Cost of Brexit: The impact on business and the economy so far

[jeba]

I don't think the EU will particularly miss the UK, or be sorry to see it go.

At least Germany will miss it. Firstly, because it was sharing the financial burden (as a net contributor) and secondly (more importantly), because without the UK the the free-market-orientated members of the EU (Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Finland) will lose their blocking minority when it comes to transforming the EU into a transfer union (think e. g. commonly issued bonds).

[Dominic]

But not voted on by the general electorate. Keep digging!

In the UK, the policies that make up the manifestos of the major parties are decided by bodies not voted for by the general electorate. How is that any different?

And those policies included in manifestos are then voted on by the electorate in a general election to choose the ruling party of their choice. Big difference.
Nobody gets to vote on the decisions made by the EU Commission, which, in some cases, are against the wishes of the electorate of individual countries

The EU Parliament get to vote on the decisions made by the EU Commission.

[Varky]

In the UK, the policies that make up the manifestos of the major parties are decided by bodies not voted for by the general electorate. How is that any different?

And those policies included in manifestos are then voted on by the electorate in a general election to choose the ruling party of their choice. Big difference.
Nobody gets to vote on the decisions made by the EU Commission, which, in some cases, are against the wishes of the electorate of individual countries

The EU Parliament get to vote on the decisions made by the EU Commission.

After the event. QED.I seem to think that the Commission has possibly, in the past, even overruled decisions of the European Parliament, which is in fact a toothless body overpopulated by career politicians who have never done a real days work in their lives (I must thank Farage for that quote, although I am no great supporter of him or his party)

[Pete G]

The UK has elected to leave the club of which it is a member and to whom it has agreed certain financial commitments. It goes without saying the UK must honour those commitments.

I personally have no experience of leaving a club where I have been asked to pay my share of future financial commitments to be executed after my departure, and therefore from which I could not possibly benefit, is that really considered standard practice, or even remotely equitable?

I have been involved in many business arrangements whose dissolution has involved dealing with future financial commitments, but that has been pretty universally based on two principles

a) That if I was indeed committed to future liabilities I still retained a interest in that future expenditure, in terms of asset ownership and benefit realisation.
b) that an acceptance of future liabilities also formed the basis of the division of ownership of existing assets and previous realisation of benefits of previous joint investments on the same pro-rata basis

Which is why most dissolutions involve either the release of the leaving party from future commitment, on the basis that those that remain wish to continue with whatever project the expenditure involves unfettered by external complications, or using the breakup of the arrangement to relinquish those commitments completely on the part of all parties.

Given that since 1970 there has only been two countries that have consistently been net contributors to the EEC/EU, and that benefits in these terms would not only include concrete assets but revenues from 'out of EU' custom tariffs and, of course benefit from 'subsidy' (effectively internal re-investment), were I a member of the UK Brexit negotiating team, I would welcome the opportunity to have the EU open their books to demonstrate future financial commitments, on the basis that it would give me the opportunity to consider what past and future asset ownership and share of past and future benefit realisation those commitments could be offset against.

The is no empirical evidence available to this point of course, as the EEC/EU has consistently failed to produce a complete set of books, but I would suspect that it would fall into the category of the EU asking questions they don't actually want to know the answer to, especially the French contingent

[cyprusgrump]

*sigh*

My memory's not so good these days, but I seem to remember that in the thread I claimed that Sterling had stubbornly refused to break out of it's trading range over the past nine months. Certain parties - it might have been CyprusGrump and Dominic - took me to task over that claim. They pointed out that in the past 3 weeks Sterling had just pipped over the trend line...and CyprusGrump gleefully posted graphs to illustrate his point. I reminded that their jubilance might be short-lived...and I believe my closing words to Dominic were: "We'll see".

Checked Sterling's progress today, only to find that once again Sterling has succumbed to the strength of the Euro and also the USD. So, back on trend.

No, your memory isn't so good is it...?

In the thread in question, you repeatedly posted 5-day currency charts and used them to gleefully pronounce that 'the Pound is plummeting'. You lectured Dominic on how to spot future trends by 'laying a ruler across the peaks'. You even gave instructions and a link to the Yahoo 5-day chart in case your audience were too thick to do it themselves.

You may not remember - given your poor memory and all that - that I posted a 1-month currency chart and a trend line going in the other direction. Quelle surprise , a 1-month chart was then 'too short' a timescale to determine future trends.

When Dominic and I pointed out the, shall we say, inconsistency in your argument you then replied with, "We'll see".

Well, we shall see obviously.

But I note that while the pound dropped ~€0.02 following the result of the first round of the French election and the palpable relief from the EU, it didn't really lose anything against the Dollar and is currently trading at a smidge under $1.28.

Either way, the 1-month trend for both currencies is still up and to the right.

Perhaps it isn't just your memory that isn't so good these days...?

[Dominic]

After the event. QED.I seem to think that the Commission has possibly, in the past, even overruled decisions of the European Parliament, which is in fact a toothless body overpopulated by career politicians who have never done a real days work in their lives (I must thank Farage for that quote, although I am no great supporter of him or his party)

http://www.euractiv.com/section/sustain ... bags-deal/

A quick but by no means exhaustive google suggests otherwise.

[Pete G]

After the event. QED.I seem to think that the Commission has possibly, in the past, even overruled decisions of the European Parliament, which is in fact a toothless body overpopulated by career politicians who have never done a real days work in their lives (I must thank Farage for that quote, although I am no great supporter of him or his party)

It is, in fact, even less democratic that that.

The European Parliament is not allowed, by treaty, to be the origin of legislation or directives, and is therefore incapable of making any meaningful decision for the EC to overrule.

Under Lisbon, all new legislation is 'commissioned' by the CoM, and designed by the EC, and then put up to the EP for 'approval'

Not all legislation/decisions by the EC actually require EP approval, treaty matters and [ironically] non-eu trade arrangements are specifically exempt.

Even if a measure is rejected by the EP, the EC will still implement it, unless the CoM approve that 'rejection' either by qualified majority, or unanimous decision depending on circumstance [effectively reversing the old 'veto' concept]

The only valuable services the EP provide is giving a public veneer of a democratic process where none actually exists, and the presence of so many warm but otherwise useless bodies in a single large building presumably provides some reduction in the heating bill

[jeba]

Aren´t the Commissionars named by their respective democraticly elected governments representing the will of their people? Isn´t that enough of legitimation? Not even the German Chancellor needs to be a member of Parliament and (s)he isn´t up for direct voting. That´s the very essence of representative democracy.

[Jim B]

Jeba
You are correct but many are just in denial because it doesn't fit in with their views.

Jim

[Pete G]

Aren´t the Commissionars named by their respective democraticly elected governments representing the will of their people? Isn´t that enough of legitimation? Not even the German Chancellor needs to be a member of Parliament and (s)he isn´t up for direct voting. That´s the very essence of representative democracy.

No really, consider ex-Tribune lefty and arch EU trougher Kinnock, rejected twice by the electorate as a representative of the country rather than his constituency, yet appointed by Blair to perform exactly that function, and implement the very same insanely socialist policies the electorate had previously rejected twice with a lack of democratic interference he could only have dreamed of as PM.

Subsequent governments are unable to replace him, as he is now firmly beyond their reach, or in fact any other form of accountability, as long as he wishes to continue to sup from the EU gravy-boat

[Jim B]

He left the EU in 2005 . The system of proposing UK Commissioners is part of the quaint old British Buddy System that all Parties use, nothing whatsoever to do with EU directives, the same people you want to give back control to.

Jim

[Pete G]

He left the EU in 2005 . The system of proposing UK Commissioners is part of the quaint old British Buddy System that all Parties use, nothing whatsoever to do with EU directives, the same people you want to give back control to.

Jim

True, if it wasn't for the fact that his horse-staggeringly large EU pension is predicated on continuing to support EU policy in his new haven of unaccountable authority the House of Lords.

Same tired politics, same paymaster, same contempt for the democratic process, just more money and a prettier dress

[Jim B]

He was responsible for cutting salaries and pensions while a vice president of the Commission which won him few friends in Brussels. The point of it all though is that all these failures were proposed by successive British Governments and not the EU.

Jim

[Varky]

Jeba
You are correct but many are just in denial because it doesn't fit in with their views.
Jim

In denial because what you state is far from the truth, never mind just our views.
Unfortunately, you and your Brexit deniers are still barking up the wrong tree and trying to say that an indirect election has the same validity in everyone's eyes as a direct election.

Keep digging! But remember just by saying the same thing over and over again and flying in the face of reality, does not make it so.

[Jim B]

Varky
If you can't get your head around how the system works it's a bit pointless trying to explain it. You Brexiteers give the impression of passengers on a bus that's driven off the edge of a cliff and you keep saying to each other, so far so good, so far so good.

Jim

[Pete G]

He was responsible for cutting salaries and pensions while a vice president of the Commission which won him few friends in Brussels. The point of it all though is that all these failures were proposed by successive British Governments and not the EU.

Jim

Well that would be most unusual, as all of the other commissioners were, upon taking office, made to foreswear the authority of their member state, and prioritise EU policy and procedure over any and all national concerns, a oath that holds good even after leaving office whilst collecting their pension.

Maybe they gave him a pass, because he's such a nice guy

That was probably after his re-appointment to the EC, after it was discovered that the one he had previously sat on was so deeply corrupt, they had to scrap it all and start again

[Varky]

Varky
If you can't get your head around how the system works it's a bit pointless trying to explain it. You Brexiteers give the impression of passengers on a bus that's driven off the edge of a cliff and you keep saying to each other, so far so good, so far so good.
Jim

That's the point. The system doesn't work for the electorate, only for those with the snouts in the trough and as far as you are concerned two words come to mind ostrich and sand. So can you now stop insulting people and stop your bully boy tactics brought over from CL.

[Jim B]

If logical argument is bully boy tactics then I stand accused. But if you want to talk about snout in the trough why don't you look at the activities of one of your leading Brexiteers, Rees Mogg who's just had a massive grant awarded by the Tory Government to refurbish his house and these are the people you want to give back control to.

Jim

[Jimgward]

Actually Brexit is causing one part of the economy to boom..... that of the consultancy firms, like PWC, who make their coin from re-writing policies and giving advice. Apparently they are booming from work in Westminster, to re-write purchasing guidelines, laws and much more...

In Scotland, they anticipated the need to replicate some EU rules as Scottish law. Since we have a separate law system (regarded by many as one of the world's best) then we won't face huge expenses to move from an EU set of rules, to local.

[OhSusana]

You Brexiteers give the impression of passengers on a bus that's driven off the edge of a cliff and you keep saying to each other, so far so good, so far so good. Jim

Summed it up in one Jim

That is brilliant, Jim!
Put it with a cartoon, and sell it to Private Eye )