GDP per capita doesn’t contradict the statements of the sources I posted above since it’s a mean of economic activity and therefore, it does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about winners and losers among social groups after Brexit.
Also interesting you chose ‘fixed 2015 US $’ when this was an all-time-high exchange rate (US $ - £) compared to the one in your selected time frame.
Yes it’s normal and usually makes sense. In this particular case, however, it distorts the data basis, as the UK GDP is valued higher than the two eurozone countries due to the very high reference exchange rate.
And I said ‘you’ because you could have chosen other normalizations as well… yielding a different picture.
For example you could normalize by annual % growth of GDP.
Makes sense. If nothing else is available, we have to work with what we have.
And thank you for the clarification.
To clarify my point: I am not saying that Brexit was an absolute economic disaster… but that some wealthy Brexit supporters benefited disproportionately compared to the average citizen and therefore pushed forward the populist campaign that ultimately led to the exit.
Retarded Brexit comment of the week 🎖️
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/brexit-lies-and-rich-folk/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/03/observer-view-list-of-brexit-wins-is-in-short-and-feeble
https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/files/100089116/4_Morgan_Glenn_1976_Brexit_1/_.pdf
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD?locations=GB-DE-FR&start=2016
GDP per capita doesn’t contradict the statements of the sources I posted above since it’s a mean of economic activity and therefore, it does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about winners and losers among social groups after Brexit. Also interesting you chose ‘fixed 2015 US $’ when this was an all-time-high exchange rate (US $ - £) compared to the one in your selected time frame.
https://www.cer.eu/insights/brexit-four-years-answers-two-trade-paradoxes
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/lessons-from-brexit-on-the-effects-of-trade-disintegration-20260116.html
https://academic.oup.com/oxrep/article/38/1/82/6514758?login=false
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/slowing-economic-growth-brexit-and-the-productivity-challenge/
I didn’t choose the measure, the OBR did.
Normalising in dollars is normal.
Yes it’s normal and usually makes sense. In this particular case, however, it distorts the data basis, as the UK GDP is valued higher than the two eurozone countries due to the very high reference exchange rate.
And I said ‘you’ because you could have chosen other normalizations as well… yielding a different picture.
For example you could normalize by annual % growth of GDP.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?end=2024&locations=GB-DE-FR&start=2007
(Side note: Thanks for the source, this database is amazing!)
Unfortunately that’s the only date the source provides on a constant dollar basis.
Using today’s dollar shows the same thing, the UK is not performing any worse than its near peers.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=GB-FR-DE&start=2016
To be clear, I’m not suggesting Brexit has been an economic success, it wasn’t an economic decision, it was a political one.
Makes sense. If nothing else is available, we have to work with what we have.
And thank you for the clarification. To clarify my point: I am not saying that Brexit was an absolute economic disaster… but that some wealthy Brexit supporters benefited disproportionately compared to the average citizen and therefore pushed forward the populist campaign that ultimately led to the exit.