Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Ooops I thought it was just a jpg, hadn’t realised there was a link behind it.
Will try and check it out over the weekend.
@PragueAddick looks like I will be working most of the weekend so a detailed response will take a while.
In the interim, worth re-posting something I mentioned some time back to you:
"You previously referred me to a very decent book, ‘Brexit, what the hell happens now?’ by Ian Dunt. I could not agree more with him than when he states that it should be relatively straightforward to organise a transitional period in which a decent and comprehensive trade deal could be agreed in the national interest. As he goes on to say, it is British values that will help get the country through this period of time: calm debate, instinctive scepticism, practical judgement and moderation. Unfortunately, as he further points out, our political class appear to have lost sight of these values and the sooner we reaffirm them, the better off we will be."
I'm not convinced that any of these can be claimed to be particularly British values. Though, to be honest I'm not convinced there's any such thing as 'British values" I think it's just weasel term used to give the fake sense that there's some coherent form of Britishness.
That said, they all seem like perfectly laudable qualities and I'm sure he's right that we'd be better of if our politicians demonstrated rather more of them. The last one I believe is a call for Big Rob to join in and dig us out of this mess.
Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Just had a quick look at the tweet you sent as I won't have a chance again over next few days.
The author has obviously spent quite some time putting this together. There is no way I can assess, agree or refute his figures without a similar amount of research. For the moment, my two posts above will be my response but I will take a proper look when I get time.
Why would you need to though? If a similar set of tweets was promoting leaving the EU, would you devote a similar amount of time researching them or would you accept them at face value if they confirmed your bias?
Why do you always have to be so aggressive with you're posts ?
Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Just had a quick look at the tweet you sent as I won't have a chance again over next few days.
The author has obviously spent quite some time putting this together. There is no way I can assess, agree or refute his figures without a similar amount of research. For the moment, my two posts above will be my response but I will take a proper look when I get time.
Why would you need to though? If a similar set of tweets was promoting leaving the EU, would you devote a similar amount of time researching them or would you accept them at face value if they confirmed your bias?
If it were full of statistics as this is, then obviously yes.
Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Just had a quick look at the tweet you sent as I won't have a chance again over next few days.
The author has obviously spent quite some time putting this together. There is no way I can assess, agree or refute his figures without a similar amount of research. For the moment, my two posts above will be my response but I will take a proper look when I get time.
Why would you need to though? If a similar set of tweets was promoting leaving the EU, would you devote a similar amount of time researching them or would you accept them at face value if they confirmed your bias?
Why do you always have to be so aggressive with you're posts ?
Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Just had a quick look at the tweet you sent as I won't have a chance again over next few days.
The author has obviously spent quite some time putting this together. There is no way I can assess, agree or refute his figures without a similar amount of research. For the moment, my two posts above will be my response but I will take a proper look when I get time.
Why would you need to though? If a similar set of tweets was promoting leaving the EU, would you devote a similar amount of time researching them or would you accept them at face value if they confirmed your bias?
If it were full of statistics as this is, then obviously yes.
I think you know me better than that by now.
Plus @PragueAddick asked for a counter to the arguments.
Unfortunately I do not carry that statistical information in my head. I need to check.
This post won't add anything to the debate but I've just returned from four very pleasant days in Amsterdam. I admit to liking being part of one big European family. Felt more at home there than in my own home town if I'm honest.
Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Just had a quick look at the tweet you sent as I won't have a chance again over next few days.
The author has obviously spent quite some time putting this together. There is no way I can assess, agree or refute his figures without a similar amount of research. For the moment, my two posts above will be my response but I will take a proper look when I get time.
Why would you need to though? If a similar set of tweets was promoting leaving the EU, would you devote a similar amount of time researching them or would you accept them at face value if they confirmed your bias?
If it were full of statistics as this is, then obviously yes.
I think you know me better than that by now.
Plus @PragueAddick asked for a counter to the arguments.
Unfortunately I do not carry that statistical information in my head. I need to check.
Would you be able to counter them if the information was correct? And if you have no reason to suspect the information is incorrect why not proceed along those lines.
To the untrained eye it may look like you're accusing Prague of posting false information, or that your counter argument is simply to find a different set of statistics that back up your perception without addressing the points raised by the facts in front of us.
Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Just had a quick look at the tweet you sent as I won't have a chance again over next few days.
The author has obviously spent quite some time putting this together. There is no way I can assess, agree or refute his figures without a similar amount of research. For the moment, my two posts above will be my response but I will take a proper look when I get time.
Why would you need to though? If a similar set of tweets was promoting leaving the EU, would you devote a similar amount of time researching them or would you accept them at face value if they confirmed your bias?
If it were full of statistics as this is, then obviously yes.
I think you know me better than that by now.
Plus @PragueAddick asked for a counter to the arguments.
Unfortunately I do not carry that statistical information in my head. I need to check.
Would you be able to counter them if the information was correct? And if you have no reason to suspect the information is incorrect why not proceed along those lines.
To the untrained eye it may look like you're accusing Prague of posting false information, or that your counter argument is simply to find a different set of statistics that back up your perception without addressing the points raised by the facts in front of us.
Ffs I am not accusing him of anything.
He wanted a reasoned counter argument so I made a couple of interim posts and stated I would look into a more in depth response.
Can you point me to the post where I said that about you? I think you are really working extra hard to take offence at any posts that include derogatory comments about Brexit voters. You are going to have a hard time over the coming 10 years.
As a Remain voter I only deal in facts. Opinion poll after opinion poll since the Referendum has shown that the least educated section of the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit. That is a simple fact. Some people on here are saying we should stop pointing this fact out to the poor Brexit voters because they are getting upset about it. That is their, the people stating we should stop pointing it out, prerogative. I am with Michael Bloomberg on this. The utter stupidity and dumbness of the Brexit vote must never be brushed under the carpet to save the blushes of the Brexit voters. It needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Over the coming decades it needs to be properly taught in schools so that future generations don't repeat our mistake. In 20 years the word Brexit will be synonymous with stupid and idiot.
You stated that Brexit voters are even more stupid and ill educated than anyone realised.
My post was very obviously tongue in cheek. I probably should have added a ‘wink’ to help you.
Chill out, it was meant to be humorous.
Hi mate. I think that because, like me, @Red_in_SE8 carefully studies robust data to inform his views, he knows perfectly well that the Brexit vote does not come exclusively from the least educated groups. However it is very interesting that the Brexit vote is over-weight in the same social demographic groups as those who voted for populist/xenophobic parties in other parts of Europe, and for Trump. The Czech election was the latest example. In most of those cases, leaving the EU was not on the election agenda (patently in the US case). Indeed a smiley from you would have helped. And an indication that you have had the time to read that thread, because I would be interested in your take.
The very reason why I tried to attract you and Dippenhall to it is because broadly your Brexit stance is, as I understand it, underpinned by a belief that our international trade position can actually improve after Brexit, and this outweighs any possible negative. Neither of you have placed issues around immigration at the centre of your arguments, which I greatly respect.
I do now feel that as the trade issues have been examined more carefully, (and I started from a less informed base than you two on this issue) your confidence looks increasingly misplaced. That is why I'd like to know how you would counter the author's arguments.
Ooops I thought it was just a jpg, hadn’t realised there was a link behind it.
Will try and check it out over the weekend.
@PragueAddick looks like I will be working most of the weekend so a detailed response will take a while.
In the interim, worth re-posting something I mentioned some time back to you:
"You previously referred me to a very decent book, ‘Brexit, what the hell happens now?’ by Ian Dunt. I could not agree more with him than when he states that it should be relatively straightforward to organise a transitional period in which a decent and comprehensive trade deal could be agreed in the national interest. As he goes on to say, it is British values that will help get the country through this period of time: calm debate, instinctive scepticism, practical judgement and moderation. Unfortunately, as he further points out, our political class appear to have lost sight of these values and the sooner we reaffirm them, the better off we will be."
I'm not convinced that any of these can be claimed to be particularly British values. Though, to be honest I'm not convinced there's any such thing as 'British values" I think it's just weasel term used to give the fake sense that there's some coherent form of Britishness.
That said, they all seem like perfectly laudable qualities and I'm sure he's right that we'd be better of if our politicians demonstrated rather more of them. The last one I believe is a call for Big Rob to join in and dig us out of this mess.
This post won't add anything to the debate but I've just returned from four very pleasant days in Amsterdam. I admit to liking being part of one big European family. Felt more at home there than in my own home town if I'm honest.
We're gong back over old ground again but it's entirely reasonable to express concerns over immigration and the perceived effects this has on our public services, housing, jobs, etc. That was a concern Remain failed miserably to address properly. Partly because it would involve the government admitting that the things people were concerned about were due primarily to their policies and inaction and not caused by excessive immigration.
However the degree to which Leave campaigned on an anti-immigration platform (they called it "controlled" of course) bore no relation to the reality of the situation as was and will be in the future.
We will still need immigration to fill those jobs that are unattractive to UK nationals. I've just come from an elderly person's warden assisted flat. They require care visits three times a day to dress, clean and feed them and see to some medical needs. They are doubly incontinent.
The idea that the Eastern European carers that are currently perfoming these tasks, on minimum wage or thereabouts, are preventing a UK carer from doing that job is frankly pathetic. If you or I wanted that type of job, or picking veg or working on a food factory production line or in retail, the jobs are there.
Those jobs will still (arguably increasingly so) be there after Brexit and as a result we will still have immigration. Albeit a little less so, not because the UK has taken back control but because, financially, it is a less attractive place to emigrate to.
Where's that immigration need going to be met? I suspect from the poorest Commonwealth countries, leaving us with a situation where we've done no more than swap immigration from one developing economy like Poland with another like Pakistan, India, Nigeria, Ghana, Bangladesh, Malaysia, the West Indies, etc. How this is going to play out with a certain demographic and mindset within Leavers is going to be an interesting issue in the longer term (and I include members of my own family in that group).
And let's not forget the role that certain sections of the press played, and continue to play, in this false narrative that all of societies ills can be laid at the door, wholly or in part, on immigration.
[Above is an analysis of front pages in the run up to the referendum. Almost 100% of them were negative in tone. Sorry, but no one is going convince me that regular readers of the Mail and Express have a truly unbiased view on the subject of immigration purely by dint of choosing to read a newspaper that has such a clear anti-immigration agenda. Source:sub-scribe.co.uk/2016/09/the-press-and-immigration-reporting.html ]
In conclusion I suspect that a lot of Leavers, hoping to see less immigration as a result of last year's vote, are going to be sorely disappointed in the future.
There’s a very simple answer, pay a decent wage for these jobs.
I kind of want a braver soul than I to surf a few football forums and gauge who's having the worst/maddest/most hilarious Brexit thread. Bet the Newcastle one is an absolute doozy
Thread going well. It's been virtually all Remainers for two pages, except for one Brexiter who's just said 'I give up'
To be fair as a remainer I have nothing but respect for the way @stonemuse has handled himself and his views on this thread and the others. I enjoy reading his posts and I look forward to his response. I would like to think most of us on this thread agree his posts are constructive and polite
Thread going well. It's been virtually all Remainers for two pages, except for one Brexiter who's just said 'I give up'
To be honest, I just should have said that it’s not worth it. No one is going to change their mind on either side.
In any event, Remain will prevail in the end so it’s all moot.
Ultimately the UK will not have the balls to take this forward ... nor does it have the political skills or nous to do so.
Respect!
It's not about changing minds on the 2016 vote - It's all about where we might be in 2018 and beyond. There are several choices and we are fortunate that there are credible champions for the next 5-10 years.
Thread going well. It's been virtually all Remainers for two pages, except for one Brexiter who's just said 'I give up'
To be fair as a remainer I have nothing but respect for the way @stonemuse has handled himself and his views on this thread and the others. I enjoy reading his posts and I look forward to his response. I would like to think most of us on this thread agree his posts are constructive and polite
hear, hear.
And @stonemuse is right, there is a lot to absorb in that thread. It's reasonable for him to consider whether there is other data which might at the very least suggest a less dark outcome than the author concludes. And he didn't ask me to set him this homework.
The trade issue is really important. Can we really cut better deals on our own, compared to if we stay in the EU; or in the single market? Increasingly I think the evidence is stacking up that we cannot, but if anyone can put a counter-argument, @stonemuse can. Especially as @Dippenhall has given up and started blaming everything on the "liberal elite", while admitting he doesn't really know what it is. Poor. I don't think he would chuck around phrases like "flat back four" or "false nine" on the relevant threads without being quite clear what they mean.
The boss of Swiss bank UBS has said plans to move 1,000 jobs from London as a result of Brexit are now looking "more and more unlikely".
Chief executive Sergio Ermotti said the banking giant's fear of losing a fifth of its 5,000-strong UK workforce in the wake of the vote to leave was now unlikely to materialise following some "regulatory and political clarification about what we need to do".
That looks like it's going to be a very interesting and thought-provoking book.
I don't know if you posted it initially because he happily brands himself as a member of the liberal metropolitan elite. He goes on to say a lot more that's of interest (Unfortunately the Torygraph blocks you after one read if you use an adblocker). He basically argues that it is beyond dispute that both Labour and Tory politicians have been serving this "elite" for the last 20 years (or more broadly the finance and service sector in London and SE). That may well be beyond dispute.
But what I will hope to find out in his book is the answer to this question; You have reminded yourself, Robert, that people not in that broad group above - people in unionised jobs, firemen and the like, people who may well have been the majority of your classmates at your comprehensive - have been neglected by politicians. I thoroughly agree with you on that point Robert. But are you seriously saying that Brexit is the first stage of a political revolution which will bring better lives to this large group of people? You seriously think that the likes of Johnson, Gove, Redwood, IDS, Grayling, Fox, and most of all the Cartoon Aristocrat, have seen the light and are setting about spreading the wealth of the country down to these people? You think they care about these people Robert? And even if they do care, what policies are they planning to help these people, and why do we need Brexit in order to enact them?
That's what I will be looking for in his book. But from that excerpt I reckon it will be a very compelling read.
The boss of Swiss bank UBS has said plans to move 1,000 jobs from London as a result of Brexit are now looking "more and more unlikely".
Chief executive Sergio Ermotti said the banking giant's fear of losing a fifth of its 5,000-strong UK workforce in the wake of the vote to leave was now unlikely to materialise following some "regulatory and political clarification about what we need to do".
That article's a bit contradictory isn't it? On the one hand he's saying they may not need to move the 1000 jobs abroad and then on the other that they are continuing to make plans to do so anyway, including asking London based staff where their preference to relocate to is last week. Are they planning on going or not?
More interesting is the statement, "...It is unclear what reassurances the bank has received in the last few months that has made its earlier estimate for job moves seem unrealistic, with a spokesman for the bank declining to comment further." Are we talking about the government making more secret promises like those offered to car manufacturers in the hope to stop businesses bailing out. Promises that it may not be able to keep...
Interesting article and a fantastic piece of marketing from Peston. I agree to a large extent with what he describes, as an inhabitant of the Essex coast it does feel that this area has been neglected. The irony is that it's not EU bureaucrats that have been the neglecters-in-chief, but UK based ones. It is our own government who have cut public sector jobs in the area, either in centralising them in the city (against their own policy) or in the north, whilst doing little or nothing to stimulate alternative work in the private sector. This has lead to a reduction in local employment opportunities. For many in Essex now (and I've no doubt Kent, Sussex and other counties are the same), the options are reduced to taking on zero-hours bar work and similar insecure dead-end service work, or joining the daily commute to London.
How then, did we get ourselves in a position where the angst of the disaffected was aimed at Europe with the aim of giving more power to those in the UK who had let them down? The only answer I have is the relentless stream of anti-EU propaganda that was served up by her majesty's gutter press. For decades people were fed a constant diet of lies, misinformation and (if they were lucky) half-truths. Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that they kicked out at the wrong target. The sad truth is though, that voting for Brexit didn't kick the liberal elite in the teeth, it kicked everyone in the teeth.
Interesting article and a fantastic piece of marketing from Peston. I agree to a large extent with what he describes, as an inhabitant of the Essex coast it does feel that this area has been neglected. The irony is that it's not EU bureaucrats that have been the neglecters-in-chief, but UK based ones. It is our own government who have cut public sector jobs in the area, either in centralising them in the city (against their own policy) or in the north, whilst doing little or nothing to stimulate alternative work in the private sector. This has lead to a reduction in local employment opportunities. For many in Essex now (and I've no doubt Kent, Sussex and other counties are the same), the options are reduced to taking on zero-hours bar work and similar insecure dead-end service work, or joining the daily commute to London.
How then, did we get ourselves in a position where the angst of the disaffected was aimed at Europe with the aim of giving more power to those in the UK who had let them down? The only answer I have is the relentless stream of anti-EU propaganda that was served up by her majesty's gutter press. For decades people were fed a constant diet of lies, misinformation and (if they were lucky) half-truths. Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that they kicked out at the wrong target. The sad truth is though, that voting for Brexit didn't kick the liberal elite in the teeth, it kicked everyone in the teeth.
I was also quite interested in the way employment works in that part of the world. Having always been brought up and lived in London, for a short period I moved to Broadstairs in July 2011 - Feb 2012 after my mother in law passed away from breast cancer. My ex wife wanted to be with her dad and I had no objections given how traumatic the whole run up to and subsequent passing had been
Anyhow, we both still had jobs in London that we kept and commuted too. 8 months was the maximum we could both handle until we had to come back up to London. The commute for me wasn’t on the high speed and still cost a good £115 a week, hers was and that was about £125. You could argue that rent was cheaper but not cheap enough to be balanced out, and I was getting up at 5.30am to get the 6.18am that got me into London Bridge at 8.10am
My journey home was the 5.36pm getting in at 7.20pm, hers got her back about 8ish as she finished later usually. We had no life during the week.
I often wondered what I would’ve done for employment had we stayed there and I worked there. It’s a seaside town so obviously busier in the summer, but all I could see jobs wise were trade (I have no skills in), retail or local government or hospitality/tourism.
Not knocking any of them as professions, but in relation to stig’s post, I wonder how it’s sustainable long term. It has to have been because people live, work and own nice homes there, but I really couldn’t get my head around how restricted and limited opportunities were
Given that the Brexit bill has been further delayed in the Commons and will be very hard to force through the Lords; and that Theresa May has, apparently, delayed any discussion in Cabinet of post-Brexit trade deals until 2018; and the fact that there has still not been "sufficient progress" on the Brexit talks with the EU, which will go on until at least December; and that the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far; and that we are therefore in the worst-possible position with regards to negotiating an exit and a deal...
...does anyone still believe that Brexit is going to be a success?
Given that the Brexit bill has been further delayed in the Commons and will be very hard to force through the Lords; and that Theresa May has, apparently, delayed any discussion in Cabinet of post-Brexit trade deals until 2018; and the fact that there has still not been "sufficient progress" on the Brexit talks with the EU, which will go on until at least December; and that the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far; and that we are therefore in the worst-possible position with regards to negotiating an exit and a deal...
...does anyone still believe that Brexit is going to be a success?
No but not for that reason.
Remainers have never thought Brexit could be a success.
Leavers are convinced that Remainers talking down the economy are ruining everything.
@PragueAddick thanks for the link, an interesting read. As one poster seemed to think I was accusing you of providing false information, I have left my work aside for a while and taken a look at the report behind the tweeted figures. The report covers International Trade in Services 2015 and was released at the start of this year. Disappointing that the ONS takes so long to analyse the figures but does mean we should have the 2016 figures by the end of January 2018.
It is important to note that the figures do not include the travel, transport and banking sectors. According to the report, and based on the 2015 estimates, the data in the report contributed approximately 55% to the total trade in services export estimates for the whole of the UK. So there is quite a large gap in the figures. That is not to say that the figures will not extrapolate in a similar way when taking into account the full 100%, but it is unclear. So worth remembering that the provided figures only relate to 55% of UK exports of services, not 100%, and do not include the sectors mentioned above.
Total exports of services (excluding travel, transport and banking) from the UK continued to follow an upward trend and increased from £119,703 million in 2014, to £123,231 million in 2015. The rate of growth of UK service exports in 2015 increased marginally compared with 2014, from 2.1 percentage points to 2.9%. The estimates show that in 2015, the UK continued to be a net exporter of services meaning more services were exported from the UK than imported.
As the tweeter stated, the EU amounts to 35.7% of the total. The US figure is 22.7% and Asia 17.4%. Strangely the Middle East is missing from the figures apart from Saudi Arabia, which is included within Asia!
His 6th slide states that if the US is removed from the figures, the EU percentage share increases. I do not quite see why he would want to extract the US. Obviously if you take one figure out, another will increase. The same happens with the EU figure if you take Germany out! The fact is that the US figure is a real figure and cannot be taken out of the total.
As he says in slide 10, only some of the ‘rest of the world’ is growing. Again, surely obvious, no one has ever said anything different. The US and Asia are definitely still growing. Slide 15 demonstrates increases for India and Saudi Arabia. In actual fact, if you look at the figures, virtually the whole of Asia is increasing. (Incidentally I really do not understand why the Middle East is missing and Saudi is placed in Asia). The tweeter is making political mischief by stating that Brexit is a means to seek a deal with Saudi.
However, good for him, at least he has made an analysis, more than most have done even if his interpretation could be considered as skewed … and it only covers 55% of the overall figure.
I used some figures from the HM Treasury earlier this year in one of my own presentations – unfortunately I have lost the link (just in case someone thinks I am making it up). In 2006, 54.7% of Britain’s exports (that’s all of them, not just 55% of Services) went to the EU. In 2015, it was 44.6% - a significant decrease. I believe we are one of only two EU member States that trade more outside the EU than inside it – and the non-EU trade is growing.
Obviously the question that needs to be addressed is what control over trade means for the UK when (if) we exit. I believe in free trade and the abolition of tariffs that can impact on developing and third world countries. So what is free trade for me? Free trade means that individuals and companies can import and export goods and services without any government-imposed barriers. Such barriers include tariffs (or taxes on imports), import quotas and discriminatory product standards, government procurement policies or intellectual property (IP) rules. I dislike protectionism of all types whether it be the extreme approach attempted by Trump or punitive tariffs applied by the EU.
There is no doubt that a customs union has many advantages – but it also has negatives and constraints. A ‘harmonised’ trade framework prevents individual states from pursuing their own trade policy agenda, bilaterally and multilaterally. Greater control over our own trade policy provides a freedom to expand the development and scope and partners of future trade deals on terms that are more suitable to us and not on the consensus of 28 countries.
As mentioned in the report to which I linked in my earlier post, “non-tariff Free Trade with non-EU countries would bring benefits to the UK. Free trade is also progressive in its impact: the poor benefit proportionately more than those who are better off. It is in the interests of UK consumers and UK importers generally to buy as cheaply as possible, which implies that tariffs are a form of self-harm. The UK should therefore commit to a policy of unilateral free trade with the rest of the world, thereby eliminating all barriers to imports, and it should do so regardless of whether other countries impose tariffs on their imports from the UK or not. Unilateral free trade should be supplemented by efforts to reach free trade agreements with our major trading partners. The priority should be to seek deals with the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the EU. The purpose of these deals should be to promote free trade, and it is important to avoid deals that focus on other objectives such as regulatory harmonisation.”
With regard to UK/EU trade, in the event that a deal cannot be reached (and, personally, I think a deal will be achieved at the 11th hour), the UK would continue to trade with the EU under WTO rules. The IEA discussion paper summarises the situation succinctly: under such circumstances, it would then be up to the EU whether it wished to impose tariffs on imports from the UK, but WTO rules prohibit punitive tariffs against any trading counterparty. And imposing tariffs on imports from the UK would be a major act of self-harm: EU consumers would face higher prices for British goods and the supply chains of EU manufacturers would be disrupted. It is, therefore, also in the EU’s self-interest to seek free trade with the UK.
The UK most certainly exports a lot to the EU, even if it is decreasing. But these sales do not happen because of the Single Market – they would have happened anyway. Because we are in the Single Market, we must accept common regulations. This would be far better if it were common ‘minimal’ levels of regulation. We do not need to be in the EU in order to trade. The proof of the pudding being that countries such as China, Japan, US, India, etc. export to the EU – incidentally, all of these countries have been attempting to get a free trade agreement with the EU but none have yet been put in place and/or used.
When we leave, we will still have to comply with EU rules and standards. So what? We have to do that wherever we export by complying with local rules, regulations and standards.
In fact, being outside the EU may place us in a stronger position. 14 countries that traded with the EU under WTO rules from 1993 to 2015, including the US, India and Japan, increased their exports to the EU (excluding the UK) by 52%, compared with 25% for the UK.
“We came to the conclusion that the less we attempted to persuade foreigners to adopt our trade principles, the better … we avowed our total indifference whether other nations became free traders or not: but we should abolish Protection for our own sakes, and leave other countries to take whatever course they liked best.” Richard Cobden, free trade campaigner, discussing the UK abolition of the Corn Laws in 1846.
This post won't add anything to the debate but I've just returned from four very pleasant days in Amsterdam. I admit to liking being part of one big European family. Felt more at home there than in my own home town if I'm honest.
Ditto mate... Spentt last week in Blackpool and i thought i was in continental Europe too.
Given that the Brexit bill has been further delayed in the Commons and will be very hard to force through the Lords; and that Theresa May has, apparently, delayed any discussion in Cabinet of post-Brexit trade deals until 2018; and the fact that there has still not been "sufficient progress" on the Brexit talks with the EU, which will go on until at least December; and that the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far; and that we are therefore in the worst-possible position with regards to negotiating an exit and a deal...
...does anyone still believe that Brexit is going to be a success?
No but not for that reason.
Remainers have never thought Brexit could be a success.
Leavers are convinced that Remainers talking down the economy are ruining everything.
Is it just me or is fiish and chizz the same poster.
Given that the Brexit bill has been further delayed in the Commons and will be very hard to force through the Lords; and that Theresa May has, apparently, delayed any discussion in Cabinet of post-Brexit trade deals until 2018; and the fact that there has still not been "sufficient progress" on the Brexit talks with the EU, which will go on until at least December; and that the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far; and that we are therefore in the worst-possible position with regards to negotiating an exit and a deal...
...does anyone still believe that Brexit is going to be a success?
Yep - can't wait. I can't say I expected the EU27 to be falling over themselves to get us out.
Interesting that the "divorce bill" is a sticking point, yet meanwhile at the EIB:
Under the statutes of the EIB, its shareholders can only be member states of the EU. However, it had been hoped by many in senior positions in the bank that “rational thinking” would lead to an amendment to the rule book to allow the UK to stay. (The Guardian)
So, if rational thinking is going to be introduced (in a place), then perhaps elsewhere, the parties concerned in Brexit can get a move on and sort it out.
the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far
It's up to the 27 round the table as much as it is the UK to sort out the terms - we are leaving them, not vice versa, so they need to be more prepared than us (IMO).
Guy is married to the same girl for 40 years. Decides to leave her right now and look for a better option. Guy has the phone numbers for Nicole Sherzinger, Taylor Swift, Rachel Riley etc, but they could be wrong and even then - the ladies may not answer. A year later he talks to wife about the divorce bill - she says you can't have my Wham CD's and I want half the house and both the cats. Guy thinks - Phew, I thought I was gonna get the Wham CD's but half the house has skinted me and I miss the cats. In time - the guy rents the house next door with Sherzinger, Swift and Riley - sees cats over garden fence, and buys his own CD's.
Given that the Brexit bill has been further delayed in the Commons and will be very hard to force through the Lords; and that Theresa May has, apparently, delayed any discussion in Cabinet of post-Brexit trade deals until 2018; and the fact that there has still not been "sufficient progress" on the Brexit talks with the EU, which will go on until at least December; and that the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far; and that we are therefore in the worst-possible position with regards to negotiating an exit and a deal...
...does anyone still believe that Brexit is going to be a success?
Yep - can't wait. I can't say I expected the EU27 to be falling over themselves to get us out.
Interesting that the "divorce bill" is a sticking point, yet meanwhile at the EIB:
Under the statutes of the EIB, its shareholders can only be member states of the EU. However, it had been hoped by many in senior positions in the bank that “rational thinking” would lead to an amendment to the rule book to allow the UK to stay. (The Guardian)
So, if rational thinking is going to be introduced (in a place), then perhaps elsewhere, the parties concerned in Brexit can get a move on and sort it out.
the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far
It's up to the 27 round the table as much as it is the UK to sort out the terms - we are leaving them, not vice versa, so they need to be more prepared than us (IMO).
Guy is married to the same girl for 40 years. Decides to leave her right now and look for a better option. Guy has the phone numbers for Nicole Sherzinger, Taylor Swift, Rachel Riley etc, but they could be wrong and even then - the ladies may not answer. A year later he talks to wife about the divorce bill - she says you can't have my Wham CD's and I want half the house and both the cats. Guy thinks - Phew, I thought I was gonna get the Wham CD's but half the house has skinted me and I miss the cats. In time - the guy rents the house next door with Sherzinger, Swift and Riley - sees cats over garden fence, and buys his own CD's.
Yeah but the sensible bloke would have thought ahead and ripped all the CDs at no cost to himself before the Mrs changed all the locks on his old gaff. One gets the feeling that the Department For Exiting The European Union have no idea that the EU equivalent of FLAC even exists. Perhaps it doesn't!
Comments
I think you know me better than that by now.
Unfortunately I do not carry that statistical information in my head. I need to check.
To the untrained eye it may look like you're accusing Prague of posting false information, or that your counter argument is simply to find a different set of statistics that back up your perception without addressing the points raised by the facts in front of us.
He wanted a reasoned counter argument so I made a couple of interim posts and stated I would look into a more in depth response.
I give up.
I think that adds considerably actually.
In any event, Remain will prevail in the end so it’s all moot.
Ultimately the UK will not have the balls to take this forward ... nor does it have the political skills or nous to do so.
It's not about changing minds on the 2016 vote - It's all about where we might be in 2018 and beyond. There are several choices and we are fortunate that there are credible champions for the next 5-10 years.
And @stonemuse is right, there is a lot to absorb in that thread. It's reasonable for him to consider whether there is other data which might at the very least suggest a less dark outcome than the author concludes. And he didn't ask me to set him this homework.
The trade issue is really important. Can we really cut better deals on our own, compared to if we stay in the EU; or in the single market? Increasingly I think the evidence is stacking up that we cannot, but if anyone can put a counter-argument, @stonemuse can. Especially as @Dippenhall has given up and started blaming everything on the "liberal elite", while admitting he doesn't really know what it is. Poor. I don't think he would chuck around phrases like "flat back four" or "false nine" on the relevant threads without being quite clear what they mean.
https://google.co.uk/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/10/27/ubs-says-threat-moving-1000-jobs-london-unlikely/amp/
The boss of Swiss bank UBS has said plans to move 1,000 jobs from London as a result of Brexit are now looking "more and more unlikely".
Chief executive Sergio Ermotti said the banking giant's fear of losing a fifth of its 5,000-strong UK workforce in the wake of the vote to leave was now unlikely to materialise following some "regulatory and political clarification about what we need to do".
I don't know if you posted it initially because he happily brands himself as a member of the liberal metropolitan elite. He goes on to say a lot more that's of interest (Unfortunately the Torygraph blocks you after one read if you use an adblocker). He basically argues that it is beyond dispute that both Labour and Tory politicians have been serving this "elite" for the last 20 years (or more broadly the finance and service sector in London and SE). That may well be beyond dispute.
But what I will hope to find out in his book is the answer to this question; You have reminded yourself, Robert, that people not in that broad group above - people in unionised jobs, firemen and the like, people who may well have been the majority of your classmates at your comprehensive - have been neglected by politicians. I thoroughly agree with you on that point Robert. But are you seriously saying that Brexit is the first stage of a political revolution which will bring better lives to this large group of people? You seriously think that the likes of Johnson, Gove, Redwood, IDS, Grayling, Fox, and most of all the Cartoon Aristocrat, have seen the light and are setting about spreading the wealth of the country down to these people? You think they care about these people Robert? And even if they do care, what policies are they planning to help these people, and why do we need Brexit in order to enact them?
That's what I will be looking for in his book. But from that excerpt I reckon it will be a very compelling read.
More interesting is the statement, "...It is unclear what reassurances the bank has received in the last few months that has made its earlier estimate for job moves seem unrealistic, with a spokesman for the bank declining to comment further." Are we talking about the government making more secret promises like those offered to car manufacturers in the hope to stop businesses bailing out. Promises that it may not be able to keep...
m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/toyota-brexit-jobs-uk_uk_59b84eaee4b0edff971757e8
How then, did we get ourselves in a position where the angst of the disaffected was aimed at Europe with the aim of giving more power to those in the UK who had let them down? The only answer I have is the relentless stream of anti-EU propaganda that was served up by her majesty's gutter press. For decades people were fed a constant diet of lies, misinformation and (if they were lucky) half-truths. Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that they kicked out at the wrong target. The sad truth is though, that voting for Brexit didn't kick the liberal elite in the teeth, it kicked everyone in the teeth.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/07/boris-johnson-peddled-absurd-eu-myths-and-our-disgraceful-press-followed-his
http://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/resources/publications/ethics-in-the-news/media-lies-and-brexit
Anyhow, we both still had jobs in London that we kept and commuted too. 8 months was the maximum we could both handle until we had to come back up to London. The commute for me wasn’t on the high speed and still cost a good £115 a week, hers was and that was about £125. You could argue that rent was cheaper but not cheap enough to be balanced out, and I was getting up at 5.30am to get the 6.18am that got me into London Bridge at 8.10am
My journey home was the 5.36pm getting in at 7.20pm, hers got her back about 8ish as she finished later usually. We had no life during the week.
I often wondered what I would’ve done for employment had we stayed there and I worked there. It’s a seaside town so obviously busier in the summer, but all I could see jobs wise were trade (I have no skills in), retail or local government or hospitality/tourism.
Not knocking any of them as professions, but in relation to stig’s post, I wonder how it’s sustainable long term. It has to have been because people live, work and own nice homes there, but I really couldn’t get my head around how restricted and limited opportunities were
Given that the Brexit bill has been further delayed in the Commons and will be very hard to force through the Lords; and that Theresa May has, apparently, delayed any discussion in Cabinet of post-Brexit trade deals until 2018; and the fact that there has still not been "sufficient progress" on the Brexit talks with the EU, which will go on until at least December; and that the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far; and that we are therefore in the worst-possible position with regards to negotiating an exit and a deal...
...does anyone still believe that Brexit is going to be a success?
Remainers have never thought Brexit could be a success.
Leavers are convinced that Remainers talking down the economy are ruining everything.
It is important to note that the figures do not include the travel, transport and banking sectors. According to the report, and based on the 2015 estimates, the data in the report contributed approximately 55% to the total trade in services export estimates for the whole of the UK. So there is quite a large gap in the figures. That is not to say that the figures will not extrapolate in a similar way when taking into account the full 100%, but it is unclear. So worth remembering that the provided figures only relate to 55% of UK exports of services, not 100%, and do not include the sectors mentioned above.
Total exports of services (excluding travel, transport and banking) from the UK continued to follow an upward trend and increased from £119,703 million in 2014, to £123,231 million in 2015. The rate of growth of UK service exports in 2015 increased marginally compared with 2014, from 2.1 percentage points to 2.9%. The estimates show that in 2015, the UK continued to be a net exporter of services meaning more services were exported from the UK than imported.
As the tweeter stated, the EU amounts to 35.7% of the total. The US figure is 22.7% and Asia 17.4%. Strangely the Middle East is missing from the figures apart from Saudi Arabia, which is included within Asia!
His 6th slide states that if the US is removed from the figures, the EU percentage share increases. I do not quite see why he would want to extract the US. Obviously if you take one figure out, another will increase. The same happens with the EU figure if you take Germany out! The fact is that the US figure is a real figure and cannot be taken out of the total.
As he says in slide 10, only some of the ‘rest of the world’ is growing. Again, surely obvious, no one has ever said anything different. The US and Asia are definitely still growing. Slide 15 demonstrates increases for India and Saudi Arabia. In actual fact, if you look at the figures, virtually the whole of Asia is increasing. (Incidentally I really do not understand why the Middle East is missing and Saudi is placed in Asia). The tweeter is making political mischief by stating that Brexit is a means to seek a deal with Saudi.
However, good for him, at least he has made an analysis, more than most have done even if his interpretation could be considered as skewed … and it only covers 55% of the overall figure.
I used some figures from the HM Treasury earlier this year in one of my own presentations – unfortunately I have lost the link (just in case someone thinks I am making it up). In 2006, 54.7% of Britain’s exports (that’s all of them, not just 55% of Services) went to the EU. In 2015, it was 44.6% - a significant decrease. I believe we are one of only two EU member States that trade more outside the EU than inside it – and the non-EU trade is growing.
Obviously the question that needs to be addressed is what control over trade means for the UK when (if) we exit. I believe in free trade and the abolition of tariffs that can impact on developing and third world countries. So what is free trade for me? Free trade means that individuals and companies can import and export goods and services without any government-imposed barriers. Such barriers include tariffs (or taxes on imports), import quotas and discriminatory product standards, government procurement policies or intellectual property (IP) rules. I dislike protectionism of all types whether it be the extreme approach attempted by Trump or punitive tariffs applied by the EU.
There is no doubt that a customs union has many advantages – but it also has negatives and constraints. A ‘harmonised’ trade framework prevents individual states from pursuing their own trade policy agenda, bilaterally and multilaterally. Greater control over our own trade policy provides a freedom to expand the development and scope and partners of future trade deals on terms that are more suitable to us and not on the consensus of 28 countries.
As mentioned in the report to which I linked in my earlier post, “non-tariff Free Trade with non-EU countries would bring benefits to the UK. Free trade is also progressive in its impact: the poor benefit proportionately more than those who are better off. It is in the interests of UK consumers and UK importers generally to buy as cheaply as possible, which implies that tariffs are a form of self-harm. The UK should therefore commit to a policy of unilateral free trade with the rest of the world, thereby eliminating all barriers to imports, and it should do so regardless of whether other countries impose tariffs on their imports from the UK or not. Unilateral free trade should be supplemented by efforts to reach free trade agreements with our major trading partners. The priority should be to seek deals with the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the EU. The purpose of these deals should be to promote free trade, and it is important to avoid deals that focus on other objectives such as regulatory harmonisation.”
With regard to UK/EU trade, in the event that a deal cannot be reached (and, personally, I think a deal will be achieved at the 11th hour), the UK would continue to trade with the EU under WTO rules. The IEA discussion paper summarises the situation succinctly: under such circumstances, it would then be up to the EU whether it wished to impose tariffs on imports from the UK, but WTO rules prohibit punitive tariffs against any trading counterparty. And imposing tariffs on imports from the UK would be a major act of self-harm: EU consumers would face higher prices for British goods and the supply chains of EU manufacturers would be disrupted. It is, therefore, also in the EU’s self-interest to seek free trade with the UK.
The UK most certainly exports a lot to the EU, even if it is decreasing. But these sales do not happen because of the Single Market – they would have happened anyway. Because we are in the Single Market, we must accept common regulations. This would be far better if it were common ‘minimal’ levels of regulation. We do not need to be in the EU in order to trade. The proof of the pudding being that countries such as China, Japan, US, India, etc. export to the EU – incidentally, all of these countries have been attempting to get a free trade agreement with the EU but none have yet been put in place and/or used.
When we leave, we will still have to comply with EU rules and standards. So what? We have to do that wherever we export by complying with local rules, regulations and standards.
In fact, being outside the EU may place us in a stronger position. 14 countries that traded with the EU under WTO rules from 1993 to 2015, including the US, India and Japan, increased their exports to the EU (excluding the UK) by 52%, compared with 25% for the UK.
“We came to the conclusion that the less we attempted to persuade foreigners to adopt our trade principles, the better … we avowed our total indifference whether other nations became free traders or not: but we should abolish Protection for our own sakes, and leave other countries to take whatever course they liked best.”
Richard Cobden, free trade campaigner, discussing the UK abolition of the Corn Laws in 1846.
I can't say I expected the EU27 to be falling over themselves to get us out.
Interesting that the "divorce bill" is a sticking point, yet meanwhile at the EIB:
Under the statutes of the EIB, its shareholders can only be member states of the EU. However, it had been hoped by many in senior positions in the bank that “rational thinking” would lead to an amendment to the rule book to allow the UK to stay. (The Guardian)
So, if rational thinking is going to be introduced (in a place), then perhaps elsewhere, the parties concerned in Brexit can get a move on and sort it out.
the EU27 have already started preparing their negotiating plans for the deal, meaning the UK will be as under-prepared for the deal negotiation as we have been for the Brexit talks so far
It's up to the 27 round the table as much as it is the UK to sort out the terms - we are leaving them, not vice versa, so they need to be more prepared than us (IMO).
Guy is married to the same girl for 40 years.
Decides to leave her right now and look for a better option.
Guy has the phone numbers for Nicole Sherzinger, Taylor Swift, Rachel Riley etc, but they could be wrong and even then - the ladies may not answer.
A year later he talks to wife about the divorce bill - she says you can't have my Wham CD's and I want half the house and both the cats.
Guy thinks - Phew, I thought I was gonna get the Wham CD's but half the house has skinted me and I miss the cats.
In time - the guy rents the house next door with Sherzinger, Swift and Riley - sees cats over garden fence, and buys his own CD's.