[Kaiserschmarrn]

So your defense is that if somebody else is doing shit then we are okay?

I'm not defending anything, but I'm laughing at you strenuously using a 0.4% drop in growth from one quarter to the next as proof for decline when this has happened lots of times before and when the major economies in the EU aren't doing any better than the UK. The reality is that the eurozone economic recovery has been disappointing so far, whereas the UK economy has held up better than anticipated before the referendum.

Estonia grew by 4.5 percent.

I think Malta has also grown splendidly. Together you'll make all the difference.

Bottom line being that countries have different dependencies in Europe. Some will grow and some will not. Overall the EU is growing.

Surely dependencies also exist for the UK and it isn't necessarily immune to the economic slowdown seen in other parts of the world. Overall, the UK is also growing.

UK was mostly loosing growth over every quarter though until it reached the point in December. There was no particular underlying factor that could have caused this besides Brexit instability.

Even the text you quoted in the post I first replied to mentions weakness in the eurozone as a contributing factor. Not sure why you are trying so hard to ignore every other possible explanation. More often than not it's not a single cause anyway.

@Kaiserschmarrn, the UK had the greatest loss of growth. From the top of the list of OECD countries it dropped to the very bottom.

A lot of the growth acceleration in the UK from 2013 to 2015 that took the UK to the top of the G7 and subsequent lower growth can be explained by domestic policies, such as the Help to Buy scheme, and government spending.

[JohnRawls]

I'm not defending anything, but I'm laughing at you strenuously using a 0.4% drop in growth from one quarter to the next as proof for decline when this has happened lots of times before and when the major economies in the EU aren't doing any better than the UK. The reality is that the eurozone economic recovery has been disappointing so far, whereas the UK economy has held up better than anticipated before the referendum.


I think Malta has also grown splendidly. Together you'll make all the difference.


Surely dependencies also exist for the UK and it isn't necessarily immune to the economic slowdown seen in other parts of the world. Overall, the UK is also growing.


Even the text you quoted in the post I first replied to mentions weakness in the eurozone as a contributing factor. Not sure why you are trying so hard to ignore every other possible explanation. More often than not it's not a single cause anyway.


A lot of the growth acceleration in the UK from 2013 to 2015 that took the UK to the top of the G7 and subsequent lower growth can be explained by domestic policies, such as the Help to Buy scheme, and government spending.

I meant in December not across all the year. My bad for making it vague.

[noemon]

Brexit has already cost the UK economy at least £80bn since the EU referendum, and a damaging no-deal scenario could force an emergency cut in interest rates, according to a Bank of England rate-setter.



Gertjan Vlieghe, a member of the Bank’s monetary policy committee, said that since the vote in June 2016, the economy had lost about 2% of GDP compared with a scenario where there had been no significant domestic economic events.

Britain had lost about £40bn a year, or about £800m a week of lost income, he said, in the period since the referendum as its economy stalled while the rest of the world recorded one of its strongest expansions of the past decade.

Vlieghe’s estimate for the weekly cost of Brexit so far is more than double the £350m the Leave campaign claimed could be saved on EU membership fees and instead spent on the NHS. The claim, emblazoned on the side of the campaign’s battlebus, became a key focus for debate in the run-up to the vote.

Vlieghe said in London on Thursday: “That 2% of GDP is not trivial, that’s £40bn or if you prefer it in bus units, it’s £800m a week.”

He said business investment in Britain had been stuck around zero, with a drop of 3.7% in 2018, despite an upswing worth about 6% annually in the rest of the G7. Consumer spending also slowed as households came under pressure from higher prices, sparked by the sharp fall in the value of the pound straight after the Brexit vote.

“It is very unusual for investment to shrink that much when the rest of the world is doing pretty much just fine, until at least recently.

“UK growth in the past two years has been weaker than we would have expected based on the performance of the global economy alone,” he said. “Based on what happened in the rest of the world we would have expected UK growth to accelerate but actually it slowed.”

Several estimates have been made before to quantify the cost of the Brexit vote. Mark Carney, the Bank’s governor, has previously said the vote cost households about £900 each in lost income. There are also various estimates for the potential hit from Britain crashing out without a deal on 29 March.

Threadneedle Street estimates the worst-case disruptive scenario could spark a slump into a recession with worse consequences for Britain than the 2008 financial crisis, while the Treasury estimates that all Brexit options are worse for the economy than remaining in the EU.

Vlieghe, an independent economist on the Bank’s nine-member MPC, said the magnitude of the potential negative hit to the economy was uncertain, particularly over the long term.

While he said there was an important democratic debate on the possible trade-offs between the political and economic consequences of Brexit, he added that leaving the EU without a deal could warrant an emergency cut in interest rates.

“In the case of a no-deal scenario I judge that an easing or an extended pause in monetary policy is more likely to be the appropriate policy than a tightening,” he said.

However, should Britain secure a smooth Brexit deal, the world economy manage to avert a further slowdown and inflationary pressure in Britain rise, he said it would be appropriate for the Bank to raise rates around once per year.

[Rugoz]

I wonder why the Guardian quotes an individual committee member instead of an official central bank publication.

[noemon]

John Bercow has just announced which amendments he will allow MPs will vote on tonight - and there are only three.

They are:

Amendment A, tabled by Jeremy Corbyn (Labour) - would force the government to offer a meaningful vote by the end of February. If there is no deal, then the government would have make a statement on what the next steps will be.

Amendment E, tabled by Anna Soubry (Conservative) - tabled by anti-Brexit MPs, calls for publication of "the most recent official briefing document relating to business and trade on the implications of a no-deal Brexit presented to cabinet.”.

Amendment I, tabled by Ian Blackford (SNP) - would require the government to negotiate an extension of at least three months to the Article 50 process.

I wonder why the Guardian quotes an individual committee member instead of an official central bank publication.

I wonder why you are not using a Central Bank Publication to dispute the Central Bank Committee member.

[Atlantis]

I'm not defending anything, but I'm laughing at you strenuously using a 0.4% drop in growth from one quarter to the next as proof for decline when this has happened lots of times before and when the major economies in the EU aren't doing any better than the UK.

With the exception of Italy, virtually every economy in the EU did better than the UK since the Brexit vote. After staying at the top of the OECD for many years, the UK dropped to the very bottom after the Brexit vote. That is no coincidence. That is clearly and undeniably linked to Brexit uncertainty.

What Brexit proper will do to the UK economy will depend on the outcome of trad talks: the harder the Brexit, the harder the fall.

The reality is that the eurozone economic recovery has been disappointing so far, whereas the UK economy has held up better than anticipated before the referendum.

Not true, the EU27 had a good growth after the Brexit vote and Germany had a new record export volume in 2018. The fact that slowing of demand in China (35% of German cars are sold in China) and Trump's trade wars have reduced global demand has nothing to do with Brexit.

I know that you don't care, but even for the Brexshitters it isn't exactly a smart strategy to claim that they promoted Brexit with the understanding that it would damage Europe.

A lot of the growth acceleration in the UK from 2013 to 2015 that took the UK to the top of the G7 and subsequent lower growth can be explained by domestic policies, such as the Help to Buy scheme, and government spending.

And that at a time of austerity. Osborne must have found a way of squaring the circle.

You forget the primary cause for the UK's high growth rates: immigration from Eastern Europe, which Tony Blair deliberately employed to boost the UK economy. Which also means that the economy will start to shrink once the exodus starts.

Now go and thank Tony for high growth and Brexit - in addition to the Iraq war.

[JohnRawls]

With the exception of Italy, virtually every economy in the EU did better than the UK since the Brexit vote. After staying at the top of the OECD for many years, the UK dropped to the very bottom after the Brexit vote. That is no coincidence. That is clearly and undeniably linked to Brexit uncertainty.

What Brexit proper will do to the UK economy will depend on the outcome of trad talks: the harder the Brexit, the harder the fall.



Not true, the EU27 had a good growth after the Brexit vote and Germany had a new record export volume in 2018. The fact that slowing of demand in China (35% of German cars are sold in China) and Trump's trade wars have reduced global demand has nothing to do with Brexit.

I know that you don't care, but even for the Brexshitters it isn't exactly a smart strategy to claim that they promoted Brexit with the understanding that it would damage Europe.



And that at a time of austerity. Osborne must have found a way of squaring the circle.

You forget the primary cause for the UK's high growth rates: immigration from Eastern Europe, which Tony Blair deliberately employed to boost the UK economy. Which also means that the economy will start to shrink once the exodus starts.

Now go and thank Tony for high growth and Brexit - in addition to the Iraq war.

UKs economy is a bit fundamentally different compared to EU economies. Most EU economies are export/import dependant on members within the EU and large chunks of our economies are linked to this Export/Import.

UK is also dependent on this but much less so. I am not sure why that is the case but as i mentioned UK and Germany have around 1.5 times gap in that regard. Not to mention Germany is more linked to the EU compared to the UK.

That is not necessarily a good or a bad thing because that situation makes you more prosperous but also more dependent on other countries and their ability to buy. So you can't survive in a vacuum. For example, US is the least dependant economy in the world on exports/imports out of the massive ones. 50% of what the US exports/imports is done within NAFTA also. So you have to divide that number by 50% usually.

So US can survive without connections from the outside world while for Germany exports/imports are paramount. UK is somewhere in the middle actually. If Germany is always around high 40%s then the US is around 10-12% usually. UK being at around 30-32%. Germany is at around 60% to the EU and 40% outside. So UK is much less export dependent in general and on the EU in particular because that number stands at 45% for the UK.

I mean the numbers are huge but not as devastating as it would be for France or Germany to leave the EU. For them it is literal suicide while for UK it is very problematic but perhaps not catastrophic damage. The quesiton is if they can recover from it and do something better which literally everyone doubts. As mentioned before there are technically 3 economies that you can export to that matter:
1) USA
2) EU
3) Japan

The rest of the places do not matter or usually have the capacity to produce locally and consume it themselves (India, China, etc) Japan is not even a close 3rd. EU consumption wise is larger than the US because of larger population. US has more GDP per capita and a strong Millenial population. Japan has very weak consumption but overall numbers are good due to high GDP per capita.

So right now, UK is in a situation where:
1) It cuts ties to the EU and looses its preferential status in the EU market. <- Will be much worse.
2) It is possible to achieve a deal with the US but they will probably milk UK for all it has to do that. (This is realistically the only scenario where UK does semi-well. By replacing EU membership with US economic membership. This won't come cheap) <- This is the only area where you will improve compared to EU.
3) Japan(I have literally no clue what Japan will ask for. So i do not think it is possible for UK to get a better deal here) <- No clue, probably insignificantly worse.

[Rich]

Its fantastic watching a great leader like Teresa May, who lesser mortals constantly deride as cowardly and stupid.

Following on from David Cameron's brilliant decision to call a referendum and save the Conservative Party from catastrophe in the 2015 General Election and possible long term eclipse as Britain's natural party of government, May has done an excellent job of marginalising UKIP and increasing the Tory vote from what Cameron achieved in 2015. Even if May went tomorrow she still would have achieved a brilliant run, as all the supposedly brave and intelligent commentators have constantly written her off and pronounced her doom.

May's 230 vote defeat was certainly a humiliation, but can she have the last laugh and force her opponents to crawl through the yes lobby and vote for her deal unchanged in any meaningful way? She already had the pleasure of humiliating Reese Mogg by forcing him to swear his confidence in May mere days after calling for her resignation. A lot of Labour scab MPs are desperate for some fig leaf to cover voting for May's Tory Brexit. I think May realises that she doesn't need to offer anything to these pathetic, spineless cowards.

The outcome is still not decided, a softer Brexit and Remain are still possible outcomes. But for those who support these, we'd have a lot better chance of defeating the Brexiteers if people abandoned the comforting fantasies of Cameron and May's stupidity.

[B0ycey]

Clearly May cannot rely on the support of the Brexiteers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-parliaments-47201286

If she is insistant on Brexit she has to listen to the Remainers. They hold the numbers in parliament so they hold the power. Has the penny dropped yet.

[layman]

Despite being a soft brexiteers herself, she will stubornly court the brexiteers right to the wire.

Reasons are Parliamentry arithmetic and party loyalty. She was party chairman for years and Tory through and through.

Dealing with the remainder faction is more troublesome than it sounds because Corbyn wont allow labour to cooperate in order to get the soft brexit he claims he wants. Reason is strategic. He wants it to be a Tory brexit so she gets the blame and he can get the crown. Damage to the economy is a price worth paying for socialism in one country. He is doing a decent job of stringing along remainers voters and mps in the process.

They are losing patience with him but he knows they have nowhere to really turn right now.

[B0ycey]

@layman, if she wants her deal to get through parliament she needs to listen to Kyle and Watson across the other side of the house. Give the remainers another vote and if they lose she has the numbers to get her deal through parliament. Win-Win.

[noemon]

Dealing with the remainder faction is more troublesome than it sounds because Corbyn wont allow labour to cooperate in order to get the soft brexit he claims he wants.

How is Corbyn not allowing this? He(and Labour as a whole) have made their position crystal-clear. He has extended his helping hand to Theresa May and told her plainly: "Do a Customs Union and we will whip our MP's to support a soft-Brexit". What else is he supposed to do layman? Labour have voted in their conference their entire strategy:

a) Call for elections and failing that..
b) Support the Tories to do a soft-Brexit and failing that...
c) Support a second referendum

What kind of position would satisfy you personally?

He wants it to be a Tory brexit so she gets the blame and he can get the crown.

The Crown has gone into his head the very minute the election results came out in 2017. He got Labour a 10% increase and he came short only a few hundred thousand votes from becoming PM. The Tories have created a knot of their own doing, have undone 10 years of austerity, have damaged Britain's reputation irreparably, have damaged the economy and are being openly ridiculous & racist(windrush scandal). Jeremy is all that is left of British mild realism. Quite ironic but true nevertheless. They have paved the way for Corbyn to become PM and all he had to do was just sit there and let them fuck it all up on their own. The only thing left for the anti-Corbyn brigade is mud, a mud that is also mathematically turning into a sucker punch.

Brexit is entirely a Tory thing and whatever happens, no Brexit, soft Brexit or no deal Brexit they are fucked under all scenarios. Their best bet is to call for elections and let Jeremy handle Brexit so that he gets the blame. This is their only chance of saving their party for the following elections, anything else will simply destroy them forever and keep Corbyn in power for 3 or 4 election cycles at least.

Damage to the economy is a price worth paying for socialism in one country.

Once again I do not really see how Corbyn is damaging the economy with his stance.
Why do you hate him so much layman? The guy is a social democrat, his stance on Free University Education and the NHS is superb. Would you not want your children/nephews/godchildren to attend university without paying 10k per year per child? Like it was a mere 20 years ago? Did Britain have socialism 20 years ago?

[Kaiserschmarrn]

With the exception of Italy, virtually every economy in the EU did better than the UK since the Brexit vote. After staying at the top of the OECD for many years, the UK dropped to the very bottom after the Brexit vote. That is no coincidence. That is clearly and undeniably linked to Brexit uncertainty.

What Brexit proper will do to the UK economy will depend on the outcome of trad talks: the harder the Brexit, the harder the fall.

Not true, the EU27 had a good growth after the Brexit vote and Germany had a new record export volume in 2018. The fact that slowing of demand in China (35% of German cars are sold in China) and Trump's trade wars have reduced global demand has nothing to do with Brexit.

It was roughly the 2013 to 2015 period in which the UK outperformed the G7 since the financial crisis which, as I mentioned, can in large part be explained by domestic policies and govt spending. The euro area had another recession (which the UK avoided) and was basically catching up.



I don't think there's good evidence that the Brexit vote had much influence on 2016 and 2017 growth, although it probably had a larger effect on 2018. However, it was not the sole reason for the slowdown in the UK in 2018 either.

I know that you don't care, but even for the Brexshitters it isn't exactly a smart strategy to claim that they promoted Brexit with the understanding that it would damage Europe.

I don't know anybody who claims that and have no idea why you'd think that's the case. That's not to say that Brexit won't have an effect on the EU, but damaging the EU, much less Europe, obviously wasn't the purpose.

And that at a time of austerity. Osborne must have found a way of squaring the circle.

You forget the primary cause for the UK's high growth rates: immigration from Eastern Europe, which Tony Blair deliberately employed to boost the UK economy. Which also means that the economy will start to shrink once the exodus starts.

I don't think immigration had a significant impact on the period in question.

[Beren]

Clearly May cannot rely on the support of the Brexiteers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-parliaments-47201286

If she is insistant on Brexit she has to listen to the Remainers. They hold the numbers in parliament so they hold the power. Has the penny dropped yet.

Maybe she's not insistent on Brexit, but her party and voters are. Remainers may hold the numbers in parliament, but May may be the last Remainer Tory leader.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

UK GDP contributions:

Investment was a drag in 2018 but not before. Trade was mixed since 2016.

Year on year ranking of some OECD countries:


Quarter on quarter:

[B0ycey]

Maybe she's not insistent on Brexit, but her party and voters are. Remainers may hold the numbers in parliament, but May may be the last Remainer Tory leader.

May a remainer? Perhaps she should behave like one.

Ultimately she holds more power than she thinks if remaining in the EU was her ambition. She has 9 months of unhindered Tory leadership control and has a remain parliament willing to back her. Also if she intends on stepping down anyway perhaps she should do the complete sacrifice and listen to voices on the other side of the chamber and not her own party on this issue. After all, every compromise she offers the Brexiteers returns with a slap in the face.

[Beren]

May a remainer? Perhaps she should behave like one.

Ultimately she holds more power than she thinks if remaining in the EU was her ambition.

Remaining prime minister is her ambition, and running down the clock while trying to keep her party together is the only thing she's been doing all along since she struck her deal with the EU. As Cameron's mentee and successor, and still advised by him, she'd call off the whole thing if she could. I wonder if she's more of a Leaver than Corbyn, who's chasing the dragon called Customs Union with a Say and waiting for the moment when he's forced to actually do something. Until then all Britain's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.

[Rich]

Brexit is entirely a Tory thing and whatever happens, no Brexit, soft Brexit or no deal Brexit they are fucked under all scenarios.

The Tories were fucked by the 1832 Reform Act. They've been a dead man walking ever since. Parties don't get to win and retire. Politics means doing what ever necessary to survive till tomorrow.

The problem both main parties face is that they both cover a ridiculously large amount of ideological territory. The divides in Labour are bigger than in the Tories. The big Tory divide of course is over Europe, by calling the Referendum Cameron largely succeeded in moving the problem out of the party and on to the country.

[Beren]

by calling the Referendum Cameron largely succeeded in moving the problem out of the party and on to the country.

By calling and losing the Referendum Cameron largely succeeded in giving his party to the Leavers, although he wanted the opposite, that's how brilliant he was. Now May is fighting a rearguard action instead of him.

[noemon]