|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On June 24 2016 15:13 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +Global markets buckled as Britain’s vote on European Union membership infected every asset class.
The pound plunged by a record and the euro slid by the most since it was introduced in 1999 as the BBC projected a victory for the "Leave" campaign with most votes counted in Britain’s referendum on membership of the European Union. South Africa’s rand led slides among the currencies of commodity-exporting nations as oil sank to about $47 a barrel and industrial metals slumped. The yen surged and gold soared with U.S. Treasuries as investors piled into haven assets. Futures on the FTSE 100 Index plunged with S&P 500 Index contracts as Asian stocks dropped by the most in five years.
“It’s scary, and I’ve never seen anything like it,” said James Butterfill, head of research and investments at ETF Securities, said by phone from London. “We’re going to see outflows from basically any kind of cyclical asset. A lot of people were caught out, and many investors will lose a lot of money.”
The debate over the U.K.’s EU membership has dominated investor sentiment throughout June, with appetite for riskier assets having built up over the past week as bookmakers’ odds suggested the chance of a so-called Brexit was less than one in four. The victory for the "Leave" campaign will fan speculation that more countries could withdraw from the EU and finance officials in the world’s biggest economies may intervene as reaction in financial markets proves reminiscent of late 2008, at the height of the global financial crisis.
At 5:11 a.m. London time, BBC projections showed voters backing “Leave” by 52 percent to 48 percent. U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron warned Brexit would tip the country into recession, while JPMorgan Chase & Co. and HSBC Holdings Plc warned such as outcome would lead them to move thousands of jobs out of London.
These are among the most notable moves in global financial markets:
British pound falls as much as 11 percent to $1.3229, weakest since 1985
Yen jumps 4.7 percent to 101.36 per dollar, after surging past 100 for first time since 2013
Japan’s Topix index leads Asian stock losses, down 7.9 percent
FTSE 100 Index futures tumble 8 percent; S&P 500 Index contracts slump as much as 5.1 percent, the maximum move allowed
Yield on 10-year Treasuries drops 29 basis points to 1.46 percent, set for biggest daily decline since 2009; similar Japanese yield reaches record-low minus 0.215
New York crude oil retreats 6.3 percent to $46.93 a barrel, poised for biggest loss since Jan. 20
Gold rallies as much as 8.1 percent to $1,358.54 an ounce, highest since March 2014
South Africa’s rand plunged 6.4 percent against the dollar and reached a record low versus the yen; Mexico’s peso slid 6.1 percent to 19.33, near its all-time low
Poland’s zloty dropped by the most since 1993
The iTraxx Asia index of credit-default swaps rose by the most in three months
The pound was down 9.8 percent as of 2:15 p.m. in Tokyo, more than double its previous record drop of 4.1 percent recorded in 1992, when the currency was was forced out of Europe’s exchange-rate mechanism.
“This is a very challenging situation but the reality is that market liquidity and overall liquidity in the U.K. is drying up as we speak in a very rapid way,” said John Woods, chief investment officer for Asia-Pacific at Credit Suisse Private Banking, told Bloomberg TV in Hong Kong. “It’s highly likely that we see monetary easing in a coordinated response” from central banks across the world, he said.
The euro slumped 3.8 percent, while currencies in Norway, Sweden and Turkey posted even steeper losses.
Japan’s currency jumped by the most since 1998 versus the dollar.
“All hell is breaking loose,” says Vishnu Varathan, a senior economist in Singapore at Mizuho Bank Ltd. “The only surefire is you buy yen, you buy U.S. Treasuries, you buy gold, and you sit tight."
Stocks The MSCI Asia Pacific Index declined 4.3 percent as benchmarks retreated across the region.
British insurer Prudential Plc, HSBC and Standard Chartered Plc all slid more than 10 percent in Hong Kong. Glencore Plc tumbled 13 percent.
Commodities The Bloomberg Commodity Index fell 2.1 percent, its biggest loss of the year.
Crude oil tumbled as much as 6.8 percent in New York. Copper and nickel dropped more than 3 percent in London. Gold was up 5.9 percent.
“Gold will be a preferred safe-haven asset with a ‘Leave’ vote,” said Barnabas Gan, an economist at Singapore-based Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp, who forecast that it could rally to as much as $1,400 if ‘Remain’ loses. Bullion’s expected to remain volatile until the final verdict is out, according to Gan. www.bloomberg.com
The dutch stock market will take the biggest fall of all markets today I think. They are hurt the most with the brexit,maybe even more then Britain itself. Germany wont be pretty either but think the Netherlands will be slightly worse still.
What eu gonna do now, Print even more money?
|
Geese don’t come much more golden than the City of London.
The narrow lanes of the Square Mile, lined with handsome neoclassical stone and gleaming modern glass, are at the heart of a British financial sector that paid 66 billion pounds ($94 billion) in tax last year and employs more than 2 million people nationwide. It is oft-resented, has helped push the capital’s house prices out of reach for many, and required a bailout of more than 100 billion pounds from taxpayers less than a decade ago.
It is also without a doubt the country’s most lucrative industry. Yet ahead of a June 23 referendum on European Union membership, many of the City’s leading lights are deeply worried about its future. Since almost exactly 30 years ago, when Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher liberalized finance through a package of reforms so dramatic they were dubbed the “Big Bang,” London has become the undisputed financial capital of a united Europe -- a status that now hangs in the balance.
"Just because the City is strong at the moment doesn’t mean that it has a perpetual right to remain so," said Marcus Agius, 69, the chairman of Barclays Plc during the 2008 global financial crisis. "Brexit would be an act of supreme folly. In the future we would look back and wonder: ‘Why the hell did we do that? What were we thinking?’"
City proponents of a Brexit see it as a way of making the financial industry more globally competitive by potentially unshackling it from some EU rules like bonus caps. But while the 1980s “Big Bang” attracted international firms, the leaders of global banks say a Leave vote would drive them away.
They employ the lion’s share of the 400,000 workers in the financial district and have been clear about their intentions. JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon has 16,000 employees in London and other British cities, and this month told staff a vote to leave could mean a quarter of those jobs might be cut.
Executives at Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and HSBC Holdings Plc have all issued similar warnings. On Wednesday, Deutsche Bank AG Chairman Paul Achleitner said Brexit would be "an economic disaster for the U.K.," where the lender employs more than 8,000 people. It doesn’t help that it’s also a delicate time for bankers in general; worries about the outlook for the global economy coupled with a slump in commodities markets have depressed trading while low interest rates have squeezed revenue.
Central to the Brexit concern is the issue of "passporting." Under EU law, a bank incorporated in any one member state can sell its products and services in all 28, thus accessing a $19 trillion integrated economy with more than 500 million citizens. It’s a regime that allows even the largest banks to get by with only satellite offices in hubs like Paris and Madrid, and none at all in many other EU countries, keeping the overwhelming bulk of staff in London.
Up for Negotiation Like every other aspect of the EU’s relationship with the U.K. after a Brexit vote, passporting would be up for negotiation with no guarantees it would remain in place. The same would be true of the ability of London trading floors to continue euro-denominated trading and settlement without restriction.
“It’s an illusion that passporting will continue if we leave,” said Peter Sands, 54, who ran Standard Chartered Plc from 2006 until last year. “It’s therefore incontrovertible that banks that serve Europe from London will have to move significant numbers of people.”
Immigration law would be another worry; London banks are thick with French, Spanish and Italian citizens who’ve never had to apply for a British visa thanks to the EU’s free-movement laws, and whose future status would be unclear. For a QuickTake on Brexit, click here
Talks to clarify those questions would take years, and the bloc’s political leaders say they aren’t likely to grant any special favors. Last week Germany’s deputy finance minister emphasized that "there has to be a difference between being part of the family or just a neighbor." Without a clear distinction, Jens Spahn told ARD Television, "it doesn’t make sense to say that there’s added value to being a member of the European Union."
Acrimonious Debate "The real problem we have in this is, nobody has a clue what ‘Out’ looks like," said Alistair Darling, 62, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer who oversaw the rescue of Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and other lenders. "We do not know what the consequences would be. The referendum is just the beginning of the process."
The Leave campaign, fronted by former City commodities broker turned U.K. Independence Party leader Nigel Farage and previous London mayor Boris Johnson, has argued the U.K. will be in a strong position to win rapid concessions from the EU because of the size of its economy. When it comes to the financial industry, they say, Britain would be able to regulate itself as it sees fit.
With polls showing the vote will come down to the wire, their contest with the Remain side got increasingly bitter last week. Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne was accused of economic scaremongering while Bank of England Governor Mark Carney hit back against claims he sacrificed his independence to support the government. Campaigning was then suspended following the murder of Labour lawmaker Jo Cox, an advocate for remaining in the EU, in her Yorkshire electoral district.
Liquid Lunches The transformation of the City into a dynamo capable of driving much of the British economy has been stark. Before the “Big Bang,” when the U.K.’s financial markets were heavily protected from foreign competition, it was staid to the point of sedation. The bankers were overwhelmingly British, the workdays short, and the lunches often liquid.
Determined to shake up the markets, Thatcher abolished fixed commissions, allowed large banks to take over brokerages, and opened the London Stock Exchange to overseas players. The subsequent boom made many bankers and traders rich, not without substantial bitterness from those left out -- especially since their prosperity coincided with the collapse of Britain’s heavy industry in the poorer north, though some big banks since have set up back office operations outside London.
Backers of Brexit within finance, who include Shore Capital founder Howard Shore and hedge-fund manager Crispin Odey, say a more independent City would be better positioned to chase global opportunities, while retaining access to the European market through a generous post-departure settlement.
The architect of the “Big Bang” agrees with them. "The real threat to the City comes from not leaving," because of expanding EU regulations that will hold back British finance, said Nigel Lawson, 84, who served as chancellor under Thatcher. "I don’t think EU membership has had a huge impact on the City’s success."
London’s Allure To be sure, many of London’s advantages aren’t at all connected to its EU status. The English language, a respected court system, good universities and transparent government are all draws for financial firms. So too are the pleasures of living in one of the world’s great cosmopolitan cities -- which many bankers might be loath to trade for the more modest charms of, say, Frankfurt.
While Brexit would certainly be disruptive, "factors that are intrinsic to London" mean it will remain an attractive destination for finance whatever happens on June 23, said Mohamed El-Erian, the chief economic adviser at Allianz SE and a Bloomberg View columnist.
But the City’s success is closely bound up with EU membership, argues Peter Mandelson, a former Labour Party minister and European trade commissioner. Under former Prime Minister Tony Blair in the 1990s, he was instrumental in re-branding Labour as a champion of the City, making its prosperity a bipartisan priority for the first time.
"London has grown as Europe’s financial center because we are part of the EU single market, because we’re part of the action," Mandelson, 62, said. If Britain leaves the EU, London "won’t end as a financial center, it will just be second-tier," he said. "The golden goose will be maimed. The question is, how much?" www.bloomberg.com edit: DIdn't realise the article was this big lol sorry.
|
On June 24 2016 15:16 Wegandi wrote: European countries don't have juries? I guess juries are more of a British Common Law thing... en.wikipedia.org - jury trial in various jurisdictions 
But as a side note, there is something very rare here in Germany that is like "jury duty squared". It's called 'lay judge position' and it means 5 years of sitting next to a real judge as an extra...
|
Studied in Oxford, many UK friends on my facebook. The amount of "That's it I'm moving to Ireland/Scotland if they devolve/Canada/..." posts is insane xD
Of course very few of them will actually move, but it's funny to watch unfold.
|
On June 24 2016 15:20 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 15:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 24 2016 15:15 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 24 2016 13:20 amazingxkcd wrote:On June 24 2016 13:05 KwarK wrote:On June 24 2016 13:03 LegalLord wrote: Yeah, going against a major national vote goes down much more poorly than supporting any given position without that factor. A defect against this vote is really going to be quite shitty for the political career of anyone who does it. Two tier status might still be on the cards which is what most of Britain always wanted. We'll see what France and Germany do. could see Denmark and netherlands holding referendum if #Brexit wins Dutch person here, I have not heard anybody about a Dutch referendum for leaving the EU (except for our local Clown Trump), and after the disaster that was this years' referendum, I doubt it'd be easy to get going without changing some of those laws first (min 30% participation, it's very likely that rule completely fucked over the results of the Ukraine referendum) BBC says 54% of Dutch voters want to have a referendum. As to what shakes out between the UK and the EU, there is nothing keeping the UK and EU from coming to very friendly arrangements except human emotion. If the EU wants to act all butthurt and/or whoever runs the UK after Cameron wants to be a sore winner, then both sides could tit-for-tat each other and harm everyone. If they want to put their emotions aside, satisfactory arrangements for commerce between the UK and EU member states can and will be found. Our referendums are non binding though and the last one was a total disaster with 32% or something turning out. Technically speaking this UK referendum was non-binding in a similar manner. It is just that Cameron (et al.) 'made' it binding.
As for the 32% turn out rate (was actually between 30-31% in the end, it was a result of the 30% treshhold that is in place to make the referendum 'official'. This made it so a lot of people didn't vote "strategically" so the referendum would be void. We ended up in a situation in which 60% voted "NO", but it is very very very very very likely the general population is in favor of the Ukraine agreement. Which is superawkward.
|
On June 24 2016 15:29 Laurens wrote: Studied in Oxford, many UK friends on my facebook. The amount of "That's it I'm moving to Ireland/Scotland if they devolve/Canada/..." posts is insane xD
Of course very few of them will actually move, but it's funny to watch unfold.
Only funny if you don't live here.
|
On June 24 2016 15:22 zatic wrote: Estoxx down 12% before opening. This will be a fun day. Looking forward to waking up to a panicking NY financial market.
|
I think it was a rather bad decision for the UK even if I am all against the EU and for nations deciding their own fate in general. But I am really interested what that means for Scotland. Wasn't remaining part of the EU a reason for them to decide against their independence? And if you just look who voted against Brexit...
|
One thing that i've just read on reuters..
The majority of "out voters" are old farts, the majority of "in voters" are young people. Now one can argue that the youth is dumb etc, but it seems odd to me that a decision of this magnitude isn't made by the generation that will live to see what fruit it bears.
People, in fact, today literally fucked their kids over.
|
On June 24 2016 15:32 m4ini wrote: One thing that i've just read on reuters..
The majority of "out voters" are old farts, the majority of "in voters" are young people. Now one can argue that the youth is dumb etc, but it seems odd to me that a decision of this magnitude isn't made by the generation that will live to see what fruit it bears.
People, in fact, today literally fucked their kids over.
75% of young voters wanted to stay in. Thankfully my area in the south wanted to remain, but that's pretty moot since the overall is out.
|
I guess everyone wants to keep trading with England so it mostly becomes an exercise in smacking them around enough for show and then making a good deal. Trying to subvert as much finance as possible and making sure imports to EU doesnt use England as the main port of entry should be sufficent.
A funny alternative would be a deal where the current system stays in place and England keeps paying its net fee to the union but I guess there is no way the English public would accept that even if it would probably be the most lucurative deal in all.
|
On June 24 2016 15:32 m4ini wrote: One thing that i've just read on reuters..
The majority of "out voters" are old farts, the majority of "in voters" are young people. Now one can argue that the youth is dumb etc, but it seems odd to me that a decision of this magnitude isn't made by the generation that will live to see what fruit it bears.
People, in fact, today literally fucked their kids over. I would actually argue that 'the youth' (22-35) is more accurately aware of politics and how markets operate than older generations who argue from authority and stigma's.
|
On June 24 2016 15:32 m4ini wrote: One thing that i've just read on reuters..
The majority of "out voters" are old farts, the majority of "in voters" are young people. Now one can argue that the youth is dumb etc, but it seems odd to me that a decision of this magnitude isn't made by the generation that will live to see what fruit it bears.
People, in fact, today literally fucked their kids over. Considering that Europe suffers from an increasingly aging population, expect that to happen a lot more in the future.
|
On June 24 2016 15:32 m4ini wrote: One thing that i've just read on reuters..
The majority of "out voters" are old farts, the majority of "in voters" are young people. Now one can argue that the youth is dumb etc, but it seems odd to me that a decision of this magnitude isn't made by the generation that will live to see what fruit it bears.
People, in fact, today literally fucked their kids over.
in like 99% of the cases, young people (if we make an arbitrary line at, lets say 50) do better choices simply because they are not yet heavily blinded by nostalgia. obviously not the case if some kind of special training or knowledge is required.
|
On June 24 2016 15:31 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 15:20 RvB wrote:On June 24 2016 15:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 24 2016 15:15 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 24 2016 13:20 amazingxkcd wrote:On June 24 2016 13:05 KwarK wrote:On June 24 2016 13:03 LegalLord wrote: Yeah, going against a major national vote goes down much more poorly than supporting any given position without that factor. A defect against this vote is really going to be quite shitty for the political career of anyone who does it. Two tier status might still be on the cards which is what most of Britain always wanted. We'll see what France and Germany do. could see Denmark and netherlands holding referendum if #Brexit wins Dutch person here, I have not heard anybody about a Dutch referendum for leaving the EU (except for our local Clown Trump), and after the disaster that was this years' referendum, I doubt it'd be easy to get going without changing some of those laws first (min 30% participation, it's very likely that rule completely fucked over the results of the Ukraine referendum) BBC says 54% of Dutch voters want to have a referendum. As to what shakes out between the UK and the EU, there is nothing keeping the UK and EU from coming to very friendly arrangements except human emotion. If the EU wants to act all butthurt and/or whoever runs the UK after Cameron wants to be a sore winner, then both sides could tit-for-tat each other and harm everyone. If they want to put their emotions aside, satisfactory arrangements for commerce between the UK and EU member states can and will be found. Our referendums are non binding though and the last one was a total disaster with 32% or something turning out. Technically speaking this UK referendum was non-binding in a similar manner. It is just that Cameron (et al.) 'made' it binding. As for the 32% turn out rate (was actually between 30-31% in the end, it was a result of the 30% treshhold that is in place to make the referendum 'official'. This made it so a lot of people didn't vote "strategically" so the referendum would be void. We ended up in a situation in which 60% voted "NO", but it is very very very very very likely the general population is in favor of the Ukraine agreement. Which is superawkward. Well i seriously doubt that an EU membership referendum would get only 30% turnout. The bigger the issue the more turnout yes?
|
On June 24 2016 15:41 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 15:31 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 24 2016 15:20 RvB wrote:On June 24 2016 15:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 24 2016 15:15 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 24 2016 13:20 amazingxkcd wrote:On June 24 2016 13:05 KwarK wrote:On June 24 2016 13:03 LegalLord wrote: Yeah, going against a major national vote goes down much more poorly than supporting any given position without that factor. A defect against this vote is really going to be quite shitty for the political career of anyone who does it. Two tier status might still be on the cards which is what most of Britain always wanted. We'll see what France and Germany do. could see Denmark and netherlands holding referendum if #Brexit wins Dutch person here, I have not heard anybody about a Dutch referendum for leaving the EU (except for our local Clown Trump), and after the disaster that was this years' referendum, I doubt it'd be easy to get going without changing some of those laws first (min 30% participation, it's very likely that rule completely fucked over the results of the Ukraine referendum) BBC says 54% of Dutch voters want to have a referendum. As to what shakes out between the UK and the EU, there is nothing keeping the UK and EU from coming to very friendly arrangements except human emotion. If the EU wants to act all butthurt and/or whoever runs the UK after Cameron wants to be a sore winner, then both sides could tit-for-tat each other and harm everyone. If they want to put their emotions aside, satisfactory arrangements for commerce between the UK and EU member states can and will be found. Our referendums are non binding though and the last one was a total disaster with 32% or something turning out. Technically speaking this UK referendum was non-binding in a similar manner. It is just that Cameron (et al.) 'made' it binding. As for the 32% turn out rate (was actually between 30-31% in the end, it was a result of the 30% treshhold that is in place to make the referendum 'official'. This made it so a lot of people didn't vote "strategically" so the referendum would be void. We ended up in a situation in which 60% voted "NO", but it is very very very very very likely the general population is in favor of the Ukraine agreement. Which is superawkward. Well i seriously doubt that an EU membership referendum would get only 30% turnout. The bigger the issue the more turnout yes? Correct, but the Ukraine referendum showed a very large weakness in the Dutch referendum laws, so don't expect any public votes until those are resolved.
|
|
|
|
|
Geert Wilders in Netherlands just demanded a, well, how to call it, Nexit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|