Economic reality is beginning to catch up with the false hopes of many Britons. One year ago, when a slim majority voted for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, they believed the promises of the popular media and of the politicians who backed the Leave campaign that Brexit would not reduce their living standards. Indeed, in the year since, they have managed to maintain those standards by running up household debt.
This worked for a while, because the increase in household consumption stimulated the economy. However, the moment of truth for the British economy is fast approaching.
As the latest figures published by the Bank of England (BOE) showed, wage growth in Britain is not keeping up with inflation, so real incomes have begun to fall.
As this trend continues in the coming months, households will soon realize that their living standards are falling and they will have to adjust their spending habits. To make matters worse, they will also realize that they have become over-indebted and will have to deleverage, thus further reducing the household consumption that has sustained the economy.
Moreover, the BOE has made the same mistake as the average household: It underestimated the impact of inflation and will now be catching up by raising interest rates in a pro-cyclical manner. These higher rates will make household debt even harder to pay off.
The British are fast approaching the tipping point that characterizes all unsustainable economic trends. I refer to such a tipping point as “reflexivity” — when both cause and effect shape each other.
LOSE-LOSE
Economic reality is reinforced by political reality. The fact is Brexit is a lose-lose proposition, harmful both to Britain and the EU. The Brexit referendum cannot be undone, but people can change their minds.
Apparently, this is happening. British Prime Minister Theresa May’s attempt to strengthen her negotiating position by holding a snap election badly misfired: She lost her parliamentary majority and created a hung parliament.
The primary cause of May’s defeat was her fatal misstep in proposing that older people pay for a substantial portion of their social care out of their own resources, usually the value of the homes that they have lived in all of their lives.
This “dementia tax,” as it became widely known, deeply offended the core constituency — older people — of May’s Conservative Party. Many either did not vote, or supported other parties.
The increased participation of young people was also an important contributing factor in May’s defeat. Many of them voted for Labour in protest, not because they wanted to join a trade union or because they support Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn (although he gave an unexpectedly impressive performance throughout the campaign).
The attitude of Britain’s young people to the single market is diametrically opposed to that of May and supporters of a “hard” Brexit. Young people are eager to find well-paying jobs, whether in Britain or elsewhere in Europe.
In that respect, their interests correspond with the interests of the City of London, where some of those jobs are to be found.
STRATEGIC SHIFT
If May wants to remain in power, she must change her approach to the Brexit negotiations, and there are signs that she is prepared to do so.
By approaching the negotiations that started on Monday in a conciliatory spirit, May could reach an understanding with the EU on the agenda and agree to continue as a member of the single market for a period long enough to carry out all the legal work that will be needed.
This would be a great relief to the EU, because it would postpone the evil day when Britain’s absence would create an enormous hole in the EU’s budget. That would be a win-win arrangement.
Only by taking this path can May hope to persuade parliament to pass all the laws that need to be in place once the Brexit talks are completed and Britain withdraws from the EU. She might have to abandon her ill-considered alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party in Ulster and side more emphatically with the Tories of Scotland, who are keen on a softer version of Brexit.
May will also need to atone for the sins of the Tories in the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea with regard to last week’s Grenfell Tower fire, in which 79 people are presumed to have lost their lives.
If May embraces such a platform, she could then carry on leading a minority government, because nobody else would want to take her place.
Brexit would still take at least five years to complete, during which time new elections would take place. If all goes well, the two parties might want to remarry even before they have divorced.
George Soros is chairman of Soros Fund Management and chairman of the Open Society Foundations.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath