Jump to content

Recommended Posts

@Red Devil - From the article I linked to:


"It is not good enough to say most forecasts were based on an assumption of an immediate UK notification of Article 50... Brexit uncertainty exists regardless of when the UK informs the EU of its intention to leave "

We have to accept that things haven't been as bad as was predicted. Of course, that's not to say that leaving the EU will not have negative long term consequences, but I think Remainers (of which I am one) have to accept that the dire predictions made about the immediate impacts of a leave vote haven't materialised.

More like Cognitive Dissonance than bias...


Economists cannot forecast illogical behaviour of the herd...excessive borrowing to spend... overoptimistic expectations based on unreal criteria etc., etc. When the chickens come home to roost don't blame the economists - we can only comment on what reality is or might be, either historically or otherwise.


Current account - deficit; current budget - deficit; Government borrowing - all time high; Personal borrowing - all time high; Currency - trending definitely devaluation; Inflation - soon to rise dramatically in certain critical sectors; Health sector - underfunded; Education - underfunded; Housing - underfunded;


Brexit negotiations - not even started, totally unknown even to ministers.


Prognosis - doubtful & uncertain.


What more signs do you need ?

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @Red Devil - From the article I linked to:

>

> "It is not good enough to say most forecasts were

> based on an assumption of an immediate UK

> notification of Article 50... Brexit uncertainty

> exists regardless of when the UK informs the EU of

> its intention to leave "


Logically that should be the case. But have you noticed how financial markets, and the economy as a whole, often don't seem to react to the prospect of events on the horizon, but only respond when things actually happen? I'm not sure why this happens - but I have noticed it before.

Jenny1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > @Red Devil - From the article I linked to:

> >

> > "It is not good enough to say most forecasts

> were

> > based on an assumption of an immediate UK

> > notification of Article 50... Brexit

> uncertainty

> > exists regardless of when the UK informs the EU

> of

> > its intention to leave "

>

> Logically that should be the case. But have you

> noticed how financial markets, and the economy as

> a whole, often don't seem to react to the prospect

> of events on the horizon, but only respond when

> things actually happen? I'm not sure why this

> happens - but I have noticed it before.


With article 50 to be triggered in March, I guess we will soon see whether or not it has an impact.

Jenny1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > @Red Devil - From the article I linked to:

> >

> > "It is not good enough to say most forecasts

> were

> > based on an assumption of an immediate UK

> > notification of Article 50... Brexit

> uncertainty

> > exists regardless of when the UK informs the EU

> of

> > its intention to leave "

>

> Logically that should be the case. But have you

> noticed how financial markets, and the economy as

> a whole, often don't seem to react to the prospect

> of events on the horizon, but only respond when

> things actually happen? I'm not sure why this

> happens - but I have noticed it before.


The markets mainly moved on the basis of receiving huge quantities of QE which flowed more or less directly into the pockets of the banks & larger companies thus boosting the already rich with what was effectively unearned income that was reflected in their share prices. We are not all in it together when the benefits flow - only when they need bailing out.


Others got caught up in the feel good factor thinking that they too were to benefit in this supposed economic uplift & spent & spent & spent.... It is a financial chimera. Too late will they realize that this will not be so - the people who have loaded their credit/debit cards, overdrafts & remortgages with debt will learn a very sorry lesson over the next few years when there are the inevitable price increases, wage stagnation, job losses, cutbacks, less working hours etc that are on the horizon, as various businesses cut back on expenses & beyond that when interest rates do go up as they struggle to pay for their excessive spending.


The Chinese government has recently taken radical action to prevent further capital flight to protect its shaky economy - they are preparing for the Trump economic war. Heretofore [up to 1st January 2017] every Chinese was able to export $50,000 per year with no questions asked. Now they have to justify every purpose for its use including invoices from schools/universities, invoices from foreign companies for supply of goods [permission not now given if similar is available in China]. The Chinese buyers are already defaulting on property purchases in Australia, New Zealand, UK, US, Germany, France, Brazil, Canada. So the marketing in China will come to an end and developers of properties in these economies will suffer a crash in their cashflow - prices will fall. House prices for 2017 will be flat at best & will likely fall. This will affect our economy as they were significant buyers of property & other assets.


This will not offset inflation in the construction industry as much of the purchases are in $ or are energy linked - on top of a flat market we will have inflation at 7%+ in construction [last year 6% - RICS figure]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But it does make a difference, uncertainty isn't

> some form of mathematical constant...


Don't know what you are trying to say, but your statement here is true - if it were a constant then it could be computed accurately.


Uncertainty is chaotic, but it can be modeled to reflect particular circumstances - we can apply certain deviation factors that are relatively dependable; the greater the range of the model the less accurate will be the answers you get. But for particular circumstances we can use uncertainty indices to point the way forward for specific issues. The biggest problem is that uncertainty typically rises abruptly but declines very gradually due to issues of trust & confidence.


The BoE has done its best to allay uncertainty but the government has exacerbated an already very uncertain economic environment - most economists are scratching their heads in frustration & foreigners are bemused with the UK government [non]performance.

OK Economy people riddle me this


The BOE and Government states we are growing faster than other economies


However when calculated in Dollars our GDP (last years in the link) will have shrunk

and not only that we will have fallen behind France since June 16. Also if the

pound tumbles after May invokes article 50 we could fall behind India putting us

7th in the world (we were 5th). No doubt in France our economic performance is being

reported in Dollars.


Some people say there is a danger of us even being relegated from the G7 and the pound

losing its status as a reserve currency yet everybody saying the economy is great and

the BOE apologising.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> OK Economy people riddle me this

>

> The BOE and Government states we are growing

> faster than other economies

>

> However when calculated in Dollars our GDP (last

> years in the link) will have shrunk

> and not only that we will have fallen behind

> France since June 16. Also if the

> pound tumbles after May invokes article 50 we

> could fall behind India putting us

> 7th in the world (we were 5th). No doubt in

> France our economic performance is being

> reported in Dollars.

>

> Some people say there is a danger of us even being

> relegated from the G7 and the pound

> losing its status as a reserve currency yet

> everybody saying the economy is great and

> the BOE apologising.

>

>

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Unite

> d_Kingdom


Nominal GDP is still expected to grow but at a slower rate in the coming years, mainly due to Brexit uncertainty. It has already fallen in Construction, Agriculture & Industry but was offset by increases in Services. However the effect of the devaluation in sterling will lead to a reduction of GDP measured as PPP [Purchasing Power Parity] & this will affect not only the UK ranking but also the UK capacity to perform internationally.


We have already fallen behind France


See the following comment from the Wikipedia article


"In the third quarter of 2016 wages were still 7% below the level they had been at prior to the Great Recession in real terms.[94] The previous 10 years had been the worst decade for real wage growth since the 1860s. Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, described it as a lost decade. Productivity was 16% below the long-term trend."


There are two systemic issues in the current economy 1] Distribution - between regions & income/wealth levels experienced by different levels in society. 2] productivity - Krugman has made the comment "?productivity isn?t everything but in the long run it is almost everything? Krugman was talking about the determinants of growth, and hence living standards, in the economy over the longer-run. The raw numbers, looked at over long spans of history and large cross-sections of countries, suggest Krugman is right.


The effects of any improvement in the economy have been skewed & not everyone can recognize the claimed improvement.


Reserve currency ststus - SDR


The respective weights of the U.S. dollar, euro, Chinese renminbi, Japanese yen, and pound sterling are 41.73 percent, 30.93 percent, 10.92 percent, 8.33 percent, and 8.09 percent. These weights were used to determine the amounts of each of the five currencies included in the new SDR valuation basket that took effect on October 1, 2016 & are set every 5 years but also adjusted daily taking relative currency values into account. The next review is in 2020 & yes, the UK could fall out of being a reserve currency or have its weighting reduced. Sterling has been falling as an influence since the creation of the SDR in 1969.


Andy Haldene is a great economist and has been very hard on himself. He is a down to earth person and well grounded without any airs or pretensions. We all admit to failing to measure the uncertain & irrational elements in the economy & have to do better in the future at evaluating the seemingly irrational micro behaviours that can radically influence the macro outturn. Comparing economic forecasting to weather forecasting is a bit tongue-in-cheek - we don't have the luxury of having multiple satellites broadcasting real-time information that we can use. Much of our data is lagging & the uncertainty data is mainly compiled from social feedback & analysis which is subjective & varied.


Brexit is a unique scenario & is made more so due to the lack of information/direction coming from the government. Who knows what is inside any of their heads - Brexit is Brexit; Red, white & Blue Brexit; more like BS Brexit; - we are in a state of suspended animation until this dormant government actually says/does something comprehensible & that could be made more difficult in the light of whatever the Supreme Court might rule.


We are directionless policy-wise & we can only wait & see.


Addendum - The Economist article on May is telling. They don't make commentaries lightly but their Theresa Maybe tag is hard-hitting & timely. The article was obviously written by a Tory sympathizer but they spared her little and characterized her openly as a personification of Eden rather than a Thatcher reincarnation.


Let's hole it doesn't turn into Theresa Mayday....Mayday...Mayday...

Thanks :)


I just found this Telegraph article from a year ago, they were gloating about the UK becoming the worlds 4th largest economy and mention France and Italy would be knocked out of the G8 due to their poor economies.


Of course we may still boom after Brexit and I wouldn't be complaining.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/12068319/Booming-Britain-to-become-worlds-fourth-largest-economy-as-France-and-Italy-face-G8-exclusion.html

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Chief economist of Bank of England admits errors

> in Brexit forecasting:

> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/05/c

> hief-economist-of-bank-of-england-admits-errors



Personally I'm nearer this....


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/06/economists-economic-policy-brexit-crash-failure

Morgan Stanley have it - we need a Goldilocks Brexit, however ...


'Morgan Stanley makes it pretty clear that it sees the "Goldilocks" Brexit ? named for the fairy tale when the character of the same name tries out porridge and beds in a house of bears to find the conditions that are "just right" ? is pretty unlikely'


http://uk.businessinsider.com/morgan-stanley-on-goldilocks-brexit-and-the-british-economy-2017-1

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Chief economist of Bank of England admits

> errors

> > in Brexit forecasting:

> >

> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/05/c

>

> > hief-economist-of-bank-of-england-admits-errors

>

>

> Personally I'm nearer this....

>

> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan

> /06/economists-economic-policy-brexit-crash-failur

> e


Sir Simon Jenkins [PPE degree] on his usual rant against science & mathematics of any sort. A truly regressive chappie - ex liberal turned small conservative in every way. Tried his hand editing the Evening Standard - moved on. Tried his hand at editing the Times - was moved on by Murdoch due to poor sales. Tried his hand as Political Editor at the Economist - moved on. Writes for the Guardian & Huffington Post. Quite a mover. He's in favour of handing back the Falkland to Argentina. Famous for saying "Wave a banknote at a pundit and he'll predict anything" He's not so slow at taking a few pounds for his own brand of punditry. Gave great parties at the expense of the National Trust. You are welcome to him.

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We know who he is we aren't complete ignoramuses

> to your towering intellect and fantastic forecasts

> :)


He's a wannabe economist, described as a "professional miserabilist" in The Londonist.


As to my intellect, it is modest but I try to be objective & honest. As to forecasts - these are in Theresa Maybe's waiting room so let's see where we are in 12 months time....

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...