Funds Insider - Opening the door to funds

Welcome to the Citywire Funds Insider Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error

A grown-up, dispassionate assessment of Brexit
Robin B
Posted: 18 November 2024 10:12:10(UTC)

Joined: 01/04/2024(UTC)
Posts: 1,522

Thanks: 1519 times
Was thanked: 4633 time(s) in 1246 post(s)
Adelaide One;325885 wrote:


I am seeing a lot of anger here RobinB! And a wide ranging series of points which might be unfairly directed at the Governor of the BoE (who I understood was a brexit suipporter) and the EU. So for balance ....

1. Mr Bailey is using government figures which says the GDP is 4% lower due to Brexit. They use a counterfactual model to model the difference, and that takes into account covid response. It's consistent with other figures and empirical reporting.

That 4% is equivalent to a tax income of about £80bn, plenty to fill the 22bn black hole / build hospitals / HS2 / not need to raise NI. We could even afford a Liz Truss budget with that sort of income.

2. Mountains of legistation. They've had 4 years since Brexit to get rid of any they don't like, and seemed unable to do so.

3. Having the highest tax burden. How is that affected by the EU? We have been out for 4 years

4. Energy. Our energy price is determined by the price of gas.

5. I would agree, other economies do seem to be doing worst. Think how much better we would be if we were in the EU.

5. Balance of trade. 80-85% of our economy is services and not trade

6. No one but you is talking about re-joining. Something like "closer ties" were the words used. And if ther eis a business case for it, why not?

7. What evidence do you have about re-joining would kill our tech sector?

8. I understood Mr Bailey was selected out of a smaller pool of candidates because the BOE governor needed to be a brexiteer. So you might have yourself to blame there if you feel he isn't the best candidate, keen to please his bosses [I thought he was the boss], or the other insults you have for him, RobinB (sorry if that makes you angry as well)


I'm not angry at all, I'm laughing at your post and what an ill educated NPC you are. Most of what you've written is too daft to respond to.

You cannot accurately model what the GDP difference is between where we are now and where we would be had we stayed in the EU. Far too many variables. It is a guess and a politically motivated one. Only poorly educated people and those lacking common sense believe this rubbish. Look at the accuracy of political polling - this modelling you refer to is way less trustworthy than that.

Most of your other points are irrelevant. I was drawing attention to all the other variables that might have a bearing on GDP and might have been different in myriad ways had history been different. Here are some simple facts that our political class shy away from: our balance of trade with the EU has improved since we left, our manufacturing base has expanded and overtaken France's, and our economic growth has exceeded numerous EU economies. Do I need to say any more?

"Our energy price is determined by the price of gas" ... "80-85% of our economy is services not trade"... thank you for those illuminating points; you've even managed to get those wrong.

Next you'll be telling me Rachel Reeves was a chess champion and economist. Can Mr Bailey please confirm whether or not Rachel was an economist at the BOE before transferring to the complaints department at HBOS? I'm sure he could... but probably prefers not to upset his bosses.
1 user thanked Robin B for this post.
Jay P on 18/11/2024(UTC)
ANDREW FOSTER
Posted: 18 November 2024 10:41:33(UTC)

Joined: 23/07/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8,120

Adelaide One;325885 wrote:


1. Mr Bailey is using government figures which says the GDP is 4% lower due to Brexit. They use a counterfactual model to model the difference, and that takes into account covid response. It's consistent with other figures and empirical reporting.

That 4% is equivalent to a tax income of about £80bn, plenty to fill the 22bn black hole / build hospitals / HS2 / not need to raise NI. We could even afford a Liz Truss budget with that sort of income.



Can you be precise in what you mean here...

Exactly what is 4% lower than what?

For example you may mean that "UK GDP in 2023 was 4% lower than what it would have been were we still in the EU".... or do you mean "UK GDP is 4% lower than it was when we left the EU"...or something completely different.

Please be precise in what you are claimng becauase it isn't clear at all.
Robert D
Posted: 18 November 2024 10:50:39(UTC)

Joined: 06/11/2016(UTC)
Posts: 1,479

Robin B;325837 wrote:
[

Let's use our freedom to conclude a great trade deal with the US, which is our biggest trade partner. .


And in one sentence all credibility flies out of the window. "A great trade deal" ...... is that you Donald?

Trade talks are brutal. Please enlighten us on what leverage the UK would have in trade talks with the US and why Johnson and Sunak didn't get anywhere with Trump or Biden. The few UK trade negotiators that haven't been sacked would love to know

https://www.theguardian....ritain-axes-negotiators

Wave Action
Posted: 18 November 2024 12:45:17(UTC)

Joined: 30/11/2023(UTC)
Posts: 391

Thanks: 461 times
Was thanked: 626 time(s) in 261 post(s)
Brexit and GDP...

Here's the doom and gloom where UK never recovers..

https://i0.wp.com/moneva...ast.jpg?w=724&ssl=1

Here's a recent update..UK the dotted line is doing ok.

https://pbs.twimg.com/me...t=webp&name=900x900

Here's some EU countries and nothing special.

https://pbs.twimg.com/me...at=jpg&name=900x900

Now some official sites..

https://www.ons.gov.uk/e...stimateuk/september2024

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NGDPRSAXDCGBQ

No better no worse then ?
1 user thanked Wave Action for this post.
Jay P on 18/11/2024(UTC)
ANDREW FOSTER
Posted: 18 November 2024 13:46:06(UTC)

Joined: 23/07/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8,120

Robert D;326044 wrote:
Robin B;325837 wrote:
[

Let's use our freedom to conclude a great trade deal with the US, which is our biggest trade partner. .


And in one sentence all credibility flies out of the window. "A great trade deal" ...... is that you Donald?

Trade talks are brutal. Please enlighten us on what leverage the UK would have in trade talks with the US and why Johnson and Sunak didn't get anywhere with Trump or Biden. The few UK trade negotiators that haven't been sacked would love to know




For pretty much the same reasons that the USA-EU trade talks utterly failed.

And that is that the USA has no interest in trade deals that don't heavily favour the USA. And no one needs one of those badly enough.

They also prevent Trump from using threats of tariffs as a weapon. Because they are fixed in most trade deals.

I don't regard a US-UK deal as particularly required anyway. The USA seems bent on getting a Darwin Award for self destruction of it's economy and withdrawing itself from the trade-pool. Fine. Let them get on with it.

Much better to focus on deals with Australasia.
1 user thanked ANDREW FOSTER for this post.
Jay P on 18/11/2024(UTC)
Robert D
Posted: 18 November 2024 14:30:01(UTC)

Joined: 06/11/2016(UTC)
Posts: 1,479

ANDREW FOSTER;326076 wrote:
[

For pretty much the same reasons that the USA-EU trade talks utterly failed.

And that is that the USA has no interest in trade deals that don't heavily favour the USA. And no one needs one of those badly enough.

They also prevent Trump from using threats of tariffs as a weapon. Because they are fixed in most trade deals.

I don't regard a US-UK deal as particularly required anyway. The USA seems bent on getting a Darwin Award for self destruction of it's economy and withdrawing itself from the trade-pool. Fine. Let them get on with it.

Much better to focus on deals with Australasia.



You seem to be agreeing (for once) that a US-UK trade deal is a non-starter but I'm not sure any current US trade deals are going to stop Trump slapping on tariffs. If there's anything that animates and annoys Trump, it's trade - and tariffs will be one of his first acts when he assumes power in January

It's astonishing that you have posted the sentence in bold - the government's own impact assessment estimates that the long-run effect of the 2023 UK-Australia trade agreement will be to increase UK GDP by 0.08% or £2.3 billion a year by 2035. Let that number sink in.

It must be blindingly obvious that after the self-inflicted wounds of Brexit we need better trade relations with our nearest trading partners, the EU, a market of about 400 million people compared to Australasia's 30 million and worth more than £350 billion to the UK. Andrew Bailey finally got something right .in his speech last week. . .


2 users thanked Robert D for this post.
You have to change your life on 18/11/2024(UTC), SJ Ford on 29/11/2024(UTC)
ANDREW FOSTER
Posted: 18 November 2024 15:00:38(UTC)

Joined: 23/07/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8,120

Robert D;326083 wrote:
ANDREW FOSTER;326076 wrote:
[

For pretty much the same reasons that the USA-EU trade talks utterly failed.

And that is that the USA has no interest in trade deals that don't heavily favour the USA. And no one needs one of those badly enough.

They also prevent Trump from using threats of tariffs as a weapon. Because they are fixed in most trade deals.

I don't regard a US-UK deal as particularly required anyway. The USA seems bent on getting a Darwin Award for self destruction of it's economy and withdrawing itself from the trade-pool. Fine. Let them get on with it.

Much better to focus on deals with Australasia.



You seem to be agreeing (for once) that a US-UK trade deal is a non-starter but I'm not sure any current US trade deals are going to stop Trump slapping on tariffs. If there's anything that animates and annoys Trump, it's trade - and tariffs will be one of his first acts when he assumes power in January

It's astonishing that you have posted the sentence in bold - the government's own impact assessment estimates that the long-run effect of the 2023 UK-Australia trade agreement will be to increase UK GDP by 0.08% or £2.3 billion a year by 2035. Let that number sink in.

It must be blindingly obvious that after the self-inflicted wounds of Brexit we need better trade relations with our nearest trading partners, the EU, a market of about 400 million people compared to Australasia's 30 million and worth more than £350 billion to the UK. Andrew Bailey finally got something right .in his speech last week. . .



Yes, I see UK-US deal as a non-starter. But it doesn't concern me particularly. Nothing is going to happen with Trump in place so its on ice until then at the minimum.

Re; Australia trade deal, lets look at a bit of data.

Quote:


Total trade

In the four quarters ending Q2 2024, the total trade between the UK and Australia was £22.3 billion, a 14.3% increase from the same period in 2023.

Exports

In the four quarters ending Q2 2024, the UK exported £15.6 billion to Australia, a 10% increase from the same period in 2023.



So looking encouraging to me. The 0.08% figure looks absurd.

PS I wrote Australasia not Australia.
172 Pages«Previous page170171172
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets