Point one you said "Meaningless when the backdrop is a major finacial shock"
IN MACRO ECONOMICS, A FINANCIAL SHOCK HAS TO EXIST FOR MORE THAN 1 QUARTER.
You simply made this claim up, because you thought it sounded impressive.
Point two you said "Wage inflation was happening anyway because the minimum wage went up by 7.5% from April this year"
The Median Average Salary was £27,480 in 2008 and it is £27,600 in 2016. According to inflation calculations is should be £30,500 in 2016.
You simply have not read original post
Point three you said "Now financial services which account for 25% of GDP"
The Financial Service Sector is about 13-14% of the UK economy
You simply quote an incorrect figure here
This UK economy has successfully operated (in the past) and had much better GDP growth when the Financial Sector was smaller 8%, 10%, 12%, etc.
It can be argued: economies with smaller Financial Sector deliver better GDP growth, than economies with oversized Financial Sectors
This is because, economies with oversized Financial Sectors have high levels of speculative pumps and dumps. Equally, it produces an over emphasis in short-term share and bond yields, which hampers business and entrepreneurial efforts
Point four you said "bank roll the work shy are being threatened by loss of passporting rights,"
This is clearly not macro economic argument, but merely an argument based on prejudices.
As they say: each person has their own unique and personalised self-motivational bigotries
Point five you said "Paris and Frankfurt which are seeing an opportunity to steal trade from London"
Fraternity is: "the rights of competitor to compete in an environment free of murder, torture, drugging, harassment, theft".
Even though the EU does not adhere to principles of "Fraternity".
Those centres have been competing with the UK for decades, they are not stealing anything, but merely continuing their competition
Point six you said "Brexit negotiations will not happen. As soon as the UK gives official notice to quit Europe, there will be a wall of silence for 2 years until the UK drops out"
The UK has a Net Trade Deficit with EU of £6-£10 billion each month or around £72-£120 billion per annum (it goes up down all the time).
Simply put: where there to be no BREXIT negotiations, everything defaults to WTO tariff taxation of 10%.
Naturally, this would generate extra tax receipts revenue of £6-£10 per annum, when combined with WTO Tariff Rebate Scheme for major UK exporters to EU, which means UK goods would not become more expensive to EU consumers.
Point seven you said "The City is the gateway to Europe. Soon London is going to be gateway to Grimsby. Let's hope fishing can replace the City of London."
Before, the UK joined the EU in 1975, fishing was a major part of UK economy and it also contained large numbers of jobs in secondary support industries.
When Fishing went into decline, the UK's ship-building sector went into decline. Therefore, the total losses have been much greater than immediate losses in the Fishing Sector.
These were well paid jobs, where nicely distributed outside London and Southeast.
If, the Fishing Sector could recover to somewhere near it's pre-EU size, it would be very helpful in re-balancing the economy and yielding better economic performance in Northern England and Scotland.
There could, also, be indirect recovery in shipbuilding sector in the UK.
IN MACRO ECONOMICS, A FINANCIAL SHOCK HAS TO EXIST FOR MORE THAN 1 QUARTER.
You simply made this claim up, because you thought it sounded impressive.
Point two you said "Wage inflation was happening anyway because the minimum wage went up by 7.5% from April this year"
The Median Average Salary was £27,480 in 2008 and it is £27,600 in 2016. According to inflation calculations is should be £30,500 in 2016.
You simply have not read original post
Point three you said "Now financial services which account for 25% of GDP"
The Financial Service Sector is about 13-14% of the UK economy
You simply quote an incorrect figure here
This UK economy has successfully operated (in the past) and had much better GDP growth when the Financial Sector was smaller 8%, 10%, 12%, etc.
It can be argued: economies with smaller Financial Sector deliver better GDP growth, than economies with oversized Financial Sectors
This is because, economies with oversized Financial Sectors have high levels of speculative pumps and dumps. Equally, it produces an over emphasis in short-term share and bond yields, which hampers business and entrepreneurial efforts
Point four you said "bank roll the work shy are being threatened by loss of passporting rights,"
This is clearly not macro economic argument, but merely an argument based on prejudices.
As they say: each person has their own unique and personalised self-motivational bigotries
Point five you said "Paris and Frankfurt which are seeing an opportunity to steal trade from London"
Fraternity is: "the rights of competitor to compete in an environment free of murder, torture, drugging, harassment, theft".
Even though the EU does not adhere to principles of "Fraternity".
Those centres have been competing with the UK for decades, they are not stealing anything, but merely continuing their competition
Point six you said "Brexit negotiations will not happen. As soon as the UK gives official notice to quit Europe, there will be a wall of silence for 2 years until the UK drops out"
The UK has a Net Trade Deficit with EU of £6-£10 billion each month or around £72-£120 billion per annum (it goes up down all the time).
Simply put: where there to be no BREXIT negotiations, everything defaults to WTO tariff taxation of 10%.
Naturally, this would generate extra tax receipts revenue of £6-£10 per annum, when combined with WTO Tariff Rebate Scheme for major UK exporters to EU, which means UK goods would not become more expensive to EU consumers.
Point seven you said "The City is the gateway to Europe. Soon London is going to be gateway to Grimsby. Let's hope fishing can replace the City of London."
Before, the UK joined the EU in 1975, fishing was a major part of UK economy and it also contained large numbers of jobs in secondary support industries.
When Fishing went into decline, the UK's ship-building sector went into decline. Therefore, the total losses have been much greater than immediate losses in the Fishing Sector.
These were well paid jobs, where nicely distributed outside London and Southeast.
If, the Fishing Sector could recover to somewhere near it's pre-EU size, it would be very helpful in re-balancing the economy and yielding better economic performance in Northern England and Scotland.
There could, also, be indirect recovery in shipbuilding sector in the UK.
i'll go out on a limb here and say you voted "Leave"
...