3 ms·

I don't have a horse in this race, but sources I found claim Brexit was economically detrimental to this day, including but not limited to the wiki page and its

by Cpoll 1mo ago

I don't have a horse in this race, but sources I found claim Brexit was economically detrimental to this day, including but not limited to the wiki page and its citations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_effects_of_Brexit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_effects_of_Brexit

gizajob 1mo ago
Give it time
- f_devd 1mo ago
  How much time? Doesn't seem like the trend is reversing
  - gizajob 1mo ago
    About 30 years
mike_hearn 1mo ago
It's a bad idea to trust Wikipedia for anything that might have a political or ideological slant that would upset the left, which the non-impact of Brexit definitely did. For instance, there are biographical pages on Wikipedia for people who died years ago but Wiki claims they're still alive, because the only websites that reported the death are anti-woke and thus considered not "reliable sources". So they just ... revert any edits stating the person died. To understand the true state of things you need to look elsewhere these days. Sad, but that's what seems to happen when you rely on volunteer moderators. That page specifically is citing a lot of "studies" that are just wishcasting by academics, e.g. > A 2018 analysis by Stanford University and Nottingham University economists estimated that uncertainty around Brexit reduced investment by businesses by approximately 6 percentage points and caused an employment reduction by 1.5 percentage points. Unemployment continuously fell after the vote in 2016 until it reached record lows. But if you believe Wikipedia you'd think unemployment rose. This is the kind of thing they define as reliable sources. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rat...
- Cpoll 1mo ago
  I don't understand. The 10year view on the site you linked shows a spike in unemployment in 2020 after Brexit took effect, and current rates are still higher than pre-Brexit rates. Is there an explanation for why the 2016 vote would be directly responsible for the temporary dip? But I'm not convinced you can prove or disprove anything from one graph without context and analysis.
  - mike_hearn 1mo ago
    Nobody claimed the 2016 vote lowered unemployment. It was on a steady downward trend that continued for years, uninterrupted by the vote. This wasn't what economists predicted: they claimed the "uncertainty" of a Leave vote would cause a huge recession with 800,000 job losses. That's what the wiki quote is about - note that 2018, when the Stanford guys made their claims, is before 2020.

by Cpoll 1mo ago

gizajob 1mo ago

Give it time

f_devd 1mo ago
How much time? Doesn't seem like the trend is reversing
- gizajob 1mo ago
  About 30 years

mike_hearn 1mo ago

It's a bad idea to trust Wikipedia for anything that might have a political or ideological slant that would upset the left, which the non-impact of Brexit definitely did. For instance, there are biographical pages on Wikipedia for people who died years ago but Wiki claims they're still alive, because the only websites that reported the death are anti-woke and thus considered not "reliable sources". So they just ... revert any edits stating the person died. To understand the true state of things you need to look elsewhere these days. Sad, but that's what seems to happen when you rely on volunteer moderators. That page specifically is citing a lot of "studies" that are just wishcasting by academics, e.g. > A 2018 analysis by Stanford University and Nottingham University economists estimated that uncertainty around Brexit reduced investment by businesses by approximately 6 percentage points and caused an employment reduction by 1.5 percentage points. Unemployment continuously fell after the vote in 2016 until it reached record lows. But if you believe Wikipedia you'd think unemployment rose. This is the kind of thing they define as reliable sources. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rat...

Cpoll 1mo ago
I don't understand. The 10year view on the site you linked shows a spike in unemployment in 2020 after Brexit took effect, and current rates are still higher than pre-Brexit rates. Is there an explanation for why the 2016 vote would be directly responsible for the temporary dip? But I'm not convinced you can prove or disprove anything from one graph without context and analysis.
- mike_hearn 1mo ago
  Nobody claimed the 2016 vote lowered unemployment. It was on a steady downward trend that continued for years, uninterrupted by the vote. This wasn't what economists predicted: they claimed the "uncertainty" of a Leave vote would cause a huge recession with 800,000 job losses. That's what the wiki quote is about - note that 2018, when the Stanford guys made their claims, is before 2020.