View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #10261
    Dreadlord Nigel Tufnel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Here lies David St. Hubbins, and why not?
    Posts
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by Helden View Post
    /snip
    For a more detailed description of the UK's fortunes immediately following the Leave vote, see:

    https://www.ft.com/content/cf51e840-...f-99f383b09ff9

    In short, since June 2016:

    - GDP growth lowest of G7
    - Employment up
    - Real wage growth lower
    - Households borrowing more than they save
    - Business investment stagnant
    - FTSE 250 performing poorly

    Teleros' argument (and also Andrew Neil's) revolves round the fact that as the apocalyptic hasn't happened we should all be jolly grateful.
    You can't really dust for vomit.

  2. #10262
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,267
    Quote Originally Posted by Nigel Tufnel View Post
    In short, since June 2016:

    - GDP growth lowest of G7
    - Employment up
    - Real wage growth lower
    - Households borrowing more than they save
    - Business investment stagnant
    - FTSE 250 performing poorly

    Teleros' argument (and also Andrew Neil's) revolves round the fact that as the apocalyptic hasn't happened we should all be jolly grateful.
    Worth noting that employment is only up on paper due to figures being inflated by shady companies misuse of zero hour contracts. It has fallen in real terms.

  3. #10263
    Quote Originally Posted by Teleros View Post
    You jest, but this was the Treasury's prediction for a vote to leave:



    Either they're just that damn incompetent (in which case why believe anything they say?), or they were lying to try and scare people away from voting to leave (in which case why believe anything they say?).
    UK's GDP/cap did in fact drop 3.2% from 2016 to 2017.

    2017 39,252$ -3.2%
    https://countryeconomy.com/gdp/uk

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nigel Tufnel View Post
    Teleros' argument (and also Andrew Neil's) revolves round the fact that as the apocalyptic hasn't happened we should all be jolly grateful.
    "Brexit will be amazing!"

    *beat*

    "Shut up Brexit won't be the end of the world!"
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  4. #10264
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Worth noting that employment is only up on paper due to figures being inflated by shady companies misuse of zero hour contracts. It has fallen in real terms.
    At some point action needs to be taken against misclassification
    Hail Lilith and see you in Hell!

  5. #10265
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,267
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    At some point action needs to be taken against misclassification
    Indeed, problem is nobody is willing to do it, May is insistent there is no problem and Corbyn is insistent that he will ban ZH contracts which will punish the majority of people on them who aren't being abused.

  6. #10266
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Indeed, problem is nobody is willing to do it, May is insistent there is no problem and Corbyn is insistent that he will ban ZH contracts which will punish the majority of people on them who aren't being abused.
    This isn't about the UK, misclassification is very common in several EU countries. It's been a decade of ever worsening labour rights but misclassification goes beyond worsening rights, it's actually violating basic accounting principles.
    Hail Lilith and see you in Hell!

  7. #10267
    Pandaren Monk Teleros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    UK's GDP/cap did in fact drop 3.2% from 2016 to 2017.
    You've been conned by Fake News. Let's take the figures from the UK's Office of National Statistics, instead of the per capita GDP figures from some random site.

    Year & GDP in £millions
    2013 Q1 = 432,989
    2013 Q2 = 436,307
    2013 Q3 = 444,346
    2013 Q4 = 447,705
    2014 Q1 = 453,883
    2014 Q2 = 460,696
    2014 Q3 = 464,730
    2014 Q4 = 464,986
    2015 Q1 = 467,295
    2015 Q2 = 475,229
    2015 Q3 = 475,541
    2015 Q4 = 477,774
    2016 Q1 = 485,326
    2016 Q2 = 489,494
    2016 Q3 = 493,730
    2016 Q4 = 500,974
    2017 Q1 = 505,882
    2017 Q2 = 508,235
    2017 Q3 = 512,380
    2017 Q4 = 517,974
    2018 Q1 = 520,742
    2018 Q2 = 524,731
    2018 Q3 = 530,604

    Source: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gross...eries/ybha/pn2

    If you don't trust the ONS though, try the IMF:

    https://www.imf.org/external/datamap...P_RPCH@WEO/GBR

    Note the chart in the bottom left, showing the GDP growth rate. Notice how it's positive during the whole Brexit period. Also notice the other indicators along the bottom, such as GDP per capita etc, none of which show this 3.2% drop you claim.

    Finally, even if you still want to cling to your Fake News source, consider the trends:

    2013 = 2.3% pc, 2,755,356 annual
    2014 = 9.4% pc, 3,036,310 annual
    2015 = -5.3% pc, 2,897,060 annual
    2016 = -8.9% pc, 2,660,687 annual
    2017 = -3.2% pc, 2,600,000 annual

    That looks like there's been a severe drop from 2014 to 2016 that has more or less hit bottom and is now about to recover. Not that I'd put any stock in these figures though, because again, they're nonsense.
    Still not tired of winning.

  8. #10268
    Quote Originally Posted by Teleros View Post
    You've been conned by Fake News. Let's take the figures from the UK's Office of National Statistics, instead of the per capita GDP figures from some random site.
    Psssst... GDP per capita is different from raw GDP...
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  9. #10269
    https://www.imf.org/external/datamap...C/WEOWORLD/GBR
    2.67 trillion in 2016
    2.63 trillion in 2017
    That's a 1.5% drop

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    Psssst... GDP per capita is different from raw GDP...
    In per Capita GDP
    https://www.imf.org/external/datamap...C/WEOWORLD/GBR
    2016, 40,660
    2017, 39,800
    Hail Lilith and see you in Hell!

  10. #10270
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    Psssst... GDP per capita is different from raw GDP...
    The treasury report made predictions about plain and simple gdp though.
    They're not arguing that the UK is doing well, but that the predictions didn't come to fruition.

  11. #10271
    Quote Originally Posted by sefrimutro View Post
    The treasury report made predictions about plain and simple gdp though.
    They're not arguing that the UK is doing well, but that the predictions didn't come to fruition.
    Mmmm, I mean they didn't specifically say GDP per capita but I'd usually assume that's implied since it's the more relevant figure.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    https://www.imf.org/external/datamap...C/WEOWORLD/GBR
    2.67 trillion in 2016
    2.63 trillion in 2017
    That's a 1.5% drop

    - - - Updated - - -



    In per Capita GDP
    https://www.imf.org/external/datamap...C/WEOWORLD/GBR
    2016, 40,660
    2017, 39,800
    Yep, same figures in my link.

    I suspect the discrepancy is because Tele's figures are in pounds whereas the international figures are in USD, and the pound plummeted in 2017.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  12. #10272
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    Yep, same figures in my link.

    I suspect the discrepancy is because Tele's figures are in pounds whereas the international figures are in USD, and the pound plummeted in 2017.
    Keep in mind that forecasts always use static currencies to present their numbers, therefore Teleros is misrepresenting them by using current values for the pound.

  13. #10273
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    Mmmm, I mean they didn't specifically say GDP per capita but I'd usually assume that's implied since it's the more relevant figure.
    It's more relevant to the people, which is why politicians use it. These were numbers about the performance of the country though. I recall it raised many eyebrows at the time.
    Personally (I'm far from an economy expert), reading several reviews of it, I came to the conclusion that the conclusions of the shock scenario were about right /if/ the process was rushed. So... dunno... many predictions were made, it's only normal that some don't come to fruition.

  14. #10274
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Actually I answered it multiple times, the additional analogy about how favour works was simply included because of how much difficulty you were having with the concept.
    You did not, once again, I asked you if thought the proposal favoured the UK to which waffled about on and on and on about the proposal being favourable. This is different.

    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    I did, in fact it was alluded too in the post of mine that you initially replied too.
    No, it wasn't. Your initial post implied that the deal favoured the UK hence why I asked.

    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    You've made this clear, however as myself and others have pointed out, your disbelief in the fact doesn't stop it being correct.
    Hmm, in fairness you've said that this deal is favourable to the UK because everyone thought that the UK would get a worse deal and then said that everyone is complaining because the deal is not good enough. And you described the UK as a pissy little island in the north sea which only has any relevance on the world stage due to its EU membership. And described Canada as considerably more important than the UK to the EU.

    So it is quite clear that what you would describe as a fact is not the same as what the rest of world would. Perhaps you could elaborate on this point and provide some actual facts or evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    No it is not, it is showing it favourable treatment in negotiations, hence why it gets more favourable treatment than more important countries.
    Where's your evidence to support these assertions that the UK is receiving more favourable treatment than more important nations?

    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Yes, because the UK is in that position DUE TO BEING A MEMBER OF THE EU, once it leaves the EU it will no longer have the increased privelege/importance and negotiating power that being an EU member gives.
    Prior to joining the then EEC the UK's GDP was approximately 40% greater than Canada's, I've not heard of any sort of mass extinction of Canadians so I think it is fair to say that the UK's population, thus potential market, was, as it is today, larger than Canada's and I am pretty sure that the UK and Canada were geographically in the same places as they are today prior to the UK joining the EEC.

    What evidence to have to support all of this?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teleros View Post
    You jest, but this was the Treasury's prediction for a vote to leave:



    Either they're just that damn incompetent (in which case why believe anything they say?), or they were lying to try and scare people away from voting to leave (in which case why believe anything they say?).
    In fairness this seems to result of stress testing the UK economy models and is the very worst case scenario which is pretty much the same as the figures recently released by the BofE which Carney is going to great lengths to explain that they are not predictions of what will happen.

    I think it was a mistake to paint these figures as prediction of what will happen if leave won the referendum, which I don't doubt was driven by the government, and I think by taking this approach it has become more difficult to educate the public (us) to the potential impact from Brexit.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Worth noting that employment is only up on paper due to figures being inflated by shady companies misuse of zero hour contracts. It has fallen in real terms.
    Zero hour contracts are still jobs, however you could have just read the link provided and you would have seen that your statement is wrong; "Not only is employment up, but most of the growth has been in full-time jobs. The number of people in part-time jobs and in self-employment is now falling gently and more than offset by the rise in full-time work, reducing concerns that people are underemployed."

  15. #10275
    Pandaren Monk Teleros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    Psssst... GDP per capita is different from raw GDP...
    Yes. Go to your link, and the 3.2% figure there is from the per capita GDP table.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    2.67 trillion in 2016
    2.63 trillion in 2017
    That's a 1.5% drop
    And yet, go to their "real GDP growth" section and there's no shrinking there at all. What I think is happening with these figures is that they're showing it in terms of billions of current US dollars, but due to the £ dropping after Brexit, this is making it look like GDP went down even though the IMF's GDP growth figures show an increase.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    Keep in mind that forecasts always use static currencies to present their numbers, therefore Teleros is misrepresenting them by using current values for the pound.
    Again, see the IMF stuff about GDP growth.

    IMF: GDP went down: https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/GBR (current $ prices)
    IMF: GDP grew: https://www.imf.org/external/datamap...P_RPCH@WEO/GBR (growth rate)
    IMF: GDP grew: https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPGDP@WEO/GBR (purchasing power parity)

    Perhaps the IMF is in thrall to a secret Brexiteer cabal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    I think it was a mistake to paint these figures as prediction of what will happen if leave won the referendum, which I don't doubt was driven by the government, and I think by taking this approach it has become more difficult to educate the public (us) to the potential impact from Brexit.
    Exactly.
    Still not tired of winning.

  16. #10276
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    I think it was a mistake to paint these figures as prediction of what will happen if leave won the referendum
    their main mistake was not properly anticipating that worst case predictions based on a worst case scenario (that rational people took action to mitigate after the vote) would not then be endlessly shouted about by scum like Farage and the TPA (who understand completely what the predictions were based on) as further public gaslighting tools to encourage the view that economic forecasts are always worthless and always biased
    Last edited by Dizzeeyooo; 2018-11-30 at 02:12 PM.

  17. #10277
    Tusk has echoed May's comments that it is her deal, no deal or no Brexit; European Council President Donald Tusk, meanwhile, has stressed that the deal the EU struck with Theresa May was the "only possible one".

    He said: "If this deal is rejected in the Commons, we are left with, as was stressed a few weeks ago from Prime Minister May, an alternative - no deal or no Brexit at all."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46394431

    There is absolutely no way that parliament will allow no deal so we're essentially left with May's deal or no Brexit but regardless of which way this goes there is going to be a lot of annoyed people in the UK.

  18. #10278
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    Tusk has echoed May's comments that it is her deal, no deal or no Brexit; European Council President Donald Tusk, meanwhile, has stressed that the deal the EU struck with Theresa May was the "only possible one".

    He said: "If this deal is rejected in the Commons, we are left with, as was stressed a few weeks ago from Prime Minister May, an alternative - no deal or no Brexit at all."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46394431

    There is absolutely no way that parliament will allow no deal so we're essentially left with May's deal or no Brexit but regardless of which way this goes there is going to be a lot of annoyed people in the UK.
    Isn't it possible you'd get to a no deal result by parliamentary incompetence? People vote down May's deal hoping for any number of different things, nothing however happens fast enough and you end with no deal.
    Hail Lilith and see you in Hell!

  19. #10279
    Herald of the Titans dribbles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Brexitia
    Posts
    2,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Isn't it possible you'd get to a no deal result by parliamentary incompetence? People vote down May's deal hoping for any number of different things, nothing however happens fast enough and you end with no deal.
    Shhhhhh, please don't tell the little bit dim remainers and other eurofanatics that our parliament is incompetent, they still believe we can get the Maybot brexit or no brexit. Pretty much one in the same thing anyway unless you want to split hairs. Bwahahahaaaa

  20. #10280
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Isn't it possible you'd get to a no deal result by parliamentary incompetence? People vote down May's deal hoping for any number of different things, nothing however happens fast enough and you end with no deal.
    That's a possibility but I would say a remote one. In the result of a deadlock I think it is more likely that parliament will request an extension of A50, which due to the damaging nature of no-deal to both the EU and UK I reckon will be accepted, the danger is that there is no consensus by the end of the extension period at which point I think there will either be a GE or another referendum.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •