Article 50

[dsr]

Just a couple of facts - and these are facts - that ought to be borne in mind:

2. The much publicised 300bn pa savings for the first year after we no longer have to pay the EU budget have been spent. In fact they were spent in the week after brexit, because this is how much extra we had to spend to sell long-dated government bonds in the week after Brexit as a consequence of the vote. We have so far spent quite a lot of years' savings in subsequent debt auctions. This of course ignores the fact that the figure was entirely bogus in the first place, and the consequences of leaving on anything other than identical terms to those we have currently on tax revenues.

Food for thought, whichever way you voted.

Actual facts - the first government bond sale after Brexit was on 4th July, well over a week after the poll. And the six months' net bond sales July to December 2015 were £27.9 billion; in the same months in 2016 it was £28.6 billion. Not a lot different.

Incidentally, the government bonds sold on the last sale before the vote yielded 1.75% interest - that was because demand was low so the government received less money for them. The first sale after the vote was at 0.38%, because they were in high demand and investors were willing to pay a higher premium.


https://www.ft.com/content/5783c090-420 ... 12b3873ae1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Imploding Turtle]

Which would you like to categorise that statement under, being wrong or lying?

Neither.

[Paul Waine]

Here's a 10-year graph of the pound versus the Euro. Can you take a look at it, especially around 2008, and still say that the fall in the pound was unprecedented?

http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from= ... R&view=10Y

btw: my "like" for the post is dsr's provision of some facts. always good to look at the facts - though it might undermine one or two of the positions being taken.

I'm a big fan of changeable exchange rates. The ability of the value of GBP to move v USD or Euro or any other currency is important. It provides a "shock absorbing" response to some of the other things that can happen within and between economies.

The euro is similarly volatile, but all the members of the euro zone are locked into a fixed exchange rate. That is why Greece and all the P.I.I.G.S (not seen that expression for a couple of years) are suffering so much unemployment. And, that is why Germany has a relatively strong export performance - because being a member of the euro prevents the deutschemark appreciating against the other European nations' own currencies.

[Imploding Turtle]

Here's a 10-year graph of the pound versus the Euro. Can you take a look at it, especially around 2008, and still say that the fall in the pound was unprecedented?

http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from= ... R&view=10Y

Couldn't resist cherry picking, could you? Now look at charts comparing it to every other major currency.

[claretspice]

I cant access that link DSR, but the stat I used is taken from a presentation given by a chap from Warwick Business School abut a month ago. I thought it was the week after, but may well be wrong about that.

[Colburn_Claret]

One of my FB chums wrote this status, don't think he's a big Brexit fan...



Don't remember seeing a Brexit thread on here so....thoughts?

I'd change my friends

[RocketLawnChair]

Right. And until then only a ******* imbecile would say that any expected post-brexit economic downturn that hasn't happened yet, before Brexit has happened, was therefore the prediction was a lie.

Edit: two words

I am by no means as informed as you are on this subject IT. So one more question.

Was the emergency budget that Osborne threatened actually going to be roughly 3 years after the referendum? (and about 6 more budgets)

[Colburn_Claret]

If this had been a referendum on Capital Punishment, and the great British public in their infinite wisdom had voted for its re-introduction would be all have had to fall in line like the dishonourable Labour Party have.
Of course not we would have gone on fighting for what we believe to be right, and so we should now.

Brexit might turn out to be economically fine but politically it's a sad reflection on the xenophobic nature of our society, working with others doesn't come easy to this insular island.

sorry ABC, but I'm not a xenophobe, just don't think that Brussels is a democratic institution running in the best interests of the peoples of Europe.
But apparently it's always good to call us all racists. It does prove your point after all..............yawn.

[RingoMcCartney]

To commemorate the triggering of Article 50. The BBC as announced it will be broadcasting sombre music for the foreseeable future.

[nil_desperandum]

Actual facts - the first government bond sale after Brexit was on 4th July, well over a week after the poll.

1

Pedantically splitting hairs in order to make a point there I think.
Referendum result announced on Fri June 24th, then one working week, and bond sale on the following Monday. I make that 6 working days. (Being equally pedantic, Is one day well over a week?)

[dsr]

Pedantically splitting hairs in order to make a point there I think.
Referendum result announced on Fri June 24th, then one working week, and bond sale on the following Monday. I make that 6 working days. (Being equally pedantic, Is one day well over a week?)

You're fairly pedantic yourself. 11 days after the referendum, if you like; but whether that constitutes "well over a week" or not, it certainly constitutes over a week. And it's not as if the bond issue was specially because of the Brexit result, because governments and government stats don't work that fast; it was issued because they issue bonds several times a month, and the hiatus of close to a month was also close to a record. And it completely ignores that the government got the best rates they have ever got for the sale of bonds, so the market for bonds apparently liked the result.

I think spice's lecturer had an axe to grind and was being selective with the truth. My link was from the FT, which appears to have one of those inefficient firewalls that you can slide around if you use google search rather than going direct to the main site. The report was purely factual, the conclusions I have drawn from it are my own.

[claretspice]

I'm not sure the delegate who gave this talk was being selective with the truth: he's an established expert in his field and he was being paid to address a trade conference. This idea that these people whose professional credibility is on the line are on some sort of vindictive mission is utter nonsense, frankly. This was one of a number of pieces of evidence he offered to demonstrate his point that there was no net benefit to the exchequer of brexit in even the most simplistic cash terms.

[ClaretMoffitt]

Well that's good news.

[aggi]

Here's a 10-year graph of the pound versus the Euro. Can you take a look at it, especially around 2008, and still say that the fall in the pound was unprecedented?

http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from= ... R&view=10Y

Sterling fell to it's lowest ever level (so I guess that would be unprecedented) against the basket of currencies. However, around 2008 it was pretty low as well.

FXRates.JPG (78.17 KiB) Viewed 1846 times

Sterling was viewed as overvalued before the Brexit vote but it wasn't thought to be that overvalued (5%-10% were the figures I saw that were bandied about).

Realistically though, if we're going to start having tariffs on our trade with everyone we're going to need a weak pound, the likelihood is that people will have to suffer the increased costs of goods that that will bring with it.

Anyway, if anyone is interested this was the letter we sent re: Article 50. Much more conciliatory and less jingoistic than some recent coverage would lead people to expect
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... d_Tusk.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[claretandy]

Sterling fell to it's lowest ever level (so I guess that would be unprecedented) against the basket of currencies. However, around 2008 it was pretty low as well.

FXRates.JPG

Sterling was viewed as overvalued before the Brexit vote but it wasn't thought to be that overvalued (5%-10% were the figures I saw that were bandied about).

Realistically though, if we're going to start having tariffs on our trade with everyone we're going to need a weak pound, the likelihood is that people will have to suffer the increased costs of goods that that will bring with it.

Anyway, if anyone is interested this was the letter we sent re: Article 50. Much more conciliatory and less jingoistic than some recent coverage would lead people to expect
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... d_Tusk.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The IMF said the pound was overvalued by 20%.

[aggi]

The IMF said the pound was overvalued by 20%.

Having just found the reference, that's a bit disingenuous. The IMF said it was overvalued by 5%-20%.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr ... df#page=13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[FactualFrank]

[bartons baggage]

If this had been a referendum on Capital Punishment, and the great British public in their infinite wisdom had voted for its re-introduction would be all have had to fall in line like the dishonourable Labour Party have.
Of course not we would have gone on fighting for what we believe to be right, and so we should now.

Brexit might turn out to be economically fine but politically it's a sad reflection on the xenophobic nature of our society, working with others doesn't come easy to this insular island.

So it's not just football you're clueless about.

[claretandy]

The latest YouGov poll shows that whether they backed Leave or Remain, 69% of the British public are now behind the government taking the UK out of the European Union.

Just 21% want to see Brexit blocked or a second referendum

The remoaners on here really are in a shrinking minority.

[claretspice]

I don't think anyone disputes that the right thing to do is to leave the EU. That is what people voted for by a relatively narrow majority.

I think the point is that we need to do that in a manner that doesn't amount to vandalising the economy and diminishing the prospects of future generations, and we need to determine our destination and strategy based on realities, not mythical benefits that a "hard" brexit might deliver - such as perceived financial savings of not having to pay into the EU budget, and the idea that stopping free movement from the EU will somehow create a land into which immigration slows to a trickle. Both of those assumptions are false.

incidentally, the same YouGov poll included some sensational stuff about the things that folk want to see reinstated now we're out of the EU. Like old school lightbulbs and pre-decimal currency.

[DCWat]

Well the old light bulbs were far better

[Paul Waine]

I'm not sure that is right. Donald Trump used this logic, and has wasted no time in learning that experience of doing private business deals bear absolutely no resemblance to doing multi faceted deals with politicians who are accountable to their electorate.

I wouldn't suggest that a property developer and casino operator is comparable with the calibre of people in the private sector.

PDT has gathered a number of experienced business people - but, so far as I can tell, he's not involved any of them in his health care "reforms."

There should be a difference between handling the detail of trade negotiations and the politicians democratic accountability to the electorate. Trade deals will only be successful if the former are mastered.

Note: wikipedia listed Clegg's time working for European Commission as his "career outside politics." (I feel wiki got this wrong, btw).