Guest pelmetman Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118187/european-elections-poll-eu-elections-2019-vote-candiates-brexit-news 91% B-) ..........and in 2nd place .....UKIP on 4% :D ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-24 4:02 PM https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118187/european-elections-poll-eu-elections-2019-vote-candiates-brexit-news 91% B-) .......... And you accuse me of only frequenting "Remainer Chat rooms". The Brexpress! only 91% on there. Thought it would have been 100%. Brexiteers will indeed vote for Nigel because they are daft enough to believe his lies again. He doesnt have to deliver anything so he can promise them all Unicorns again but the same stinking awful deal will still be there waiting like a bad smell that refuses to go away waiting for someone, either Parliament or the Public to either pass it or revoke Article 50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-04-24 4:09 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 4:02 PM https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118187/european-elections-poll-eu-elections-2019-vote-candiates-brexit-news 91% B-) .......... And you accuse me of only frequenting "Remainer Chat rooms". The Brexpress! only 91% on there. Thought it would have been 100%. Brexiteers will indeed vote for Nigel because they are daft enough to believe his lies again. He doesnt have to deliver anything so he can promise them all Unicorns again but the same stinking awful deal will still be there waiting like a bad smell that refuses to go away waiting for someone, either Parliament or the Public to either pass it or revoke Article 50. So that 2% for Labour wasn't you? :D ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 B-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 https://thebrexitparty.com/ B-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Barryd999 - 2019-04-25 12:30 PM https://thebrexitparty.com/ B-) As they say ........All advertising is good advertising ;-) ....... Keep up the good work :D ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-24 9:04 AM...........................…. 1 Seeing as your Remoaner "Expert" predictions to date have PROVED to be not just wrong......but totally and utterly wrong ;-) ........... 2 So based on that evidence.....I'll take your so called economists "Predictions" *-) ........With a large bucket of salt (lol) ......... 3 Your Remoaner "Experts" next task is to try and blame the coming "global" recession on Brexit :D ....... 1 You need to be more specific, Dave. Which predictions have been proved wrong, and what is the proof? Mis-quoting the forecasts, as you usually do, isn't proof. 2 What evidence? Be careful of the salt, it's bad for blood pressure! :-D 3 I doubt that they will - they aren't that daft - but what the will certainly say (because it is obvious to anyone who chooses to look) is that whatever impact the next recession has on the UK, it will have been made worse by Brexit (always assuming we do leave). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-04-25 3:43 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 9:04 AM...........................…. 1 Seeing as your Remoaner "Expert" predictions to date have PROVED to be not just wrong......but totally and utterly wrong ;-) ........... 2 So based on that evidence.....I'll take your so called economists "Predictions" *-) ........With a large bucket of salt (lol) ......... 3 Your Remoaner "Experts" next task is to try and blame the coming "global" recession on Brexit :D ....... 1 You need to be more specific, Dave. Which predictions have been proved wrong, and what is the proof? Mis-quoting the forecasts, as you usually do, isn't proof. 2 What evidence? Be careful of the salt, it's bad for blood pressure! :-D 3 I doubt that they will - they aren't that daft - but what the will certainly say (because it is obvious to anyone who chooses to look) is that whatever impact the next recession has on the UK, it will have been made worse by Brexit (always assuming we do leave). 1......Specific? 8-) 2.......The only thing that's bad for my blood pressure is to much Remoaner Bullsh*t :D ....... 3....... "I doubt that they will" ........So we kinda agree on something at last (lol)........Naturally only history will decide who was right and who was wrong......depending on who's funding the current batch of left wing biased academics that are writing our history (lol) (lol) (lol) ..... 4......So who's the idiot Brian? :D ........... Just askin :-> ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-25 4:43 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-04-25 3:43 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 9:04 AM...........................…. 1 Seeing as your Remoaner "Expert" predictions to date have PROVED to be not just wrong......but totally and utterly wrong ;-) ........... 2 So based on that evidence.....I'll take your so called economists "Predictions" *-) ........With a large bucket of salt (lol) ......... 3 Your Remoaner "Experts" next task is to try and blame the coming "global" recession on Brexit :D ....... 1 You need to be more specific, Dave. Which predictions have been proved wrong, and what is the proof? Mis-quoting the forecasts, as you usually do, isn't proof. 2 What evidence? Be careful of the salt, it's bad for blood pressure! :-D 3 I doubt that they will - they aren't that daft - but what the will certainly say (because it is obvious to anyone who chooses to look) is that whatever impact the next recession has on the UK, it will have been made worse by Brexit (always assuming we do leave). 1......Specific? 8-) 2.......The only thing that's bad for my blood pressure is to much Remoaner Bullsh*t :D ....... 3....... "I doubt that they will" ........So we kinda agree on something at last (lol)........Naturally only history will decide who was right and who was wrong......depending on who's funding the current batch of left wing biased academics that are writing our history (lol) (lol) (lol) ..... 4......So who's the idiot Brian? :D ........... 1 Yes, specific. Who's forecast was wrong, and where was it wrong? 2 I sympathise! :-D 3 You really do think Brexit is a party political thing, don't you? :-S Despite all the evidence that it is no such thing, and that the division over leaving the EU splits both parties from top to bottom. 4 If we do leave, and the economic forecasts prove correct, all those who ignored them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fast Pat Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-04-25 6:33 PM 1 Yes, specific. Who's forecast was wrong, and where was it wrong? I'll help you out Dave, you can copy my 19 forecasts I've previously provided you with in this thread, they have all been PROVED to be wrong. Remind me again who made them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-04-25 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 4:43 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-04-25 3:43 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 9:04 AM...........................…. 1 Seeing as your Remoaner "Expert" predictions to date have PROVED to be not just wrong......but totally and utterly wrong ;-) ........... 2 So based on that evidence.....I'll take your so called economists "Predictions" *-) ........With a large bucket of salt (lol) ......... 3 Your Remoaner "Experts" next task is to try and blame the coming "global" recession on Brexit :D ....... 1 You need to be more specific, Dave. Which predictions have been proved wrong, and what is the proof? Mis-quoting the forecasts, as you usually do, isn't proof. 2 What evidence? Be careful of the salt, it's bad for blood pressure! :-D 3 I doubt that they will - they aren't that daft - but what the will certainly say (because it is obvious to anyone who chooses to look) is that whatever impact the next recession has on the UK, it will have been made worse by Brexit (always assuming we do leave). 1......Specific? 8-) 2.......The only thing that's bad for my blood pressure is to much Remoaner Bullsh*t :D ....... 3....... "I doubt that they will" ........So we kinda agree on something at last (lol)........Naturally only history will decide who was right and who was wrong......depending on who's funding the current batch of left wing biased academics that are writing our history (lol) (lol) (lol) ..... 4......So who's the idiot Brian? :D ........... 1 Yes, specific. Who's forecast was wrong, and where was it wrong? 2 I sympathise! :-D 3 You really do think Brexit is a party political thing, don't you? :-S Despite all the evidence that it is no such thing, and that the division over leaving the EU splits both parties from top to bottom. 4 If we do leave, and the economic forecasts prove correct, all those who ignored them. "In a paper signed off by George Osborne, which neither the former chancellor nor anyone else who has made a grim prognosis for Britain’s departure from the EU should be allowed to forget, the finest minds in the Treasury came up with two scenarios for the aftermath of a vote to leave the EU. In the ‘shock’ scenario, GDP would be 3.6 per cent lower after two years (compared with if the country had voted to remain), the pound would fall by 12 per cent and unemployment would rise by 520,000. In the ‘severe shock’ scenario GDP would be six per cent lower, the pound would fall by 15 per cent and unemployment would rise by 820,000. But even this could prove to be optimistic, the authors claimed, adding: “There are significant downside risks which imply that the impact could be even larger”. https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/the-brexit-bounce-making-a-mockery-of-george-osbornes-project-fear/ (lol) (lol) (lol) ............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 "More than 20,000 people (89 percent) said they would back the former Ukip leader’s grassroots rebellion party if Britain heads to the polls in May. This is compared to just 211 Express.co.uk readers (zero percent) who said they would vote for the Conservative Party in the forthcoming May elections. The poll results come as it emerged disillusioned voters have sided with Nigel Farage, and the Brexit Party is currently odds on favourites to win the majority of the seats in the UK." https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118773/Brexit-poll-eu-elections-poll-brexit-news-latest-brexit-party-farage B-) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Fast Pat - 2019-04-26 8:09 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-04-25 6:33 PM 1 Yes, specific. Who's forecast was wrong, and where was it wrong? I'll help you out Dave, you can copy my 19 forecasts I've previously provided you with in this thread, they have all been PROVED to be wrong. Remind me again who made them? I prefer to copy & paste reality........Not Remoaner fairy stories :D .......... HOW MYSTIC GEORGE GOT IT SO WRONG Claim: A vote to leave ‘would cause an immediate and profound economic shock’ which would ‘push the UK into recession’. Treasury analysis claimed the economy would ‘fall into recession, with four quarters of negative growth’. Reality: False. The UK’s economic growth has remained positive for every quarter since the referendum, with Britain finishing the year as one of the fastest growing economies in the G7. Claim: Unemployment ‘would increase by around 500,000’ in the wake of a Brexit vote. Reality: False. Britain’s employment rate has risen since the referendum. In the three months to January, unemployment fell to 4.7 per cent – the best rate since 1975. Claim: A Brexit vote ‘would immediately lead to an increase in the premium for lending to UK businesses and households’. Reality: False. The Bank of England responded to the referendum result by cutting interest rates to a historic low of 0.25 per cent, where they have remained. Claim: Trading partners, including the US, are already negotiating with the EU. ‘Before they start negotiations with the UK they are likely to want those deals to conclude.’ Reality: False. The new US administration has indicated it will not proceed with a planned EU-US trade deal, but has said the UK will be ‘first in the line’ for a bilateral deal. Claim: A Brexit vote would lead to ‘a reduction in foreign investment’. Reality: Likely to prove false. Investment figures for 2016 have not yet been published, but there have been a number of big foreign investments since the referendum. Claim: Britain would ‘lose preferential access to 53 markets’ with which the EU has trade deals, and these would ‘take years to renegotiate’. Reality: Likely to prove false. Theresa May has said there is no reason why the UK cannot continue with the existing trade deals. Countries such as Mexico and Canada have said they want to strike quick trade deals with the UK. Claim: A vote to leave ‘would have an impact on our ability to affect the EU’s decision making’. Reality: True. Ministers accept that the UK will not be at the table when Brussels draws up new regulations after Brexit. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4419490/Only-two-Osborne-s-19-Brexit-forecasts-come-true.html 2017 project fear started to unravel (lol) (lol) (lol) .......... Since then BOE interest rates have gone up because the economy is doing great ........along with the employment and wage growth....... "Brexit Bounce" is proving to be the TRUE reality NOT "Project Fear" B-) ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-26 9:07 AM "More than 20,000 people (89 percent) said they would back the former Ukip leader’s grassroots rebellion party if Britain heads to the polls in May. This is compared to just 211 Express.co.uk readers (zero percent) who said they would vote for the Conservative Party in the forthcoming May elections. The poll results come as it emerged disillusioned voters have sided with Nigel Farage, and the Brexit Party is currently odds on favourites to win the majority of the seats in the UK." https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118773/Brexit-poll-eu-elections-poll-brexit-news-latest-brexit-party-farage B-) ........... Hhmmm........Faridge and polls! (lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 We've been here before Dave - probably more than once! :-D The last time was on 23 April 2019 at 4:09 PM (in response to you making the same point), when I said. "Well, the forecasts weren't that wrong, were they? The £ fell in value, as forecast. Investment fell, as forecast. Productivity fell, as forecast. Personal incomes basically froze, albeit they have recently risen slightly. Exports fell, as forecast. Private spending fell, as forecast. The May 2016 Treasury forecast (which I assume you refer to), identified four processes that needed to be completed post referendum, and the forecast was based on achieving these. Process 1: agreeing the UK’s terms of withdrawal from the EU under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union Process 2: agreeing the UK’s new trading relationship with the EU Process 3: agreeing the UK’s new trading relationships with the rest of the world including over 50 countries with which the UK would need to negotiate new trade arrangements Process 4: changing the UK’s domestic regulatory and legislative framework. Now, check actual progress against the above. Not one of those four objectives has been met 33 months after the referendum. So, ask yourself whether, in view of that lack of progress, any of the forecast outcomes of voting leave can realistically be said to have been wrong? The term used in the forecast is "immediate". It is in the assumptions regarding timing that the forecast is wrong, not in the economic assumptions." All you are doing (again) is selecting headline points you think support your view (but made by who? Why, those well regarded organs of economic commentary - the Daily mail and the Spectator. So, no bias there, then!) :-D What you really need is to download and read these three documents (which it seems the Mail and Spectator journalists failed to do): 1 February 2016: "The process for withdrawing from the European Union." http://tinyurl.com/hm3qrqk 2 April 2016: "HM Treasury analysis: the long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives" http://tinyurl.com/jsg3h64 3 May 2016: "HM Treasury analysis: the immediate economic impact of leaving the EU" http://tinyurl.com/zn9uads All I can say is read, and inwardly digest. :-D The main characteristic of all three is the number of times the word uncertain is used, in relationship to the forecast outcomes, the timescales, and what might be negotiated with the EU. I don't see how anyone who had even skimmed than the Executive Summaries could begin to make serious claims that the forecasts are "wrong" - in any sense other than the actual figures presented have not turned out to be accurate. These are forecasts against huge uncertainties, and they say so. If, instead of combing them for instances where the forecast numerical outcomes haven't been realised (which is inevitable in any forecast) they are read constructively (I'm tempted to say intelligently) they are surprisingly accurate in predicting the general direction of travel. Osborn is first and foremost a political animal. He is to the right of the Conservative party, and favours a "small state". Hs is immensely privileged, privately educated, and has a degree in modern history from Oxford. He is not an economist. The forecasts are all too assertive, and I doubt that a serious economist, having expressed the uncertainties that are stressed in the texts, would have been as rash in expressing possible outcomes in such precise terms. IMO, these are primarily political documents, and not economists' discussion pieces. However, they all say much the same thing, which is that Brexit will be a highly risky and uncertain path, but will, on any measure be bad for the economy. To date, as ever, we have not left the EU, so all we are seeing is the result of the vote in terms of the resulting uncertainties (that word again!) - not the results of having left. So much has changed over the intervening 30 odd months that I doubt these documents, on which the diehard Brexitos love to dance in glee, have any remaining validity as forecasts at all - saving that their general direction of travel, as above, is generally reflective of reality. That, to me, does not equate to wrong, just not yet sufficiently aligned with events to be judged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-04-26 1:06 PM We've been here before Dave - probably more than once! :-D The last time was on 23 April 2019 at 4:09 PM (in response to you making the same point), when I said. "Well, the forecasts weren't that wrong, were they? The £ fell in value, as forecast. . ......and as I've pointed numerous times to levels last seen in 8 of the last 10 years *-) ........ What your excuse for that? (lol) ......... As for investment.......... I'm not surprised some folk are sat on their cash seeing as they don't know whether Corbyn will get into No 10 by default 8-) ......... I reckon once we finally leave and have a GE which will hopefully kick Corbyn into touch, that's when we'll see the investment taps turned back on B-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-04-26 1:06 PM We've been here before Dave - probably more than once! :-D The last time was on 23 April 2019 at 4:09 PM (in response to you making the same point), when I said. "Well, the forecasts weren't that wrong, were they? The £ fell in value, as forecast. Investment fell, as forecast. Productivity fell, as forecast. Personal incomes basically froze, albeit they have recently risen slightly. Exports fell, as forecast. Private spending fell, as forecast. The May 2016 Treasury forecast (which I assume you refer to), identified four processes that needed to be completed post referendum, and the forecast was based on achieving these. Process 1: agreeing the UK’s terms of withdrawal from the EU under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union Process 2: agreeing the UK’s new trading relationship with the EU Process 3: agreeing the UK’s new trading relationships with the rest of the world including over 50 countries with which the UK would need to negotiate new trade arrangements Process 4: changing the UK’s domestic regulatory and legislative framework. Now, check actual progress against the above. Not one of those four objectives has been met 33 months after the referendum. So, ask yourself whether, in view of that lack of progress, any of the forecast outcomes of voting leave can realistically be said to have been wrong? The term used in the forecast is "immediate". It is in the assumptions regarding timing that the forecast is wrong, not in the economic assumptions." All you are doing (again) is selecting headline points you think support your view (but made by who? Why, those well regarded organs of economic commentary - the Daily mail and the Spectator. So, no bias there, then!) :-D What you really need is to download and read these three documents (which it seems the Mail and Spectator journalists failed to do): 1 February 2016: "The process for withdrawing from the European Union." http://tinyurl.com/hm3qrqk 2 April 2016: "HM Treasury analysis: the long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives" http://tinyurl.com/jsg3h64 3 May 2016: "HM Treasury analysis: the immediate economic impact of leaving the EU" http://tinyurl.com/zn9uads All I can say is read, and inwardly digest. :-D All I can say is why cant you understand the word "Immediate" those projections were supposed to happen as soon as we voted to leave *-) ........... But they didn't did they?.......in fact the complete opposite happened to the majority of their predictions..... so why should we accept that any of their other fairy stories will prove to be anymore accurate? >:-) ........ As they're compiled by the same useless Remoaner biased economists EXPERTS (lol) ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-26 12:57 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-26 9:07 AM "More than 20,000 people (89 percent) said they would back the former Ukip leader’s grassroots rebellion party if Britain heads to the polls in May. This is compared to just 211 Express.co.uk readers (zero percent) who said they would vote for the Conservative Party in the forthcoming May elections. The poll results come as it emerged disillusioned voters have sided with Nigel Farage, and the Brexit Party is currently odds on favourites to win the majority of the seats in the UK." https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118773/Brexit-poll-eu-elections-poll-brexit-news-latest-brexit-party-farage B-) ........... Hhmmm........Faridge and polls! (lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) You and your Labour MP are "aware" that's not the real Brexit party account? ;-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-04-26 1:06 PM Osborn is first and foremost a political animal. He is to the right of the Conservative party, and favours a "small state". Hs is immensely privileged, privately educated, and has a degree in modern history from Oxford. He is not an economist. The forecasts are all too assertive, and I doubt that a serious economist, having expressed the uncertainties that are stressed in the texts, would have been as rash in expressing possible outcomes in such precise terms. IMO, these are primarily political documents, and not economists' discussion pieces. However, they all say much the same thing, which is that Brexit will be a highly risky and uncertain path, but will, on any measure be bad for the economy. The only part of that document written by Osborne was his signature *-) ....... "This document has benefitted from a review by Professor Sir Charles Bean, former Deputy Governor of the Bank of England, acting in a personal capacity as an academic consultant to HM Treasury. All content and conclusions in this study are, however, the responsibility of HM Treasury. Commenting on the work, Professor Bean said: “While there are inevitably many uncertainties – including the prospective trading regime with the EU – this comprehensive analysis by HM Treasury, which employs best-practice techniques, provides reasonable estimates of the likely size of the short-term impact of a vote to leave on the UK economy." It's purely the product of our Remoaner biased establishment......Using their Remoaner biased "EXPERTS" >:-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-26 1:50 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-26 12:57 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-26 9:07 AM "More than 20,000 people (89 percent) said they would back the former Ukip leader’s grassroots rebellion party if Britain heads to the polls in May. This is compared to just 211 Express.co.uk readers (zero percent) who said they would vote for the Conservative Party in the forthcoming May elections. The poll results come as it emerged disillusioned voters have sided with Nigel Farage, and the Brexit Party is currently odds on favourites to win the majority of the seats in the UK." https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118773/Brexit-poll-eu-elections-poll-brexit-news-latest-brexit-party-farage B-) ........... Hhmmm........Faridge and polls! (lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) You and your Labour MP are "aware" that's not the real Brexit party account? ;-) ......... What Labour MP? And you claim it's "not the real Brexit party account".......yet as usual show nothing to substantiate your claim. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-26 2:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-26 1:50 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-26 12:57 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-26 9:07 AM "More than 20,000 people (89 percent) said they would back the former Ukip leader’s grassroots rebellion party if Britain heads to the polls in May. This is compared to just 211 Express.co.uk readers (zero percent) who said they would vote for the Conservative Party in the forthcoming May elections. The poll results come as it emerged disillusioned voters have sided with Nigel Farage, and the Brexit Party is currently odds on favourites to win the majority of the seats in the UK." https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118773/Brexit-poll-eu-elections-poll-brexit-news-latest-brexit-party-farage B-) ........... Hhmmm........Faridge and polls! (lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) You and your Labour MP are "aware" that's not the real Brexit party account? ;-) ......... What Labour MP? And you claim it's "not the real Brexit party account".......yet as usual show nothing to substantiate your claim. *-) Alright nit picker.....LABOUR MEP :D ........... BTW you can check out the real thing here ;-) .......https://thebrexitparty.org/ ......and you'll notice their tweets have @brexitparty_uk......Not #Brexit#Brexitparty (lol) ...... Looks to me like your fake news fakers need to up their game 8-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-26 1:47 PM.........…………..All I can say is why cant you understand the word "Immediate" those projections were supposed to happen as soon as we voted to leave *-) ............ But you didn't read anything, did you Dave? Not even the front cover of the document titled "HM Treasury analysis: the immediate economic impact of leaving the EU". Where does that say "HM Treasury analysis: the immediate economic impact of voting to leave the EU". There's close on 200 pages of fairly dense text in those documents, which set out the possible scenarios surrounding how we might leave, and what the consequences might be in the short, and long, terms. It is totally pointless picking on a few bits of the total outcome forecasts that havent proved 100% accurate, and then claiming the whole document is wrong. Forecasts are forecasts - in other words they look for precedent, and then try to project the past trends into the future while adjusting them for foreseeable changed circumstances. You seem to thing forecasts are the work of some Mystic Meg with 100% powers of clairvoyance - but they are not. That is why I tried to draw your attention to the frequent expressions of uncertainty throughout the whole set of documents. If you won't read the documents, you can't understand what they say, so can't claim that they are completely wrong, on the basis that some of the headline claims haven't proved 100% accurate. The point is that they haven't proved 100% inaccurate either; just wrong in places - which is normal for forecasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-26 3:01 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-26 2:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-26 1:50 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-26 12:57 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-26 9:07 AM "More than 20,000 people (89 percent) said they would back the former Ukip leader’s grassroots rebellion party if Britain heads to the polls in May. This is compared to just 211 Express.co.uk readers (zero percent) who said they would vote for the Conservative Party in the forthcoming May elections. The poll results come as it emerged disillusioned voters have sided with Nigel Farage, and the Brexit Party is currently odds on favourites to win the majority of the seats in the UK." https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1118773/Brexit-poll-eu-elections-poll-brexit-news-latest-brexit-party-farage B-) ........... Hhmmm........Faridge and polls! (lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) You and your Labour MP are "aware" that's not the real Brexit party account? ;-) ......... What Labour MP? And you claim it's "not the real Brexit party account".......yet as usual show nothing to substantiate your claim. *-) Alright nit picker.....LABOUR MEP :D ........... BTW you can check out the real thing here ;-) .......https://thebrexitparty.org/ ......and you'll notice their tweets have @brexitparty_uk......Not #Brexit#Brexitparty (lol) ...... Looks to me like your fake news fakers need to up their game 8-) ........ You couldn't even spot that £350m whopper of a lie on the side of a big red bus! (lol) And why would i bother looking at a bunch of Faridges fruitloops.....the latest recruit being Mad Ann. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-04-26 7:10 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-26 1:47 PM.........…………..All I can say is why cant you understand the word "Immediate" those projections were supposed to happen as soon as we voted to leave *-) ............ But you didn't read anything, did you Dave? Not even the front cover of the document titled "HM Treasury analysis: the immediate economic impact of leaving the EU". Where does that say "HM Treasury analysis: the immediate economic impact of voting to leave the EU". There's close on 200 pages of fairly dense text in those documents, which set out the possible scenarios surrounding how we might leave, and what the consequences might be in the short, and long, terms. It is totally pointless picking on a few bits of the total outcome forecasts that havent proved 100% accurate, and then claiming the whole document is wrong. Forecasts are forecasts - in other words they look for precedent, and then try to project the past trends into the future while adjusting them for foreseeable changed circumstances. You seem to thing forecasts are the work of some Mystic Meg with 100% powers of clairvoyance - but they are not. That is why I tried to draw your attention to the frequent expressions of uncertainty throughout the whole set of documents. If you won't read the documents, you can't understand what they say, so can't claim that they are completely wrong, on the basis that some of the headline claims haven't proved 100% accurate. ***The point is that they haven't proved 100% inaccurate either; just wrong in places - which is normal for forecasts.*** So a prediction of 820,000 job loses.......compared to the reality of the best employment figures since the 70's is classed in your Remoaner demented mind as being slightly inaccurate??? (lol) (lol) (lol) .......... The only uncertainty Project Farce has caused in my mind, is whether our Remoaner biased establishment "EXPERTS" are truly that incompetent? 8-) .......Or did they willfully LIE in order to try to influence the out come of the 2016 referendum? >:-( ....... My gut instinct is on the latter >:-) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 Bump :D ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.