Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

mrginge

ilovehouses wrote: »

Having something which is more highly valued by the EU than the UK is going to traded off of course. The fishing lobby know this which is why they're being so noisy.

It's got to be kept in perspective though. Even if the EU valued this sector 20% more than the UK 20% of a small number is still a small number.

Like I said. We are over a barrel on everything.

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

Clear enough, I would have thought. What's yours?

If it was clear I wouldn't have asked.

I assume your implying that no deal is the current deal and not wto. But we'll only get a copy of the eu deal if the USA allow us, which they won't. So it's chlorine chicken or wto.

Rough_Justice

Herzlos wrote: »

If it was clear I wouldn't have asked.

I assume your implying that no deal is the current deal and not wto. But we'll only get a copy of the eu deal if the USA allow us, which they won't. So it's chlorine chicken or wto.

Oh do make your mind up.

Herzlos wrote: »

You ate [sic] sort of right though; we might not get chlorine chicken or hormone beef

phillw

cogito wrote: »

Of course we Brits are so incredibly stupid that we would have allowed every last cod to be caught. It's such a good job that we have the EU to show us the way. How many thousands of tons of dead fish have to be chucked back because of the insanity of EU fisheries regulations?

How many Rhino horns are destroyed after they are illegally killed?

It appears it is a good job.

Rough_Justice

ilovehouses wrote: »

Looked like a straight answer to me. With explanatory notes too.

If the size of the fishing industry is small but we lose that every year for 15 years then there's scope to end up with a big loss.

Or, I'm wrong, and the size of the UK fishing industry isn't trivial after all then losing something the size of that every year for 15 years is even more significant.

Which way do you want it?

Still struggling. Maybe Father Ted can help you.

From your original reply you are wrong - and you need the help of somebody with a little more nous than your preferred option of Father Ted.
No wonder you got ir wrong if you rely upon similar thought process to formulate replies.
So allow me.

Your supposed 0.5 lost GDP is wrong.
Look: "The British government!!!8217;s own analysis of the economic impact of Brexit forecasts a fall in gross domestic product growth of up to 16 percent relative to current forecasts in the worst affected region of the U.K."(*)
Can you read that?
Up to 16% of growth.
Maximum.
Ignoring forecasts, 2017 growth was 1.8%
16% of 1.8% is what?
*Hint*
It is not 5%.
It is not 0.5%

Have you got the calculator fired-up yet?
Answer = 0.288%
That's quite a bit away from 0.5% plus it's a supposed worst-case scenario and it ignores the "in the worst affected region" precondition.
What about in the least affected region?
Well London would see 0.063% loss in GDP growth.
Taking 2017 as an example, GDP growth in London would fall from 1.8 % to?
Yup, you got it.
1.74%
Wow!
Also that scenario is a forecast supposing a worst-case WTO Brexit.
I'm not going to even bother working out other figures because as sure as night follows day, they will either be discounted or ignored judging from recent experience here.


That pretty much renders your fishing argument irrelevant.
What renders it even more irrelevant though is the accepted knowledge that far more is likely to affect future growth than Brexit; the march of mechanisation for one thing, where (because of reliance upon service industries) the UK is perhaps much less at-risk than say Germany which relies far more upon manufacturing.






* https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-analysis-shows-big-economic-hit-from-brexit/

kabayiri

Just suppose we had a 2nd referendum on the terms of the exit deal.

This is what people like Tony Blair and Gina Miller etc argue for.

I know what the Leave option would be. It might not be everything we sought but I would know what it entailed.

But...what would the Remain option look like?
- Would we keep all the opt outs we had before?
- Would we be encouraged to join the Euro?
- Would Spain take the opportunity to bring up the Gibraltar issue?
- Would we have to accept some of Merkels' unwanted refugees, from the large number who arrived in 2015?
- What would our place be in the EU going forward?

Truthfully, do you think our politicians could answer this? It's more likely that some of this won't be in their hands will it?

This plus the loss of face that May's team would have makes it pretty unlikely don't you think?

Rough_Justice

melanzana wrote: »

No one is allowed to question Brexit anymore. There is only one message allowed. Remainers have been called some very awful things, but Brexiteers haven't as far as I can see.

Have you been reading today?
Are you seeing now who doesn't like being questioned?

How many of the posts are genuine debate about Brexit and how many are nothing more than blatant attempted character assassination with no other contribution?
If you can't sensibly argue the point try rubbishing the posters instead is the stock remainer answer for many, judging from today's belligerence.

I saw elsewhere a very apt description of what threads like this one have descended into:
the equivalent of two bald men arguing over whether to use a brush or a comb.

kabayiri

ilovehouses wrote: »

0.5% - 0.1%. It's a trifling amount - who cares? About the same contribution to GDP as the UK's sewing machine manufacturing industry according to this.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/neweconomics/rule-britannia-britannia-rules-waves-fishing-patriotism-pragmatism/

Silly to try and compare it to pre-EU days. Almost meaningless.

This is indeed it, really.

Precisely who does care?

Sometimes, the numbers might be small, but the importance to those people; those seaside communities; is high.

I always thought that the Brexit vote might come down to local issues vs the centrists. Osborne was probably the best example of someone who was a centrist in his words and charts.

There aren't that many French farmers relative to the 500m in the EU either, but they oppose any major reform to the CAP vehemently. In a way it is admirable.

So I wonder why it is just us who don't care for the disenfranchised.

kabayiri

gfplux wrote: »

There is no good reason the EU will grant Britain any influence. Surely that is one of the cornerstones of the Brexit vote, to loose all EU influence over Britain and Britain to lose any influence over the EU.

PS kabayiri why not update your location.

I'm in the North West of the UK gfplux.

You're welcome for a cuppa anytime, but bring a raincoat!

My area was pretty much 50-50 when it came to the referendum. My household was pretty much 50-50 when it came to the referendum.

I know there is this desire to categorise people as entirely one way or the other, but the reality was nothing like that. Sometimes, it was a marginal call. Of course, the rules of the referendum game dictate a binary outcome. If we don't like that we should blame Cameron and friends. They defined the nature of the referendum.

Thrugelmir

kabayiri wrote: »

There aren't that many French farmers relative to the 500m in the EU either, but they oppose any major reform to the CAP vehemently. In a way it is admirable.

Runs far deeper than just Farmers. It's the power of the unions. Nationalism runs deep.