this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2023
59 points (95.4% liked)

UK Politics

3100 readers
366 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Snapshot of Eurozone inflation falls to 5.5% in sharp contrast to UK. Economists put reason for divergence down to Brexit and Britain’s energy price guarantee.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] emerty 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The CAP has not been reformed successfully, you're confusing task with goal

Wow, if you think wasting 66b is a sign of good governance, you're lost pal

The CAP is controlled by the lobbyists, and backed by the big growing countries, always has been. It's got nothing to do with protecting biodiversity and all to do with profit

https://www.politico.eu/article/copa-cogeca-farmering-lobby-europe/

the second case, all those people were investigated and arrested and are in court now, further they were voted out of their positions too, again something I wish our government would do

Lol, those are the ones that got caught. Man, you are naive as hell

Why do you think there are over 25k lobbyists in Brussels? For the beer and chips?

[–] G4Z 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The CAP has not been reformed successfully, you’re confusing task with goal

You've added that qualifier not me, depends how you define success doesn't it. My point was that things can and do change.

Wow, if you think wasting 66b is a sign of good governance, you’re lost pal

Heh, you know, I knew you were going to come back with this so I already have my answer to it.

Yes 66bn certainly does sound like a lot of money to waste, over a period of 8 years and between 28 countries.

Makes me wonder why you are not so bothered about the 200bn that this country has spent on this Brexit project, all on it's own in the same time frame.

Lol, those are the ones that got caught. Man, you are naive as hell

Oh right... so now you're pointing to the corruption that you can't prove exists?

Let me ask you this, what do you make of the blatant clear corruption in this country? specifically all of the pork barrel money related to Brexit like the Tees port scandal for example?

I'd like to think you'll be just as scathing, but somehow it seems like any cost associated with Brexit is worth it for some reason, even though you can't even tell me specifically what that reason is, much less prove it's a valid one. I wish I could say this was the first conversation I've had with somebody with Brexititus related Brexit blindness but when you get down to it, you're all remarkably similar.

[–] emerty 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Lol, you are like most remain voters I encounter, you like the idea of the EU, but don't actually know anything about it. Of the 3 current federations, which one would you like the EU to become? Russia? China? USA?

Ok. Let's do some simple maths re wasted money

66b wasted plus 66b opportunity cost plus 66b to redo the work that was meant to have been done. That's 198b... And that assumes biodiversity hasn't got worse, which it has, so it will cost more. Why do you defend failure?

And no, the UK hasn't spent 200b on brexit. You are demonstrating stunning levels of economic illiteracy now.

When I present you evidence of EU incompetence and corruption, you claim this as evidence of competence and purity. 😂

How about UVL and her disappearing texts?

https://www.politico.eu/article/new-york-times-sue-european-union-ursula-von-der-leyen-pfizer-texts/

And no, I won't defend yet another power structure, I'm not a nationalist, I think all politicians have the opportunity to be corrupt, I don't think that them being in Westminster or Brussels makes a blind bit of difference. You just prefer corruption with a nice accent and better coffee 😂.

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

undefined> Lol, you are like most remain voters I encounter, you like the idea of the EU, but don’t actually know anything about it. Of the 3 current federations, which one would you like the EU to become? Russia? China? USA?

Mate one of the first posts you made on this contained 2 factually incorrect statements and none of your links have backed up your claims.

If me pointing this out makes me a typical remain voter, well I suppose that shows just how much more informed we are than you typically Brexit blind types.

66b wasted plus 66b opportunity cost plus 66b to redo the work that was meant to have been done. That’s 198b…

Oh well in that case, £200 bn lost, plus 200bn to re do all that work when we do eventually join and then another eleventy billion for things I made up just like you.

And no, the UK hasn’t spent 200b on brexit. You are demonstrating stunning levels of economic illiteracy now.

OBR says otherwise.

You've already demonstrated you're willing to make incorrect statements (charitable) and unsupported claims, bit rich to be saying anything about others literacy.

When I present you evidence of EU incompetence and corruption, you claim this as evidence of competence and purity.

I never said that though.

I said

' I think those are both fantastic examples of accountability' which is an entirely different statment

Do you always make up these straw men to knock down,do you think putting words in your debate opponents mouth is a god way to argue? You are simply incapable of responding to the actual point that's been stated or something?

I’m not a nationalist,

You voted for fucking Brexit mate, and you're defending it. If you aren't a nationalist, you're in bed getting fleas off them.

Honestly, you 'lexiters' are more deluded than the most red faced sun reading UKIPers.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

https://www.farminguk.com/news/world-s-largest-vertical-farm-set-to-open-in-norfolk_61380.html

Your Google fu sucks as does your critical thinking skills

Again, the UK has not spent 200b, source?

Yes, I did vote for it. Very happy with it. Guess it just sucks to be you

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, the OBR says 4% GDP loss per year.

3.1 trillion per year GDP, let's make it 5% just to make it easy

150 billion per year, x 2+ years, it's well over 200bn.

Bloomberg also agrees

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-31/brexit-is-costing-the-uk-100-billion-a-year-in-lost-output

So, you going to accept this fact then? or is it going to be fingers in ears?

Your Google fu sucks as does your critical thinking skills

What is this supposed to prove?

I'm saying, they have 2 of the largest companies in the world you've pointed to a company with 34 employees and 2 farms (1 in construction) In farm in Germany has 422 employees (source linkedin for both) so it's 10 times as big a company as the one you linked.

Yes, I did vote for it. Very happy with it. Guess it just sucks to be you

Haha, yeah I can tell, you won't accept reality, you can't accept you've made a huge mistake, you can't handle the truth!

Like I said, you're all remarkably gullible, I mean similar.

[–] emerty 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Lol, the OBR said 4% of GDP per CAPITA OVER 15 YEARS

LOL, YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT YOURE TALKING ABOUT 😂😂😂😂

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lol, the OBR said 4% of GDP per CAPITA OVER 15 YEARS

Mate, firstly.

Calm down.

Secondly, you're wrong, it is GDP not GDP per capita and it is at least 200bn.

These are facts, accept the facts.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

LOL

Fuck off and learn something before you give it large pal.

The post-Brexit trading relationship between the UK and EU, as set out in the ‘Trade and Cooperation Agreement’ (TCA) that came into effect on 1 January 2021, will reduce long-run productivity by 4 per cent relative to remaining in the EU

Productivity, as in GDP per capita. Not GDP.

https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/#assumptions

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

No it's GDP, you are simply wrong, confidently wrong I will grant you, but wrong.

Tell me genius, what's the measure for long term productivity growth the OBR uses here?

https://obr.uk/box/productivity-growth-long-term/

Oh right, look at that, it's GDP.

I mean, are you saying Bloomberg is also wrong?

Again, resorting to insults just shows up your immaturity and the fact that you've lost this debate.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago

GDP growth was similar in the twentieth century and the nineteenth, averaging 2.1 per cent in both cases. Higher productivity growth in the twentieth century therefore is associated with weaker growth of total hours worked, due to a combination of weaker employment growth and falling average hours

You don't understand your own link, 🤡

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Fucking hell,

GDP is one thing

Gross domestic product is a monetary measure of the market value of all the final goods and services produced in a specific time period by a country or countries.

GDP per capita is a measure of productivity and living standards

What Is GDP Per Capita? Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita is an economic metric that breaks down a country's economic output per person. Economists use GDP per capita to determine how prosperous countries are based on their economic growth GDP per capita is calculated by dividing the GDP of a nation by its population. Countries with the higher GDP per capita tend to be those that are industrial, developed countries

Once you've worked that out, tell me what the loss of productivity that the OBR is forecasting is down to.

Hint, it's comparative advantage. When you've learned what that is, let me know.

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah I know what the difference is, I've just shown you that the OBR is referring to GDP when they walk about 'long term productivity growth' and nothing you have posted there contradicts that.

Seems to be a pattern here, you say something incorrect, I point it out, and you throw insults.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Lol, no they're not. Productivity is not GDP...

And the 4% is over 15 years and is a result of loss of comparative advantage.

If you have to compound an effect over 15 years to get 4%, the effect is fuck all.

[–] G4Z 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So why do Bloomberg put it at 100bn based on that 4% figure?

If you have to compound an effect over 15 years to get 4%, the effect is fuck all.

Yeah, sounds unlikely doesn't it?

Let me ask you, what do you think it's cost the UK per year in billion pounds?

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah, sounds unlikely doesn't it?

But that's what the forecast says. 4% of productivity lost over the long term of 15 years due to loss of comparative advantage

https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis

But the forecast is for the cost, no benefit is included.

The loss of comparative advantage is replaced, I'd argue, with competitive advantage which has a much stronger effect. The UK is no longer bound by the anti science regulations on genetic engineering and the new overly restrictive proposed regulations on AI

GDP per capita is a ratio of GDP / population, so if you do more with fewer people, by using automation, robots and AI, your GDP per capita will grow...

The 4% figure over 15 years is a difference of 0.29% to 0.27% productivity growth. Government policy has at least that 0.02% effect

I predict a Starmer govt will be able to introduce policy that will offset the productivity loss just by investing in renewable energy, let alone any research universities' innovations.

[–] G4Z -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

long-run productivity is GDP mate. Unless you have something which actually says otherwise? Even assuming it is GDP per capita, so what?

But the forecast is for the cost, no benefit is included.

Yes it is included, there isn't any.

The UK is no longer bound by the anti science regulations on genetic engineering and the new overly restrictive proposed regulations on AI

Uh-hu.. back to maybe and could then...

GDP per capita is a ratio of GDP / population, so if you do more with fewer people, by using automation, robots and AI, your GDP per capita will grow…

Mate, I work in IT, have done for 25 years. There is no EU regulation preventing productivity increasing thanks to automation, what a load of nonsense.

Also, we don't have fewer people do we, we have more people.

The 4% figure over 15 years is a difference of 0.29% to 0.27% productivity growth. Government policy has at least that 0.02% effect

Show me a source from somebody credible that says that exactly.

I have a credible source says it's costing 100bn a year.

Here’s another one

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-damage-uk-economy-covid-b2308178.html

Britain’s gross domestic product (GDP) will be 4 per cent smaller than if the country had stayed in the EU, the head of the government’s fiscal watchdog confirmed on Sunday.

Pretty clear that if you ask me, from a national newspaper.

I predict a Starmer govt will be able to introduce policy that will offset the productivity loss just by investing in renewable energy, let alone any research universities’ innovations.

I predict it could all have been done in the EU, and research and development would have been easier and cheaper to collaborate on to boot.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago

long-run productivity is GDP mate. Unless you have something which actually says otherwise? Even assuming it is GDP per capita, so what?

🤦‍♂️

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not maybes or coulds. Overly restrictive regs, because all EU law is civil law, not common as in the UK. I doubt you'll ever admit you don't know what you're talking about though

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/30/23779611/eu-ai-act-open-letter-artificial-intelligence-regulation-renault-siemens

What's the long range population forecast for the UK genius?

[–] G4Z 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes it is maybes or could, that AI act is still not law and you have no idea what regulation the UK gov may or may not introduce. Further, I don't believe anything in that act will prevent AI development anyway, which regulation is it exactly you think is going to be 'overly restrictive', they all sound very reasonable to me and I'm a technical person who works in IT, unlike you.

So you ever going to answer my question then?

What figure do you put on the cost per year, if you disagree with the OBR's 100bn per year?

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I know how UK common law is written and how civil regs are, I'm not even going to begin arguing unless you demonstrate that you know the difference

And the cost? UK govt has actually spent around £8b on brexit preparations

The investment delay will be recouped

UK was 2nd in Europe on GDP per capita in 2016 and is still 2nd in Europe in 2022 so it's negligible.

[–] G4Z 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

And what is your source for that 8bn?

Is that all the costs, I asked how much per year?

UK was 2nd in Europe on GDP per capita in 2016 and is still 2nd in Europe in 2022 so it’s negligible.

The measure is against where we would have been had we remained in the EU though.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/brexit-spending-government-preparations

It's impossible to prove where the UK would have been, a 100 year pandemic makes the brexit effect just noise. The synthetic counter factual models are smart but stupid.

You do realise that your 4% forecast is also a could and maybe yeah?

Here are the actual facts on GDP per capita. Maybe you understand pictures more easily than words

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=GB-XC-FR-DE-ES-IT&start=2016

[–] G4Z 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So I asked you, how much is Brexit costing per year, and you've given me what was spent to prepare for Brexit. Can you see how these are not the same thing?

I am getting a little tired of your constant dishonesty, I'm trying to be charitable with you, but I don't really see how it's possible to misunderstand such a simple question if you are as smart as you claim to be.

It’s impossible to prove where the UK would have been, a 100 year pandemic makes the brexit effect just noise. The synthetic counter factual models are smart but stupid.

Well of course because it's predicated on a model of where we would have been had we not left the EU. It's extrapolation in that sense, but it's more than you have isn't it?

Here are the actual facts on GDP per capita. Maybe you understand pictures more easily than words

Still not relevant to anything though, because as I said the measure is against where we would have been had we stayed in, not how well we still stack up in some rankings.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Still not relevant to anything though, because as I said the measure is against where we would have been had we stayed in, not how well we still stack up in some rankings.

It's clearly relevant to our nearest economic peers...it's actual data, in the measure that the OBR forecast, and not educated guesses.

I'm tired of your dullness, goodbye

[–] G4Z 2 points 1 year ago

Well it was certainly interesting to engage, I'll know exactly what to watch out for with you on your future posts.

Have a lovely evening :)

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yet again I go to read your link to see what you are talking about and yet again it's not what you say.

Okay so the NYT wants to read the texts, how does that show evidence of 'corruption'?

I mean, maybe we will see them and something will be uncovered, but as of right now you have nothing. If she's corrupt then I hope they throw the book at her. You've not provided any evidence for your claim though. Again.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Oh yeah, Turkish state media site that doesn't even load and talks about Breitbart's opinion, cracking source. Yeah, that I won't accept, give me a reputable source.

You are literally googling for any old shit to support your nonsensical position.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Firstly, no need for insults.

I'm debating you in good faith, and I am smashing you to bits quite frankly and it's not even difficult, it's easy. Respond with better arguments and stop lying to yourself and you may be less upset.

Secondly, again that story is not what you said it is. It's allegations and it's not even EU related it's from back when she was German defence minister.

Now I already told you, I don't agree with corruption, I'd throw the book at her if there's any truth to it and it were down to me.

Any institution over time will have examples of corruption, from the top right down to local councils and the church raffle. It's a very human problem that occurs everywhere. The important thing is how you deal with it, and as far as I can see the first case they dealt with it very well (arrests and prosecutions) and in the second case that's clearly something for the German government to do something about.

Then I look at the UK, these idiots you voted to give all the power too, day after day there are stories and evidence about corruption on absolutely incredible scale, literally billions stolen, 200 billion at least wasted on this pile of shit....

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lol, smashing. You haven't got a clue pal.

There you go again, defending failure

I didn't vote for those idiots, moron.

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Of course 'I have a clue', as far as I'm concerned I've demolished you and you've got nothing. That's why you've resorted to insults.

You're defending Brexit (badly), the very definition of defending failure.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Dunning-Kruger effect effect occurs when a person's lack of knowledge and skills in a certain area cause them to overestimate their own competence

That's you that is

[–] G4Z 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well done, did you learn about that decades old internet trivia yesterday or something?

I've not claimed to have any specialist knowledge, I've just researched the things you said and found them incorrect.

I'm not going to continue this thread with you though because you won't accept simple facts backed up by reputable sources. You think everybody is wrong if it doesn't fit with your pre decided narrative and you'll lash out to defend your fragile ego. Maybe you should talk to somebody.

[–] GreatAlbatross 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Morning guys, can we cool things off a little?

Debate is fine, but when it's getting dragged into personal insults, and cry-laugh emojis as punctuation like some facebook-aunt, is it really a functional debate any more?

It's only Tuesday!

[–] G4Z 1 points 1 year ago

You are right, I apologise for any insulting I did. I would prefer to debate civilly.

[–] emerty 1 points 1 year ago