Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

It's 8% of the f******g growth you idiot.

Jesus bloody Christ.

I know.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

But these are matters of public record, are they not?

Are you denying those things happened?

Just read that small conversation back. 

 

I was asking you a question of why you didn't pay more tax and your response was not to answer but to accuse me of being happy people were dying in A&E.

 

You are losing your mind.

[Innovindil]

34 minutes ago, toddybad said:

I suppose in the end this is one of the great divides between right and left.

I want quality public services and am happy to pay for them.

My tongue in cheek I would say the right would happily watch children go without education and see thousands stuck in ambulances outside A+E if it would save them a few quid personally.

So that's a no to you giving your spare tax money to the school then? 

 

I'll let the children know. Heartbreaking really. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

Just read that small conversation back. 

 

I was asking you a question of why you didn't pay more tax and your response was not to answer but to accuse me of being happy people were dying in A&E.

 

You are losing your mind.

You don't get a choice in the tax you pay.

Well, you don't via PAYE anyway.

Ok, I'll lighten the question, would you pay higher taxes given the state of disrepair (as shown in numerous ways recently) of our public services?

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Webbo said:

I know.

Which is 8% of the growth every year.

Which is what I said.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

You don't get a choice in the tax you pay.

Well, you don't via PAYE anyway.

Ok, I'll lighten the question, would you pay higher taxes given the state of disrepair (as shown in numerous ways recently) of our public services?

No I would not. We are already taxed a greater percentage of our money than we have been for decades. 

 

I would redistribute money from other budgets, we can start with the absurd 0.7% we send away in foreign aid.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, MattP said:

No I would not. We are already taxed a greater percentage of our money than we have been for decades. 

 

I would redistribute money from other budgets, we can start with the absurd 0.7% we send away in foreign aid.

In what way are you taxed more than for decades given income and corporation taxes have fallen throughout the last 7 years? What am I missing?

[Webbo]

9 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Which is 8% of the growth every year.

Which is what I said.

Quote

 

Under a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, UK growth would be 5% lower over the next 15 years compared to current forecasts, according to the analysis.

The "no deal" scenario, which would see the UK revert to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, would reduce growth by 8% over that period. The softest Brexit option of continued single-market access through membership of the European Economic Area would, in the longer term, still lower growth by 2%.

 

It's quite clear if you read the statement. Our growth will be 8% lower after 15 years than it would have been if we'd stayed. If you believe this report.

 

If our growth would have been 20% over 15 years staying in it'll only be 12 % worse cast scenario.

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, toddybad said:

In what way are you taxed more than for decades given income and corporation taxes have fallen throughout the last 7 years? What am I missing?

I meant the country. Although I personally pay more tax under the Tories than I did under Labour. 

 

Don't forget the top rate of tax is now 45%, vast majority of the time under Labour it was 40%.

[Fox Ulike]

56 minutes ago, Webbo said:

The govt provided a report pre referendum telling us those predictions of doom, this is a leaked govt report. Do keep up.

No. The government did not provide a report saying “we’d be in recession right now”. I’m calling bullshit. So put up or shut up. Where is this report?

 

And don’t be so patronising.

[Webbo]

6 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

No. The government did not provide a report saying “we’d be in recession right now”. I’m calling bullshit. So put up or shut up. Where is this report?

 

And don’t be so patronising.

Here's a newspaper report on it, it took me a minute to find it

 

Quote

 

Many of the Project Fear worries were listed in a Treasury document published last May, so a year on from the referendum, let’s find out if Project Fear was a pack of lies or depressingly accurate.

The Treasury’s report, lead by former Chancellor George Osborne, dramatically warned Brits that an ‘immediate and profound shock to our economy’ is to be expected if the country quits the EU.

 

Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/23/a-year-on-from-the-brexit-vote-did-project-fears-depressing-predictions-come-true-6728815/?ito=cbshare

 

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, Webbo said:

It's quite clear if you read the statement. Our growth will be 8% lower after 15 years than it would have been if we'd stayed. If you believe this report.

 

If our growth would have been 20% over 15 years staying in it'll only be 12 % worse cast scenario.

No.

 

You're actually making the calcularion worse for your argument. It would be 8% OF THE 20%. Not 8% as an absolute figure.

 

What you're saying is a humongous drop in growth worth over £150 billion.

 

What I'm saying is a drop in growth of half that.

 

You'd actually be better just giving in as 1- it helps your arguments and 2- I'm right.

[Strokes]

23 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

No. The government did not provide a report saying “we’d be in recession right now”. I’m calling bullshit. So put up or shut up. Where is this report?

 

And don’t be so patronising.

Page seven, at the bottom.

 

The analysis in this document comes to a clear central conclusion: a vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy. That shock would push our economy into a recession and lead to an increase in unemployment of around 500,000, GDP would be 3.6% smaller, average real wages would be lower, inflation higher, sterling weaker, house prices would be hit and public borrowing would rise compared with a vote to remain.

[Webbo]

Just now, toddybad said:

No.

 

You're actually making the calcularion worse for your argument. It would be 8% OF THE 20%. Not 8% as an absolute figure.

 

What you're saying is a humongous drop in growth worth over £150 billion.

 

What I'm saying is a drop in growth of half that.

 

You'd actually be better just giving in as 1- it helps your arguments and 2- I'm right.

 I'm telling you what it means, whether it's more or less  money is immaterial.

 

There's no point you and me arguing this, I'll let the economists on here decide, Kopfinko or Merging Cultures can tell us what it means. If I'm wrong I'll apologise.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Here's a newspaper report on it, it took me a minute to find it

 

Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/23/a-year-on-from-the-brexit-vote-did-project-fears-depressing-predictions-come-true-6728815/?ito=cbshare

 

There was an immediate and profound shock.

The pound fell almost 20% within about an hour.

[Guest]

Just now, Webbo said:

 I'm telling you what it means, whether it's more or less  money is immaterial.

 

There's no point you and me arguing this, I'll let the economists on here decide, Kopfinko or Merging Cultures can tell us what it means. If I'm wrong I'll apologise.

Over to you @Kopfkino

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

There was an immediate and profound shock.

The pound fell almost 20% within about an hour.

Was it a treasury/govt report?

 

Btw the £ is now $1.41,it's gone up 12 cents since the initial fall.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Was it a treasury/govt report?

 

Btw the £ is now $1.41,it's gone up 12 cents since the initial fall.

That's because soft Brexit is happening ?

[Guest MattP]

20 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Page seven, at the bottom.

 

The analysis in this document comes to a clear central conclusion: a vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy. That shock would push our economy into a recession and lead to an increase in unemployment of around 500,000, GDP would be 3.6% smaller, average real wages would be lower, inflation higher, sterling weaker, house prices would be hit and public borrowing would rise compared with a vote to remain.

So happy that people voted leave so these lies were exposed. 

 

Cameron, Gideon and all the MP's who lined up behind them unthinkingly deserved to be shown up.

[Strokes]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

So happy that people voted leave so these lies were exposed. 

 

Cameron, Gideon and all the MP's who lined up behind them unthinkingly deserved to be shown up.

I don’t think either side expected to have to justify their predictions really did they?

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

I don’t think either side expected to have to justify their predictions really did they?

Nope, if you are going to lie in politics you need to make sure you win or lose in accordance with those lies.

 

This might be the first time in history both sides got the result they didn't want.

[Rogstanley]

35 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Page seven, at the bottom.

 

The analysis in this document comes to a clear central conclusion: a vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy. That shock would push our economy into a recession and lead to an increase in unemployment of around 500,000, GDP would be 3.6% smaller, average real wages would be lower, inflation higher, sterling weaker, house prices would be hit and public borrowing would rise compared with a vote to remain.

I would say the following, at the end of the executive summary is a more sensible part to quote:

 

”In conclusion, the analysis in this document shows that a vote to leave the EU would result in a marked deterioration in economic prosperity and security.”

 

Hard to say that hasn’t happened to be honest, what with the crash in the pound (recovering now thanks to it looking like we’ll avoid a hard crash brexit), and plummeting wages. 

 

Ultimately getting the details of exactly how the consequences were going to play out was always going to be a tough ask. They modelled it and came to the conclusion that the result would be negative. In reality, that’s correct, results have been negative.

 

Compare that to the predictions of the leave campaign, things like we’d be building a new hospital every week, which have all turned out to be wrong not just in the detail but from an overall perspective as well, and it’s clear that the arguments set out by the remainers have proven to be more accurate. 

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Rogstanley said:

I would say the following, at the end of the executive summary is a more sensible part to quote:

 

”In conclusion, the analysis in this document shows that a vote to leave the EU would result in a marked deterioration in economic prosperity and security.”

 

Hard to say that hasn’t happened to be honest, what with the crash in the pound (recovering now thanks to it looking like we’ll avoid a hard crash brexit), and plummeting wages. 

 

Ultimately getting the details of exactly how the consequences were going to play out was always going to be a tough ask. They modelled it and came to the conclusion that the result would be negative. In reality, that’s correct, results have been negative.

 

Compare that to the predictions of the leave campaign, things like we’d be building a new hospital every week, which have all turned out to be wrong not just in the detail but from an overall perspective as well, and it’s clear that the arguments set out by the remainers have proven to be more accurate. 

Is your real name Colin?

[Strokes]

Just now, MattP said:

Nope, if you are going to lie in politics you need to make sure you win or lose in accordance with those lies.

 

This might be the first time in history both sides got the result they didn't want.

Absolutely and now they’re intentionally messing it up and leaking timely reports, so they can wriggle out of it. It’s all part of the rehashed plan for us to accept the softest brexit.

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

I would say the following, at the end of the executive summary is a more sensible part to quote:

 

”In conclusion, the analysis in this document shows that a vote to leave the EU would result in a marked deterioration in economic prosperity and security.”

 

Hard to say that hasn’t happened to be honest, what with the crash in the pound (recovering now thanks to it looking like we’ll avoid a hard crash brexit), and plummeting wages. 

 

Ultimately getting the details of exactly how the consequences were going to play out was always going to be a tough ask. They modelled it and came to the conclusion that the result would be negative. In reality, that’s correct, results have been negative.

 

Compare that to the predictions of the leave campaign, things like we’d be building a new hospital every week, which have all turned out to be wrong not just in the detail but from an overall perspective as well, and it’s clear that the arguments set out by the remainers have proven to be more accurate. 

The leave campaign did not predict anything for the period of triggering article 50 and leaving the EU that I can recall. Feel free to correct me though.