GDP per capita growth [1] has been more or less flat since 2008. The time of the GFC. I think people are starting to forget what productivity growth even feels like it has been so long. Subsequent governments set immigration to infinity to make GDP go up, but this has further exposed the fact that per-capita it is flat.
The US was & is ahead per capita but you can see the EU and Canada taking a big hit in 2008 and going sideways after that.
Here's full GDP. It tells a different story due to the EU's larger population. There have been several occasions where it actually had a larger economy than the US; but every time it seems to hit a roadblock and go sideways for a decade (1980, 1995, 2008): https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?end=2023...
I remember when Tony Blair was elected and Gordon Brown proudly proclaimed "An end to boom and bust economics". I don't think many people realised this would be continuous bust with no boom ever.
Brexit was around the same time as COVID, so hard to split the two.
>> It's also way higher than it ever was back when Britain was monoracial.
Yes, but the immigration model has changed. It used to be "let the best and brightest from around the world work and live in the UK" now it is "let anybody move here that is willing to work for less money".
Well, no, actually. It's not hard to look at the expected effects of brexit and examine whether they are occurring. For example, decline in small forms exporting to Europe due to trades friction.
"But the working assumption of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government's independent official forecaster, is still that Brexit in the long-term will reduce exports and imports of goods and services by 15% relative to otherwise. It has held this view since 2016, including under the previous Government."
"And the OBR's other working assumption is that the fall in trade relative to otherwise will reduce the long-term size of the UK economy by around 4% relative to otherwise, equivalent to roughly £100bn in today's money."
You mean the same civil service that was against Brexit from the start, still tries to justify it being a bad idea? Amazing.
You even didn't include the paragraph prior to your quote:
"It's also clear UK services exports - such as advertising and management consulting - have done unexpectedly well since 2021."
I realise Brexit was a horrible shock for the middle classes that they are still coming to terms with, but I think long term it will be neutral or positive. Now that we have a more pro-UK president there is even scope of trade deals with the USA replacing some of the "lost" EU trade.
Right - I included the bottom line on trade. There's plenty more context in the article, and only a small sliver is at all good for the Brexiteer. Everyone agrees it's been between 6-30% worse on the trade front, and the OBR estimate is middle-of-the-road in that regard.
"Would be a run on the pound" is forecasting, just like expecting that Brexit will eventually be neutral or slightly positive. The article reports agreement on past/present facts.
The obr is not the only source here, but one among many.
You seem very invested in ignoring evidence that before wasn't a great idea. This suggests you're more interested in ideology than evidence-based reasoning. It's distressing that "free thinking" has become an excuse to ignore evidence and pursue vibes-based policy.
