The Brexit Effect

It seems that it is now generally understood that Brexit is a major factor in our economic woes alongside other factors of course.

That is the one factor that we can easily sort, simply by joining the SM and CU.

At a stroke our economy would be put into remedial care and we could look forward to a more sane future,

"The Daily Telegraph is politically conservative and has endorsed the Conservative Party at every UK general election since 1945. The personal links between the paper's editors and the leadership of the Conservative Party, along with the paper's generally right-wing stance and influence over Conservative activists, have led the paper commonly to be referred to, especially in Private Eye, as the Torygraph.
Even when Conservative support was shown to have slumped in the opinion polls and Labour gained the ascendant, the newspaper remained loyal to the Conservatives. This loyalty continued after Labour ousted the Conservatives from power by an election result in 1997, and in the face of Labour election wins in 2001 and the third successive Labour election win in 2005.

When the Barclay brothers purchased the Telegraph Group for around £665m in late June 2004, Sir David Barclay suggested that The Daily Telegraph might no longer be the "house newspaper" of the Conservatives in the future. In an interview with The Guardian he said, "Where the government are right we shall support them". The editorial board endorsed the Conservative Party in the 2005 general election.[citation needed]

During the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, the paper supported the Better Together 'No' Campaign. Alex Salmond, the former leader of the SNP, called The Telegraph "extreme" on Question Time in September 2015.

In the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum it endorsed voting to leave the EU.

During the 2019 Conservative leadership election, The Daily Telegraph endorsed their former columnist Boris Johnson. In 2019, former columnist Graham Norton, who had left the paper in late 2018, said "about a year before I left, it took a turn" and criticised it for "toxic" political stances, namely for a piece defending US Supreme Court then-nominee Brett Kavanaugh and for being "a mouthpiece for Boris Johnson" whose columns were allegedly published with "no fact-checking at all".

It was fined £30,000 in 2015 for "sending an unsolicited email to hundreds of thousands of its subscribers, urging them to vote for the Conservatives."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Telegraph

The Daily Telegraph is hardly an impartial source of factual information.

It maybe a less obvious source of rubbish than The Daily Express or The Daily Mail but it is still flagrant propaganda for the far right wing of UK politics.

Just look at the proprietors of these right wing propaganda papers. Who are they?

Here is Urmstongran's article if you'd like to read it:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/28/project-fear-back-wrong-ever/

Apologies everyone for not quoting my source.
The article was written by Robert Tombs who is professor emeritus of French history at the University of Cambridge.

If we were in such a bad way economically after the pandemic why was Kwarteng able to offer so many tax cuts in his mini budget?

Good morning Ug, I am intrigued by your comments about the 'Remainer' media. For years, until it could be ignored no longer, Brexit just wasn't mentioned, or if it was, it was to dismiss discussion and to assure us that' the will of the people' was being honoured. As to the printed media, I would not call The Telegraph, Express, Daily Mail 'Remainer Media'. In fact apart from The Guardian, the bulk of the newspapers (and their non-dom owners) were staunch supporters of Brexit. It just shows how different we can see the same events.

The UK economy has fallen far behind the EU since Brexit
Britain’s GDP per head has grown just 3.8 per cent since the referendum, while the EU’s has grown by 8.5 per cent.

www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/06/uk-economy-fallen-behind-eu-since-brexit

ug that is interesting. Do you have a reference for those figures please?

I do know that Mody has long been anti-EU. So a definite Brexiter, as opposed to what the Telegraph maintains.

Germany is having a tough time just now but it’s manufacturing industry is massively stronger than the UK. Unless we improve quickly we are going to descend to the level of Italy and Greece .

Germany’s productivity is way higher than the U.K. and has been for years. We were doing much better whilst in EU but now the economy has taken a nose dive, and has plummeted still further thanks to the brief reign of Truss, you can’t pretend otherwise.

If you are going to quote verbatim from the Telegraph Urmstongran, you really need to tell us your sources.

Then along came the pandemic, furlough payment and the war in the Ukraine affecting gas prices. Life sometimes gets in the way.

But the Brexit bus promised us £350,000 a week extra to spend on the NHS

Well just to posit a different POV from a different expert (in the interest of balance you understand) ...

Mark Carney, sometime governor of the Bank of England, fired the opening shot in the latest push, claiming that, because of Brexit the British economy has declined from the equivalent of 90 per cent of the German to a mere 70 per cent. This has been lapped up uncritically by the Remainer media.

As it happens, while Carney’s assertion was being trumpeted, the Princeton economist professor Ashoka Mody, a leading authority on the EU economy, was speaking in Cambridge. Mild-mannered and courteous though he is (and no advocate of Brexit), he described Carney’s claims as “complete bull----”: “If anything, the British economy has performed slightly better than the German since Brexit,” he said, in terms of growth, per capita wealth, and innovation.

Yes, we heard aright. But I don’t recall it being reported on the BBC. Germany’s growth model, Mody added, is fragile, its position as Europe’s leading economy is in doubt, and it faces “a painful transition”, while eurozone debt means chronic instability.

Eighty thousand million £s a year! Get your head round that.

£80,000.000,000 !!!

This is our very own OBR's assessment of the LONG TERM loss to our economy as a result of Brexit.

I certainly understand that the government can create as much money as it needs, it did that all through Covid to support the population through the pandemic.

If a credible plan for long term growth were proposed there is no reason the creation of money would be a problem, because as you have said spending precedes taxation. The UK has currently a deficit of around 100% of GDP, the US deficit is aproaching 150%

What we do need is an increase in taxes

That all depends on whose taxes you want increased.

There's no point in increasing the taxes of those who can't afford to pay. If you want any sort of growth in the domestic economy people need some spare money to spend...

Truss was planning to borrow in order to fund the tax relief for the richest. What we do need is an increase in taxes together with an increase in investment in UK industries.

Katie59

The Truss plan I’m pretty sure was to invest in growth, wether that was borrowing or QE or creation of money.

So Maisie tell us if the cash to increase growth is not borrowed, or QE, where does it come from, or is there a “magic money tree” after all

Read the extract I posted, or read the documents I linked to. There certainly is a 'magic money tree'. It's called the Bank of England and it created' the money for QE. If it can 'create' money to buy bonds it can 'create' it for the government to spend directly into public services. In fact, that's exactly what it does do. The spending comes first, as the researchers discovered by ^ extensive analysis of legal statutes, public reports, correspondence with authorities, and Freedom of Information requests^

I'm at a loss to understand why this is so difficult to grasp.

Being 'pretty sure' that Truss was going to invest in growth is not a plan.
At least Labour says what it is going to invest in...

The Truss plan I’m pretty sure was to invest in growth, wether that was borrowing or QE or creation of money.

So Maisie tell us if the cash to increase growth is not borrowed, or QE, where does it come from, or is there a “magic money tree” after all

What was the plan, Katie?

The state doesn't have to borrow to invest. It's really time that people understood this. I am not making this up.

From: *Embrace the self-financing state — it is already here*


In our recent working paper, ‘The self-financing state’, we analyse in detail how the UK public finances operate and the government’s role in the sterling monetary system.* Through extensive analysis of legal statutes, public reports, correspondence with authorities, and Freedom of Information requests, we have arrived at a clear conclusion regarding the UK public finances: the government always finances its spending by issuing new money.

This is not an active decision to use monetary finance, as one is led to believe by the Government Budget Constraint theory. On the contrary, it is a straightforward consequence of the way the sterling monetary system has been designed and operated for at least a century and a half.

medium.com/iipp-blog/embrace-the-self-financing-state-it-is-already-here-35cef7595495

www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/sites/bartlett_public_purpose/files/the_self-financing_state_an_institutional_analysis_of_government_expenditure_revenue_collection_and_debt_issuance_operations_in_the_united_kingdom.pdf

It could not have worked without increased borrowing, there must have been a lot of state investment needed.

Katie59

State investment.

Yes that was the part of the Truss plan that was not publicized, it had no chance of working unless a lot of state investment was carried out to stimulate the economy.

My own doubts were that it was a long term plan that had little chance of success before the next GE

If it wasn't publicised how do you know about it? What did she intend doing?

State investment.

Yes that was the part of the Truss plan that was not publicized, it had no chance of working unless a lot of state investment was carried out to stimulate the economy.

My own doubts were that it was a long term plan that had little chance of success before the next GE

Like most people I hope, I evaluated the pros and cons of Brexit and decided that, on balance, we were better off staying in, plus the people who were the strongest advocates of Brexit put me off (Farage for one). In a non goady way, could I ask Kadinsky and Urmstongran why, based on what we have endured since 2016, they would still joyfully vote for Brexit again? Honestly? What areas of your or public life have you seen improved by your vote? I am truly curious.