| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
Yes, heard this 5 million times already. Read the article. Markets adjust when they get the news of something, not when it actually happens. And the uncertainty keeps the markets down. Once Brexit happens, the uncertainty is lifted and they are able to make investment/employment decisions with confidence. Also: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-38526284 Banks are not using that excuse. Their predictions were for immediate economic downturn, and they are now admitting they were wrong. | ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
I'll go out on a limb, and kills me to respect anyone so selfish/deluded, and say that some who voted Brexit did it for plausible arguments. However in lalaland it was a perceived vote against globalisation when in reality it was a vote against contentalisation. It in fact enables globalisation. And it isn't a pathetic consumer market that will save you. Financial services already are moving to New York, Dublin, Paris and Frankfurt; oh and Warsaw. As soon as that happens, no it won't be the end of the country, but the UK will lose any international sway it ever held. I suppose with trident they can still cling onto their veto but what is that worth? India GDP has surpassed the UK that should make even you realise something. I can think of any one of ten excuses you're going to cite as to why but none are actually relevent for it to have happened this soon. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
The Guardian has a very significant story on its front page tomorrow. It has obtained notes of a meeting that Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, had with senior MEPs this week. These notes show that Barnier told them that he wanted a ‘special’ deal that would guarantee access for the EU firms and countries to the City of London’s financial markets. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/leak-suggests-eu-will-seek-special-deal-access-city-post-brexit/ https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/13/eu-negotiator-wants-special-deal-over-access-to-city-post-brexit There goes the last pillar of the Remain argument. I've said it multiple times throughout this thread - there is no alternative to London in Europe in terms of depth of expertise and levels of capital, etc. Even Barnier acknowledges its importance. Brexit may hold risks for Britain - the economy and the supremacy of London as Europe's financial capital being two of them. But the rest of the European Union also faces risks. And, according to the governor, those risks are greater for the continent. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38582690 Carney has changed his tune, too. He now argues that the financial risk is greater for the EU than it is for the UK. Honestly even I am surprised by how consistently correct my predictions have been. I argued both these points months ago  . | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Anyhow it is laughable how earlier in the thread, you was saying that it would be positive for UK if London's importance as a financial centre was diminished, yet now its importance has become the talking point of your non-existent argument? I guess anything goes out of your mouth as long as it fits your agenda. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
| ||
|
Agathon
France1505 Posts
On January 15 2017 00:49 bardtown wrote: There goes the last pillar of the Remain argument. I've said it multiple times throughout this thread - there is no alternative to London in Europe in terms of depth of expertise and levels of capital, etc. Even Barnier acknowledges its importance. Except it's not London which is so important. It's the business located in London who are important. And such things can relocate. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On another note, pound has decreased quite a lot since Theresa May indicated that there will be hard Brexit or that the single market isn't a huge priority. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On January 15 2017 09:53 Agathon wrote: Except it's not London which is so important. It's the business located in London who are important. And such things can relocate. They're in London for a reason. London is the important factor. Otherwise, as you say, they could just relocate. Let's be serious though, no significant bank wants to move to Europe. It's London, Singapore, Hong Kong or New York. It's about regulation, infrastructure, people and capital. On January 15 2017 10:07 Shield wrote: Guys don't waste time arguing with bardtown. You can do better. Whatever you say doesn't really matter. He is obssessed with his Brexit shit. On another note, pound has decreased quite a lot since Theresa May indicated that there will be hard Brexit or that the single market isn't a huge priority. Hang on, didn't the guy I just responded to say 'hard Brexit' looks less and less likely? Now you're saying what everybody paying attention already knows - that it looks very likely. Pound has fallen, meanwhile FTSE100 is on it's 13th record breaking day in a row, manufacturing output is up and the trade deficit is gradually being rectified while growth continues strongly and inflation stays low. How horrendous. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9999 Posts
| ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
If it's true that the EU is a failed experiment that isn't meant to survive, then it will ultimately end up being like jumping off a sinking ship. It will hurt, but it's better than the alternative. What should be certain at this point, however, is that we're looking forward to a decade of turmoil and change, and the EU looks very vulnerable to that right now. I just wonder how many people are particularly fond of the "we are stronger as the US's lapdog within the EU than we would be on our own." | ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
On January 16 2017 01:46 bardtown wrote: Seems that way. Even with current regulation London has just picked up Snapchat and European HQs for Facebook, Google and McDonalds. That's despite actual tax havens existing within the EU (Ireland, Luxembourg, etc). I think those investments alongside talk of further cutting corporation tax should help negotiations, anyway. Google's HQ is in Ireland... So is facebook and McDs is going to Geneva. <=> fail. Deluded Hammond making threats; https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/15/philip-hammond-suggests-uk-outside-single-market-could-become-tax-haven Not any part of that model would benefit the people not that it matters simply because; https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/14/netherlands-will-block-eu-deal-with-uk-without-tax-avoidance-measures A fake article in the guardian laid claim that the EU wanted a transitional deal. It was immediately corrected to the EU must be vigilant about the economic impact.. A slight difference lol.. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On January 15 2017 09:28 bardtown wrote: Citation needed, as usual. On more or less every single thing you said. So, let me get this straight. You claim that every argument for remaining in the EU has been demolished, without arguing for or against any arguments, and when someone points this out, you write out what appears to be some sort of meme. Sorry, but the onus is on you to prove yourself. I really don't understand you. See, I have spoken to many friends, some of which are for, and some are which are against leaving the EU. We can argue and understand each other. You on the other hand appear to have no interest in discourse at all and generally write posts in a sensationalist manner as if you are quoting from some sort of echo chamber. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On January 16 2017 09:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote: So, let me get this straight. You claim that every argument for remaining in the EU has been demolished, without arguing for or against any arguments, and when someone points this out, you write out what appears to be some sort of meme. Sorry, but the onus is on you to prove yourself. I really don't understand you. See, I have spoken to many friends, some of which are for, and some are which are against leaving the EU. We can argue and understand each other. You on the other hand appear to have no interest in discourse at all and generally write posts in a sensationalist manner as if you are quoting from some sort of echo chamber. You've been in this thread long enough to know I am the only dissenting voice in an echo chamber. You also know that I have argued extensively against all the arguments for remaining. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/15/google-commits-to-massive-new-london-hq http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/snapchat-set-up-internationbal-hq-london-post-brexit-britain-los-angeles-tech-company-app-a7518746.html https://www.ft.com/content/1f884f92-bd62-11e6-8b45-b8b81dd5d080 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/facebook-to-open-new-headquarters-in-london-next-year-a7429201.html And you seem to miss the point, mythical. There's nothing at all delusional about what Hammond said: if the UK cannot get access to the single market, it can seek to exploit a new niche. It is very much in the interests of the EU to prevent that. As such, they can offer single market access in return for the UK committing to measures to prevent it becoming a tax haven. But please do show me where I am wrong. What cards do the EU have left in their hand, now? The UK govt has made it clear they are willing to leave the single market and the customs union. And, despite everything, the British economy is growing faster than Germany or France. What can the EU do? WTO trade tariffs would put money in the UK's pocket due to the enormous trade deficit, especially with Germany and France, i.e. the countries who make the decisions. Cut off scientific ties to far and away the most accomplished country on the continent? Punish British citizens living abroad who pour money into their economies? Even the banks are getting over their initial anxieties, and FT keeps publishing articles about how passporting isn't so important after all. All the while the EU and its banks are starting to acknowledge that they need access to London. The EU has the power to make it more difficult for businesses in the UK which trade in the EU to do so. Difficult enough that some of them will move, sure. That's if they refuse to give the UK preferential access to the single market, though, which means crippling their own businesses which rely on London, risking financial collapse and paying needless tariffs to export to what will become their largest external trading partner. Told you months ago the balance of negotiations was deceptive. Objectively the UK is at a serious advantage. The only difficulty is that the zealots in the EU itself are willing to harm everybody to prove an ideological point. That will doubtless bring them into conflict with national leaders and parliaments, though, which will weaken their position even further. Meanwhile, there is talk of free trade deals with every economy that matters, starting with those countries we should always have been close to (NZ, Aus, Can, US). There is every reason to be positive about the UK's outlook. And that, I suspect, is why this thread has become so quiet. Sorry to disappoint . | ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4558 Posts
| ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
You've been in this thread long enough to know I am the only dissenting voice in an echo chamber. You also know that I have argued extensively against all the arguments for remaining. There is a very obvious reason for that. How does the UK have, objectively, a serious advantage? What advantage do they have? Use EU residents as bargaining chips? Congratulations on actually uniting the EU to record approval levels across the entire continent. Here we are not so stupid to think that any one country can really stand up to the BRICs, US, etc. But you keep on practicing your speeches in the mirror and making sure you spend as much time speaking to pensioners. I'm sure it means something in the long run. But it's fine I want you to have a hard brexit. Simply because of the reprecussions for NI, and Scotland. Let Little England be just that; Little and isolated. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
Most likely scenario is that all the trade that matters will continue tariff free and a few symbolic tariffs will be set up so the EU can claim that the UK is suffering for its decision. If, on the other hand, the EU tries to enforce a mutually detrimental deal then it will only serve to show why leaving was the right decision. Punishing the UK for the sake of threatening other EU countries would only serve to make the EU look tyrannical. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On January 17 2017 00:51 bardtown wrote: I've just told you. The UK is the EU's biggest export market with a huge surplus in their favour, and EU financial institutions are reliant on access to London's financial services. They can't afford to completely sever ties with the UK, and the UK has made red lines of free movement and supremacy of British law. Therefore, the EU has two choices: concede access to the single market for key industries (e.g. finance, automotive) without free movement, or risk a financial crash. Most likely scenario is that all the trade that matters will continue tariff free and a few symbolic tariffs will be set up so the EU can claim that the UK is suffering for its decision. If, on the other hand, the EU tries to enforce a mutually detrimental deal then it will only serve to show why leaving was the right decision. Punishing the UK for the sake of threatening other EU countries would only serve to make the EU look tyrannical. Technically being second to the US (for 2015 that is, source). I think if Trump and May work together, they might have a seriously strong position, representing about 40% of exports. Though I'm not aware how dependent both actually are on European technology (e.g. Hinkley Point?). | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On January 17 2017 01:32 Artisreal wrote: Technically being second to the US (for 2015 that is, source). I think if Trump and May work together, they might have a seriously strong position, representing about 40% of exports. Though I'm not aware how dependent both actually are on European technology (e.g. Hinkley Point?). That includes UK exports to the US. Once the UK is outside the EU the UK will be the #1 export destination. I have also mentioned before that France's most successful bilateral trade relationship (in terms of surplus) is with the UK. Even if that weren't the case, it is unimaginable that they would jeopardise Hinkley Point when they are so heavily invested in its success. Trump is clearly very pro-Brexit, but I don't know what influence he can really have. He can make angry noises if the deal seems unfair to the UK, I suppose, and that may be surprisingly effective. Or not. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9999 Posts
On January 16 2017 16:27 Laurens wrote: Well we could continue to point and laugh at the dropping pound, but that gets boring after a while. I'm sure the thread will be buzzing again after May's speech on Tuesday. Parity soon? I'm sure I saw a nameless individual in this thread talking about the benefits for the UK of the pound being worthless. He was the only dissenting voice in that discussion. | ||
| ||
|
Afreeca Starleague
Shine vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs EffOrt
OSC
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
