Skip to main content

The Effects of Brexit

I've read lots of stuff about possible outcomes, but some seem most plausible:
  • GDP loss of 2%
  • Business loss to EU as trade is tougher, but maybe better for northern-based old school trade
  • Loss of some businesses that will partially relocate to the EU, e.g., finance and technology
Commentary from Krugman, whom I trust:
The straight economics is clear: Brexit would make Britain poorer. It wouldn’t necessarily lead to a trade war, but it would definitely hurt British trade with the rest of Europe, reducing productivity and incomes. My rough calculations, which are in line with other estimates, suggest that Britain would end up about two percent poorer than it would otherwise be, essentially forever. That’s a big hit.

London and southeast England would be hit hard, but Brexit would probably mean a weaker pound, which might actually help some of the old manufacturing regions of the north.
My own take on possible sociopolitical outcomes:
  • Reduction in immigration
  • Although the ruling elite might change, it is more likely a further swing to the right, as UK will be less under the influence of civilizing EU
  • Increased anti-immigrant sentiment and laws
  • Reduced ability to travel and work in EU for UK youth
Again, commentary from Krugman:
And that’s where Boris Johnson’s tirade against President Obama is so wonderfully clarifying. It tells us who the anti-EU wing of the Conservatives really are; it tells us not just that they are pretty close to UKIP, but that intellectually and emotionally they live in the same fever swamps as the American right. And they would, all too probably, take on a strong, even dominant role in British politics post-Brexit.
Another, easy to digest take...

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Polls Show Government Shutdown Is Eroding Faith in Economy

It's obvious that much economic sentiment is simply political allegiance, although even that has some fact-based reasoning behind it. When Republicans harm Democratic-leaning states or focus on the industries of the Rust Belt, Democrats worry. Conversely, Republican worry when the newer industries common in Blue states are given prominence by Democrats. That said, little that Trump has done is good for the long-term welfare of the country, and much of the short-term benefits are really long-term losses, specifically, the reductions in taxes which will likely entail future belt-tightening, loosening of corporate regulation will lead to future costs for healthcare, environmental cleanup, and consumer debt. Rather than play the safe hand of trying to bring down an inflated market, Republicans instead chose to 'put out the fire with gasoline'. Eventually, there will be pain, suffering, and loss, but who will suffer, and by how much, is yet to be seen. As for outright ignorant...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Amazon Is Caught in an Unexpected Brawl in New York

#1 I was surprised that less affluent groups and minorities were for Amazon coming to NYC, although I was aware that locals in my area would be in favor. I live in Murray Hill, and it has a large number of software developers, in number and percentage, in Manhattan, and many - most? - people in our zip code earn in the six figures. I've worked as a software developer for over 15 years, and have occasionally been contacted by Amazon for my skills, although I would not put too much on this as I am always being contacted by recruiters, much of worthless. Although I am likely to benefit from Amazon coming to NYC, I am not a fan of the deal in its current incarnation. It takes too much money from our coffers, circumvents city governance, will place a large burden on existing resources, and will drive up costs for many New York residents. It seems the biggest boosters would be the real estate industry, along with anyone that might be able to profit from selling to the behemoth... h...
Post a Comment
Read more

How Much Will Americans Sacrifice for Good Health Care?

I'm am often reminded of a statement, paraphrased from Amartya Sen, that one person's equality is another man's inequality when discussing social welfare. Making the system work could mean increasing taxes on the wealthy, reducing the military expenditure, reducing payments for unproven medications, reducing the power of insurers, doctors, and medical/pharmaceutical companies. American wellbeing, on the whole, might improve substantially, but the flip side is that all of those impinged upon would take umbrage as if their freedom was reduced. In the end, we have to realize there is a greater good to human welfare and life, and that the interests of the powerful matter less. Even then, if we tried, expect lawsuits and smears, accusations of socialism and tyranny... https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/opinion/sunday/medicare-for-all-universal-health-care.html?comments#permid=30660804
Post a Comment
Read more