign of desperation, unless of course you have evidence that the UK is not seeing record employment; that the UK is not seeing continued growth; or that the UK's deficit is not at the lowest level since before the financial crisis.
They are real-world factual examples, not predictions.

Ballard

wunferall wrote: »

Oh dear.
This reminds me of "It's a puppet!".

They are predictions.
Now it might be better if you took the time to look at how many anti-Brexit predictions over these past three years or so have come true versus how many have been proven totally false.

Without wishing to appear rude, it's very obvious that some posters here really need to get off their keyboards more often and take a peek at what's happening in the big wide world.

Placing reliance on doom-laden predictions rather than what is actually happening so that your anti-Brexit POV is upheld is indeed a sign of desperation, unless of course you have evidence that the UK is not seeing record employment; that the UK is not seeing continued growth; or that the UK's deficit is not at the lowest level since before the financial crisis.
They are real-world factual examples, not predictions.

I know that it’s a prediction which is why I’ve posted such in most, if not all, of my posts on the subject. As I’ve already said, I was replying to a post by a brexiteer who, it would seem, trusted the prediction that the EU would lose out by 1.5%.

Had no one mentioned the forecast I wouldn’t have brought it up. In fact I wouldn’t have known about it because I’m not trawling the news for titbits.

fatbeetle

Just thought I'd drop this in here...

In our working paper, we conclude that much of this work contains flaws of analysis, and a treatment of evidence that leads to exaggerated costs of Brexit. Gravity models are well established as a technique for estimating the impact of trade associations or currency unions but require more care than has been in shown, when being applied to a specific issue like Brexit. The Treasury has been particularly cavalier in its approach, both in its application of gravity analysis and in applying a ‘knock-on’ impact from trade to productivity. Other organisations have been a little more circumspect about the productivity link, which we doubt exists to any significant degree for advanced economies, but several have used it without much questioning. The short-term forecasts which have turned out to be wrong have further damaged confidence in economists’ contributions to public debate.

https://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/centre-for-business-research/downloads/working-papers/wp493.pdf

Ballard

fatbeetle wrote: »

Just thought I'd drop this in here...

That article must have taken some finding. Well done.

Zero_Gravitas

fatbeetle wrote: »

Just thought I'd drop this in here...

Shock news! Founder of “Briefings for Brexit” a pro-brexit website, co-publishes a paper supporting brexit. Who would have thought it?

mrginge

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

Shock news! Founder of “Briefings for Brexit” a pro-brexit website, co-publishes a paper supporting brexit. Who would have thought it?

You clearly haven’t read the paper, as it’s authors do not support brexit.
It’s an analysis of the statistical models used in a number of brexit impact forecasts. It’s probably a little tough for most remainers to understand as it’s quite technical.

The irony in a remainer dismissing an analysis purely because they think it ‘supports brexit’ will not be lost on many.

Mum_of_1

Ballard wrote: »

That article must have taken some finding. Well done.

So you see a post explaining very clearly why so many of the predictions about possible UK growth loss as a result of Brexit are wrong and by authors that do not support Brexit please note, therefore you must dismiss it out of hand and use sarcasm as your only defense?


It looks like you don't realise that tactics like those helped lose remainers their referendum and led to a Brexit decision.

Ballard wrote: »

Why should I care whether or not the EU loses out financially? My prime concern is that the U.K. is predicted to lose out. It was a remainer who first posted that the EU is expected to be worse off so I was responding to that.

It’s hardly desperation. Desperation is doing something like posting that ‘the enemy’ will be worse off whilst ignoring that so will we. Rather a Pyrrhic victory if you ask me.

Well there's another example saying that the UK might not in fact lose out because of flawed predictions.
You're just trying to suggest you're worried because it suits your pro-remain anti-Brexit stance, aren't you? Because if you were completely honest you would accept that neither you, me nor anybody else can know for sure what the future holds but what we do know for sure is that remainers are still deliberately misleading ( lying ) when issuing their predictions.
Probably the result of a fear of an ever-more-likely WTO Brexit.

Zero_Gravitas

mrginge wrote: »

You clearly haven’t read the paper, as it’s authors do not support brexit.
It’s an analysis of the statistical models used in a number of brexit impact forecasts. It’s probably a little tough for most remainers to understand as it’s quite technical.

The irony in a remainer dismissing an analysis purely because they think it ‘supports brexit’ will not be lost on many.

Nice try. Yes, I have read it. Whilst they claim it’s “not political” the authors fail to point out that on of the authors is editor of “Briefings for Brexit”. Call me old fashioned, but that’s a conflict of interest.

And whilst it’s been carefully worded, the output of the paper is effectively brexiteer project fear - because these economists got their assumptions wrong and so far things aren’t as bad as predicted, then any suggestion that Brexit will be bad must be wrong. Sounds like brexit support to me.