Or because it is speculation. While you keep ignoring what actually happens.Originally Posted by Loki
Though I suppose at the end of the boy who cried Wolf a Wolf does appear.
Or because it is speculation. While you keep ignoring what actually happens.
Though I suppose at the end of the boy who cried Wolf a Wolf does appear.
This is kind of a retarded objection unless you want us to believe that your beliefs about the possible impact of Brexit didn't matter at all to your decision-making process and that you live entirely in the moment.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
http://gizmodo.com/german-lawmakers-...ium=socialflow
The UK might be able to keep its car manufacturers after all.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Gosh, you mean people are coming to get the same 16% cheaper? Next thing we know you're gonna tell us the pound in your pocket is still worth the same.
But tell me Randblade; how many of the extra Gucci bags those Chinese tourist bought were produced in the UK? And how many tourists is a 25% rise in Chinese tourism to your capital? Are we looking at a number significantly over 20.000?
Congratulations America
No it have my beliefs and Loki has his. The difference is that Loki is delusionally pretending that someone's speculation is in fact reality.
Here are some real experts discussing why the devaluation is a good thing for the UK and a bad thing for Europe. Oh and that a fair exchange rate is probably $1.10 but an overshoot to parity may be possible and no bad thing. Hard to disagree.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...align-grip-of/
Yeah yeah, we're gonna hoover up things you don't produce at much lower prices. Also we'll be vacationing in the UK like there is no tomorrow, as it will be our closest destination for a cheap weekend away from home. I hope you'll enjoy all the Czech stag parties. The lower pound is good for you like the lower turkish pound is good for Turks; in the end they are just providing the same to foreigners at a much lower price without getting much richer themselves. I also guess the people who assemble iPhones in China are shaking in their boots now that you have become so much cheaper.
In the real world meanwhile, the pound edges up as the UK government re-tweaks its chaotic brexit plan to mean that maybe the UK won't actually break away all that much from the EU.
Congratulations America
"real experts"? Are the other experts "fake experts"?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Randblade lives in a parallel universe created by the Daily Mail and the like (he claims not to read it, yet gobbles down its recieved truths). In that universe Brexit is just brilliant, and nothing bad will ever come from it for Britain."real experts"? Are the other experts "fake experts"?
That whole thing about it all being a tad chaotic and outright damaging; that's just talk for defaitists in the UK and Brit-hating Europeans who are jealous jealous jealous of not being allowed upon England's pleasant pastures any longer. Don't believe it, a collapse in Sterling is good, fucking up production lines never hurt the economy and the euro is going to collapse any day now.
Congratulations America
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-37627308
The sheer stupidity of these arguments mirrors that of the Greeks during the bailout negotiations. They're probably going to end up with the same result.
And yes Rand, a real expert is one that supports you.
Hope is the denial of reality
Oops, May seems to have been a naughty girl; the pound is getting a beating again. Of course saying 'as close as possible' is not much of a result if your audience wants to hear 'inside'.
And just to show I'm not just being mean to the Bumbling Brexiteers: there is an upside to screwing your financial sector; it may result in cutting it down to a size that doesn't endanger the stability of your entire economy every time there's a bank with a problem. That should be somewhat reassuring given the fact that the UK is a smallish economic power.
Congratulations America
No they're just not necessarily experts on the Bank's policies and objectives. See for example the put down by former Governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King. It's pretty funny when someone warns that what you're trying to achieve will be the unfortunate consequence of doing what you want"real experts"? Are the other experts "fake experts"?Lord King, the former Governor of the Bank of England, echoed the comments on sterling, saying the sell-off was largely welcome.
"During the referendum campaign, someone said the real danger of Brexit is you'll end up with higher interest rates, lower house prices and a lower exchange rate, and I thought: dream on.
Because that's what we've been trying to achieve for the past three years and now we have a chance of getting it."Sure bad things can happen. Just what you're claiming is either nonsense or simply not bad.
It is good, you've not shown a single negative yet. If production lines get fucked up that will be bad, that's not happened yet either. The Euro isn't going to collapse it already has failed for the last eight years in a row.That whole thing about it all being a tad chaotic and outright damaging; that's just talk for defaitists in the UK and Brit-hating Europeans who are jealous jealous jealous of not being allowed upon England's pleasant pastures any longer. Don't believe it, a collapse in Sterling is good, fucking up production lines never hurt the economy and the euro is going to collapse any day now.
How is that news? The UK possibly paying has been a possible outcome all along, it is an EEA-style solution which has always been possible. The possibility in that article is that we'll pay half of what we would have paid if we'd Remained which would be good news.
One possible win/win solution we chould have is that we pay for development funds for Eastern Europe (as discussed as a compromise so Eastern Europe drops demands for free movement) and then count those development funds against our 0.7% international aid budget.
Are you seriously so ignorant as to not realise that this is desired and not a problem? Lord King even said it was desired in my link, not sure what you're struggling to comprehend here.
This irrelevant provided they are referred to in their capacity as experts in their specific relevant areas of expertise. The BoE's policies represent just one small aspect of Brexit.
This is not particularly funny because, while the outcome may seem to be similar, there's no guarantee that the path you take to that outcome will be the one you'd have chosen otherwise, or the journey as safe as you may have wanted wrt speed of change etc. It really is a pretty stupid put-down but obviously Mr. King would be well sheltered from the negative impact of any socioeconomic turbulence.See for example the put down by former Governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King. It's pretty funny when someone warns that what you're trying to achieve will be the unfortunate consequence of doing what you want
But this is just plain ridiculous. It hasn't happened yet because you've only recently voted to leave, haven't actually triggered the withdrawal process and the future is still very uncertain. What's more interesting is to try to determine what is likely to happen to the logistics of eg. major multinational companies, under various scenarios. If you're drunk and driving 50km over the speed-limit on a difficult road in bad weather with a lot of people around then it's not particularly interesting to observe 30 seconds after beginning your journey that, "If I have an accident and kill people that would be bad, but that hasn't happened yet."If production lines get fucked up that will be bad, that's not happened yet either.
What makes you think that freedom of movement is something only Eastern Europe demands when it is one of the most important policies of the EU since before they joined?One possible win/win solution we chould have is that we pay for development funds for Eastern Europe (as discussed as a compromise so Eastern Europe drops demands for free movement) and then count those development funds against our 0.7% international aid budget.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
This has to be the worst case of cognitive dissonance I have ever come across.
Hope is the denial of reality
Indeed, unless they start claiming things outside their expertise like matter-of-factly claiming an objective is a negative.
Though the path has been chosen and the journey may be risky but we have departed on that journey and complaining about the destination now is a bit moot.This is not particularly funny because, while the outcome may seem to be similar, there's no guarantee that the path you take to that outcome will be the one you'd have chosen otherwise, or the journey as safe as you may have wanted wrt speed of change etc. It really is a pretty stupid put-down but obviously Mr. King would be well sheltered from the negative impact of any socioeconomic turbulence.
Agreed but I don't think we are driving drunk, we made a sober decision to get on the road.But this is just plain ridiculous. It hasn't happened yet because you've only recently voted to leave, haven't actually triggered the withdrawal process and the future is still very uncertain. What's more interesting is to try to determine what is likely to happen to the logistics of eg. major multinational companies, under various scenarios. If you're drunk and driving 50km over the speed-limit on a difficult road in bad weather with a lot of people around then it's not particularly interesting to observe 30 seconds after beginning your journey that, "If I have an accident and kill people that would be bad, but that hasn't happened yet."
Because it is Eastern European migration that is most common and most unpopular while free movement is becoming unpopular in western Europe already. If Eastern Europe accepts restricted movement I doubt western politicians will die in a ditch to deny a trade deal because of a free movement requirement.What makes you think that freedom of movement is something only Eastern Europe demands when it is one of the most important policies of the EU since before they joined?
There is zero reason to link free trade with free movement. People are not widgets. Free movement in the EU is a political objective and we are leaving the political agreement.
The first step was admitting you had a problem, now you might be able to start realising that your so-called "experts" actually exist on both sides of the debate and open your mind.
Can you be more specific?
Look, even if you might want to go down to the river you might not want to get there by being pushed off of a cliff onto a waterfall.Though the path has been chosen and the journey may be risky but we have departed on that journey and complaining about the destination now is a bit moot.
The current discussion is about whether or not the journey is going to go well from this point onwards. In other words, regardless of whether or not you were sober when you got into the car, your safety may be compromised now or in the future, for example due to things that are beyond your control.Agreed but I don't think we are driving drunk, we made a sober decision to get on the road.
Freedom of movement is valued highly also by Western European citizens and esp. by businesses, not to mention the EU itself. Moreover, if the UK restricts movement, it means more Eastern Europeans may turn to other countries, perhaps to everyone's detriment or at least their frustration.Because it is Eastern European migration that is most common and most unpopular while free movement is becoming unpopular in western Europe already. If Eastern Europe accepts restricted movement I doubt western politicians will die in a ditch to deny a trade deal because of a free movement requirement.
[/QUOTE]There is zero reason to link free trade with free movement. People are not widgets. Free movement in the EU is a political objective and we are leaving the political agreement.
It is both an economical, political and social objective. There are also no purely economical reasons to link free trade with eg. human rights, labor protection laws, environmental laws etc.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
How about those bemoaning a fall in the sterling, a fall in house prices etc? Bring it on.
OTOH if you want to go down river and you've already gone over the edge and landed back in the stream underneath without crashing then bemoaning that you are heading down river seems odd.Look, even if you might want to go down to the river you might not want to get there by being pushed off of a cliff onto a waterfall.
Absolutely there may be issues in the future out of our control, but that doesn't make trying to manage what is in our control to our advantage is not unreasonable.The current discussion is about whether or not the journey is going to go well from this point onwards. In other words, regardless of whether or not you were sober when you got into the car, your safety may be compromised now or in the future, for example due to things that are beyond your control.
It may be highly valued but if its not on the table then there's no reason to cut off your nose and deny free trade just because free movement isn't available. The EU has recognised that people aren't the same as widgets when it has organised trade deals that aren't linked to free movement. Turkey is in the EU's customs union (which we won't be) and doesn't have free movement. Funny how that works.Freedom of movement is valued highly also by Western European citizens and esp. by businesses, not to mention the EU itself. Moreover, if the UK restricts movement, it means more Eastern Europeans may turn to other countries, perhaps to everyone's detriment or at least their frustration.
It is both an economical, political and social objective. There are also no purely economical reasons to link free trade with eg. human rights, labor protection laws, environmental laws etc.
It seems that Randblade is falling for that UKIP trope that freedom of movement is the same as the refugee crisis.
Let me explain you something Randblade; most people in the EU are quite capable to differentiate between EU citizens who come work and live in their country and refugees from other countries. Also we are not prone to mix up our Polish plumbers with ISIS terrorists. So, no, freedom of movement is not particularly controversial in the rest of the EU. I think you better get used to the fact that without freedom of movement you're going to get limited access at the best. If necessary I'm sure you'll still buy some (admittedly less) BMW's under WTO rules.
After 15 years it's time you get into your head that the EU is not just a free trade zone, it was never intended as one and it never will be one. The internal market is just one of the things that make it attractive.
Congratulations America
I couldn't care less if we continue with freedom of movement, but we won't.
I have it in my head that the EU is not just a free trade zone, that's why I voted Leave. I want a free trade zone, I don't want a single nation. We can create a free trade zone that doesn't yet exist between the EU and the UK and let those nations that wish to dissolve into a single united nation get on with that without any naysaying from those who just want trade like us. That way we all get what we want.
You are not in any position to have ideas about what we are going to do with our union.
Not exactly a geopolitical impact, but I thought it was a bit of a howler that Tesco is pulling a bunch of Unilever products because they appearantly don't know how to pass on the higher prices that rose due to the chaos that Brexit already is causing
Congratulations America
Tesco is pulling a bunch of products because Unilever are trying to pull a fast one and trying to do some dodgy price gouges blaming it on Brexit and Tesco (led by a former director of Unilever who knows that business quite well) didn't fall for it so entered a confrontation.
Good for Tesco's. The idea that a fall in sterling means Unilever needs to put the price of Marmite up 10% when 100% of the world's Marmite production occurs in the UK is absurd. Nice try Unilever now fuck off, thankfully I hate Marmite anyway. Got enough Colman's English Mustard to get me through this confrontation.
Things are coming apart but all is well because Randy has his mustard and could not afford a vacation in Europe to start with.
Congratulations America
Would you care to make any predictions about fuel prices Mr Blade?
There's a man goin' 'round, takin' names
And he decides who to free and who to blame
Who needs fuel anyway. Before the EU you were doing just fine with coal. For the wuzzes who insist on using it (basically unpatriotic remoaners) I suspect a 5p/l rise before the week is out.
Congratulations America
According to the Belfast Telegraph the bill just for the pulling out process is going to be 18bn pounds. I presume that's on current exchange rates.
Congratulations America
Damn those markets, not doing what Rand wants them to do.
Hope is the denial of reality
I think a 5p a litre change is both likely and affordable.
It is doing what I want. Company A tries to pull a fast one, Company B says no I don't think so, consumers adjust.
That would be the Randblade explanation for it; simple and wrong. Like always.
The reality is that company A is a multi-national producing and selling its products in 190 countries, wanting to make a profit on those products. Company B is a retailer also hoping to make a profit while trying to stay in business as the likes of Lidl are eating away its market share and its profit margins are razor thin. Company A doesn't just sell one product at a time to company B but a package of products which are priced in a way so that the products in the package - on average - are profitable. This means some products are internally evening out the less profitable other products which company A still wants to have on offer because it makes the complete package more competitive. Now, with a drop of the local currency of almost 20% against the currency in which the majority of raw materials are priced in an overall rise of the package with 10% is outright moderate for company A. They are no doubt absorbing some of the rise in costs on the expense of their profit margins.
Company B can't afford that 10% though because it has no buffer to absorb it with and would have to pass on the rise in prices on to the consumers. Which would probably mean those consumers won't buy the products through them any longer. It's a no-win situation for company B. Whether they have the products on their shelves at higher prices or not at all; they won't be able to move them at a profit.
Nobody is trying to pull a fast one or calling anyone's bluff. It is just an example of industry adjusting to a new reality; which is that the UK does become poorer from a collapsing currency.
This would be Randy's cue to state that he doesn't need coffee, chocolate or foreign fruits and that Brexit is just Brilliant.
Last edited by Hazir; 10-13-2016 at 10:32 AM.
Congratulations America
Very much this.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote