Brexit negotiations

Surely it's better to have low unemployment and reduced standards of living, rather than high unemployment and higher standards of living.

Natasha Whittam wrote:Surely it's better to have low unemployment and reduced standards of living, rather than high unemployment and higher standards of living.

I've long ago given up reading Wanderlust's long standing diatribe against Brexit being that it is completely one-sided, myopic and clearly personally bitter about the outcome.

I'm no supporter of Brexit myself but any good news about it is conspicuously absent from any of Wanderlust posts.  

For instance he moans about the inflation rate but neglects to mention that it actually fell last month with the Bank of England saying this -

"The Bank of England has said it thinks inflation peaked at the end of 2017 and will fall back to its target of 2% this year."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42702752

So in a few months wage growth could well be 2.4% with inflation at 2% - making Wanderlust rant complete bullshit.

When you resort to hide facts simply to make your argument look better, then clearly your views aren't reasoned, fair or balanced - and once that happens there is no point others bothering to read them anymore.

There's good news as well as bad about the economy in the news, post the Brexit vote - funny how many anti-Brexit moonmen never seem to see them though - but only the negative reports!

The rumour is xmiles and wanderlust have arranged for a joint suicide pact on 29th March 2019.

Natasha Whittam wrote:The rumour is xmiles and wanderlust have arranged for a joint suicide pact on 29th March 2019.

Exit MEANS Exit.

Natasha Whittam wrote:Surely it's better to have low unemployment and reduced standards of living, rather than high unemployment and higher standards of living.

On what planet does that make sense?
And why are they the only two options?

Sluffy wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Surely it's better to have low unemployment and reduced standards of living, rather than high unemployment and higher standards of living.

I've long ago given up reading Wanderlust's long standing diatribe against Brexit being that it is completely one-sided, myopic and clearly personally bitter about the outcome.

I'm no supporter of Brexit myself but any good news about it is conspicuously absent from any of Wanderlust posts.  

For instance he moans about the inflation rate but neglects to mention that it actually fell last month with the Bank of England saying this -

"The Bank of England has said it thinks inflation peaked at the end of 2017 and will fall back to its target of 2% this year."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42702752

So in a few months wage growth could well be 2.4% with inflation at 2% - making Wanderlust rant complete bullshit.

When you resort to hide facts simply to make your argument look better, then clearly your views aren't reasoned, fair or balanced - and once that happens there is no point others bothering to read them anymore.

There's good news as well as bad about the economy in the news, post the Brexit vote - funny how many anti-Brexit moonmen never seem to see them though - but only the negative reports!

I am deeply impressed that you got all that without even reading my post.

However if you ever do decide to read what I write before going into your default slag me off mode, you'll see that what I wrote was a comment about the way the economy is going without any reference to Brexit whatsoever. 

A more discerning reader might recognise that Brexit negotiations will shape how a high employment low wage economy eventually looks, but the point made clearly implied that we are heading that way with or without Brexit.

wanderlust wrote:On what planet does that make sense?
And why are they the only two options?

Everything I write or say makes sense. To me.

But just to confirm, I was saying it's better to have low unemployment and reduced standards of living, rather than high unemployment and higher standards of living.

I really can't make that statement any clearer. PM me if you still don't understand.

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Surely it's better to have low unemployment and reduced standards of living, rather than high unemployment and higher standards of living.

I've long ago given up reading Wanderlust's long standing diatribe against Brexit being that it is completely one-sided, myopic and clearly personally bitter about the outcome.

I'm no supporter of Brexit myself but any good news about it is conspicuously absent from any of Wanderlust posts.  

For instance he moans about the inflation rate but neglects to mention that it actually fell last month with the Bank of England saying this -

"The Bank of England has said it thinks inflation peaked at the end of 2017 and will fall back to its target of 2% this year."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42702752

So in a few months wage growth could well be 2.4% with inflation at 2% - making Wanderlust rant complete bullshit.

When you resort to hide facts simply to make your argument look better, then clearly your views aren't reasoned, fair or balanced - and once that happens there is no point others bothering to read them anymore.

There's good news as well as bad about the economy in the news, post the Brexit vote - funny how many anti-Brexit moonmen never seem to see them though - but only the negative reports!

I am deeply impressed that you got all that without even reading my post.

However if you ever do decide to read what I write before going into your default slag me off mode, you'll see that what I wrote was a comment about the way the economy is going without any reference to Brexit whatsoever. 

A more discerning reader might recognise that Brexit negotiations will shape how a high employment low wage economy eventually looks, but the point made clearly implied that we are heading that way with or without Brexit.

You don't half talk utter shite - you posted your comment in the BREXIT THREAD that you yourself started!  If it had nothing to do with Brexit then why post it here, you numpty!

And as I've pointed out above that the Bank of England is predicting a fall in inflation to under that of the current percentage wage growth - which would result in a high employment HIGH wage economy.  But don't let such facts get in the way of how you see things in your head.

A more discerning reader might recognise you as someone trying to wriggle out of the massive hole you've just dug yourself by thinking you are smarter than the rest of us but we ALL can see what a complete and utter muppet you are at times.

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Surely it's better to have low unemployment and reduced standards of living, rather than high unemployment and higher standards of living.

I've long ago given up reading Wanderlust's long standing diatribe against Brexit being that it is completely one-sided, myopic and clearly personally bitter about the outcome.

I'm no supporter of Brexit myself but any good news about it is conspicuously absent from any of Wanderlust posts.  

For instance he moans about the inflation rate but neglects to mention that it actually fell last month with the Bank of England saying this -

"The Bank of England has said it thinks inflation peaked at the end of 2017 and will fall back to its target of 2% this year."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42702752

So in a few months wage growth could well be 2.4% with inflation at 2% - making Wanderlust rant complete bullshit.

When you resort to hide facts simply to make your argument look better, then clearly your views aren't reasoned, fair or balanced - and once that happens there is no point others bothering to read them anymore.

There's good news as well as bad about the economy in the news, post the Brexit vote - funny how many anti-Brexit moonmen never seem to see them though - but only the negative reports!

I am deeply impressed that you got all that without even reading my post.

However if you ever do decide to read what I write before going into your default slag me off mode, you'll see that what I wrote was a comment about the way the economy is going without any reference to Brexit whatsoever. 

A more discerning reader might recognise that Brexit negotiations will shape how a high employment low wage economy eventually looks, but the point made clearly implied that we are heading that way with or without Brexit.

You don't half talk utter shite - you posted your comment in the BREXIT THREAD that you yourself started!  If it had nothing to do with Brexit then why post it here, you numpty!

And as I've pointed out above that the Bank of England is predicting a fall in inflation to under that of the current percentage wage growth - which would result in a high employment HIGH wage economy.  But don't let such facts get in the way of how you see things in your head.

A more discerning reader might recognise you as someone trying to wriggle out of the massive hole you've just dug yourself by thinking you are smarter than the rest of us but we ALL can see what a complete and utter muppet you are at times.

Carry on if it makes you happy.....

You’re being unfair Sluffy. Lust was commenting on the current state of the economy according to the ONS, while the Bank Of England’s forecasts are relevant they - 1. Are by definition not a guarantee and 2. May not have been seen by Lust. The level of inflation being below wage growth is also not the sole contributor to a country being ‘high wage’ so to speak.

Lust hasn’t abused you, there’s no need to give it out like that.

T.R.O.Y wrote:You’re being unfair Sluffy. Lust was commenting on the current state of the economy according to the ONS, while the Bank Of England’s forecasts are relevant they - 1. Are by definition not a guarantee and 2. May not have been seen by Lust. The level of inflation being below wage growth is also not the sole contributor to a country being ‘high wage’ so to speak.

Lust hasn’t abused you, there’s no need to give it out like that.

I did an A level in Economics many years ago and know that it is not an exact science - indeed it was described at the time as having to drive a car with blacked out front and side windows, with only a rear mirror to see where you've been, with both the accelerator and breaks having a time delay between pressing them and them working.

I would imagine the analogy is still somewhat relevant.

People are of course entitled to their own opinions on anything - it doesn't mean that they are right (or going to be) however.

It's clear that Wanderlust fancies that he knows a fair bit about economics as he has consistently alluded to how our economy is/will be considerably worse off than if we had stayed in the EU - but the simple fact is that no one KNOWS that and won't until it happens and we have time analyse what actually took place and how it did effect us.

Constantly posting everything negative he can in the news about the economy, whilst at the same time omitting to mention anything good about the economy just underlines his complete bias on the matter and total lack of balance on the subject.

His post above on which I commented on shows at best he did not update himself of the current position of the economic factors he mentioned - even though they were widely available - and thus led to an ill informed conclusion from him and clearly showing that he doesn't even keep himself aware of the statements of the country's leading expert on the economy and advisor to the government - the Bank of England.

I merely pointed out his continual prejudice on the Brexit decision by, in this instance, not using easily accessible economic information by the governments own advisor (the Bank of England) and instead using misleading information to back up his own personal position.

Instead of simply acknowledging that his statement was not based on current, easily available information, which would lead to a complete undermining of his conclusions - and his long standing rant about Brexit - he decided that he would try to front it out by pretending it had nothing at all to do with his views of Brexit and by attempting to be patronising of me, distracting attention away from the effect of the falling level of inflation on his again stated conclusion.

As for abuse, words like numpty, muppet and moonman are almost terms of endearment compared to what many say in the world of social media and certainly a great deal less offensive than the things Wanderlust has said to me in the past.

I doubt he even takes it personal anyway, as I don't take his comments to me either.

Cameron back tracking on his "Brexit is a disaster" stance. Trump saying that UK/US trade is going to increase may times. Low unemployment, Twirls still a quid for four.

The UK is thriving. And it's only going to get better once we leave the EU.

Looks like the wanderlust/xmiles suicide pact won't be needed.

Trump and Cameron, two opinions you can definitely trust.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Trump and Cameron, two opinions you can definitely trust.

At least Cameron only puts his dick in a dead pig's mouth.

Trump uses both hands to drink a glass of water. That can't be right.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Trump and Cameron, two opinions you can definitely trust.

Ha ha, bitter remoaner.

Political and economic opinions do seem to be mellowing with regard to Brexit, and the catastrophic effects it will have. Also, my own view is that if we have to toe the line for an extra 1-5 to 2 years under the EU in order to get a better deal, then it'll be worth it. 
It'll ruffle some Brexit campaigners feathers, give some, (ill placed), hope to the remainers, but more importantly, the EU will have to honour their part of the bargain, (which should be better than a Norway set up), as we will have played the game fairly, as far as they are concerned. 
My concern is that we agree to what wil,l in effect be, very minor changes at the end of the process.

I don’t think the damage will be too bad, but I think we’ll end up with many of the same rules yet none of the influence.

T.R.O.Y wrote:I don’t think the damage will be too bad

You've changed your tune. In a past life you said Brexit would be like Armageddon.

I think we’ll end up with a very soft Brexit, and our situation will be very similar to it is now except we have no influence. 

A massive waste of time and money all the same.

Just a prediction though.

We'd lost most of our influence anyway, and more importantly, we'll be able to trade with whoever we like, without Europe's permission.