Paul Nuttall's statement on UKIP election disaster

[JohnD]

it looks like Davey is not familiar with the term.

bit surprising, really.

I wonder where he has looked.

Nowhere?

 

[noseall]

Macron has not won the French presidential election either, eh Foxtrot?

 

[Corgigrouch GTi]

Macron has not won the French presidential election either, eh Foxtrot?

I don't know, I wasn't there...

 

[noseall]

I don't know, I wasn't there...

Where?

 

[Corgigrouch GTi]

Where?

Lord knows......but I wasn't there

 

[wobs]

Now, where has this come from and how have they been able to look into the future and when was it first created?...Oh yes, Bank of America Merril Lynch Research ESTIMATES...Or did they just make it up for a willing fool to post?

Along with a list of other studies who say much the same thing. Shall I bore you with them?
Here's a few tasters:
https://www.cer.org.uk/sites/default/files/smc2016_26april2016.pdf
www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/39338209/IPOL_IDA_2016_595334_EN.pdf

"Calculations using a standard multicountry, multisector, computable
general equilibrium model show welfare losses of 1.3 to 2.6 percent,
but dynamic models that incorporate productivity effects suggest that these
could rise to 6.3 to 9.5 percent. Brexit’s supposed benefits—such as lower
immigration, better regulations, and more trade deals with non-EU countries—
would do little or nothing to offset these losses. It seems unlikely that voters
were fully aware of the magnitude of these costs at the time of the vote."
https://www.brookings.edu/wp.../2017/.../brexits-long-run-effects-john-van-reenen.pdf

And then there's what Japan thinks:
http://uk.businessinsider.com/japan-brexit-note-to-britain-2016-9
Now that is interesting, given how much they have invested in the UK.

 

[Corgigrouch GTi]

Along with a list of other studies who say much the same thing. Shall I bore you with them?
Here's a few tasters:
https://www.cer.org.uk/sites/default/files/smc2016_26april2016.pdf
www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/39338209/IPOL_IDA_2016_595334_EN.pdf

"Calculations using a standard multicountry, multisector, computable
general equilibrium model show welfare losses of 1.3 to 2.6 percent,
but dynamic models that incorporate productivity effects suggest that these
could rise to 6.3 to 9.5 percent. Brexit’s supposed benefits—such as lower
immigration, better regulations, and more trade deals with non-EU countries—
would do little or nothing to offset these losses. It seems unlikely that voters
were fully aware of the magnitude of these costs at the time of the vote."
https://www.brookings.edu/wp.../2017/.../brexits-long-run-effects-john-van-reenen.pdf

And then there's what Japan thinks:
http://uk.businessinsider.com/japan-brexit-note-to-britain-2016-9
Now that is interesting, given how much they have invested in the UK.

But this is only valid if you are dumb enough to believe what they are telling you.. How do you check what they say is true? The could be telling you lies to suit their own agenda...How do you know that their models are correct? economic models cannot take into account unexpected data beyond what they have been programmed for and since we now live in unpredictble times, all bets are off... and as HimaDIY says they may be feeding you duff data knowing that you will spread it.... Perhaps that is how recessions are started..

 

[wobs]

But this is only valid if you are dumb enough to believe what they are telling you.. How do you check what they say is true? The could be telling you lies to suit their own agenda...How do you know that their models are correct? economic models cannot take into account unexpected data beyond what they have been programmed for and since we now live in unpredictble times, all bets are off... and as HimaDIY says they may be feeding you duff data knowing that you will spread it.... Perhaps that is how recessions are started..

So you have an alternative model? One that shows we'll be better off? Put it up.

I should add that one is from a Dutch university (academics are less likely to lie about these things)
Also, nearly all the studies find the same thing: We'll be worse off. To what degree depends upon what type of Brexit, and other variables.

Maybe you prefer the Institue of Fiscal Studies on the issue?

The truth is there are numerous studies, but you have shown zero evidence that any of them are wrong. Yes, there could be some miraculous deal that saves us all, but do you think that is likely in light of the evidence? Liam Fox has been putting in the air miles talking to governments about setting up trade deals, but he can't actually make any deals, as we are still in the EU. And even when we do leave, I don't see how we could possibly be better off. If you know of a way, please share.

 

[Corgigrouch GTi]

So you have an alternative model? One that shows we'll be better off? Put it up.

I should add that one is from a Dutch university (academics are less likely to lie about these things)
Also, nearly all the studies find the same thing: We'll be worse off. To what degree depends upon what type of Brexit, and other variables.

Maybe you prefer the Institue of Fiscal Studies on the issue?

The truth is there are numerous studies, but you have shown zero evidence that any of them are wrong. Yes, there could be some miraculous deal that saves us all, but do you think that is likely in light of the evidence? Liam Fox has been putting in the air miles talking to governments about setting up trade deals, but he can't actually make any deals, as we are still in the EU. And even when we do leave, I don't see how we could possibly be better off. If you know of a way, please share.

The problem with academics is that they really serve no useful purpose and are only interested in where their funding comes from since being an academic produces no income from production

 

[wobs]

The problem with academics is that they really serve no useful purpose and are only interested in where their funding comes from since being an academic produces no income from production

This is classic cognitive dissonance. You question the sources, but ignore the fact that none of them have reason to lie. A major reason that we have progressed as a society is that we have some reliable sources of information, such as universities (and their research). They do not give answers to fit an expectation. They get as close to the truth as they can. If they didn't, they would lose credibility.

Again, I ask you to provide alternative evidence that Brexit will make us better off.
In the meantime, here is another study, this time from the Institute of Fiscal Studies:
https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8296

Edit: I should add that your post is reminiscent of Gove's "we've had enough of experts". This anti-intellectualism will bring nothing but harm to this country.