post brexit

[shaunaneto]

Er - didn't something fairly massive happen in 2008 - surely most people's predictions were wrong for this period?

I'm too lazy too trawl through the waybackmachine to try and verify this. But I distinctly remember reading numerous reports in the years before 2008 that we was heading for trouble.

Was it as much a case of folk ignoring the problem as there was still being money made? More a failure to predict the date than the event!?

[shaunaneto]

Borrowing £122 billion is pretty small compared with what previous governments have borrowed.

The arguments always seem to come back to money which pretty much everyone seems to agree, we don't know what the figures will be.

Whatever the actual numbers, there is still pretty hefty weekly sum that currently going to the EU that we will be able to spend as our elected government determines.

Is coming back to numbers to argue not a case of the non numbers arguments not being up for argument any more as the two sides are (for the purposes of arguing) irreconcilable on that front.

Which would be a curious thing really, as both leave and remain voted to make the UK a better place to live, one of the few things both side agree on wanting. They just disagreed on how to get there!

[Muddy Retriever]

Er - didn't something fairly massive happen in 2008 - surely most people's predictions were wrong for this period?

My point exactly. None of these "experts" predicted the financial crisis - something which famously perplexed the Queen.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ch-coming.html

[Stolly]

Borrowing £122 billion is pretty small compared with what previous governments have borrowed.

[/B]

You do realise that the £122 billion is increased borrowing don't you? Our total national debt is something like £1.6 trillion!!!!

[Graham Breeze]

You do realise that the £122 billion is increased borrowing don't you? Our total national debt is something like £1.6 trillion!!!!

Stolly

Shake your head in sorrow and accept that people believe what they want to believe. Some people think the earth is flat.


Although that's forgivable because they come from Planet Brexit.

[Witton Park]

So given that the only forecast that we have had that can be tested was total b***ocks why do you think we should automatically accept any others as being factual?

Because the financial services industry have been doing it for years and getting away with it

[Witton Park]

"All forecasts have to be treated with a pinch of salt because they are wrong so often. Before the OBR was founded Government forecast were done by the Treasury. In June 2007 it's central forecast for the middle of 2009 was for growth of 2.5%. It estimated that there was a 90% probability that growth would be between 0.8% and 4.2%. That's a pretty wide range for them to be right but they still weren't. Actual growth.......minus 6%!"

Er - didn't something fairly massive happen in 2008 - surely most people's predictions were wrong for this period?

Yes, and why didn't the "experts" see it coming? There was evidence out there.

[Witton Park]

Good call WP - a regular watch from me is Today in Parliament if there is something I wish to understand without the bias and personal beliefs. My morning coffee is often accompanied with "(day) in parliament" highlights from the day before. Sometimes though as its the BBC it can be very bias so it is better if you are really interested to watch the whole debate on i-player without any cuts.
Here is the "Exiting the European Unions Select Committee" that you mentioned. I hope everyone watches it with an open mind and does not get up and make a cup of tea when the positive/negative bit whichever they disagree with comes on ;-) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...e-eu-committee

I watched QT last night, it was awful to watch. In their short points on each topic, the panellists come out with opinions, occasionally facts, but often in a context that suits their point. This sort of programme no longer seems to serve a useful purpose as it just entrenches opinions and doesn't really debate and inform.

Contrast that with the select committee and you get good questions, option to follow up and question points made.

[RaceTheSweeper]

I watched QT last night, it was awful to watch. In their short points on each topic, the panellists come out with opinions, occasionally facts, but often in a context that suits their point. This sort of programme no longer seems to serve a useful purpose as it just entrenches opinions and doesn't really debate and inform.

Contrast that with the select committee and you get good questions, option to follow up and question points made.

deleted my first reply as it didn't read right. So in reply.
Totally agree with you. These programmes used to inform us with what is happening so we can digest, debate and inform. Now they just inform on their own agenda. Sadly, opinions over Brexit do come from "highlights" programmes rather than from unbiased sources. I have to bang my head in astonishment when listening to the bias of Laura Kuenssberg! How on earth does she get away with it!

[Mossdog]

Stolly

Shake your head in sorrow and accept that people believe what they want to believe. Some people think the earth is flat.


Although that's forgivable because they come from Planet Brexit.

So true lad. And it's populated by those with heads full of magical thinking and a daily (Mail) diet of antagonism towards their fellow men (and lasses !)