To be fair, the government's bungling of the response to Coronavirus is more responsible for that than Brexit - at least for the first year or so of the recession.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
- Status
To be fair, the government's bungling of the response to Coronavirus is more responsible for that than Brexit - at least for the first year or so of the recession.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 37,150
In 1706To be fair, the government's bungling of the response to Coronavirus is more responsible for that than Brexit - at least for the first year or so of the recession.
Which suggests BuBu's next move....
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
That makes more sense, I thought I'd read that we'd past the 'more in total' line some time ago.
It depends on how one does the calculation, and where one decides to start the clock running but if it's "lost GDP growth" then you're right that we've likely already passed it, but the economy isn't 10% smaller than it otherwise would have been - which is what would be required for it to be an annual figure.
gypsyjackson
Master Poster
And yet the farmers voted en-masse for Brexit. I'm finding it difficult to drum up too much sympathy.
OTOH I am very concerned about food standards but I suppose hundreds of thousands of extra cases of food poisoning and a thousand extra deaths a year is a price worth paying for the blue passports it turns out we could have had all along if we were that bothered about it
I suppose the large farming companies will be bought off with generous subsidies and the small farms will just go out of business making second homes so much cheaper for the urban wealth creators
To be fair to the NFU, it supported Remain and encouraged its members to vote to stay. Not very successfully, I suppose! Minette (and Meurig Raymond before her) has consistently urged the Government to do a decent deal with the EU, and always warns of the consequences of not getting a deal at all.
But hard to disagree with what Captain Swoop says on the subject.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
But lost GDP growth, bureaucratic expansion, money spaffed on invisible borders, expensive (if uninformative) advertising schemes......?
gypsyjackson
Master Poster
I’ll have to look for that report, because that’s just before the South Sea Bubble, covers the Long and Great Depressions, and obviously both world wars, so you really hope it’s hyperbole.
Depressing.
Compared to the lost GDP growth, the rest are just rounding errors. The bureaucratic expansion and invisible borders have cost a few million and the advertising is tens, maybe a couple of hundred million.
It's all depressing and pathetic but 3% off GDP is £65 billion - every single year.
It's not
The UK economy is forecast to shrink by 30% or more in half a year, so close to 15% for the whole year.
By comparison:
South Sea Bubble - <10% contraction
WW1 - 7% contraction
WW2 - < 5%
https://www.ft.com/content/734e604b-93d9-43a6-a6ec-19e8b22dad3c
True. It's not there yet but it's coming close like a driving train.
Doubly so if you count some of Covid-19 devastation in Britain as due to Brexit. This is impossible to separate with any degree of fairness but it's safe to say that without having to deal with Brexit, Britain would likely be better prepared for the epidemic and better able to take advantage of the common European policies.
If for no other reason then because someone more competent than BJ would likely be PM. This is not difficult to imagine, most farm animals would do better.
McHrozni
More tech wizardry from our most excellent government -
"The UK government’s plan to invest hundreds of millions of pounds in a satellite broadband company has been described as “nonsensical” by experts, who say the company doesn’t even make the right type of satellite the country needs after Brexit.
The investment in OneWeb, first reported on Thursday night, is intended to mitigate against the UK losing access to the EU’s Galileo satellite navigation system.
But OneWeb – in which the UK will own a 20% stake following the investment – currently operates a completely different type of satellite network from that typically used to run such navigation systems."
"The UK government’s plan to invest hundreds of millions of pounds in a satellite broadband company has been described as “nonsensical” by experts, who say the company doesn’t even make the right type of satellite the country needs after Brexit.
The investment in OneWeb, first reported on Thursday night, is intended to mitigate against the UK losing access to the EU’s Galileo satellite navigation system.
But OneWeb – in which the UK will own a 20% stake following the investment – currently operates a completely different type of satellite network from that typically used to run such navigation systems."
The UK government? Wouldn't surprise me.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
They're awaiting the hostile takeover.
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Yes.
But this is the same british government that invested in a shipping company that not only had no ships, but no port rights for the imaginary ships.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
And went, for PPE, directly to a company that doesn't produce PPE ( and had an asset sheet that would just about cover a small car)
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 86,584
THE UK Government has said that it will not align with EU chemicals policy, instead bringing in its own controversial system.
https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/uk-confirms-it-will-not-align-with-eu-chemicals-agency/
https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/uk-confirms-it-will-not-align-with-eu-chemicals-agency/
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
More paperwork and conflicting standards.
All of which will tend to make UK products less attractive.
- Status