Brexit and the Consequences

sminicooper said:
UK top for business 2018

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtba...est-countries-for-business-2018/#4016b55326de
Click to expand...


This is indeed good news but must be interpreted in context.

US and UK were pulling out of the recession and recovering much earlier than EU and at faster pace.

Fact that UK is now falling behind EU recovery should be a concern we are losing momentum.

Then there is also the what/if UK didn't invoke article 50 and continued as before, thus with same level of investment as before than our growth rate likely to be higher than what it is now. Of course we'll never know. What is certain is investment is down and considerable levels have been deferred.

Let's hope good news continues. (y)
 
Atilla said:
This is indeed good news but must be interpreted in context.

US and UK were pulling out of the recession and recovering much earlier than EU and at faster pace.

Fact that UK is now falling behind EU recovery should be a concern we are losing momentum.

Then there is also the what/if UK didn't invoke article 50 and continued as before, thus with same level of investment as before than our growth rate likely to be higher than what it is now. Of course we'll never know. What is certain is investment is down and considerable levels have been deferred.

Let's hope good news continues. (y)
Click to expand...

Yes – good points. And the IMF today are a bit gloomy also – but they've been wrong before!
 
What to do in Christmas Limbo ?
 

Attachments

  • EU Sinking Ship.jpg
    EU Sinking Ship.jpg
    381.6 KB · Views: 102
U.K. Treasury Asked to Reveal Its Own Analysis of Brexit Impact

Blimey here we go again... Did they or didn't they??? What was that fiasco with Davies couple of weeks ago?


Now Hammond is coming under scrutiny after telling the Treasury committee that his ministry had “modeled and analyzed a wide range of potential alternative structures between the European Union and the U.K.," which inform Britain’s negotiating position. This has given Labour an opening.

In response the Treasury referred the lawmakers to Hammond’s comments, made on Dec. 6. The members of Parliament are also demanding answers to the following questions:

Has this work been carried out independently by the Treasury?
Does this analysis differ significantly from the Treasury’s pre-referendum analysis?
Has the Treasury shared the analysis with the Brexit department and the prime minister’s office?
Does the modeling include a sectoral analysis, looking at the impact of Brexit on specific sectors of the U.K. economy? And if so, which sectors?


Reminded me of this advert... Some of you may not be wise enough to remember it ;)

 
Atilla said:
. . . Did they or didn't they??? . . .
Click to expand...
Who knows and who cares - doesn't make a blind bit of difference either way.

Take a leaf out of the Brexiteers' book Atilla and view this sort of so called 'analysis' the way most of us do: i.e. as utterly pointless agenda driven speculation that's best ignored. After all, if some talking head on Bloomberg says the S&P is going to crash in Q1 of 2018 - you wouldn't short the market on the strength of it now would you! Of course not: so treat any impact assessment (or lack thereof) the same way!
Tim.
 
timsk said:
Who knows and who cares - doesn't make a blind bit of difference either way.

Take a leaf out of the Brexiteers' book Atilla and view this sort of so called 'analysis' the way most of us do: i.e. as utterly pointless agenda driven speculation that's best ignored. After all, if some talking head on Bloomberg says the S&P is going to crash in Q1 of 2018 - you wouldn't short the market on the strength of it now would you! Of course not: so treat any impact assessment (or lack thereof) the same way!
Tim.
Click to expand...

:LOL: yeah, that’s the general brexiteers response - ignore any factual analysis of the future and rely on fanciful dreams instead.

You did, after all, conclude that UK was going to be better off outside the EU so I presume that was after you had made some form of “impact assessment” or was it just a hopeful shot in the dark?
 
Hi Jon,
barjon said:
:LOL: yeah, that’s the general brexiteers response - ignore any factual analysis of the future and rely on fanciful dreams instead.
Click to expand...
Well, if you can explain how 'factual analysis of the future' works - that would not only be germane to this topic, but also of great interest to T2W as a whole. After all, if you have a way of doing this then, presumably, it could apply equally well to the financial markets. Assuming you haven't, you must surely accept that a Brexit impact assessment is going to be nothing more than wild speculation - aka opinion - written to suit the agenda of whoever commissions it. In other words, it's a meaningless waste of time and money.

barjon said:
You did, after all, conclude that UK was going to be better off outside the EU so I presume that was after you had made some form of “impact assessment” or was it just a hopeful shot in the dark?
Click to expand...
As you well know, not least because I've made it clear often enough on this thread - I voted out of principle. The principle that Ponzi schemes always fail in the end, the principle that if the ship's going down it's better to bail out earlier rather than later, and the principle that the people of the U.K. and their elected MPs are much more likely to care for and do what is in our collective best interests than the unelected, unaccountable and irremovable metropolitan elite in Brussels. So, no impact assessment required and no shot in the dark either; it's just plain good ol' fashioned common sense!
:LOL:
Tim.
 
timsk said:
Hi Jon,

Well, if you can explain how 'factual analysis of the future' works - that would not only be germane to this topic, but also of great interest to T2W as a whole. After all, if you have a way of doing this then, presumably, it could apply equally well to the financial markets. Assuming you haven't, you must surely accept that a Brexit impact assessment is going to be nothing more than wild speculation - aka opinion - written to suit the agenda of whoever commissions it. In other words, it's a meaningless waste of time and money.


As you well know, not least because I've made it clear often enough on this thread - I voted out of principle. The principle that Ponzi schemes always fail in the end, the principle that if the ship's going down it's better to bail out earlier rather than later, and the principle that the people of the U.K. and their elected MPs are much more likely to care for and do what is in our collective best interests than the unelected, unaccountable and irremovable metropolitan elite in Brussels. So, no impact assessment required and no shot in the dark either; it's just plain good ol' fashioned common sense!
:LOL:
Tim.
Click to expand...

So whether it will turn out to be better for us was not a factor in your decision beyond an assumption (guess) that it would be if our elected MPs were shaping the rules?

I think I would be with you if it really was “the unelected, unaccountable and irremovable, metropolitan elite in Brussels” in control of things. Unfortunately, that’s just a brexiteer fallacy paraded by the mischievous or those who don’t understand the constitutional set up (power) in the EU.

It’s akin to complaining about our own unelected, unaccountable and irremovable elite - it’s called the Civil Service.
 
I remember last year prior to the vote that Tim had a rethink on his brexit decision wondering if he was doing the right thing, Im sure he spent a lot of time analyzing and going over and over things to come to that that decision... We all have different views as to how we think our country/EU should be run.

I made my own decisions why I think we will be better outside the EU and most likely the reasons are different to Tim's, saying that, You can't argue britain was successful inside the Union but imo was heading in the wrong direction, So, can we head in the right direction and still be successful in the future ? Yes, im sure we can.... Can we do "in depth analysis" of how that future will look ? No, that path is being built as we walk down it..
 
mike. said:
I remember last year prior to the vote that Tim had a rethink on his brexit decision wondering if he was doing the right thing, Im sure he spent a lot of time analyzing and going over and over things to come to that that decision... We all have different views as to how we think our country/EU should be run.

I made my own decisions why I think we will be better outside the EU and most likely the reasons are different to Tim's, saying that, You can't argue britain was successful inside the Union but imo was heading in the wrong direction, So, can we head in the right direction and still be successful in the future ? Yes, im sure we can.... Can we do "in depth analysis" of how that future will look ? No, that path is being built as we walk down it..
Click to expand...

Yes, I have no quarrel with the integrity of Tim’s decision. I just don’t think you can write off the whole of the economic forecasting industry (however difficult that may prove), particularly when there has to be some element of crystal ball gazing in arriving at the in/out decision in the first place.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
European Level 2 question
Replies
1
Views
3K
theknifemac
theknifemac
C
New! eSignal MarketCenter 3
2 3
Replies
41
Views
9K
Ghost Dog
G
Atilla
Trump Presidency and the Consequences
160 161 162
Replies
3K
Views
357K
Atilla
Atilla
N
trading for prop shops
Replies
1
Views
7K
Directional
Directional
B
companies listed on more than one exchange
Replies
3
Views
2K
grantx
G
Top