Brexit: Now What? Part III

[Dave Rogers]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11895440&postcount=1895
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11895479&postcount=1898

There are more in all likelihood, but I found these in the first two minutes and they suffice.

McHrozni

You should maybe look at these two as well, and then admit that what you're doing is cherry-picking.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11895432#post11895432

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11895437#post11895437

Mike, you should apply for a million dollars. This is exactly what you said would happen.

Dave

 

[wobs]

It doesn't have to. IMO McHrozni is miles wide of the mark but IMO it's not completely out of the question that countries who currently have 50% of UK GDP could overhaul us in a 20+ year period if:

• They experience 3-4% growth over that period
• UK GDP grows at the rate it has over the last couple of decades at a little under 2% on average
• The Pound drops another 10% or so against the dollar
• Scotland acheives independence
• There's a 5%-10% GDP dip as a result of Brexit

Looking at the studies overall on Brexit, the range of impacts looks quite wide, so it would be tricky to predict what we will be like in 20 years:

For the UK the losses average between 1.31% and 4.21 % of GDP for the optimistic and pessimistic scenarios respectively, or 0.13% to 0.41% of GDP annually. Among the different models it is also notable that the losses for the UK are higher than average in the case of two models (OECD and UK Treasury) that capture negative impacts on foreign direct investment (FDI), which is redirected in some degree away from the UK into the EU 27. In their pessimistic scenarios the losses cumulate to about 7.5% of GDP, or 0.75% annually, which are highly significant amounts macro-economically. This FDI effect is not however reflected in models estimated for the EU27, and so implies that there might need to be some adjustment to the results
reported above for the EU27.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/595374/IPOL_STU(2017)595374_EN.pdf

I do think India and Brazil will surpass us in that time, but countries like Canada or Australia, who are more developed may struggle to sustain such economic growth on average, and they probably won't surpass us if we get sufficient trade deals in the coming years. But of course, there are many if's.

 

[MikeG]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11895440&postcount=1895
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11895479&postcount=1898

There are more in all likelihood, but I found these in the first two minutes and they suffice.

McHrozni

Do you think that the vitriol and sneering directed at anyone who might express some sympathy with some aspects of Brexit is likely to lead to anyone wanting to answer this? You've added a nice little example, too, with the "bring back hanging" line, proving your question is not neutral........and in fact is nothing more than a trap. I could list all sorts of upsides to Brexit, but what would be the reaction? Further, it might lead people to conclude that I voted for it. So why would I bother? Why would anyone bother?

.......What solid, positive upsides are there to the UK leaving the EU? Given that it appears our farming industry and our NHS actually need access to imported labour, can you name one thing that the UK will be able to do once out of the EU that's a solid, net positive for the country.

If you'll allow me to list just two, without assuming that this means I think they are the primary factors, or that I think they might balance out other negative factors, then I'm prepared to do it as an experiment. Deal?

......... For the less shrill, and I like to consider myself among them, would you mind putting the case for Brexit that you can imagine an idealized Leaver making?

No, I absolutely won't be doing that. I've really have fallen into that trap before. The danger is that I am immediately labelled as a supporter of Brexit.........

GO back and read, before you make yourself look even sillier.

It is perfectly possible to find some upsides to Brexit without being pro-Brexit. I would have thought that even the most one-eyed here would understand something so simple as that.

 

[McHrozni]

You should maybe look at these two as well, and then admit that what you're doing is cherry-picking.

I don't see how these balance out what he's been saying. They do muddy the waters, but I really don't see him as anything other than a supporter of Brexit who pretends to be skeptical in order to engage in debate.

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

You should maybe look at these two as well, and then admit that what you're doing is cherry-picking.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11895432#post11895432

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11895437#post11895437

Mike, you should apply for a million dollars. This is exactly what you said would happen.

Dave

Thanks Dave. Yeah, exactly. Honest to god, some people here are so fanatical that 'if you're not with us you're against us" isn't putting it strongly enough.

 

[McHrozni]

It is perfectly possible to find some upsides to Brexit without being pro-Brexit.

Sure. In the same sense it's possible to find some upsides to being guillotined without expressing a desire to get executed.

The thing is, your posts do not express anything like that.

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

I don't see how these balance out what he's been saying. They do muddy the waters, but I really don't see him as anything other than a supporter of Brexit who pretends to be skeptical in order to engage in debate.......i

I've probably 2 years of posting in this thread and others on the subject. Go ahead and quote me. Don't slur me. Don't say what you think I am. Don't cast aspersions..........quote me.

 

[McHrozni]

I've probably 2 years of posting in this thread and others on the subject. Go ahead and quote me. Don't slur me. Don't say what you think I am. Don't cast aspersions..........quote me.

In the above posts you repeatedly ask for positive points of Brexit without providing any while casting doubt on the downsides of Brexit without providing any reasoning for the said doubt.

This is exactly how a pro-Brexit high end troll would behave. If it walks and quacks like a duck it probably isn't a sea cucumber. Those don't quack.

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

Sure. In the same sense it's possible to find some upsides to being guillotined without expressing a desire to get executed.

The thing is, your posts do not express anything like that.

McHrozni

Edited by zooterkin: 

<SNIP>
Edited for rule 12.

As it happens, I thought Brexit was a fairly balanced argument. I saw good reasons for staying, and good reasons for going, as I've been saying for 2 years here. That makes me some Brexit apologist in the eyes of extremists. A racist, xenophobe blah blah blah.....

As I said years ago, if I had voted Leave it would have been for reasons well outside the mainstream, particularly with regard to trading relations with Africa. Well, **** me sideways......that makes me a game-player in your eyes. I don't actually give a toss what you think my position is, but I will continue to counter rabid unthinking extremism such as you and others express here.

 

[MikeG]

In the above posts you repeatedly ask for positive points of Brexit.......

Can you read? Really? Quote me.

 

[MikeG]

.......This is exactly how a pro-Brexit high end troll would behave......

Are you accusing me of trolling?

Do you have any sense of how bizarre it is that someone who doesn't hold the same sense of the balance between arguments for Leave and Remain as you do is called a troll, simply for expressing those views?

Jesus H........this is just exactly as I predicted.

 

[The Don]

I do think India and Brazil will surpass us in that time, but countries like Canada or Australia, who are more developed may struggle to sustain such economic growth on average, and they probably won't surpass us if we get sufficient trade deals in the coming years. But of course, there are many if's.

For Canada and Australia to overtake the UK, IMO it largely depends on what happens to commodity prices over that period. If they are buoyant then I think that there is a good chance that they can sustain the kinds of growth rates that could have them overhauling the UK in 20-25 years.

 

[GlennB]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11895440&postcount=1895
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11895479&postcount=1898

There are more in all likelihood, but I found these in the first two minutes and they suffice.

McHrozni

Neither says anything remotely close to your claim. MikeG was pressured to name a thing or two that would be to the UK's advantage post-Brexit and came up with those in response (reluctantly, as is clear from the context). He wasn't claiming that "Brexit is good" at all, and your examples suffice only to show that you're either being willfully dishonest or didn't bother to check the context of those posts.

 

[McHrozni]

As it happens, I thought Brexit was a fairly balanced argument.

Oh I'm sorry! That's where my confusion came from. I would like to amend my post above from:

Since this is coming from a guy who considers Brexit to be a good idea for UK, I'll take it as a compliment.

So, thanks

to:

Since this is coming from a guy who considers Brexit to be a neutral idea for UK, I'll take it as a compliment.

So, thanks

I deeply apologize for the mistake.

Now we can all be happy

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

For Canada and Australia to overtake the UK, IMO it largely depends on what happens to commodity prices over that period. If they are buoyant then I think that there is a good chance that they can sustain the kinds of growth rates that could have them overhauling the UK in 20-25 years.

That and immigration to those countries. They have about half the population of UK each, if they are to catch up to UK in 20-25 years they need to take in at least some 5-10 million immigrants too.

But it's quite doable, especially if one of the darker scenarios for UK happens and there are suddenly lots of Britons looking for a new home. I was on a hyperbole with 16th place, I readily admit that

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

Oh I'm sorry! That's where my confusion came from. I would like to amend my post above from:

Since this is coming from a guy who considers Brexit to be a good idea for UK, I'll take it as a compliment.

So, thanks

to:

Since this is coming from a guy who considers Brexit to be a neutral idea for UK, I'll take it as a compliment.

So, thanks

I deeply apologize for the mistake.

Now we can all be happy

McHrozni

I'm reading that as dripping with sarcasm. Am I wrong?

 

[McHrozni]

I'm reading that as dripping with sarcasm. Am I wrong?

Read it any way you want, I'm just glad we cleared up the confusion. You aren't pro-Brexit, you're just someone who doesn't know whether Brexit will be good or bad.

The change is quite insignificant as far as I'm concerned.

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

.......The change is quite insignificant as far as I'm concerned......

Yeah, like I said:

some people here are so fanatical that 'if you're not with us you're against us" isn't putting it strongly enough.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Read it any way you want, I'm just glad we cleared up the confusion. You aren't pro-Brexit, you're just someone who doesn't know whether Brexit will be good or bad.

As, indeed, are all of those of us who lack clairvoyance. I think leaving the EU is on balance probably a bad idea, but if it turns out not to be, I won't deny the reality because I "know" it was going to be bad. One of the biggest political problems in Britain at the moment, and for some time now, has been the absurd level of polarisation surrounding our membership of the EU; it should be, has to be in a civil discourse, OK for someone to say "On balance I'm in favour/against, but I can see some good arguments against/in favour" without immediately being accused of being a traitor, a shill or a troll. None of us have a crystal ball; none of us can be sure, either way. MikeG, it seems to me, is simply being honest in admitting that.

Dave

 

[McHrozni]

As, indeed, are all of those of us who lack clairvoyance. I think leaving the EU is on balance probably a bad idea, but if it turns out not to be, I won't deny the reality because I "know" it was going to be bad. One of the biggest political problems in Britain at the moment, and for some time now, has been the absurd level of polarisation surrounding our membership of the EU; it should be, has to be in a civil discourse, OK for someone to say "On balance I'm in favour/against, but I can see some good arguments against/in favour" without immediately being accused of being a traitor, a shill or a troll. None of us have a crystal ball; none of us can be sure, either way. MikeG, it seems to me, is simply being honest in admitting that.

Dave

Don't get me wrong, I will readily admit I was wrong if Brexit does turn out to have been a good idea.

It's just that the balance is so heavily tilted against it I sincerely doubt in the analytical capacity of anyone who disagrees with it, unless he (she/it) provides good evidence of that. MikeG hasn't done so, so I happily take his criticism as a form of weird praise, which is what the offending post was about (and not a us-vs-them thing he makes it out to be).

Swap Brexit with vaccines cause autism 'controversy' if you find it problematic. If it turns out vaccines do cause autism, I will also admit I was wrong. That doesn't mean anyone who claims he's a fence sitter will get anything resembling respect from me in the meantime though. The evidence that vaccines cause autism is just as absent as evidence Brexit could be good for UK and the results of fake "skepticism" on the matter can be just as devastating.

McHrozni