????

Anyway I've got to go and look after my kids as 95% x 25% = a clear majority, apparently but mats ain't me strong point being a thick type

"Scum of the first order" hello fellow bigot.

I don't care about the grammmar lesson. But don't you call me a bigot because there is no evidence at all and it's not true, unless bigotry is defined as not agreeing with your views. You retract the bigotry comment - typical polarised view of the sanctimonious 'liberal'. The only bigotry I can see is your one box or the other simplistic and not very clever or certainly open worldview. You are the narrow minded one.

Oh such sanctomy - yes teacher. You come across as a self righteous pompous twat, so the feeling is mutual but I hadn't made a habit of following posting sepecifically about you which you seem to have done to me STALKER ALERT

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ???? Wrote: > > I'm not sure being anti-European immigration > technically counts as racism. > > He's also against immigration from just about > everywhere else and very against accepting any > refugees. > > "I'm loving the newer gentler kind of politics." > > Seeing as over the last few days, just in the > posts I've seen you've called people who disagree > with you "w@nkers," "precious w@nkers," told them > they're "pissing in the wind" and that you've > "always enjoyed" being a hater, I'm not sure > you're contributing much in that area yourself, > are you? No I'm not come and give me a stern lecture . Are you my new stalker? Seems like it.

I'm loving the newer gentler kind of politics

I don't like his politics or campaigning but he says he wants all EU workers already here to be given permanent residence - which is more than May has said. He's married to a funny speaking foreigner and I'm not sure being anti-European immigration technically counts as racism. He's a shitbag in my opinion but people really are being a bit hysterical.

Burbage Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Now I like to give the Guardian a good kicking > as > > much as the next person, but it most media > outlets > > went with similar versions of this story. Even > > the Beeb. > > Which suggests it was a plant - a story fed to the > outlets by someone, probably from within the > Labour Party, to further the agenda of whoever was > paying them. In the old days, when there was > journalism, a pre-digested leak or press release > would spark at least a little curiosity. But these > days, they just get lightly rewritten (if that) > by, in this case, the Guardian's Religion and Hate > Crime Correspondent, as it's important to get > stuff out there, where it can flog advertising, > and correct it later (and flog more advertising), > than to worry about details. > > Which leaves us to have to work out where the > money was, and who might be pushing the agenda. > This is sad because, in a very real sense, it > hands victory to the small army of green-ink > conspiracists that we thought we'd left behind on > facebook. > > But it's also great fun, not least because > journalists, however lazy, are legally allowed to > conceal their sources, even those that bribe them. > That means we can be creative. > > To my mind, the most interesting coincidence is > that that Tristram Hunt MP got given ?20k, for no > stated purpose, by Lord Sainsbury (a former > minister under Blair) just before all this > happened, that Tristram Hunt MP stepped out of the > shadow cabinet, citing 'political differences' > with Corbyn, and that Corbyn was generally Brexity > whereas Sainsbury was Remain to the tune of over > ?500k. > > Obviously, I have no idea if there really is a > link. It is, after all, possible Lord Sainsbury > was not acting out of guilt, philanthropy or the > fear of having to pay more for tomatoes. And maybe > Tristram Hunt MP (Eton, Observer, BBC) has no idea > how plant stories. And, of course, it doesn't > easily fit with the idea that the Labour's woes > are all caused by hard-left troublemaking, rather > than Blairite (and ex-SDP) grasping grudgery. > > But it's certainly a thought, and more likely, to > my mind, that most of the above. Not least because > all the information I've got comes from the > Electoral Commission and (perhaps less plausibly) > Wikipedia, rather than a bunch of other media > outlets that, with respect, do little more than > recycle other people's agendas. Corbyn supporters consistently moving into COnspiract Theorty territory is another warning light for me on him

But this is a "what if scenarios" two weeks ago the 'client' would be asking "what if the Uk leaves the EU?" And, you'd have to say "this hasn't happened before so we need to make some assumptions on Consumer spending, inflation, levels of investment etc etc. Other than exchange rate we have no meaningful data of this sorts based on 11 days. What hard data are you inputting then, there's been almost none at the aggregate level has there?

Where I agree with you entirely Lordhip is on the uncertainty - I don't think we should even have an election yet because of this just get on and get some heads of agreement on Brexit negotiated.

Of course the data you have there is no point in discussing with me , MM, yes, that's handy.

Still amazed that your models and analysis can do so much on now 12 days data ( including none on economic growth, employment, inflation, consumer spending at an aggregate etc etc) on a scenario, Brexit, of which we have no precedent and your modelling is based on no assumptions. Mmmmmmmm.

Anyway, see the other thread. I don't understand how you've done any modelling on 11 days data on which the only hard data you have is the exchange rate. It's a bullshit model or has massive heroic assumptions - what are your inputs? Just your assumptions I'm presuming as we've no hard datA yet on anything ( other than the ?)

So where's your data to input for the last 11 days? How have your models calibrated anything other than guess work to come out with these scenarios? We don't know do we? We have no meaningful data yet? So you have made heroic assumptions or you haven't actually used any models? Any sensible model - and I think that's an oxymoron - needs data. The only conceivable way you could have done this is by making massive assumptions on say interest rates, trade levels, the value of the ? as 11 days gives you no meaningful data does it?

jaywalker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > OK try this > > The EU can spot a hegemonic possibility when they > see one. If they refuse to negotiate even > informally before A50 is invoked we are placed in > a hopeless negotiating position. > > The EU can fix individual members problems. But we > have declared we are no longer a member! > > The accuracy of models of system outcomes is > actually quite good. See the weather forecast. > There is MUCH more data and MUCH more computing > power (Moore's law) now: even 'chaotic' systems > have long periods of stability. The BofE is > polling its informants DAILY to ascertain the > 'real' reaction to regrexit. > > Trade deals in the EU involve free movement of > labour. Unfortunately most regrexiters voted > 'leave' on the basis of atavistic notions of > nationhood. > > The point of a model is that it models the system, > not the shock. The shock can be calibrated - for > example by the BofE's polling of informants. What were the models predicting, say 2 years out, in 2006?

Ok try this We have no real negotiation strength - we do The EU can fix individual members problems that occur as a result of Brexit - on what evidence? Greece? The world can be explained by models.......oh yes Trade deals can't be put together quickly - they can actually The EU doesn't want to get to a workable compromise - of course they do A 'Brexit' type scenario has never happened so how do your models build that in? I've said we are going to have economic hardship, largely as a result of uncertainty, my point is that if we get on with it, things won't be as bad as your models suggest

Spot on Louisa

I think you and Jaywalker should be on the MPC forthwith - your talents are wasted on the EDF. In other news, two blokes with a spreadsheet and "The Dummy's Guide to Economics" get very excited.

I think the thing that horrifies much of the PLP is his complete incompetence rather than his ideology - the Corbynistas hide his uselessness behind 'the new kind of politics mantra'

p!ssing in the wind but p1ss on by all means

I think there's a potential strong brand in here "Sweary Builder" , think "Aussie Man with a van"; I also think there's some right precious W*nkers in SE22 nowadays

PS you may know something about modelling, your post suggest you know very little about negotiation, if we are going to patronise....

Was that the modelling that failed to predict the financial crisis in 2008 - whereas as some more observational economist called it right? was that the Modelling that in the late 80s said the Yen was about to become the global currency and Japan would overtake the US in the early 90s. Modelling is flawed because it tries to rationalise irrational behaviour, tries to simplify the complex and basis future predictions on past outcomes. Economics is dismal as a science and there's plenty of empirical evidence to back that up. Where does my attitude mirror Gove's? you are confusing an argument that things might not be so bad with a dogma, never what I was trying to do. Remove the red mist. I VOTED REMAIN - take that in.

No sh1t Sherlock. I mentioned the FTSE 250 too as having made some recovery but being down. There's just a bunch of negative sentiment at first it was look at the FTSE and now when it's at a 8 month high people are saying well that international - changed from the story a week on Friday. I need to stress again I voted remain, I think we'll have a recession but there's plenty of sound argument that it won't be the catastrophe that many people think. Three were so,e very similar arguments around not joining the Euro; similar argument were put up when Switzerland voted not to join in the early 99s too. None of us know but I think it will sort itself out ok - or certainly there is a very good chance it will.

Plus the volatility is more problematic for EUropan banks than us - Italian bank especially, but Deutchbank looking wobbly