Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Eu To Lose £500Bn And Uk To Gain £640Bn In No-Deal Brexit
…says Patrick Minford professor of economics at Cardiff University and chair of the Eurosceptic Economists for Free Trade group.
https:/
The Sun itemises:
https:/
No surprise they’re reluctant to let us go. Bring it on!
https:/
The Sun itemises:
https:/
No surprise they’re reluctant to let us go. Bring it on!
Answers
The Times has this interesting analysis behind its paywall - so I'll break with my usual habit and do a biggish cut/paste : "It seems that there is no way to satisfy those who want to crack the big end of an egg and those who want to crack the small end. Therefore, leaving without a trade deal with the European Union 27 is growing more likely. Both Mark Carney,...
08:43 Mon 06th Aug 2018
I respect Patrick Minford, but for every economist who shares a simailar view there is an equally prominent one who takes the complete opposite view. With all these things (and I've done projections of this sort) a small tweak to teh assumptions will often change the outcome significantly- and you can tweak the figures to show whatever you want to show.
I am not unattracted to a no-deal though.
I am not unattracted to a no-deal though.
This (in a nutshell) is why we've been doing it wrong in all the negotiations so far.
It was never up to us (the economic winners) to offer payments and concessions in a seemingly desperate 'Any Deal will Do' strategy - we should have said "OK - give us your best offer and we'll let you know".
I know it's not that simple (nothing ever is), but from a position of economic strength we seem to have become belly-crawling supplicants to M. Barnier and his boss 'Drunko Junko' - embarrassing hardly covers it.
But, finally, perhaps the spectre of No Deal will concentrate their addled/conniving brains as the need to preserve as much as possible of their UK funded gravy train kicks in - and the EU27 heads of state should also see the writing on the wall.
It was never up to us (the economic winners) to offer payments and concessions in a seemingly desperate 'Any Deal will Do' strategy - we should have said "OK - give us your best offer and we'll let you know".
I know it's not that simple (nothing ever is), but from a position of economic strength we seem to have become belly-crawling supplicants to M. Barnier and his boss 'Drunko Junko' - embarrassing hardly covers it.
But, finally, perhaps the spectre of No Deal will concentrate their addled/conniving brains as the need to preserve as much as possible of their UK funded gravy train kicks in - and the EU27 heads of state should also see the writing on the wall.
One of the comments in the Telegraph "correspondence blog.
//Minford is in good company as in recent UK history the few economics forecasters who get it right are seldom popular figures. Sir Geoffrey Howe’s first budget was met with a letter to the times from 364 opposing economic experts. Mrs Thatcher could only name 2 experts who agreed with her.
When Nigel Lawson reigned as Chancellor from Mrs Thatcher’s Govt he was not so vocal in opposition to the EU as he is now. His successor Lamont went on with Major to cost us all Billions in the ERM Black Wednesday debacle.The one consistent warning voice at the time against the EU-ERM/Eurozone was Thatcher’s trusted economics advisor Sir Alan Walters, who also resigned and later joined the Euro-Sceptic referendum party.
Walters along with Minford were the 2 experts who agreed with Thatcher and they called it right.
Not all economists may be winners, but it seems reasonable to speculate that the place the losers like best, might just happen to be located in the capital of Belgium. //
//Minford is in good company as in recent UK history the few economics forecasters who get it right are seldom popular figures. Sir Geoffrey Howe’s first budget was met with a letter to the times from 364 opposing economic experts. Mrs Thatcher could only name 2 experts who agreed with her.
When Nigel Lawson reigned as Chancellor from Mrs Thatcher’s Govt he was not so vocal in opposition to the EU as he is now. His successor Lamont went on with Major to cost us all Billions in the ERM Black Wednesday debacle.The one consistent warning voice at the time against the EU-ERM/Eurozone was Thatcher’s trusted economics advisor Sir Alan Walters, who also resigned and later joined the Euro-Sceptic referendum party.
Walters along with Minford were the 2 experts who agreed with Thatcher and they called it right.
Not all economists may be winners, but it seems reasonable to speculate that the place the losers like best, might just happen to be located in the capital of Belgium. //
Why not actually read the rest, given that it's a Nobel Prize winner speaking?
It is, as a matter of fact, not unreasonable to suggest that there was some Russian interference in both the Brexit referendum and in other recent US/European elections. I don't think that's equivalent to saying that Leave would not have won without Russian help, but that throwaway remark shouldn't destroy your interest in the piece.
Minford isn't quite alone, but it's worth remembering that the economists' opinion in Brexit is, roughly speaking, 5-1 against Minford et al's analysis. This alone isn't meant to be decisive -- the majority has been wrong before -- but it's worth mentioning for context.
It is, as a matter of fact, not unreasonable to suggest that there was some Russian interference in both the Brexit referendum and in other recent US/European elections. I don't think that's equivalent to saying that Leave would not have won without Russian help, but that throwaway remark shouldn't destroy your interest in the piece.
Minford isn't quite alone, but it's worth remembering that the economists' opinion in Brexit is, roughly speaking, 5-1 against Minford et al's analysis. This alone isn't meant to be decisive -- the majority has been wrong before -- but it's worth mentioning for context.
Some seem to think that economics trumps all, and stress any minuses to make a questionable case. But control of one's own nation trumps economics in all but the most desperate of situations, so the foundations of some opinions are already on shakey ground.
Of course there are border checks when importing/exporting. Of course one will ascertain goods have really originated in the country exporting. How it should be. Losing control of one's own country to squeeze slightly more efficiency is not on. It's a step too far.
And one wouldn't be desperate to get a perfect deal with the US. Firstly there's a whole world out there, and secondly one can still trade without special deals during any period whilst negotiations take place.
No one expects change not to come with a period of disruption. Where your house needs work on it you accept the repair situation until it's back to an acceptable standard again.
Of course there are border checks when importing/exporting. Of course one will ascertain goods have really originated in the country exporting. How it should be. Losing control of one's own country to squeeze slightly more efficiency is not on. It's a step too far.
And one wouldn't be desperate to get a perfect deal with the US. Firstly there's a whole world out there, and secondly one can still trade without special deals during any period whilst negotiations take place.
No one expects change not to come with a period of disruption. Where your house needs work on it you accept the repair situation until it's back to an acceptable standard again.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.