BritInParis

And yet you don't.

Some are, but there's also been significant investment since the vote. Not enough to draw any conclusion either way and certainly not enough to support the financial Armageddon theory.

Editha

Even if the pound were only as low now as during the financial crisis, that would be a cause for concern. But, this is a link to a chart that shows the pound is significantly lower now than during the financial crisis.

BritInParis

The pound dropped against the dollar after the vote but it was around the same rate before the vote (1.4) as during the financial crisis. It had also hit the same rate during the intervening period. After dropping to 1.2 it's now rebounded to 1.3 so it's lost about 7-10% since just before the Brexit vote. Before the vote the IMF said that sterling had been overvalued by 5-20% in 2015 when the average was 1.5 so effectively sterling is now where it should be. Meanwhile the FTSE 100 has been at record high levels and unemployment is at 4.5% compared to an EU average of 7.8%.

Richard8655

It was a 20% drop against USD.

To so easily roll the dice without drawing any conclusions is certainly poor strategic planning for such a monumental decision. Abandoning the single market will likely bring significant negative economic impact according to many analysts. Some including Tony Blair and the Scottish government see it as disastrous.

BritInParis

See Post #153.

Cameron's decision to prevent any contingency planning for a 'Leave' win having called the referendum was utterly foolish and betrays his arrogance.

Blair and the SNP could hardly be described as neutral observers but it would be foolish to make any predictions - economics is not a science. Much will depend on our future relationship with the EU which has yet to be decided.

The point I've been making is that all the dire predictions made before the referendum by the Remain campaign - such the instant recession - have manifestly failed to materialise. If a UK-EU FTA can be struck which replicates much of the access we currently have to the Single Market - a precedent exists in CETA - then the economic impact of Brexit will be minimised and would be mutually advantageous to both the UK and the EU27. The question is whether the politics will trump the economics.

Novocastrian

If you're practising for a job interview with DExEU, you're wasting your time trying to cherry-pick. They've already abandoned that idea.

BristolUK

So EU Lite then. Or is it Brexit Lite.

If the aim is to minimise the impact of doing something (sometimes known as damage limititation) why the hell do the something?

Novocastrian

CETA doesn't cover "passporting" for services, financial or otherwise. So not Brexit lite, but Brexit lite without about half of the UK economy.

That comment is far too sane. Wash yer mouth out.

holly_1948

The crucial part of Brexit is that UK regains control of immigration. To be blunt, this means Eastern Europeans and Muslims are, at least somewhat, unwelcome to many or most Britons.

Free trade of goods without free movement of labour (people) is entirely possible - Canada has this.
Free trade of services with EU but without free movement of people appears to be impossible - no-one has that.
The Continent runs a surplus in goods with the UK, hence the desire on their part for free trade in goods.
The Continent runs a deficit in services with the UK, hence their desire to shut down free trade in services.

The only material negotiating power the UK has is the power of the purse. As long as UK keeps pouring money (net) into Brussels the EU has no incentive to ever finally agree on anything. Like the Israelis they want negotiations that go on forever and never reach any conclusion. One day HMG will wake up to grasp that.

Editha

Well at least Holly isn't recycling the same Daily Telegraph article over and over again. But possibly that is because broadsheets aren't sold on her planet.

holly_1948

It's called Socialism my dear. And it's the coming thing.
I seem to recall that the Daily Mail was never big on socialism. Is it still published modernly?

BristolUK

I've read your more recent posts and thought didn't you used to be left of centre? Because you don't sound it now.

Perhaps

holly_1948

I thought I was commenting on how things are. As contrasted with how I might wish them to be.

Left of centre? Yes. I'm appalled that Russia has a homelessness problem. It never used to in Soviet times, for all the privations that people suffered back then.
As to a political system, being (relatively) free of corruption and graft must always be a more important issue than being left (public ownership of assets, free university education and free medicine) or right (private ownership of assets including schools and hospitals).
It makes little difference whether government owns enterprise (China) or enterprise owns government (USA). Two sides of the same coin. The best government money can buy, and has bought.