UK watchdog and EU tell banks to prepare for hard Brexit

[melvinmelvin]

from above;

That’s the problem with referendums. The masses don’t necessarily decide what’s good for the economy. 

 

no, quite right,

 

but is there anything negative with that?

masses decide what they fancy; good for economy / or / the opposite

that is the way it should be

 

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

26 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

And if we met in a bar, although I would tell where I am from, I would certainly not discuss Brexit with you. And that does not have anything to do with my or your nationality, but with the fact that politics are not a good small talk topic (I actually did the mistake at a company event with two French guys and two Malaysian girls: the one anti-EU French guy had to argue against us four and even the discussion was polite and constructive, the night was ruined). 

I couldn't agree more. Most people with a view on this are already hard coded, so there can be no benefit discussing it among friends/family, only resentment and ruined evenings/lunches/beers.

[stevenl]

7 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

from above;

That’s the problem with referendums. The masses don’t necessarily decide what’s good for the economy. 

 

no, quite right,

 

but is there anything negative with that?

masses decide what they fancy; good for economy / or / the opposite

that is the way it should be

 

 

 

Disagree. Governing should be about what is good, not what people want.

[melvinmelvin]

25 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Disagree. Governing should be about what is good, not what people want.

 

agree with you

 

but we did not talk about governing in the above posts

we talked about the whims and wishes of the masses

[CG1 Blue]

45 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Disagree. Governing should be about what is good, not what people want.

The word 'good' does not only apply to economics.

[tebee]

Michel Barnier ~ “The UK wants to take back control of its money, law and borders. We will respect that. But the EU also seeks to keep control of its money, law and borders. The UK should respect that.”

[Guest]

9 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Like I said, it's your (or his) prerogative.  I find it more interesting to know the nationality of who I'm speaking to, particularly on a topic like Brexit where there are many interests at play in many countries. If it was a topic about smoking or bad driving that's different.

There may be the occasional sock puppet, but I'm not concerned about that.

You might say you are from UK. I might say you are Russian troll. 

 

[stevenl]

9 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

The word 'good' does not only apply to economics.

Agree.

[tebee]

Boris Johnson may have saved the EU
In the wake of the Brexit vote, support for the EU around the continent is at its highest since 1983

 

https://www.ft.com/content/6d375b7e-8f99-11e8-b639-7680cedcc421

 

 

 

It’s hard now to recall, but until quite recently many people thought Brexit would start a stampede out of the EU. After the British vote, Europhobe politicians Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders schemed to duplicate the result in France and the Netherlands. In October 2016, Britain’s Daily Express newspaper chirruped: “Europe is in trouble as across the continent countries are gearing up to hold their own referendums on membership of the superstate.”
 

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

Boris Johnson may have saved the EU
In the wake of the Brexit vote, support for the EU around the continent is at its highest since 1983

 

https://www.ft.com/content/6d375b7e-8f99-11e8-b639-7680cedcc421

 

 

 

It’s hard now to recall, but until quite recently many people thought Brexit would start a stampede out of the EU. After the British vote, Europhobe politicians Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders schemed to duplicate the result in France and the Netherlands. In October 2016, Britain’s Daily Express newspaper chirruped: “Europe is in trouble as across the continent countries are gearing up to hold their own referendums on membership of the superstate.”
 

The ft appears to be a shining source of dubious, anti-brexit news articles nowadays!

 

IIRC, they first came out with an article implying that Heathrow was borrowing money to cover a 2 month shut-down in the event of a hard brexit ?, followed by an article saying that food stores had received no guidance from the govt. to stockpile food (but implying that this was due to the govt's incompetence) - and now we have the above! ?

 

How did they manage to miss the fact that the rise of extreme right-wing parties is causing concern, as it's on the rise in various eu countries?.....

Edited July 27, 2018 by dick dasterdly

[Jip99]

11 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

The ft appears to be a shining source of dubious, anti-brexit news articles nowadays!

 

IIRC, they first came out with an article implying that Heathrow was borrowing money to cover a 2 month shut-down in the event of a hard brexit ?, followed by an article saying that food stores had received no guidance from the govt. to stockpile food (but implying that this was due to the govt's incompetence) - and now we have the above! ?

 

How did they manage to miss the fact that the rise of extreme right-wing parties is causing concern, as it's on the rise in various eu countries?.....

 

 

 

Would it be fair to say that the FT is part of the establishment......?

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

 

Would it be fair to say that the FT is part of the establishment......?

I think it would be fair to say, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg are.

[stephenterry]

17 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

from above;

That’s the problem with referendums. The masses don’t necessarily decide what’s good for the economy. 

 

no, quite right,

 

but is there anything negative with that?

masses decide what they fancy; good for economy / or / the opposite

that is the way it should be

 

 

 

 

It might surprise you that the majority of those who voted for leave was focused on several simple home-based reasons not linked with the economy:

 

 - the unemployed who considered that leaving the EU would be better than the current situation. A main motivation for constituencies north of the Watford gap.

- those who thought it a 'mistake' to have been in the EU at all. Oldies.

- those who mistrusted anything European. Poor households in run down suburbs.

- those who sought to take advantage of business opportunities in their own vested interests, like Rees-Mogg.

- those who considered that the EU was a waste of taxpayers money, and was stuffed with useless bureaucrats. One-tracked mindset, considering 80% of the EU budget was given back to the member states.

- those who hated immigrants for taking UK jobs. Unemployed, living off benefits, and a main motivation.

- those who thought the NHS would be better-off. Influenced by the red bus pictures.

 

While these are all valid voting reasons, the lack of understanding across the country (including parliament) in what would happen to the UK's business economy should Brexit turn out to be a disaster before it even happened is a valid reason not to have held such a simple referendum in the first place.

 

Now Brexit is a reality, and the UK will have to live with whatever deal that the withdrawal negotiations provide. 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

11 hours ago, oilinki said:

You might say you are from UK. I might say you are Russian troll. 

 

That's right, and the moon landing was fake...

[CG1 Blue]

18 hours ago, stevenl said:

And how is the comparison with other west European countries?

Feel free to look that up

 

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Feel free to look that up

 

If I show you you'll ignore since it doesn't fit your narrative.

[CG1 Blue]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

If I show you you'll ignore since it doesn't fit your narrative.

I showed you a table demonstrating the UK economy has not been in decline since WW2 - in fact the opposite. I was responding to your comment: "Has UK thrived without its colonies? Pound has been in a decline since WW2, why would that change now?"

Go ahead and show me - I can take it!

 

 

[tebee]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

The ft appears to be a shining source of dubious, anti-brexit news articles nowadays!

 

IIRC, they first came out with an article implying that Heathrow was borrowing money to cover a 2 month shut-down in the event of a hard brexit ?, followed by an article saying that food stores had received no guidance from the govt. to stockpile food (but implying that this was due to the govt's incompetence) - and now we have the above! ?

 

How did they manage to miss the fact that the rise of extreme right-wing parties is causing concern, as it's on the rise in various eu countries?.....

The FT is interested in making money - Brexit is all about losing money - therefore the FT tends to have articles that appear to be  anti brexit  .

[stevenl]

4 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

I showed you a table demonstrating the UK economy has not been in decline since WW2 - in fact the opposite. I was responding to your comment: "Has UK thrived without its colonies? Pound has been in a decline since WW2, why would that change now?"

Go ahead and show me - I can take it!

 

 

Pound has been in decline and other west European countries have done a lot better.

So yes, UK has not done well.

[CG1 Blue]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Pound has been in decline and other west European countries have done a lot better.

So yes, UK has not done well.

So in the 73 years since the end of the war, how many European economies have overtaken the UK?

[bristolboy]

 

 

54 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

So in the 73 years since the end of the war, how many European economies have overtaken the UK?

On the basis of average GDP per capita. Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Belgium,  and Finland. Some would include Ireland and Luxembourg but those figures are distorted by their status as tax havens.

And on the basis of income equality you might want to throw in France since its very close to the UK in per capita GDP but income is a lot more equally distributed and social services are far superior. So far the average French citizen life is a lot more comfortable than in the UK.

https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&hl=en&dl=en#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:FRA:DEU:ITA:SWE:GBR:USA:NOR:DNK:BEL:AUT:NLD:FIN:LUX:IRL&ifdim=country&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false

Edited July 27, 2018 by bristolboy

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

 

 

On the basis of average GDP per capita. Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Belgium,  and Finland. Some would include Ireland and Luxembourg but those figures are distorted by their status as tax havens.

And on the basis of income equality you might want to throw in France since its very close to the UK in per capita GDP but income is a lot more equally distributed and social services are far superior. So far the average French citizen life is a lot more comfortable than in the UK.

https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&hl=en&dl=en#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:FRA:DEU:ITA:SWE:GBR:USA:NOR:DNK:BEL:AUT:NLD:FIN:LUX:IRL&ifdim=country&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false

Interesting.  Did those countries overtake the UK between 1945 and 1975, or between 1975 and now?

[melvinmelvin]

On 7/27/2018 at 9:35 AM, stephenterry said:

 

It might surprise you that the majority of those who voted for leave was focused on several simple home-based reasons not linked with the economy:

 

 - the unemployed who considered that leaving the EU would be better than the current situation. A main motivation for constituencies north of the Watford gap.

- those who thought it a 'mistake' to have been in the EU at all. Oldies.

- those who mistrusted anything European. Poor households in run down suburbs.

- those who sought to take advantage of business opportunities in their own vested interests, like Rees-Mogg.

- those who considered that the EU was a waste of taxpayers money, and was stuffed with useless bureaucrats. One-tracked mindset, considering 80% of the EU budget was given back to the member states.

- those who hated immigrants for taking UK jobs. Unemployed, living off benefits, and a main motivation.

- those who thought the NHS would be better-off. Influenced by the red bus pictures.

 

While these are all valid voting reasons, the lack of understanding across the country (including parliament) in what would happen to the UK's business economy should Brexit turn out to be a disaster before it even happened is a valid reason not to have held such a simple referendum in the first place.

 

Now Brexit is a reality, and the UK will have to live with whatever deal that the withdrawal negotiations provide. 

 

4

 

nope,

 

does not surprise me at all

that is often the way referenda goes, peoples votes linked to minor rather than major issues for the country

 

to a large extent; same same for general elections

too many look into their purse and wonder which vote is most likely to increase the content

 

[Guest]

Interesting article which is good to read. Also listen the phone call to the radio show. 

 

Quote

 

As a British EU negotiator, I can tell you that Brexit is going to be far worse than anyone could have guessed

The Government keeps saying it ‘didn’t realise’ the problems, but they had the experts at Whitehall – they just refused to listen to them. Now we’re facing a breakdown in airline safety, medicine, animal welfare, security, international aid and so much more

 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-eu-negotiator-europe-euratom-airline-safety-negotiations-theresa-may-worse-anyone-guessed-a7858586.html

[tebee]

Good to see the NY Times has the same sort of opinion of Boris as I do 

 

For the second time in three years, Boris Johnson, a politician whose ambition and superficial charm far outstrip his ability, judgment or principles, is destabilizing the British government and threatening the country’s future.....

 

 

Britain is in this mess principally because the Brexiteers — led largely by Mr. Johnson — sold the country a series of lies in the lead up to the June 2016 referendum on leaving the European Union. They did so because neither Mr. Johnson nor his fellow leader of the Leave campaign, Michael Gove, intended, wanted or expected to win.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/10/opinion/boris-johnson-resignation-brexit.html

 

 

[nauseus]

On 7/27/2018 at 12:35 AM, stephenterry said:

 

It might surprise you that the majority of those who voted for leave was focused on several simple home-based reasons not linked with the economy:

 

 - the unemployed who considered that leaving the EU would be better than the current situation. A main motivation for constituencies north of the Watford gap.

- those who thought it a 'mistake' to have been in the EU at all. Oldies.

- those who mistrusted anything European. Poor households in run down suburbs.

- those who sought to take advantage of business opportunities in their own vested interests, like Rees-Mogg.

- those who considered that the EU was a waste of taxpayers money, and was stuffed with useless bureaucrats. One-tracked mindset, considering 80% of the EU budget was given back to the member states.

- those who hated immigrants for taking UK jobs. Unemployed, living off benefits, and a main motivation.

- those who thought the NHS would be better-off. Influenced by the red bus pictures.

 

While these are all valid voting reasons, the lack of understanding across the country (including parliament) in what would happen to the UK's business economy should Brexit turn out to be a disaster before it even happened is a valid reason not to have held such a simple referendum in the first place.

 

Now Brexit is a reality, and the UK will have to live with whatever deal that the withdrawal negotiations provide. 

 

Not great composition but I think I know what you mean. Some of the points are valid and some are simply ridiculous. But it might surprise you to know that your list misses top reasons for the leave vote completely, which are the issues of the steady erosion of UK sovereignty and the growing influence of EU law over British law. 

 

As ever, the remain argument relies on the probable negative economic effects and you mention "several simple home-based reasons not linked with the economy" but actually most of the valid listed ones listed are directly or indirectly economic. 

 

 

[tebee]

From Twitter

 

 

Nobody cares about UK internal politics, or May, but this is what happened; at the back of the British Constitution is a big door, with "Do NOT Open" engraved in large unfriendly letters on it. Brexit has opened that door without making any provision for what would emerge.

[welovesundaysatspace]

9 hours ago, nauseus said:

your list misses top reasons for the leave vote completely, which are the issues of the steady erosion of UK sovereignty and the growing influence of EU law over British law.

It would be interesting to know what you actually mean and what the problem is. 

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

It would be interesting to know what you actually mean and what the problem is. 

Well if you are interested and really want to catch up on this topic there is plenty of information on the web.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

From Twitter

 

 

Nobody cares about UK internal politics, or May, but this is what happened; at the back of the British Constitution is a big door, with "Do NOT Open" engraved in large unfriendly letters on it. Brexit has opened that door without making any provision for what would emerge.

From Titter more like.