Support NeoGAF

[inoperativ]

No, I meant call the bluff as in just ignore the threat. May is never going to deport these people given their role in the British economy and the fact that many will have integrated into British society with all the associated ties to others.

Doesn't make it any less disgusting that she's scaring the shit out of thousands of innocent people just in order to pick up support from the party membership.

 

[SlipperyFishes]

Everything depends on how much screwed, how short-term, how soon to the benefits in the long-term and how big they are or can be. Let's wait for the shock to die down when we can discuss actual numbers. Yes, I *don't* have the exact numbers, I have only rough thoughts, but that's par for the course, "predictions are hard, especially about the future".

Here's a prediction that's not hard.

We wouldn't be fucked if we voted remain. This tripe I'm reading above is just trying to hope for the best out of a bad situation.

 

[ferrasvansen]

Yes we will. If we were so fucking stupid as to vote for this as a country I am positive all those responsible will walk away scout free. I definitely have no faith in us as a country anymore.

I won't and neither will the other 48%, sure the 52% will shrink to almost nobody admitting they voted leave when the economy plummets, but the young who will lead this country in 20 years will not forget. I have faith in almost half the country, not so the older disappearing half, but in the younger parts of our country, that's if they haven't all fucked off by then ofc.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Everything depends on how much screwed, how short-term, how soon to the benefits in the long-term and how big they are or can be. Let's wait for the shock to die down when we can discuss actual numbers. Yes, I *don't* have the exact numbers, I have only rough thoughts, but that's par for the course, "predictions are hard, especially about the future".

I think the shock is still to come when the UK actually leaves.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Why are you under the impression that the UK won't need to abide by EU clinical trials regulations, if any medicinal compound or biologic is expected to sell into the common market? Alternatively, why are you under some bizarre impression that pharma companies will proceed through the UK's MHRA but not through the EMA.

Pharma companies are still going to proceed through the EMA, because they want to sell to Europe.

If anything it will reduce British access to some drugs, if it ends up outside the EMA's regulatory framework, and reduce the presence of clinical trials or create a pointless and more onerous process of dual regulatory frameworks.

And cause the EMA to move it's headquarters out of London obviously.

90 pharma execs including the GSK and AZ CEOs didn't sign a letter supporting remaining in the EU for shits and giggles.

 

[accel]

Here's a prediction that's not hard.

We wouldn't be fucked if we voted remain. This tripe I'm reading above is just trying to hope for the best out of a bad situation.

You are again ignoring long-term damage from being in the EU. I linked several examples of that already. By staying in the EU the UK will subject itself for more like that.

Why are you under the impression that the UK won't need to abide by EU clinical trials regulations, if any medicinal compound or biologic is expected to sell into the common market?

It's irrelevant. The point is that the EU regulations have been damaging to many things. That we might have to continue to live with the outfall of the clinical trials regulation is a pretty weak argument for staying - they will have new regulations that will damage things, if we exit we might escape the damage.

 

[Ashes]

I gave two here:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=209117094&postcount=5763

I dunno about using the clinical trials directive - especially the old one, when the updated one comes next year. The medical research establishment is overwhelmingly in favour of Remaining for sound reason.

 

[Jackpot]

I gave two here:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=209117094&postcount=5763

Which were taken apart several times over. And doesn't even begin to dent the loss from EU funding and collaboration.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

You are again ignoring long-term damage from being in the EU. I linked several examples of that already. By staying in the EU the UK will subject itself for more like that.

You linked: fishing industries, a tiny fraction of the UK's economy; the FTA and PSR, neither of which have happened yet; the clinical trials proceedings which will apply anyway if we want single market access; and that's it, I think?

 

[klonere]

Why are you under the impression that the UK won't need to abide by EU clinical trials regulations, if any medicinal compound or biologic is expected to sell into the common market? Alternatively, why are you under some bizarre impression that pharma companies will proceed through the UK's MHRA but not through the EMA.

Pharma companies are still going to proceed through the EMA, because they want to sell to Europe.

If anything it will reduce British access to some drugs, if it ends up outside the EMA's regulatory framework, and reduce the presence of clinical trials or create a pointless and more onerous process of dual regulatory frameworks.

And cause the EMA to move it's headquarters out of London obviously.

90 pharma execs including the GSK and AZ CEOs didn't sign a letter supporting remaining in the EU for shits and giggles.

Does this mean more pharma for Ireland?

Give us your banks and drugs thanks. Consider it repatriation. Lovely.

 

[accel]

You linked: fishing industries, a tiny fraction of the UK's economy; the FTA and PSR, neither of which have happened yet; the clinical trials proceedings which will apply anyway if we want single market access; and that's it, I think?

And the “deliberate release” directive (testing genetically modified crops, etc).

If you think you refuted / countered / whatever everything, that's fine by me.

 

[ferrasvansen]

Does this mean more pharma for Ireland?

Give us your banks and drugs thanks. Consider it repatriation. Lovely.

That's certainly an option, would be a lot easier to move to an English speaking country that's still in the EU. Ireland will reap huge rewards at the UKs expense, especially in science and such easier to transfer industry.

 

[8bit]

Why are you under the impression that the UK won't need to abide by EU clinical trials regulations, if any medicinal compound or biologic is expected to sell into the common market? Alternatively, why are you under some bizarre impression that pharma companies will proceed through the UK's MHRA but not through the EMA.

Pharma companies are still going to proceed through the EMA, because they want to sell to Europe.

If anything it will reduce British access to some drugs, if it ends up outside the EMA's regulatory framework, and reduce the presence of clinical trials or create a pointless and more onerous process of dual regulatory frameworks.

And cause the EMA to move it's headquarters out of London obviously.

90 pharma execs including the GSK and AZ CEOs didn't sign a letter supporting remaining in the EU for shits and giggles.

Relationships between some Pharma companies and the UK (well, England & Wales especially) have been quite strained over the past few years, these aren't going to improve with a new UK regulatory framework. Insular island is going to be reduced to affiliate level and HQs will move out.

 

[liquidtmd]

You are again ignoring long-term damage from being in the EU. I linked several examples of that already. By staying in the EU the UK will subject itself for more like that.



It's irrelevant. The point is that the EU regulations have been damaging to many things. That we might have to continue to live with the outfall of the clinical trials regulation is a pretty weak argument for staying - they will have new regulations that will damage things, if we exit we might escape the damage.

I simply cannot reconcile 'We might escape the damage' with 'lets exit the EU and present the VERY real potential of big fucking damage on an industry wise scale leading to a mass exodus from the UK'

If you're trying to balance your mindset by having the countries best interests at heart, forgive me if I don't see it.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

As someone studying Museum Studies and Archaeology, you can bet both sectors are gonna be hit by leaving. It'll make projects more expensive while a lot of funding disappears (both from the EU and from continued austerity for local funding), and there'll be more red tape when trying to access material.

Though I would guess in general that a lot of cultural sectors would have similar issues - they can't just raise direct profits to offset it.

 

[accel]

Relationships between some Pharma companies and the UK (well, England & Wales especially) have been quite strained over the past few years, these aren't going to improve with a new UK regulatory framework. Insular island is going to be reduced to affiliate level and HQs will move out.

That depends on what that new framework would be.

I simply cannot reconcile 'We might escape the damage' with 'lets exit the EU and present the VERY real potential of big fucking damage on an industry wise scale leading to a mass exodus from the UK'

If you're trying to balance your mindset by having the countries best interests at heart, forgive me if I don't see it.

As I said more than once, it depends on numbers. Quantify the negative effect of leaving the EU. What's the number? -2.5% GDP growth in the first few years until things subside? Maybe less? Long-term benefits can easily overcome that. With how soon (and if they will at all, if you want) depending on numbers.

In short, you are likely overestimating the damage from exiting the EU.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

And the “deliberate release” directive (testing genetically modified crops, etc).

I don't even understand what your problem with the deliberate release directive is, it's literally just a safety precaution. Part B releases aren't overseen by the EU, they're overseen by national governments, so no problem, and Part C releases will continue to be overseen by the EU even if we left if we wanted to sell these crops to Europe, so there's no change.

If you think you refuted / countered / whatever everything, that's fine by me.

This is a fucking dreadful response. People have proved you substantive arguments as to why your assertions have absolutely no validity and how being a member of the European Union is critical to our economy, and you've either used examples of things that didn't happen, things that will continue to happen either way, or things that are ultimately irrelevant. When pressed on this, you have no response at all, other than "at some unspecified time in the future for some reasons I shall not fully explain, things will be better".

I'm going to shit on your bed. It might seem terrible now, but it will deter other people from ever sleeping in your bed, and so you shall, in the future, be better off than you would have been because you shall avoid quilt-hogs. Any objections?

 

[EdwardTeach]

You first ask what regulations are stifling, then switch to discussing that the UK would still have to abide by the EU rules.

Was the Clinical Trials directive stifling to the UK pharma? Yes, it was. Same for the other example I gave. That's two examples.

I think my post was fairly clear -

First paragraph -Which regulations were stifling?

In the second paragraph, I point out that if you were referring to clinical trials, then that is absurd as there can be no gain from Brexit. We will still need to abide by the EU rules, but we will no longer have any input in making the rules.

 

[Jisgsaw]

That depends on what that new framework would be.



As I said more than once, it depends on numbers. Quantify the negative effect of leaving the EU. What's the number? -2.5% GDP growth in the first few years until things subside? Maybe less? Long-term benefits can easily overcome that. With how soon (and if they will at all, if you want) depending on numbers.

In short, you are likely overestimating the damage from exiting the EU.

Less?
Brexit has the potential of bringing London to loose every signle euro-trading currently being done (which amount to almost one trillion a day).
In the same vain, It'll also probably mean death to all financial services London does within the EU, which is the biggest chunk of UK economy there is. And the UK had negociated an extremely good deal for those, that you just voted to simply forfeit for something much worse.

 

[accel]

I think my post was fairly clear -

First paragraph -Which regulations were stifling?

In the second paragraph, I point out that if you were referring to clinical trials, then that is absurd as there can be no gain from Brexit. We will still need to abide by the EU rules, but we will no longer have any input in making the rules.

There might be no gain from Brexit with respect to the fallout from the clinical trials directive. But since the EU created this directive that damaged things - and that's not the only such thing they did, they will perhaps create other directives that will damage things in the future. By exiting the EU we might escape the damage.

I wrote all this already.

Less?
Brexit has the potential of bringing London to loose every signle euro-trading currently being done (which amount to almost one trillion a day).
In the same vain, It'll also probably mean death to all financial services London does within the EU, which is the biggest chunk of UK economy there is. And the UK had negociated an extremely good deal for those, that you just voted to simply forfeit for something much worse.

Yes, less, all that could be less. As time passes, projections of losses go down, not up, they were at -4% GDP growth before, the last number I saw was -2.5%.

 

[kmag]

Stop feeding it.

 

[8bit]

That depends on what that new framework would be.

eCTD is EU only, and even if your UKCTD is based on that with minimal changes (e.g. GCC model) you have added at least 10% work output per dossier submitted. And your validators and publishing tools need to be updated, so there's a new investment in software that you didn't need.

So to a large Pharma company, where the drugs are not always approved by boards such as NICE, is it going to be worth it?

 

[accel]

Stop feeding it.

Wow.

No need, I will stop posting by myself if you think I am trolling.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Say the UK typically grows at a 2% growth rate each year in the EU (broadly true). Say by leaving, we grow at 2.5% a year (unlikely, but fine) except for the first five years where we grow at -2.5%. If we set the base year to be 100, here's what it looks like in the scenario where we leave the EU, up to 2075:

2017 100
2018 97.5
2019 95.0625
2020 92.6859375
2021 90.36878906
2022 88.10956934
2023 90.31230857
2024 92.57011628
2025 94.88436919
2026 97.25647842
2027 99.68789038
2028 102.1800876
2029 104.7345898
2030 107.3529546
2031 110.0367784
2032 112.7876979
2033 115.6073904
2034 118.4975751
2035 121.4600145
2036 124.4965148
2037 127.6089277
2038 130.7991509
2039 134.0691297
2040 137.4208579
2041 140.8563794
2042 144.3777889
2043 147.9872336
2044 151.6869144
2045 155.4790873
2046 159.3660645
2047 163.3502161
2048 167.4339715
2049 171.6198208
2050 175.9103163
2051 180.3080742
2052 184.815776
2053 189.4361704
2054 194.1720747
2055 199.0263766
2056 204.002036
2057 209.1020869
2058 214.3296391
2059 219.68788
2060 225.180077
2061 230.809579
2062 236.5798184
2063 242.4943139
2064 248.5566717
2065 254.7705885
2066 261.1398533
2067 267.6683496
2068 274.3600583
2069 281.2190598
2070 288.2495363
2071 295.4557747
2072 302.8421691
2073 310.4132233
2074 318.1735539
2075 326.1278927

Here's the scenario where we stay in the EU perpetually:

2017 100
2018 102
2019 104.04
2020 106.1208
2021 108.243216
2022 110.4080803
2023 112.6162419
2024 114.8685668
2025 117.1659381
2026 119.5092569
2027 121.899442
2028 124.3374308
2029 126.8241795
2030 129.360663
2031 131.9478763
2032 134.5868338
2033 137.2785705
2034 140.0241419
2035 142.8246248
2036 145.6811173
2037 148.5947396
2038 151.5666344
2039 154.5979671
2040 157.6899264
2041 160.8437249
2042 164.0605994
2043 167.3418114
2044 170.6886477
2045 174.1024206
2046 177.584469
2047 181.1361584
2048 184.7588816
2049 188.4540592
2050 192.2231404
2051 196.0676032
2052 199.9889553
2053 203.9887344
2054 208.0685091
2055 212.2298792
2056 216.4744768
2057 220.8039664
2058 225.2200457
2059 229.7244466
2060 234.3189355
2061 239.0053142
2062 243.7854205
2063 248.6611289
2064 253.6343515
2065 258.7070385
2066 263.8811793
2067 269.1588029
2068 274.541979
2069 280.0328185
2070 285.6334749
2071 291.3461444
2072 297.1730673
2073 303.1165286
2074 309.1788592
2075 315.3624364

Do you know the first year that Leaving-the-EU UK outperforms Staying-in-the-EU UK is? It's 2068. That's 51 years after the date I set as when we leave the EU (2017).

I'll be 75.

 

[accel]

Say the UK typically grows at a 2% growth rate each year in the EU (broadly true). Say by leaving, we grow at 2.5% a year (unlikely, but fine) except for the first five years where we grow at -2.5%. If we set the base year to be 100, here's what it looks like in the scenario where we leave the EU, up to 2075:

...

Do you know the first year that Leaving-the-EU UK outperforms Staying-in-the-EU UK is? It's 2068.

That assumes the UK inside the EU will grow by 2%, if the EU gets another economic downturn and that translates back to the UK, the entire gap will evaporate right there. Yes, when you start lower, it's harder. But you can look at it like this - you are one crisis away.

But, anyway, nice talking to you and others, I don't think I can continue, because some people above already think I am a troll.

Let's get back to this in a month or so.

 

[*Splinter]

I'm going to shit on your bed. It might seem terrible now, but it will deter other people from ever sleeping in your bed, and so you shall, in the future, be better off than you would have been because you shall avoid quilt-hogs. Any objections?

Say the UK typically grows at a 2% growth rate each year in the EU (broadly true). Say by leaving, we grow at 2.5% a year (unlikely, but fine) except for the first five years where we grow at -2.5%. If we set the base year to be 100, here's what it looks like in the scenario where we leave the EU, up to 2075:

~numbers~

Do you know the first year that Leaving-the-EU UK outperforms Staying-in-the-EU UK is? It's 2068.

Crab I love you

 

[Deleted member 231381]

That assumes the UK inside the EU will grow by 2%, if the EU gets another economic downturn and that translates back to the UK, the entire gap will evaporate.

I was averaging the whole period 1992-2016 to give that 2% figure, so that does account for recessions (including the Great Recession, in fact). Even if you say, though, that our growth inside the EU will be only 1.5%, then it still takes until 2044. That's 27 years, and I will be 51. if you think you can waste a quarter of my life like that and have me not be upset about that, you are very, very wrong.

 

[oti]

No, I meant call the bluff as in just ignore the threat. May is never going to deport these people given their role in the British economy and the fact that many will have integrated into British society with all the associated ties to others.

But hey, bluffing with the livelihoods of thousands of people amongst a new wave of xenophobia and racist incidents across the country won't hurt anyone, right? Right?

 

[PopcornMegaphone]

That assumes the UK inside the EU will grow by 2%, if the EU gets another economic downturn and that translates back to the UK, the entire gap will evaporate.

American here.

All your posts read like wishful thinking. Do you have any evidence from respected economists that back up your assertions?

 

[Jisgsaw]

Yes, less, all that could be less. As time passes, projections of losses go down, not up, they were at -4% GDP growth before, the last number I saw was -2.5%.

Projection of losses go down because right now, it seems the UK wont invoke article 50. We'll see how it stands when / if UK actually does leave and the timeframe has been laid out.

Also, your argumentation seem to be to point one single, small topics where EU may be not the best thing ever (and god knows there are lots of them), and spin it in saying that outside the EU, the UK will be able to strive in these areas.

Well:
a) As already pointed out, if the UK wants to stay in the single market (and I don't know one single sane person that wouldn't), they still will have to follow these couple harmfull (allegedly) regulations
b) Even if they didn't have to follow these regulations, those are (no offense intended to people working in that field) largely irrelevant sectors, especially for the UK, but also in the grand sheme of things.
So you through out an organisation that permitted you to be a leading financial market, securing hundreds thousands (if not millions) of jobs and generating billions in state revenue, for the off chance it may help spur somewhat irrelevant industries, that will generate less job and less revenue
c) You also through out the window access to the single market (for now), which is pretty bunkers if you ask me, as it's right at your doorstep and willing to buy your goods. It's all nice and good to leave EU to become a fishing powerhouse, but if you don't find anyone to buy your fish, it's pretty useless.

American here.

All your posts read like wishful thinking. Do you have any evidence from respected economists that back up your assertions?

You obviously haven'T follow the Leave campaign.
Experts aren't needed, what the hell could they actually know and contribute in a field where they are experts?

 

[Zaph]

[math vs. platitudes]

So, how much does it cost to do a wrap-around on a national newspaper?

 

[King_Moc]

American here.

All your posts read like wishful thinking. Do you have any evidence from respected economist that back up your assertions?

Careful, the leave camp aren't fond of any so called "experts".

 

[ricardo_sousa11]

Pound is right not at 1.19€, isnt that the lowest since the brexit?

Still not enough for shoe eating, but quite close..

 

[KingSnake]

Pound is right not at 1.19€, isnt that the lowest since the brexit?

Still not enough for shoe eating, but quite close..

There is still potential, I'm holding my shopping on amazon.co.uk until 1:1 exchange rate is hit.

Yes, less, all that could be less. As time passes, projections of losses go down, not up, they were at -4% GDP growth before, the last number I saw was -2.5%.

Isn't the -2.5% drop calculated only over 2 quarters?

 

[QuicheFontaine]

I'll be 75.

Your grandkids will thank you

 

[accel]

Say the UK typically grows at a 2% growth rate each year in the EU (broadly true). Say by leaving, we grow at 2.5% a year (unlikely, but fine) except for the first five years where we grow at -2.5%. If we set the base year to be 100, here's what it looks like in the scenario where we leave the EU, up to 2075:

...

Do you know the first year that Leaving-the-EU UK outperforms Staying-in-the-EU UK is? It's 2068. That's 51 years after the date I set as when we leave the EU (2017).

I'll be 75.

By the way, you miscomputed. The projection of -2.5% GDP growth from Brexit is relative to current numbers, not absolute. So, your math should be comparing the UK-in-EU growing at 2% a year and the UK-outside-of-EU reducing at -0.5% (not -2.5% as you did) the first five years and then growing by 2.5% ever after.

Not that this changes anything I said regarding one crisis away (and that you factored in the depression doesn't matter, because it's still one crisis away meaning if the EU has one crisis more than the UK, the UK gets even).

/shrug

But, really, let's revisit this in a month or so.

Isn't the -2.5% drop calculated only over 2 quarters?

I don't know, but a -2.5% drop per quarter is the same thing as a -2.5% drop per year.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Your grandkids will thank you

Grandkids? You think we'll survive President Trump and the Wasp Queen? Michael Gove 2018 died for our sins!

 

[Linkstrikesback]

There is still potential, I'm holding my shopping on amazon.co.uk until 1:1 exchange rate is hit.

Whereas I bought a $100.something in amazon US credit to pay off my persona 5 special edition preorder now. Dammit, I'm not having brexit take that to a price I can't afford too.

 

[cormack12]

All this talk of fish makes me look forward to standing in markets next to GAF members with out own stall songs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3mTSXIMumY

 

[Tommy DJ]

Your grandkids will thank you

Seeing how the UK trends to respond to a lot of economic problems with more austerity, I'm honestly not sure if a lot of people could last long enough to have or actually see their grandkids.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

By the way, you miscomputed. -2.5% GDP growth is compared to current numbers, not absolute. So, your math should be comparing the UK-in-EU growing at 2% a year and the UK-outside-of-EU reducing at -0.5% (not -2.5% as you did) the first five years and then growing by 2.5% ever after.

Not that this changes anything I said regarding one crisis away (and that you factored in the depression doesn't matter, because it's still one crisis away meaning if the EU has one crisis more than the UK, the UK gets even).

/shrug

But, really, let's revisit this in a month or so.

No, I really didn't. The -2.5% was in absolute terms (well, it's a confidence interval between -1.3% and -2.6% but they're both in absolute terms). See also the IMF report estimating a -5.5% fall in GDP (real terms, again, not relative) by 2019, which is two years of -2.3%

 

[Engell]

Pound is right not at 1.19€, isnt that the lowest since the brexit?

Still not enough for shoe eating, but quite close..

nah the lowest was : 1.18536

EUR per 1 GBP
4 Jun 2016 14:00 UTC - 4 Jul 2016 14:23 UTC
GBP/EUR close:1.19199 low:1.18536 high:1.31369

 

[KingSnake]

I don't know, but a -2.5% drop per quarter is the same thing as a -2.5% drop per year.

Sorry, say what?

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Seeing how the UK trends to respond to a lot of economic problems with more austerity, I'm honestly not sure if a lot of people could last long enough to have or actually see their grandkids.

And there was someone in here earlier who was disputing me when I said the British are a naturally pessimistic people.

Grandkids? You think we'll survive President Trump and the Wasp Queen? Michael Gove 2018 died for our sins!

These, on the other hand, are well founded and reasonable points. My earlier post is cheerfully retracted.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Sorry, say what?

he's right on that one. Quarterly figures are extrapolated to what they'd be if the whole year was like that quarter. Don't ask me why.

 

[accel]

No, I really didn't. The -2.5% was in absolute terms (well, it's a confidence interval between -1.3% and -2.6% but they're both in absolute terms). See also the IMF report estimating a -5.5% fall in GDP (real terms, again, not relative) by 2019, which is two years of -2.3%

https://twitter.com/AlexWhite1812/status/748194756765884416

That's what I meant by -2.5% GDP growth.

 

[KingSnake]

he's right on that one. Quarterly figures are extrapolated to what they'd be if the whole year was like that quarter. Don't ask me why.

Are they retroactively corrected for current year?

 

[accel]

Are they retroactively corrected for current year?

It's just math.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

https://twitter.com/AlexWhite1812/status/748194756765884416

So a) that's a different paper, b) it's still a 1% fall in absolute terms, c) it's at the optimistic end of most predictions I've seen, and fine, d) here's what the figures look like the -1% a year for 5 years then 2.5%, or 2% in perpetuity:

Bremain Brexit
2017 100 100
2018 102 99
2019 104.04 98.01
2020 106.1208 97.0299
2021 108.243216 96.059601
2022 110.4080803 95.09900499
2023 112.6162419 97.47648011
2024 114.8685668 99.91339212
2025 117.1659381 102.4112269
2026 119.5092569 104.9715076
2027 121.899442 107.5957953
2028 124.3374308 110.2856902
2029 126.8241795 113.0428324
2030 129.360663 115.8689032
2031 131.9478763 118.7656258
2032 134.5868338 121.7347665
2033 137.2785705 124.7781356
2034 140.0241419 127.897589
2035 142.8246248 131.0950287
2036 145.6811173 134.3724045
2037 148.5947396 137.7317146
2038 151.5666344 141.1750074
2039 154.5979671 144.7043826
2040 157.6899264 148.3219922
2041 160.8437249 152.030042
2042 164.0605994 155.830793
2043 167.3418114 159.7265629
2044 170.6886477 163.7197269
2045 174.1024206 167.8127201
2046 177.584469 172.0080381
2047 181.1361584 176.3082391
2048 184.7588816 180.715945
2049 188.4540592 185.2338437
2050 192.2231404 189.8646898
2051 196.0676032 194.611307
2052 199.9889553 199.4765897
2053 203.9887344 204.4635044

Takes until 2053 until we're better off.

 

[Maledict]

Love you doing the numbers on this Crab. I'm sure myself and another poster were talking about this recently, but basically it's like compound interest - people really, really don't understand how it works or what the effects of a short term drop are. I didn't until I saw a treasury presentation on the 2008 crisis that made my hair stand on end.