Booming Britain to become world's fourth largest economy

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/e...ource=Facebook

Booming Britain to become world's fourth largest economy as France and Italy face G8 exclusion

Europe's largest economies will struggle to remain members of the world's elite economic club as UK races ahead, finds new report

UK set to race past its European rivals by 2030

Britain will reach the "giddy" heights of the fourth largest economy in the world, leapfrogging Germany and Japan over the next two decades, new analysis shows. The UK is set to become the best performing economy in the western world over the next 15 years, boosted by its leading position in global software and IT sectors, according to a report by the Centre for Economics Business and Research.

By contrast, the stagnant Italian and French economies are set to be replaced in the world's new economic order by growth giants of the emerging world - India and Brazil.

Britain is currently the world's fifth largest economy based on total Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which currently stands at $3.04 trillion. The UK overtook France in GDP terms in 2014. Bumper growth will put Britain on course to become the world's fourth largest economic powerhouse ahead of an ageing Japan and Germany in the 2030s, according to the CEBR's latest world economic league table.

The total cash value of the UK economy will grow to around $4.7 trillion by 2031, but is expected to be quickly overtaken by Brazil in fourth spot by the 2040s. UK economic growth is set to hit 2.9pc this year, the second fastest in the advanced world after the United States. It means the economy is now 6.1pc larger than its pre-financial crisis peak.

The Treasury said the CEBR's analysis was evidence that the Government's long-term economic plan was working, with the deficit reduced by almost two thirds as a share of GDP since its peak in 2009-10 and an average of 1,000 extra people in work each day.

Britain's fortunes are in sharp contrast with France and Italy, which face "exclusion" from the grouping of the world's advanced economies, said the CEBR.
Europe's third and fourth largest economies will be replaced by India and Brazil in the G8 over the next 15 years, as they fight years of low growth and ageing populations, warned the report.

As Brazil and India meet the political criteria for membership of the exclusive G8 club of developed democracies, their ascension could see France and Italy kicked out of the group, or the club expanded to a G10 as more economies join. The CEBR said France's "dire" economic prospects will see it fall from the world's 5th to 9th largest economy by 2030. France's socialist government has been on a drive to carry out radical spending cuts and roll-out new economic reforms in a bid to revive economic growth.

But the CEBR said "the pace of French economic reform is far too slow even for the economy to tread water in the world economy."
France will grow by 1.1pc this year, and average just 1.25pc GDP growth over the next five years, according to the International Monetary Fund.

Italy - currently 8th in the global league table - has suffered even worse fortunes. Since joining the euro in 2000, GDP growth has remained flat, making it the slowest growing economy of any major developed nation. Italy also has the second highest debt mountain in the eurozone after Greece at over 132pc of GDP. Its global position is set to slip by five places to 13th by 2030.

As I always point out in EU debates when people make the false claim we couldn't survive on our own outside of that declining and outdated bloc, Britain is the only European nation expected to remain in the global top ten by 2050. We've already overtaken France and next is Germany. It's fantastic.

We should be more confident of ourselves. We'll do even better too once we're able to sign our own free trade deals with India, China and so on.

Thoughts?

[The Don]

Britain is expected to remain within the global top 10 based on it's current performance which is as a member of the EU. Leaving an economic trade bloc and changing the status quo makes these predictions worthless as they are based on our current performance (which is as part of the EU). Any prediction made on our performance after leaving the EU is hypothetical and worthless.

Your example is like saying "If we keep buying lottery tickets until 2050 then we'll surely win, we might as well stop buying lottery tickets now as we know we're going to win in the future" which is nonsensical gibberish.

[scottish]

Britain is expected to remain within the global top 10 based on it's current performance which is as a member of the EU. Leaving an economic trade bloc and changing the status quo makes these predictions worthless as they are based on our current performance (which is as part of the EU). Any prediction made on our performance after leaving the EU is hypothetical and worthless.

Your example is like saying "If we keep buying lottery tickets until 2050 then we'll surely win, we might as well stop buying lottery tickets now as we know we're going to win in the future" which is nonsensical gibberish.

The chance of winning (with the change to 59 numbers) I believe is 1 in 45,057,474

Currently there's 2 draws a week (lotto) which is 104 a week, which is 104 attempts per year assuming 1 per month.

So to complete 45,057,474 attempts at 104 per year that's 433,244 (rounded down) years.

Failing that, with 34 years to go that would need to be 1,325,219 attempts per year or 25,484 per week or 12,742 per draw.

At that it would be a cost of £90,114,948 over 34 years so you better hope the Jackpot is better and only won by you

unless you're talking about £25 wins and stuff then nvm

[-:Undertaker:-]

Britain is expected to remain within the global top 10 based on it's current performance which is as a member of the EU. Leaving an economic trade bloc and changing the status quo makes these predictions worthless as they are based on our current performance (which is as part of the EU). Any prediction made on our performance after leaving the EU is hypothetical and worthless.

Your example is like saying "If we keep buying lottery tickets until 2050 then we'll surely win, we might as well stop buying lottery tickets now as we know we're going to win in the future" which is nonsensical gibberish.

Not at all.

Most of the future growth is from Commonwealth and developing economies such as India which we're currently barred from signing Free Trade Deals (FTAs) with. Tiny non-EU Switzerland without any historical connections what so ever just completed a FTA with China and yet Britain is stuck within the EU and unable to forge deals with its closest friends such as Australia, America, New Zealand, Canada and so on. Now sure the EU itself could sign an FTA with China or India but being in the EU then means we have to abide by what the likes of protectionist France don't want included in any deal, which inhibits our growth and opportunities. Why should Britain be held to ransom and have to accomodate totally different views to our own on trade when we can just go it alone?

Britain being the 4th largest world economy and only European power in the top ten being unable to take its own seat at the World Trade Organisation is damaging.

[The Don]

The chance of winning (with the change to 59 numbers) I believe is 1 in 45,057,474

Currently there's 2 draws a week (lotto) which is 104 a week, which is 104 attempts per year assuming 1 per month.

So to complete 45,057,474 attempts at 104 per year that's 433,244 (rounded down) years.

Failing that, with 34 years to go that would need to be 1,325,219 attempts per year or 25,484 per week or 12,742 per draw.

At that it would be a cost of £90,114,948 over 34 years so you better hope the Jackpot is better and only won by you

unless you're talking about £25 wins and stuff then nvm

I didn't intend for the example to be taken literally, just used it to show the flawed argument being used here. Obviously you're more than likely going to lose the lottery and generally it's financially smarter to not play, I just wanted an example where if the status quo remains the same you'll be better off in the future, so people like dan argue against the status quo because "in the future we'll be better off" without realising that if we change the status quo now, the predictions behind your argument are completely pointless because they are based off what we are currently doing.

- - - Updated - - -

Not at all.

Most of the future growth is from Commonwealth and developing economies such as India which we're currently barred from signing Free Trade Deals (FTAs) with. Tiny non-EU Switzerland without any historical connections what so ever just completed a FTA with China and yet Britain is stuck within the EU and unable to forge deals with its closest friends such as Australia, America, New Zealand, Canada and so on. Now sure the EU itself could sign an FTA with China or India but being in the EU then means we have to abide by what the likes of protectionist France don't want included in any deal, which inhibits our growth and opportunities. Why should Britain be held to ransom and have to accomodate totally different views to our own on trade when we can just go it alone?

Britain being the 4th largest world economy and only European power in the top ten being unable to take its own seat at the World Trade Organisation is damaging.

Switzerland isn't posed to be the worlds fourth largest economy in 2030. Unless you're arguing against economic prosperity I don't see your point. The prediction made in your OP is based off our current performance in the EU. We have no idea what will happen to our economy if we leave.

Britain is predicted to be the worlds 4th largest economy as a member of the EU.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Switzerland isn't posed to be the worlds fourth largest economy in 2030. Unless you're arguing against economic prosperity I don't see your point. The prediction made in your OP is based off our current performance in the EU. We have no idea what will happen to our economy if we leave.

Britain is predicted to be the worlds 4th largest economy as a member of the EU.

We don't know what will happen to our economy if we stay. By staying we're taking huge economic risks.


- By staying and to be able to play a "full part" would require us to ultimately join the Eurozone.
- The Eurozone will move closer together over the coming years meaning a permanent Euro voting majority on EU economic legislation.
- Demands have already been put forward for stricter financial regulations which will hurt the City of London disproportionately.
- The European Union may not exist by 2050 meaning Britain will have missed her chances now to sign FTAs with China, India and America.
- Continued membership ultimately will require the abolition of Common Law which isn't going to happen, see first point made.


Britain had an economy before we entered the EEC and we'll have one after. In any case, we're in a much stronger position now to 2050 than we were in 1973.

Why be so pessimistic about Britain's ability to do business and trade with the world? We're much more free market than continental Europe.

Why should Britain be held to ransom and have to accomodate totally different views to our own on trade when we can just go it alone?

Can you answer that question?

[FlyingJesus]

We don't know what will happen to our economy if we stay.

We don't know anything, but that is what this particular prediction by CEBR is based on. 1 + 2 is 3, however that doesn't mean that 1 + 4 is 3 as well just because you're starting at the same point: changing part of the formula means you have to recalculate. We may magically end up number one in the world if we leave the EU, who knows, but this very specific analysis is about what is likely to happen if things continue as they are

[abc]

By staying we're taking huge economic risks.

Same can be said about us leaving the EU.

[dbgtz]

I can imagine a lot will change the world by 2030 that this will not be accurate anymore.

[cocaine]

India and Brazil are by far no surprise given their performance over the past decade or so, however the former will have an absolute mission if they want to be one of the leading eight.

As for the UK's position - I'm skeptical. Forecasts are usually subject to change given political influences and external factors at the time of research and certain indicators that measure economic growth can be picked and chosen (as with all quantitative data) and obviously as time goes on the more inaccurate forecasts are likely to be. While I expect the service industry to grow at a higher rate than traditional industries, we can't ignore that Japan and Germany are nations that are also well developed.