Brexit eta Egiptoko izurriteak

Egiptoko plagak baina okerragoak gertatu behar omen ziren, Brexit eta gero…

Eta hala ere, …

Brexit: la domanda interna ha funzionato1

Pubblicati i dati recenti sulla crescita della Gran Bretagna nel 2016, che si assesta sul 2%.

I dati sembrano indicare il ruolo fondamentale svolto da “resistenza della domanda interna e maggior export” nel sostituire il calo d’investimenti delle imprese, che sarà il vero campo di gioco delle scelte di politica economica futura dell’UK.

(Ad ogni modo per ora si può affermare che “fuori dalla UE” per la Gran Bretagna non ci sono state le cavallette, le piaghe d’Egitto, etc.)

Bill Mitchell-ek ere aspaldian gauza bertsua aipatu zuen:

Bill Mitchell: Brexit?

Zer dela eta Brexit emaitza handia den

Brexit-ez haratagoko balediko hondamendiaz hitz bi

Post-Brexit: Bill Michell eta kazetariak

Brexit eta geroko Britainia Handiko egoera

Austeritatea da arazoa, ez Brexit

Gehigarriak:

Brexit: Kataluniako ekonomialari baten ikuspegia

Zenbait iritzi Brexit dela eta

Brexit: erresaka (teoriko eta praktikoa)

Post-hauteskundeak eta post-Brexit

Berdin dio. Hemengo progreek, kazetariek, politikariek eta ekonomialari sutsuek segituko dute Brexit eta Trump-en efektua nahastuz… Brexit eskuinekoek bultzatu zutela aldarrikatzen, baita perla gehiagorik ere…, eta hori guztia ezkerraren izenean, noski.

Ezkerrari buruzko zipriztin batzuk, despistatuentzat edo:

Ikus, besteak beste, ondokoak:

Europako ezkerra? Missing…; Ezkerraz, beste behin…; Europako ezkerraz, gehigarria; Korporazio transnazionalez eta ezkerraz hitz batzuk; Europako egoeraz eta ezkerraz hitz bi; Eskoziako ezkerraz hitz bi; Mitchell-ek Espainiako ‘ezkerrari’ egindako kritika; Globalizazioa, neoliberalismoa, nazio-estatua eta ezkerra; Mikal Kalecki eta ezkerra; Ezkerrak ez du adorerik eta gutxiagotasun konplexua dauka; Neoliberalismoa, amets amerikarra eta Ezkerra; …

Eta bereziki, ondoko bi link hauek: Brexit eta ‘ezkerra’ eta Brexit, ezkerra eta Lexit.

Ikasiko ote dute inoiz? Dudatan nago.

Nahiago dute ezertarako balio ez duten aspaldiko eskema zahar eta zaharkituei atxikitzea, teoria berriak ikastea baino.

Ezintasun intelektuala nabarmenegia da, zoritxarrez.


4 erantzun “Brexit eta Egiptoko izurriteak” bidalketan

  1. NEVER GONNA GIVE EU UP
    Jeremy Corbyn lets Brexit voters down as he refuses SEVEN TIMES to confirm he’d back will of the people in painful telly interview
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3518792/labour-party-jeremy-corbyn-refuses-to-say-we-would-leave-eu/

    “Seven times Corbyn fails to answer the question
    Here is the transcript from the BBC where the Labour leader failed to rule out keeping the UK in the EU:
    Laura Kuenssberg: Jeremy Corbyn let’s start with Brexit because if you become prime minister it will be the biggest task in front of you. You said today Brexit is settled. Does that mean if you’re prime minister, come hell or high water, whatever the deal on the table, we will be leaving the European Union?
    Jeremy Corbyn: Look there’s a clear vote in the referendum a year ago. But there is now the negotiations which have already begun. I sent a letter to President Elect Macron last night congratulating him on his election and also setting out in broad terms what our aims are in these negotiations: To have good relations with Europe of course, secondly to make sure there is a trade access, a tariff free trade access, to European markets. Thirdly, that we will of course protect the rights of EU nationals living in Britain which we will do straight away and that we will also ensure that the regulations that we got from the European Union such as Working Time Directive and employment conditions will be defended and maintained. It has to be put very clearly.
    LK: That is what you would hope to achieve. But on that specific point if you say Brexit is settled whatever happens in the negotiations – however well or badly they go – we would be leaving if you were prime minister.
    JC: We will go into the negotiations with the determination to achieve what I’ve just outlined. And it’s not a one-off meeting, it’s not a one-off discussion. It also involves relations with all the governments across Europe in every one of the member states as well as their parliaments and the European governments and the commission.
    LK: But forgive me Jeremy Corbyn that’s not quite my question. My question is if you’re prime minister we will leave come hell or high water whatever is on the table at the end of the negotiations?
    JC: We win the election we’ll get the good deal with Europe. A good deal with Europe that will ensure that the very large number of manufacturing jobs in Britain that rely on trade with Europe won’t suddenly find themselves under World Trade Organization rules where there’ll be a tariff wall put up immediately around this country.
    LK: But on that specific point Jeremy Corbyn few few can predict how the negotiations will go either for Theresa May…
    JC: The specific point is we’re negotiating to gain that market access to Europe.
    LK: But you won’t say then that we might potentially stay or we might… just to be completely clear because people will want to know this. If you’re prime minister we will leave whatever happens?
    JC: People know that there’s been a referendum and a decision was made a year ago. We’ve set out very clear our terms for negotiations. Keir Starmer has built those relationships across Europe and that is what we’ll be pursuing in the European Union. I don’t know any more than you do exactly what is going to happen in the future on this, but I do know we are not approaching this from megaphone diplomacy. We’re not approaching this from threats. We’re not proposing to set up some kind of tax haven on the shores of the European Union. We’re serious about these negotiations.
    LK: But forgive me Jeremy Corbyn this is a very important point to lots of people. As you say, we don’t know what will happen in the negotiations. If you are prime minister can you categorically say that we would definitely leave because if you won’t there is a chink of a possibility that things could change and we might end up looking differently at our options.
    JC: The danger is of the approach the Conservatives are taking in their megaphone diplomacy with Europe and approaching the whole thing as though what you’ve got to do is shout loud and be abusive to people across the Channel. Our view is you have to talk to them, negotiate with them and recognise there is actually quite a lot of common interest, particularly in manufacturing industry. That is the process we’re following.
    LK: So you won’t you won’t address that point specifically?
    JC: We are negotiating a trade arrangement with Europe and protection of the things that we’ve gained from the European Union.”

  2. Afera ez da Brexit. Ea ulertzen duzun!
    Bill Mitchell-en Disturbing pay trends in Britain
    (http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=36433)

    “Earlier this month (July 3, 2017) the British Office of National Statistics (ONS) released a research report – Wage growth in Pay Review Body Occupations – which basically summarises what has gone wrong with the world under neo-liberalism. While the Report is about the UK, which has particular characteristics, the trends identified are almost universal and reflect the dominance of the ‘free-(not!)-market’ austerity mentality that has crippled progress around the world. It also helps us understand why the British economy is stalling again and why the latest data on household spending is so disturbing. These trends have nothing to do with Brexit. They are all down to misguided government policy (austerity) and erroneous strategies that seek to generate fiscal surpluses when the non-government sector needs to also run surpluses (and the two aspirations are not simultaneously achievable). British workers are paying for this incompetence. The economists who gratuitously hand out the spurious advice, unfortunately do not lose their jobs.
    (…)
    A progressive agenda must include housing provision for lower-paid key workers in areas where they are required to work to fulfill their essential roles to society. But that is another topic altogether.
    But a progressive agenda also has to aim to rebalance the wage distribution in favour of ‘key workers’ and ensure that unproductive workers – that is, those that work in financial markets, as an example – are rewarded more modestly, as is fitting for their contribution to society.
    Well that is not the way things are working out in the UK.
    (…)
    If real wages are in decline or stagnant then households will cut spending and/or maintain spending via increased debt. In this neo-liberal era it is usually the latter strategy that is used first (running up credit cards etc) then when that becomes precarious or they run out of credit – then the spending collapses.
    That is more or less where we are at now in the UK (and as I noted above – the trend is not confined to the UK – so Brexit cannot be blamed).
    (…)
    While real wages for key workers are falling, executives (particularly in the unproductive financial markets) are seeing their salaries accelerate rapidly.
    One report shows that “since 2000, bosses’ salaries have increased almost six times more quickly than their workers” (Source).
    Nothing can defend these trends. Pure greed and hubris are the motivating forces and a whole cloud of misinformation from economists keeps that motivation hidden from the workforce who are told to ‘tighten their belts’ for the good of the nation.
    (…)
    There is no justification for these pay trends. They are just the result of neo-liberalism getting way ahead of itself.
    The problem is that the good of the nation requires UK workers to receive real income growth (at least commensurate with productivity growth).
    (…)
    The British government cannot claim it can run out of money in the same way a private employer might claim (when sales for their goods and services decline).
    The British government can always maintain first-class ‘key worker’ services if it chooses.
    The PRB real wage declines are all a matter of political choice. And very poor choices at that given what we are now seeing in terms of GDP slowdowns, spending moderation, falling savings and the rest.
    All trends that increase the probability of a recession and given the scale of private debt exposure – another major financial crisis.
    Conclusion
    When Jeremy Corbyn campaigned under the “For the Many not the Few” banner the message resonated with the lived-experience of the people – the many.
    When Theresa May claims she is working for a fairer economy and wants to “work” for the people, the lived-experience of those people immediately know she is lying.
    Her Party has attacked the people and the shifting political trends reflect that.
    The people also know that the sham progressives (Blairites) have attacked their living standards in the name of ‘free (not!) market’ economics.
    These mainstream economics arguments have lost their credibility and traction.
    As a true oppositional Left starts to slowly form in Britain, the sham progressives (Blairites) and the Tories will find their dominant framing and language of the last several decades no longer resonates.
    It cannot come quickly enough.”

  3. La tasa de paro de Reino Unido baja al 4,4% hasta junio, su mínimo desde 1975
    https://www.elconfidencial.com/amp/economia/2017-08-16/tasa-de-paro-reino-unido-brexit-economia_1429396/
    La incertidumbre sobre qué pasará cuando el Brexit irrumpa en el Reino Unido parece no amedrentar, de momento, a la economía británica. Este miércoles se han conocido los datos de desempleo del país, situado en el nivel más bajo desde 1975. Concretamente, la tasa de paro se situó en el 4,4% en el segundo trimestre, una décima por debajo del nivel registrado en los tres meses anteriores y medio punto porcentual menos que un año antes, según informó la Oficina Nacional de Estadística (ONS).
    Entre abril y junio, la cifra de desempleados se redujo hasta 1,48 millones, lo que supone un descenso trimestral de 57.000 parados y de 157.000 en los últimos doce meses. A su vez, el número de personas con un puesto de trabajo aumentó hasta llegar a la cifra de 32,07 millones, 125.000 más que hace un año. De esta manera, la tasa de empleo alcanzó el récord de 75,1%, al subir un 0,3%.

    Londres plantea ‘una unión aduanera temporal’ de hasta dos años tras el Brexit

    “El panorama continúa siendo sólido, con un nuevo récord máximo en la tasa de empleo y otra caída en la tasa de paro” destacó hoy el estadista Matt Hughes, de la sección del mercado laboral de la ONS.
    Hughes confesó que, pese a esto, “los salarios reales continúan en declive” y explicó que “el número de trabajadores nacidos en otros lugares de la Unión Europea (UE) sigue aumentando, pero la tasa anual de cambio se ha ralentizado de manera notable”.
    La ONS también reveló que la inflación interanual del Reino Unido se mantuvo invariable el pasado julio al situarse en el 2,6%, el mismo nivel registrado en junio.

  4. Britainia Handia eta Brexit
    Bill Mitchell-en Britain doesn’t appear to be collapsing as a result of Brexit
    (http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=37564)

    (…) British manufacturing booming

    I saw the latest – EEF/BDO Manufacturing Outlook 2017 Q4 (released December 4, 2017) – from the EEF, which is the Manufacturers’ peak body in the UK.
    The fourth-quarter update is interesting.
    We read:
    Britain’s manufacturers are ending the year with a bang on the back of the continued improvement in global demand and increased export performance … Manufacturers are continuing to ignore the ongoing political uncertainty at home as improved global demand, from European markets in particular, and the increase in commodity prices is feeding growth across the manufacturing supply chain. This is compensating for weaker UK demand as the squeeze on living standards and Brexit uncertainty continues to take its toll domestically.
    So, two observations there:
    1. Manufacturing has not been destroyed by the Brexit decision – far from it if the data is to be believed.
    2. The UK growth rate is being hammered by domestic demand factors that are totally within the control of the British government to alter if they had the political will.
    Brexit is not causing the lull in growth.
    The EEF survey reports:
    1. “2017 has seen a clean sweep of positive balances across our main output and orders indicators – the rst time this has happened since the nancial crisis.” (post Brexit that is).
    2. “The year ended on a strong note, with output and exports response balances holding rm at the multi-year highs reported in the previous quarter.”
    3. “manufacturers expect this momentum to carry into the start of next year …”
    4. “Our results, in line with the recent past, continue to show improvements in demand conditions across Asian and North American markets.”
    However, the EEF also note that the:
    Meanwhile the weakness in the domestic market, and in particular the construction sector, though dragging on some sectors
    The latest reports on British Construction – for example the UK Construction PMI data (released December 4, 2017) shows that there is little growth in the sector with commercial contracts drying up and the growth being driven by “residential work”.
    While there has been hints that this is a Brexit-effect other firms have blamed the “subdued economic outlook” on the decision by British firms to hold back on investment.
    After all, if the current productive capital is sufficient to meet current output and sales expectations are weak, then it is unlikely to be a strong investment climate.
    Of course, when the non-government sector holds back on investment due to pessimism, that opens up the door for more public investment in foundational infrastructure, as outlined in the UKs recently announced Industrial Strategy.
    As the EEF Outlook notes:
    … historically the pace of change has been very slow and UK infrastructure appears to be falling behind other leading economies and the demands of the market …
    At the centre of our policies for the building of a new economy is investment in smart infrastructure to create the right environment for businesses and local communities to flourish …
    Better roads and rail links will give the best return if they connect the regions and the regional powerhouses – helping areas on the cusp of sustainable economic success to cement their position and help their businesses to thrive.
    Which means the Construction industry can be revitalised with some smart public sector infrastructure contracts. Again, the capacity to make these policy interventions has nothing to do with Brexit.
    That is, any attempts by the EU to declare government projects as breaching the single market guidelines should be ignored by the British government.
    The whole purpose of Brexit is to get away from stifling rules that prevent the UK government using its currency-issuing capacity to advance the well-being of its people.
    Conclusion
    As time passes, it becomes clearer that the June 2016 British Referendum decision to leave the EU has not had the disastrous impacts predicted.
    I know people will still say that we have to wait until the full effects are observed. Fair enough. But the disaster scenarios that more or less predicted immediate collapses have clearly been wrong.
    And trends such as in British manufacturing are clearly defying more medium-term projections of disaster.
    Where there are negative signs in the British economy at present – suppressed domestic demand, decaying infrastructure etc – we can trace that to a long period of austerity and a failure of the British government to use its currency properly.
    Obviously there is some shocks going on as people anticipate Brexit. Australia went through that when Britain went into the EEC. But those shocks are likely to be temporary and, as is already happening, Britain is reorienting itself to the wider world away from Europe. (…)

Utzi erantzuna

Zure e-posta helbidea ez da argitaratuko. Beharrezko eremuak * markatuta daude

6 + 1 =