Costs from regulatory divergence likely to be at least as important as border costs in the long run, but not immediately 2/
A few thoughts on how Brexit is likely to affect the UK economy in 2021 - with the caveat that much remains uncertain 1/
Costs from regulatory divergence likely to be at least as important as border costs in the long run, but not immediately 2/
However, I do not anticipate shortages of essential goods, as imports can be expedited if needed, e.g. air freight, priority customs processing 3/
- Red tape, e.g. need for customs workers wastes resources & lowers productivity
wasting resources
- Tariffs (if no deal)
- Rules of origin (if deal)
- Lost market access for services
https://t.co/07wNehNn7z 5/
Fwiw I get told that economics and process considerations (haulage, logistics, manufacturing etc) play limited role in #brexit inner circle decision-making. Belief it\u2019ll be messy but business will adjust. Q is more short term political embarrassment. 2/2
— Peter Foster (@pmdfoster) December 13, 2020
Consumer price rises likely to be moderate (low single digits?) but will gradually erode living standards similar to post-referendum https://t.co/l7Zyegk7MZ 6/
Cost of living
— Thomas Sampson (@thom_sampson) June 22, 2020
Leave vote caused sterling to fall by around 10% raising import costs & consumer prices
Breinlich, Leromain, @DennisNovy & I estimate depreciation increased cost of living by 2.9% by Q2 2018, costing average household \xa3870 per yearhttps://t.co/FsI5enlGfk 4/
https://t.co/d2r6M1GlvB 7/
Which industries are most exposed to EU tariffs under no deal?
— Thomas Sampson (@thom_sampson) December 7, 2020
12 sectors (HS 4 digit) have exports to the EU above \xa3350 million & would face an average EU tariff (ad-valorem equivalent) of at least 10% under no deal
Motor vehicles, clothing, meat & dairy feature prominently
time passes. 8/
And, as the Bank of England has noted, monetary policy cannot offset the impact of a permanent negative supply shock 10/
costs to tax payers rather than solving underlying problem of higher trade costs 11/
https://t.co/2ZULlcIotu
Excellent @UKandEU report on implications of new deal. @anandMenon1 @jdportes @jillongovt: https://t.co/OV0XXk5ypk
Interesting @JohnSpringford @tomashirstecon piece on interactions between Brexit & Covid:
https://t.co/pgasjQHwzw
More from Brexit
You May Also Like
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
1/\u201cWhat would need to be true for you to\u2026.X\u201d
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) December 4, 2018
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody: https://t.co/Yo6jHbSit9
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?