Brexit Schmexit

[feral chile]

1 hour ago, gary1979666 said:

You don't need an accountant to work it out (although I'm one) - it's just maths.  Neil's sums are right and Feral is confusing a 10% reduction to a 10% reduction in the rate of growth.

ah yes, it was you I was thinking of.

So, can you please explain to me, if the future difference in actual projected income is 9.5% less GDP, how that isn't a reduction of GDP of 9.5%?

We're comparing future projections brexit/non Brexit, not projected figures with now.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, feral chile said:

though you seem perfectly happy to adopt the Tory definition over the established one that Labour used.

I wasn't working a formula to try and extract more money out of the treasury, I was stating an irrefutable fact about people's lifestyles. 

Facts are neither Labour or tory. Facts are the truth you want to reject.

[feral chile]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

No, the govt's financial-projection research does.

otherwise known as feral, according to you.

[feral chile]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

I wasn't working a formula to try and extract more money out of the treasury, I was stating an irrefutable fact about people's lifestyles. 

Facts are neither Labour or tory. Facts are the truth you want to reject.

You did read the projected effects on the rest of the UK?

It's a Welsh local paper, so of course it's going to play to its readers, it did give all t=regional projections, however.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, feral chile said:

otherwise known as feral, according to you.

you're just talking any old bollocks to try and wash your wrong away.

[eFestivals]

Just now, feral chile said:

You did read the projected effects on the rest of the UK?

I read the first sentence, a sentence that exposed the writer was an idiot.

I stopped reading at that point.

[feral chile]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

which has nothing to do with the fact that people *DO* have better lifestyles today than in the past (ie: absolute poverty is lesser), or the fact that you have an attachment to the idea that always-getting-better should be guaranteed, and at a faster rate than it's currently happening.

What the fuck has any of this got to do with the fact that we're all gonna get buggered if brexit happens?

[feral chile]

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

Some people put in greater efforts to get their extra. Some people don't piss what they get up the wall and accumulate extra. There's reasons for difference which are outside of any marxist ideal.

Oh, except the marxist ideal was about reward for effort anyway, and not reward for sitting on your arse. Lots of people seem to have missed that bit.

 

Wow you've really bought into this shit haven't you?

Some people work 60 hours at NMW to make ends meet.

Go tell them they should make more effort.

[feral chile]

25 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

 

what are you babbling on about? I've no idea.

 

 

 

Oh I realise you have no idea.

[feral chile]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

unfortunately, they and you suffer from the same affliction - the idea that things should always get better (or money can be spent to make it better) without any reference to how the wealth required to make things better is generated.

And that where you say right now things can be magick'd up to port things, they think there'll be that magic after we leave the EU.

The cure to this affliction for you both is economic reality, if you're prepared to take the medicine.

Apologies, I somehow read that as you saying I was making up the projected growth figures.

I think we're at cross purposes here.

This isn't just a welsh problem, the reason i'm so worked up is that we bloody voted for it!

It just so happens that the place I read the leaked figures was a Welsh news site.

Edited February 8, 2018 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

Just now, feral chile said:

Wow you've really bought into this shit haven't you?

No, you're just making extra bits up and adding them onto what i've said.

Or do you think Marx was a tory?

 

Just now, feral chile said:

Some people work 60 hours at NMW to make ends meet.

No shit sherlock (says the man doing 60+ hours for half NMW). I didn't say they didn't.

And when they make ends meet, they have shit loads more than someone doing 60 hours a week in the past.

7 out of ten people in the UK say they're financially destitute. Yet 7 out of tn people from the UK have at least one foreign holiday a year. Work that one out.

 

Just now, feral chile said:

Go tell them they should make more effort.

Stop letting your fantasies run away with your brain (or alternatively, stop trolling to whitewash your embarrassment).

[feral chile]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

No, you're just making extra bits up and adding them onto what i've said.

Or do you think Marx was a tory?

 

No shit sherlock (says the man doing 60+ hours for half NMW). I didn't say they didn't.

And when they make ends meet, they have shit loads more than someone doing 60 hours a week in the past.

7 out of ten people in the UK say they're financially destitute. Yet 7 out of tn people from the UK have at least one foreign holiday a year. Work that one out.

 

Stop letting your fantasies run away with your brain (or alternatively, stop trolling to whitewash your embarrassment).

My husband's father used to work 7 days a week till he died of cancer in his fifties. He had been diagnosed an ulcer and by the time he went back as he was too ill to work, they gave him 2 weeks to live. which was accurate.

So nightmare, yes, fantasy no.

I don't think it's right to discuss publicly how the family were forced to survive financially afterwards.

They lived near the docks.

His brother died at the steelworks while he was still in his twenties/early thirties. The qworkers all walked out.It was suspected that safety issues were ignored, and it was a mystery how he fell to his death unnoticed and silently. it was suspected that his head injury wa caused before the fall, but never proven. But his colleagues probably knew, hence the walk out.

His sister's son was cycling to work and got killed in a road accident.

step out of your bubble when you try to discuss entitlement and privilege.

A lot of our family have given their lives trying to financially support their families.

Edited February 8, 2018 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, feral chile said:

Apologies, I somehow read that as you saying I was making up the projected growth figures.

I think we're at cross purposes here.

This isn't just a welsh problem, the reason i'm so worked up is that we bloody voted for it!

But it's not a disaster (and I say that as no supporter of brexit).

As you've already pointed out, people tend not to miss what they've never had (any problem will be with those who have an expectation of more for them based only on their wants).

That 10% lost growth is actually tiny in its effect (in the difference between having lost that 10% or not). For the whole of the UK, you're talking somewhere around £5Bn a year of GDP (in an economy of about £2000bn per year).

It would be better to not lose that growth, but it's not a disaster. It's the sort of size which any number of factors might impact into the economy each year.

The problem with this one is that it's a negative that we'll (as a country) be choosing to make.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, feral chile said:

step out of your bubble when you try to discuss entitlement and privilege.

I'm not the one with a sense of entitlement. I don't have any expectation of life just magically getting better, I realise that it's *only* work that is able to improve humanity's lot.

It's you who say we can have more, without reference to where the more might come from.

[feral chile]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm not the one with a sense of entitlement. I don't have any expectation of life just magically getting better, I realise that it's *only* work that is able to improve humanity's lot.

It's you who say we can have more, without reference to where the more might come from.

the point is, they're projecting (slower) growth.

The share of the pie is disproportionate to those taking the risk.

it's 'here, use my oven and work your bollocks of for the rest of your life making pies. I get most of it because it's my oven, you can have the burnt bits for making them'

(means of production/financial risk trumping supply of labour, in other words.)

capitalism rewards risk and opportunism, not hard work. it's the entrepreneurs who get rich, not those working for them.

That's why I disagree with your use of effort and reward analogies.

(I'm not necessarily saying we don't need those who see opportunities that us dullards miss)

Edited February 8, 2018 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

19 minutes ago, feral chile said:

capitalism rewards risk and opportunism, not hard work.

i don't disagree - tho the risk and opportunism can involve hard work too.

But the fall in growth via brexit has little all to do with capitalism, it'll be the consequence of less work - because there will be fewer people outside of Britain interested in the work done in Britain (due to increased price and barriers to easy trade).

As a consequence we'll have less to trade for shiny things from abroad, and so we'll have fewer (than we would have otherwise had) shiny things from abroad.

 

[pink_triangle]

29 minutes ago, feral chile said:

 

capitalism rewards risk and opportunism, not hard work. it's the entrepreneurs who get rich, not those working for them.

 

I think that’s a bit of a generalisation, many entrepreneurs work incredibly hard.

[feral chile]

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

i don't disagree - tho the risk and opportunism can involve hard work too.

But the fall in growth via brexit has little all to do with capitalism, it'll be the consequence of less work - because there will be fewer people outside of Britain interested in the work done in Britain (due to increased price and barriers to easy trade).

As a consequence we'll have less to trade for shiny things from abroad, and so we'll have fewer (than we would have otherwise had) shiny things from abroad.

 

And vice versa - nobody to do the work

https://www.farminguk.com/News/-Food-is-rotting-in-the-fields-and-still-we-see-no-action-NFU-deputy-warns_47804.html

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, feral chile said:

And vice versa - nobody to do the work

https://www.farminguk.com/News/-Food-is-rotting-in-the-fields-and-still-we-see-no-action-NFU-deputy-warns_47804.html

"farmers want it all ways" shocker?

The Church of England is the tories at prayer, and farmers is their day job.

[eFestivals]

the question not being asked around these forecasts, of course, is what the difference is in GDP per-head, rather than just total GDP ... because presumably along with a lower rate of economic growth they'll also be a lower rate of population growth within the economy being measured (the UK).

I've no idea if looking at it on a per-head basis say anything much different, but i'd quite like to know.

[gary1979666]

18 hours ago, feral chile said:

ah yes, it was you I was thinking of.

So, can you please explain to me, if the future difference in actual projected income is 9.5% less GDP, how that isn't a reduction of GDP of 9.5%?

We're comparing future projections brexit/non Brexit, not projected figures with now.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-leaked-impact-assessment-economy-gdp-north-east-west-midlands-a8199746.html

I think the confusion lies in your article.  It talks about the impact to GDP, but other articles, like the one above, talk about impact to GDP growth.

 

So, here's the science bit:

 

No Brexit

Starting GDP  = X     (100)

Growth of Y%  (5%)

New GDP = X * (1+ Y%)   = 105

 

Impact to GDP:

New GDP = X * (1+ Y%) * (1 - 9.5%) = 95

 

Impact to GDP Growth:

New GDP = X * (1+ (Y% * (1 - 9.5%)) = 104.5

 

[eFestivals]

I see the EU are playing hardball with terms, again.

While what they're trying to force is the outcome I'd like, I'm not impressed by the way they're doing it - particularly as it goes again what they signed as much as it tries to hold the UK to what it signed.

The UK doesn't have anything that's similar to put pressure on them, so that leaves things a bit fucked.

And yet again, Jez/Labour has categorically stated they want the same hard tory brexit.

[russycarps]

21 hours ago, feral chile said:

 

Where's Russy, he's an accountant isn't he?

 

Well that's it, I'm done. After 10 years on this forum, the persona I've created is of......an accountant.

FFS!

 

[eFestivals]

12 minutes ago, russycarps said:

 

Well that's it, I'm done. After 10 years on this forum, the persona I've created is of......an accountant.

FFS!

 

 

[LJS]

3 hours ago, gary1979666 said:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-leaked-impact-assessment-economy-gdp-north-east-west-midlands-a8199746.html

I think the confusion lies in your article.  It talks about the impact to GDP, but other articles, like the one above, talk about impact to GDP growth.

 

So, here's the science bit:

 

No Brexit

Starting GDP  = X     (100)

Growth of Y%  (5%)

New GDP = X * (1+ Y%)   = 105

 

Impact to GDP:

New GDP = X * (1+ Y%) * (1 - 9.5%) = 95

 

Impact to GDP Growth:

New GDP = X * (1+ (Y% * (1 - 9.5%)) = 104.5

the report talks about the impact over a 15 year period. I think it's more likely that if they talk about a 5% drop in growth, they're saying that rather than growing by e.g. 35% over that 15 years GDP will only grow by 30%.