I don't get the impression on reading the comments that many of the folk left, that they are either Scots or live in Scotland.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-condemns-pathetic-corbyn-over-brexit-1-4362437
this came up on my facebook feed 🙂
[img] 
?oh=a5217b4e3af63bfe592ec9d9a2af5cc8&oe=594839E1[/img]
Switzerland isn't in the EU!
it not out of it either though is it
Yeah and when they had a rancid referendum with a stupid result, the politicians worked out how to deal with it in a sensible manner rather than going batshit crazy and driving the country off a cliff.
if anyone here is interested [url= http://bit.ly/2iI9xco ]more details[/url] I do like the
I may apply but not really in my "comfort zone".Office working language is English
and
We comply with all statutory requirements such as pension and accidental health cover.
may be useful if you were to take advantage of the hills in the background 😉
@Klunk Switzerland imo is a wonderful place to live. Be careful though of job offers which seem attractive until you see the cost of living there. For reference I have seen good graduate starting jobs at £100k equivalent
@ Edukator, the tax stat was for Greece ( from IMF report). The Germans quite rightly refused to take on responsibility for Greek debt without reforms. The Greeks should have accepted Germany's (tongue in cheek) offer of 500 tax inspectors. The "bailout" did not save the banks it saved the eurozone's very existence (for the time being), the IMF got involved as a failure of the euro was acknowledged to be bad for everyone globally (at that time). Blaming Swiss banks is daft, Greeks quite rightly wanted to get their money out, there is a long list of banks and countries they could perfectly legally transfer their money to. Greece has stemmed the capital outflows by capital controls one of who's side effects is to encourage cash transactions. Why put your money in a bank if it is trapped there and quite likely to be lost
As always IMO.
igm Scotland doesn't need anyone to look after, Scotland is very much part of our Democracy. Personally I think we'd be a lot better off if a certain Scot had not been in charge of the Economy from '97 and the entire country after Blair. However, I would not blame Scotland for him. Styrgeon and Salmond are a quite different story.
The whole Scotland voted Remain is a means to an end Independence wise. [b]SNP are well aware that the chances of Independence are zero once outside the EU and having to apply to rejoin.[/b]
Jambas, I fear that nos amis Edukator was getting a little confused earlier. Rather that looking at legal capital flight from bank accounts he should be looking at the correct data source for where the illegal stuff was happening - the Balance of Payments is the place to start.
On top of that more legal capital flight came to the UK than to Switzerland, but let's just put it down to a bad morning.
Jambas - be fair Gordi saved us from the Euro and single handedly rescued the world from the global financial crisis.
Actually only one of those claims is true, sorry.
THM - Got an interesting one to work out
If Tony Blair [b]hadn't[/b] agreed to a reduction in the UK rebate, then what would the UK net contribution be today?
Jamba - agreed. Brown was a little free and easy on banking regulation. But those were the times - I don't remember many asking for more regulation at the time.
No idea, you tell me.
I am sure they will be looking at the way they voted in the EU referendum and the result and coming to the exact same conclusion as you 😯Scotland doesn't need anyone to look after, Scotland is very much part of our Democracy
can you imagine your reaction if the UK was staying in the EU because the Germans said so ?
THM - to be honest, it seems to be remarkably complex to work out
far beyond me mate - might be a good one for your students 🙂
Might pass. ;-). More intrigued by the French default story
And the ridiculous juxtaposition of Tory MPs like Letwin "threatening" the HoL while Labour peers defend it - even Peter Hain last night. Amusingly awful!!
I'll be honest, I like one elected for x years house and one sit in perpetuity house. One body are very clearly beholden to their constituents and can be will be voted out if they act too far outside their interests, but the weakness is that they can be swayed too much by populism (that would never happen here of course). The other house can not be called to account by the electorate, but this frees them from the difficulties of making unpopular but correct decisions - they can follow their conscience.
The combination of the two is rather good, each making up for the other's failings.
How you choose the HoL is another question of course.
Rather like a bee * the HoL works well despite its obvious design faults
The quality of the debate and papers is often excellent
* appreciate there is some urban myth there about bees!
Vortexes around the wings as I recall.
I'll let you decide if that's bees or HoL
Actually I think your design flaws comment is interesting.
The US was designed - by constitution - and it was a good enough design that it has lasted pretty well.
Westminster was less design and more evolution. Evolution roots out flaws that are a real problem but leaves those that are, most of the time, merely interesting.
Carefully the thought police won't approve of flattery!
A lot of what the US do is a bad copy IMO - look at the inauguration versus a coronation.
Indeed.
And I prefer evolution too.
A Holyrood speech worth listening to 😉 Who is representing the 1m
Scots who voted to Leave the EU ? More people in the NE of Scotland voted to Leave the EU than voted for the SNP. The Indy White paper made it clear the UK may hold an in/out Referendum - with implication that voters should take that into account in their Yes/No choice
[I]Who's representing the 1m Scots who voted out?[/I]
WTF is representing the 16m Brits who voted in?
Well jamba, if you are going to be subdividing like that, my ward should be staying in the EU.
My house should certainly stay in. Hopefully the EU citizen/passport thing will go ahead anyway.
Someone should watch - BBC Two "After Brexit: The Battle for Europe" then smell the nice Italian coffee. The Italian debts are so very toxic ... 😆
So Italian debts being toxic is good chewkw? Fool.
igm - Member
So Italian debts being toxic is good chewkw? Fool.
Do you object to the Italian toxic debts as facts? 😆
Let me give you a suggestion by hammering the EU system until it breaks and in complete pieces then everyone can live happily ever after. 😛
yeah, great. Another major global financial crisis. That'll really make everyone's lives so much better.
Well we have hardly tackled de-leveraging yet, instead relying on stealing off savers to cover up the reality of the situation. Impotent monetary policy but at least we have a relatively loose fiscal policy in the UK. Good job they were only pretending about austerity.
Coming down from the QE high will be painful especially if inflation starts to accelerate. Hold on....
Coming down from the QE high will be painful especially if inflation starts to accelerate. Hold on...
Technical question for you... As QE is inflationary, will it have to come to a stop when inflation kicks in, to avoid hyper-inflation, even whilst keeping interest rates low to prevent a debt reckoning? ie: a period of inflation will force the BoE's hand into halting QE?
[quote=jambalaya ]A Holyrood speech worth listening to Who is representing the 1m
Scots who voted to Leave the EU ? More people in the NE of Scotland voted to Leave the EU than voted for the SNP.
Only one Scottish MP voted in favour of A50, against the wishes of the majority of his constituents. Do you want to take a guess at who it was?
Wow brooess, there is a lot there. Tbc in my comments I was thinking about the immediate impact of £ deval on inflation rather than stimulus provided by QE
In short (might come back on this tomorrow)
QE is an unorthodox and extreme type of policy. If the root problem goes away so does the need for QE
I don't think that there is danger of hyper inflation
Inflation is a double edged sword: it erodes the debt (good) but makes the cost of servicing debt higher (bad). Like most things it's a balance act.
I hope QE ends soon for the simple reason that it's the wrong solution to the wrong problem. A double negative.
Economic growth and inflation returning to target levels should bring and end to this stupidity. But there is a lot more behind this.
HTH
So THM - if the Tories start actively managing the economy with industrial policies, rather than letting the bankers fill their boots, will our economy grow more? It would perhaps end up better structured?
Very doubtful mol. Gov's have a very poor record in actively managing the economy. I would prefer them to keep out of the way as much as possible and let the rest of us get on with managing businesses/the economy.
Industrial policies in particular have a weak track record, but there is certainly scope for providing incentives to investment, training and possibly relocation. If they focused on helping to improve productivity they would get my vote!
At the moment, the one thing that the Tories are doing correctly goes against all the rhetoric and the perception of them. They are running one of the loosest fiscal policies in the developed world, hence my rejection of the idea of austerity. They continue to spend more than they earn at a rate that is greater than peer economies. At a time when households and corporates are deleveraging, THAT is the correct thing to do. They should stop this when, and only when, the private sector stops deleveraging. This is one reasons by the UK economy is performing relatively strongl, but goes against the common austerity narrative. Odd that!!
FWIW, and it's a technicality, QE does not involve "giving"money to the banks or letting them fill their boots.
Finally, the low tax Tories will ensure the HIGHEST tax burden on the UK economy since the mid 80s.That is another thing that needs to be addressed. Bloody Tories...... 😉
Little englanders like you?Who is representing the 1m
Scots who voted to Leave the EU ?
[i]Let me give you a suggestion by hammering the EU system until it breaks and in complete pieces then everyone can live happily ever after. [/I]
Which is the equivalent of living in a middle terrace and hoping that both you neighbours' houses get destroyed by a gas explosion...
[i]They are running one of the loosest fiscal policies in the developed world, hence my rejection of the idea of austerity.[/I]
+1 and have since the word 'austerity' came onto GO's lips.
Industrial policies in particular have a weak track record, but there is certainly scope for providing incentives to investment, training and possibly relocation.
Well that's more or less what I am talking about. There's talk of promoting certain industrial sectors, investing in busiesses and startups and so on. Either by giving money directly, paying for infrastructure or via legislation etc. Surely this is a sensible idea?
Industrial policies in particular have a weak track record, but there is certainly scope for providing incentives to investment, training and possibly relocation.
Depends what you mean in the past they did not stop machinery as it was cheaper to let children die than stop production- probably good for productivity as well - not suggesting you support such things you do have a moral code - but the second point also shows that even you support intervention as you know the market is far from perfect
The debate is only about what the intervention should be unless we wish to return to serfdom/indentured labour/slavery as the market loves ever cheaper ways of reducing labour costs - everyone will interfere with the market EVERYONE - the only debate is to what extent from the light touch of THM to the stalinist fist of erm Stalin.
Not sure about giving money directly mol, and a national investment bank is off-agneda, but apart from that doing everything you can to facilitate business (legally and with respect to environment, workers righs etc)
Of course, coming back on topic, Brexshit does the opposite. Makes business more costly and more challenging. Only a fool would....
There's talk of promoting certain industrial sectors, investing in busiesses and startups and so on. Either by giving money directly, paying for infrastructure or via legislation etc. Surely this is a sensible idea?
it could be. unfortunately it tends to turn in to a wizard wheeze to just take that money off the government IME. a few years ago we move in to a new office. we got a quote for fibre broadband. government were offering a grant to help businesses install fibre broadband - £3k. we applied for it and got it. the quote for the install went up £3k. 😐
If the government were to go the investment route the obvious is transport and communications, those things that form basic infrastructure. Problem is that the UK government flogged most of it off, and most to foreign companies. Obviously private companies will try and make as much money as they can, and seems to be the way demand assurances that any loses are covered by the government.
So rather than recycling the money it just gets off shored, and any risk is on the public sector rather than the private.
Throw into the mix WTO rules on subsidies and it gets very messy for many in the UK over the next few years. How much of the farming sector will be left in 10 years?