Official Brexit impact papers released

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

I agree generally, but we pay too much for food and when we have people queueing at food banks a reduction in price may help them. It doesn’t have to be standards, it could simply be lower production costs, but there are countries outside the EU who could supply food cheaper if they were allowed to, tariff free.

I'd be really interested to see where the UK ranks against other countries for food prices.
I know that France is a lot more expensive than the UK.

[Lancasterclaret]

but there are countries outside the EU who could supply food cheaper if they were allowed to, tariff free.

That is going to kill off our own agricultural and farming industry though. As an island and thinking long term, that is a seriously bad idea.

[nil_desperandum]

I'd be really interested to see where the UK ranks against other countries for food prices.
I know that France is a lot more expensive than the UK.

Very detailed info here, but worth a look.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics ... nd_tobacco" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We are relatively cheap for food, but THE most expensive for tobacco.
Prices are of course relative to earnings.

[Bacchus]

One thing is for sure being in wasn't, in my opinion, doing us any favours, but then I have been anti-EU (not anti-European by the way) ever since we joined the Common Market.

Out of interest, in what way do you think membership of the EU wasn't doing us any favours?

The only thing I think people forget is that the old Common Market, the thing that we joined, was purely a trading organisation, a small group of countries joined together in trade, nothing more. What it became is a huge monster of a thing that started to interfere with law making and other things not to do with trade, and it has started to threaten the sovereignty of all its member countries.

Another regular paradox of the Brexit argument is that the EU morphed from a trading entity to an all consuming political entity and yet at the same time it is unwilling to change or evolve. Which is it? It can't be both.

[Greenmile]

I think the term is very misleading. David Goodhart explains it much better than I can. This is an article he wrote in the FT. Like him, I’ve had a bit of an epiphany on the issue post referendum, which seems to have brought all this to light even though on the face of it the issues are different.

https://www.ft.com/content/39a0867a-097 ... 3b21361b43

But, the “somewheres” as Goodhart calls them in his book, still have to be self aware enough to recognise the issue and recognise that wealthy people or the elite if you will, do sometimes want to help them. Some, like the clown 10-15 posts up who was abusing me, are so wrapped up in hate of wealthy people they are beyond help.

I’m not wealthy enough for an FT subscription. Could you summarise Mr Goodhart’s explanation for me, please? (or copy and paste it, even)

[Bacchus]

I expect us to get cheap stuff tariff free from various non EU nations to supplement what we have now.

So we'll put zero-rated tariffs on food from non-EU nations, regardless of the damage to our own agriculture economy?

This is the problem with the "we'll trade with the rest of the world instead" logic. It assumes that we can just set up deals with non-EU countries the day after we leave the EU without a single trade deal to speak of, and that we can do so without damaging our own economy and that all these other countries will take pity on us rather than exploiting our isolated position of weakness. Every business in the country will then just change their supplier base, customer base and international logistics overnight to accommodate the new world order.

I'm sure we'll all prosper from a future global trade of jam and unicorns though.

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

Very detailed info here, but worth a look.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics ... nd_tobacco" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We are relatively cheap for food, but THE most expensive for tobacco.
Prices are of course relative to earnings.

That makes interesting reading, thank you.
The UK is cheaper than Slovenia, Malta and Cyprus.

Average salary per month.
Slovenia (Ljubljana) €1050 net
Malta (Valletta) €1340
Cyprus (Nicosia) €1300 net

[houseboy]

Out of interest, in what way do you think membership of the EU wasn't doing us any favours?




Another regular paradox of the Brexit argument is that the EU morphed from a trading entity to an all consuming political entity and yet at the same time it is unwilling to change or evolve. Which is it? It can't be both.

Point one: It has become too controlling, passing laws that try to fit all it's member countries but not appearing to recognise the diversity of cultures within it's own boundaries. These cultures have different values and, in my opinion, the EU does not recognise this. I do believe also, but many disagree, that we put more in than we got out. I also believe it to be massively undemocratic, dominated by bureaucrats and top heavy with red tape. Others may disagree.
Point two: The paradox you mention is quite correct if it is used as an argument, I however have never said that. Quite the opposite in fact, I believe it has changed massively from the thing that we originally joined.
Incidentally, the remain side keep saying that we should hold a second vote 'now the truth is out' (whatever that truth may be), but what of those who voted to go in in the first place all those years ago? Where they mislead, seeing what the Common Market evolved into? Would they have voted to join if they had known that it would eventually become what it has? Just a thought.

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

And the UK average is €2580 - I've converted it for comparative ease.

[Lancasterclaret]

but what of those who voted to go in in the first place all those years ago? Where they mislead, seeing what the Common Market evolved into? Would they have voted to join if they had known that it would eventually become what it has? Just a thought.

Have you seen the speech by the Prime Minister at the time?

Made it pretty clear what it was we were getting involved in to be fair.

“But whatever the economic arguments, the House will realise that, as I have repeatedly made clear, the Government’s purpose derives, above all, from our recognition that Europe is now faced with the opportunity of a great move forward in political unity and that we can and indeed must — play our full part in it.

and

“The community which we are joining is far more than a common market. It is a community in the true sense of that term. It is concerned not only with the establishment of free trade, economic and monetary union and other major economic issues, important though these are — but also as the Paris Summit Meeting has demonstrated, with social issues which affect us all — environmental questions, working conditions in industry, consumer protection, aid to development areas and vocational training.

[Paul Waine]

There was a report in The Times in mid-Feb, it might be of interest to some of the posters on here.

Brains for Brexit: top academics and thinkers put the case for ‘leave’

"Those who voted ‘leave’ are often dismissed as dim or racist. But now some of Britain’s top academics and thinkers — from the left and right — have banded together to put the positive political and economic case for independence."

The group have now launched their website, ( https://briefingsforbrexit.com/our-mission/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ) where they describe their mission as follows:

"There is a prevailing media view that all sensible and informed people oppose Brexit. It has even become quite commonplace to associate support for Brexit with low levels of education and intellect, and to claim that reason and thought inevitably lead to an anti-Brexit view. This is simply not true. Moreover, it is divisive and tends to undermine democratic legitimacy. Our aim is to provide a platform for informed analysis and for the expression of opinion which believes that the future welfare of Britain and Europe require that the choice made in the Referendum should be fully and positively carried out.

"Most of the founders of this initiative voted for the UK to leave the EU. Our reasons for doing so are not identical and we come from different parts of the political spectrum. However, what has brought us together is a firm conviction that Brexit is about reasserting popular control over decision-making in the United Kingdom. We do not think control is a fantasy or a dream. Nor do we think it is worth sacrificing in exchange for EU membership. We believe not in the sovereignty of governments, which EU membership props up all too well, or of supra-national bodies, but in the sovereignty of the people. After a considerable amount of economic analysis we also do not feel that leaving the EU will be economically damaging, even though a degree of short-term disruption may well be involved.

"We call ourselves ‘Briefings for Brexit’ because we aim to provide factual evidence and reasoned arguments. We believe that the people of Britain are fully capable of assessing information which is explained clearly and simply, and the spirit of this platform is to encourage debate and discussion. Groupthink and intellectual consensus characterizes the current debate around Brexit in the UK and abroad and our aim is to change this."

[ŽižkovClaret]

The current position is to sacrifice us EU residing expats as they are **** scared of granting reasonable rights of settlement to EU citizens established in the UK.

So cheers for that Brexit voters.

[Imploding Turtle]

The current position is to sacrifice us EU residing expats as they are **** scared of granting reasonable rights of settlement to EU citizens established in the UK.

So cheers for that Brexit voters.

Why do you hate your country?

[ŽižkovClaret]

Why do you hate your country?

I don't, however i sure dislike some of its inhabitants.

Yours,

One of Mrs May's "Citizens of Nowhere"

[Damo]

The current position is to sacrifice us EU residing expats as they are **** scared of granting reasonable rights of settlement to EU citizens established in the UK.

So cheers for that Brexit voters.

I suppose that's the price you pay

[Paul Waine]

I thought it worthwhile copy and pasting a little from The Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge (working paper no 493).

Ken Coutts, Graham Gudgin, Jordan Buchanan.

"Economic Forecasters in the UK have a poor record over the last decade. The failure to foresee the 2008 economic crisis has become infamous, even involving the Queen’s famous question: ‘Why did nobody notice it?’ That failure showed up how little work had been done on understanding the importance of credit markets in the UK. One aspect of this was the strange lack of a banking sector in the Bank of England model, a lacuna now being rectified. The failure to predict the crisis was followed by a large over-estimate of the speed of recovery of the UK from the 2009 recession. The tendency of the Office for Budget Responsibility to over-estimate the speed of recovery (see chart 1 below) is now recognised by the OBR itself. The OBR proposes to drop its assumption that growth in UK productivity will return to a pre-recession norm. However, the OBR will continue to base its forecasts on assumptions for productivity and population rather than attempting to forecast these things econometrically. The common tendency to describe OBR projections as forecasts rather than assumptions has compounded the importance of its over optimism. The term ‘productivity puzzle’ sums up the profession’s difficulties in understanding the slow growth of productivity in the UK, and the related lack of growth in real wages.

"In light of these shortcomings it might have been expected that the profession would take extra care to make its assessment of the potential impact of Brexit as fair and accurate as possible. A further failure would add substantially to the questioning of the underlying soundness of economic theory and practice related to forecasting. We argue in this paper that this did not happen and that much of the economic assessment of the impact of Brexit has been flawed, leading to a conclusion that the profession does indeed need to reassess its methods.

"This paper begins by questioning the view common in academic and media publications that UK membership of the EEC/EU has been beneficial for growth in per capita GDP. This is followed by a brief description of the methods used by forecasters to generate the short-term Brexit forecasts, now known to be overly pessimistic. We then briefly summarise our previous work on the use of gravity models by H M Treasury and others in assessing the amount of trade likely to be lost due to Brexit. This is followed by a review of the influential assessments of the impact of Brexit by the London School of Economics’ Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) which relies mostly on a general equilibrium approach. Then, we examine the basis for the widespread claim that any loss of trade will be accompanied by a knock-on impact on productivity. This relationship between trade and productivity commonly accounts for around half of the overall negative impact of Brexit, yet it is only lightly questioned. Finally, we assess a small number of direct, partial equilibrium estimates of the impact of Brexit on trade, plus two reports which have very recently returned to the issue of the long-term impact.

"Our conclusion is that most estimates of the impact of Brexit in the UK, both short-term and long-term, have exaggerated the degree of potential damage to the UK economy. We stress at this point that this is not a politically-driven exercise. Most of the four-person team behind the research for this and our other papers voted ‘Remain’ in the 2016 referendum and would do so again if given the chance. Our purpose is rather to establish a sound basis for the ongoing debate on the likely potential economic impact of Brexit, and more generally to question the quality of economic analysis in dealing with major, macroeconomic policy issue like Brexit."

(End of quote. The academic paper extends to 58 pages).

I've highlighted (bold and underline) what I feel are the key phrases to note in this paper. It may be helpful in understanding the arguments some of us have made about the gaps in the economic "forecasts" concerning the impact of Brexit.

[ŽižkovClaret]

I suppose that's the price you pay

For daring top have a sense of adventure and venturing beyond my home country?

Hope you tell that to the next foreign NHS nurse or doctor you are helped by. Maybe they should have stayed at home eh?

[Lancasterclaret]

Hi Paul, I can't see anything in that report that says we are going to have an economic boom, and "exaggerated" still suggests that we are going to take a completely unnecessary hit.

Other important bit, it is nice to see that forecasters and economists are started to realise that our productivity is something that needs a massive upheaval if we have any hope of competing in a post-brexit world.

[ŽižkovClaret]

Hi Paul, I can't see anything in that report that says we are going to have an economic boom, and "exaggerated" still suggests that we are going to take a completely unnecessary hit.

Other important bit, it is nice to see that forecasters and economists are started to realise that our productivity is something that needs a massive upheaval if we have any hope of competing in a post-brexit world.

Be alright, they will introduce a 50 hour working week and cut annual leave to 15 days. Productivity will be up in no time once the UK is free of those pesky rules and regulations

[Paul Waine]

Be alright, they will introduce a 50 hour working week and cut annual leave to 15 days. Productivity will be up in no time once the UK is free of those pesky rules and regulations

Hi Zizkov, I believe that productivity is a measure of output per unit of input, so increasing the number of hours worked won't necessarily increase the output per hour. As people tire it's common that their work rate will slow, output will decrease and so, productivity will fall.

I'm not sure how extensive the opposite can occur, as people get more and more practised at a task, they can become more proficient at completing the task and produce better quality. But, I'd hazard a guess that that will be result of people who are enjoying the tasks that are performing.

[Damo]

For daring top have a sense of adventure and venturing beyond my home country?

Hope you tell that to the next foreign NHS nurse or doctor you are helped by. Maybe they should have stayed at home eh?

No not at all. I'm more than happy to contribute to the wages of NHS doctors and nurses.
I have no problem with you venturing from your home country either. I just don't want to have to pay for it.
If you want to chip in to this year's holiday for me and mine I might change my opinion

[ŽižkovClaret]

No not at all. I'm more than happy to contribute to the wages of NHS doctors and nurses.
I have no problem with you venturing from your home country either. I just don't want to have to pay for it.
If you want to chip in to this year's holiday for me and mine I might change my opinion

I paid plenty of tax in the UK when i resided there, i now pay tax in the EU where i live, and wish to continue doing so. What do you think me moving abroad has cost you exactly?

[Paul Waine]

Hi Paul, I can't see anything in that report that says we are going to have an economic boom, and "exaggerated" still suggests that we are going to take a completely unnecessary hit.

Other important bit, it is nice to see that forecasters and economists are started to realise that our productivity is something that needs a massive upheaval if we have any hope of competing in a post-brexit world.

Hi Lancs, isn't the discussion on this thread about how the "doom and gloom" of HMG's own "forecasts" and similar "negatives" of leaving the EU?

I find it interesting that there are economists (can we argue "leading economists" - does their position at Cambridge Uni merit this?) that take a different view and argue against the econometric models commonly used.

I also find it encouraging that people who identify themselves as having voted "remain" in 2016 (and state they would do so again) can look at the econonic consequences of brexit as an academic exercise - and are happy to publish their findings.

I feel the quality of the debate is important - and can only strengthen our democracy.

And another optimistic view, a book by Stephen Pinker, "Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism and Progress," was reviewed in The Economist (February 24th 2018). "Because people can think logically, life will keep getting better, argues Steven Pinker in his exhilarating new book."

[Damo]

I paid plenty of tax in the UK when i resided there, i now pay tax in the EU where i live, and wish to continue doing so. What do you think me moving abroad has cost you exactly?

I don't think you moving abroad has cost me anything
How long do you suppose your income tax contributions last for? Should we subsidise you forever because you paid tax here previously?

[Paul Waine]

Deleted duplicate post.

[ŽižkovClaret]

I don't think you moving abroad has cost me anything
How long do you suppose your income tax contributions last for? Should we subsidise you forever because you paid tax here previously?

How do you suppose you are subsidising me now?

[nil_desperandum]

No not at all. I'm more than happy to contribute to the wages of NHS doctors and nurses.
I have no problem with you venturing from your home country either. I just don't want to have to pay for it.
If you want to chip in to this year's holiday for me and mine I might change my opinion

I wouldn't worry too much about Zizkov, but what you should be concerned about would be if tens of thousands of retired ex-pats felt compelled to return to the UK, bringing with them all their ailments /future ailments, thus placing increased demands on the NHS, and for social care, and claiming a wide range of benefits such as winter fuel allowance etc.
This would be especially compounded if we had fewer migrant workers from the EU working in the system and paying tax and NI etc., and if the economy in general takes a hit - even a minor one.

[Paul Waine]

I wouldn't worry too much about Zizkov, but what you should be concerned about would be if tens of thousands of retired ex-pats felt compelled to return to the UK, bringing with them all their ailments /future ailments, thus placing increased demands on the NHS, and for social care, and claiming a wide range of benefits such as winter fuel allowance etc.
This would be especially compounded if we had fewer migrant workers from the EU working in the system and paying tax and NI etc., and if the economy in general takes a hit - even a minor one.

Hi nil_d, but if many of those retired ex-pats were following the exercise regime of the 70 year old cyclists reported in the media today (The Times, for example: "Science works out secret to a 20-year-old body in your 70s" ), then there won't be so many health and social care demands.

[Damo]

How do you suppose you are subsidising me now?

I never claimed to be subsidising you.
I just don't feel like I need to apologise to you as a Brexit voter, given that you have chose to leave the UK in favour of sunshine and cheap living

[CrosspoolClarets]

So we'll put zero-rated tariffs on food from non-EU nations, regardless of the damage to our own agriculture economy?

This is the problem with the "we'll trade with the rest of the world instead" logic. It assumes that we can just set up deals with non-EU countries the day after we leave the EU without a single trade deal to speak of, and that we can do so without damaging our own economy and that all these other countries will take pity on us rather than exploiting our isolated position of weakness. Every business in the country will then just change their supplier base, customer base and international logistics overnight to accommodate the new world order.

I'm sure we'll all prosper from a future global trade of jam and unicorns though.

I agree, generally. I’m not a Dan Hannan style free trading fan, on the whole, though it can be beneficial in most areas. Food is a special case, we have to be self sufficient.

I would target specific foodstuffs where we are not big producers, we could retain tariffs (or high mandatory standards preferably) for others where we would be otherwise exposed (although not forgetting we have quotas now with many). The key is that we can set our own tariffs rather than use the EU ones which protect other nations more than us.

The big worry would be lamb where we export a lot of it to the EU, whereas sugar is similar but because we want to sell that outside the EU, but cannot due to quotas, they are relishing it.

My view would be that UK farmers have to offer a premium product, and those of us that can afford it will buy it. I would ban some cheap imports (hormone treated beef, chlorinated chicken etc) but have a cheap option for those who need it, without compromising too far on standards.

In truth though, we are having a good debate but the experts who know the detail would come up with far better suggestions.

We have to get food cheaper, but a supermarket cartel and our weather do not help.

[Spiral]

Delusional.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I’m not wealthy enough for an FT subscription. Could you summarise Mr Goodhart’s explanation for me, please? (or copy and paste it, even)

Nor me. Not sure why I can see it and you can’t.

Nobody would appreciate me pasting it all, it’s a huge interview, but one section is below. Many don’t agree with him, but I do. He entitles it “why I left my liberal London tribe”. He is an old Etonian, his dad was an MP. His book is about Anywheres and Somewheres. The former could be viewed as a metropolitan elite, the latter people still often living within 20 miles of their birthplace. It describes the feelings of decent people, the “Gillian Duffys” if you will, who don’t feel comfortable with this new UK that the (still minority) Anywheres have created.

If, to use economic jargon, you have high human capital, you will thrive in open, competitive systems and only be held back by prejudice or protectionism. You are also likely, in the language of American sociologist Talcott Parsons, to have an “achieved” identity, meaning one based on your own educational and career success, rather than an “ascribed” identity based on gender, ethnicity, particular places. This helps you to move more confidently through the world, unlike those with more fixed identities, who can be upset by rapid change.

To take a Brexit-related example, if you are an Anywhere, EU freedom of movement is in your interests because you can take your talents elsewhere in Europe for a few years without bureaucratic hindrance and you are unlikely to face much direct competition from people moving the other way — indeed, having some French or Polish acquaintances may even make your life more interesting. Somewheres, by contrast, are far less likely to have the qualifications or aptitude to work abroad and do often face direct competition from EU citizens coming here — more than one-third of production jobs in food manufacturing (about 120,000 people) have been filled by people from eastern Europe in the past few years, up from almost nothing before 2004.

It is true there have always been affluent and educated people with more open and expansive views than those living more pinched lives. What is different now is the scale. Until recently, Anywhere liberalism was the preserve of a small percentage of the population. Now, thanks to the expansion of higher education, it may extend to 20 to 25 per cent of the population and is growing. And, over the past generation, it has dominated the political class and the national culture. Anywhere politicians who think they are governing in the national interest are, at least some of the time, governing in the Anywhere interest — in everything from the expansion of higher education to the unprecedented openness of modern societies.

Both the Anywhere and Somewhere world views are legitimate, and decent, in their different ways and in many areas of politics and economics the division is barely relevant. But on the so-called “security and identity” issues that have loomed so much larger in recent years, they have created a dismayingly large gulf in British society and an instability in our politics which has ended our membership of the EU and may now be ending the union with Scotland, too.

So how did I, as someone who by background is as Anywhere as it is possible to be — start to listen in as an outsider to my friends’ political conversations? How did I start to see the divide from the Somewhere side? What has changed me? .....

[next interesting section]

......An emotionally mature liberalism must also accept that white majorities, not just minorities, in western societies have ethnic attachments too and an interest in a degree of demographic stability — and it is not shameful or racist for people to feel uncomfortable if their neighbourhood changes too rapidly, whether from gentrification or ethnic change.

Other things flow from the caveat, too — things that do not challenge the core beliefs of modern liberalism but temper and qualify their more dogmatic application. The belief, for example, that men and women are equal but not identical and that some sort of gender division of labour in the home and the broader society remains popular. That order and legitimate authority in families, schools and the wider society are a necessary condition of human flourishing, not a means of crushing it. That religion, loyalty and the wisdom of tradition deserve greater respect than is common among “blank sheet” liberals who tend to focus narrowly on issues of justice and harm.

[dsr]

The current position is to sacrifice us EU residing expats as they are **** scared of granting reasonable rights of settlement to EU citizens established in the UK.

So cheers for that Brexit voters.

There are numerous valid reasons to disagree with Brexit, but I'm not sure that "because it doesn't suit the people who don't want to live in Britain" is one of them.

[Spiral]

There are numerous valid reasons to disagree with Brexit, but I'm not sure that "because it doesn't suit the people who don't want to live in Britain" is one of them.

It doesn't suit the swathe of under-18's who weren't entitled to vote but have to suffer the consequences of Brexit, either, but here we are...farting around attempting to kowtow to a "decision" made by a slim majority of righteous, sex-starved, overly-indulged baby-boomers, utterly (utterly, UTTERLY) terrified of the human condition who will be, at best: dribbling cabbages; at worst, dead...having eventually (inevitably; entropy is a bitch) jumped off the planet before ever getting the chance to see their post-EU fantasy crumble before their eyes. Shambles. Socrates was right all along.

[Flatline]

It doesn't suit the swathe of under-18's who weren't entitled to vote but have to suffer the consequences of Brexit, either, but here we are...farting around attempting to kowtow to a "decision" made by a slim majority of righteous, sex-starved, overly-indulged baby-boomers, utterly (utterly, UTTERLY) terrified of the human condition who will be, at best: dribbling cabbages; at worst, dead...having eventually (inevitably; entropy is a bitch) jumped off the planet before ever getting the chance to see their post-EU fantasy crumble before their eyes. Shambles. Socrates was right all along.

Old people are the most knowledgeable going,as for under 18's most wouldn't know how to wipe their own arse.
I bet you never had a Dad to raise you properly to come up with a statement like that.

[dsr]

It doesn't suit the swathe of under-18's who weren't entitled to vote but have to suffer the consequences of Brexit, either, but here we are...farting around attempting to kowtow to a "decision" made by a slim majority of righteous, sex-starved, overly-indulged baby-boomers, utterly (utterly, UTTERLY) terrified of the human condition who will be, at best: dribbling cabbages; at worst, dead...having eventually (inevitably; entropy is a bitch) jumped off the planet before ever getting the chance to see their post-EU fantasy crumble before their eyes. Shambles. Socrates was right all along.

Moral for tomorrow - don't post when drunk.

[Spiral]

So..I'm a b&stard and also a drunk...

You two heathens familiar with he concept of ad hominem?

[Flatline]

So..I'm a b&stard and also a drunk...

You two heathens familiar with he concept of ad hominem?

I take it you don't have a Dad then?
As for heathens,you're the one whom doesn't believe in God.

[Spiral]

I take it you don't have a Dad then?
As for heathens,you're the one whom doesn't believe in God.

*who

But yes, I'm prone to making judgements on the grounds of logic and reason rather than faith and superstition.

edit-I've just noticed that you're eerily close to denying the Holocaust on that crackpot's "free speech" thread. You'll forgive me if I henceforth ignore literally everything you ever post on UpTheClarets.

[Lancasterclaret]

Hi Lancs, isn't the discussion on this thread about how the "doom and gloom" of HMG's own "forecasts" and similar "negatives" of leaving the EU?

Paul, its not exactly proving that the studies are wrong and we are not going to take a hit though is it? They are arguing for a different economic model to be used, rather than trying to claim its all "Project Fear".

As an aside, Flatline (and others) posts on Brexit are why I think its more than an economic disaster. If you let people (and others) like him have an say in which way a country is going, well, its only going to go one way.

And I'd take the enthusiasm, tolerance and dynamism of youth over cynical, greedy, set in their ways, selfish old people everyday of the week.

Its the future we are talking about here, not the past.

[Greenmile]

Nor me. Not sure why I can see it and you can’t.

Nobody would appreciate me pasting it all, it’s a huge interview, but one section is below. Many don’t agree with him, but I do. He entitles it “why I left my liberal London tribe”. He is an old Etonian, his dad was an MP. His book is about Anywheres and Somewheres. The former could be viewed as a metropolitan elite, the latter people still often living within 20 miles of their birthplace. It describes the feelings of decent people, the “Gillian Duffys” if you will, who don’t feel comfortable with this new UK that the (still minority) Anywheres have created.

If, to use economic jargon, you have high human capital, you will thrive in open, competitive systems and only be held back by prejudice or protectionism. You are also likely, in the language of American sociologist Talcott Parsons, to have an “achieved” identity, meaning one based on your own educational and career success, rather than an “ascribed” identity based on gender, ethnicity, particular places. This helps you to move more confidently through the world, unlike those with more fixed identities, who can be upset by rapid change.

To take a Brexit-related example, if you are an Anywhere, EU freedom of movement is in your interests because you can take your talents elsewhere in Europe for a few years without bureaucratic hindrance and you are unlikely to face much direct competition from people moving the other way — indeed, having some French or Polish acquaintances may even make your life more interesting. Somewheres, by contrast, are far less likely to have the qualifications or aptitude to work abroad and do often face direct competition from EU citizens coming here — more than one-third of production jobs in food manufacturing (about 120,000 people) have been filled by people from eastern Europe in the past few years, up from almost nothing before 2004.

It is true there have always been affluent and educated people with more open and expansive views than those living more pinched lives. What is different now is the scale. Until recently, Anywhere liberalism was the preserve of a small percentage of the population. Now, thanks to the expansion of higher education, it may extend to 20 to 25 per cent of the population and is growing. And, over the past generation, it has dominated the political class and the national culture. Anywhere politicians who think they are governing in the national interest are, at least some of the time, governing in the Anywhere interest — in everything from the expansion of higher education to the unprecedented openness of modern societies.

Both the Anywhere and Somewhere world views are legitimate, and decent, in their different ways and in many areas of politics and economics the division is barely relevant. But on the so-called “security and identity” issues that have loomed so much larger in recent years, they have created a dismayingly large gulf in British society and an instability in our politics which has ended our membership of the EU and may now be ending the union with Scotland, too.

So how did I, as someone who by background is as Anywhere as it is possible to be — start to listen in as an outsider to my friends’ political conversations? How did I start to see the divide from the Somewhere side? What has changed me? .....

[next interesting section]

......An emotionally mature liberalism must also accept that white majorities, not just minorities, in western societies have ethnic attachments too and an interest in a degree of demographic stability — and it is not shameful or racist for people to feel uncomfortable if their neighbourhood changes too rapidly, whether from gentrification or ethnic change.

Other things flow from the caveat, too — things that do not challenge the core beliefs of modern liberalism but temper and qualify their more dogmatic application. The belief, for example, that men and women are equal but not identical and that some sort of gender division of labour in the home and the broader society remains popular. That order and legitimate authority in families, schools and the wider society are a necessary condition of human flourishing, not a means of crushing it. That religion, loyalty and the wisdom of tradition deserve greater respect than is common among “blank sheet” liberals who tend to focus narrowly on issues of justice and harm.

Thanks for that.

Isn’t it a good thing that there are more “anywheres”? Affluent and educated people with open and expansive views moving confidently through the world with their qualifications and aptitude. All sounds very positive to me, unlike the phrase “metropolitan elite” which seems to be an exclusively pejorative term (nowadays at least).

I totally disagree with the guy’s last paragraph, which just reads as right wing reactionary nonsense to me - a woman’s place is in the home / respect your “betters” / religion and tradition should never be questioned etc. Throw in a more patronising and supercilious tone, and it could have been written by Rowls

[ŽižkovClaret]

Should we subsidise you forever because you paid tax here previously?

Damo, you say something in one post, then say the opposite when challenged. I don't think i'll bother communicating with you further.

[Paul Waine]

Paul, its not exactly proving that the studies are wrong and we are not going to take a hit though is it? They are arguing for a different economic model to be used, rather than trying to claim its all "Project Fear".

Hi Lancs, the "Briefings for Brexit" guys are saying that the models used to predict the economic consequences of brexit are flawed, and if the models are flawed then the outcomes "forecast" by those models are invalid ("wrong" if you prefer). For me, that's as clear as saying brexit will not be "all doom and gloom" - in economic terms.

My understanding of the HMG models is that they don't forecast that "we are going to take a hit" - in the way that we took a hit in 2008. The HMG models only "forecast" that the economic growth will be slower than it would have been, according to their models, if the UK had remained in the EU. So, GDP will not be down, it will just be "not have grown as much as it would otherwise have done...." The general population will still be better off in 15 years time than we are today....

The "Briefings for Brexit" guys are simply saying that these HMG models (and the others commonly quoted) are invalid - and economic growth will continue whether we are inside the EU (single market, customs union et al) or we are outside the EU.

I haven't read the full report - and I won't be doing that today, got to get to the London Stadium.

[Celts]

I don't know why we're all over thinking this.

The referendum was a vote on immigration. That's it, in a nut shell.

[ŽižkovClaret]

I don't know why we're all over thinking this.

The referendum was a vote on immigration. That's it, in a nut shell.

ironic if so, as sure, it might cap the largely white immigrants from Eastern europe, but trade deals with non-EU countries which we are told are now prized, may well yield more relaxed immigration for people from Pakistan, India, Africa.

Not sure many Brexiters quite did the sums on that one when they voted for that big red bus.

[nil_desperandum]

I don't know why we're all over thinking this.

The referendum was a vote on immigration. That's it, in a nut shell.

Not if you ask those who voted leave. Hardly any of them will admit to this, and those who did vote on this basis totally misunderstood the reality of the situation, since leaving the EU will have no impact on immigration from the wider world, (other than to almost certainly increase it), and we already had the ability whilst in the EU to curb immigration under EU rules if we had wanted to.

[Spijed]

Not if you ask those who voted leave. Hardly any of them will admit to this, and those who did vote on this basis totally misunderstood the reality of the situation, since leaving the EU will have no impact on immigration from the wider world, (other than to almost certainly increase it), and we already had the ability whilst in the EU to curb immigration under EU rules if we had wanted to.

No doubt the vote of many in Burnley was to curb immigration!

[Lancasterclaret]

Paul, I get that but its still a stretch to claim that we are going to be ok based on the idea that the current models are ALL wrong.

[Imploding Turtle]

tbf we are going to be OK, as a nation. We're just going to be far worse off, that's all. But at least we stop brown people coming here. Or something.

[claretandy]

tbf we are going to be OK, as a nation. We're just going to be far worse off, that's all. But at least we stop brown people coming here. Or something.

What is it with you lefties and your obsession with "brown people" ?