Worst-case Brexit could kill 92,000 science, tech jobs across UK – report A no-deal Brexit scenario could scrap 92,000 science and technology jobs across the UK, a report has claimed. The analysis (PDF), carried out by Cambridge Econometrics and commissioned by Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, aims to put numbers on the impact of a series of scenarios once the UK leaves the European Union. Overall, it …
Wow, your argument is so strong that you immediately resort to insulting those whose opinion differs to yours.
This is totally going to convert me to your point of view.
Meanwhile, in the real world, leaving the EU remains an idiotic idea, the proponents of which almost universally stand to gain from it in various ways, for example, by not having their tax dealings come under the scrutiny that the EU wishes to impose...
From the same guys who predicted a recession and the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs immediately should the Referendum have gone to Leave? How often do you have to check a broken watch before it tells the right time?
Wouldn't their time more usefully be used to suggest constructive negotiating points to minimise job losses - or even create new jobs? It turns out that prior to the referendum they were so busy predicting gloom that it didn't occur to any of them that the scenarios they were examining could have positive results - such as record low unemployment and the highest order books for thirty years?
If they missed those immediate outcomes of the Referendum, what opportunities are they missing in the negotiations?
From the same guys who predicted a recession and the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs immediately should the Referendum have gone to Leave
Well, I don't know about you, but my salary went up by less than inflation last year, and the NHS is doing so well with that extra £350M a week it isn't getting. Magical brexit rainbow unicorns for all!
You do know that we haven't actually left yet?
I am aware of this, yes. These are the effects of the vote to leave, before we have even left. They aren't going to get better once we have left.
If someone tells me that it is a bad idea to cut my arm off with a machete, despite it being patently obvious, I'm not about to go and cut it off just to find out.
If you are confident that things will improve after we leave the EU, assuming this insanity cannot be avoided, I suggest you put your money where your mouth is. I am willing to bet you any amount of money that the NHS will NOT get £350M a week additional funding after we leave the EU. At least then I may be in the position to get some sort of compensation from one of the fuckwits that voted to screw over the country. I'll take it in Euros please.
If you are confident that things will improve after we leave the EU, assuming this insanity cannot be avoided, I suggest you put your money where your mouth is. I am willing to bet you any amount of money that the NHS will NOT get £350M a week additional funding after we leave the EU.
Of course it won't, for a number of reasons, not least that that figure is the UK's gross contribution, not the net one. It was a stupid bit of propaganda.
At least then I may be in the position to get some sort of compensation from one of the fuckwits that voted to screw over the country.
I didn't get to vote, unfortunately, thanks to yet another broken promise by a UK politician. All the same, your comment about "screw over the country" is unfortunately all too common of the remainer attitude that the EU may not be great, but leaving would be worse. Never mind that the EU economy is moribund, growth is low, unemployment (especially in the Euro zone) is high, you'd prefer to sit in your comfort zone and get by. That's not the future I want.
I'll take it in Euros please.
I'll take Sterling, Dollars and Yen, please.
Sure Brexit might be a disaster, but it could also be an opportunity. If we don't try it we'll have neither, just a slow decline like every other European empire in the past. So yes, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is, I'm investing in the UK.
Sometimes you just have to take a chance on change, as I did many pre-EU years ago when I left the UK to live in another European country. It worked at the time, but like most of the Euro zone it's suffering, it's time to leave.
So yes, I support Brexit and I'm willing to work to make it succeed. Assuming it goes ahead, what are you prepared to do to make it work, even if you dislike it? Or is that too much hard work compared to just complaining that "Well, I didn't vote for it"?
Au contraire, Phil.
It convinced gullible ignorant people to vote Leave by convincing them it help improve the funding of something they cared quite deeply about.
It was a very smart piece of propaganda.
Which is to say it was an emotional, manipulative and blatant lie which allowed the Leave campaign to play those voters like a banjo at an Ozark hoedown.*
*Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and Rupert Murdoch would all like to thank your for supporting Leave.
They couldn't have done it without you.
And that's the point. The Leave campaign's predictions were about the effects of Brexit, not the effects of the referendum. And so is this report.
We've already seen the effects of the referendum: a large drop in the £, which also means that the stock market hasn't gone up in real terms. And many companies preparing their exit from the UK. This report is about what will happen in 2019+.
You do know that "Let's fund our NHS instead" doesn't necessarily mean it would get the full £350 million you remainers have constantly misunderstood for the last year?
It's like trying to talk sense into a brick wall. No wonder they're still protesting and trying to overturn the result...
Saying you can do something isn't the same as actually doing it. Who knew! And Nigel Farage isn't in power to deliver that claim in any case is he?
You do know that "Let's fund our NHS instead" doesn't necessarily mean it would get the full £350 million you remainers have constantly misunderstood for the last year?
That's not what the banner Boris was stood in front of said...
http://news.images.itv.com/image/file/1019912/stream_img.jpg
You do know that "Let's fund our NHS instead" doesn't necessarily mean it would get the full £350 million you remainers have constantly misunderstood for the last year?
That's not what the banner Boris was stood in front of said...
http://news.images.itv.com/image/file/1019912/stream_img.jpg
Let's != We will
Why are intelligent people still labouring and misunderstanding this point? We all knew that the Vote Leave campaign has no direct authority to actually manage Treasury funds!
Once we have left we will at least be able to choose what we spend the net amount that no longer goes to the EU - if you DONT like what government spends it on then vote them out.
"Once we have left we will at least be able to choose what we spend the net amount that no longer goes to the EU - if you DONT like what government spends it on then vote them out."
We'll be able to choose what we spend the GROSS amount on. We'll no longer have to pay someone else to tell us what tospend our money on.
You shouldn't make any decision until you have all the facts. And right or wrong is subjective.
or to put it more simply: since you never are in possession of all the facts you should never make a decision. Just leave it all to mama Merkel and her hordes of unelected bureaucrat cronies.
They know everything.
"since you never are in possession of all the facts you should never make a decision".
Funny that, you have all the facts, even the Americans have the facts. see the Rand corp.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2200.html
"Key Findings
The economic analysis shows that the UK will be economically worse-off outside of the EU under most plausible scenarios. The key question for the UK is how much worse-off it will be post-Brexit.
The option of leaving the EU with no deal and entering World Trade Organization (WTO) rules would lead to the greatest economic losses for the UK. This would reduce future GDP by around five per cent over ten years, which is a loss of $140 billion.
Under WTO rules, the EU would also lose out economically, but nowhere near the same proportion as the UK — about 0.7 per cent of its overall GDP, which is $97 billion.".
Brexit was built on lies and dreams, perhaps on alternative facts. And there you go with a two party system where both parties are more concerned by the next election than the well being of the people.
Two idiots at the helm, "in the name of the people". What is there to expect but unicorns.
"You do know that "Let's fund our NHS instead" doesn't necessarily mean it would get the full £350 million you remainers have constantly misunderstood for the last year?"
You are trying to whitewash an outrageous Leave lie and it was an official lie since Boris proclaimed it at a formal Leave press conference. The other outrageous racist lie was that 80 million Turks would all come to the UK unless there was a Leave vote.
It was overt lies like that secured the marginal Leave win and that's why Leave supporters are generally so scared of a second referendum because those lies just won't work twice.
It convinced gullible ignorant people to vote Leave by convincing them it help improve the funding of something they cared quite deeply about.
I know people who voted for both leave and remain.
On both sides, people knew who they were going to vote for long before the referendum campaign started, and propaganda from both sides was completely irrelevant to the result of my sample audience.
I'm therefore skeptical that a huge number of people were swayed by campaign promises.
Realistically the biggest issue was and remains immigration driving down wages and working conditions and driving up housing/living costs for the poorest in society, and politiancs brought about the result by saying "oh, but we can't do anything about that while we're in the EU." Result, we get a vote to leave the EU.
This effect of uncontrolled immigration is terrible if your in the poorest 50% of society as it seriously impacts your disposable income and working conditions, but great if your in the richest 50% as your larger wage packet goes even further and if your in the top 20% or so then the value of your property portfolio increases significantly due to the huge competition for housing driving prices up.
Hence why the vote was split along class lines the way it was.
The problem for UK PLC is that the poorest 50% of the people in the economy are now spending pretty much all of their wages just on housing and food etc, and therefore have little disposable income to spend on anything else, which strangles the economy.
Furthermore, kids who would once have gotten their own property are still living with their parents into their 30's. This means that a house with 2 parents and 2 adults are paying one set of concil tax, rather than the two adults having their own properties and paying 3 sets of council tax. Result: councils have much larger populations in a similar area than they once would have had, and are starved of money to deal with infrastructure problems and care for the elderly (which directly feeds into the NHS having problems).
I don't know how these problems are going to be resolved, but I do know that the richest 50% of the population screaming insults at the poorest 50% of the population is unlikely to contribute towards lessening tensions between class groups and starting to resolve the problems that we face.
"I don't know how these problems are going to be resolved, but I do know that the richest 50% of the population screaming insults at the poorest 50% of the population is unlikely to contribute towards lessening tensions between class groups and starting to resolve the problems that we face."
Something else that isn't going to contribute is the poorest 50% discovering that what happens isn't what they'd been persuaded was going to happen.
I do, however, notice that the Farages & BoJos of this world are actually in the richest 50%.
"From the same guys who predicted a recession and the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs immediately should the Referendum have gone to Leave? How often do you have to check a broken watch before it tells the right time?"
^ That just sounds like a denial of reality. Economic growth in the UK is more sluggish than it otherwise would have been without Brexit (source = IMF) and last year international credit reference agency Moody's downgraded the UK's international credit rating while the other two, Fitch and Standard and Poor's, rated the UK's outlook as Negative.
The net result of all the Brexit-induced economic damage is that France will overtake the UK in terms of overall national GDP within the next year or two to be followed shortly thereafter by India. That is Brexit economic "success" for you.
Anyway, many thanks to all the brexiters from Paris.
Instead of moving hot air, here are sources showing some short term effect:
(London Real Estate prices down for the first time in years: -0.5%)
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jan/08/uk-house-prices-fall-halifax-wages-buyers
(For those who don't read French is says that we are now around +9% a year in Paris which we hadn't seen for a long time!)
https://www.pap.fr/actualites/immobilier-paris-bat-des-records-de-prix/a19952
So I just made a nice amount a money, only last year, thanks to your vote.
I am very glad, please continue!
As for the long term effect... sorry I lost my crystal ball, but apparently your politics have found it, so all is well!
I do not see this accounting for Life Sciences people going where the funding is which is something they do.
That whole industry is based on that. There are very little permanent contracts even in the commercial part of it, it is all fixed term, subject to funding. The moment the funding goes elsewhere the people go with it. Most of them have little "roots" anyway and a very large proportion of them are from Europe because UK simply does not produce enough degree educated life sciences professionals.
This does not seem to account for their exodus and that exodus will happen. It is a given considering how that industry is organized.
"by 2030"
Crystal ball? Chicken bones? Vision in a dream? And what situation will the world be in by then? If this is purely from the EU being capable of continuing what if the EU has broken up by then? (suggested by EU presidents and others 'because of brexit'). Does this account for any potential partnership with the US or China or the rest of the world or does it assume we are all lepers? Does this assume that the EU are complete arses and will work with Israel but not the UK? Does this assume the EU collapses under its numerous crises? Is this working on the assumption of the EU getting out of their financial mess or assuming we will follow their bad policies? How worst case are we talking?
Will we have flying cars by then? Or will a lack of them be blamed on brexit?
Does this account for any potential partnership with the US or China
USA, China? Funding UK Science? Dude, share what you are smoking(*). Smoking cool stuff is not a crime. Not sharing is.
The report paid specific attention to two areas which will be hit most in the case of hard Brexit.
1. Life Sciences.
2. Financial Industry.
IMHO it underestimated the hit to both because there will be a feedback loop in either case.
(*)I initially studied life sciences and chemistry before going to the dark side of IT. Some of the people I studied with who spent decades in USA and have green cards or even US passports are back in Eu now. Because there is MORE MONEY HERE. In addition to it being more pleasant place to work
@ Voland's right hand
"USA, China? Funding UK Science?"
Why is it UK science? Surely it is science conducted with participation from the UK? Since China is looking to advance their capacity in innovation and the US doesnt necessarily trust China there may be opportunities as well as the UK and US working together. Should we be looking at it for outcomes or getting other countries to give money to our Scientists? And once knowledge is out there it is out there and monetising it is hard.
"The report paid specific attention to two areas which will be hit most in the case of hard Brexit."
I will be interested to see the changes in the financial industry as the EU have gone protectionist and making it difficult to access without being in the EU (something which caused some serious fall out with Switzerland I think it was) while the UK will impose no additional restrictions on EU financial businesses beyond the normal outside the UK rules. Add that we have the financial capital the EU drools over it would seem the EU does have something to lose. As for science the EU may decide not to give our contribution to our scientists, woo. And they might decide to be childish and take their ball home. So? And they might stomp their feet. (See where I am going)
It's called 'planning' - one makes a range of assumptions based on a reasoned analysis of the plausible scenarios and then models the likely results of those assumptions. They don't claim to predict the future with 100% accuracy, but as an approach to minimise risk it's better than assuming a brigade of the 5th Cavalry mounted on flying unicorns will turn up at the last minute and save you from your stupidity.
@ Pen-y-gors
"It's called 'planning' - one makes a range of assumptions based on a reasoned analysis of the plausible scenarios and then models the likely results of those assumptions."
That sounds a good plan. So the EU in its financial mess and its presidents making excuses for its breakup while they plot how to vastly change the EU into a very different structure that would likely leave us out anyway (or forced to the Euro). A reasonable assumption is an unrecognisable EU. I also recall Osborne and Carney making their unreasonable assumptions such as everything they have been trying to do to recover from the financial crisis suddenly meaning the end of the country (because voting leave was expected and has been fixing it). Or daft WTO assumptions that we would use the maximum tariffs against imports.
"better than assuming a brigade of the 5th Cavalry mounted on flying unicorns will turn up at the last minute and save you from your stupidity."
If we could get the staunch remain fantasists to accept we are leaving instead of some last minute prayer that democracy will be ditched in favour of 'the right' answer predetermined by those who assume to be betters.
It's called 'planning' - one makes a range of assumptions based on a reasoned analysis of the plausible scenarios
It would be nice to think that they did so, but I have my doubts. Faced with a request from a remainer to come up with a report that show show bad leaving is, for which he is paying them, would you really expect a "well, actually, it won't be so bad" result?
"It would be nice to think that they did so, but I have my doubts. Faced with a request from a remainer to come up with a report that show show bad leaving is, for which he is paying them, would you really expect a "well, actually, it won't be so bad" result?"
Well, we just have to compare them with the best case scenario reports created by requests from (and paid for by) brexiteers to get a sense of balance.
Oh, hang on...
I understand the EU has had brexit impact reports published as well, so I guess that just leaves the people in charge of our actual brexit strategy to commission and publish some reports.
Strange that they haven't really, but I guess evidenced based policy has never been particularly popular with the Tories.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
