BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

1…175176178180181…2110

Comments

  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    From the 2nd best country to invest in to 7th in just a quarter.
    Link please?

    http://economia.icaew.com/news/october- ... investment

    Whichever way you look, the world is now betting against us.
    Caused by uncertainty over Brexit. Implying that once the situation becomes clearer, it will improve again. Its expected that uncertainty will cause some to pause.

    The uncertainty certainly hasn't stopped UK based BAT proceeding with a massive corporate acquisition.

    You are being disingenuous - your terminology would imply that you are well aware that the BAT case is the exact opposite.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    Joelsim wrote:
    In two hours the UK economy has lost $350 BILLION. That’s equivalent to 40 years of EU contributions.

    Sterling crashed already.

    AAA rating likely to be lost immediately.

    Tax rises inevitable.

    Well done to everyone who voted to leave.

    Now we'll all pay the price for your utter stupidity.
    Joel, you were saying that the economy had already melted down on the morning of 24th June...
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    From the 2nd best country to invest in to 7th in just a quarter.
    Link please?

    http://economia.icaew.com/news/october- ... investment

    Whichever way you look, the world is now betting against us.
    Caused by uncertainty over Brexit. Implying that once the situation becomes clearer, it will improve again. Its expected that uncertainty will cause some to pause.

    The uncertainty certainly hasn't stopped UK based BAT proceeding with a massive corporate acquisition.

    You are being disingenuous - your terminology would imply that you are well aware that the BAT case is the exact opposite.
    It is indeed an outbound acquisition, but all the more good news since the exchange rate impact has not stopped it from going ahead.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,435
    Have we already talked about the collapse of Ceta? Bodes pretty terribly for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in any sort of helpful time frame...
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,387
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Caused by uncertainty over Brexit. Implying that once the situation becomes clearer, it will improve again.
    I think if they expect to "improve again" (or were sure it would), then there wouldn't have been the enormous and currently sustained flight from the £. Remember, the value of a country can go down as well as up (as it should have said in the Leave campaign's small print). Hope isn't the same as certainty, apart from those of unwavering faith.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    From the 2nd best country to invest in to 7th in just a quarter.
    Link please?

    http://economia.icaew.com/news/october- ... investment

    Whichever way you look, the world is now betting against us.
    Caused by uncertainty over Brexit. Implying that once the situation becomes clearer, it will improve again. Its expected that uncertainty will cause some to pause.

    The uncertainty certainly hasn't stopped UK based BAT proceeding with a massive corporate acquisition.

    yeah but as BAT overseas profits have soared because they are not in sterling, they ve got the cash, Reynolds on the other hand have faltered, i guess not so much demand for steel bikes doesnt help.

    As you said, Brexit will give some opportunities........
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    From the 2nd best country to invest in to 7th in just a quarter.
    Link please?

    http://economia.icaew.com/news/october- ... investment

    Whichever way you look, the world is now betting against us.
    Caused by uncertainty over Brexit. Implying that once the situation becomes clearer, it will improve again. Its expected that uncertainty will cause some to pause.

    The uncertainty certainly hasn't stopped UK based BAT proceeding with a massive corporate acquisition.

    You are being disingenuous - your terminology would imply that you are well aware that the BAT case is the exact opposite.
    It is indeed an outbound acquisition, but all the more good news since the exchange rate impact has not stopped it from going ahead.

    "UK based" I am sure you are aware that it is British in name only and this a further move to strengthen its position outside of the UK.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    Have we already talked about the collapse of Ceta? Bodes pretty terribly for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in any sort of helpful time frame...

    No because we keep going off on micro level tangents. I agree this was the biggest Brexit news of the week but the great British public can only understand Marmite.

    Hilary Benn seems to get it as he is suggesting we decide early on the pursue transitionary arrangements.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    From the 2nd best country to invest in to 7th in just a quarter.
    Link please?

    http://economia.icaew.com/news/october- ... investment

    Whichever way you look, the world is now betting against us.
    Caused by uncertainty over Brexit. Implying that once the situation becomes clearer, it will improve again. Its expected that uncertainty will cause some to pause.

    The uncertainty certainly hasn't stopped UK based BAT proceeding with a massive corporate acquisition.

    You are being disingenuous - your terminology would imply that you are well aware that the BAT case is the exact opposite.
    It is indeed an outbound acquisition, but all the more good news since the exchange rate impact has not stopped it from going ahead.

    "UK based" I am sure you are aware that it is British in name only and this a further move to strengthen its position outside of the UK.
    It is Uk headquartered and more importantly draws its accounts up in sterling, so the currency point stands. Bad news for the doom mongers.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    Have we already talked about the collapse of Ceta? Bodes pretty terribly for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in any sort of helpful time frame...

    No because we keep going off on micro level tangents. I agree this was the biggest Brexit news of the week but the great British public can only understand Marmite.

    Hilary Benn seems to get it as he is suggesting we decide early on the pursue transitionary arrangements.
    It is also further evidence of why the EU is fatally flawed. They cannot even get a trade deal with Canada after 7 years of trying. Commentators have suggested that the EU is unlikely to do any trade deals in the near future for the same reaons.

    It also means that the UK will find in considerably easier and quicker to do trade deals with other countries compared to the EU.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    Have we already talked about the collapse of Ceta? Bodes pretty terribly for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in any sort of helpful time frame...

    No because we keep going off on micro level tangents. I agree this was the biggest Brexit news of the week but the great British public can only understand Marmite.

    Hilary Benn seems to get it as he is suggesting we decide early on the pursue transitionary arrangements.
    It is also further evidence of why the EU is fatally flawed. They cannot even get a trade deal with Canada after 7 years of trying. Commentators have suggested that the EU is unlikely to do any trade deals in the near future for the same reaons.

    It also means that the UK will find in considerably easier and quicker to do trade deals with other countries compared to the EU.

    EU trade deals have to satisfy all 28 members, so in essence will be hard to come by.
    Unless of course there is political union...
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    Have we already talked about the collapse of Ceta? Bodes pretty terribly for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in any sort of helpful time frame...

    No because we keep going off on micro level tangents. I agree this was the biggest Brexit news of the week but the great British public can only understand Marmite.

    Hilary Benn seems to get it as he is suggesting we decide early on the pursue transitionary arrangements.
    It is also further evidence of why the EU is fatally flawed. They cannot even get a trade deal with Canada after 7 years of trying. Commentators have suggested that the EU is unlikely to do any trade deals in the near future for the same reaons.

    It also means that the UK will find in considerably easier and quicker to do trade deals with other countries compared to the EU.

    EU trade deals have to satisfy all 28 members, so in essence will be hard to come by.
    Unless of course there is political union...

    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    Have we already talked about the collapse of Ceta? Bodes pretty terribly for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in any sort of helpful time frame...

    No because we keep going off on micro level tangents. I agree this was the biggest Brexit news of the week but the great British public can only understand Marmite.

    Hilary Benn seems to get it as he is suggesting we decide early on the pursue transitionary arrangements.
    It is also further evidence of why the EU is fatally flawed. They cannot even get a trade deal with Canada after 7 years of trying. Commentators have suggested that the EU is unlikely to do any trade deals in the near future for the same reaons.

    It also means that the UK will find in considerably easier and quicker to do trade deals with other countries compared to the EU.

    EU trade deals have to satisfy all 28 members, so in essence will be hard to come by.
    Unless of course there is political union...

    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.


    A trading bloc that wants trade barriers? Perhaps I should have voted to leave then? :lol:
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.
    It's not that they don't care, its they they appear to be incapable because of the unwieldiness of the approval process. Ironically it was a region of Belgium worried about competition from Canada that has stopped the deal in its tracks :roll:
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    Have we already talked about the collapse of Ceta? Bodes pretty terribly for the chances of us getting anything remotely sensible agreed in any sort of helpful time frame...

    No because we keep going off on micro level tangents. I agree this was the biggest Brexit news of the week but the great British public can only understand Marmite.

    Hilary Benn seems to get it as he is suggesting we decide early on the pursue transitionary arrangements.
    It is also further evidence of why the EU is fatally flawed. They cannot even get a trade deal with Canada after 7 years of trying. Commentators have suggested that the EU is unlikely to do any trade deals in the near future for the same reaons.

    It also means that the UK will find in considerably easier and quicker to do trade deals with other countries compared to the EU.

    EU trade deals have to satisfy all 28 members, so in essence will be hard to come by.
    Unless of course there is political union...

    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.


    A trading bloc that wants trade barriers? Perhaps I should have voted to leave then? :lol:

    Free marketeers love the free European internal market but deplore the trade barriers to the rest of the world
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.
    It's not that they don't care, its they they appear to be incapable because of the unwieldiness of the approval process. Ironically it was a region of Belgium worried about competition from Canada that has stopped the deal in its tracks :roll:

    See my point above that we should spend our two years sorting out the best WTO terms that we can achieve.
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.
    It's not that they don't care, its they they appear to be incapable because of the unwieldiness of the approval process. Ironically it was a region of Belgium worried about competition from Canada that has stopped the deal in its tracks :roll:

    Isnt it more that the Belgium Government, allows the regional parliament to veto the national one, rather than a failing with the EU.
    Its not as if the EU has given such power to europes many other regional parliaments is it.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    We are much freer now to tear down these trade barriers witb the rest of the world. And much more capable of striking deals compared to negotiating as a part of the EU.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    mamba80 wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.
    It's not that they don't care, its they they appear to be incapable because of the unwieldiness of the approval process. Ironically it was a region of Belgium worried about competition from Canada that has stopped the deal in its tracks :roll:

    Isnt it more that the Belgium Government, allows the regional parliament to veto the national one, rather than a failing with the EU.
    Its not as if the EU has given such power to europes many other regional parliaments is it.
    Not sure, but when the Canadian trade minister flies home from Europe in sheer exasperation after 7 years of trying to strike strike a trade deal with the EU, you know you are dealing with one badly ****ed up institution.

    Here is what she said - pretty damning stuff:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/21/eu-canada-ceta-trade-deal-meltdown-canadian-minister-walks-out
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    We are much freer now to tear down these trade barriers witb the rest of the world. And much more capable of striking deals compared to negotiating as a part of the EU.

    I think you misunderstand who owns the trade barriers. They are not ours to tear down
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,387
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    mamba80 wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Alternatively you could interpret the moral of the story to be that the EU does not care too much if it gets a trade deal with Canada. No lessons to be drawn there.
    It's not that they don't care, its they they appear to be incapable because of the unwieldiness of the approval process. Ironically it was a region of Belgium worried about competition from Canada that has stopped the deal in its tracks :roll:

    Isnt it more that the Belgium Government, allows the regional parliament to veto the national one, rather than a failing with the EU.
    Its not as if the EU has given such power to europes many other regional parliaments is it.
    Not sure, but when the Canadian trade minister flies home from Europe in sheer exasperation after 7 years of trying to strike strike a trade deal with the EU, you know you are dealing with one badly ****ed up institution.

    Here is what she said - pretty damning stuff:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/21/eu-canada-ceta-trade-deal-meltdown-canadian-minister-walks-out
    And here's what the BBC said... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37735968 - not quite as damning.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    The damning comments I am referring to are what was said by the Canadian trade minister. Doesn't matter who reported them.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,387
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The damning comments I am referring to are what was said by the Canadian trade minister. Doesn't matter who reported them.
    If you're going to damn the entire EU project on the back of one angry politician's opinion, I would say it does matter.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,428
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The damning comments I am referring to are what was said by the Canadian trade minister. Doesn't matter who reported them.
    If you're going to damn the entire EU project on the back of one angry politician's opinion, I would say it does matter.
    See my other comments above on the main reasons why the project is fundamentally flawed. This is just additional evidence.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The damning comments I am referring to are what was said by the Canadian trade minister. Doesn't matter who reported them.
    If you're going to damn the entire EU project on the back of one angry politician's opinion, I would say it does matter.
    See my other comments above on the main reasons why the project is fundamentally flawed. This is just additional evidence.

    why did you vote IN and do you regret that now? it certainly sounds like it.

    i disagree its fundamentally flawed, its got issues yes, but they can be resolved, in a way with the reluctant UK out, might make this easier.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,387
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The damning comments I am referring to are what was said by the Canadian trade minister. Doesn't matter who reported them.
    If you're going to damn the entire EU project on the back of one angry politician's opinion, I would say it does matter.
    See my other comments above on the main reasons why the project is fundamentally flawed. This is just additional evidence.
    You're in the same cognitive bias loop that you accuse all 'lefties' of being in. If it's so fundamentally flawed, I'm confused as to why you voted Remain: the EU hasn't changed that much since July (though I'm afraid that the UK has).
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The damning comments I am referring to are what was said by the Canadian trade minister. Doesn't matter who reported them.
    If you're going to damn the entire EU project on the back of one angry politician's opinion, I would say it does matter.
    See my other comments above on the main reasons why the project is fundamentally flawed. This is just additional evidence.
    You're in the same cognitive bias loop that you accuse all 'lefties' of being in. If it's so fundamentally flawed, I'm confused as to why you voted Remain: the EU hasn't changed that much since July (though I'm afraid that the UK has).

    I too voted remain for reasons given here, although I also regard the EU as deeply flawed.

    viewtopic.php?f=40088&t=13060592&hilit=medicine

    I recognised that there would be an economic cost to leaving, which I thought would outweigh potential benefits.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,387
    Ballysmate wrote:
    I too voted remain for reasons given here, although I also regard the EU as deeply flawed.
    I think most people who voted Remain would admit to the EU being flawed, but then all government is, as are all versions of democracy. But, accepting all that, the UK of July 2016 was a far far better place than the UK of the 1970s I knew by just about every indicator you can find, and I, for one, don't think that's a coincidence. Neither do I think it's a coincidence that both of the generations before me fought in world wars, and I didn't.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    I too voted remain for reasons given here, although I also regard the EU as deeply flawed.
    I think most people who voted Remain would admit to the EU being flawed, but then all government is, as are all versions of democracy. But, accepting all that, the UK of July 2016 was a far far better place than the UK of the 1970s I knew by just about every indicator you can find, and I, for one, don't think that's a coincidence. Neither do I think it's a coincidence that both of the generations before me fought in world wars, and I didn't.

    Well said Brian, ten years of Margaret got this country back on its feet.
    As regards world wars, everyone in Europe was united looking at Russia as the common enemy and the nuclear genie was out of the bottle.

    But looking further at your premise, until 1973, the Common Market consisted of 6 countries, West Germany, France, Italy and the Benelux countries. Now, I suppose it was possible that Luxembourg would kick off and invade someone, but I doubt it. :wink:
    So the main antagonists would be France and West Germany. A Germany that had been divided and heavily invested in and rebuilt. Yes, a trade agreement,(that was the crux of the relationship then) between France and West Germany was beneficial in their mutual coexistence, but to suggest that they were held back from war by Italy and Benelux until UK, Ireland and Denmark joined, is nonsense. Since we joined, which members have been restrained from aggression towards another? What were the potential flash points?
    Where can anyone point to and say that potential conflict was averted because the two likely foes were members of the Common Market, EEC or EU?
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,435
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    We are much freer now to tear down these trade barriers witb the rest of the world. And much more capable of striking deals compared to negotiating as a part of the EU.

    I agree with the sentiment, but unfortunately the EU has the combined virtues of proximity and size, which makes it quite important.

    I think the only way forward would be to agree to continue under the current arrangement for a period of years until a new agreement can be reached. But unfortunately the same EU members will need to agree to the transitional period and then to the final agreement so I can't see it going very well.

Categories