Most Absurd Brexit Claim Ever: "30-Year Recession, Worse Than 1930s"
Guardian writer Amelia Hill cites alleged "experts" in her nonsensical appraisal UK cannot simply trade on WTO terms after no-deal Brexit.
The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.
The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.
“No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”
The government cannot simply cut and paste the 120,000 EU statutes into UK law and then make changes to them gradually, Howard said. “The UK will need to set up new enforcement bodies and transfer new powers to regulators to create our own domestic regimes,” she said.
Effects Felt for 30 Years
Hill made five references to Howard but I have no idea who that alleged expert is. We do not have a full name, but Howard is a she.
Hill's moans about a 1930s recession and claims even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades, in the same paragraph.
The actual linked-to article by Guardian writer Emine Saner is titled: Two, 50 or 100 years: when do leavers think Brexit will pay off?
The title is very misleading.
This is what Jacob Rees-Mogg actually stated: “We won’t know the full economic consequences for a very long time.” That is quite accurate. Benefits accrue every year.
Former Brexit Secretart David Davis said "There is no reason why many of these cannot be achieved within two years.”
Hill managed to take an already purposelessly-overhyped headline title and turn it into a complete fabricated lie that links recessions to 30-year waits for benefits.
After 16 paragraphs of total fearmongering FUD, Hill mentions the counter-claims.
Economists for Free Trade, a group with links to Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Davis, claims there is “nothing to fear” from leaving the EU without reaching an agreement.
David Collins, a professor of international economic law at City University of London, said: “The UK can trade quite easily on an uncertified schedule.”
However, Collins conceded that an uncertified schedule “might be an indication of that complaining member’s intention to initiate a dispute against the member,” and that “the WTO dispute settlement process can take several years to resolve”.
Thus two correctly cites experts say no problem. Two law experts, not economic experts makes the opposing claim.
Collins, an international economics professor, is certainly correct, but notice the slant of the article and the title.
The idea of a 30-year recession wins the blue ribbon for dumbest statement ever about Brexit, and that is saying quite a lot.
Hill deserves a blue ribbon herself for producing an absurd article full of clearly-overhyped nonsense, without even properly referencing who one her alleged "experts" is.
The Guardian frequently presents fake news articles with left-wing progressive and Brexit slants. Hill and Saner provide today's examples.
30-year recession. Get real.
Short-term, the EU will get hit much harder than the UK. Germany will get hit the hardest. At that point the EU will be ready for serious trade discussion with the UK.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock