Frang
Player Valuation: £70m
Knew his onions did George.. Allegedly
Current Affairs EU In or Out
- Thread starter micknick
- Start date
- Status
Armel
Player Valuation: £15m
Dat verklaart.
Carl O'Ancelotti
Player Valuation: £20m
UK worse off under every Brexit option - analysis
Northern Ireland would be among the regions hardest hit by a no-deal Brexit or a Canada-style Free Trade Agreement, according to official British government figures. The northeast of England, northwest and west midlands would also be badly affected in such a scenario, while the pain would be more evenly spread under the scenario closest to Prime Minister Theresa May's deal, with London worst hit. Withdrawal from the European Union under the British government's plans could cut the UK's GDP by up to 3.9% over the next 15 years. But leaving without a deal could deliver a 9.3% hit to GDP over the same period, said the analysis. And the UK will be poorer in economic terms under any version of Brexit, compared with staying in the EU. The document did not put a cash figure on the potential impact on the economy, but independent experts have said that 3.9% of GDP would equate to around £100 billion a year by the 2030s, far outweighing the UK's current contribution to EU budgets.
Meanwhile, the Long-Term Economic Analysis paper found that government borrowing could be forced up by as much as £119 billion by 2035 if the UK quit the EU without a deal and up to £26.6 billion under a scenario similar to Prime Minister Theresa May's plans. The 83-page document was drawn up by officials from a number of departments including the Treasury, the Department for Exiting the EU, Industry, Environment, International Trade and the Home Office.
The government analysis does not attempt precisely to forecast the impact of Mrs May's deal. But it compares the likely impact of the proposals agreed by the Cabinet at Chequers in July and set out in the government's White Paper with the alternative scenarios of Norway-style membership of the European Economic Area, a Canada-style free trade agreement with the EU and a no-deal Brexit. It finds that GDP will be lower in 15 years under all Brexit scenarios than it would be with EU membership. And in all cases, national income will be reduced if migration from Europe is reduced from its current levels. Potential outcomes range from a 0.6% reduction if the White Paper is accompanied by frictionless trade and unchanged migration levels to 9.3% if a no-deal Brexit reduces net immigration by European workers to zero.
The scenario which most closely reflects the government's plan would see the Chequers deal tempered by some trade friction and with zero net immigration from the EEA. Under these conditions, GDP could be expected to be 3.9% lower 15 years after Brexit than it would have been if the UK remained. If frictionless trade was achieved, the cut would be around 2.5%. GDP would be an estimated 1.4% lower with EEA membership and 4.9% with a Canada-style free trade agreement if migration levels remained the same, the document suggests. If net migration was cut to zero under a Canada-style deal the hit to GDP would be around 6.7%.
https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/1128/1013804-brexit_assesments/
All part of Project Fear though by a government trying scare its own people...
Northern Ireland would be among the regions hardest hit by a no-deal Brexit or a Canada-style Free Trade Agreement, according to official British government figures. The northeast of England, northwest and west midlands would also be badly affected in such a scenario, while the pain would be more evenly spread under the scenario closest to Prime Minister Theresa May's deal, with London worst hit. Withdrawal from the European Union under the British government's plans could cut the UK's GDP by up to 3.9% over the next 15 years. But leaving without a deal could deliver a 9.3% hit to GDP over the same period, said the analysis. And the UK will be poorer in economic terms under any version of Brexit, compared with staying in the EU. The document did not put a cash figure on the potential impact on the economy, but independent experts have said that 3.9% of GDP would equate to around £100 billion a year by the 2030s, far outweighing the UK's current contribution to EU budgets.
Meanwhile, the Long-Term Economic Analysis paper found that government borrowing could be forced up by as much as £119 billion by 2035 if the UK quit the EU without a deal and up to £26.6 billion under a scenario similar to Prime Minister Theresa May's plans. The 83-page document was drawn up by officials from a number of departments including the Treasury, the Department for Exiting the EU, Industry, Environment, International Trade and the Home Office.
The government analysis does not attempt precisely to forecast the impact of Mrs May's deal. But it compares the likely impact of the proposals agreed by the Cabinet at Chequers in July and set out in the government's White Paper with the alternative scenarios of Norway-style membership of the European Economic Area, a Canada-style free trade agreement with the EU and a no-deal Brexit. It finds that GDP will be lower in 15 years under all Brexit scenarios than it would be with EU membership. And in all cases, national income will be reduced if migration from Europe is reduced from its current levels. Potential outcomes range from a 0.6% reduction if the White Paper is accompanied by frictionless trade and unchanged migration levels to 9.3% if a no-deal Brexit reduces net immigration by European workers to zero.
The scenario which most closely reflects the government's plan would see the Chequers deal tempered by some trade friction and with zero net immigration from the EEA. Under these conditions, GDP could be expected to be 3.9% lower 15 years after Brexit than it would have been if the UK remained. If frictionless trade was achieved, the cut would be around 2.5%. GDP would be an estimated 1.4% lower with EEA membership and 4.9% with a Canada-style free trade agreement if migration levels remained the same, the document suggests. If net migration was cut to zero under a Canada-style deal the hit to GDP would be around 6.7%.
https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/1128/1013804-brexit_assesments/
All part of Project Fear though by a government trying scare its own people...
Water is wet.
Evidently it was Chuka who asked for this Guff- hence today's economic outlook that are never correct.......
I trust these models, to be honest. It's difficult to understand how reducing the partnership with our closest economic allies won't harm our economy.
That being said, I don't want to live in an economy. The pro-European argument needs to rely on vision for a brighter, more culturally collaborative future with our European compatriots.
How much will our future contributions be with the EU - no one can forecast that a new EU army when we have and contribute to NATO it's a pity certain EU countries did not honour the 2 percent needed - it is not a bright future in the Eurozone with growth at 0.2 percent in 2016 the biggest vote turn out the democratic voted us to leave this mafia style polictical union and in negotiations the EU have proved to look that way in the EU commission who earn 120,000 euros per month less expenses which they have no need to publish!
I don't know. A capable negotiator would have been able to get some sort of solid answer on this, but alas...
If we were still members, we could have had a veto on that. Oh well.
The Euro, as it stands, is a flawed concept. I can understand why many European countries are negating their NATO contributions whilst the choice is between spending a couple more million on arms, whilst their children suffer at the hands of ideologically driven austerity.
I understand why the EU negotiated this way. At the end of the day, there are 27 of them, and one of us.
It's bingo for the commissioners Bruce they win every month salary wise who will democratically elect the next leader after Junker?......
Barnier is favourite as he has stiched the UK over this deal........
Don't fetch a decent poster into our disagreement Bruce I notice it suits you to tag posters when it suits youlol
Urm 27 tell me about their economies of the eastern block member states and how much they contribute to the Eu budget to what they take out ?.........
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_states_by_GDP_growth
You might notice the preponderance of eastern states in the top 10. We're in 'at least we're not Villa' territory towards the bottom. Indeed, the A8 make up 8 of the 14 fastest growing economies in the EU, which if you were to discount the likes of Malta, Cyprus and Luxenbourg becomes even more impressive.
Armel
Player Valuation: £15m
He hasn't stitched up the U.K. I still don’t see how May (or somebody else tbh) could have negotiated the whole thing better. Very little wiggle room.
It’s very problematic. After +- 2.5 years there’s still no ‘national’ (U.K.) consensus about what/how is the best way forward. Not even in her own party/or the other one (and if there is one it's very vague). Not about what road to follow. Not even about what roads are feasible/dead ends.
Part of the problem is typically British. I’m sorry but even opponents of Brexit keep overestimating the relative weight/importance of their country. As long as the U.K. was a member of the E.U., they enjoyed a preferential regime for all sorts of matters. For some reason it’s difficult to comprehend for some that the referendum ended that. Not because the E.U. wants to punish the U.K. (tbf some might enjoy that); simply to preserve the European project. Nothing would undermine the E.U more than the suggestion that you can exit, but still maintain the advantages. There is no magical deal that offers an elegant solution for the U.K., but doesn’t aggravate the internal European problems.
The whole starting point of the Brexiteer negotiating strategy was flawed: the EU is important for the U.K., but the U.K. is equally as important for the E.U. That’s false. Yes Brexit will have an impact on the European economy. Yes, most European leaders (not all; a few have gone into payback mode and will continue to do so) would prefer a different outcome. But it is what it is. Europe can continue without the U.K; a notion that grows more stronger as time passes. It might even make certain things easier
In many European countries, the latest episode in the Brexit soap doesn’t even make the headlines any more. A result of the Brits leaving is off course that the U.K.’s power over European politics is shrivelling.
I ask you: How would you have conducted the negotiations (differently), keeping in mind all the legal restraints placed upon you by the European treaties and the distinct interests of the remaining (some who might even see opportunities in the case of a relatively hard Brexit) E.U. countries ? A concrete solution, that would solve all the problems that you most likely will be facing in the event of a no deal. The problems 'normal' people will be facing - I'm not particularly fussed about the elite they'll find a way.
- Status