Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Guided Missile]

Quote

David Miles, one of the three members of the Office for Budget Responsibility's (OBR's) executive team, conceded that the OBR's central forecasts...were “almost guaranteed to be wrong”

A statement after the last budget.

[Tamesaint]

I see that GM has given his nurses the slip again and got near the computer. 

[Fan The Flames]

11 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

And in respect of the OBR's predictions, you really are having a laugh:

OBR's GDP predictions (%)

Forecast year	Prediction	Actual	Miss*	Growth was:
2015	2.7	2.6	0.1	Worse
2015	2.8	2.6	0.2	Worse
2016	3	2.3	0.7	Worse
2017	2.8	2.1	0.7	Worse
2018	2.5	1.7	0.8	Worse
2019	2.4	1.7	0.7	Worse
2020	2.1	-11	13.1	Worse
2021	1.5	7.5	-6	Better
2021	1.4	7.5	-6.1	Better
2021	1.6	7.5	-5.9	Better
2021	1.8	7.5	-5.7	Better
2021	4	7.5	-3.5	Better

While you're in comedy mode, tell me the one about the UK trade growth being solely due to inflation again.

 

That there is why we need a new government.

[Sheaf Saint]

35 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

tell me the one about the UK trade growth being solely due to inflation again.

UK trade - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

After removing the effect of inflation by calculating "chained volume measures" (explained in Section 10: Glossary), total goods imports decreased by £0.4 billion (1.1%) in August 2023 (Figure 2). This was because imports from the EU fell by £0.7 billion (3.2%), while imports from non-EU countries rose by £0.3 billion (1.7%).

Total goods exports fell by £1.3 billion (4.6%) in August 2023, after the effect of inflation is removed. Exports to non-EU countries decreased by £1.0 billion (7.2%) and exports to EU countries fell by £0.2 billion (1.8%).

[Guided Missile]

59 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

UK trade - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

After removing the effect of inflation by calculating "chained volume measures" (explained in Section 10: Glossary), total goods imports decreased by £0.4 billion (1.1%) in August 2023 (Figure 2). This was because imports from the EU fell by £0.7 billion (3.2%), while imports from non-EU countries rose by £0.3 billion (1.7%).

Total goods exports fell by £1.3 billion (4.6%) in August 2023, after the effect of inflation is removed. Exports to non-EU countries decreased by £1.0 billion (7.2%) and exports to EU countries fell by £0.2 billion (1.8%).

What is it, an idiots convention today? Where does that extract say the UK trade growth is solely due to inflation? Of course adjustments have to be made. That is a fucking million miles away from saying the UK trade growth is solely due to inflation, as your special needs pal above, posted.

[badgerx16]

13 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

What is it, an idiots convention today?

It wasn't until you showed up.

[Guided Missile]

Fort those that are interested in the details, here's the report that forms the basis of the argument that Brexit has not affected UK trade. Try and park your prejudices and study the facts. Who knows, you may learn something and build your knowledge. I did.

[Sheaf Saint]

46 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

What is it, an idiots convention today? Where does that extract say the UK trade growth is solely due to inflation? Of course adjustments have to be made. That is a fucking million miles away from saying the UK trade growth is solely due to inflation, as your special needs pal above, posted.

It doesn't say that in exactly those words, but anybody who knows how to read graphs would see they quite clearly show negative growth in exports to both EU and non-EU countries since the end of the Brexit transition period, when inflation is adjusted for, and only a slight increase in imports from the EU (you know, that trading bloc that we used to have unlimited access to) which is mostly offset by a drop in non-EU imports. 

So when can we expect to start seeing the amazing benefits to our GDP of these wonderful new trade deals that leaving the EU was supposed to allow us to make?

[badgerx16]

26 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

Fort those that are interested in the details, here's the report that forms the basis of the argument that Brexit has not affected UK trade. Try and park your prejudices and study the facts. Who knows, you may learn something and build your knowledge. I did.

You pay your money, you take your choice;

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21582041.2023.2192043

"Our further analysis suggests that the UK has experienced a significant contraction in its trading capacity in terms of the varieties of goods being exported to the EU due to the TCA, which signify some serious long-term concerns about the UK’s future exporting and productivity"

[Guided Missile]

21 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

It doesn't say that in exactly those words, but anybody who knows how to read graphs would see they quite clearly show negative growth in exports to both EU and non-EU countries since the end of the Brexit transition period, when inflation is adjusted for, and only a slight increase in imports from the EU (you know, that trading bloc that we used to have unlimited access to) which is mostly offset by a drop in non-EU imports. 

So when can we expect to start seeing the amazing benefits to our GDP of these wonderful new trade deals that leaving the EU was supposed to allow us to make?

So, you didn't read the report referenced above, did you? 

[badgerx16]

9 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

So, you didn't read the report referenced above, did you? 

Have you read the one I linked.

( Rhetorical question as you have me on ignore ).

[Sheaf Saint]

30 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

So, you didn't read the report referenced above, did you? 

I hadn't, because I didn't refresh the page before posting and thus didn't see your post, but I have now and it only reinforces the point that the growth figures you originally quoted are false because they are not adjusted for inflation...

 

Edited 8 November, 2023 by Sheaf Saint

[Gloucester Saint]

Sheaf Saint has done a brilliant job in posting exactly what I was going to post and which the OBR report backed up. GM is something else thinking forecasts are an exact science although given that he seemed to think the Kings Speech was actually endorsing the thinnest legislative programme for 30 years we shouldn’t be surprised. 

GM - if I’m thick graduating with degrees and higher degrees from world top 100 and 200 universities, what does that make you pal? It’s a very decent local university these days in that part of the world but it wasn’t a university back in the mid-70s. University of Portsmouth gained degree awarding powers after 1992, becoming a university through act of Parliament under the Major government  https://policies.docstore.port.ac.uk/policy-110.pdf

So anyone graduating from 1992 onwards could call themselves a University graduate if they attended a polytechnic. Nothing wrong with Polys but not something to shout from the rooftops either. 

PS Enjoy the next 12 months because the way the Tories are going and if Braverman gets control in opposition, you won’t see another Tory majority government, or possibly any Tory government in the rest of your lifetime. As a Lib Dem and Remainer, seeing Brexit gradually unravelled and your hysterics are going to be entertaining. 

Edited 8 November, 2023 by Gloucester Saint

[Tamesaint]

On 07/11/2023 at 07:45, Guided Missile said:

I'm obviously not as smart as you, so help me on this one. You are saying that the growth in UK exports is purely down to inflation. I assume you've corrected for the change in the value of sterling, as the dollar, the safe haven, has risen inexorably? 

Inexorably eh?? 

The last time that I tried to talk to  you about exchange rates on this forum you called me a sanctimonious prick. I will try again but this time  WHY DON'T YOU READ THIS AND TRY AND LEARN SOMETHING?? 

The dollar's rise against GBP is not inexorable. The pound fell immediately against both the dollar and the Euro and has never recovered since this country's bat shit crazy decision to leave the EU. GBP traded around 1.50 /1.60 against USD in the years leading up to 2016. Once this country decided to shoot itself in the foot it has tended to be in the 1.20/ 1 30 range. The same is true with the Euro - instead of the 1.50 / 1.60 range it has been in the 1.10 /1 20 range. You can quote your favourite economist nutters as much as you like but to paraphrase an old saying you can't fight the markets. Brexit was batshit crazy and the markets know that. 

Everything that we buy in USD now costs more to the British  consumer. As oil is priced  in USD it means that since 2016 everyone in this country has  been paying at least  5 pence a litre more for fuel than we would have done pre Brexit. 

The current level of USD v GBP is not inexorable. It is obvious to anyone who is not an arrogant, pathetic simpleton.

[Tamesaint]

8 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Sheaf Saint has done a brilliant job in posting exactly what I was going to post and which the OBR report backed up. GM is something else thinking forecasts are an exact science although given that he seemed to think the Kings Speech was actually endorsing the thinnest legislative programme for 30 years we shouldn’t be surprised. 

GM - if I’m thick graduating with degrees and higher degrees from world top 100 and 200 universities, what does that make you pal? It’s a very decent local university these days in that part of the world but it wasn’t a university back in the mid-70s. University of Portsmouth gained degree awarding powers after 1992, becoming a university through act of Parliament under the Major government  https://policies.docstore.port.ac.uk/policy-110.pdf

So anyone graduating from 1992 onwards could call themselves a University graduate if they attended a polytechnic. Nothing wrong with Polys but not something to shout from the rooftops either. 

PS Enjoy the next 12 months because the way the Tories are going and if Braverman gets control in opposition, you won’t see another Tory majority government, or possibly any Tory government in the rest of your lifetime. As a Lib Dem and Remainer, seeing Brexit gradually unravelled and your hysterics are going to be entertaining. 

Guided Missile went to a posh school and ended up studying at Portsmouth Poly.With that sort of education he should have done better than Portsmouth Poly. Just feel sorry for such a loser. 

[badgerx16]

6 hours ago, Tamesaint said:

Guided Missile went to a posh school

Wasn't that posh, I went there as well. Luckily, he was just starting his final year when I started first year, so I don't think we ever met.

Mind you, his LinkdIn says he went to the University of Portsmouth, which is a fib.

Edited 9 November, 2023 by badgerx16

[Weston Super Saint]

46 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Wasn't that posh, I went there as well. Luckily, he was just starting his final year when I started first year, so I don't think we ever met.

Mind you, his LinkdIn says he went to the University of Portsmouth, which is a fib.

To be fair, I think that's a LinkedIn issue more than anything - you can only choose the institution under it's current name, so even if you went there when it was a 'polytechnic' you could only choose the 'university' option now.

[whelk]

Come on guys I know GM is a twat but sneering at lower grade universities/polys is not becoming.

[badgerx16]

54 minutes ago, whelk said:

Come on guys I know GM is a twat but sneering at lower grade universities/polys is not becoming.

Why, he sneers at everybody else.

[whelk]

20 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Why, he sneers at everybody else.

Of course not for him. Deserves all he gets. Thinking more on behalf of other Poly graduates. Not me of course, I went to a good one😄

[Guided Missile]

Quote

1. Goods trade between the UK and EU does not show a Brexit effect.
If Brexit were a major disrupter of UK trade, we could expect to see a divergence between UK trade with EU destinations and UK trade with non-EU destinations. This is not the case. Office for National Statistics (ONS) trade data shows that trade flows by industry sector to EU and non-EU countries generally moved together. UK goods exports to EU countries increased by 13.5 per cent and to non-EU countries by 14.3 per cent between 2019 and 2022 (all commodities, current prices – see table 1).

If we exclude precious metals, then exports to EU destinations increased by 13.4 per cent while exports to non-EU countries increased by only 5.7 per cent (see table 2), and if we use deflated data then exports to EU countries fell by 7.2 per cent but decreased by 9.8 per cent to non-EU countries (see table 3).⁴

2. Services trade between the UK and EU does not show a Brexit effect.
Service exports to the EU increased by 14.8 per cent from 2019 to 2022, and although total service trade with non-EU countries grew by more, there was wide variation between service industries (see table 4).⁵ Business services, telecommunications and intellectual property services all increased more to EU than to non-EU countries, while financial services, insurance and pensions, transport and travel services all increased more to non-EU countries. As exports are demand driven this is unlikely to be due to Brexit but simply due to varying rates of growth and requirements for different types of services in different export destinations.

3. The Brexit referendum vote did not disrupt EU/UK trade.
It has been suggested by the OBR that two fifths of the impact from Brexit on UK relative productivity occurred between the Brexit referendum in 2016 and the signing of the UK–EU TCA in December 2020, caused by lower investment which in turn caused lower trade. This is not apparent in the trade data: UK–EU trade continued to grow from 2015, before the Brexit referendum, until 2019, the last full year before the UK left the EU (see table 5).

4. Trade comparisons with other nations have not fundamentally changed.
While it has been claimed that the UK was at the bottom of the G7 for goods exports, this merely echoes the UK economy’s long-term trade patterns as it moved away from manufacturing to become a major service provider.⁶ Considering data from the past twenty years, the UK was generally the second smallest goods exporter in the G7 until 2021 when Canada’s commodity-based economy saw a boost from oil and gas exports that pushed it ahead of the UK (see graph 1). The UK’s general trade pattern has not fundamentally shifted since Brexit in comparison to other G7 countries; the UK is still the second largest service exporter in the G7 after the US.⁷

5. The OBR’s claim that Brexit will negatively impact the UK economy is not supported by trade data. The OBR’s chairman stated in October 2021 that leaving the EU would ‘reduce [the UK’s] long run GDP by around 4%’.⁸ The OBR’s April 2023 Brexit analysis claims that Brexit will reduce long-run productivity by 4 per cent relative to remaining in the EU and assumes that post-Brexit trade friction would cause both exports and imports to be 15 per cent lower in the long run than if the UK had remained in the EU.⁹ Neither claim is supported by the trade data so far. The UK and EU have a tariff-free and quota-free trade deal and the UK’s major exports have been unperturbed by trade friction between the UK and the EU.

The OBR also claimed that lower trade would be caused by lower investment in the UK due to Brexit uncertainty.¹⁰ However, if so, this also is not apparent in the trade data, and now that Brexit uncertainty has been removed, postponed investment in the UK economy is likely to be reinstated.

Taken together, the data indicates that Brexit has not negatively impacted UK–EU trade. The argument that Brexit might have some impact on the future level of UK–EU trade cannot be completely disproven, but any impact is extremely unlikely to be sufficient to see trade 15 per cent lower or productivity 4 per cent lower than if the UK had remained in the EU, as the OBR claimed it would. Indeed, more widely, given the rebound in post-Covid trade; the recent Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with Australia, New Zealand and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP); the ongoing trade negotiations with India and the Gulf Cooperation Council; and renegotiations of trade agreements with Canada, Mexico, South Korea, Switzerland and Turkey, as well as potential regulatory freedom which could improve UK competitiveness, Brexit overall should boost UK trade.

Like I said, an instructive read. Good summary above, with the important bits highlighted.

[badgerx16]

22 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

Like I said, an instructive read. Good summary above, with the important bits highlighted.

When you find a source that is not the IEA, Mail, or Express we might, perhaps, give a seconds thought as to whether it was a reliable quote.

[Danbert]

On 07/11/2023 at 12:45, Guided Missile said:

Only a terminally dim Marxist would think "net zero" is a good idea.

I'm sorry, run that past me again. What exactly does net zero have to do with Marxism?

[CB Fry]

17 minutes ago, Danbert said:

I'm sorry, run that past me again. What exactly does net zero have to do with Marxism?

Uncle Joe Stalin and Chairman Mao not big on heavy industry. No sir.

I think they only really cared about solar powered lesbian mung bean embroidery or something. So woke they were.

 

[Guided Missile]

10 hours ago, Danbert said:

I'm sorry, run that past me again. What exactly does net zero have to do with Marxism?

Quote

 

The advocacy and adoption of climate agreements stem from a Marxist worldview, seeking a global redistribution of wealth and the disintegration of national sovereignty in favour of a new international system. 

Marx believed that capitalism brought about the problems of the world and it is capitalists who ought to be held accountable. Marx artfully wrote, “Modern bourgeois society with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells.” Climate alarmists believe capitalists overproduced and the problems associated with climate change are a direct result of the "sorcery" they have conjured.

 

The above is taken from this paper which pretty well sums up my long held opinion on the net zero scam. It also explains what net zero has to do with Marxism.

HTH

[Guided Missile]

In anticipation of the ad-hominem attack on the author of the paper I referenced above, Katelyn N. Larossa is currently an Analyst at the United States Department of Defense. A seminal paper.

[Fan The Flames]

11 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The above is taken from this paper which pretty well sums up my long held opinion on the net zero scam. It also explains what net zero has to do with Marxism.

HTH

You explained why you think the Marxist moniker may work, but you haven't explained the scam bit.

Edited 11 November, 2023 by Fan The Flames

[CB Fry]

10 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The above is taken from this paper which pretty well sums up my long held opinion on the net zero scam. It also explains what net zero has to do with Marxism.

HTH

To save time clicking on the link the summary is that Net Zero has nothing to do with "Marxism", and GM is a fucking plank. 

[Guided Missile]

Quote

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has long maintained the rise of global temperatures, this is not based on reality, or even observable data. In 2000 the IPCC projected a one degree Celsius increase in global temperatures by 2010; however, a rise in global temperatures was not actualized. Rather, if one looked to the temperatures of the 20th century, “you will find that its up and down pattern does not follow the industrial revolution’s upward march of atmosphere carbon dioxide (CO2), which is the supposed central culprit for man caused global warming.”

Read the paper.

Edited 11 November, 2023 by Guided Missile

[Guided Missile]

The UN is at it, as usual:

Quote

The UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development focuses on the issue of inequality throughout the world as exacerbated by climate change. The 2030 Agenda highlights the LDCs and small island states, which are already among the most impoverished in the world, as the same nations who will be most adversely affected by climate change (be that rising seas or extreme weather patterns). These nations, though not having contributed greatly to the proposed causes of climate change, are the ones who will have to adapt. However, they lack the financial resources to diversify their economies and construct climate barriers. It is this basis the UN is utilizing to further redistribute capital throughout the world. Paragraph 41 of the agenda states, “We recognize that these will include the mobilization of financial resources as well as capacity-building and the transfer of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries,” which appears almost verbatim in the Paris Agreement.15 Taking technology from the developed countries to provide to those deemed “most impoverished,” under the premise of climate change is merely a guise for the redistribution of wealth on a global scale. 

Edited 11 November, 2023 by Guided Missile

[badgerx16]

Somebody seems to have put fresh batteries in the GM bot this morning.

[badgerx16]

39 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The above is taken from this paper which pretty well sums up my long held opinion on the net zero scam. It also explains what net zero has to do with Marxism.

HTH

 

28 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

In anticipation of the ad-hominem attack on the author of the paper I referenced above, Katelyn N. Larossa is currently an Analyst at the United States Department of Defense. A seminal paper.

 

25 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

Read the paper.

 

18 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The UN is at it, as usual:

This is the Brexit thread you twat.

[Guided Missile]

If the above hasn't educated you, my other favourite source for debunking the net zero scam here, should do, for those that give a shit and can spare an hour to learn. 

[Tamesaint]

58 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The above is taken from this paper which pretty well sums up my long held opinion on the net zero scam. It also explains what net zero has to do with Marxism.

HTH

To be perfectly honest I couldn't give a flying fuck what you think. You pontificate. You don't debate. Whatever you post tends to come from some weird source and is normally a load of gibberish. When delivered in such an arrogant, condescending manner your views convert nobody and just make people think that you are completely weird. 

 

 

[badgerx16]

5 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

If the above hasn't educated you, my other favourite source for debunking the net zero scam here, should do, for those that give a shit and can spare an hour to learn. 

Who gives a flying fuck about your favourite sources ? If you had spent "an hour to learn", or even just a couple of minutes, you would have worked out this is not the Climate Change thread.

Edited 11 November, 2023 by badgerx16

[Tamesaint]

7 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

To be perfectly honest I couldn't give a flying fuck what you think. You pontificate. You don't debate. Whatever you post tends to come from some weird source and is normally a load of gibberish. When delivered in such an arrogant, condescending manner your views convert nobody and just make people think that you are completely weird. 

 

 

If anyone is bothered to look it up Liberty University sounds a pretty odd place. A Christian evangelical college it is proud to be a teacher of creationism. 

An oddball college promoting views that a complete weirdo promulgates. Whoever would have believed it??? 😁😁😁

 

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Guided Missile said:

In anticipation of the ad-hominem attack on the author of the paper I referenced above, Katelyn N. Larossa is currently an Analyst at the United States Department of Defense. A seminal paper.

How many analysts do you think the DoD employs? She is hardly Jack Ryan. And it is hardly a "'seminal paper", it is her university thesis. I could dig mine out of the attic and post it on the Internet, it wouldn't make it authorititive.

Edited 11 November, 2023 by badgerx16

[Danbert]

Kemi Badenoch doing a Guided Missile and getting called out for it:

https://www.bestforbritain.org/trade_secretary_celebrates_fall_in_uk_trade

[Guided Missile]

10 hours ago, Danbert said:

Kemi Badenoch doing a Guided Missile and getting called out for it:

https://www.bestforbritain.org/trade_secretary_celebrates_fall_in_uk_trade

Remainer pressure group piece, which falsely links a fall in UK trade due to Brexit, by ignoring trade in services,  when the overall trade data demonstrates no such effect:

Quote

If Brexit were a major disrupter of UK trade, we could expect to see a divergence between UK trade with EU destinations and UK trade with non-EU destinations. This is not the case. Office for National Statistics (ONS) trade data shows that trade flows by industry sector to EU and non-EU countries generally moved together. UK goods exports to EU countries increased by 13.5 per cent and to non-EU countries by 14.3 per cent between 2019 and 2022 . If we exclude precious metals, then exports to EU destinations increased by 13.4 per cent while exports to non-EU countries increased by only 5.7 per cent , and if we use deflated data then exports to EU countries fell by 7.2 per cent but decreased by 9.8 per cent to non-EU countries.

Service exports to the EU increased by 14.8 per cent from 2019 to 2022, and although total service trade with non-EU countries grew by more, there was wide variation between service industries. Business services, telecommunications and intellectual property services all increased more to EU than to non-EU countries, while financial services, insurance and pensions, transport and travel services all increased more to non-EU countries.
While it has been claimed that the UK was at the bottom of the G7 for goods exports, this merely echoes the UK economy’s long-term trade patterns as it moved away from manufacturing to become a major service provider.
The UK’s general trade pattern has not fundamentally shifted since Brexit in comparison to other G7 countries; the UK is still the second largest service exporter in the G7 after the US.

 Keep digging, ladies...

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Guided Missile said:

Remainer pressure group piece, which falsely links a fall in UK trade due to Brexit, by ignoring trade in services,  when the overall trade data demonstrates no such effect:

 Keep digging, ladies...

No mention of climate change ? Are you feeling OK ?

Also, the piece is specifically about trade in goods, and the concerns of businesses trying to export to the EU post Brexit. Only a minority of UK businesses deal in services, especially so in the small and medium size sectors.

 

Could you possibly find 1 article to reference that is not from the IEA ? Constantly quoting the same item, from the same biased source, does not make it any more reliable.

Edited 13 November, 2023 by badgerx16

[Sheaf Saint]

2 hours ago, Guided Missile said:

Remainer pressure group piece, which falsely links a fall in UK trade due to Brexit, by ignoring trade in services,  when the overall trade data demonstrates no such effect:

 Keep digging, ladies...

So your whole argument here is that leaving the EU can't have had an undue impact on trade in goods with the EU because our trade in goods to non-EU countries is also down but by an even greater percentage.

While the general gist of that may be true, do you really need me to explain to you why that isn't the massive Brexit win you seem to think it is?

[Tamesaint]

Does GM think that referring to his opponents as  "ladies" is some sort of insult?? He definitely has a strange opinion of 50% of the human race. 😁😁😁

[Guided Missile]

Brexit benefits:

• Reduced vulnerability to international shocks
  • Former Treasury economist and fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs, Julian Jessop, says that leaving the EU has “reduced our vulnerability to international shocks” in the market. The ONS agreed, saying the UK “may be more resilient to global supply chain disruption than other economies” due to supply chain changes made because of Brexit.
• Increased use of domestic suppliers
  • The ONS also released figures in 2022 showing that businesses had moved to using more UK suppliers since the end of the transition period that followed the country’s withdrawal from the EU – a big boost for UK businesses. This trend has continued in 2023, with nearly three quarters of businesses reporting that they were able to get all the goods they needed within the UK without any disruption.
• Less EU restrictions
  • After Brexit, the UK is less restricted by some EU regulations. It is argued that a positive result of Brexit has been an ability to trade more freely with non-EU markets – for example, the US and Australia. The UK is putting in place new trade agreements with many non-EU countries around the world.
• Increased opportunity for growth
  • Emerging markets such as Brazil, China, and South Africa account for more consumer spending every year. The fall of the pound makes British products cheaper for international markets, which could make them more appealing and benefit exporters.
• Simplifying the reporting burdens for small and medium companies
  • The government is reviewing the thresholds retained in EU law and the filing requirements for businesses that file micro-entity accounts, aiming to reduce the reporting burden on many small companies. In May 2022, it issued a press release saying that 350 EU rules were to be ditched “creating simpler, more flexible and transparent procurement.” The government said these would “level the playing field for SMEs and drive economic growth across the UK.”

[badgerx16]

From the same source;

"In January 2020, after months of bitter wrangling, the UK formally exited the EU, with an agreed 11-month transition period enabling both sides to negotiate a new trade deal.

In the following year, 2021, goods export hit an all-time low – dropping by 40.7%, the biggest tumble since records began. Import value then grew in 2022 by 11% to just over £53 billion with a rise in imports from countries both in and outside of the EU. However, this is widely believed to be predominantly due to globally rising costs, rather than signalling economic growth.

The UK’s Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) warned that the long-term impact of Brexit would be worse for the UK economy than Covid-19 – predicting it would reduce GDP by as much 4%, with the pandemic cutting it by a further 2%. It’s estimated that , in Q4 of 2022, GDP had fallen by 5.5%. The Centre for Economic Policy Research estimated that Brexit raised consumer prices, costing the average household £250 more on food alone.

Meanwhile, 80% of SMEs say costs have increased since Brexit, particularly to import goods and recruit staff.

Other business challenges created by Brexit include tariffs for British exports, disruption in supply chains, decrease in EU workers, and unstable confidence in the UK market. The knock on effect of these challenges on businesses has been considerable – 2022 saw a rise in insolvencies, which has continued to surge into 2023, with insolvencies reaching their highest levels since records began."

“Brexit still remains a hurdle – it’s become a structural hurdle for UK exports,” said Allianz Trade’s Head of Economic Research, Ana Boata. She notes that in 2021, UK exports fell in volume at a time when most countries were enjoying a post-lockdown surge in trade."

 

( For those wondering where the king of c&p found his latest item;

https://www.allianz-trade.com/en_GB/insights/economic-research/benefits-of-brexit-is-there-a-silver-lining-for-smes.html .

Please note, the list is of "possible" Brexit benefits ).

Edited 13 November, 2023 by badgerx16

[Guided Missile]

Brexit has boosted wage growth in the UK just as the Leave campaign predicted, economists have said. Senior City analysts said near record-wage growth was partly being driven by a crackdown on uncontrolled immigration from the EU, with employers forced to pay higher wages for low-skilled roles previously filled by Europeans. Marion Amiot, a senior European economist at rating agency S&P, said: “It’s much harder to get people from Europe so UK based-employees have better bargaining power and it means they can get higher wages.”

[badgerx16]

Yet again no attribution to the Telegraph.

However, the article quoted goes on to say

"Economists emphasised that Brexit is one of several factors contributing to surprisingly strong wage growth in the UK.

Other factors driving up wage growth include a wave of early retirement post-Covid and an increase in long-term sickness post-pandemic, both of which have contributed to a shortage of workers."

( https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/11/19/uk-wages-brexit-boost-leave-campaigners/ )

So maybe not as much of a Brexit boost as originally claimed.

Edited 20 November, 2023 by badgerx16
Add link to article

[Tamesaint]

30 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Yet again no attribution to the Telegraph.

However, the article quoted goes on to say

"Economists emphasised that Brexit is one of several factors contributing to surprisingly strong wage growth in the UK.

Other factors driving up wage growth include a wave of early retirement post-Covid and an increase in long-term sickness post-pandemic, both of which have contributed to a shortage of workers."

So maybe not as much of a Brexit boost as originally claimed.

What??? You mean that GM has got the wrong end of the stick and doesn't understand what he is posting. Who would believe it??? 

[sadoldgit]

According to a recent poll as published in The Times, people with a lower cognitive ability were more likely to vote for Brexit.

You only need to read this thread to come to that conclusion. 😂

Before I get lynched again for no reason, I did try and post a link to the article but it is behind a paywall so this will have to do (yes, I know it comes at it from a different angle).

https://neurosciencenews.com/cognitive-skills-brexit-25246/

[Guided Missile]

UK leading the pack in terms of growth as the PMI graph below shows. Great news for those that support British business. Maybe not so good for the bitter Remainers.

 

Edited 23 November, 2023 by Guided Missile

[badgerx16]

I had no idea what that graph means, so I looked it up. It is basicly a confidence survey and the numbers show.......

" The headline PMI is a number from 0 to 100. A PMI above 50 represents an expansion when compared with the previous month. A PMI reading under 50 represents a contraction while a reading at 50 indicates no change. The further away from 50, the greater the level of change.  "

So it pretty much shows the square root of fuck all.

 

Edited 23 November, 2023 by badgerx16