Leaving a Union with its largest trade partner has cost the UK. Therefore Scotland should leave a Union with its largest trade partner to mitigate this?
The European Union is the same as the UK Union and the Union of marriage and the Transport and General Workers Union according to the clever cleverest No commentators here.
I wonder who in the snp came up with this figure 🤔
[removed]
I can’t comprehend how being “independent” means joining immediately up with another oppressive union. You’re not independent if you’re living by someone else’s terms. We can live off tatties, beef and whisky.
Guess how much Scotland would lose on public spending if it left the UK?
Around 41% of Scotlands public spending is paid for by grants from being in the UK, while Scotland itself still runs at a 15% deficit.
That’s more than 1.6bn and far more than the EU would grant Scotland would it be a member.
Humza is using that 2.5% to justify the big hit to public finances in a reasonably straightforward manner IMO, however without some important caveats.
There are three main sources of this reduction in that paper: investment, productivity and trade. So far, about half of the impact is thought to be from trade:
> Given the share of the European Union in UK total trade, **we project a 25 per cent reduction in UK-EU trade over 15 years.** Within NiGEM, this implies a reduction in the terms of trade of around 1 per cent, which translates into a fall in real personal disposable income of around 2.5 per cent.[Out of 5.2% by 2035]
Yet they also say this:
> Previous work on the impact of Brexit on the UK economy assumed a sharp decline in trade with the European Union, based on gravity model estimates. However, bilateral trade data show that **the initial sharp decline in trade with the United Kingdom has been largely reversed in the post Brexit period.** In fact, UK imports from the European Union have been above their short-term trend since 2016, while exports to the European Union are close to trend
Note the trend is positive, so trade with the EU has actually risen since Brexit.
So prior efforts to figure out how much trade with the EU would fall by have proven to be, thusfar, hopelessly pessimistic. Nevertheless they are still assuming a 25% reduction versus the counterfactual of uninterrupted EU membership, and that accounts for half of the result.
Just something to consider when thinking about the wisdom of using Very Large Numbers in a political endeavour.
Like the rest of what humza says. Bullshit
Probably just siphoned 1bn of that in to a private account labelled “Palestine fund “
10 comments
Just Brexit? Man alive
Leaving a Union with its largest trade partner has cost the UK. Therefore Scotland should leave a Union with its largest trade partner to mitigate this?
The European Union is the same as the UK Union and the Union of marriage and the Transport and General Workers Union according to the clever cleverest No commentators here.
I wonder who in the snp came up with this figure 🤔
[removed]
I can’t comprehend how being “independent” means joining immediately up with another oppressive union. You’re not independent if you’re living by someone else’s terms. We can live off tatties, beef and whisky.
Guess how much Scotland would lose on public spending if it left the UK?
Around 41% of Scotlands public spending is paid for by grants from being in the UK, while Scotland itself still runs at a 15% deficit.
That’s more than 1.6bn and far more than the EU would grant Scotland would it be a member.
It’s an interesting bit of analysis that the figures here are taken from. [NIESR think](https://www.niesr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JC760-NIESR-Outlook-Autumn-2023-Global-Topical-Feature-v2.pdf?ver=fm1bT2iswCeftq4LE8k2) there has been about a 2.5% impact to GDP from Brexit so far.
Humza is using that 2.5% to justify the big hit to public finances in a reasonably straightforward manner IMO, however without some important caveats.
There are three main sources of this reduction in that paper: investment, productivity and trade. So far, about half of the impact is thought to be from trade:
> Given the share of the European Union in UK total trade, **we project a 25 per cent reduction in UK-EU trade over 15 years.** Within NiGEM, this implies a reduction in the terms of trade of around 1 per cent, which translates into a fall in real personal disposable income of around 2.5 per cent.[Out of 5.2% by 2035]
Yet they also say this:
> Previous work on the impact of Brexit on the UK economy assumed a sharp decline in trade with the European Union, based on gravity model estimates. However, bilateral trade data show that **the initial sharp decline in trade with the United Kingdom has been largely reversed in the post Brexit period.** In fact, UK imports from the European Union have been above their short-term trend since 2016, while exports to the European Union are close to trend
Note the trend is positive, so trade with the EU has actually risen since Brexit.
So prior efforts to figure out how much trade with the EU would fall by have proven to be, thusfar, hopelessly pessimistic. Nevertheless they are still assuming a 25% reduction versus the counterfactual of uninterrupted EU membership, and that accounts for half of the result.
Just something to consider when thinking about the wisdom of using Very Large Numbers in a political endeavour.
Like the rest of what humza says. Bullshit
Probably just siphoned 1bn of that in to a private account labelled “Palestine fund “
Miss being on social EU benefits ?