Footflaps how many businesses hire an economist, answer practically none. In fact most money/asset managers don't hire one either as they are not worth their wages.
cchris - nothing is going to happen to you post Brexit. If you wanted to guaranty you could stay you'd just get a British passport. I have many American friends who've done just that. They intend to go back to the US but why nit get a passport you are entitled to when it has no liabilities attached ? I have no intention of getting a French passport, no need for one in the event of Brexit IMO
Serious question now, does anyone know what will happen to EU national if Brexit win?Get visa I guess?
Nobody knows, is the answer.
It could be that everything is lovely straight away, or it could be that everything is lovely after a bit of a rocky start (tough luck for you during that period) or it could be that despite their theoretical right to stay, foreigners get f***ed over so as to "persude" them to leave, and that although the primary targets are Romanians and Poles, a few Frenchies get caught as collateral damage.
Have to wait and see. Or hopefully, not.
Footflaps how many businesses hire an economist,
Most large corporations, banks, finance houses do....
But then you just make up shit to justify your case.
Stick "Economist" into LinkedIn and look through the 30k+ entries...
£10bn is the equivalent of 11.5% of the total raised by VAT - ie equivalent of 18% vs 20%
The EU should be paying us for being such a good customer, if there are trade tarifs we'll make a massive profit
I have nothing against having a British passport but like you I don't see the need for one.
I hope this thread keeps going for many years, so we can all come back and discuss the good/bad changes that 2mrws vote has bought upon us, actually I might have to ressurect the last general election thread so we can do the same there..
In reply to the OP I'm out..
£10bn is
A tiny % of GDP which is something like £1.8t / year at the moment.
according to 99% of all Economists
come on now you have to give equal weight to both sides of the argument.
@footflaps my last bank employer had 150,000 staff and 10 economists. The economists are employed to generate research which customers mostly don't read. If you ask research analysts at banks (who write about companies) most of them don't pay attention to what the economists say. The bank didn't use Economists to make business decisions and various senior guys where all laid off despite being specialists in Asia. The bank tracked whether customers read their work (as it was emailed out via links you had to click through) and mostly they did not
I was being generous when I said of the research I read only 5% was economics. In reality I haven't read any Economic research in 3 years. I have attended some meetings with very prominent economists but beyond getting their views on headline events / major trends I find they just speak tosh. They have in general a spectacularly bad track record at being right or even close. If you look at all their projections on US interest rates the last few years, miles out. I used to pay for a subscription to "Dismal Scientist" as they are contrarians, I was (and remain) more interested in that view as Economists are particularly bad at "Group Speak"
lazybike - Member
I hope this thread keeps going for many years, so we can all come back and discuss the good/bad changes that 2mrws vote has bought upon us, actually I might have to ressurect the last general election thread so we can do the same there..In reply to the OP I'm out..
Ive got one change for sure
you see that really long queue at passport control, that says Non-EU members, next time you go on holiday youll be in that one watching all the EUers whiz through
yeah its stupid to base your voting intention on airport hassle but I think it nicely sums up the extra bureaucracy that is going to hit us in our future interactions with Europe
A tiny % of GDP which is something like £1.8t / year at the moment.
Our whole military costs only 2% GDP and we spend 4% GDP on NHS. £10bn is 7.7% of the NHS budget. Not so trivial.
If it really was trivial we'd up spending on all sorts of things by £10bn, £10bn there.
We keep the Scottish one alive, especially to point out the Oil price from time to time 8)
The EU should be paying us for being such a good customer, if there are trade tarifs we'll make a massive profit
which would be true if we did not have a 25bn trade deficit.
If it really was trivial we'd up spending on all sorts of things by £10bn, £10bn there.
yet they can find 85 times that to bail out the banks and fund trident which cost almost the enter NHS budget. There are choices being made...
@kimbers..its as good a reason as any! like I said we can come back and discuss all our hopes and fears and see what, if anything, has changed..
funnily enough, has been on the rise for 3 months. Some people must be getting tired of the economic warfare on Russia....jambalaya - Member
We keep the Scottish one alive, especially to point out the Oil price from time to time
molgrips - MemberI would point out that whilst many people, probably the majority in the UK are not xenophobic as you point out, there are is clearly (to me) a sizeable minority who would put British people first. To me, this is xenophobia.
Well if you want to backtrack be my guest, I don't mind.
This however is what you initially said with regards to my comment :
molgrips - Member"And the British people are not racist, election result after election result proves that".
They are quite xenophobic though.
Posted 3 hours ago # Report-Post
The British people are quite xenophobic means the British people are quite xenophobic, even I, a foreign born non-British EU national, understands the basic English behind that comment.
And having understood what you said I decided to express strong disagreement with that premise. Something which apparently has upset you.
Now if you to say [i]"what I really meant to say is........."[/i] then fine, I don't mind - we all say things which in hindsight we would say different.
EDIT : And btw putting "British people first" is not xenophobia. Not as the term is generally understood to mean. I've already pointed out that the accepted definition of xenophobia [i]"dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries"[/i].
I think it is the responsibility of the British government to put British people first. It is not the responsibility of the British government to put American people first, or French people first, or whatever. I am not xenophobic, not in the widely accepted definition of the term.
The British people are quite xenophobic means the British people are quite xenophobic, even I, a foreign born non-British EU national, understands the basic English behind that comment.
Well you think you do, but I am not sure you do. Does it mean that each British person is quite xenophobic, or that a sizeable proportion of the individuals in Britain are xenophobic? It actually means the latter. There's a difference between "British people are xenophobic" and "[b]the[/b] British people are xenophobic".
Something which apparently has upset you
No, what has actually upset me is your apparent nastiness, which was hugely un-called for.
Now if you to say "what I really meant to say is........." then fine
What I really meant to say was that there seem to be quite a few xenophobic attitudes in Britain.
which would be true if we did not have a 25bn trade deficit.
Trade deficit means we make money, we collect the tarifs on all the imports as they are levied on the buyer (well in reality the seller has to take some pain as they typically have to cut prices too)
Trade deficit means we make money, we collect the tarifs on all the imports as they are levied on the buyer (well in reality the seller has to take some pain as they typically have to cut prices too)
Unless the tariffs make us uncompetitive...?
No, what has actually upset me is your apparent nastiness, which was hugely un-called for.
I think you'll find on STW many posters think personal abuse is regularly called for (for the avoidance of doubt I am not referencing you or ernie specifically).
This Referendum Campaign has been extremely personally abusive, generally from the Remain side I may say.
@molgrips agreed although trade tarifs applied to Chinese and American goods don't seem to make much difference to our purchases from them do they ?
Well you think you do, but I am not sure you do.
Now you're insulting me by claiming that I don't understand basic English, don't be so nasty.
Is it coz I is foreign?
Check the edit in my post btw.
Trade deficit means we make money, we collect the tarifs on all the imports as they are levied on the buyer
I cannot work out if your grasp is this simplistic and you believe this or whether you know this is just not true
the reality is tariffs affect trade and trade will change so that they buy even less of our things[more expensive therefore less competitive therefore less purchased] and we do the same to their things for the same reason
Unfortunately our things are 50% of our export trade and their things are about 5%. This is a trade war we cannot win as we need them much more than they need us
That is why no credible economists has pointed out that tariffs will be great for the uk and we will be quids in
You may as well say that under Brexit the EU will give us all a fiver to let them trade with us its just as ludicrous
This Referendum Campaign has been extremely personally abusive, g[u]enerally from the Remain side I may say[/u].
Jo Cox' family may disagree
As indeed did the forum when you posted your views on that thread- did you apologise no you attacked everyone else for needing a "pantomime villain". Like Balotelli you sit around wondering "why always me?"
This Referendum Campaign has been extremely personally abusive, generally from the Remain side I may say.
ah the old switcheroo whilst being the victim
SUbtle...for you 🙄
It's also patently untrue as GDP will take a massive hit post Brexit (according to 99% of all Economists).
Post-Brexit, GDP is predicted to rise 27% from the 2015 level by 2030. Notwithstanding that anyone who claims to be able to predict things like GDP 14 years into the future should probably have a carer, that's not really a massive hit is it?
What are the implications on a close vs overwhelming remain vote ??
close = lots and lots of legal wrangling I expect
its yes or no
Very close may mean a count back i guess but i have no idea what the rules are on that ...anyone?
Ouch
Bird have just said they expect 5-8% rise in their prices post Brexit
This serious attempt to fact-check every claim on both sides is a good effort:
https://medium.com/im-trying-to-fact-check-brexit
If you don't read it all, at least read the conclusion:
"At every single turn, I found that the Leave campaign’s arguments were founded on lies. Sorry, it’s as simple as that. I wish it wasn’t."
The leave campaign has given unequivocal assurances that any new immigration system would not affect the estimated 3 million non-British EU citizens already in the country...... [the conclusion]Leading lawyers say the leave claims are “not based in fact” and the status quo is unlikely to continue, given that immigration is so central to the leave campaign.“There is no cast-iron guarantee on acquired rights in the event Britain leaves the EU,” says Sionaidh Douglas-Scott, professor of law at Queen Mary University of London and an expert in European law. “If you leave the EU you are no longer a member of the club that gives you those rights.”
Still we have the vague appeal to Gove's authority from a quote that was disputed
www.google.co.uk/amp/www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/22/juncker-confirms-british-need-know-will-no-renegotiation/amp/?client=ms-android-google#
He also said no negotiation if we leave.
What an arrogant tool.
That wasn't quite the way PM reported that story. Their take was that a leave vote would not lead to a renegotiation - which makes more sense when you read the direct quotes. And you'd expect.
However I was driving, I may have misheard.
Since when did facts become arrogant?
“We have concluded a deal with the Prime Minister, he got the maximum he could receive, we gave the maximum we could give,” Mr. Juncker said.“So there will be no kind of renegotiation, nor on the agreement we found in February, nor as far as any kind of treaty negotiations are concerned.
“Out is out.”
WHat is arrogant about that ?
He said the bloody obvious, nothing more and nothing less.
We'll be too busy trying to stabilise our banking system, post leave, to worry about renegotiating anything! We'll be negotiating from a position of great weakness. However, hopefully the markets are right and we won't be going there come Friday....
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/eu-referendum-brexit-leave-plane-banner-jo-cox-memorial-trafalgar-square-brendan-cox-disgusting-a7095796.html ]The Pro Leave mob staying classy right til the end[/url]
Vile insensitive ****s!!!
As I've said before: nice company you're keeping Jammers 😕
“We have concluded a deal with the Prime Minister, he got the maximum he could receive, we gave the maximum we could give,” Mr. Juncker said.
Luckily, Jeremy Corbyn's plan is to walk in as PM, sit down at the table and overnight deliver Europe wide reforms that see it move away from a free-market, corporatist dream into a paragon of social democracy.
This serious attempt to fact-check every claim on both sides is a good effort:
Am I misreading that? have I missed some pages or something? he appears to have fact checked a grand total of six things, one of which he doesn't actually check anything, and another he says the result is inconclusive.
WHat is arrogant about that ?
that is going to tip a lot of people who are on the fence over to leave.
A guy on LBC said he was just in a chamber of commerce meeting and quite a few business types flipped over to leave on the basis of that.
Both the remain party, inc Cameron and Corbyn, have been saying that it is better to remain and change the wrong things from within - but junckers has just pronounced that this will definitely not happen, so trashing that argument which a lot of people were hoping would be true.
For instance, how is Corbyn going to renationalise the railways if he gets in ? Answer is that he won't be able to.
I am pretty sure the final "out is out" comment by Junkers quantifies the fact that he is stating there will be no negotiation in the event of a [b]Leave[/b] vote.
Vile insensitive ****s!!!
As I've said before: nice company you're keeping Jammers
If ever you needed another reason to not vote for Brext......that's it! Phenomenally poor taste IMHO..
I am pretty sure the final "out is out" comment by Junkers quantifies the fact that he is stating there will be no negotiation in the event of a Leave vote
he said no better deals to persuade us to stay in, but he also said "We have concluded a deal with the prime minister, he got the maximum he could receive, we gave the maximum we could give"
we means no negotiations if we stay in either.
It means that we will be part of a team equally as able to play our part as everyone else.
