May is seceretly working with Merkel to ensure that Brexit is very short term, and the UK will be back in pretty quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
Printable View
May is seceretly working with Merkel to ensure that Brexit is very short term, and the UK will be back in pretty quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
Ha ha!Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
WP, you need to go on a short course on media studies.
Did the idea that this information would only be known by an anti-Europe lobby group not seem strange to you?
It can’t be true - it’s not been on the front page of the Mail yet
What I love is the fact that the person on twitter took screen shots of the article (before its removal). There is so little trust nowadays.
I don't know Noel. A lot of credence seems to be given to pro EU lobby groups, even groups and individuals reliant on the EU for a source of income.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
Do you not think Chequers was odd?
I tend not to take on board such stuff from either side unless I can dissect it, check it's voracity. But what this does is support my suspicions at the time of Chequers.
I suppose we'll find out in due course.
There have been a few news articles on this subject recently. Apparently we are more likely to believe fake news if it's something we'd like to believe.
"I will list all the companies I think are leaving and blame it all on brexit".Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
Trouble is that some of the companies listed are certainly not leaving because of brexit. The car industry is in serious trouble: Honda in particular. Even car plants in europe are closing and/or moving to turkey. Some are retrenching to japan now they can. So correlation is not cause.
Dyson is certainly not leaving because of brexit. So consider other causes. I can tell you for certainty some companies are leaving because of the prospect of Corbyn and Mcdonnels threat to steal part of the company and replace their boards with agitators. All companies will have a strategy to deal with the threat, they just wont want to upset the customers by saying so. Companies outside britain have international treaties that protect them from expropriation to allow safe investment here. Corbyns clear threat to return to the car industries to the 70s will certainly be weighing in on decisions. So blame it all on brexit, is more of project fear.
What trumps that is economic gravity. For as long as we import a lot more than we export, the net migration if there is any will be towards Britain in the form of company moves, expanded business and startups. Thats why we are still growing europe is not. Sure there will closures, but it is not the whole story.
I cannot understand why any vote for EU, considering the history of intransigence and ideologyto the point of self harm, deliberately prolonging uncertainty now harming them and us. It is why some of us want to leave. Hopelessly undermined by remainers. Now for project certainty. The impending collapse of the Euro. I cannot understand why any socialist can vote for the mass economic hardship the euro has clearly caused.
You’re good at this Oracle. Where do you stand on the really key issue of our time ie folks using GPS watch things when racing?
Nope. I will stick to brexit. Running with GPSsss is far too controversial for me!Quote:
Originally Posted by Derby Tup
I don't dare get into that argument
Suffice to say my first was a mgellan jammed into bumbag, remember them??. I Bust it in a slip on little stand at duddon. On the rare occasions it managed to get a sat fix at all, it took ages to get one!
There is no answer to suit everyone.
Those outside the lakes will say "they equalize the advantage locals have". Good map navigators who want to maximise advantage say "GPS is unethical". Some folk will say "it makes it safer" others say "until they break! so what then if you rely on them?". Many will say its about the running, and GPS cant help your legs anyway. It amazes me how it got the community into an argument meltdown.I will stick to brexit. I prefer black and white. ;-)
Again with the opinions as facts. Many people (including many in Southern Europe) see the long-term economic benefits the EU and the Euro has brought, and that this has disproportionately benefited those in the poorest areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oracle
Is anyone posting an actual socialist?
First separate facts and mood music. The inexorable progression of Target 2, the approach of ECB to issuer limits and the inability of Italy ever to pay its debts, the doom loop of zombie banks and government bonds and the massive and incurable youth unemployment are all facts. As is the fact all unions have failed for all the same reasons. Which is why I call it certainty. I just cannot say when.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
Now to mood. I doubt any in Greece say what you have. Southern italy certainly does not. The problem is the growing underclass of 40 percent youth unemployment becoming unemployable young adults. They have nothing, they have nothing to lose, and no hope. The EU refused a budget that could have helped them. All fact.. And they are the reason for such as five star. I travel in some of these countries spain, portugal. The young people have no current voice but are in despair. Those that can leave will. Ultimately they will be the catalyst for "enough is enough" and the ultimate falling out of Italy and EU. If the bond markets and EU punishment beating have not done it first that is. Italy is already in recession.
This FT article nails Brexit and the need for a second referendum -> https://www.ft.com/content/ebaeebcc-...e-efab61506f44
Edit: Whoops, I just realised you will need to subscribe to the FT to read it 🙄
Whoops? Is that a professional financial term you often need to use with your clients, Stolly?:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
I liked this in the Telegraph by an Estonian MEP and Law Professor
"Let me offer you a recollection of when I was sent with colleagues to the Supreme Soviet to regain Estonian independence. First of all, they sent people to do that job, who believed in independence. They did not send some Party apparatchiks who believed in the USSR. We Estonians were not so stupid."
This argument is the one that nails brexit:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
If remainers didnt realise how intransigent and unreasonable the EU is ,and has always been, in preferring ideology to the wellbeing of the people of the EU, they most certainly do by now. It is demonstrated beyond doubt by both the stream of insulting statements of the unelected eurocratsand and their refusal to negotiate trade in over 2 years, or indeed negotiate at all despite the inevitable harm it is causing and also the attempt to annexe northern ireland with shades of austria 1938. So now remainers know that, they will not vote for an organisation that is intent on doing us harm.
I would also hope by now , Remainers have studied the destitution their precious EU is causing by austerity forced by the impossible euro ( although remainers in my experience are very badly informed) and they will not want to belong to an organisation that treats its people so badly. The reality is EU has cherrypicked money and keeping us as a market for their goods whilst resisting all of our reasonable demands and trying to lock us democratic states in ever tighter strait jacket So hopefully remainsers will now take the rose tinted glasses off.
The essence of the FT article by the way was that the outlook and motivations of leave vs remain voters was leave voted for cultural and anti immigration reasons whilst remain voted for economic reasons. So arguments since from either side never really have any traction with the opposing view. And hence why never the Twain shall meet.
Also a lot of the leave voters being retired were not, in their minds, directly effected by the economy in any event. That too with the referendum taking place right at the height of a massive refugee crisis, heightening peoples concerns right at the wrong time over immigration
All the same the article goes on to say that a second referendum is absolutely the best next step before any Brexit gets finalised due to the growing stats and polls that say that remain would comfortably win this time. In other words the “will of the people” might well be different now and, in pushing through Brexit based on the will of the people nearly three years ago, the government would quite probably be going against “the will of the people” 😊
Indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
Throughout this sorry saga I have been reminded of a book I knew in a previous existence called The Abilene Paradox(Professor Jerry Harvey, George Washington University) which informed some of my organization development work.
In essence the book is a parable about a group of people who agree to do something (drive a hundred miles on dusty roads to Abilene, Texas in a non-air-conditioned car in the heat of the summer sun) that no individual actually wishes to do but complies because they all think the others wish to make the trip. Ie managers often agree to act in a way contradictory to what they actually want to do or believe is right based on what they think others want to do.
The book was published in 1988. I still have it.
In the lemming myth I wonder if the odd lemming rushing towards the cliff edge ever said "are we sure this is the right way, fellas?"
Which is clearly written by a remainer: I voted brexit for economic reasons. Any vote for EU can only be cultural. It is causing devastation to many countries in economic terms. Soros is saying today what has been said by all serious economists for many years. Greece can never recover in the euro. Ditto italy. Ditto portugal.Only emotive arguments exist for remain ( or being German so being the beneficiary helps). The economics says the euro and therefore EU is screwed, and that is giving rise to populist movements and immigration.
That points at one of the big problems with the debate, which is false comment or presumption on motivations of others. I have yet to meet a brexiter that paid any heed to 350 million on a bus. Many brexiters take heed of the opportunity to be the new singapore. The real value of independence in trade deals is way bigger than that. The problem is you have to be an entrepreneur to throw in the safe day job and take the risk , and then the whole world attacks you for doing so much better. The nay sayers and remainers only look at the salary in the twilight industry you may have lost to state it is too much risk. But if it is failing anyway what is the risk? EU is in its twilight years.Our MPs are social security minded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
I voted leave for economic reasons. The EU has hardly been an economic success. Not just my opinion but some experts such as Mr Stiglitz as we've mentioned earlier on the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
It looks pretty strong to me: https://tradingeconomics.com/europea...gdp-per-capitaQuote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
Which is the problem with EU collective figures and propaganda. Remainers dont research it.
It works well for Germany and some northern states at the expense of all the rest. The fourth reich is doing well thanks. But italy GDP per capita is still only what it was when it joined the euro. No growth at all. Negative if you allow for inflation. Italy has no means to recover or even to halt the increase in debt to GDP. Nor does greece..etc. Youth unemployment is 40% in much of southern europe. Minimum wage earners earn less but unlike here are taxed.
That is why the euro is doomed. The losers have no way to recover. The imbalance capital flows and bond yields in the poor economies are unsustainable. The ECB will hit the buffers, certainly when a german takes over in november and enforces the silly rules. Brussels will not advertise it for obvious reasons..
Italy stopped growing precisely because and when it joined the euro in 1998
https://tradingeconomics.com/italy/gdp-per-capita
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
Question Time might be worth watching tonight. There are two Brexiteers on the panel, Dominic Raab and The Times columnist Ian Martin. Often our "impartial" state broadcaster likes to have a 4:1 Remain bias so it will be nice to almost have parity. Loud mouthed lefty half-wit Owen Jones is also supposed to be on the panel so it might get quite feisty.
And I voted remain based on cultural reasons, the idea of being part of a closer European Union (the economic advantages were to a certain extent icing on the cake). But never mind me and you WP, in the round the Financial Times’s point was correctQuote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
If you break it down Noel, go to the "max" graph that gives you 4 blocks of 11 years starting 1969 through to 2013.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
1 = 37%
2 = 25%
3 = 26%
4 = 8.5%
for each of the 11 year periods.
even if you extend the final 11 year block to end of period it only gives you a 15% increase over the longest period.
That looks to me like there has been a slowing since Maastricht, something I've said previously. The USA has grown GDP by almost double the Eurozone since Maastricht.
Thanks for the heads up. I thought inviting brexiteers was against the corporation credo.
Owen Jones , I cannot stand the man. He no longer even attempts objective journalism as a Corbyn sycophant. or is that sickophant? I was somewhat amused when Andrew Neill questioned him on twitteras to why Owen had sold his soul to a Labour head office who had nothing but contempt for Jones! It pointed out that Neill still knew Milne who was a one time subordinate of his, so he knew exactly what they thought of Jones! Useful idiot springs to mind..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever
Was it really. Too many articles including seemingly this , ascribe false motives to the opposite faction , based only on confirmation bias of the authors own standpoint.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
Whilst every single thing you say isn’t to confirm the bias of your standpoint? 🤔Quote:
Originally Posted by Oracle
Perhaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
But I do have both : 100 percent failure of every single currency union in europe and elswhere in history to back me up, and also the overwhelming weight of economic opinion on my sidewhen I say the eurozone is screwed beyond repair.
What was once a niche opinion ten years ago, was reinforced by weighty analysis of such as Hans Werners Sim, and now is mainstream opinion. Shared even by varoufakis and Stiglitz and Soros even today. When Soros and varoufakis agree, you know it will be bad! Brussels go all quiet if you ever mention Target 2
But I dont mind being in the minority. For three years before the last financial crisis I was saying it was inevitable. Just like the euro now.
So now a heads up to the medium future. Worst of all the dollar will crash and will make 1929 look like a picnic, because ever since the 2007 crisis the Fed has prescribed ever increasing amounts of the very medicine that made the patient sick in the first place to the point there is now way back. The curse of cheap money. US bond purchase over subscribe is now the lowest it has ever been. Sub prime auto is now as bad as sub prime property ever was.
And now a niche opinion, which will become mainstream. Before that Australian and Chinese banks will crash because of the property bubbles in those caused by cheap money which could be the catalyst for the US crash. The bubble in china is just like it was in 2006 in the states. The rental yield in australia is laughably much lower than mortgage rates. There is also money to be made in property in Germany at present because of the dysfunctionality of the euro. But not for long.
You heard it here first!
Generally frowned upon I think. If you subscribe to the Telegraph this is a good article. It mentions the often 4:1 Remain bias. It is the same with other BBC programmes where Remainers regularly outnumber Leavers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oracle
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...brexit-debate/
Yes he is an idiot. Given his previous gushing praise for its leadership I'd love it if a member of the audience asked about Venezuela.Quote:
Owen Jones , I cannot stand the man.
[QUOTE=Muddy Retriever;647079. Loud mouthed lefty half-wit Owen Jones
I would like to point out that the above named prat is not Welsh. (and I don't mean MR)
I notice all the statements about the Eurozone growth ignore the financial crash. I suggest this might have had something to do with the downturns over the last 11 years. I'm not an economist, but maybe we should be comparing the EU to other global economies during this same period.
That misses the essential point.
The problem is not just absolute performance, but increasing divergence within the eurozone itself which is forced by the currency union.
That is what will rip it apart. Compare the divergence of italy and the fourth reich as a whole. Italy is not blameless, but italy , greece and the rest are prevented from any hope of recovery as said Soros today. As I pointed out earlier, when Soros and Varoufakis both agree there is the same problem and solution is impossible,then it has to be bad!
Apart from that.A commitee 26 countries cannot agree on anything except the lowest common denomnator It is why all deals are suboptimal and take seven years, and in the case of migration no deal was reached. The only deal EU will do is not a deal because it is unnaceptable to us. It doesnt take seven years , it can be done in months. they take that long because of the impossibilty of EU state agreement.
Imagine a camel if it had been designed by a commitee of 27, worse still when hijacked by officials who care only about preserving ideology not whether the camel is useful. The camel would stand no chance of walking! Eu can not succeed because it has become too unwieldy.
Now imagine a one to one deal between two countries, focussed just on their interests. No contest in the result, far better for both parties. Eurozone is screwed. And with it the EU. It cannot make a decision, even to save its life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
According to this article I linked to last week:Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
In 2000, a year after the euro was introduced, the US economy was only 13% larger than the eurozone; by 2016 it was 26% larger
https://www.theguardian.com/business...oseph-stiglitz
So that includes the years of financial crash for both the USA and the eurozone.
my previous analysis of the figures you linked to was over 40 odd years so smoothing out a number of growth periods and downturns.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
When comparing to USA or any other developed economy I think the 2008 crash hit everyone, but some have come out of it stronger than others.
I seem to remember someone making the point that if you break the years down into blocks the most recent 11 years shows the EU is slowing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
I can’t help but laugh (ironically) at all the expert opinions coming from some of the pro-Brexit zealots on here as to why economically leaving the EU is best. Virtually every economist in the U.K., most major businesses, the CBI, the Bank of England and the IMF disagree with them though. But hey what do they know eh?
This from the IMF - UK’s economic outlook in six charts https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles...-in-six-charts - sums things up pretty accurately and pretty expertly I think but Witton maybe you have six charts of your own, gleaned from some ultra right wing think tank conspiracy theory web page, that knows better?
Rubbish there was not a chart showing the value of a blue passport.
Not sure if this is aimed at me, but if it is it isn't what I've said.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
I have said that GDP Growth in the Eurozone since Maastricht as been below the trend for modern developed economies.
So that's circa 25 years.
If it was so good, no one has copied it, independent nations have outperformed it. How is that so?
It's a nice idea, put poorly in to practise.
It was aimed at you, but I see what you're saying now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
It's interesting how different people see different things in data.
https://tradingeconomics.com/europea...gdp-per-capita
If you set it to "max" it shows the EU GDP per capita since the early 60s. To me it shows a steady unchanging rate of growth up to about 2007 then a sharp decline followed by a return to a similar rate of growth. Where's the slowing you see post-Maastricht?