Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Moore remains odds-on favourite in Alabama even though the Dem

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited December 6 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Moore remains odds-on favourite in Alabama even though the Dems are spending nearly ten times as much on TV ads like these

The biggest current political betting markets in the UK are not about British politics at all. They were about the US with Trump’s survival being number one and the Alabama senate race, which takes place next Tuesday, number two.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • He's awful
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,806
    Second! Like Remain.....
  • He's awful

    Am I talking about David Davis or Roy Moore?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 8,880

    He's awful

    Am I talking about David Davis or Roy Moore?
    Both?
  • Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,806

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 3,030

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    quantitative I think
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 8,880

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    David Camerons fault surely!!
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 5,858
    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    I'm reminded of the Mitchell & Webb sketch..."Are we the baddies?".
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    EY.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 59,709
    edited December 6

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 3,030
    On topic - yep I reckon 4.6 on betfair is value.

    I'd say it's 65/35 for the Republicans at best.

    Pollsters probably aren't used to competitive Alabama statewide elections, and we may see Republicans stay home for a weak candidate... let's see anyway.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 7,006
    Scott_P said:
    Value if you consider his threat to resign if Green is sacked was not about shoring up the DPM but was really looking for an honourable exit.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,221
    edited December 6
    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049
    FPT

    I remain of the view that we should wait and see what deal is put on the table.

    May's Florence (and previous Lancaster House) speeches acknowledged there would be three categories of UK regulation post Brexit: (1) those where we'd want to maintain alignment (mutual interest - basically shadowing EU); (2) do similar things but in our own way (common goals, I presume w/o dumping, but with a degree of allowance for UK standards), and; (3) areas of divergence (which is the latitude for regulatory innovation over time)

    The question is what and how much falls into each category. I'd expect things like cars/aerospace/energy/infrastructure in (1) and agriculture/security/employment in (2) and greater flexibility on services in (3).

    Now for the hard part.

    I think a lot of the angst on both sides, within the UK and EU is strong emotion overlaying what are usually logically technical common standards, many of which exist also at a global or international level anyway.

    The EU insist on sticking their flag onto everything, and pursuing symbols of statehood (presidents, flags and new EU institutions) which does everything possible to get the British goat up, and rouses all their deepest suspicions. They also continue to pursue further integration of the eurozone, under "ever closer union" in the Lisbon Treaty with an activist ECJ, which constitutes the hard evidence.

    The UK have gone along with it historically for the basic reason (amongst the elites) that such things "don't matter" because it's purely emotional, and amongst a small minority, the traditional nation state is a bit of an annochrism anyway, and the only thing that matters is the level of inside influence the UK has in shaping global affairs.

    But, it does matter. Nation states are fundamentally social and emotional entities made up of real, feeling live human beings. That's how they stick, or don't stick. Same for the UK nationalists. Same for the EU federalists.

    So the UK aligning its own standards and regulations via Westminster that are very similar to the EU's (just with a Union Jack on them rather than an EU flag) on things that'd be very similar anyway whilst, at the same time, putting a permanent end to political integration could go a long way to taking the sting out of the issue. And I think we'd end up having some form of informal influence across the EU and in the WTO in the longer-term anyway, on the former, by virtue of our economic and political weight.

    So I'm open minded. I'll be looking for how much meaningful latitude we are offered under (3) and the precise terms of (1) and (2).

    And I'll be ignoring most political commentators and journalists (who persistently get the detail wrong) and looking at the hard evidence for myself.
  • On topic.

    I tipped backing Roy Moore at 4/7, he's now 1/6

    I am tipster of the year (If you ignore the fact his price went to 10/11 for a while)
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
    The government has a long standing relationship with EY AIUI, I'm sure they've done the report already.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 15,422
    edited December 6

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
    They could have asked the Commission for theirs.

    An Assessment Of The Economic Impact Of Brexit
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144
    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.
  • Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
    They could have asked the Commission for theirs.

    An Assessment Of The Economic Impact Of Brexit
    I'm gobsmacked, I've just pulled up our own report on leaving the single market and customs union or one of them.

    We compiled this report back in March 2016 and updated it regularly since then.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
    They could have asked the Commission for theirs.

    An Assessment Of The Economic Impact Of Brexit
    I'm gobsmacked, I've just pulled up our own report on leaving the single market and customs union or one of them.

    We compiled this report back in March 2016 and updated it regularly since then.
    I remember writing the one for my old workplace and contributing to the one for my new workplace. I'm genuinely baffled by DExEU not having one.

    FWIW, both reports came to the same conclusion, single market - yes, customs union - no.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,494
    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    And remitting any tarriffs to the EU too, right?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 15,422
    This will end in Article 50 being revoked and the Brexiteers all being hauled before a Chilcot style inquiry.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 293
    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    To be fair, the last week has been ample evidence that our current crop of politicians shouldn't be allowed any say in anything more complex than running a whelk stall.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 3,030

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
    They could have asked the Commission for theirs.

    An Assessment Of The Economic Impact Of Brexit
    I'm gobsmacked, I've just pulled up our own report on leaving the single market and customs union or one of them.

    We compiled this report back in March 2016 and updated it regularly since then.
    I suspect DD will walk this one back too... perhaps emphasize the many, many impact assessments that were read by the department/himself etc.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144
    Mortimer said:

    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    And remitting any tarriffs to the EU too, right?
    No, we'd keep the tariffs, at least in theory.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,371

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 33,339

    This will end in Article 50 being revoked and the Brexiteers all being hauled before a Chilcot style inquiry.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 39,452
    Mr. Max, indeed. I said for a long time I was pretty relaxed about a range of leaving options, with the exception being we have to leave the customs union.

    Mr. Glenn, unilateral revocation remains open to question, and there's the democratic matter of just ignoring a referendum (which is why I think another remains a credible option).
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 10,120
    edited December 6
    David Davis chance of being PM must have gone completely and it is looking more likely that a remainer will lead the party post TM.

    It is clear that the EU is an organisation no one believing in democracy should have anything to do with.

    However, the shear force of remain influence in the EU and the UK is overwhelming the exit process.

    Breaking news. Progress between TM and Arlene Foster in phone call
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 742

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    There really is no point as no one knows. We were supposed to be in a Brexit recession now according to the predictions., Who predicted during the financial crisis in 2010 that by 2017 we would have record employment and record low unemployment in this Country. The forecasts were for 20 years of recession.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 1,892

    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    To be fair, the last week has been ample evidence that our current crop of politicians shouldn't be allowed any say in anything more complex than running a whelk stall.
    To many journalists in positions of power who think its just some word play and a bit of fun and games without any understanding of how the real world works.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,494

    This will end in Article 50 being revoked and the Brexiteers all being hauled before a Chilcot style inquiry.
    Remember the Golden rule of Brexit....
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,494
    MaxPB said:

    Mortimer said:

    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    And remitting any tarriffs to the EU too, right?
    No, we'd keep the tariffs, at least in theory.
    Oh right, apologies, I assumed that there would be a demand for remitting some tarriffs to the EU as we do now.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 925

    This will end in Article 50 being revoked and the Brexiteers all being hauled before a Chilcot style inquiry.
    Yezovshchina is coming for the leavers.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,000
    FWIW I think Moore will win easily. America is so polarised currently that people will just ignore damaging allegations about their preferred candidate and assume the source is biased.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 293
    JonathanD said:

    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    To be fair, the last week has been ample evidence that our current crop of politicians shouldn't be allowed any say in anything more complex than running a whelk stall.
    To many journalists in positions of power who think its just some word play and a bit of fun and games without any understanding of how the real world works.
    Indeed, and maybe today is as good a time as any to post the Stephen Collins meisterwerk.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318
    Davis can't be favourite for first out of the Cabinet because @HYUFD has him becoming next PM.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,806
    Meanwhile, back in the real world:

    One strand of comment that has been common amongst those who oppose Britain’s withdrawal from the EU is that when the alleged difficulties and consequences of Brexit become clear to voters they will come to regret the decision to Leave – or at least will wish to sue for a soft Brexit. The experience of the last six months suggests this logic may be faulty.......

    ....If the talks about Brexit continue to be difficult and if the economy does indeed begin to suffer, we should not presume that voters in Britain will change their minds about the merits of Brexit. Rather they may simply blame politicians - on both sides of the channel – for their apparent failure to deliver what those who voted for Leave have all along said they want.


    https://whatukthinks.org/eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/EU-Briefing-Paper-11-Half-time-brexit-negotiations.pdf
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318
    fpt

    Dura_Ace said:



    The solution to NI border is, and always was, that there will be a customs border but that provisions need to be made for it to be as 'soft' as possible through the provisions the UK government has suggested. There was no other solution.

    Of course there are other solutions: revoke A50 or 32 county Ireland. Both would be ideal.

    The latter would probably result in civil war in NI, so not sure that is an optimal solution.
    The former would probably result in a civil war in the UK. So overall, not terribly helpful overall.
    Bring on a civil war.

    Remainers would win, we’re younger than Leavers. A distinct advantage in wars.
    Nah. You have neither the commitment nor the ruthlessness. Your snowflake generation wouldn't last 30 seconds.
    It's true. Fanatics versus Men of Reason? The MoRs have no chance.
    Remainers are not men of reason. Just cowards.
    You are saying this on a thread with @Dura_Ace? The @Dura_Ace who has served in HMF?

    Tell us, Lincolnshire and District Cub Scouts Distinction in Hopscotch aside, what does your service record look like?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,371
    currystar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    There really is no point as no one knows. We were supposed to be in a Brexit recession now according to the predictions., Who predicted during the financial crisis in 2010 that by 2017 we would have record employment and record low unemployment in this Country. The forecasts were for 20 years of recession.
    I repeat. Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years? The financial industry seems to think it is worth trying.
    I didn't say it was easy.
    Trying to run the country on instinct or whatever the Daily Mail headline is today is a recipe for disaster.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 59,709
    edited December 6


    And to think David Davis said these impact assessments were important in helping to work out the details of the FTA we want.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318
    If he had a shred of self-respect or decency (which I think he has), he should go.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 41,925
    currystar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    There really is no point as no one knows. We were supposed to be in a Brexit recession now according to the predictions., Who predicted during the financial crisis in 2010 that by 2017 we would have record employment and record low unemployment in this Country. The forecasts were for 20 years of recession.
    We've not bothered - in my opinion it is a racing certainty that we'll be heading out the EU straight into transitional fudge pie.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 742

    currystar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    There really is no point as no one knows. We were supposed to be in a Brexit recession now according to the predictions., Who predicted during the financial crisis in 2010 that by 2017 we would have record employment and record low unemployment in this Country. The forecasts were for 20 years of recession.
    I repeat. Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years? The financial industry seems to think it is worth trying.
    I didn't say it was easy.
    Trying to run the country on instinct or whatever the Daily Mail headline is today is a recipe for disaster.
    Absolutely not, this has never happened before and you would pay a fortune for someone to guess
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 293
    If there were any impact assessments, I would expect them to have leaked in some form.

    At the very least, someone, somewhere, would know someone at DExEU working on putting them together.

    The fact they haven't leaked makes me inclined to believe DD. Either that, or DExEU is a very tight ship, which seems implausible.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 59,709
    edited December 6
    TOPPING said:

    If he had a shred of self-respect or decency (which I think he has), he should go.
    Not important is it, it's not like the financial services sector is the biggest contributor to the Treasury.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 925
    TOPPING said:



    You are saying this on a thread with @Dura_Ace? The @Dura_Ace who has served in HMF?

    Tell us, Lincolnshire and District Cub Scouts Distinction in Hopscotch aside, what does your service record look like?

    No need to get the campaign ribbons out. I'm sure there are lions and poltroons on both sides.

    However, it was the experience of going to war three times in nine years that aided me on my ideological journey to EU arch-federalism.
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,833
    MaxPB said:

    Mortimer said:

    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    And remitting any tarriffs to the EU too, right?
    No, we'd keep the tariffs, at least in theory.
    https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/facts-figures/customs-duties-mean-revenue_en
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 884

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
    They could have asked the Commission for theirs.

    An Assessment Of The Economic Impact Of Brexit
    Or they could have just used the one commissioned by the CBI from PWC

    PWC Report on Brexit for CBI

    OF course, it didn't model the EEA option - based on the idea that it wouldn't show any significant economic divergence and that wouldn't have supported the CBI's stance in the referendum.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,221

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    The crunch issue is whether, in a WTO arrangement, the pricing power of the EU would be greater or lesser than the UK's pricing power. In order to make this judgement, you need to know whether there really is an EU wide competitive market or whether there are local country or sector markets. This is unknowable until Brexit is implemented.
  • FWIW I think Moore will win easily. America is so polarised currently that people will just ignore damaging allegations about their preferred candidate and assume the source is biased.

    You are probably right, and of course, it's Alabama. But the odds on The Other Guy are generous, and it's a wild political climate just now......
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318
    currystar said:

    currystar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    There really is no point as no one knows. We were supposed to be in a Brexit recession now according to the predictions., Who predicted during the financial crisis in 2010 that by 2017 we would have record employment and record low unemployment in this Country. The forecasts were for 20 years of recession.
    I repeat. Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years? The financial industry seems to think it is worth trying.
    I didn't say it was easy.
    Trying to run the country on instinct or whatever the Daily Mail headline is today is a recipe for disaster.
    Absolutely not, this has never happened before and you would pay a fortune for someone to guess
    Not 100% sure if you are being serious here, but you provide a range of scenarios, together with associated probabilities. Hence in any model assumptions can be tweaked.

    Or alternatively [WARNING EXPERTS HAVE A HAND IN THIS NEXT BIT] - use a gravity model to understand and predict bilateral trade flows.
  • Onto something more optimistic than Brexit

  • ElliotElliot Posts: 232
    Are all those outraged about the government not depending on economic forecasts in Brexit planning the same ones who insisted on the "economic facts" of us having an immediate year long recession in the event of a Leave vote? The same ones that believed the predictions of an interest rate surge that would cost home-owners thousands in mortgage payments? People who insisted the economic analyses showed the City would haemorrhage jobs after Article 50 was invoked?

    The UK economics forecasting profession should have had an almighty reckoning in the last year and a half. Not a single one of the forecasters used by the Bank of England has got it right. We have full employment, low interest rates, company after company building new London HQs and a hiring boom in the City. And yet people double down on insisting economic forecasts are the gospel truth and all policy should be formed around them.

    I guess people just can't handle being wrong on such an emotional issue, and certainly can't readjust their understanding of the world.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144

    MaxPB said:

    Mortimer said:

    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    And remitting any tarriffs to the EU too, right?
    No, we'd keep the tariffs, at least in theory.
    https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/facts-figures/customs-duties-mean-revenue_en
    As a non-member we would, in theory, keep the tariffs. Not sure how that would hold up against a money hungry organisation like the EU though.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,314
    I've never been to Alabama.

    But I've never let ignorance hold me back from offering an opinion in the past...

    The Democrat looks to be value here. Why? Because I think black turnout will be high (see Virginia senatorial election), and I think turnout of typically Republican white women will be low. I would also note that opinion polls in Virginia and New Jersey last month underestimated the Dem margin pretty significantly.

    All that being said, I require at least 2-1 to bet on Alabama, simply because this is such a Red state.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 39,452
    edited December 6
    It's at times like this I wish Aurelian were PM. He'd sort this out.

    Edited extra bit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurelian
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,833
    MaxPB said:

    Mortimer said:

    MaxPB said:

    What's stupid is that most analysis I have seen for the Customs Union advises the UK to leave, it's having the rules made for us but having no say in them. Literally the worst of all worlds.

    And remitting any tarriffs to the EU too, right?
    No, we'd keep the tariffs, at least in theory.
    https://www.taxation.co.uk/Articles/2017/04/04/336250/beginner-s-guide-customs-duties

    In 2015, according to the European Commission website customs duties on imported goods worth €1,727bn entering the EU from non-EU countries, collected €23.3bn, of which €18.6bn were transferred to the EU budget. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, in 2015-16 customs duties collected in the UK amounted to £3.1bn paid to the EU.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,573
    edited December 6

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    Only if you had a range of assessments applying a range of knowns, known knowns, unknowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns (or something similar). One assessment is useless, as it will be seen through a certain prism and would have a very low confidence rating and would be of little value. A range of assessments allow you to form a guessed overview of likelihood and pick out a few likely effects.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 7,006

    twitter.com/JakubKrupa/status/938354431086809089

    That would be the Shippers book that lays the blame for no emergency brake on FOM on the Home Secretary? Whatever happened to Theresa May?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,221
    The EU Commission is playing hardball in negotiations because it believes its own report that the UK will be far worse off under WTO rules than would the EU.

    If, like the Treasury report on Brexit, the report turns out to be wrong the EU will suffer more than it thought. But that will be too late, the die will have been cast. What is needed is for the EU Commission to be convinced that their report can not be accurate and that the outcome is unknown, including that WTO would be worse for the EU than for the UK.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 1,892
    .
    Elliot said:

    Are all those outraged about the government not depending on economic forecasts in Brexit planning the same ones who insisted on the "economic facts" of us having an immediate year long recession in the event of a Leave vote? The same ones that believed the predictions of an interest rate surge that would cost home-owners thousands in mortgage payments? People who insisted the economic analyses showed the City would haemorrhage jobs after Article 50 was invoked?

    The UK economics forecasting profession should have had an almighty reckoning in the last year and a half. Not a single one of the forecasters used by the Bank of England has got it right. We have full employment, low interest rates, company after company building new London HQs and a hiring boom in the City. And yet people double down on insisting economic forecasts are the gospel truth and all policy should be formed around them.

    I guess people just can't handle being wrong on such an emotional issue, and certainly can't readjust their understanding of the world.

    Yes, we've been fortunate that the EU27 economy has done much better than expected and has dragged the UK along with it to some extent.

    On the other hand, people's wages are falling in real terms and we've gone from being the fastest growing in the G7 to the slowest.
  • It's at times like this I wish Aurelian were PM. He'd sort this out.

    Edited extra bit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurelian

    We need a Constantine I.

    Someone to convert from Leaver to Remain and change the course of human history.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318

    The EU Commission is playing hardball in negotiations because it believes its own report that the UK will be far worse off under WTO rules than would the EU.

    If, like the Treasury report on Brexit, the report turns out to be wrong the EU will suffer more than it thought. But that will be too late, the die will have been cast. What is needed is for the EU Commission to be convinced that their report can not be accurate and that the outcome is unknown, including that WTO would be worse for the EU than for the UK.

    I would not underestimate the desire of the EU to put political ideals above economic reality.

    Indeed I have heard that very gambit praised to high heavens by some on here in relation to the UK's approach.
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,833
    philiph said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    Only if you had a range of assessments applying a range of knowns, known knowns, unknowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns (or something similar). One assessment is useless, as it will be seen through a certain prism and would have a very low confidence rating and would be of little value. A range of assessments allow you to form a guessed overview of likelihood and pick out a few likely effects.
    A summary of which is likely to indicate a range of possibilities from mildly beneficial down to armageddon with a mean outcome somewhere around "a few years of significant discomfort, a few more of mild discomfort, and then a slight improvement on what came before" ;-)
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318

    philiph said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    Only if you had a range of assessments applying a range of knowns, known knowns, unknowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns (or something similar). One assessment is useless, as it will be seen through a certain prism and would have a very low confidence rating and would be of little value. A range of assessments allow you to form a guessed overview of likelihood and pick out a few likely effects.
    A summary of which is likely to indicate a range of possibilities from mildly beneficial down to armageddon with a mean outcome somewhere around "a few years of significant discomfort, a few more of mild discomfort, and then a slight improvement on what came before" ;-)
    Yep that sounds about right. Didn't see it written on the side of a bus, that said.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049
    TonyE said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    Who would you have got to do it? The Treasury?
    My firm has done it, there's several other banks and city institutions that could have done it (and have done it)

    Firms like KPMG and McKinseys could also do it.
    They could have asked the Commission for theirs.

    An Assessment Of The Economic Impact Of Brexit
    Or they could have just used the one commissioned by the CBI from PWC

    PWC Report on Brexit for CBI

    OF course, it didn't model the EEA option - based on the idea that it wouldn't show any significant economic divergence and that wouldn't have supported the CBI's stance in the referendum.
    The idea that the Big4 produce analytical reports wholly independent of their Clients preferred conclusions is touching.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144
    TOPPING said:

    The EU Commission is playing hardball in negotiations because it believes its own report that the UK will be far worse off under WTO rules than would the EU.

    If, like the Treasury report on Brexit, the report turns out to be wrong the EU will suffer more than it thought. But that will be too late, the die will have been cast. What is needed is for the EU Commission to be convinced that their report can not be accurate and that the outcome is unknown, including that WTO would be worse for the EU than for the UK.

    I would not underestimate the desire of the EU to put political ideals above economic reality.

    Indeed I have heard that very gambit praised to high heavens by some on here in relation to the UK's approach.
    Definitely true. If the UK was given tariff free goods trade and no need for regulatory alignment on services trade it would weaken the case for membership of the EU and eventually the EU's continued existence. More and more people are unhappy with the EU, but willing to put up with it because it brings economic gains, especially for continental countries who's trade is 60-65% within the bloc.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 232
    JonathanD said:

    .

    Elliot said:

    Are all those outraged about the government not depending on economic forecasts in Brexit planning the same ones who insisted on the "economic facts" of us having an immediate year long recession in the event of a Leave vote? The same ones that believed the predictions of an interest rate surge that would cost home-owners thousands in mortgage payments? People who insisted the economic analyses showed the City would haemorrhage jobs after Article 50 was invoked?

    The UK economics forecasting profession should have had an almighty reckoning in the last year and a half. Not a single one of the forecasters used by the Bank of England has got it right. We have full employment, low interest rates, company after company building new London HQs and a hiring boom in the City. And yet people double down on insisting economic forecasts are the gospel truth and all policy should be formed around them.

    I guess people just can't handle being wrong on such an emotional issue, and certainly can't readjust their understanding of the world.

    Yes, we've been fortunate that the EU27 economy has done much better than expected and has dragged the UK along with it to some extent.

    On the other hand, people's wages are falling in real terms and we've gone from being the fastest growing in the G7 to the slowest.
    That would be the EU27 with an unemployment rate 50% higher than ours and lower GDP per capita? They are pulling us along? The EU27 got hammered much harder than us because of poor EU policymaking and now they have a bit of reversion to the mean. And a big part of that is on much higher corporate debt levels than the UK.

    Though I do like the idea that all these Remain-favouring economic think tanks failed because they failed to take into account the EU. And that it had the effect of getting the immediate impact of the Leave vote wrong by miles when they had all the economic date from just a few weeks before.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 16,963
    edited December 6
    The idea that the government would have some magical, detailed insight into the exact impact of an as-yet-unknown trade arrangement on dozens of sectors was obvious baloney from the start, and it certainly wouldn't have any more insight as you an easily get from publicly available documents. So the fuss about the distinction between 'analyses' and 'impact assessments' is just noise. There was never going to be anything interesting in the working papers.

    What actually matters is what arrangement we negotiate with the EU. On that side, hopefully some progress is about to be made. The signals look quite encouraging.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,105

    On topic.

    I tipped backing Roy Moore at 4/7, he's now 1/6

    I am tipster of the year (If you ignore the fact his price went to 10/11 for a while)

    Somewhat surprised so many people thought/think he might lose. What, after all, makes his case significantly different from Trump's?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 39,452
    Mr. Eagles, Aurelian was a more impressive emperor than Constantine. That said, Constantine's decision to move the capital had a massive impact for a thousand years. Of course, if Aurelian hadn't kicked so much arse, there wouldn't've been an Empire for Constantine to rule over.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,221
    A good and worthy effort by OGH to move discussion away from Brexit.

    People don't always get what they deserve.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    On topic, I still don’t have a clue about Alabama. It’s the most red of red States, there’s not been a Democrat elected there for decades, the polling is unreliable and even if loads of Republicans stay at home Moore could still win it. Maybe I just bet against the pervert, for very small stakes after being silly with the cricket.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049
    Pulpstar said:

    currystar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    There really is no point as no one knows. We were supposed to be in a Brexit recession now according to the predictions., Who predicted during the financial crisis in 2010 that by 2017 we would have record employment and record low unemployment in this Country. The forecasts were for 20 years of recession.
    We've not bothered - in my opinion it is a racing certainty that we'll be heading out the EU straight into transitional fudge pie.
    My view is there is little the EU can do to restrain the UK's long-term economic success, post Brexit. Hence the desire to handcuff us in via the A50 negotiations. The transition and adjustment is the uncomfortable bit, and that's the negotiating hook.

    Which is why the EU wants a deal. It's worried that once we get through an tungsten-tipped Brexit (bad for several years) we won't come back for seconds for a while and, when we do, it'll be a different game.

    If the RoW doesn't give that much of a sh*t about the UK and Brexit (0.7% global population), it doesn't care much more about the EU either (6% population) in a world where 80% of economic growth will come from outside both.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318

    The idea that the government would have some magical, detailed insight into the exact impact of an as-yet-unknown trade arrangement on dozens of sectors was obvious baloney from the start, and it certainly wouldn't have any more insight as you an easily get from publicly available documents. So the fuss about the distinction between 'analyses' and 'impact assessments' is just noise. There was never going to be anything interesting in the working papers.

    What actually matters is what arrangement we negotiate with the EU. On that side, hopefully some progress is about to be made. The signals look quite encouraging.

    Economics has been called many things, so I suppose baloney wouldn't be particularly out of place. But it's the least bad way of determining likely impacts on a whole range of issues, bilateral trade, for example.

    To say that it is too complicated is not really a grown-up way forward. If nothing else, such "working in the margin" allows us, the voters, to understand the basis upon which any particular decision was made. That the assessments don't exist confirms that it is gut feel and hope that has fuelled the decisions that have taken us to where we are now.

    Now of course, we have voted for precisely this situation, so there really should be no cause for complaint, but we can at least make observations.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144

    The idea that the government would have some magical, detailed insight into the exact impact of an as-yet-unknown trade arrangement on dozens of sectors was obvious baloney from the start, and it certainly wouldn't have any more insight as you an easily get from publicly available documents. So the fuss about the distinction between 'analyses' and 'impact assessments' is just noise. There was never going to be anything interesting in the working papers.

    What actually matters is what arrangement we negotiate with the EU. On that side, hopefully some progress is about to be made. The signals look quite encouraging.

    The government should at least have assessments for various scenarios available as a baseline to work from. It's about not having any unknown unknowns.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049

    It's at times like this I wish Aurelian were PM. He'd sort this out.

    Edited extra bit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurelian

    We need a Constantine I.

    Someone to convert from Leaver to Remain and change the course of human history.
    Barnier/Juncker is Hannibal, having just won a crushing victory at Cannae he fails to move on to Rome thinking his enemy finished.

    May is Scipio, whilst everyone thinks she's finished, she's about to launch an incursion into the heart of Carthage and defeat him at the Battle of Zuma.
  • Dadge said:

    On topic.

    I tipped backing Roy Moore at 4/7, he's now 1/6

    I am tipster of the year (If you ignore the fact his price went to 10/11 for a while)

    Somewhat surprised so many people thought/think he might lose. What, after all, makes his case significantly different from Trump's?
    Er, the underage girl.....?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 10,290
    Will David Davis have to resign this afternoon for misleading Parliament?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318
    MaxPB said:

    The idea that the government would have some magical, detailed insight into the exact impact of an as-yet-unknown trade arrangement on dozens of sectors was obvious baloney from the start, and it certainly wouldn't have any more insight as you an easily get from publicly available documents. So the fuss about the distinction between 'analyses' and 'impact assessments' is just noise. There was never going to be anything interesting in the working papers.

    What actually matters is what arrangement we negotiate with the EU. On that side, hopefully some progress is about to be made. The signals look quite encouraging.

    The government should at least have assessments for various scenarios available as a baseline to work from. It's about not having any unknown unknowns.
    Yep.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 15,422

    My view is there is little the EU can do to restrain the UK's long-term economic success, post Brexit. Hence the desire to handcuff us in via the A50 negotiations. The transition and adjustment is the uncomfortable bit, and that's the negotiating hook.

    Which is why the EU wants a deal. It's worried that once we get through an tungsten-tipped Brexit (bad for several years) we won't come back for seconds for a while and, when we do, it'll be a different game.

    How is maintaining the territorial integrity of the UK compatible with a tungsten-tipped Brexit?
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,105

    Meanwhile, back in the real world:

    One strand of comment that has been common amongst those who oppose Britain’s withdrawal from the EU is that when the alleged difficulties and consequences of Brexit become clear to voters they will come to regret the decision to Leave – or at least will wish to sue for a soft Brexit. The experience of the last six months suggests this logic may be faulty.......

    ....If the talks about Brexit continue to be difficult and if the economy does indeed begin to suffer, we should not presume that voters in Britain will change their minds about the merits of Brexit. Rather they may simply blame politicians - on both sides of the channel – for their apparent failure to deliver what those who voted for Leave have all along said they want.


    https://whatukthinks.org/eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/EU-Briefing-Paper-11-Half-time-brexit-negotiations.pdf

    This is disingenuous because Brexit voters aren't a homogeneous bloc. Even if 90% of Brexit voters are staunch, that puts them in a national minority whose views could, and should, be overridden. (By this I don't mean that Brexit should be stopped, but that it should be of a non-hard variety.)
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,105

    Dadge said:

    On topic.

    I tipped backing Roy Moore at 4/7, he's now 1/6

    I am tipster of the year (If you ignore the fact his price went to 10/11 for a while)

    Somewhat surprised so many people thought/think he might lose. What, after all, makes his case significantly different from Trump's?
    Er, the underage girl.....?
    Denied.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 41,925
    GIN1138 said:

    Will David Davis have to resign this afternoon for misleading Parliament?

    Has he mislead parliament ?

    Genuine question - Can someone provide the Hansard quotes verbatim..
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,144

    Dadge said:

    On topic.

    I tipped backing Roy Moore at 4/7, he's now 1/6

    I am tipster of the year (If you ignore the fact his price went to 10/11 for a while)

    Somewhat surprised so many people thought/think he might lose. What, after all, makes his case significantly different from Trump's?
    Er, the underage girl.....?
    It's still an allegation, right?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 24,874
    So, a triumph for the Minister for Winging It this morning.

    Presumably there are some competent Brexit-backing Tory MPs somewhere. It would be good if one or two of them could be in the Cabinet.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,573
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    The idea that the government would have some magical, detailed insight into the exact impact of an as-yet-unknown trade arrangement on dozens of sectors was obvious baloney from the start, and it certainly wouldn't have any more insight as you an easily get from publicly available documents. So the fuss about the distinction between 'analyses' and 'impact assessments' is just noise. There was never going to be anything interesting in the working papers.

    What actually matters is what arrangement we negotiate with the EU. On that side, hopefully some progress is about to be made. The signals look quite encouraging.

    The government should at least have assessments for various scenarios available as a baseline to work from. It's about not having any unknown unknowns.
    Yep.
    Which by definition is impossible
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 39,452
    Mr. Royale, *Zama. Also, Hannibal could not have taken Rome. It was too well-defended, had too large a population, and he lacked the siege gear/expertise.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,105

    Pulpstar said:

    currystar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Jeez, David Davis says there was no qualitative analysis taken before the decision to leave the customs unions.

    They could go to any City institution and buy some in. How incompetent is DExEU?!
    The Treasury forecasts of Brexit proved to be worthless qualitively and quantitively. There are too many unknowns for any evaluation to be worth the paper it is written on.
    Read that back to yourself slowly.
    Is it seriously not worth trying to predict the effects of the biggest upheaval in 50 years?
    There really is no point as no one knows. We were supposed to be in a Brexit recession now according to the predictions., Who predicted during the financial crisis in 2010 that by 2017 we would have record employment and record low unemployment in this Country. The forecasts were for 20 years of recession.
    We've not bothered - in my opinion it is a racing certainty that we'll be heading out the EU straight into transitional fudge pie.
    My view is there is little the EU can do to restrain the UK's long-term economic success, post Brexit. Hence the desire to handcuff us in via the A50 negotiations. The transition and adjustment is the uncomfortable bit, and that's the negotiating hook.

    Which is why the EU wants a deal. It's worried that once we get through an tungsten-tipped Brexit (bad for several years) we won't come back for seconds for a while and, when we do, it'll be a different game.
    The EU isn't (yet) doing anything to "restrain the UK's long-term economic success", although clearly after 2019 we'll be competitors rather than allies in the global marketplace.

    We are the ones looking to restrain our own success: many people voted Brexit to close off the flow of cheap and plentiful EU brains and labour which has driven a lot of our recent growth.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 15,422
    A reminder that Rachel Sylvester has been skewering unsuitable Tory leadership contenders for over a decade.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1494155/Climbing-towards-the-top-and-refusing-to-look-down.html

    There are two main criticisms of Mr Davis made by some MPs. The first is that he is lazy - a tag he dismisses out of hand by pointing to his track record as the hyperactive chairman of the Commons public accounts committee.

    "It doesn't stack up, but maybe it's a compliment," he says. "I've made my way to what I do now from a reasonably lowly background and didn't break a sweat. Fantastic."
This discussion has been closed.