6 thoughts on “The Alternative Brexit Economic Analysis (ABEA): a rejoinder to our critics”

  1. Posted 22/02/2018 at 18:16 | Permalink

    One reason why the Treasury’s short term forecasts were so wrong is that they correctly predicted a fall in sterling after a Brexit vote but not the consequential benefits for the economy. It is my view that the main economic difference between a soft and a hard Brexit is not the resultant level of GDP but the value of the pound. GDP for a hard Brexit will be much the same as for a soft Brexit but the value of the pound will be lower. I am surprised to see that there is no discussion of currency exchange rates in your discussion above.

  2. Posted 22/02/2018 at 18:27 | Permalink

    Hi julian

    great work, i am not an economist, but i am deeply suspicious of the treasury 15 year forecast. really!. 15 years. anyway it seems more of a political based than mathematical forecast. this has led to a red bus called the brexit fact bus going around with a 2 billion pound a week loss claim if we brexit. Any chance you clever guys! could have a look at this some time. As this seems to be a completely absurd claim to make. probably a variation of the garbage in garbage out type of forecasting models.

    regards
    Nigel.

  3. Posted 23/02/2018 at 09:57 | Permalink

    Thank you for this article. Given the relentless denigration of Leave voters since the referendum and the repetition of doomsday scenarios by the small (and hopefully dwindling) numbers of Remainers it is a welcome change to read something which is optimistic and makes sense. Thank you.

  4. Posted 23/02/2018 at 16:46 | Permalink

    I agree with all of the comments above.
    The Treasury’s ability to see the direct cause of Brexit but not follow through and predict the subsequent effect of Brexit is their main downfall. I would suspect that part of this is down to the Treasury being packed with remainers who are yet to realise that Brexit was about opening ourselves to the world market rather than closing ourselves off from all markets – something not even left-wing Brexiteers argued for.
    Funnily enough, the Treasury’s assumptions on the impact of lower net migration paint a dim view on the ability of the Government and also workers themselves to plug skill shortages when they arise (something which surely cannot be directly blamed on Brexit).

    Keep up the good work, Julian!

  5. Posted 04/07/2018 at 20:54 | Permalink

    I think the problem is the government’s credibility in implementing a free trade deal with Europe and other nations is very poor at the moment. You can wish for free trade, and it certainly is a good thing for the economy, but it is dependent on government and institutional mechanisms to make it happen. This government is very good at making sweeping statements, and having a huge implementation gap in making it happen. This is apparent in other areas such as the Industrial Strategy, housing, and educational attainment. Trade is no different – it is a political process, and as such it is a lengthy one. Hope is not a strategy for dealing with the real world.

  6. Posted 25/07/2018 at 17:48 | Permalink

    This website definitely has all the information and facts I needed concerning this subject and didn’t know who to ask.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published.