Brexit: Now What? Part III

[The Don]

This is ... possible, yes. I proposed she did that for Bremainers, but yes, it could be she did so for Brexiteers.

Given the rhetoric of the past few months, pulling back may not be very practical, and the risk of a diamond-hard Brexit with punitive actions by EU is quite real.

Boris Johnson just rejected any payments into EU budget again. Giving cash to EU is just about the only leverage UK has at this point. Does he really think he can extract concessions without giving anything in return?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39217075

McHrozni

Probably not, but for the vast majority of Conservatives it is more important not to pay into EU than get a decent Brexit deal.

 

[ceptimus]

I don't dismiss the article, but you must realise that the article is about fifteen years of no real pay rises, nine to ten of which have already occurred.

So you can't blame it on Brexit - or at least not the start and the first two-thirds of it.

 

[The Don]

The IFS warning on incomes follows the claim earlier on Thursday by the Resolution Foundation that the UK is in the midst of the worst decade for pay growth since the Napoleonic wars of 1803–1815.

Brexit is worse for UK workers than either of the World Wars was. Would Brits still vote for Brexit if they knew this would happen?

McHrozni

Probably not. IIRC there was some opinion poll a couple of months ago (which annoyingly I cannot find) where something like 80% of people were anti-Brexit if it cost them personally more than £100 a year.

The Remain campaign made some pretty bold claims (some have called them lies) about how much worse off people would be as a result of Brexit. They simply were not believed in sufficient numbers.

This will no doubt be spun again as Remoaners re-engaging "Project Fear" and be dismissed. The truth is that we'll never know how much Brexit has cost because we don't have an otherwise identical UK economy to act as a control.

 

[McHrozni]

I don't dismiss the article, but you must realise that the article is about fifteen years of no real pay rises, nine to ten of which have already occurred.

So you can't blame it on Brexit - or at least not the start and the first two-thirds of it.

Brexit is alive and well as a cause for this sort-of calamity.

While the Office for Budget Responsibility at least delivered some good news on borrowing, the family finances picture has actually deteriorated since the autumn statement.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Probably not, but for the vast majority of Conservatives it is more important not to pay into EU than get a decent Brexit deal.

How do they live, I wonder. This is like not wanting to purchase bread, because you value that 1 pound more than you value the bread, and you starve to death as a result.

There should be a rather strong evolutionary pressure against such genes, I think.

Probably not. IIRC there was some opinion poll a couple of months ago (which annoyingly I cannot find) where something like 80% of people were anti-Brexit if it cost them personally more than £100 a year.

The Remain campaign made some pretty bold claims (some have called them lies) about how much worse off people would be as a result of Brexit. They simply were not believed in sufficient numbers.

This will no doubt be spun again as Remoaners re-engaging "Project Fear" and be dismissed. The truth is that we'll never know how much Brexit has cost because we don't have an otherwise identical UK economy to act as a control.

Maybe, but we can estimate the minimum. Jobs leaving the UK explicitly due to Brexit and their tax receipts are all to be counted, for example. We won't get an exact number, but we should get a decent estimate.

McHrozni

 

[ceptimus]

It's nonsense to claim that something happening now is the CAUSE of something that began nine or ten years ago.

 

[The Don]

How do they live, I wonder. This is like not wanting to purchase bread, because you value that 1 pound more than you value the bread, and you starve to death as a result.

There should be a rather strong evolutionary pressure against such genes, I think.

tbh, many of them are those who are least likely to be affected by Brexit in the short to medium term. A significant proportion are comfortably retired on a combination of state and occupational pensions. There's no indication that Brexit will make their lives very much less comfortable especially because that occupational pension is likely index-linked and the triple-lock similarly insulates the state pension.

Younger conservatives tend to be (but are not exclusively) drawn from the better off who again aren't likely to bear the brunt of Brexit. The dissenting voices in the Conservative Party tend to be business people.

Maybe, but we can estimate the minimum. Jobs leaving the UK explicitly due to Brexit and their tax receipts are all to be counted, for example. We won't get an exact number, but we should get a decent estimate.

McHrozni

Ah, but that would just be an estimate, made by experts. Unless their message is pro-Brexit, they are inherently untrustworthy

 

[McHrozni]

It's nonsense to claim that something happening now is the CAUSE of something that began nine or ten years ago.

Only if these events can't affect the "something" that is happening - which is, of course, utter nonsense.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

tbh, many of them are those who are least likely to be affected by Brexit in the short to medium term.

I include in this number Daddy Don who, despite being an immigrant from the US himself (and from a family who were immigrants to the US from Italy in the last 120 years) was a strong supporter of, and voter for, Brexit.

His reasons were many fold. He didn't like the number of immigrants who were coming in and changing the country (even though there are very few in the small town in the North of England in which he has lived for 45 years), he didn't like the way that the EU was "taking over everything" but was hard pressed to specify particular policies he objected to, and was fundamentally opposed to the idea of a federal Europe. Most of his information comes from the staunchly pro-Brexit Daily Telegraph.

The thing is that he is in his early 80's, is drawing an occupational pension and the state pension and is, thanks in part to his thriftiness, very well off. He is absolutely insulated financially from the effects of Brexit. One area where I could see an impact is if the supply of labour in the social care arena becomes a major issue but in his part of the world, it's likely that there will be more people available as other industries contract.

Daddy Don has little or nothing to lose from Brexit, and from his perspective something to gain. As someone in the middle of life I have plenty to lose and little or nothing to gain. If I had a child of around university age their situation would be even worse with narrower horizons.

 

[McHrozni]

tbh, many of them are those who are least likely to be affected by Brexit in the short to medium term. A significant proportion are comfortably retired on a combination of state and occupational pensions. There's no indication that Brexit will make their lives very much less comfortable especially because that occupational pension is likely index-linked and the triple-lock similarly insulates the state pension.

Younger conservatives tend to be (but are not exclusively) drawn from the better off who again aren't likely to bear the brunt of Brexit. The dissenting voices in the Conservative Party tend to be business people.

So ... why are they against paying money to the EU? Personal and emotional reasons?

Ah, but that would just be an estimate, made by experts. Unless their message is pro-Brexit, they are inherently untrustworthy

Hehe

Yeah, this looks about right for the Brexiteer movement.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

So ... why are they against paying money to the EU? Personal and emotional reasons?

McHrozni

You'd have to ask them but presumably they that money could be better spent somewhere else (like the NHS or increasing the state pension) or not at all (allowing taxes to be reduced).

 

[Aber]

Boris Johnson just rejected any payments into EU budget again. Giving cash to EU is just about the only leverage UK has at this point. Does he really think he can extract concessions without giving anything in return?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39217075

I'd equate this with the stories from the EU side of "agree to pay our bill before we can start talking about post-exit relationships".

If either side is completely serious then Brexit will be a bloody battle.

 

[McHrozni]

You'd have to ask them but presumably they that money could be better spent somewhere else (like the NHS or increasing the state pension) or not at all (allowing taxes to be reduced).

This would mean they don't understand that Brexit will also cause less taxes to be collected in UK, and reducing taxes further would make the matter worse still.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

This would mean they don't understand that Brexit will also cause less taxes to be collected in UK, and reducing taxes further would make the matter worse still.

McHrozni

Those predictions of financial doom and gloom have been made by "experts" who clearly have an anti-Brexit slant and therefore can be safely ignored

Any benefits that result from paying to the EU are also uncertain (according to pro-Brexit experts, who obviously should be believed ) and so can be discounted from the equation so the equation simply comes down to paying that money to the EU or doing something better with that money.

 

[McHrozni]

Those predictions of financial doom and gloom have been made by "experts" who clearly have an anti-Brexit slant and therefore can be safely ignored

Any benefits that result from paying to the EU are also uncertain (according to pro-Brexit experts, who obviously should be believed ) and so can be discounted from the equation so the equation simply comes down to paying that money to the EU or doing something better with that money.

Yeah, I'm sure those are their arguments. I find it difficult a person is able to both read and not see through them right away. Before you ask, I suspect ceptimus is just trolling us for laughs

McHrozni

 

[MCel58]

It's nonsense to claim that something happening now is the CAUSE of something that began nine or ten years ago.

It was not the initial cause but we were told by the Tories that we would be able to plan for growth in this parliament and that the years of austerity had worked. However due to Brexit we are spending not on growth but on Brexit and standing still.

 

[The Don]

Yeah, I'm sure those are their arguments. I find it difficult a person is able to both read and not see through them right away. Before you ask, I suspect ceptimus is just trolling us for laughs

McHrozni

Possibly but if (s)he is, and is successful, it's because it's such an authentic impersonation of a Brexiteer.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

This would mean they don't understand that Brexit will also cause less taxes to be collected in UK, and reducing taxes further would make the matter worse still.

McHrozni

The difference (at least to some it appears) is that the EU bill is real money that you can prove that is written down and in the books while the economic downturn is future imaginary money that you can't really prove or can simply deny.

An important psychological difference it seems.

 

[3point14]

Probably not. IIRC there was some opinion poll a couple of months ago (which annoyingly I cannot find) where something like 80% of people were anti-Brexit if it cost them personally more than £100 a year.

This? I can't see the sourcing for the piece though

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/hard-brexit-only-if-its-free/

 

[3point14]

The difference (at least to some it appears) is that the EU bill is real money that you can prove that is written down and in the books while the economic downturn is future imaginary money that you can't really prove or can simply deny.

An important psychological difference it seems.

Only, to be fair, if one is a *********** idiot.