Brexit never? Britain can still change its mind, says Article 50 author

[tomacht8]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

 

The model does not work as you say. Try reading it in detail. And it is a model which is perfectly suitable to today's world.

Ok, i try to make Minfords theoretical model simple:

The 5 premises of the perfect market are:
1. unlimited reaction speed of the market to price changes
If a dealer of toilet paper at London Heathrow lowers its price for this good, all the demand for toilet paper will immediately fall to him, because he is the cheapest provider.

2. no personal preferences in the trade
If you buy your bread for breakfast, and you have the choice to make a purchase from a 22-year-old saleswoman with sexy long legs or an old unfriendly man. Where would you buy your bread? If the old mans bread would be 3 pence cheaper, nobody would buy bread from the girl.

3. no problems with geographical bridging.
If the cheapest provider for a commodity (let's say a lady vibrator) sits in Spain, all the British would go shopping there.

4. All market participants have the same information.
So, if the dealer for toilet paper in London Heathrow lowers his price, all Londoners would know that at the same time.

5. All goods are homogeneous.
Every natural product (lets say a banana) would then have to be identical,
in shape, color, material and decoration.
 

That's just a theoretical model.
The substantiated explanation for real trade can not and will not be provided by this model.
Minford always reflects his theoretical model on the practice against the background of the perfect market.
Believe it or not, Minford's publications are hardly quoted in serious economics science.
But in the SUN and Express you can read a lot about him.
But if the assumptions of the perfect market are valid, then Minford would be right.
All the British would buy there toilet paper in London Heathrow, would buy there bread from an old man, would buy there vibrators in Spain and would eat identical bananas.

Do not follow a blind man, if you have 86 men with each one eye around you.

 

[Khun Han]

3 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

Seimens is German, Google is American and AstraZeneca is anglo Sweedish, all of which confirms my point about FDI being a result of increases in the value of foreign currencies.

 

Yes agreed, the economists did predict a huge drop in FDI following the vote which didn't take place, probably because the value of the Pound plummeted so much following the yes vote. After all, what would you do if you were a foreign buyer of (Thai Baht FOR EXAMPLE) if the value of the baht fell by up to 20% against your home currency, why you'd buy of course!

 

Those companies didn't do fire sale purchases, they bolstered existing investments - exactly what Project Fear said wouldn't happen.

 

And everybody predicted the drop in Sterling. So why didn't Project Fear's economists factor this into their prediction about FDI? Are they completely useless at their jobs? They couldn't have been telling porkies could they? Either way, remain wants us to believe these same discredited economists about a supposed post-brexit scenario. It's beyond silly!

[Khun Han]

2 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

Ok, i try to make Minfords theoretical model simple:

The 5 premises of the perfect market are:
1. unlimited reaction speed of the market to price changes
If a dealer of toilet paper at London Heathrow lowers its price for this good, all the demand for toilet paper will immediately fall to him, because he is the cheapest provider.

2. no personal preferences in the trade
If you buy your bread for breakfast, and you have the choice to make a purchase from a 22-year-old saleswoman with sexy long legs or an old unfriendly man. Where would you buy your bread? If the old mans bread would be 3 pence cheaper, nobody would buy bread from the girl.

3. no problems with geographical bridging.
If the cheapest provider for a commodity (let's say a lady vibrator) sits in Spain, all the British would go shopping there.

4. All market participants have the same information.
So, if the dealer for toilet paper in London Heathrow lowers his price, all Londoners would know that at the same time.

5. All goods are homogeneous.
Every natural product (lets say a banana) would then have to be identical,
in shape, color, material and decoration.
 

That's just a theoretical model.
The substantiated explanation for real trade can not and will not be provided by this model.
Minford always reflects his theoretical model on the practice against the background of the perfect market.
Believe it or not, Minford's publications are hardly quoted in serious economics science.
But in the SUN and Express you can read a lot about him.
But if the assumptions of the perfect market are valid, then Minford would be right.
All the British would buy there toilet paper in London Heathrow, would buy there bread from an old man, would buy there vibrators in Spain and would eat identical bananas.

Do not follow a blind man, if you have 86 men with each one eye around you.

 

 

I'm sure your post makes sense to you.

[Chomper Higgot]

Brexit is, for the time being, stalled. 

 

Britain's negotiating team (I use the term 'team' in it's loosest sense) are facing the exact problem 'Project Fear' said they would face. 

 

1. The Brexiteers have no plan (absolutely no plan)

2. The Brexiteers have hopes for a deal that they have been told is not available.

3. The Brexiteers have to face up to paying the divorce bill.

4. The Brexiteers have to face up to the demands from the EU for citizen rights.

5. The Brexiteers have to come up with an answer for Northern Ireland ***

 

*** This latter point is a bit of a problem because the Tories are reliant upon the DUP, the DUP will not agree a deal that is acceptable to Dublin and Dublin will not agree a deal acceptable to the DUP.

 

Meanwhile the banks and financial services industry are demanding passporting rights to EU markets, industry is demanding clarity from the government, and there is little doubt that the UK government will collapse in its attempt the balance a Brexit deal between the competing demands in the Tory party.

 

 

 

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

Don't be harsh, there is a money tree, really!

Of course there is - and Corbyn has got his watering can all ready.

 

 

[nauseus]

49 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Brexit is, for the time being, stalled. 

 

Britain's negotiating team (I use the term 'team' in it's loosest sense) are facing the exact problem 'Project Fear' said they would face. 

 

1. The Brexiteers have no plan (absolutely no plan)

2. The Brexiteers have hopes for a deal that they have been told is not available.

3. The Brexiteers have to face up to paying the divorce bill.

4. The Brexiteers have to face up to the demands from the EU for citizen rights.

5. The Brexiteers have to come up with an answer for Northern Ireland ***

 

*** This latter point is a bit of a problem because the Tories are reliant upon the DUP, the DUP will not agree a deal that is acceptable to Dublin and Dublin will not agree a deal acceptable to the DUP.

 

Meanwhile the banks and financial services industry are demanding passporting rights to EU markets, industry is demanding clarity from the government, and there is little doubt that the UK government will collapse in its attempt the balance a Brexit deal between the competing demands in the Tory party.

 

 

 

1. The Brexiteers have no plan (absolutely no plan) this was actually Cameron's responsibility.

2. The Brexiteers have hopes for a deal that they have been told is not available. who actually said that?

3. The Brexiteers have to face up to paying the divorce bill. so what?

4. The Brexiteers have to face up to the demands from the EU for citizen rights. and vv for the EU.

5. The Brexiteers have to come up with an answer for Northern Ireland *** it's a negotiation, or supposed  to be.

 

And it's government who have to solve all these, with the EU. The Brexiteers job was to vote.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

28 minutes ago, nauseus said:

1. The Brexiteers have no plan (absolutely no plan) this was actually Cameron's responsibility.

2. The Brexiteers have hopes for a deal that they have been told is not available. who actually said that?

3. The Brexiteers have to face up to paying the divorce bill. so what?

4. The Brexiteers have to face up to the demands from the EU for citizen rights. and vv for the EU.

5. The Brexiteers have to come up with an answer for Northern Ireland *** it's a negotiation, or supposed  to be.

 

And it's government who have to solve all these, with the EU. The Brexiteers job was to vote.

 

 

I see, you vote, but will not accept responsibility fo the outcome. 

[simoh1490]

4 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Those companies didn't do fire sale purchases, they bolstered existing investments - exactly what Project Fear said wouldn't happen.

 

And everybody predicted the drop in Sterling. So why didn't Project Fear's economists factor this into their prediction about FDI? Are they completely useless at their jobs? They couldn't have been telling porkies could they? Either way, remain wants us to believe these same discredited economists about a supposed post-brexit scenario. It's beyond silly!

Let's take AstraZeneca first, here's what happened:

 

"AstraZeneca, Britain’s second-largest drugmaker, is to announce further investment in its Macclesfield site in northern England, in a boost for Britain’s £60bn life sciences industry.

 

AstraZeneca is not committing to manufacturing expansion in the UK as it waits for clarity on the government’s Brexit plans. Last month, its chief executive, Pascal Soriot, said the company would “wait to see” before committing itself to further investment in Britain because of uncertainty in the pharmaceutical industry following the vote to leave the EU, in particular over the regulatory regime for new medicines".

 

https://www.ft.com/content/f171ba36-8b19-11e7-9084-d0c17942ba93

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/aug/27/astrazeneca-shrugs-off-brexit-fears-with-factory-expansion

 

Then there's Google UK:

 

 "The decision pre-dates Brexit," 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/google-cloud-opened-its-first-uk-region-with-london-2017-7

"He said open borders and free movement for skilled migrants were "absolutely" important to the success of the technology sector in the UK".

 

I asked Mr Pichai what the government's approach should be to immigration controls.

"I want to be respectful," he answered.

"These are important questions for the citizens of the UK to answer.

"I think there are thoughtful debates to be had.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37988095

 

 

 

 

 

[simoh1490]

5 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

I'm sure your post makes sense to you.

I don't mean to be disrespectful Hans but your comment on Minfords Theoretical model of economics says it all really, you (and your co-posters) don't really understand economics and this is why you've never been able to put forward an economic forecast showing the impact of Brexit on the UK economy. Minford's economic theory may be flawed and suspect but he does understand economics and the fact he has drawn the wrong conclusions from it all don't subtract from that. Most Brexiteers on the other hand don't understand the model (as you have just confirmed) ergo they don't understand economics and simply try to back people such as Minford because they do. It's rather like cheating on your math homework at school: you didn't understand the math homework problem so you cribbed the answers from the boy in your class who is best at math, sadly on that particular day he got his homework wrong.

[Khun Han]

5 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Let's take AstraZeneca first, here's what happened:

 

"AstraZeneca, Britain’s second-largest drugmaker, is to announce further investment in its Macclesfield site in northern England, in a boost for Britain’s £60bn life sciences industry.

 

AstraZeneca is not committing to manufacturing expansion in the UK as it waits for clarity on the government’s Brexit plans. Last month, its chief executive, Pascal Soriot, said the company would “wait to see” before committing itself to further investment in Britain because of uncertainty in the pharmaceutical industry following the vote to leave the EU, in particular over the regulatory regime for new medicines".

 

https://www.ft.com/content/f171ba36-8b19-11e7-9084-d0c17942ba93

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/aug/27/astrazeneca-shrugs-off-brexit-fears-with-factory-expansion

 

Then there's Google UK:

 

 "The decision pre-dates Brexit," 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/google-cloud-opened-its-first-uk-region-with-london-2017-7

"He said open borders and free movement for skilled migrants were "absolutely" important to the success of the technology sector in the UK".

 

I asked Mr Pichai what the government's approach should be to immigration controls.

"I want to be respectful," he answered.

"These are important questions for the citizens of the UK to answer.

"I think there are thoughtful debates to be had.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37988095

 

 

 

 

 

From your quoted article:

 

"Soriot said last month that AstraZeneca would carry on investing at its new £500m headquarters in Cambridge, where it will open a biomedical campus next year, which will be its biggest centre globally for cancer research."

 

Let's move on to Google, where you missed out this first sentence:

 

"Google's global president for cloud customers, Tariq Shaukat, told Business Insider that Brexit had little impact on the company's timeframe."

 

Now, onto Siemens (Europe's biggest):

 

“The UK matters with or without being a member of the EU. The Brexit vote will not diminish our commitment to your country."

 

“We never said the UK is in bad shape if it leaves the EU: we said the EU would miss a massive opportunity. Without the UK, the EU may never be able to stand up against superpowers like China and the US,”

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/siemens-boss-joe-kaeser-vows-to-invest-in-uk-in-brexit-u-turn-a7132236.html

 

Novo Nordisk:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-novo-dordisk-pharmaceutical-giant-uk-drug-research-centre-115-milliom-vote-of-a7552541.html

 

GSK:

 

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-gsk-britain/glaxosmithkline-invests-275-million-pounds-in-uk-despite-brexit-idUKKCN1070HY

 

Apple:

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/revealed-apple-to-create-stunning-new-hq-at-battersea-power-station-a3356201.html

 

And on and on and on.....

 

[Khun Han]

29 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

I don't mean to be disrespectful Hans but your comment on Minfords Theoretical model of economics says it all really, you (and your co-posters) don't really understand economics and this is why you've never been able to put forward an economic forecast showing the impact of Brexit on the UK economy. Minford's economic theory may be flawed and suspect but he does understand economics and the fact he has drawn the wrong conclusions from it all don't subtract from that. Most Brexiteers on the other hand don't understand the model (as you have just confirmed) ergo they don't understand economics and simply try to back people such as Minford because they do. It's rather like cheating on your math homework at school: you didn't understand the math homework problem so you cribbed the answers from the boy in your class who is best at math, sadly on that particular day he got his homework wrong.

 

And I don't mean to be disrespectful Simon, but you 'liked' a post about Minford by Tomacht that is away with the faeries. And it's crystal clear that you don't understand economics: You keep putting your faith in failed models and failed predictions. Minford has, so far, got brexit right. Project Fear's big hitters have got it so wrong it's comical. You keep on espousing that Minford's theories are flawed (whilst he carries on being proven right) and keep on pushing Project Fear's hilariously inept predictions and models, ok?

Edited November 19, 2017 by Khun Han

[simoh1490]

3 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

And I don't mean to be disrespectful Simon, but you 'liked' a post about Minford by Tomacht that is away with the faeries. And it's crystal clear that you don't understand economics: You keep putting your faith in failed models and failed predictions. Minford has, so far, got brexit right. Project Fear's big hitters have got it so wrong it's comical. You keep on espousing that Minford's theories are flawed (whilst he carries on being proven right) and keep on pushing Project Fear's hilariously inept predictions and models, ok?

2

What I liked about that post was Tomacht's explanation which I thought was very good, we'd already established and mostly agreed the model is flawed and his assumption invalid. Trying to determine what a person believes, solely from emoticons, is very dangerous although the use of them by your camp has not gone unnoticed.

 

STOP doing this: "And it's crystal clear that you don't understand economics" - repeating back to me, something I've just said to you, is playground stuff and makes you look silly,

 

AND STOP THIS ALSO: "Project Fear's big hitters have got it so wrong it's comical". You don't cite where or how, you just generalise without explanation and expect everyone to accept the statement as it stands - they don't. If you make a statement that others have got it wrong, explain how, cite examples, provide links to prove how, then your argument has credibility and some weight. 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2017 by simoh1490

[simoh1490]

13 hours ago, nauseus said:

What will be the impact of Brexit on the UK economy during the first five and ten years, will it grow or will it shrink

Shrink then recover. EU will just wobble then continue to shrink, especially if no trade deal with UK.

 

What will happen to the Pound vs USD exchange rate, will it rise, fall or remain the same, ranges will do.

Fall then recover again but it is liable to survive - can't say the same for the Euro.

 

Will immigration numbers drop more than 10% 

After a time, yes.

 

Will the NHS get more funding or less as a result of Brexit.

Yes.

 

Will Brexit cause taxes to rise, fall or remain the same.

Same but if Labour get in next time they will rise in UK!

 

These are my opinions (best guesstimates) as you wanted.  

The prime driver for most of the markets today is just sentiment.

 

I can just imagine what's coming next........

 

OK see, we can agree on some of these points, if only you'd answered sooner!

 

I agree that taxes would rise under Labour. But the idea of a labour government raises issues that are so far reaching that we're probably better off not discussing that here and let's just focus on Brexit and current government, do you agree?

 

We can also agree that the NHS will get more funding since this has already been announced by the current government at the budget this week although that funding is not as a result of Brexit.

 

I further agree that the economy will shrink and the Pound will fall in value, those things could easily lead to a reduction in the number of immigrants since the economy will have shrunk.

 

So the key questions that remain seem to be, how far will it fall and for how long and what will be the further implications of those falls, consider three scenario's:

 

Scenario I - Low Impact: we agree a soft Brexit, transition is as smooth as it can be, we pay somewhere between £40 biill and 80 bill., as described earlier.

 

Scenario II - Medium Impact: we agree a soft Brexit but the devils in the detail and it's a painful divorce as unsettled issues keep emerging and the fight continues. We pay a negotiated exit fee but it's less than the EU is happy with and this continues to be a source of friction.

 

Scenario III - High Impact: Hard Brexit, we pay nothing and we just walk.

 

Scenario IV - Current governement comes unstuck, loses it's majority and we go to an election.

 

Do they sound like reasonable headings under which we can evaluate and debate impacts?

 

 

[baansgr]

19 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

OK see, we can agree on some of these points, if only you'd answered sooner!

 

I agree that taxes would rise under Labour. But the idea of a labour government raises issues that are so far reaching that we're probably better off not discussing that here and let's just focus on Brexit and current government, do you agree?

 

We can also agree that the NHS will get more funding since this has already been announced by the current government at the budget this week although that funding is not as a result of Brexit.

 

I further agree that the economy will shrink and the Pound will fall in value, those things could easily lead to a reduction in the number of immigrants since the economy will have shrunk.

 

So the key questions that remain seem to be, how far will it fall and for how long and what will be the further implications of those falls, consider three scenario's:

 

Scenario I - Low Impact: we agree a soft Brexit, transition is as smooth as it can be, we pay somewhere between £40 biill and 80 bill., as described earlier.

 

Scenario II - Medium Impact: we agree a soft Brexit but the devils in the detail and it's a painful divorce as unsettled issues keep emerging and the fight continues. We pay a negotiated exit fee but it's less than the EU is happy with and this continues to be a source of friction.

 

Scenario III - High Impact: Hard Brexit, we pay nothing and we just walk.

 

Scenario IV - Current governement comes unstuck, loses it's majority and we go to an election.

 

Do they sound like reasonable headings under which we can evaluate and debate impacts?

 

 

Carney holds the key to Sterling regardless of Brexit. Shrowded statements from him have kept it down. 

[simoh1490]

4 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Carney holds the key to Sterling regardless of Brexit. Shrowded statements from him have kept it down. 

It's true that comments by BOE can impact on the value of Sterling, this is simply because markets try to evaluate every word that is spoken and look for clues as to direction. But any resulting movement in GBP soon reverses if markets get it wrong and the expected direction doesn't materialise, those things are only minor tweaks in the value. Other than those things, the value of the Pound is determined by all the market forces that any free and unfettered floating currency is impacted by, volume, political uncertainty, economic forecast etc.

[nauseus]

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

I see, you vote, but will not accept responsibility fo the outcome. 

The only responsibility falls on the government to act on the result of the referendum, as promised. 

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

OK see, we can agree on some of these points, if only you'd answered sooner!

 

I agree that taxes would rise under Labour. But the idea of a labour government raises issues that are so far reaching that we're probably better off not discussing that here and let's just focus on Brexit and current government, do you agree?

 

We can also agree that the NHS will get more funding since this has already been announced by the current government at the budget this week although that funding is not as a result of Brexit.

 

I further agree that the economy will shrink and the Pound will fall in value, those things could easily lead to a reduction in the number of immigrants since the economy will have shrunk.

 

So the key questions that remain seem to be, how far will it fall and for how long and what will be the further implications of those falls, consider three scenario's:

 

Scenario I - Low Impact: we agree a soft Brexit, transition is as smooth as it can be, we pay somewhere between £40 biill and 80 bill., as described earlier.

 

Scenario II - Medium Impact: we agree a soft Brexit but the devils in the detail and it's a painful divorce as unsettled issues keep emerging and the fight continues. We pay a negotiated exit fee but it's less than the EU is happy with and this continues to be a source of friction.

 

Scenario III - High Impact: Hard Brexit, we pay nothing and we just walk.

 

Scenario IV - Current governement comes unstuck, loses it's majority and we go to an election.

 

Do they sound like reasonable headings under which we can evaluate and debate impacts?

 

 

Your five possibilities seem to broadly cover what might happen but I see no point in worrying about which one will be the closest until there is some real news. 

 

The only thing I would add, this year, is that the UK will not be paying 80 billion and you have not considered the EU in this at all, and any internal problems that may arise to affect everything. Mutti Merkel still has no government! 

 

Maybe Mugabe can take over from Juncker and save the day?  

Edited November 20, 2017 by nauseus
Mutti

[simoh1490]

11 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Your five possibilities seem to broadly cover what might happen but I see no point in worrying about which one will be the closest until there is some real news. 

 

The only thing I would add, this year, is that the UK will not be paying 80 billion and you have not considered the EU in this at all, and any internal problems that may arise to affect everything. Mutti Merkel still has no government! 

 

Maybe Mugabe can take over from Juncker and save the day?  

Er....four possibilities!

[Khun Han]

4 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

What I liked about that post was Tomacht's explanation which I thought was very good, we'd already established and mostly agreed the model is flawed and his assumption invalid. Trying to determine what a person believes, solely from emoticons, is very dangerous although the use of them by your camp has not gone unnoticed.

 

STOP doing this: "And it's crystal clear that you don't understand economics" - repeating back to me, something I've just said to you, is playground stuff and makes you look silly,

 

AND STOP THIS ALSO: "Project Fear's big hitters have got it so wrong it's comical". You don't cite where or how, you just generalise without explanation and expect everyone to accept the statement as it stands - they don't. If you make a statement that others have got it wrong, explain how, cite examples, provide links to prove how, then your argument has credibility and some weight. 

 

 

 

Simon, you are absolutely clueless about economics, and have playground debating skills to match. Goodbye.

[Chomper Higgot]

Leaders of Britain's aerospace industry are giving evidence to parliament on the impact of Brexit on their businesses. 

 

I take it we all accept that the leaders of this industry know more about the subject than anyone on this board. 

 

So let's listen to what they have to say.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Chomper Higgot
clarify that it is the leaders of the industry who will give evidence.

[baansgr]

26 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Leaders of Britain's aerospace industry are giving evidence to parliament on the impact of Brexit on their businesses. 

 

I take it we all accept that the leaders of this industry know more about the subject than anyone on this board. 

 

So let's listen to what they have to say.

It really depends where there bias stands. An example is Carney, you would think the Governor of the BOE would know more than most of us but because of his hidden agenda and bias to remaining he has been wrong on just about everything.

[simoh1490]

May just offered £40 bill., will it be enough I wonder, more importantly, where's it going to come from, what will need to be cut to in order to pay for it and/or, will taxes have to increase as a result.

 

. http://www.independent.co.uk/

[simoh1490]

OH no, it's not enough, what to do!

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/882218/brexit-news-theresa-may-36bn-divorce-bill-offer-european-union-eu-brussels-negotiations

[tomacht8]

On 20.11.2017 at 12:05 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

Leaders of Britain's aerospace industry are giving evidence to parliament on the impact of Brexit on their businesses. 

 

I take it we all accept that the leaders of this industry know more about the subject than anyone on this board. 

 

So let's listen to what they have to say.

Would be nice to learn something about the results.
The airlines plan their flight plans (start rights, landing rights, slots and paperwork) 1 year and more in advance.
I think that there are still some problems that are likely to kicking in soon.

[Chelseafan]

On 11/17/2017 at 3:34 AM, Grouse said:

This is all completely off topic

 

The point is that this Brexit foolishness can easily be halted.

 

Only extreme Brexiteers are still in favour. Certainly a case of the tail wagging the dog (the head knows the better option is to remain)

 

Let's check the current position with an online or postal referendum? What's to lose? It would cost peanuts.

In your opinion.

 

[Chelseafan]

20 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

May just offered £40 bill., will it be enough I wonder, more importantly, where's it going to come from, what will need to be cut to in order to pay for it and/or, will taxes have to increase as a result.

 

. http://www.independent.co.uk/

I presume its £40billion and not a bill for £40 because that would be freakin' awesome... :)

 

Godfrey Bloom made a good point on the radio today. If we have to pay a heavy penalty divorce bill then we should know where every penny is being spent. In a matter of business there  would be a forensic report by an external auditor who would itemise what each party owes,  real estate, parliamentary buildings, commitment to investment bank, etc .  At the moment numbers seem to be made-up on the back of a fag packet.

 

 

 

 

[simoh1490]

10 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

I presume its £40billion and not a bill for £40 because that would be freakin' awesome... :)

 

Godfrey Bloom made a good point on the radio today. If we have to pay a heavy penalty divorce bill then we should know where every penny is being spent. In a matter of business there  would be a forensic report by an external auditor who would itemise what each party owes,  real estate, parliamentary buildings, commitment to investment bank, etc .  At the moment numbers seem to be made-up on the back of a fag packet.

 

 

 

 

"bill." is short for billion!

[baansgr]

2 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

"bill." is short for billion!

The Eu seem to be like Thai builders etc, just pluck a round figure of 10s out the air. What about a breakdown, supposedly its for pensions and existing commitments. The EU has had over a year to calculate an exact figure..... Why havnt they

[simoh1490]

6 minutes ago, baansgr said:

The Eu seem to be like Thai builders etc, just pluck a round figure of 10s out the air. What about a breakdown, supposedly its for pensions and existing commitments. The EU has had over a year to calculate an exact figure..... Why havnt they

Why haven't we since we're the ones who will be paying it!

[baansgr]

Just now, simoh1490 said:

Why haven't we since we're the ones who will be paying it!

Because they are the ones demanding it needs paying so the onus is on the Eu. All your previous posts about playground behavior of turning the questions round and you do it again. So the question stands why havnt they calculated an exact figure with a breakdown