Economy watch

Sluffy wrote:

I read something from the PR person for the Remain campaign (very interesting reading it was too) and at an early point in the campaign they had a brainstorming session and one of the questions they asked themselves was 'What benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU' - they couldn't come up with a single one!

Their campaign could only come up with benefits to business and that why it was almost totally centred around the economic issues of leaving the EU.

They could not get the public to identify benefits to themselves.

They knew that migration was a major issue to the electorate and they gambled the house that people would rather be better off financially and have migration issues, than be worse off and face the migration issues.

They lost.

Rather than blaming the electorate the question should in my opinion be why even have a referendum in the first place as the only reason it was given was a Conservative internal party struggle to control their EU rebels.

They too gambled on silencing once and for all their Euro-sceptics.

They also lost - and in doing so put us all in this totally unnecessary position.

Great work lads!

I would be interested in learning the source for the idea that "what benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU - they couldn't come up with a single one!". I find this hard to believe. I know the Tories relied on Project Fear (it worked on the Scots) and Corbyn effectively sabotaged the Labour side but Sturgeon did empasise the positive benefits of EU membership. There is plenty of evidence out there as a simple internet search will reveal but one of the obvious ones is the level of subsidy received in the poorer areas of the country. Bizarrely the leave vote was strongest in the regions most economically dependent on the EU.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj3p9vE9q7OAhViL8AKHRV0DhcQFghDMAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmetro.co.uk%2F2016%2F06%2F25%2Fregions-with-the-biggest-leave-votes-are-most-economically-dependent-on-the-eu-5966531%2F&usg=AFQjCNFbdjIL50zM7R6xs68xBg11UnhxrA&sig2=yar_OxcMVXUX7rQBpBT4nQ

Note how high Lancashire is on this list. Dream on if you think a Tory government is going to match those grants.

okocha wrote:

 However what fans of Brexit still refuse to accept is that a policy endorsed by Farage, Boris, the Sun and the Daily Mail has to be fundamentally suspect unless you are rich, racist or a tax avoider. Do you really think that people like these give a shit about ordinary people? 

.......whereas Cameron, Osborne, Jeremy Hunt, Nicky Morgan, Diane Abbott and Jeremy Clarkson(!!) do???!!!

There were far more issues at stake than just the economy.

If the EU was democratically electable and had shown itself capable of major reform, the result may have been different.

Of course they don't care. My point is that Brexit fans never accept that voting the way that Farage, etc want them to vote is all too similar to turkeys voting for Christmas.

Please see the link I posted just above.

Okocha, that is completely correct, I focused my post on economics as that is the topic of the thread but in many ways the economy is the least of the EU's problems right now and unless they abandon or suspend Schengen then I fear that there will soon be a lot of civil unrest on top of the existing terrorist threat.

Can't be bothered to quote it on my phone, but that was a great post Nick - regardless of my view on the subject.

Xmiles the people in those areas came to the conclusion, not entirely incorrectly, that their lives were not going to get any better in or out of the EU, no jobs, poor schools, run down local services and ever greater influx of immigrants. So they voted to give the smug well off a bloody nose and if it made the likes of Richard Branson and Mike Ashley a few million less well off then so much the better.

Globally the wealthy have become richer at an ever increasing rate, in Britain, in Europe and in the USA whilst the general population has seen wages and living standards stagnate, with a good measure of austerity thrown in following the recession in 2008. Multinational companies have profited greatly from cheap labour and at the same time avoided paying their fair share of tax, if these monies were paid by the likes of Amazon and Google (in full) then there would be less need for grants and subsidies.

The increasing gap between rich and poor is more to do with globalisation than the EU, the political class are part of the problem in Westminster as well as Brussels's, so it remains to be seen if a will to create a fairer society in post Brexit Britain exists, I am not holding my breath.

NickFazer wrote:Xmiles the people in those areas came to the conclusion, not entirely incorrectly, that their lives were not going to get any better in or out of the EU, no jobs, poor schools, run down local services and ever greater influx of immigrants. So they voted to give the smug well off a bloody nose and if it made the likes of Richard Branson and Mike Ashley a few million less well off then so much the better.

Globally the wealthy have become richer at an ever increasing rate, in Britain, in Europe and in the USA whilst the general population has seen wages and living standards stagnate, with a good measure of austerity thrown in following the recession in 2008. Multinational companies have profited greatly from cheap labour and at the same time avoided paying their fair share of tax, if these monies were paid by the likes of Amazon and Google (in full) then there would be less need for grants and subsidies.

The increasing gap between rich and poor is more to do with globalisation than the EU, the political class are part of the problem in Westminster as well as Brussels's, so it remains to be seen if a will to create a fairer society in post Brexit Britain exists, I am not holding my breath.

I completely agree with your analysis Nick.

The reason I am so upset by the result is that I think voters deluded themselves into believing that a vote for Brexit was a vote "to give the smug well off a bloody nose" when the really rich like the owners of the Mail and Sun and Boris actually supported Brexit. And like you I don't think things are going to get better for most of us outside the EU. I actually think they will get worse because for example, contrast the EU trying to get the likes of Google to pay tax versus the sweetheart deals our pathetic HMRC does with them.

NickFazer wrote:
The increasing gap between rich and poor is more to do with globalisation than the EU, the political class are part of the problem in Westminster as well as Brussels's, so it remains to be seen if a will to create a fairer society in post Brexit Britain exists, I am not holding my breath.

I think you're right NF, and I also think that the current government is well aware of the change in the country's expectations, and it would seem that the new PM is making decisions with that in mind, (hopefully).
Finding the right approach between expectations, practicality, and planning, is one hell of a hard balancing act, and we can expect lots of ups and downs in the months, if not years, to come.

Ups and downs, well as Wanderers we are all used to those.

NickFazer wrote:In terms of the economy business will always be attracted to places where it is beneficial for them to be, it is the government's job to create those conditions. The fundamentals of the UK economy are as strong as any in the Eurozone  and we should stop talking down our prospects and look at the opportunities in front of us. We haven't even begun to negotiate any deals yet but already the doom mongers are talking about us having to accept poor deals, this is precisely the sort of attitude that will become a self fulfilling prophecy, if it isn't beneficial to us then don't sign it.

Completely agree re business relocation and you kinda got my point except to say that it was always going to be a self-fulfilling prophecy because whilst everyone knew that our economy would get shafted in the short to medium term they didn't follow that logic through to realise that we'd then have to conduct the negotiations we are depending upon from a much weaker position.
And by announcing that we'd need to renegotiate in advance (i.e. during the run up to the referendum) they exposed our weakness/dependency on the outcome - which is a very dumb move by anyone's standards.


Oh - and negotiations started two months ago.

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

I read something from the PR person for the Remain campaign (very interesting reading it was too) and at an early point in the campaign they had a brainstorming session and one of the questions they asked themselves was 'What benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU' - they couldn't come up with a single one!

Their campaign could only come up with benefits to business and that why it was almost totally centred around the economic issues of leaving the EU.

They could not get the public to identify benefits to themselves.

They knew that migration was a major issue to the electorate and they gambled the house that people would rather be better off financially and have migration issues, than be worse off and face the migration issues.

They lost.

Rather than blaming the electorate the question should in my opinion be why even have a referendum in the first place as the only reason it was given was a Conservative internal party struggle to control their EU rebels.

They too gambled on silencing once and for all their Euro-sceptics.

They also lost - and in doing so put us all in this totally unnecessary position.

Great work lads!

I would be interested in learning the source for the idea that "what benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU - they couldn't come up with a single one!". I find this hard to believe. I know the Tories relied on Project Fear (it worked on the Scots) and Corbyn effectively sabotaged the Labour side but Sturgeon did empasise the positive benefits of EU membership. There is plenty of evidence out there as a simple internet search will reveal but one of the obvious ones is the level of subsidy received in the poorer areas of the country. Bizarrely the leave vote was strongest in the regions most economically dependent on the EU.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj3p9vE9q7OAhViL8AKHRV0DhcQFghDMAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmetro.co.uk%2F2016%2F06%2F25%2Fregions-with-the-biggest-leave-votes-are-most-economically-dependent-on-the-eu-5966531%2F&usg=AFQjCNFbdjIL50zM7R6xs68xBg11UnhxrA&sig2=yar_OxcMVXUX7rQBpBT4nQ

Note how high Lancashire is on this list. Dream on if you think a Tory government is going to match those grants.

It was absolutely criminal that the Remain campaign didn't build their campaign around the benefits of European membership - which aren't about grants - that's just getting back money we pay in anyway.
The big benefits are:

• Confidence - and therefore increased value - in the British economy whilst we are part of a European bloc that is far better equipped to fight off the rising challenge of the big two economies.
  
• Political stability in the European region in the nuclear age
  
• Voting rights including the veto over any country - including Turkey - from joining
  
• Scientific, medical and judicial joint ventures 
  
• Military support and the future option to create a European army that would reduce the cost to Britain and risk to British soldiers substantially
  
• A seat at the table to ensure Britain's interests are maintained in cross border issues such as immigration.
  
• Pre-negotiated advantageous trade deals with zero tariffs, substantially reduced "red tape" for British companies (who will now have to negotiate 27 deals and produce 27 sets of documentation)
  

There are other benefits but more importantly being in the EU had the potential to shape the future of our neighbours as well as the UK itself.

Sadly, none of that matters now and we'll just have to see what we can salvage.

wanderlust wrote:

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

I read something from the PR person for the Remain campaign (very interesting reading it was too) and at an early point in the campaign they had a brainstorming session and one of the questions they asked themselves was 'What benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU' - they couldn't come up with a single one!

Their campaign could only come up with benefits to business and that why it was almost totally centred around the economic issues of leaving the EU.

They could not get the public to identify benefits to themselves.

They knew that migration was a major issue to the electorate and they gambled the house that people would rather be better off financially and have migration issues, than be worse off and face the migration issues.

They lost.

Rather than blaming the electorate the question should in my opinion be why even have a referendum in the first place as the only reason it was given was a Conservative internal party struggle to control their EU rebels.

They too gambled on silencing once and for all their Euro-sceptics.

They also lost - and in doing so put us all in this totally unnecessary position.

Great work lads!

I would be interested in learning the source for the idea that "what benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU - they couldn't come up with a single one!". I find this hard to believe. I know the Tories relied on Project Fear (it worked on the Scots) and Corbyn effectively sabotaged the Labour side but Sturgeon did empasise the positive benefits of EU membership. There is plenty of evidence out there as a simple internet search will reveal but one of the obvious ones is the level of subsidy received in the poorer areas of the country. Bizarrely the leave vote was strongest in the regions most economically dependent on the EU.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj3p9vE9q7OAhViL8AKHRV0DhcQFghDMAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmetro.co.uk%2F2016%2F06%2F25%2Fregions-with-the-biggest-leave-votes-are-most-economically-dependent-on-the-eu-5966531%2F&usg=AFQjCNFbdjIL50zM7R6xs68xBg11UnhxrA&sig2=yar_OxcMVXUX7rQBpBT4nQ

Note how high Lancashire is on this list. Dream on if you think a Tory government is going to match those grants.

It was absolutely criminal that the Remain campaign didn't build their campaign around the benefits of European membership - which aren't about grants - that's just getting back money we pay in anyway.
The big benefits are:

• Confidence - and therefore increased value - in the British economy whilst we are part of a European bloc that is far better equipped to fight off the rising challenge of the big two economies.
  
• Political stability in the European region in the nuclear age
  
• Voting rights including the veto over any country - including Turkey - from joining
  
• Scientific, medical and judicial joint ventures 
  
• Military support and the future option to create a European army that would reduce the cost to Britain and risk to British soldiers substantially
  
• A seat at the table to ensure Britain's interests are maintained in cross border issues such as immigration.
  
• Pre-negotiated advantageous trade deals with zero tariffs, substantially reduced "red tape" for British companies (who will now have to negotiate 27 deals and produce 27 sets of documentation)
  

There are other benefits but more importantly being in the EU had the potential to shape the future of our neighbours as well as the UK itself.

Sadly, none of that matters now and we'll just have to see what we can salvage.

Well said Wanderlust.

Also from a personal/work level - the work/time directive meaning a maximum of 48 hours a week - actually created jobs for more people rather than relying on overtime which doesn't actually make a difference to efficiency - also helps maintain a more balance between work and outside life

Being able to claim compensation when flights are delayed or cancelled

European Arrest Warrant which has been used against someone I know - and glad it was used

Roaming charges to disappear

No duty free and no limit on what I can buy and bring over from other EU countries

Being able to move, work and buy houses without the added red tape and getting the same rights as locals in that country without having to become a citizen.

bwfc71 wrote: Being able to claim compensation when flights are delayed or cancelled

You'll still be able to do that.

bwfc71 wrote:European Arrest Warrant which has been used against someone I know - and glad it was used

It's a European Arrest Warrant, not an EU Arrest Warrant. Leaving the EU will make no difference.

bwfc71 wrote:Roaming charges to disappear

It'll just be replaced by something else like when you go to the US or Australia.

bwfc71 wrote:No duty free and no limit on what I can buy and bring over from other EU countries

Who gives a shite. Only chavs buy booze at the airport.

bwfc71 wrote:Being able to move, work and buy houses without the added red tape and getting the same rights as locals in that country without having to become a citizen.

I don't intent to live abroad, just like 99.9% of the population.

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

I read something from the PR person for the Remain campaign (very interesting reading it was too) and at an early point in the campaign they had a brainstorming session and one of the questions they asked themselves was 'What benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU' - they couldn't come up with a single one!

Their campaign could only come up with benefits to business and that why it was almost totally centred around the economic issues of leaving the EU.

They could not get the public to identify benefits to themselves.

They knew that migration was a major issue to the electorate and they gambled the house that people would rather be better off financially and have migration issues, than be worse off and face the migration issues.

They lost.

Rather than blaming the electorate the question should in my opinion be why even have a referendum in the first place as the only reason it was given was a Conservative internal party struggle to control their EU rebels.

They too gambled on silencing once and for all their Euro-sceptics.

They also lost - and in doing so put us all in this totally unnecessary position.

Great work lads!

I would be interested in learning the source for the idea that "what benefits would the general public say they have from being in the EU - they couldn't come up with a single one!". I find this hard to believe. I know the Tories relied on Project Fear (it worked on the Scots) and Corbyn effectively sabotaged the Labour side but Sturgeon did empasise the positive benefits of EU membership. There is plenty of evidence out there as a simple internet search will reveal but one of the obvious ones is the level of subsidy received in the poorer areas of the country.

Sorry, I hadn't ignored your question, I've just not had time to find the quote.

It comes from Lucy Thomas, Deputy Director, Britain Stronger in Europe.

I must have remembered it from a video interview rather than reading it - but here it is below.

The video is excellent viewing in my opinion (it is 10 minutes long) and the quote comes at about 1minute 10 secs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36877788

Thanks Sluffy.

Very interesting viewing and it shows quite clearly how inept the Remain campaign was - starting with those idiots running it not being able to think of a single positive benefit of being in the EU. Not that Corbyn exactly helped.

xmiles wrote:Thanks Sluffy.

Very interesting viewing and it shows quite clearly how inept the Remain campaign was - starting with those idiots running it not being able to think of a single positive benefit of being in the EU. Not that Corbyn exactly helped.

The bottom line was that the politicians simply did not understand (or perhaps care) about their market - the electorate.

The elephant in the room (immigration) which mattered to the a vast majority of the electorate - particularly the older voters (being the ones most likely to vote anyway) was simply not addressed - how could it be, it was a major plank in being in the EU.

I'm not very political myself but I work closely with local political activists on a fairly frequent basis whilst working in the community. I was somewhat amazed of their cast iron certainty that the vote in the area I work in would be a Remain one, it seem quite blatantly obvious to me that even first generation ethnic familys who came to the country in recent years themselves (many of them not even being born here) had found job opportunities and public services (health, housing, education, transport, crime, etc) swamped and over stretched by current increasing immigration, to the detriment of the people already here.

It seemed fairly clear to me which way the vote would turn out in this particular electoral area and I was proved right.

There was no need for the referendum - the Conservatives only held it because of internal in fighting.

Clearly even Johnson thought it was about political manoeuvring - being the leader of the Brexit's he would be given a top job in a reconciled Tory (Remain) cabinet, with a power base with Eurosceptics within the party and a popularist choice of the general election voters, he would clearly be in a position of power to take over from Cameron at the end of his term and be in the perfect position to bring both parts of the Conservative party together.

The only problem was the he didn't understand the market he was casting for votes in and was shocked to find that not only had he won but will probably never be forgiven by his party or become a future PM.

Latest ONS report on manufacturing output shows that manufacturing output hit a 22 year high in Q2 in the build up to the referendum i.e. April so that was definitely a benefit of being in the EU. However in May and June, decline set in with growth falling to a twentieth of what it had been in April.
Despite this a separate ONS report showed that the trade deficit in June rose to £5.1 billion for the month (that's how much more we imported than we exported in one month if you didn't know) from £4.2 billion in May which is an increase in dependency on imported goods of about 21% post-referendum.  Obviously Britain has been a net importer for donkey's years which makes you wonder why anyone ever believed that exports would offset the Brexit hit however bad the exchange rate got, but that massive rise in the trade deficit shows that as British industry continues to contract and as new investment disappears it's obvious that exports will be even less able to save us despite the BoE introducing the lowest interest rate of all time and taking other quantitive easing measures to try to kickstart manufacturing back into life. Brexit has therefore created the quadruple whammy impact on the economy (fall in British output, fall in investment in British business, increase in foreign imports - all of which undermines Britain's negotiation strength in trade negotiations) - a vicious circle that even the most ardent Remain campaigners didn't fully expect. 
Hopefully Hammond can borrow even more from the world bank to arrest the slide via his budget before we have nothing left to negotiate with, but for now British (or foreign) investors are not backing British industry as (altogether now!) - it's all about confidence.

Pound falls below $1.30 and €1.70 - possibly as a result of the British manufacturing figures and continued downward trend.

I personally don't think we are heading into full on recession, but today William Hill's - who this morning fought off a takeover bid from 888 and Rank Group  - came up with this:


Bookmaker William Hill says it believes a UK recession before the end of 2017 is an odds-on shot and it's offering 8/11 - a 57% chance - that it will happen, but even money that it will not.

 'We believe there is slightly more chance than not that the UK will experience another recession before the end of 2017' says William Hill's spokesman Graham Sharpe (source: BBC news website)




On a more positive note, retail sales have improved pretty much in line with the good weather so whilst most Brits are concerned about their future spending power, we splashed on barbecue stuff, pubs and restaurants in July contributing to an overall rise of 1.7% on last July.

Going to see the bank on Saturday as I'm thinking about moving house, after all since I contributed to our possible exit from the EU I feel duty bound.

Slightly off topic but this is the only Brexit thread still active. Interesting analysis of the favourite brands of the two sides in the debate. Can't say I am surprised at what it shows though.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-36970535

I can't see Crayola on that list.

A mistake, surely?