| The Comments |
Mickeyfinn,
Returning to your previous posting re economists.
Your method of “reporting” as you put it, sadly appears flawed by stereotyping or labeling people into left or right wing camps. By doing so you fail to recognise that many people prefer to determine their decision making via more reasoned wider evaluation that frequently spans political divides.
So with regard to economists and reviewing alternative economic models, we should not prejudge and dismiss such alternatives out of hand from the outset ( as occurred during the referendum campaign) in an attempt to influence voters by discrediting the economist(s), without full provision of these alternative evaluations to the general public alongside reasoned and rational critiques from BOTH economic perspectives. Thereby allowing voters the privilege of determining their own minds based upon ALL evidence….
By attempting to influence voters against an alternative economic model from the outset it appears yet again an attempt to preempt the outcome and stifle debate.
The irony is however that many have now recognised flaws in the Govt's economic modelling, born out by previous forecasting failures, and more recently the short term forecasting errors, predictions and “threats” that have not been realised (emergency budget, etc).
I have to ask the question therefore how many errors have to occur in this current economic model that is followed by the IMF, Govt and financial institutions, before a reasoned re-evaluation is deemed necessary?
2
Like
|
I have to ask ads, why was the You Tube video that you directed us all to a 35 minute mono log by your economist and why were any counter arguments by the other expert giving evidence to the Select Committee edited out of it.
It is fine to review alternative models, but when any critique of that model is edited out of the discussion it makes that model suspect. Scientists and economists accept that their work needs to be peer reviewed...except Minford supporters it seems.
0
Like
|
|
The IN camp should not make judgments on the Richmond by election outcome ,Richmond is one of the most the expensive suburb's of London to to buy a house in ,they live in a world of their own where expensive cars parked on the drive is the norm ,Richmond is a far cry from the north of England .
5
Like
|
But about the same distance from Spain! 
0
Like
|
ads wrote:
Your method of “reporting” as you put it, sadly appears flawed by stereotyping or labeling people into left or right wing camps. By doing so you fail to recognise that many people prefer to determine their decision making via more reasoned wider evaluation that frequently spans political divides.
I don't agree ads. It's cine qua non to know first where the writer or speaker has their personal hidden agendas. You can then balance the argument that is being put to you with that knowledge in mind. It allows for greater understanding. When I was at Uni. my tutor was a Marxist. We only discovered that fact because we found he had been thrown out of Berkley Uni; California for teaching English with a Marxist philosophy. In those cold war days that mattered.
I have nothing against Marxism but knowing where someone’s political allegiances lie when they are offering theoretical science matter quite a lot.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
I wonder, are you as willing to review uncomfortable realities that have wide and significant implications on people's lives across Europe Mickeyfinn?
Back in 2015
“The facts are that the 2010 IMF programme anticipated growth in Greece to resume after a year whereas by 2014, one quarter of the economy had been extinguished. Describing an error of that totally unprecedented scale as “over-optimism” in forecasting is no admission: it is breathtakingly dismissive of the facts. And for those IMF directors who considered that forecasting errors of that scale can only be evident in hindsight, one has to wonder about the quality of their screening of other forecasts for other countries produced by IMF staff.
Furthermore, Christine Lagarde, the IMF’s managing director, and Poul Thomsen, leader of the IMF team that produced those extraordinarily wayward forecasts and the policies based on them (and since elevated to IMF department director for Europe), both said in response to the ex-post review of IMF work on Greece that in the same circumstances they would do the same again.
There has been no admission of error by the IMF, and that is most certainly not to its credit.”
The magnitude of this “error” alongside the turning of blind eyes to Greece’s and Italy’s failure to adhere to accession criteria intended to act as stability mechanism, that has subsequently negatively impacted the lives of all too many citizens should not be under-estimated, and those who try and minimise the impact or suggest errors in all forecasting is common place without due regard to the scale and impact of these errors, need to take a long hard look at the uncomfortable realities.
And this economic model is STILL being used by Govts, Financial Institutions and the IMF when making their forecast predictions.
I will ask again, how many large scale errors have to occur by adhering to this current economic model that is supported by the IMF, Govt and financial institutions, before a reasoned re-evaluation is deemed necessary?
Why are the remainers not proactively demanding reform and demanding this become an essential prerequisite within the Brexit negotiations? Why are they just criticising the Govt and not supporting citizens needs and concerns across Europe? Why do they not comprehend the harm that they do in their present stance on Europe? It’s hypocrisy to deny that in support of a flawed system and economic model that they are not harming citizens’ best interests. By their lack of proactivity they are in effect following in the footsteps of those who have little conscience when turning a blind eye to such realities.
Is it any wonder that citizens have lost trust in the establishment when they fail to address accountability and reform of this nature? Is it any wonder that those who continue to turn blind eyes to these and other factors highlighted within this thread have lost the respect of those who ARE facing up to the realities and seeking solutions to ensure citizens are better protected from major impact on their lives born from intransigent EU policy and false forecasting ?
Apologies for the rant but IMHO it's unforgiveable I'm afraid. 
3
Like
|
New lib dem MP got slaughtered on TalkRadio. She was so bad, she walked out after a few minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn3vuKEgTbs
This message was last edited by tenerife on 02/12/2016.
3
Like
|
Fair play the Lib Dem won it by a land slide all 4.5% of it.
1
Like
|
The UK could seek a deal which would allow sections of the economy to remain within the EU's customs union after Brexit, international trade minister Greg Hands has suggested.
It comes after the Brexit secretary said the UK would consider paying for "best possible" single market access.
As the pound posted its fifth consecutive week of gains against the euro, Mr Hands's words were cited by financial market commentators as further evidence that fears over a "hard Brexit" were easing.
Davis sought to reassure business leaders that immigration controls after Brexit will not be imposed "in a way that it is contrary to the national and economic interest".
0
Like
|
PP
Davis sought to reassure business leaders that immigration controls after Brexit will not be imposed "in a way that it is contrary to the national and economic interest".
I think this is what the leavers on here have been saying since day oine, it is in everyone's interest that we let in the migration that enhances our economy and that we introduce control's that ensure this happens.
1
Like
|
ads wrote:
Is it any wonder that those who continue to turn blind eyes to these and other factors highlighted within this thread have lost the respect of those who ARE facing up to the realities and seeking solutions to ensure citizens are better protected from major impact on their lives born from intransigent EU policy and false forecasting ?
The recent banking stress tests by the BOE would contradict that statement. The ECB has also done something similar for European banks. The EU has also put in place controls on credit lending within the EZ since the economic crisis and steered them out of the worst crisis since the thirties.
Financial forecasting and predictions are a notoriously difficult art. How you should read them is basically as an honest attempt at assessment of the future financial trends of the subject matter at the time they are made. With the assumption the graph line stays constant with nothing to knock it off course. Sometimes they are right and as often or not prove incorrect. Forecasts are usually regarded a prediction guide which has been said on here many times.
It’s too easy to attack and accuse the IMF of failure without also indicating along side it’s many successes.
It's quite amusing to read some of statements that British politicians trot out about how they are going to achieve Brexit. Then EU politicians bring the debate back to realitiy. At least EU politicians all have one consistant message. No concessions to Britain on Brexit without the four freedoms. A 'pick and mix' Brexit for Britain just 'aint gonna happen as Mr Kenny the Irish prime minister put it this week.
Perhaps now the leavers are starting to truly understand the meaning of 'Brexit means Brexit'. I detect some panic slipping under the doors in the corridors of power as the British people vote for remain candidates and face the true impact of leaving behind something greater than themselves.
This message was last edited by Mickyfinn on 03/12/2016.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
You can all discuss back room deals on hear until the cows come home ,because it really doesn't matter what the UK wants in the shape of trade deal's from the EU ,whatever proposals are made by the British Government has got to be agreed to by 27 other EU member states and one of the big draw back's of that is that all 27 members have got to agree and as you know the EU are notoriously slow coming to agreement on what are the simple matters and as they do not have a majority win system it could take 10 years for the EU to sort their politics on the UK exit .According to article 50 agreement exit, has to be come to a conclusion with in 2 years this is something that the EU/UK knows is not going to happen ,so in 2 years time the UK will be forced to seek trade deal's out of EUROPE and it will be put all down to EU incompetence.
This message was last edited by windtalker on 03/12/2016.
2
Like
|
Micky
I think your comments prove the fact that the experts are wrong 50% of the time with their forecasts.
The problem is working out if they are wrong by being too optimistic or too pessimitistic.
I think Ads is just trying to suggest that there a number of experts who have a positive view on Brexit, I don't think he is suggesting Minford is always right or that the IMF is always wrong.
The whole point of Brexit, is to seek a better way as this country has realised it has not been working in the interests of its citizens but the Remoaners seem to suggest all is well with the EU, why leave? Really?
Not true I'm afraid, European banks are also up a creek without a paddle, it will all unravel soon, nothing to do with Brexit, but no doubt we will get the blame.
4
Like
|
Hugh - I dont think any remainers have suggested everything is well with the EU. I certainly don't believe that and have also written on here what changes I would like to see.
An organisation with the scope and complexity of the EU will always require reforms and changes. It's a dynamic structure and believe it or not change does happen, it's just that it takes a little longer because of the need for political consultation among 27 member states and their domestic parliaments.
These are not sufficient substantive reasons in my view to leave the organisation. Britain would be cutting off its nose to spite it's face.
Brexit can be still handled in a way that will suit the people of Britain. I mean ALL the people of Britain not just they that voted to leave for that would be a form of tyranny for half the population that wishes to remain.
A middle ground must be found and negotiated. A soft Brexit must be the only way forward. A Brexit which allows the UK to retain some of its influence in the future direction of the block.
The alternative will be a disaster for Britain. Imagine a unified block of states 22 miles from Calais in which your country has no stake, a limited trading relationship and no political influence over. A grim future.
A little like Mexico to the USA.and we all know what happens there.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
a unified block of states 22 miles from Calais
But we are just one state (or perhaps 4 if you want to break the union).
A little like Mexico to the USA
Prefer to think of Canada. A more apt but still poor comparison.
1
Like
|
Soft Brexit is just a construct by those that want to stop us leaving. All this obsfucation is just making a good deal more difficult.
What we need is a best Brexit.
David Davis needs to assuage the worries of those that have our best interests at heart but were remainers before the vote.
The idea that he can tell the whole nation his strategy remains ridiculous. The only way I could see of assuaging these worries is to take on board, in his team, a labour remainer of stature who can be descrete. The only person who I can think of who could fit this bill is Alan Johnson.
This message was last edited by tteedd on 03/12/2016.
2
Like
|
No middle ground. No "soft" Brexit. No customs union. We the majority voted to leave and that's what we should do. No halfway house, half in and half out - just leave. If there is another vote tomorrow leave will win again - why? Because some people have tried their damndest to stop democracy, which makes us leavers even more determined to leave it completely. The EU will never change, will never listen to the common people FACT.
If the blockers think they will get their own way think again. We will just vote UKIP into power at the next general election if thats what it takes to get the result we voted for.
4
Like
|
Micky
You still haven't grasped the point.
Very soon there will be no Eu left to negotiate with..
The economic model is flawed and the interests of its citizens are forgotten to the deference of big business and banks.
It is borrowed to the hilt, struggling growth wise and all they keep shouting at us is
no chenge,, no chance, our way or no way, well they can pull themselves apart as far as we are concerned.
Change is what is required in the world.
You correctly quoted it takes a long time to get 27 countries to agree, precisely the point, it is cumbersome and slow moving and trade will continue with or without dpsingle markets, just in a different way.
I have experience of dealing with the Spanish and realise just how slow they are to change, let alone Europe as a whole.
Italy is having a referendum for change, will it succeed?
Nobody is going to put at risk selling to the UK or buying from the UK IF the product is good enough.
As others have said, we will leave the EUCC, the single market, etc. And we will negotiate deals that suit the UK and all its citizens.
4
Like
|
Very soon there will be no Eu left to negotiate with..
Keep on telling yourself that and you might start to really believe it. What evidence can you put forward to support that view? The stability of the EU is not under threat because of Brexit as the leavers would love to believe. The solidarity and trading relations of nations is stronger than any one country even though Britain’s budget contributions will be missed. The EU existed before Britain joined and it will continue long after the UK has left.
In fact it will grow and strengthen without Britain constantly whinging and sniping from the side lines. Britain will miss the EU far more than the other way around.
I believe there is a consensus within the European Council to be rid of Britain as quickly as possible. It is not in their best interests to offer any concessions. Watch the panic setting in when that fact finally dawns on this Brexit stuffed government.
The BBA will say this coming week that their members will all leave Britain unless Brexit is staggered. The City of London will be reduced to half its current size. Once the banks leave others will follow. I predict an exodus of financial services business to Paris or Frankfurt.
They will be left with a stark choice trade with barriers from London or free trade within Europe. Trade with the rest of the world will likely take years to complete. No brainer really.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|