# Brexit



## mrPPincer

Looks like they're going for it.
https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/


----------



## dogcom

It would be a good idea to get out of the EU while they still can. However through some kind of rigging I bet they will stay in by some slim margin.


----------



## sags

_Don't look so sad, I know it's over
But life goes on and this old world will keep on turning
Let's just be glad, we had some time to spend together
There's no need to watch the bridges that we're burning

Lay your head, upon my pillow
Hold your warm and tender body close to mine
Hear the whisper of the raindrops blowing soft against the window
And make believe you love me, one more time, for the good times

I'll get along, you'll find another, and I'll be here
If you should find, you ever need me
Don't say a word about tomorrow, or forever
There'll be time enough for sadness, when you leave me

Lay your head, upon my pillow
Hold your warm and tender body close to mine
Hear the whisper of the raindrops blowing soft against the window
And make believe you love me, one more time, for the good times

_


----------



## mrPPincer

Looks like the polls now say the 'in' camp is looking stronger.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-polls-idUSKCN0Z40SC

Personally for the sake of my portfolio I'm cheering for the 'in' team


----------



## olivaw

Personally, I believe that a slim victory for the remain camp is probably the best possible outcome for Britain. They'll be just like Quebec. Narrowly vote to remain and then negotiate concessions. :smilet-digitalpoint


----------



## olivaw




----------



## indexxx

sags said:


> _Don't look so sad, I know it's over
> But life goes on and this old world will keep on turning
> Let's just be glad, we had some time to spend together
> There's no need to watch the bridges that we're burning
> 
> Lay your head, upon my pillow
> Hold your warm and tender body close to mine
> Hear the whisper of the raindrops blowing soft against the window
> And make believe you love me, one more time, for the good times
> 
> I'll get along, you'll find another, and I'll be here
> If you should find, you ever need me
> Don't say a word about tomorrow, or forever
> There'll be time enough for sadness, when you leave me
> 
> Lay your head, upon my pillow
> Hold your warm and tender body close to mine
> Hear the whisper of the raindrops blowing soft against the window
> And make believe you love me, one more time, for the good times
> 
> _


Written by the incredible Kris Kristofferson...


----------



## GizelleGizelle

So tomorrow is the referendum date, we'll see ;-)


----------



## olivaw

*LIVE: Germans offer the ultimate bribe to Britain in asking it to remain in EU*



> "Dear Brits, if you stay in the EU, we'll even acknowledge the Wembley goal," Bild wrote on its front page Thursday, in a nod to Sir Geoff Hurst's extra-time goal at London's Wembley stadium that gave England its first — and only — World Cup trophy.


Two more hours until the polls close. British newspapers are reporting that we'll have to wait many hours for the count.


----------



## gibor365

Bookmakers odds: chance of Brexit plunges to all-time low of 15 per cent


----------



## gibor365

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/chance-brexit-plunges-time-low-17-per-cent


----------



## new dog

It looks like the they will remain by a slim margin just as mentioned above, funny how that always happens. Poor British will now be under the EU regulatory control.


----------



## gibor365

If Brits decide to stay -> they think that it's better


----------



## ian

UK pollsters do not have a very good track record.

The undecided vote, last time I read, was reported to be 5 percent. That, plus the murder of the Yes MP and the terrible weather in the UK today could mean that it is anyones guess as to what the outcome will be.

Guessing should be over by 10 pm EST unless of course it is so tight that recounts are required.


----------



## AltaRed

Blog updates happening at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-when-date-vote-odds-uk-britain-a7094741.html

Scroll down below Red font links to see latest sound bites.


----------



## olivaw

Looks like CBC is also live blogging: http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/breaking/brexit-vote/ but you don't get the juicy political name calling and extras provided by the Independent live blog above.


----------



## mrPPincer

51.6% leave ve 48.4% stay now with 58.6% of the votes in currently.

Live coverage and reporting here on youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-nwKX6LrC4&ab_channel=Liberty

doesn't look good for my portfolio :/


----------



## mordko

Looking like leave... The English voted to leave by a wide margin. London and the Scots want to remain. Major trouble in the currency markets, oil and stocks are dropping like crazy. Not obvious why, it's not at all clear how Brexit will impact economies.


----------



## mrPPincer

It's a done deal, they're out. Just announced.


----------



## sags

Is Mark Carney still at the BOE ?

If so, he will have a late night scrambling to provide liquidity to UK banks.

People are fed up and the world is going to undergo a lot of social upheaval while voters take back control.


----------



## new dog

I am surprised but this could be the excuse they need to unwind the manipulation and let the markets find their real value. At some point they will need to bring it all down and I would have thought it would wait until after the election in the US but maybe they will do it now.


----------



## olivaw

David Cameron is in for a tough day too.

And here comes another Scottish independence referendum.


----------



## atrp2biz

Closed short VIX this morning. Short again @25.00. What's the opposite of a falling knife? I'm sure I'm a little early for this but...


----------



## ian

Telegram Poll post ballot results show 65 percent in favour of Cameron resigning. Boris? Grove?


----------



## new dog

From what I understand this vote is just an advisory vote so they don't have to leave and could revisit the vote later.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/green-eu-referendum-not-legally-binding-brexit-2016-6


----------



## capricorn

_"From what I understand this vote is just an advisory vote "_

with 72% participation, it would be very hard to ignore the vote.


----------



## leeder

Anyone looking to buy into this impending market correction?


----------



## atrp2biz

Closed my VIX short. Again, probably a little early, but I need to go to bed.  I'll take my $2000 and run.


----------



## kcowan

Half hour after markets opened Paris down 10%. Frankfurt down 8+%, London down 8-% Zurich down 6% and Cameron has resigned. Live from Luxembourg.


----------



## heyjude

The prospect of Boris Johnson as UK PM and Donald Trump as POTUS is truly frightening. Not to mention the bad hair.....


----------



## humble_pie

kcowan said:


> Half hour after markets opened Paris down 10%. Frankfurt down 8+%, London down 8-% Zurich down 6% and Cameron has resigned. Live from Luxembourg.




kcowan are you really in Luxembourg? that's so neat ... can u post frequent updates _sur place_?


----------



## GoldStone




----------



## Eder

I think the UK did the right thing...anyway,markets go up & down regardless of situations such as Brexit...our wall of worry is intact


----------



## doctrine

A great day to have off. Looks like I'll be buying all morning depending on what is on sale!


----------



## AltaRed

doctrine said:


> A great day to have off. Looks like I'll be buying all morning depending on what is on sale!


About the only thing on sale is something like VGK (Europe centric). Even then, it's no fire sale @ 8-10% off. Any exit from the EU will be a slow grind of 1-2 years. Suspect it means more of a 'go nowhere' market than anything else due to economic inefficiencies as trade barriers go up on both sides, etc. The real kicker would be if Scotland et al tell England to stuff it in a second referendum and go it alone as a new member of the EU.


----------



## mordko

Nobody knows what "Brexit" actually means. The only sensible action now is for Britain and the EU to declare that UK stays in the common market. Otherwise both sides lose out. Let's hope that common sense prevails. And chances are that several of the other EU countries will follow suite.


----------



## sags

Alan Greenspan calls Brexit the tip of the iceberg. He says it is the widespread global problem of incomes failing to rise that has created Brexit and will continue to lead to many other global political and economic problems.

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000528906

_The problem that is causing the British problem is far more wide spread. Fundamentally, what we are looking at is a massive slowing in the rate of real incomes across the whole European spectrum. It is caused essentially by output per hour in virtually every country slowing to a halt. It is not the case only in the United States, where it is obviously an extreme, but pretty much around the OECD. Now the result of this is that real incomes are not going anywhere and that is creating a serious political problem which is not easy to resolve._


----------



## doctrine

AltaRed said:


> About the only thing on sale is something like VGK (Europe centric). Even then, it's no fire sale @ 8-10% off. Any exit from the EU will be a slow grind of 1-2 years. Suspect it means more of a 'go nowhere' market than anything else due to economic inefficiencies as trade barriers go up on both sides, etc. The real kicker would be if Scotland et al tell England to stuff it in a second referendum and go it alone as a new member of the EU.


Actually, you're right. I rebalanced about two weeks ago and I'm still well above even that level. Think I'll go watch some movies instead and check back in a few weeks


----------



## sags

This is going to reinforce the "sell in May" theory.


----------



## sags

Some of the European banks were down 30% at one point, so some people were desperate to sell.


----------



## SMK

Those that sold in haste will probably come to regret it.


----------



## kcowan

sags said:


> Some of the European banks were down 30% at one point, so some people were desperate to sell.


On the train from Cologne to Koblenz yesterday, we shared a compartment with a young German lady. She was going home to Frankfurt. She said that a leave vote will cause the banking centre to shift from London to Frankfurt.


----------



## GoldStone

UK stocks close the week +2.356%, their best weekly performance in 4 months.


----------



## ian

It is unclear to me why the media are saying that this vote 'stuns' the world. 

The polls have shown for the past month or so that the vote was split and could go either way. Not much of a surprise really.


----------



## humble_pie

kcowan said:


> On the train from Cologne to Koblenz yesterday, we shared a compartment with a young German lady. She was going home to Frankfurt. She said that a leave vote will cause the banking centre to shift from London to Frankfurt.



only in her dreams each:


----------



## bass player

ian said:


> It is unclear to me why the media are saying that this vote 'stuns' the world.
> 
> The polls have shown for the past month or so that the vote was split and could go either way. Not much of a surprise really.


It was too close to call all along, so no one should be surprised at the outcome. It only "stunned" the left leaning media whose political ideology took a hit.


----------



## humble_pie

from where i sit at the bottom of the scullery, it seems that britain may not necessarily leave the EU.

a trick event is the next leadership of the conservative party. I am led to believe that, in the UK, a party in power can replace its Prime Minister leader simply by electing another person as party leader. Pundits are saying that, by resigning, that is exactly what david cameron hopes to bring about.

if this works, will not the next conservative leader have untold power to actually leave or not leave the EU? are there british constitutional precedents to the mechanics of such an action? i don't believe any precedents exist ...

would not the next conservative party prime minister be able to slow, delay or even stop the Brexit process, whatever this process might be?

if so, then a lot will depend upon the upcoming Conservative Party leader elections, over there on the auld sod.

in the meantime, a few months of sobering economic hardship would likely knock some sense into a few heads.

the real issue in the brexit vote was immigration/refugee intake, imho. Not a member of the EU that does not suffer with this issue. Possibly the entire Union needs to rethink this issue.

it's fascinating to see how the upset british vote - which profoundly reflected the wishes of ordinary british citizens - is being hailed even in cmf forum as a breath of fresh air.


----------



## mrPPincer

kcowan said:


> On the train from Cologne to Koblenz yesterday, we shared a compartment with a young German lady. She was going home to Frankfurt. She said that a leave vote will cause the banking centre to shift from London to Frankfurt.


I was thinking on my hike this morning about this, if Scotland leaves the UK before the UK and the EU get a deal sorted out (and that seems likely to me), then why wouldn't Scotland become the new hub; everybody could move HQs a bit north and be a part of the EU, but still have close ties to London.

Just speculating ofc, but I think it would be poetic justice 

I can just see all those bespectacled brits sipping tea with their morning crumpets and counting all the dollars I lost overnight.

What's next, EU breaks apart? Trump?
This wave of protectionism is starting to get me down a bit :uncomfortableness:


----------



## mrPPincer

bass player said:


> It was too close to call all along, so no one should be surprised at the outcome. It only "stunned" the left leaning media whose political ideology took a hit.


It was too close to call, but it was looking like the remain camp was gaining traction; from the poll of polls, and from the bookmakers, and the markets were starting to bet on a remain.

I bought some PUK and it was up over 15% in 10 days yesterday.
I could have sold at a nice quick profit yesterday but I thought 'remain' had it.

I took a gamble and lost; it's below purchase price again now, still, p/e is ok, and I'm not selling.
What is it they say? 'you don't lose if you don't sell', true, but not always true.

My other UK ADRs, BT down 20%, BBL & RIO both down 8% at the moment, (from yesterday's close that is).


----------



## gibor365

ian said:


> It is unclear to me why the media are saying that this vote 'stuns' the world.
> 
> The polls have shown for the past month or so that the vote was split and could go either way. Not much of a surprise really.


because just before the vote "Bookmakers odds: chance of Brexit plunges to all-time low of 15 per cent"... it's like in football if Liechtenstein beats Germany


----------



## humble_pie

what's next? president trump sends F-35s to invade merrie englande even though the stealth fighters have to be refuelled at least every 4 hours (& the refuellers aren't stealth aircraft so there goes the stealth aspect in canada's vast north country.)

the kate/wills machine takes over as king & queen of north america & the next royal baby will be an african-brit.


----------



## mordko

Boris is the most likely incoming PM and Britain is definitely leaving. Nobody will dare to defy voters. 

The real question is: who is next? Is it going to be Denmark? France? Holland? Also, will Scotland leave UK? (good riddance). 

From an investor point of view:

- Will Germany try to kick Britain out of the Common Market just out of spite or will common sense prevail? 
- European banks are trading like they are having major, major trouble. This has been going on for a while. Will Brexit damage credit? And if so, can Central Banks come to the rescue (again)?


----------



## SMK

capricorn said:


> _"From what I understand this vote is just an advisory vote "_
> 
> with 72% participation, it would be very hard to ignore the vote.


The results were close though, so what about the 48%?

This was all rather strange how it came to end. Last week markets tumbled several days ahead of the vote (why?), then just before the vote, everything was in green.


----------



## mrPPincer

mordko said:


> Will Germany try to kick Britain out of the Common Market just out of spite or will common sense prevail?


I don't think it will be just out of spite if they do, but IMHO there has to be penalties as a deterrent if they don't want the rest to follow like rats from a sinking ship, so maybe out of self-preservation for the EU they will have to say "out is out".


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> Boris is the most likely incoming PM and Britain is definitely leaving. Nobody will dare to defy voters.
> 
> The real question is: who is next? Is it going to be Denmark? France? Holland? Also, will Scotland leave UK? (good riddance).
> 
> From an investor point of view:
> 
> - Will Germany try to kick Britain out of the Common Market just out of spite or will common sense prevail?
> - European banks are trading like they are having major, major trouble. This has been going on for a while. Will Brexit damage credit? And if so, can Central Banks come to the rescue (again)?




Yeah, Boris Johnson is the most likely successor to David Cameron. He'll be tasked with negotiating Brexit. He may also be tasked with negotiating the dissolution of the United Kingdom. He's not up to it. 

You can't blame Germany for playing tough. Their objective is to protect Europe, not to make life easy for England.


----------



## mordko

Killing free trade between Britain and the EU will hurt both sides (and the rest of us if European banks go belly up). Britain imports quite a bit more from the EU than it exports to the EU. Some European countries would see their GDPs cut by high percentages Doubt it would somehow help to preserve the EU-project. Most likely outcome - nothing will happen to the free trade part of the deal because eurocrats won't be able to make a decision.

Canada has been negotiating free trade agreement with the EU for ~10 years now. Perhaps we can quickly reach a separate deal with Britain.


----------



## olivaw

If you think that Europe will allow England* to remain part of the free trade deal, then you are engaged in a spot of wishful thinking.

* Not sure if the UK will exist in a few years.


----------



## capricorn

olivaw said:


> * Not sure if the UK will exist in a few years.


I am thinking the same for Europe.
I am sure there are others in the queue preparing their exit referendum.


----------



## mordko

UK might not exist for very much longer. EU's existence is even more questionable. The fall of EUSSR needn't be painful. Putting up trade barriers is a separate issue - why hurt oneself needlessly?


----------



## ian

UK might not exist for very much longer?? Really???

Rule Brittania!


----------



## gibor365

ian said:


> UK might not exist for very much longer?? Really???
> 
> Rule Brittania!


meaning , they won't exist in current form  . For examle, Scotland may do another referendum , to separate and become part of EU


----------



## Eclectic12

mordko said:


> Nobody knows what "Brexit" actually means. The only sensible action now is for Britain and the EU to declare that UK stays in the common market.


Once the UK triggers article 50, there is two year period to negotiate whatever there is going to be. During the process, the UK remains a member of the EU, but if talks are not concluded after two years, and no extension is granted, Britain reverts to world trade organisation terms, requiring tariffs to be imposed.

As for current action ... the call from the EU leaders is for the UK to trigger article 50 as soon as possible to avoid a long, drawn out uncertainty.




mordko said:


> ... And chances are that several of the other EU countries will follow suite.


Which would give the EU what incentive to negotiate a deal that the UK would like?

Then too, with Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon saying that a second independence vote is now "on the table" following the vote ... likely turmoil is staying for the a while.


Cheers


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> Boris is the most likely incoming PM and Britain is definitely leaving. Nobody will dare to defy voters.
> 
> The real question is: who is next? Is it going to be Denmark? France? Holland? Also, will Scotland leave UK? (good riddance).
> 
> From an investor point of view:
> 
> - Will Germany try to kick Britain out of the Common Market just out of spite or will common sense prevail?
> - European banks are trading like they are having major, major trouble. This has been going on for a while. Will Brexit damage credit? And if so, can Central Banks come to the rescue (again)?


If public opinion swings back to remain over the next couple months, I can see another vote being held.


----------



## Eclectic12

humble_pie said:


> from where i sit at the bottom of the scullery, it seems that britain may not necessarily leave the EU ...
> would not the next conservative party prime minister be able to slow, delay or even stop the Brexit process, whatever this process might be?


Hmmm ... the speech would be "I hear what the voters said but I know better"?

Unless the uncertainly causes a shift in voter sentiment ... I don't see how there can be anything but triggering article 50.


Time will tell.


Cheers


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> UK might not exist for very much longer. EU's existence is even more questionable. The fall of EUSSR needn't be painful. Putting up trade barriers is a separate issue - why hurt oneself needlessly?


Most of what UK was complaining about in Brexit was consequences of EU free trade. Common regulations (aka, removing non-tariff barriers) and free movement of labour (removing barriers to trade in services).

So, necessarily, UK will be erecting trade barriers with the rest of Europe.


----------



## bass player

andrewf said:


> If public opinion swings back to remain over the next couple months, I can see another vote being held.


Sure, they'll just do what Quebec does...have a referendum every now and then until they get the answer they want. Then that's the only vote that counts... :stupid:


----------



## Eclectic12

mordko said:


> ... The real question is: who is next? Is it going to be Denmark? France? Holland? Also, will Scotland leave UK? (good riddance).


So far, Turkey is waffling on wanting to join and Scotland is saying another referendum is in the relatively near future.




mordko said:


> ... Will Germany try to kick Britain out of the Common Market just out of spite or will common sense prevail?


So what rationale would the EU keep the UK in the common market? Isn't this part of the reason for joining in the first place?




> The UK has to negotiate two agreements: a divorce treaty to wind down British contributions to the EU budget and settle the status of the 1.2 million Britons living in the EU and 3 million EU citizens in the UK; and an agreement to govern future trade and other ties with its European neighbours ...
> 
> There were early warnings of difficulties ahead. The German MEP Elmar Brok, who chairs the European parliament’s committee on foreign affairs, told the Guardian the parliament would call on Juncker to strip the British commissioner, Jonathan Hill, of the financial services brief with immediate effect and turn him into a “commissioner without portfolio”.
> 
> He said: “They will have to negotiate from the position of a third country, not as a member state. If Britain wants to have a similar status to Switzerland and Norway, then it will also have to pay into EU structural funds like those countries do ...
> 
> Jean-Claude Piris, a former head of the EU council legal service, said claims that Britain would get unfettered access to the single market, without free movement of people, were the equivalent of believing in Father Christmas. He said the British “cannot get as good a deal as they have now, it is impossible”.
> 
> Some Brussels insiders fear France and Germany may soften their approach after the vote. Others think countries, especially France, will push for a harsh settlement to hammer home the price of leaving.
> 
> One likely outcome of negotiations is that banks and financial firms in the City of London will be stripped of their lucrative EU “passports” that allow them to sell services to the rest of the EU ...


http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-crisis-britain-votes-leave-eu-european-union


It seems pretty clear that without substantial differences between being a member and not being one, there is no point to having a union.


Cheers


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> Most of what UK was complaining about in Brexit was consequences of EU free trade. Common regulations (aka, removing non-tariff barriers) and free movement of labour (removing barriers to trade in services).
> 
> So, necessarily, UK will be erecting trade barriers with the rest of Europe.


You can have free trade without free movement of labour (aka NAFTA). Also, under European Free trade Association, people are permitted to move (with a visa if long-term), but are not permitted to welfare shop. 

One of the key reasons I've heard was that people didn't want to be bossed by Brussels. Also the sheer idiocy and wastefulness of eurocratia got a few mentions (e.g. having EU parliament travel between 2 countries for their sittings at astronomical cost).


----------



## sags

I remember when the EU was being formed and heard the same debates back then about regional and country differences, governance and independence etc.

Many said it wouldn't work and it turns out they were right.

I would think that another vote wouldn't solve anything as the differences and problems were present before the formation, remained during the duration and still remain.......because there is no resolution that all the countries would agree to.

Refugee immigration is an EU problem, but individual countries put up fences and pushed refugees into other countries. It was perhaps the final straw, coming as it did after bailouts and a fuming Germany.

It is pretty hard to be one big happy family when you don't like each other very much.


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> You can have free trade without free movement of labour (aka NAFTA). Also, under European Free trade Association, people are permitted to move (with a visa if long-term), but are not permitted to welfare shop.
> 
> One of the key reasons I've heard was that people didn't want to be bossed by Brussels. Also the sheer idiocy and wastefulness of eurocratia got a few mentions (e.g. having EU parliament travel between 2 countries for their sittings at astronomical cost).


NAFTA doesn't have provisions for free trade in services. The UK benefits from the lack of barriers in services (especially in finance).


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> NAFTA doesn't have provisions for free trade in services. The UK benefits from the lack of barriers in services (especially in finance).


Very true. NAFTA is an example though. It depends what they negotiate. There has to be a compromise, assuming EU does not fall apart, but it will take time. Uncertainty is probably the worst outcome in all of this.


----------



## Eclectic12

mordko said:


> ... NAFTA is an example though.


It does not have free movement for all but the TN visas simplified the process for a lot of professionals versus having to apply for a green card. It took me all of thirty minutes at the airport then off to work in the US.




mordko said:


> ... It depends what they negotiate. There has to be a compromise, assuming EU does not fall apart, but it will take time.


Agreed ... though if the UK can negotiate to basically have the same rights as a member, there is less incentive for members beyond the weaker ones to stay.




mordko said:


> ... Uncertainty is probably the worst outcome in all of this.


Then there's the uncertainly of the claim plastered on buses that leaving the EU would mean being able to spend £350 million of European Union money on the NHS after Brexit. Despite corrections, a recent poll found almost half the public believed it. As of a successful vote, the figure has dropped to £10 million or £35 million with "it wasn't me who made that mistake".


Cheers


----------



## gibor365

I'm not sure if Brits really wanted to leave EU .....maybe they just wanted to scare EU?! As per polls, beginning of the week "exit" chances were higher, Brits became scared and just before referendum "stay" chances were higher.
imho, if they would do 2nd round, "stay" votes will win 
All this BS about "independence" from Brussels is nice, but who wants to lose in 1 day 10% of your real estate value as well as of income?!


----------



## mordko

Eclectic12 said:


> It does not have free movement for all but the TN visas simplified the process for a lot of professionals versus having to apply for a green card. It took me all of thirty minutes at the airport then off to work in the US.


Have a strong suspicion that this is something most Brits would support. The resentment tended to be against "welfare shoppers" from Romania and Muslim immigration with the resulting wonders of Tower Hamlets, Bradford and Dewsbury.


----------



## capricorn

gibor365 said:


> who wants to lose in 1 day 10% of your real estate value as well as of income?!


Did they really lose this value unless they convert to some other currency. The real estate value was (to my mind) not some liquid money available for import /export.

if a house was 100K GBP, it is still the same value in GBP.


----------



## sags

I don't think people consider much of the economics when considering their citizenship.

If they did, Canadians would have sold out to Americans decades ago when some members of Congress were floating the idea of "buying" Canada with a payment of $1,000,000 to each Canadian citizen.

They wanted access to all our fresh water, and drew up a map with no US/Canada boundaries on it.

It created quite a stir in Canada at the time.


----------



## gibor365

capricorn said:


> if a house was 100K GBP, it is still the same value in GBP.


In theory yes , but if somebody sells or rents house in GB, and buys/rents in other country - they will lose $... Brits like to travel abroad a lot, now it will be much more expensive, buying good from amazon.com also etc...


----------



## gibor365

> Americans decades ago when some members of Congress were floating the idea of "buying" Canada with a payment of $1,000,000 to each Canadian citizen.


 We'd take $5 mil and go to AUS or NZ


----------



## sags

In the typical Brit fashion of going to the neighborhood pub to discuss politics, reports are that the pubs are jam packed


----------



## GoldStone




----------



## mrPPincer

capricorn said:


> Did they really lose this value unless they convert to some other currency. The real estate value was (to my mind) not some liquid money available for import /export.
> 
> if a house was 100K GBP, it is still the same value in GBP.


Every brit is that much poorer now.

Anecdote.

My brother in law had the foresight to be, and would have been, out by now if he hadn't had one tenant that refused to leave, (a professional scammer as it turns out).

He is still there trying to wrap up his RE investments before coming back, his wife and son (my sister and nephew) are here and have been for months.

If it weren't for one scumbag tenant he'd be here too, and a damned sight better off than he is now.


----------



## gibor365

I just don't understand why only 50% was required in this referendum... why not "qualified majoritry" of 75%??
In reality, taking in consideration 75% turnaround, less than 40% voted to leave EU...
Queen should interfere


----------



## bass player

gibor365 said:


> I just don't understand why only 50% was required in this referendum... why not "qualified majoritry" of 75%??
> In reality, taking in consideration 75% turnaround, less than 40% voted to leave EU...
> Queen should interfere


And less than 35% voted to stay (48.1% of 72% voter turnout).

Everyone had the opportunity to vote. If more "no" people couldn't get off their *** to vote, then I guess it wasn't that important to them.


----------



## gibor365

bass player said:


> And less than 35% voted to stay (48.1% of 72% voter turnout).
> 
> Everyone had the opportunity to vote. If more "no" people couldn't get off their *** to vote, then I guess it wasn't that important to them.


True! But those who didn't vote should be counting as "status qua" - so they don't need change


----------



## bass player

gibor365 said:


> True! But those who didn't vote should be counting as "status qua" - so they don't need change


Let's apply your reasoning to the Canadian federal election...it would have been a sweeping Conservative majority if all non-votes had gone to the Conservatives (status quo), probably the largest majority in history.

Would you have been okay with that?


----------



## gibor365

Election and referendum are 2 different "animals"... so don't compare apples and oranges... You may compare Brexit if Canada decides to leave NATO or NAFTA... and yes, who is not voting -> meaning they want to status qua...

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/23/12021222/brexit-what-happens-next good article.... this referendum was initiated by ultra-right (many of those who was destroying France during current EURO 16), and normal brits will suffer a big time.... 


> Currently there are about 1.2 million Brits living in other EU countries, while about 3 million non-British EU nationals live in Britain.


 what gonna be with those people?! Majority of 1.2 mil of those Brits are retired ppl who lives in France, Spain, Portugal ... will be they kicked out?! And huge number of 3 mil non-British EU nationals live in Britain (those are not useless muslim extremists from Syria or Iraq) - are high qualified high tech workers... will be they kicked out?! Who gonna replace them?! Football hooligans?! Poor UK..........

P.S. If Trudeau is smart, he should increase quotes for accepting non-British EU nationals who lives in Britain


----------



## andrewf

sags said:


> I don't think people consider much of the economics when considering their citizenship.
> 
> If they did, Canadians would have sold out to Americans decades ago when some members of Congress were floating the idea of "buying" Canada with a payment of $1,000,000 to each Canadian citizen.
> 
> They wanted access to all our fresh water, and drew up a map with no US/Canada boundaries on it.
> 
> It created quite a stir in Canada at the time.


Are you recalling that correctly? It would cost the US 2x their current national debt ($17 trillion) to 'buy' Canada in this way. I don't think they could afford it.


----------



## olivaw

gibor365 said:


> _"Currently there are about 1.2 million Brits living in other EU countries, while about 3 million non-British EU nationals live in Britain."_
> 
> what gonna be with those people?! Majority of 1.2 mil of those Brits are retired ppl who lives in France, Spain, Portugal ... will be they kicked out?! And huge number of 3 mil non-British EU nationals live in Britain (those are not useless muslim extremists from Syria or Iraq) - are high qualified high tech workers... will be they kicked out?! Who gonna replace them?! Football hooligans?! Poor UK..........


The _Leave_ side didn't think about any of that. They have no idea how to negotiate with Europe and they have no concern for European workers who are contributing to Britain's economy.

I was born in UK. I think they made a huge mistake.


----------



## JC66

Mostly the old folks (who aren't working and/or gonna be dead in 15 years) voted to leave and the young people voted to stay. That sucks.


----------



## Eder

Wow so 52% of UK population is old folks & will be dead in 15 years? I want back all the school tax I paid over the years!


----------



## gibor365

> Wow so 52% of UK population is old folks


 sorry, but not 52%, but 52% out of 72% turnaround... meaning 37%.


...


> The Leave side didn't think about any of that. They have no idea how to negotiate with Europe and they have no concern for European workers who are contributing to Britain's economy.
> 
> I was born in UK. I think they made a huge mistake.


 My brother's family live in UK as non-British EU nationals.... he works in big international IT company (and majority of workers also non-British EU nationals) and his wife is a nurse... If non-British EU nationals will be force to leave UK, such IT companies simply goona close their UK operations and move probably to Ireland.

This stupid move doesn't give to average working Brit absolutely nothing (positive)... even comparing to EUR, GDP in 1 hour felt 7%


----------



## bass player

gibor365 said:


> sorry, but not 52%, but 52% out of 72% turnaround... meaning 37%.


As compared to the less than 35% that voted to stay...barely a third.


----------



## bass player

JC66 said:


> Mostly the old folks (who aren't working and/or gonna be dead in 15 years) voted to leave and the young people voted to stay. That sucks.


That makes sense because many young and naïve people grow up with dreams of a socialist utopia, partly due to a childhood of leftist indoctrination through school and university. Then they get older and wiser and have to live in the real world, and that's when reality sets in and many of them change their mind.

With age come wisdom...thank goodness those old people can still vote.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole

andrewf said:


> Are you recalling that correctly? It would cost the US 2x their current national debt ($17 trillion) to 'buy' Canada in this way. I don't think they could afford it.


Who pays cash for a real estate deal that size? You mortgage the property you are buying.

Here's how the US could buy Canada and get it for nothing

1) Pay the government $36 trillion for Canada

2) Borrow the $36 trillion back, giving in return government bonds backed by Canadian real estate paying 1% a year, the going rate these days.

3) Tax Canada enough to pay the interest each year

4) Keep rolling over the debt and inflating the currency for 100 years until the $36 trillion is worth practically nothing. Don't ever pay any of it back.

If you don't understand how this works ask Donald Trump, he has been doing deals like this for years.


----------



## humble_pie

.
excellent editorial from the globe & mail.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...-is-still-time-to-reverse-it/article30608142/

the Brexit vote is complete folly but there is still time to reverse it, say the globe's editors.

as cmf legal beagle Eclectic keeps pointing out, for any member state to leave, article 50 of the european constitution has to be invoked. Following such invocation, a two-year period of exit-europe negotiations must take place.

meanwhile, the globe reports that brits who voted Leave are already waking up & asking themselves regretfully whatever had possessed their madness.

as someone says upthread, another vote a mere 2 months from now - it would have to be differently worded - would produce an entirely different result. 

me i think the temporary madness in the emerald isle is healthy. A lot of aging racist Brits were finally able to get it off their chests at last. In full public view. As temporary embarassments, nigel & boris should be grateful for their fleeting moment in the sun.

here in canada, we'd already moved beyond the geriatric bigot stage when we booted out the PCs & welcomed in a new multicultural cabinet.


.


----------



## bass player

humble_pie said:


> .
> excellent editorial from the globe & mail.
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...-is-still-time-to-reverse-it/article30608142/
> 
> the Brexit vote is complete folly but there is still time to reverse it, say the globe's editors.
> 
> as cmf legal beagle Eclectic keeps pointing out, for any member state to leave, article 50 of the european constitution has to be invoked. Following such invocation, a two-year period of exit-europe negotiations must take place.
> 
> meanwhile, the globe reports that brits who voted Leave are already waking up & asking themselves regretfully whatever had possessed their madness.
> 
> as someone says upthread, another vote a mere 2 months from now - it would have to be differently worded - would produce an entirely different result.
> 
> me i think the temporary madness in the emerald isle is healthy. A lot of aging racist Brits were finally able to get it off their chests at last. In full public view. As temporary embarassments, nigel & boris should be grateful for their fleeting moment in the sun.
> 
> here in canada, we'd already moved beyond the geriatric bigot stage when we booted out the PCs & welcomed in a new multicultural cabinet.
> 
> 
> .


Yup....everyone who voted against socialism destroying their country is a bigoted racist.

The clueless left become whining crybabies that shout "racist" and stomp their feet with childish rage anytime someone disagrees with another one of their socialist ideals because they are incapable of any reasonable debate, and incapable of any viewpoint but their own.


----------



## mordko

Anyone who thinks all Brexit supporters are "racists" should give his head a shake. It may also help to watch the Spectator debate, which is available on Youtube. Out of 3 debaters on the "Brexit" side:

- A Labour socialist who was opposed to the undemocratic nature of the EU.
- A Tory MEP, who wants to get out for economic reasons so that the country has freedom to have free trade deals with countries like Canada. 
- A populist Independence party MEP, who wants to pull out for the reasons of sovereignty and to establish control over immigration policy.

The Brexit support was very diverse. 

The 3 debaters on the Bremain side were copycats of each other. Three wealthy well spoken but humour-deprived "blairite" type politicians from Islington with a strong appeal to school teachers.


----------



## mordko

Regarding economic Armageddon claims... Things are never as bad as they seem. 

Yes, the currency dropped and so did the markets. People tend to overreact, then think. 

While the vote is irreversible, the deal will take years to negotiate and the most likely outcome is the kind of deal that Norway/Switzerland/Iceland have. That wouldn't change a thing in terms of access to EU markets and freedom of movement for most people that could be impacted.


----------



## humble_pie

bass player said:


> The clueless left become whining crybabies that shout "racist" and stomp their feet with childish rage anytime someone disagrees with another one of their socialist ideals because they are incapable of any reasonable debate, and incapable of any viewpoint but their own.



lol describes yourself to a perfect *tee*
especially the childish rage part .each:


----------



## andrewf

In which case it is a pyrrhic victory for brexiteers. They will still have open borders with EU, still bound by EU regulations, still having to pay into the EU. What was gained?


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> Anyone who thinks all Brexit supporters are "racists" should give his head a shake. It may also help to watch the Spectator debate, which is available on Youtube. Out of 3 debaters on the "Brexit" side:
> 
> - A Labour socialist who was opposed to the undemocratic nature of the EU.
> - A Tory MEP, who wants to get out for economic reasons so that the country has freedom to have free trade deals with countries like Canada.
> - A populist Independence party MEP, who wants to pull out for the reasons of sovereignty and to establish control over immigration policy.
> 
> The Brexit support was very diverse.
> 
> The 3 debaters on the Bremain side were copycats of each other. Three wealthy well spoken but humour-deprived "blairite" type politicians from Islington with a strong appeal to school teachers.




of course it was a refugee/immigration/racist vote. It's been stewing for decades.

but what would you know? you're not from england, were never born in the emerald isle, don't have as much as a single drop of saxon or celtic blood in your veins.

you may have passed through the UK as a tourist or even as a temporarily working tourist, once upon a time. However, the same does not confer preacher rights.


----------



## bass player

humble_pie said:


> lol describes yourself to a perfect *tee*
> especially the childish rage part .each:


Sorry...it's beyond frustrating that the left tends to call everyone racist who doesn't agree with them, rather than enter a debate. I got caught up and dragged down to their level.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> me i think the temporary madness in the emerald isle is healthy. A lot of aging racist Brits were finally able to get it off their chests at last. In full public view.


17.4 million Brits who voted to leave are aging racist madmen. Got it. Thank you for your nuanced perspective.

BTW...

Norway is not in the EU. Nor is Switzerland. What madness is this.

Would you say that 5.3 million Norwegians and 8.4 million Swiss are aging racists?


----------



## humble_pie

GoldStone said:


> Norway is not in the EU. Nor is Switzerland. What madness is this.
> 
> Would you say that 5.3 million Norwegians and 8.4 million Swiss are aging racists?




perhaps you could read more carefully? someone else is talking norway, switzerland etc ...

i would agree that great britain easily had/still has 17 million aging racists. As i mentioned, it was a healthy thing for the dear dotty old souls to finally get it off their chests. Now perhaps the country can march on to forge some version of the 21st century.

the word *madmen* is entirely your own fantasy, i did not use that term. Please do not put words in other persons' mouths.


----------



## GoldStone

Switzerland and Norway are members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), along with Iceland and Liechtenstein. 

Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein are also members in the European Economic Area (EEA).

The UK was part of the EFTA from 1960 to 1973. The UK joined the EEC (predecessor of the EU) in 1973, and thus left the EFTA.

If Brexit actually happens, the UK will probably join the EEA (alongside Norway) or the EFTA (alongside Switzerland).

The whole damn thing is blown out of proportions.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> the word *madmen* is entirely your own fantasy, i did not use that term. Please do not put words in other persons' mouths.


You used the word *madness*.


----------



## humble_pie

bass player said:


> Sorry...it's beyond frustrating that the left tends to call everyone racist who doesn't agree with them, rather than enter a debate. I got caught up and dragged down to their level.



the middle-of-the-roaders in cmf forum have discussed plenty. They always do. It's the aging bigots who fail to discuss. Instead they erupt into rageaholic insults, exactly as you did upthread.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> Now perhaps the country can march on to forge some version of the 21st century.


Would you say that Norway and Switzerland are stuck in the 20th century? Or, maybe, the 19th century?


----------



## bass player

humble_pie said:


> the middle-of-the-roaders in cmf forum have discussed plenty. They always do. It's the aging bigots who fail to discuss. Instead they erupt into rageaholic insults, exactly as you did upthread.


Is that the only option you can see...that anyone who voted yes is an aging bigot? Don't you think that false accusations of bigotry are also insults?


----------



## humble_pie

GoldStone said:


> You used the word *madness*.



repeat, i did not say "madmen." Please stop putting words in others' mouths.

as for "madness," i was referring to a superb & important editorial from the globe & mail, which reported that many brits are already waking up to regret the action they took only hours & days ago. If such dysfunctional turncoat thinking is not "madness," then what is?

just curious: from the way you are arguing, would you have supported the Leave vote? that does not seem like you, you are rarely so dum-dum ...


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> perhaps you could read more carefully? someone else is talking norway, switzerland etc ...


Switzerland rejected the EU membership in the 2001 referendum.

Norway rejected the EU membership in two national referendums (1972 and 1994).

By your logic, Swiss and Norwegians are aging racist.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> of course it was a refugee/immigration/racist vote. It's been stewing for decades.
> 
> but what would you know? you're not from england, were never born in the emerald isle, don't have as much as a single drop of saxon or celtic blood in your veins.
> 
> you may have passed through the UK as a tourist or even as a temporarily working tourist, once upon a time. However, the same does not confer preacher rights.


I wasn't born there but I am a British citizen who got to vote. Who is the racist here?


----------



## bass player

humble_pie said:


> as for "madness," i was referring to a superb & important editorial from the globe & mail, which reported that many brits are already waking up to regret the action they took only hours & days ago.


An editorial from a leftist newspaper is just an opinion from one side of the debate. Don't make it out to be more than that.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> just curious: from the way you are arguing, would you have supported the Leave vote? that does not seem like you, you are rarely so dum-dum ...


I don't live in the UK. I visited the country twice, very briefly, about 25 years ago. So I have no idea how I would vote.

What I know is this:

It's wrong to label 17 million people *aging racist* based on a single vote that encompasses a wide range of highly complex issues. The world is not that black and white.


----------



## humble_pie

GoldStone said:


> Switzerland rejected the EU membership in the 2001 referendum.
> 
> Norway rejected the EU membership in two national referendums (1972 and 1994).
> 
> By your logic, Swiss and Norwegians are aging racist.



oh, stop being so childish ridiculous. 1972? please ...

someone else upthread mentioned norway, switzerland, possibly iceland. It's berserk for you to try to twist that statement. Me i'm out of your discussion.


----------



## gibor365

If somebody oppose immigration politics of the government, it doesn't make him racist ... on the other hand, government politics can be racist


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> In which case it is a pyrrhic victory for brexiteers. They will still have open borders with EU, still bound by EU regulations, still having to pay into the EU. What was gained?


Exactly! No gains for average Joe 




> everyone who voted against socialism destroying their country


Oh, really?! So, you tell us that Cameron is socialist?! Than who is our Justin


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> of course it was a refugee/immigration/racist vote. It's been stewing for decades.
> 
> but what would you know? you're not from england, were never born in the emerald isle, don't have as much as a single drop of saxon or celtic blood in your veins.
> 
> you may have passed through the UK as a tourist or even as a temporarily working tourist, once upon a time. However, the same does not confer preacher rights.


Let me reiterate, that the author sounds 

a) racist. Why else would he be so interested in "blood in my veins"? 
b) impressively ignorant. "emerald isle" is Ireland, not Britain. 
c) clueless why people actually voted to Brexit.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> of course it was a refugee/immigration/racist vote. It's been stewing for decades.


Don't be so sure. This UK author argues that class divisions, not ethnic divisions, decided the outcome:

Divided Britain


----------



## bass player

GoldStone said:


> Don't be so sure. This UK author argues that class divisions, not ethnic divisions, decided the outcome:
> 
> Divided Britain


Everything is about race to some people....they see it everywhere, even when it doesn't exist.

Disagree with them on anything...even an economic issue and you are called a racist. That's how they attempt to shut down any debate that would show the flaws in their ideology.


----------



## new dog

Look at how horrible Europe is becoming and the British people are hoping to have some control over themselves and their country. I don't see how this is a bad thing and yes many who voted not to stay in did it because they don't want to be overrun by crazy young refugees.


----------



## sags

After trying to figure out if Brexit was a right wing or left wing agenda, I came to the conclusion that it isn't an either/or situation.

It appeared to me as a rare merging of right wing anti-Muslim immigration views, and left wing discontent with the economic status quo and with a basic smattering of nationalism thrown into the mix.


----------



## olivaw

Here is what the Globe and Mail article that Humble quoted said about the Leave voters. He did not say that 17 million voters were racists. He was talking about the tactics used by the leave side. 


> There is so much to be bitter about. This is a victory for the Donald Trumps of the world: those who blame newcomers and other vulnerable groups for their problems. Who rhapsodize about “better times.” Who sneer at “elites” and “experts” who urge them to be open to free trade and immigration. Who want to build walls instead of bridges. Who prefer to tear up intricately linked trade deals rather than work to improve them. Who push nativist propaganda that is blind to the darker lessons of history.


I wish the vote could be reversed but it can't. I can't tell you why 17 million people voted to leave. I can only tell you that they voted to isolate England and render it more irrelevant on the world stage.


----------



## mordko

The reality is that the Brexit side was very diverse. It united the socialist left, the nationalists and free market thatcherites. 

The Bremain side was largely represented by the upper class lefties and the small pro-europe section of the tory party who were hamstrung because they couldn't afford to come over as Europhiles. A truly positive case for EU is unsellable in England (though not in Scotland).


----------



## gibor365

> because they don't want to be overrun by crazy young refugees.


 if you think that immigration policy gonna change it, than look on Moscow... they have very strict immigration policy and .... about 4 million illegal immigarnt live in Russia and about half in Moscow.

There is also big difference between "crazy young refugees" and non-British EU nationals who works there




> It united the socialist left, the nationalists


 those guys are always together


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> I wish the vote could be reversed but it can't. I can't tell you why 17 million people voted to leave. I can only tell you that they voted to isolate England and render it more irrelevant on the world stage.


They voted to escape a socialist union and to regain their independence and control over their own future. I'm not sure why some people can't see the obvious.


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> They voted to escape a socialist union and to regain their independence and control over their own future. I'm not sure why some people can't see the obvious.


Very few of us actually see it that way Bass. I believe they made a huge mistake. It is like when the Americans re-relected GW Bush. You just shake your head and mutter "what a bunch of freakin' morons".  


*Brexit remorse: Brits Google ‘what is EU?’ after the vote, call for re-run*


> HOURS after voting to leave it, Brits were frantically googling ‘what is the EU’ — and what would happen if they left it.
> Call it Brexit remorse, but it seems online at least, many were showing they weren’t quite sure what they were voting for.
> And as the result sank in, so many people signed a petition asked for a referendum re-run, they crashed the website hosting it.
> One of the top questions asked by UK users after the Brexit referendum result to ‘leave’ was released was “what is the EU?”, Google Trends reported.
> And queries about ‘what happens if we leave the EU?’ tripled.
> Other spiking searches in the United Kingdom were queries for ‘getting an Irish passport’ and ‘move to Gibraltar’, the British territory on the south coast of Spain.


----------



## heyjude

Here is an excellent interview (29 minutes) with Margaret McMillan, a Canadian historian at Oxford University. Amongst other observations, she makes the point that a referendum tries to shoehorn a complex question into a simplistic choice. 
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayed...ygone-glories-of-the-british-empire-1.3649960

And here is a sobering analysis from last night's PBS Newshour.
Foreign policy experts anticipate Brexit’s global impact
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/foreign-policy-experts-anticipate-brexits-global-impact/


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> Very few of us actually see it that way Bass. I believe they made a huge mistake. It is like when the Americans re-relected GW Bush. You just shake your head and mutter "what a bunch of freakin' morons".


Many people said exactly the same thing when they re-elected Obama.


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> Very few of us actually see it that way Bass. I believe they made a huge mistake. It is like when the Americans re-relected GW Bush. You just shake your head and mutter "what a bunch of freakin' morons".
> 
> 
> *Brexit remorse: Brits Google ‘what is EU?’ after the vote, call for re-run*


You do realize it's not a real story?


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> Many people said exactly the same thing when they re-elected Obama.


Oh, bazinga. 





mordko said:


> You do realize it's not a real story?


From your favourite source, the Daily Mail: *Google search spike suggests many people don't know why they voted for Brexit
*


> Google search spike suggests many people don't know why they voted for Brexit
> The term 'What happens if we leave the EU?' soared after the polls closed
> Google reported a 250% spike in searches for the phrase before 5.30am


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> From your favourite source, the Daily Mail: *Google search spike suggests many people don't know why they voted for Brexit
> *


It's called "protest vote". It's just as legitimate as the vote of the educated elites.


----------



## mrPPincer

bass player said:


> Everything is about race to some people....they see it everywhere, even when it doesn't exist.
> 
> Disagree with them on anything...even an economic issue and you are called a racist. That's how they attempt to shut down any debate that would show the flaws in their ideology.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> You do realize it's not a real story?




so sorry, what do you mean, not a real story?

of course it's a real story. 

here's an update to the same story, from another major media, this time in england. The story goes that, in less than 24 hours, the petition asking for a 2nd brexit vote has already gathered 2 million signatures.

earlier today, brits trying to sign this petition evidently crashed the gummint website that hosts it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...lion-sign-petition-demanding-referendum-reru/

.


----------



## bass player

humble_pie said:


> so sorry, what do you mean, not a real story?
> 
> of course it's a real story.
> 
> here's an update to the same story, from another major media, this time in england. The story goes that, in less than 24 hours, the petition asking for a 2nd brexit vote has already gathered 2 million signatures.
> 
> earlier today, brits trying to sign this petition evidently crashed the gummint website that hosts it.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...lion-sign-petition-demanding-referendum-reru/
> 
> .


I guess now we have magical "regret votes" where some people think they can just change their mind the next day and pretend that their previous vote no longer counts.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> here's an update to the same story, from another major media, this time in england. The story goes that, in less than 24 hours, the petition asking for a 2nd brexit vote has already gathered 2 million signatures.
> 
> earlier today, brits trying to sign this petition evidently crashed the gummint website that hosts it.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...lion-sign-petition-demanding-referendum-reru/
> 
> .


Sounds like a childish tantrum. We don't like the official results, let's try online signatures.

Gummint website crashed, not a big surprise there.


----------



## humble_pie

^^


lol i am serious with my well-reasoned point of view
he appears to be exaggerating here & there
you are exploding into a childish tantrum


.


----------



## bass player

humble_pie said:


> ^^
> 
> 
> lol i am serious with my well-reasoned point of view
> he appears to be exaggerating here & there
> you are exploding into a childish tantrum
> 
> 
> .


There is nothing reasonable about "I regret how I voted, even though I had months to think about it, so now I think that I should be able to change my mind".


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> Oh, bazinga.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From your favourite source, the Daily Mail: *Google search spike suggests many people don't know why they voted for Brexit
> *


Not my favourite source. It's a made up story as is everything based on number of Google searches. If a thousand people searched for something or other; even a few thousand people did that... Hardly a piece of news. Ditto if some on the losing side don't like the result.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> so sorry, what do you mean, not a real story?
> 
> of course it's a real story.
> 
> here's an update to the same story, from another major media, this time in england. The story goes that, in less than 24 hours, the petition asking for a 2nd brexit vote has already gathered 2 million signatures.
> 
> earlier today, brits trying to sign this petition evidently crashed the gummint website that hosts it.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...lion-sign-petition-demanding-referendum-reru/
> 
> .


Why are you even talking to me? Thought my blood wasn't of the right pedigree for your taste.


----------



## humble_pie

^^


you're not feeling your leg being pulled? not even a hint of a tiny tug (?)

is why the folks on here who say things are as muddled as tea leaves are correct.

we can see that london mayor Sadiq Khan is already hard at work, in a constructive way. Even before the media interviewed him, he'd already posted on facebook that all multi-national residents of london are safe & welcome.

then he politely told the media that london the city expects to be seated at the exit negotiating table.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> Not my favourite source. It's a made up story as is everything based on number of Google searches. If a thousand people searched for something or other; even a few thousand people did that... Hardly a piece of news. Ditto if some on the losing side don't like the result.



i guess we just have to stand up to the gingham dogs & the calico cats with the actual truth? it's not a made-up story. Millions of brits are petitioning to hold another brexit vote. 

by tonight there'll be hundreds of media stories, all confirming the existence of The Petition :biggrin:

it's all so veddy veddy british, they do rabbit on so


----------



## mordko

I have no doubt the petition exists. As does The Official Monster Raving Loony Party.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> but what would you know? you're not from england, were never born in the emerald isle, don't have as much as a single drop of saxon or celtic blood in your veins.


Nah, I don't think you are pulling anyone's leg there. It's a 100% racist statement. Does not matter that I am a British citizen. Does not matter that my spouse is from Cheshire and that I spent a good chunk of my adult life in the UK. Does not matter that my family is still there. All that matters is the type of my blood. Can it get any more racist?


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> Nah, I don't think you are pulling anyone's leg there. It's a 100% racist statement. Does not matter that I am a British citizen. Does not matter that my spouse is from Cheshire and that I spent a good chunk of my adult life in the UK. Does not matter that my family is still there. All that matters is the type of my blood. Can it get any more racist?


Weren't you Russian in the other thread? Or were you pulling our leg?


----------



## humble_pie

really british now? but you have told us that you are russian . :biggrin:

then you were insisting a few hours ago that the venerable Queen herself must intervene in the brexit muddle.

every british schoolboy would know that such intervention by the monarch is not possible ...


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> Sounds like a childish tantrum. We don't like the official results, let's try online signatures.
> 
> Gummint website crashed, not a big surprise there.


Excuse me, but I am bloody well going to have my tantrum and enjoy it. 

Seriously, if the Remain side had won, do you think that would have been the end of it?


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> Weren't you Russian in the other thread? Or were you pulling our leg?





humble_pie said:


> really british now? but you have told us that you are russian . :biggrin:


Two liberal proponents of an uncontrolled mass immigration find it hard to believe that a Russian-born national can be an UK citizen.

Oh the irony. :biggrin:


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> Weren't you Russian in the other thread? Or were you pulling our leg?


Born in Russia, Jewish. Spent 10 years in the UK, British citizen. Also Canadian. My wife is English. Any more questions?


----------



## gibor365

> really british now? but you have told us that you are russian


 So what?! You;re French who live in Canada ... And I'm Russian Jewish who also have Israeli and Canadian citizenship ... and my brother has Israeli, Finish and probably will get UK one


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> really british now? but you have told us that you are russian . :biggrin:
> 
> then you were insisting a few hours ago that the venerable Queen herself must intervene in the brexit muddle.
> 
> every british schoolboy would know that such intervention by the monarch is not possible ...


You must be delirious as well as racist. Never mentioned the queen.


----------



## gibor365

mordko said:


> Born in Russia, Jewish. Spent 10 years in the UK, British citizen. Also Canadian. My wife is English. Any more questions?


He he ...you replied same second I did ... You said you're Russian Jewish ... you gonna be HP major enemy...like myself :biggrin:


----------



## humble_pie

^^

not ironic in the least.

bref, to put it bluntly, mister mordko - who only lately joined the forum - a few months ago - unfortunately fibs quite noticeably on here.

just upthread, for example, he tries to pretend that a breaking news story is not true. 

so it's understandable that reasonable parties in the forum would remain a tad skeptical when a newbie artist of wrath suddenly declares he's a british citizen *but* he thinks the Queen as reigning monarch is supposed to intervene & control the british political process ...

i mean, real british nationals know better than that.

.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> You must be delirious as well as racist. Never mentioned the queen.



yes you did. You called for the Queen to "intervene" in the brexit muddle. Of course you might have deleted your cuckoo reference just now.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> yes you did. You called for the Queen to "intervene" in the brexit muddle. Of course you might have deleted your cuckoo reference just now.


Like I say... You are cuckoo as well as racist. If anyone mentioned the queen, it wasn't me.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> yes you did. You called for the Queen to "intervene" in the brexit muddle. Of course you might have deleted your cuckoo reference just now.


Here: http://canadianmoneyforum.com/showthread.php/94833-Brexit/page9.

Gibor mentioned the queen. I never did. 

Perhaps you should apologize - also for racism? Then again, racists don't tend to have much decency.


----------



## andrewf

Maybe this pissing match could be taken elsewhere...


----------



## gibor365

> Gibor mentioned the queen. I never did.


 and probably you noticed  at the end of the sentense


----------



## mordko

gibor365 said:


> and probably you noticed  at the end of the sentense


Yep. With a smilic.


----------



## gibor365

Just talked to my brother over the Skype... He said that there is petition not to leave EU that already signed by more than 2 millions  .. btw, in his town (big university and a lot of hi tech, 75% voted for "stay".
Actually Brits can have another referendum 



> Will Britain ever be able to re-join the EU?
> 
> Yes. The final clause of Article 50 states: “If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49”.
> 
> Article 49 of the Lisbon Treaty deals with the procedure for any countries wanting to join the EU, whether they have previously been members or not.


----------



## bass player

gibor365 said:


> Just talked to my brother over the Skype... He said that there is petition not to leave EU that already signed by more than 2 millions  .. btw, in his town (big university and a lot of hi tech, 75% voted for "stay".
> Actually Brits can have another referendum


17 million people voted to leave....so why does a petition of 2 million "no's" after the fact matter?


----------



## mrPPincer

morning after hangover effect, they can change their mind if they want.
It's been decided, but it's not written in stone that it can't be undecided is it?


----------



## bass player

mrPPincer said:


> morning after hangover effect, they can change their mind if they want.


They can change their mind, but they can't change their vote. 

Of course, it stretches credibility to suggest that all those 2 million people originally voted "yes" and are now having regrets. More likely, the vast majority of them are "no" voters simply trying to muddy the waters by adding their name to the petition.

Votes in an official election/referendum count. A petition the next day doesn't mean anything.


----------



## GoldStone

Not The Onion:

*EU to launch kettle and toaster crackdown after Brexit vote*

Now I know how I would vote.


----------



## agent99

bass player said:


> 17 million people voted to leave....so why does a petition of 2 million "no's" after the fact matter?


Didn't almost 17million (16,141,241) also vote to stay? An issue like this really should not be decided by a slim majority. Much like when Quebec wanted to leave. Hope the Brits find a workable way out of this, either in or out of EU.


----------



## GoldStone

bass player said:


> Of course, it stretches credibility to suggest that all those 2 million people originally voted "yes" and are now having regrets.


No one suggested that.


----------



## mordko

bass player said:


> 17 million people voted to leave....so why does a petition of 2 million "no's" after the fact matter?


Makes them feel better? Gives journalists something to write about when it's an otherwise slow news day? 

Actually, it's traditional for eurocrats to try and ignore referendum outcomes. They did it in Ireland. They did it in Holland. A couple of other places. It's one of the reasons Brexit won and the same is about to happen in several other countries.


----------



## GoldStone

GoldStone said:


> Not The Onion:
> 
> *EU to launch kettle and toaster crackdown after Brexit vote*


I am still shaking my head at the sheer stupidity of the faceless EU bureaucrats. Tea and toast are staples of British culture. You mess with kettles and toasters... you get Brexit.

Hey EU, I have an idea. Try this:

Ban red wine and cheese... what would French do?

Ban beer and bratwurst... how would Germans react?

Morons.


----------



## Spudd

GoldStone said:


> I am still shaking my head at the sheer stupidity of the faceless EU bureaucrats. Tea and toast are staples of British culture. You mess with kettles and toasters... you get Brexit.
> 
> Hey EU, I have an idea. Try this:
> 
> Ban red wine and cheese... what would French do?
> 
> Ban beer and bratwurst... how would Germans react?
> 
> Morons.


Did you read the article? It said that they kept the kettles/toasters change strictly under wraps until after the vote was over, in case it might influence the voters.


----------



## GoldStone

Spudd said:


> Did you read the article? It said that they kept the kettles/toasters change strictly under wraps until after the vote was over, in case it might influence the voters.


Of course I read the article. It was published before the referendum. So the decision wasn't really under wraps.

This is a moot point in any case. The ban itself is moronic, regardless of the timelines.


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> Of course I read the article. It was published before the referendum. So the decision wasn't really under wraps.
> 
> This is a moot point in any case. The ban itself is moronic, regardless of the timelines.


They are planning to impose minimum energy standards for certain small appliances. You'd need to be a really low information voter to interpret that as an assault on English tradition.


----------



## Eder

bass player said:


> There is nothing reasonable about "I regret how I voted, even though I had months to think about it, so now I think that I should be able to change my mind".


Lucky for Rachel...


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> They are planning to impose minimum energy standards for certain small appliances. You'd need to be a really low information voter to interpret that as an assault on English tradition.


Kettles and toasters are primitive appliances. There is very little you can do to improve their energy efficiency. It takes a certain amount of energy to boil a liter of water or brown a toast.

Minimum energy standards would effectively mean that you can only buy an under-powered kettle or toaster that takes too long to do a simple job.

ADDED: the main issue is not the ban itself, but the meddling nature of the faceless EU bureaucracy.


----------



## mrPPincer

gibor365 said:


> Just talked to my brother over the Skype... He said that there is petition not to leave EU that already signed by more than 2 millions  .. btw, in his town (big university and a lot of hi tech, 75% voted for "stay".
> Actually Brits can have another referendum


Yeah, just talked to my mom, she's on facebook (I'm not into facebook), she said my brother in law is talking about that same petition on facebook (he's a brit).

With enough people they do have the right to ask, 2 mil in two days is a good start imho.


----------



## humble_pie

.
doesn't everything depend on whether one would be voting before one's british breakfast or after one's british breakfast though.


never mind the class argument. I say nix to the class argument. Having to toast the toast 4 times is as intolerable to a cockney wench as it is to a lord of the isles.

speaking of wenches with class arguments, that "author" Lynsey Hanley, with her graduate student obsession with class, is the most boring blithering blathering writer this forum has lately seen.

the brexit situation is far more lovably, wooly-mindedly, britishly depicted just upthread, where the writer goes:



> It's been decided, said Winnie-the-Pooh.
> 
> oh, but it's not written in stone anywhere, is it? asked Piglet anxiously. I mean, it isn't something that can't be undecided, is it? if ever we should decide that we want to undecide something, we would always be able to muddle through with a decision about the undeciding, wouldn't we?
> 
> yes of course, said Winnie-the-Pooh.
> 
> Piglet sobbed with relief. He slipped his tiny front trotter into Pooh's big furry stuffed paw. Hand in hand, the teddy bear & the piglet walked on affectionately together, along the grassy path towards the hundred acre wood.


----------



## mrPPincer

ok, sorry folks, a couple pics a brexiter friend sent..


----------



## mrPPincer




----------



## GoldStone

Post-referendum poll:

https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/746820394217259008

On the EU referendum result:
Happy: 48%
Unhappy: 43%
Indifferent: 7%
(via ComRes)

Vote split // On the #EUref result (Remain / Leave):
Happy: 4% / 92%
Unhappy: 88% / 1%
Indifferent: 7% / 5%
(via ComRes)

ComRes poll for Sunday Mirror finds sovereignty was bigger issue for Leave voters (53%) than immigration (34%).


----------



## mordko

Everyone is reaching out to Britain for a trade deal. US, Canada... Even Germany. http://www.express.co.uk/finance/ci...n-trade-relations-with-Britain-outside-the-EU


----------



## new dog

You can deal with Britain or the joke of the EU no wonder countries are reaching out.


----------



## GoldStone

*Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2257/94* of 16 September 1994, amended by *Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1135/96* of 24 June 1996, amended by *Commission Regulation (EC) No. 386/97* of 28 February 1997, amended by *Commission Regulation (EC) No. 228/2006* of 9 February 2006, replaced by *Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1333/2011* of 19 December 2011


----------



## olivaw

new dog said:


> You can deal with Britain or the joke of the EU no wonder countries are reaching out.


Dream on. Obama is talking about NATO. The United States will be far more interested in Europe than England when it comes to trade.



> President Obama said: "The people of the United Kingdom have spoken, and we respect their decision.
> 
> "The special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is enduring, and the United Kingdom's membership in Nato remains a vital cornerstone of US foreign, security and economic policy.


It's England that voted to leave. Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU.


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> Dream on. Obama is talking about NATO. The United States will be far more interested in Europe than England when it comes to trade.
> 
> 
> 
> It's England that voted to leave. Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU.


Sure. Just as Trudeau is the Prime MInister for only parts of Canada.


----------



## mordko

US and Canada will move to set up free trade agreements with Europes most dynamic, fastest growing, second largest economy. For one thing, it's no longer possible to reach a trade deal with the anti-trade EU. 

The real question is whether the EU will move swiftly to set up an association agreement with Britain, similar to what they have with Norway and a few other countries. In that case the economic damage will be next to nothing. Alternatively they may throw a hissy, like Putin did with Ukraine, and try to cause maximum damage to themselves and others. Didn't work for Russia, won't work for the already stagnating EU.


----------



## GoldStone

A grim view on what's coming next:

The EU will treat Britain like Greece
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/the-eu-will-treat-britain-like-greece/


----------



## bass player

GoldStone said:


> A grim view on what's coming next:
> 
> The EU will treat Britain like Greece
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/the-eu-will-treat-britain-like-greece/


The Telegraph? Lol. This gem of wisdom comes from that one-sided article: 

"the pity and guilt at the plight of the Greek people who had been punished through no fault of their own..."


----------



## mordko

Soros says that EU dissolution is now irreversible. 

Next - Spanish election which may end up as another nail.


----------



## GoldStone

An anonymous reader's comment on The Guardian web site went viral on Facebook, Twitter et al.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...cy-meetings-eu-uk-leave-vote#comment-77205935

"Teebs" wrote:

=======================

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

=======================


----------



## mordko

Yeah, right. The author should try himself as a fiction writer. 

The reason Boris and Gove want informal negotiations is so that their hands are not tied. Article 50 would kick-start the time clock. In reality there is absolutely no rush whatsoever, but there is no changing the course. 

And Boris was in no way "subdued". He is already campaigning for the leadership of the Tory party and it wouldn't have served him well to jump up and down with joy while Cameron was crying. Cameron still has support within the party, so Boris had to be respectful.


----------



## Pluto

Elections in Spain today. Will the results help to unravel the EU?


----------



## bass player

Thanks to the internet, the mainstream media is becoming increasingly irrelevant and no longer has the power to shape the narrative like it once did. In spite of a months long one-sided campaign from the media that pushed for a "no" vote and that predicted endless doom and gloom scenarios, they were unable to convince a majority of the people.

The same thing is happening with the climate doomsayers who have always enjoyed full support from the media, but most people are now starting to see through the misinformation and lies and turning a deaf ear to the endless claims of disaster that are predicted if "we don't act RIGHT now".


----------



## mordko

Professional journalists certainly have a role, but I do find it really funny when they start reporting what's going on on the web as "news". Like with various "petitions" and "google searches".


----------



## bass player

mordko said:


> Professional journalists certainly have a role, but I do find it really funny when they start reporting what's going on on the web as "news". Like with various "petitions" and "google searches".


Just how accurate is the petition anyway?

"Some 39,411 residents of Vatican City, home to Pope Francis, appeared to have signed the petition by Sunday morning, despite the tiny city state having a total population of just 800.

In isolationist North Korea, one of the least internet-connected countries in the world, 23,778 people had apparently gone online to express their frustration at the UK’s decision to quit the EU.

Located 800 miles south east of the Falklands, and with a permanent population of zero, the South Atlantic British Overseas Territory of South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands was responsible for more than 3,000 signatures

That was some 300 more than those coming from the British Antarctic Territory, which though home to some 400 researchers also has no settled population of its own.

Signatories are also recorded in places as far flung as the Caribbean island of Aruba (101), Bermuda (564), China (432), Hong Kong (2,089), Japan (742) Venezuela (24) and the South Pacific Islands of Tuvalu (18), Wallis and Fortuna (8) and Vanuatu (31)."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ll-for-second-brexit-vote-gains-more-than-39/

Granted, the above are small numbers, but who knows how many programs have been made that create signatures, or how many people have signed it several times. The petition is worthless, and only "newsworthy" in the sense that the signature fraud should be reported.


----------



## mrPPincer

Ironic that the petition was started by a brexiter when it looked like they were gonna lose, and now that the bremainers have jumped behind it, it's now a "petition"


----------



## mordko

Love the North Korean and Vatican's contributions to the debate  And a bunch of newspapers reported this **** yesterday as if it were legitimate news.


----------



## mrPPincer

Bass player, those fraudulent names can be removed, it's sabotage, but they make the real signatories no less legitimate.


----------



## bass player

mrPPincer said:


> Bass player, those fraudulent names can be removed, it's sabotage, but they make the real signatories no less legitimate.


So what? The referendum is all that matters. A petition created the next day by disgruntled losers is worthless. Their voice was already heard, and they lost.


----------



## mordko

mrPPincer said:


> Bass player, those fraudulent names can be removed, it's sabotage, but they make the real signatories no less legitimate.


Why don't we set up a petition on CMF? It will have real signatories and as such will be no less legitimate.


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> Sure. Just as Trudeau is the Prime MInister for only parts of Canada.


Well, in another sense, both Scotland and Northern Ireland (and possibly even London  ) maybe choose to leave the UK to remain in the EU.


----------



## ian

We are at the start of a long, windy road that probably has a few pot holes and perhaps a Uturn. Who really knows what the final outcome will be? The newspaper pundits surely don't.


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> Yeah, right. The author should try himself as a fiction writer.
> 
> The reason Boris and Gove want informal negotiations is so that their hands are not tied. Article 50 would kick-start the time clock. In reality there is absolutely no rush whatsoever, but there is no changing the course.
> 
> And Boris was in no way "subdued". He is already campaigning for the leadership of the Tory party and it wouldn't have served him well to jump up and down with joy while Cameron was crying. Cameron still has support within the party, so Boris had to be respectful.


Why should the EU enter into informal negotiations prior to Article 50 being invoked? That would just allow the UK to have the upper hand in negotiations. More likely is EU accepting an extension of the two year timeline for Article 50.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> Well, in another sense, both Scotland and Northern Ireland (and possibly even London  ) maybe choose to leave the UK to remain in the EU.


Definitely London. Most Brits would vote for that. One tiny problem with this scenario - by the time it's all over there may or may not be an EU to join. 

I am hoping that Boris, Grove, Merkel and anyone of any significance is now going to stand up and calm things down. They need to say that a version of the Norwegian scenario is the most likely solution, that negotiations will take time, that while they are on-going everything will stay "as is". Hollande and Junker made several unhelpful statements, they need to shut up. The prices of European banks point to them going belly up. It wouldn't be pretty for any of us.


----------



## andrewf

What was really needed here was some structural reform of the EU, to make it more directly democratically accountable. Unravelling it is just a recipe for decades of instability in Europe, and massive economic disruption as trade barriers are erected between integrated economies.

I mean, if the idea is to keep all the same customs, trade, and regulatory measures in place (the Norwegian scenario), what is the point of leaving the EU? If this was all about sovereignty, how could UK sign up to a trade block in which it has no say?


----------



## GoldStone

Another view from the UK:

https://twitter.com/jtepper2/status/747043256509276160

_"An American friend asked for my view on Brexit. Here are a few thoughts."_


----------



## andrewf

It will be fascinating to see who becomes PM, and what they do between now and the end of the year. I would not be surprised if no one wants the job. Boris seemed surprisingly subdued after the Brexit win. Saying that the UK will be no less united and no less European seems like either wishful thinking or denying the implications of this outcome. He doesn't seem keen to be the one to press the button on Article 50... perhaps Cameron's final revenge.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> What was really needed here was some structural reform of the EU, to make it more directly democratically accountable. Unravelling it is just a recipe for decades of instability in Europe, and massive economic disruption as trade barriers are erected between integrated economies.
> 
> I mean, if the idea is to keep all the same customs, trade, and regulatory measures in place (the Norwegian scenario), what is the point of leaving the EU? If this was all about sovereignty, how could UK sign up to a trade block in which it has no say?


Making EU "democratically accountable" = federal superstate = the exact opposite of a customs union of sovereign states. The best way to reform EU is to dissolve European Commission and European Parliament and keep the free trade zone.


----------



## andrewf

A customs union is a much larger surrendering of sovereignty than a political body that makes regulations on toasters. This is why Canada never entertained the idea of customs union with the US. We would have been surrendering our sovereignty to Washington.


----------



## heyjude

Britain has always been ambiguous about Europe. Sir Humphrey brilliantly sums it up in this 1980 clip from "Yes, Minister".

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...inister-predicted-brexit-20160626-gps1pj.html


----------



## olivaw

Not so fast, Brexiteers.......

*The Scottish Parliament could veto Brexit.* 



> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-eu-referendum-scotland-latest-a7104046.html
> Nicola Sturgeon has appeared to suggest the Scottish Parliament could effectively block the UK’s exit from the European Union.
> 
> It comes after Scotland voted by 62 per cent to Remain in the European Union while Britain, as a whole, voted by 52 per cent to 48 per cent to leave Europe.


----------



## andrewf

I'm not sure about the Scottish Parliament being able to block Brexit, but those who think they can deny Scotland a second independence referendum if it requests one in order to stay in the EU are courting trouble. The UK is going to be a gongshow for the foreseeable future.


----------



## mordko

Scottish independence could work for England. Along with Scotland a whole lot of socialists/trade unionists would leave the Union. Current arrangement is rather peculiar when anyone from Scotland or EU can study for free in Scotland with a single exception: people coming from the rest of the UK, who are the ones subsidizing "free" universities in Scotland.


----------



## steve41

Brexit theme song....

https://www.youtube.com/embed/wq_lhlIn1e0


----------



## mordko

If this is Brexit song then Deutschland uber allies is Bremain theme song.


----------



## andrewf

The wishful thinkers who claim that UK can get a good deal (better than Norway) out of secession from the EU seem to be living in fantasy land. It's like saying the UK could leave Nato (think of all the sovereignty surrendered by being part of a military alliance--Nato can force UK to war!), and still enjoy the defense guarantee. UK should expect something more like the WTO default trade rules or the rules Canada is hoping to get through CETA.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> The wishful thinkers who claim that UK can get a good deal (better than Norway) out of secession from the EU seem to be living in fantasy land. It's like saying the UK could leave Nato (think of all the sovereignty surrendered by being part of a military alliance--Nato can force UK to war!), and still enjoy the defense guarantee. UK should expect something more like the WTO default trade rules or the rules Canada is hoping to get through CETA.


That would be extremely stupid on part of those who stay in the EU. Because trade goes both ways and Germany sells way more to Britain than the other way round. It's nothing like the one sided Defense guarantee you are quoting. Merkel already indicated German preference for the Norwigian scenario. Her country's industry would expect nothing less.


----------



## bass player

The naysayers seem unable to comprehend any benefit from the UK leaving a failing socialist union and regaining their independence.


----------



## mordko

Also, NATO successfully protected members from the Soviet aggression. EU has been the slowest growing block of countries over the last 10 years. Unemployment rates are sky high. UK is the fastest growing EU country with the lowest unemployment. It should join equally dynamic countries.


----------



## GoldStone

Wonkish, but a great read:

Thoughts on the sociology of Brexit


----------



## sags

The UK can't straddle the line of in or out, because it isn't entirely up to their discretion and it wouldn't resolve the differences that have built up over the years.

The comments coming from the rest of the EU doesn't bode well for any new concessions to the UK or even discussions on negotiations.

The comments coming from Germany are pretty direct...............leave as soon as possible.


----------



## andrewf

Taking a Norway-style deal is not consistent with what Brexit was campaigning for. There would still be freedom of movement between the EU and UK and UK would still be paying that 10 billion pounds into the EU. UK would still not have sovereignty over the money spent by the EU nor over who enters the country. It is neurotic to make this case for retaking independence from the EU while hoping to remain under its thumb (with the added benefit of no longer having a seat at the decision-making table).


----------



## GoldStone

Leading 'out' campaigner Boris Johnson says the margin by which the UK voted to leave the European Union was "not entirely overwhelming"

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/747178341514489856

LOL. _"The margin was not entirely overwhelming"_ is a British-speak for: we have no f*cking idea what to do next.

I am going to go on a limb and say that Article 50 doesn't get invoked. Boris doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to pull it off. The comment in The Guardian was spot on.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> Taking a Norway-style deal is not consistent with what Brexit was campaigning for. There would still be freedom of movement between the EU and UK and UK would still be paying that 10 billion pounds into the EU. UK would still not have sovereignty over the money spent by the EU nor over who enters the country. It is neurotic to make this case for retaking independence from the EU while hoping to remain under its thumb (with the added benefit of no longer having a seat at the decision-making table).


Brexit campaign United different forces which campaigned on different platforms and appealed to different groups. Boris already said that he expects UK to stay part of the Single Market, and it's his opinion that is going to matter on the British side. Merkel said that she expects something along the Norwegian lines. There will likely be free movement of workers, but not of benefit seekers. 

Meanwhile Hollande said something dumb along the lines of punishing Britain. He is doing it for internal reasons to disadvantage those seeking Frexit and to stick it to the English. Hopefully Merkel will make him shut up before he does too much damage.


----------



## mordko

And the Guardian has long lived in la la land, all the way to justifying Stalinism. Anything they say about Boris has to be taken with a pinch of salt.


----------



## andrewf

So, would it not be ignoring the outcome of the referendum to try for the slightest exit from the EU as possible (one that keeps the UK subject to most of the regulations and obligations of EU membership)? 

It seems to me that the UK needs an election & debate over what kind of exit it wants. I mean, should Boris be the person who decides what the UK's exit looks like? He sure doesn't seem to have the foggiest clue what he wants it to look like.


----------



## GoldStone

andrewf said:


> So, would it not be ignoring the outcome of the referendum to try for the slightest exit from the EU as possible (one that keeps the UK subject to most of the regulations and obligations of EU membership)?


Read this, it's a good overview.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...de-what-brexit-means-in-the-interests-of-the/

Quote:

==================

Remainers and "liberal Leavers" - to use a loose term - are suddenly on the same side. They both seek a safe settlement that protects Northern Ireland and Scotland, and the economy.

Boris Johnson, Dan Hannan, and others in the sovereignty camp are signalling that they could live with a Brexit compromise that accepts EU migrant flows, but going back to pre-Maastricht rules that guaranteed only the right to work, before the concept of EU citizenship. This would be a modified variant of the Norwegian Model, or European Economic Area (EEA).

A "soft-Brexit" would be accepted by the vast majority of Parliament, which has a duty in these unique circumstances to act on behalf of citizens who voted for Remain and as well as for Leave. This is not an event where the winner takes all. 

It would have the backing of the trade unions, industry, and the City of London. Internal documents from the pro-Remain group TheCityUK show that they could live with an EEA option - or hybrid variant - that would preserve the City's viability by safeguarding EU passporting rights for financial services.

...

An EEA-style compromise may be the only safe way to reconcile a divided country and ensure a safe withdrawal from the EU in managed stages. 

...

Whether a "safe Brexit" along these lines would be enough to prevent a fresh referendum in Scotland remains to be seen, but a failure to address these concerns almost guarantees the break-up of the United Kingdom. 

...

While the EU could block an EEA-plus compromise, it would be courting fate to do so. The much greater difficulty is explaining to large numbers of Leave voters in Britain that Brexit may not slam the door on immigrants after all.

==================

*** I assume that "liberal Leavers" refers to anyone but UKIP.


----------



## andrewf

Is it reasonable to expect that the EU would not extract major concessions from the UK in exchange for such a favourable arrangement? In which case the Leave campaign will have lost in all but the most legalistic sense (EU membership without technically being a member of the EU). That's not going to be readily accepted by the sizable portion of the Leave camp that wanted to gain actual rather than notional independence from the EU on immigration and regulation.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> Is it reasonable to expect that the EU would not extract major concessions from the UK in exchange for such a favourable arrangement? In which case the Leave campaign will have lost in all but the most legalistic sense (EU membership without technically being a member of the EU). That's not going to be readily accepted by the sizable portion of the Leave camp that wanted to gain actual rather than notional independence from the EU on immigration and regulation.


It's not about a "win or lose". If the EU really wants to make sure that it's banks go belly up then "extracting major concessions" and damaging trade would be the best path forward. 

Some in the Brexit camp won't be satisfied whatever the path forward is selected simply because it was such a diverse movement. That's not a good reason not to move forward.


----------



## mordko

Britain, Germany and all the parts of the EU that still sell products and services have the exact same interest => ensure there is no damage to trade and make it clear as soon as possible. There is absolutely no reason why UK can't be part of the single market without being part of the ever closer union thingie.


----------



## olivaw

andrewf said:


> Is it reasonable to expect that the EU would not extract major concessions from the UK in exchange for such a favourable arrangement? In which case the Leave campaign will have lost in all but the most legalistic sense (EU membership without technically being a member of the EU). That's not going to be readily accepted by the sizable portion of the Leave camp that wanted to gain actual rather than notional independence from the EU on immigration and regulation.


Leave voters were told that _Out_ means _Out_. If they really wanted some sort of special status and concessions from Europe then they voted wrong. The parliament of every European member nation is going to need to approve any special trade deal with England. Even if everything went perfectly, it will take years.


----------



## mordko

The vast majority of Brits want to be part of a single market. That was always part of the plan for most of the leaders who supported Brexit. Anyone who followed the debate would be aware of this. 

Now, there is indeed a bit of a movement on the part of particularly dumb EU leaders like Hollande and EU bureaucrats to "punish" UK. It is Germany that calls the shots though and Merkel already said that:

a) there is no rush and
b) trying to punish UK would be dumb.


----------



## sags

The UK could deny the citizen vote and remain and it might be the best outcome for them, but they would return as a toothless part of the EU with the threat of leaving removed from the table.

What tool would they have at their disposal as a bargaining chip ? We will have a vote to leave.............again ?


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> The vast majority of Brits want to be part of a single market. That was always part of the plan for most of the leaders who supported Brexit. Anyone who followed the debate would be aware of this.
> 
> Now, there is indeed a bit of a movement on the part of particularly dumb EU leaders like Hollande and EU bureaucrats to "punish" UK. It is Germany that calls the shots though and Merkel already said that:
> 
> a) there is no rush and
> b) trying to punish UK would be dumb.


I'm sure most Brits want to be part of the single market. But do they also agree to be subject to all the regulation that that entails? And the freedom of movement associated with it?

Well, the other countries would have to agree. Germany has the most influence, but how much political capital will Germany expend on Britain's behalf to secure a good deal for the UK? France seems keen to have the UK out, and has some incentive not to provide it with a painless exit that gives it all the benefits and none of the responsibilities of membership. Manufacturers want continued access to the UK market, but European financial centres stand to gain at London's expense.

She has said that the UK does not need to immediately invoke Article 50. Not carte blanche for years of pre-negotiation. She has said it should not take too long.

And given how Merkel has treated Greece, pour encourager les autres, if she cares about stemming the dissolution of the EU, she won't blithely grant the UK the deal it wants without some penalty. That is fantasy.


----------



## GoldStone

andrewf said:


> And given how Merkel has treated Greece, pour encourager les autres, if she cares about stemming the dissolution of the EU, she won't blithely grant the UK the deal it wants without some penalty. That is fantasy.


The UK is not Greece. The UK is the third largest export market for Germany, after the US and France. 2015 German exports to the UK were worth 90B Euro. Merkel won't do anything extreme to jeopardize this trade relationship.


----------



## capricorn

Also, I am assuming this gives UK an opportunity to have potentially better (and quicker) trade agreements with large markets like China and India.
I do not believe the economic doomsday that remain camp harped on relentlessly will come to pass.


----------



## olivaw

The EU Parliament may decide to allow the Scottish and Irish referendums to conclude before considering any trade offer from the British parliament.


----------



## olivaw

capricorn said:


> Also, I am assuming this gives UK an opportunity to have potentially better (and quicker) trade agreements with large markets like China and India.
> I do not believe the economic doomsday that remain camp harped on relentlessly will come to pass.


The market disagrees. GBP continues to plummet.


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> The EU Parliament may decide to allow the Scottish and Irish referendums to conclude before considering any trade offer from the British parliament.


It's not a foregone conclusion that those referendums will be called.


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> The market disagrees. GBP continues to plummet.


Weak pound is great news for the UK exporters.


----------



## capricorn

GBP was around 1.38 to USD in feb this year. It is around 1.34 now. I am sure CAD has seen bigger variation in last year. 
I think market reaction is muted in overall scheme of things. 
FTSE closed up for the week last week.
S&P500 dropping 20% would be correction. dropping much more would be real crash. we are far from there.


----------



## andrewf

GoldStone said:


> The UK is not Greece. The UK is the third largest export market for Germany, after the US and France. 2015 German exports to the UK were worth 90B Euro. Merkel won't do anything extreme to jeopardize this trade relationship.


There is a range of outcomes between doing something extreme, and granting the UK whatever it wants. I don't expect it to be made equivalent to Bolivia in trade standing with the EU, but either Leavers will be robbed of the outcome they voted for by leaving the EU in name only, or there will be an economic penalty. Even if there is free trade in manufactured goods (what Germany would want), that does not preserve access for British services, particularly in finance. And once the UK is outside the EU, nothing stops France from advancing its agenda to keep more eurozone financial activity in the eurozone.


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> It's not a foregone conclusion that those referendums will be called.


Reuters reports that 41.9% of Scots want a new referendum while 44.7% do not want one.
The Scotsman reports that 59% of Scots now support Independence. 62% support Nicola Sturgeon's bid to keep Scotland in the EU.

Make of it what you will.


----------



## mordko

Boris has a piece in the Telegraph. Key points:



1. UK to stay in the common market

2. Freedom of movement to stay

3. Referendum wasn't about immigration. 

4. Immigration from non-EU countries to be controlled or stimulated via a point based system. 

5. Rollback of most or all of EU legislation. 

The devil will be in the detail that he is not talking about. Like the "free movement" might no longer involve housing benefits, free healthcare and wage subsidies. 

Pre-Maastricht they used to call EC "European Economic Community". After Maastricht they dropped "economic" and introduced common foreign policy, defense, law enforcement/court, asylum and immigration systems. 

UK wants to drop the political/legal aspects and have an economic union again. Now European leaders need to make similar noises and the currency/share markets will stabilize. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...much-that-britain-is-part-of-europe--and-alw/


----------



## humble_pie

andrewf said:


> Even if there is free trade in manufactured goods (what Germany would want), that does not preserve access for British services, particularly in finance. And once the UK is outside the EU, nothing stops France from advancing its agenda to keep more eurozone financial activity in the eurozone.



this is the most interesting part of the pandemonium. What is going to happen to the City of london, great financial nerve centre of the world?

already goldman is said to be rumbling that it'll move its european operations HQ to dublin.

once upon a time, a goth moved the papacy to Avignon & named himself pope Clement. It didn't last, though, & eventually the papal seat returned to rome the eternal city. So i'm betting that london will survive as a financial epicentre.


----------



## GoldStone

andrewf said:


> There is a range of outcomes between doing something extreme, and granting the UK whatever it wants. I don't expect it to be made equivalent to Bolivia in trade standing with the EU, but either Leavers will be robbed of the outcome they voted for by leaving the EU in name only, or there will be an economic penalty. Even if there is free trade in manufactured goods (what Germany would want), that does not preserve access for British services, particularly in finance. And once the UK is outside the EU, nothing stops France from advancing its agenda to keep more eurozone financial activity in the eurozone.


Would you advocate that Canada moves towards closer integration with the US that would result in:

a. All Canadians being better off economically
b. Some loss of Canadian sovereignty

If not, why not?

Canadian progressives tend to be staunchly pro-Remain but rabidly anti-American at the same time. If UK/EU tight integration is such a great idea, why not push for the same level of integration between Canada and the US?


----------



## andrewf

The big difference between EU and a hypothetical North American union is that the latter includes the global hegemon. It would not be an organization where Canada could be exert significant influence on the group's overall policy direction (US would have 80% of the GDP of such a bloc). It would mean surrendering control over those policies to the US with no direct influence on how those policies are developed. It would make more sense to join the US as a state (ideally several, to ensure >10% of the Senate).

The situation in the EU is quite different. The UK can participate in coalitions that overrule even Germany. And Germany makes up <20% of the population and economy of the EU. The UK is almost as significant economically.


----------



## dotnet_nerd

So...amidst all this noise and banter....

What buying opportunities are we seeing as the world markets plummet? There must be a lot of babies thrown out with the bathwater

Who's buying what?


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> The big difference between EU and a hypothetical North American union is that the latter includes the global hegemon. It would not be an organization where Canada could be exert significant influence on the group's overall policy direction (US would have 80% of the GDP of such a bloc). It would mean surrendering control over those policies to the US with no direct influence on how those policies are developed. It would make more sense to join the US as a state (ideally several, to ensure >10% of the Senate).
> 
> The situation in the EU is quite different. The UK can participate in coalitions that overrule even Germany. And Germany makes up <20% of the population and economy of the EU. The UK is almost as significant economically.


Sure, UK could participate in coalitions. As a US state (or a bunch of states) Canada could join forces California to overrule Texas. As Texas is currently doing with a bunch of other states to overrule Washington.


----------



## mordko

Right now any FTSE 100 company has to be be a buy. Their values dropped by ~15% in CAD terms. Their income is largely international in non-sterling currencies and won't be affected much - if at all. Makes them cheap. Markets tend to overreact; at some point they will figure out that all this noise does not amount to very much in economic terms.


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> Sure, UK could participate in coalitions. As a US state (or a bunch of states) Canada could join forces California to overrule Texas. As Texas is currently doing with a bunch of other states to overrule Washington.


You are not disagreeing with me. I said it would make more sense for Canada to join as state(s) in the union, if we were to go that route. Would the US have us on those terms? I'm doubtful.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> You are not disagreeing with me. I said it would make more sense for Canada to join as state(s) in the union, if we were to go that route. Would the US have us on those terms? I'm doubtful.


Right, we agree. In the case of Britain/EU one should add several other complications to the equations, e.g.:

- Language issues. It was easy to move from Newcastle to London when North East was depressed as a result of policies in London. Will be very hard for an average Brit to move to Germany or France as a result of economic decisions made in Brussels.

- Historic issues. Hard for anyone to do business in France - the French don't like neighbours that much.


----------



## bass player

The left has always wanted a one-world government, and the EU was a stepping stone towards that goal. It's understandable that they are so shocked and upset because a vote for independence is just another rejection of their dreams of a magical socialist utopia.


----------



## Pluto

Why did Britain join the EU in the first place?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37iHSwA1SwE


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> Canadian progressives tend to be staunchly pro-Remain but rabidly anti-American at the same time. If UK/EU tight integration is such a great idea, why not push for the same level of integration between Canada and the US?





bass player said:


> The left has always wanted a one-world government, and the EU was a stepping stone towards that goal. It's understandable that they are so shocked and upset because a vote for independence is just another rejection of their dreams of a magical socialist utopia.


It's not really a conservative/progressive thing, it's more of a common sense thing. If you have any common sense (and a connection to the UK), then you understand that the UK is better off in the EU. 

Setting aside the fantasy being peddled by the Brexiteers of this world, it's chaos in Britain right now. The outcome is going to be nothing like Boris describes. Europe holds all the cards and they are going to extract concessions for participation in the common market. The EU also has a vested interested in Scottish independence. I wonder how that will play out.


----------



## mordko

Apparently most Brits don't have any connection to the UK.


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> It's not really a conservative/progressive thing, it's more of a common sense thing. If you have any common sense (and a connection to the UK), then you understand that the UK is better off in the EU.
> 
> Setting aside the fantasy being peddled by the mordko's of this world, it's chaos in Britain right now.


I guess there are 17 million "mordko's" in the UK that live in a fantasy world, lol.

The people have spoken...they chose to leave a failing socialist union. That was the true display of common sense.


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> I guess there are 17 million "mordko's" in the UK that live in a fantasy world, lol.
> 
> The people have spoken...they chose to leave a failing socialist union. That was the true display of common sense.


Oops, I edited the reference to mordko to read a the more generic "Brexiteer" before seeing your post. Never mind, my point still stands and I didn't say that all 17 million voters live in a fantasy world. The Leave campaign peddled the fantasy of full participation in the European Common Market without the rules or obligations. Every expert, every economist, everybody in a position to know informed the voters that this was not acheivable.

Do you watch Fox News, by any chance?


----------



## olivaw

Brexit: Gibraltar in talks with Scotland to stay in EU



> Fabian Picardo, the territory's chief minister, told the BBC he was speaking to Scotland's First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, about various options.
> 
> One possibility under discussion is for Gibraltar and Scotland, which both voted to remain in the EU, to maintain the UK's membership of the bloc.
> 
> Northern Ireland could also potentially be included in the talks.
> 
> "I can imagine a situation where some parts of what is today the member state United Kingdom are stripped out and others remain," Mr Picardo told Newsnight.
> 
> "That means that we don't have to apply again for access, we simply remain with the access we have today, and those parts that leave are then given a different sort of access, which is negotiated but not necessarily under Article 50," he said, referring to a provision in the Lisbon Treaty that sets out how a member state can voluntarily leave the Union.


----------



## mordko

Someone sure is peddling something here. 

Some of the leading British economists, such as Minford, were FOR Brexit.

http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...sts+for+Brexit+-+The+Economy+after+Brexit.pdf


----------



## Eclectic12

mordko said:


> ... The real question is whether the EU will move swiftly to set up an association agreement with Britain, similar to what they have with Norway and a few other countries ...


Is what Norway & Switzerland pays into the EU low enough to make a similar agreement viable to the UK public?

Is there any country getting free trade access who isn't contributing to the EU?


Cheers


----------



## mordko

And here is an example what Brexit economists actually campaigned on: http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/eu-backers-are-the-real-protectionists


----------



## mordko

Eclectic12 said:


> Is what Norway & Switzerland pays into the EU low enough to make a similar agreement viable to the UK public?
> 
> Is there any country getting free trade access who isn't contributing to the EU?
> 
> Cheers


From where I sit, the key issue isn't how much Norway contributes. It's a detail which will be negotiated.


----------



## Eclectic12

andrewf said:


> ... I mean, if the idea is to keep all the same customs, trade, and regulatory measures in place (the Norwegian scenario), what is the point of leaving the EU? If this was all about sovereignty, how could UK sign up to a trade block in which it has no say?


Then too, with Norway paying into the EU programs ... isn't that the opposite of shutting off the flow into the EU that Brexit intended?

Or as the numbers Norway pays so low it is acceptable?


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12

mordko said:


> From where I sit, the key issue isn't how much Norway contributes. It's a detail which will be negotiated.


So you don't see any UK citizens complaining that the promise was to stop paying but in order to have a free trade relationship, the current example seems to say they have to pay?

Assuming there are differences in UK standards and EU standards ... are UK companies going to want to build to two standards?

I would expect that a NA company looking to expand would put the EU standards first on their priority list, with at the moment a bigger market.


Now if the EU splinters ... that can certainly change but for now, there's one exit and possibly one entry.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12

GoldStone said:


> Would you advocate that Canada moves towards closer integration with the US that would result in:
> 
> a. All Canadians being better off economically
> b. Some loss of Canadian sovereignty
> 
> If not, why not?


Based the NAFTA court cases ... it seems clear to me that Canada already did this.


Cheers


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> And here is an example what Brexit economists actually campaigned on


Silly me, I should have said ALMOST every expert and economist. That way, nobody would quote a few outliers.

Now, back to the Brexiteer fantasy of a sweet deal with Europe and an intact UK.............


----------



## mordko

Eclectic12 said:


> So you don't see any UK citizens complaining that the promise was to stop paying but in order to have a free trade relationship, the current example seems to say they have to pay?


Not aware of a promise to stop all payments. There will be a smaller payment because UK isn't going to fund EU Parliament sitting in 2 different countries, common agricultural policy, economic failures in southern Europe and all the other beauties of europea. Norwegian and Swiss agreements are far from perfect -they are frustrating both countries. Details will be subject to negotiation with the objective to benefit both sides. Installing trade barriers between UK and the EU isn't going to benefit anyone. 

In the mean time UK can negotiate with Canada et al - our talks with the protectionist EU have been deadlocked for umpteen years.


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> Oops, I edited the reference to mordko to read a the more generic "Brexiteer" before seeing your post. Never mind, my point still stands and I didn't say that all 17 million voters live in a fantasy world. The Leave campaign peddled the fantasy of full participation in the European Common Market without the rules or obligations. Every expert, every economist, everybody in a position to know informed the voters that this was not acheivable.
> 
> Do you watch Fox News, by any chance?


And the "stay" campaign peddled gloom and doom predictions, so there's no difference, except that a willing left leaning media fully supported the misinformation. This was evident the very next day with the screaming headlines and one-sided stories. They were unable to find 1 person out of the 17 million yes votes to interview except for a few people that claimed they "made a mistake", lol.

Do you watch MSNBC by any chance? :biggrin:


----------



## humble_pie

.
as usual i'm drawn to the human interest stories, i'm not so interested in dry theoretical comparisons of EU history vs NAFTA history ...

this am i glimpsed a video in which a US journalist showed the famous red Leave map of the UK, with london blue for Remain plus a few tiny blue spots in the north such as liverpool, manchester & sheffield. Plus - of course - the whole of scotland & northern ireland was solid blue for Remain.

the british commentator being interviewed - somebody named Nigel Walters - spoke movingly of an entire population of aging working class brits in the red zones. How they once would have voted straight Labour but now they've turned bitterly against the labour party.

how in their lifetimes these older workers have witnessed their industrial town livelihoods hollowed out. How they have waited decades & decades for so-called Euro capital to be invested in their own towns & locales, but no improvement has ever come their way.

walters said these millions of small town & rural british old-timers sincerely believe that things cannot get any worse for them. They have no more patience to listen to promises, he said.

i thought it was eerie & uncanny how just-resigned prime minister david cameron had - without ever once intending to - unwittingly placed in the hands of these gentle & melancholy older british citizens the one tool they could use in a dignified way to make their voices heard. 

that tool was the referendum.


----------



## mordko

Trying to imagine "gentle & melancholy" Geordies... Nope. Not possible.


----------



## gibor365

Today happened Brexit #2 , this this from EURO :biggrin: Tiny Iceland beat Brits 2 : 1 and sent them back to the island 

P.S. Now French should send army to Nice, to protect city from British hooligans


----------



## mrPPincer

omg YEAH! go Iceland!

Their entire population is less than london ontario, yet they're kicking *** in European football.


----------



## gibor365

mrPPincer said:


> omg YEAH! go Iceland!
> 
> Their entire population is less than london ontario, yet they're kicking *** in European football.


and they practically don't have even grass on this island 

_Earlier 51 % voted for brexit and now 11 English football players joined them_


----------



## mrPPincer

gibor365 said:


> _Earlier 51 % voted for brexit and now 11 English football players joined them_


LOL or were sent out into the snow..


----------



## mordko

Can't wait for the petition to revise the result of the Iceland game.


----------



## agent99

gibor365 said:


> and they practically don't have even grass on this island


It's one place I would love to visit. And they do have grass. In fact they have more golf courses per capita than any other country. And in summer they can play 24hrs per day. Obviously that also leaves lot's of time to practice football (their favourite sport)


----------



## heyjude

And the new First Lady of Iceland is Canadian. (She and her family were at the match last night). 

http://www.macleans.ca/news/world/meet-icelands-new-first-lady-canadian-eliza-reid/


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> And the "stay" campaign peddled gloom and doom predictions, so there's no difference, except that a willing left leaning media fully supported the misinformation. This was evident the very next day with the screaming headlines and one-sided stories. They were unable to find 1 person out of the 17 million yes votes to interview except for a few people that claimed they "made a mistake", lol.
> 
> Do you watch MSNBC by any chance? :biggrin:


Nah, I don't watch MSNBC on a regular basis. I have watched it, also Fox and CNN but generally watch CBC or get my news from the web. The reason I ask if you watch Fox News is that you refer to the "Left" in this weirdly derogatory way and seem to think that anybody to the left of Sean Hannity wants a "One World Government".


----------



## olivaw

humble_pie said:


> .the british commentator being interviewed - somebody named Nigel Walters - spoke movingly of an entire population of aging working class brits in the red zones. How they once would have voted straight Labour but now they've turned bitterly against the labour party.
> 
> how in their lifetimes these older workers have witnessed their industrial town livelihoods hollowed out. How they have waited decades & decades for so-called Euro capital to be invested in their own towns & locales, but no improvement has ever come their way.
> 
> walters said these millions of small town & rural british old-timers sincerely believe that things cannot get any worse for them. They have no more patience to listen to promises, he said.
> 
> i thought it was eerie & uncanny how just-resigned prime minister david cameron had - without ever once intending to - unwittingly placed in the hands of these gentle & melancholy older british citizens the one tool they could use in a dignified way to make their voices heard.
> 
> that tool was the referendum.


Sad, but the loss of manufacturing to Asia afflicts every developed nation. Their frustration is understandable though. 

You hit the nail on the head about Cameron handing them the perfect vehicle to express their frustration. I predict that the Brexit referendum will be remembered as one of the greatest political miscalculations in English history. Let's hope that the UK will remain intact at the end of the current chaos.


----------



## mordko

Allowing Brits a vote? Outrageous. I blame Magna Carta. There is always hope though. Maybe someone benevolent would come and save us all if we only hold hands and cry for a long time.


----------



## olivaw

Interesting discussion on CNN right now. The prediction is that Boris will ask Europe for a couple of token concessions and call a second referendum.


----------



## Eclectic12

mordko said:


> Not aware of a promise to stop all payments ...


True ... though with the numbers being thrown around as being able to be directed to the NHS that have been chopped to a much lower number. Paying in as Norway does may affect people's perception.




mordko said:


> ... Details will be subject to negotiation with the objective to benefit both sides. Installing trade barriers between UK and the EU isn't going to benefit anyone.
> In the mean time UK can negotiate with Canada et al - our talks with the protectionist EU have been deadlocked for umpteen years.


It will be interesting to see what is negotiated.


Cheers


----------



## bass player

If this is true, then Britain was wise to vote for independence:

"*The foreign ministers of France and Germany have proposed creating a “European superstate” limiting the powers of individual members following Britain’s referendum decision to leave the EU, Polish public broadcaster TVP Info has reported. 

The document in which the proposals appear is to be presented to Visegrad Group countries meeting in Prague on Monday by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, TVP Info said, adding that the document was an "ultimatum".

TVP Info said the proposals would mean members of a superstate would in practice have no right to their own army, to a separate criminal code or a separate tax system, and would not have their own currency.

In addition, TVP Info said, member states would lose control over their own borders and procedures for admitting and relocating refugees*."

http://www.thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/258994,New-EU-superstate-plan’-by-France-Germany-report


----------



## mordko

Jeremy Corbyn looks to be on his way out, although you never know. That would be awesome.


----------



## olivaw

Hard to know if the EU Superstate story that bass found is true. If it is true then I would switch from Remain to Leave. For now, I'm skeptical but here's a second link.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ies-one-control-members-armies-economies.html


> *Has Britain avoided a ‘European superstate’? France and Germany ‘draw up plans to morph EU countries into one with control over members’ armies and economies’
> 
> *France and Germany reported to have drawn up 'superstate plan'
> It would mean members give up armies and economic power to the EU
> Report 'leaked' in Poland where it has been branded 'not the solution'
> Leaders of Germany, France and Italy said EU was 'indispensable' tonight
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l-members-armies-economies.html#ixzz4Ct44EO2W
> Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


----------



## SMK

mordko said:


> Jeremy Corbyn looks to be on his way out, although you never know. That would be awesome.


The message was not strong enough for him with lost confidence of 172 votes to 40. His days were numbered before Brexit.


----------



## humble_pie

olivaw said:


> Hard to know if the EU Superstate story that bass found is true. If it is true then I would switch from Remain to Leave. For now, I'm skeptical but here's a second link.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ies-one-control-members-armies-economies.html




olivaw i'lm wondering why someone like yourself would stop to consider sensationalized trash blurbs like these? because more than anyone else, you're one who knows how the Daily Mail is nothing more than a scandal tabloid.

in the Radio Poland version of the story (bass's link) the same polish foreign minister who flew into a rage over what he thought might be intentions to create a european super-state, also said that the idea itself was an "old idea" which has been around since long before brexit. 

_" Meanwhile, Waszczykowski said later on Monday that the document by Germany and France was drawn up before the Brexit decision. He said it included "old ideas" and "does not take into account what happened during the referendum."_

this old idea has to do with european state security in the face of repeated migrant onslaughts. There's nothing new here.

already this summer - it's 2016 now - the refugee focus has shifted back to the more dangerous crossing from north africa to italy, now that southeastern europe has been able to close down the turkey/greece migrant corridor.

the summer has barely started, but already mass drownings in the mediterranean offshore libya & offshore italy have begun.

of course, the north european states are the migrants' targets. Of course north european security forces & armies are going to collaborate, cooperate & communicate with each other. Of course they are all on high alert together, night & day. Of course NATO itself might even be called upon. Of course northern europe will survive better with a unified security & refugee settlement program. This is a very sensible goal for france, germany & italy to pursue, imho.

does the above mean extra security costs? unfortunately it does. But there's no reason to translate the new security reality into hysterikspeak about a new superstate.

the genuinely puzzling aspect is that a few hermits here or there appear to believe they can ostrich their heads in the sand. Perhaps they are hoping that the MENA refugee crisis will then conveniently move itself to another galaxy.

.


----------



## AltaRed

^ +1 Sensationalist trash at its finest. Unfortunately too many take this stuff seriously.


----------



## GoldStone

On a lighter note...


----------



## Beaver101

^ :encouragement:


----------



## olivaw

humble_pie said:


> olivaw i'lm wondering why someone like yourself would stop to consider sensationalized trash blurbs like these? because more than anyone else, you're one who knows how the Daily Mail is nothing more than a scandal tabloid.





> ^ +1 Sensationalist trash at its finest. Unfortunately too many take this stuff seriously.


Thanks Humble and AltaRed. I'll remain firmly in the REMAIN camp.


----------



## new dog

Cameron blames EU stance on immigration causing remain to lose the vote. This thinking makes perfect sense because if the immigrants were unleashed on Britain like they were on Germany then Britain would have been ruined. I am also hearing stories of poor behaviour in Canada from the number we have let in. 

https://next.ft.com/content/3901dd48-3cee-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a


----------



## mordko

This 67-year-old lady from Sheffield explained Brexit best of all (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36631131 ):

‘I voted for membership of the European Economic Community 40 years [ago]. I voted for what I thought was free trade between the UK and the six founder countries. I did not vote for what the EU was becoming, which appeared to be a federal state run by Brussels bureaucrats who I believe do not serve the interests of any of the EU member states. For this reason, I voted Leave on Thursday. Although I have felt some anxiety, I also feel hopeful. I have no doubt we will see some turbulent economic times initially, but we have seen economic turbulence through the recession, and prior to that, with the high interest rates and inflation of the 1970s and 80s. As an "out" voter, I am still European. I still believe in mutually beneficial trade deals, both with Europe, and the rest of the world, and I support controlled immigration. Britain was, is, and will continue to be a great country. I am optimistic. We should see "brexit" as an opportunity.’ 

The only other point worth mentioning is that UK joined EEC during the Cold War, EU was seen as part of the western alliance and the thinking was "better Brussels than Moscow". It was an economic union and nobody could imagine the superstate beast it became after the Maastricht.


----------



## GoldStone

*How EU Overreach Pushed Britain Out*


----------



## mrPPincer

hey new dog, I'm not hearing those particular stories, above link is paywalled


----------



## GoldStone

I assume that new dog referred to this story:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/28/r...n-canadian-high-school-harassing-young-girls/

It's on the front page of reddit right now.


----------



## mrPPincer

ok 'TheRebel''s signature is all over this one, thanks for clearing that up GoldStone.


----------



## bass player

mrPPincer said:


> ok 'TheRebel''s signature is all over this one, thanks for clearing that up GoldStone.


Since you dismissed it outright, I'd love to hear what parts of the story are inaccurate.


----------



## olivaw

Setting aside the hand wringing about Syrian Refugees, here's a story about Brexit -- and Trump. 

*Angry Scots Troll Donald Trump Over Brexit Gaffe
*



> Trump also faced a backlash after tweeting that people in Scotland were “going wild” following the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union.
> 
> Many Scots are angry at his tweet because most actually voted to remain inside the EU.
> 
> All 32 council areas and a total 62 percent of Scots backed the UK to remain in the EU, according to the BBC. It was in contrast to the U.K. as a whole, which voted 52 percent to 48 percent for “leave.”
> 
> Dozens of Twitter users branded Trump a “moron,” “weapons-grade plum” and “idiot” — including British pop star Lily Allen, TV presenter Sue Perkins and comedian Peter Serafinowicz.





> The referendum result has prompted U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron to resign, and it appears as if Scotland may now seek to remain in the European Union itself — but by splitting from the United Kingdom.
> 
> “Scotland has delivered a strong, unequivocal vote to remain in the EU, and I welcome that endorsement of our European status,” said Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon. She added that a second independence referendum for her nation was now “highly likely.”
> 
> Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.


----------



## GoldStone

mrPPincer said:


> ok 'TheRebel''s signature is all over this one, thanks for clearing that up GoldStone.


You can follow the link to the original school documents. Read them and reach your own conclusions.


----------



## bass player

> Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.


Lol. What else would you expect from Huffington Post?


----------



## mrPPincer

what's funny? there's nothing inaccurate in that quote.


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> Lol. What else would you expect from Huffington Post?


The assessment of Trump seems reasonable, no? The story is accurate, confirmed here: http://globalnews.ca/news/2787023/d...al-media-thrashing-for-scottish-brexit-tweet/

Here's a fun video about Brexit.


----------



## mrPPincer

GoldStone said:


> You can follow the link to the original school documents. Read them and reach your own conclusions.


another time maybe, thanks Goldstone, but I don't need to be feeding depression atm, dog died saturday, & had a death in the family recently, digging for info on the misbehaving brown people right now is not on the top of my priority list at the immediate moment

addendum, scumbags come in all colours. if the reports are accurate so be it, they need to be dealt with. period.


----------



## new dog

Sorry mrppincer it just went that way for some reason so I will try another link.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...eu-parliament-brexit-your-fault-migrant-fears

On the stories I can't post them because they come from zero hedge and no one will read it. In one of our elementary schools the refugee parents of a young girl who was a A student beat here until she was brain damaged and now needs help to do homework. She was taken away but the parents I believed were not charged because they didn't have enough evidence. They treated her very badly because she was a girl they didn't want in their family.


----------



## olivaw

new dog said:


> Sorry mrppincer it just went that way for some reason so I will try another link.
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...eu-parliament-brexit-your-fault-migrant-fears


Cameron was talking about resentment towards other Europeans working in the UK. He said nothing about refugees. Poles, Czechs, Slovaks and Hungarians are getting the brunt of the backlash. 

The BBC reported on the same meeting: *BBC: EU Brexit summit: Sad 'last supper' in Brussels*



> British Prime Minister David Cameron had to brief them on the EU in-out referendum that went so disastrously wrong for him.
> An EU official close to the talks said the other 27 wanted to hear his "explanation of the situation in the UK that led to the vote" and his "timeline" now for the tortuous process of pulling out of the EU.





> A spate of racist incidents in the UK since the Brexit vote has caused widespread alarm. Czech minister Tomas Prouza told the BBC that "there needs to be a very strong statement from the UK government" about that.
> 
> Poles - the largest community of EU workers in the UK - have been abused in some of the attacks.
> 
> Mr Prouza said he feared the referendum had "opened a can of worms - this atmosphere reminds us of the 1930s".
> 
> "We thought we had buried this 70 years ago," he added.
> 
> The Visegrad Group - Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary - agree that freedom of movement must remain a condition for being in the EU single market. So they will be tough negotiators if the UK seeks a free trade deal with the EU.
> 
> "It's four freedoms or no freedoms," Mr Prouza said, referring to the EU's free movement of goods, services, people and capital.


----------



## james4beach

I heard the pompous speech that Farage (of UKIP) gave at the EU parliament. It was shameful. He insulted them and is just begging them to screw him and his country. He's self-assured and on a high.

Such a blow-hard. And it was only 52% in favour... talk about overconfidence.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...tells_meps_theyve_never_had_a_proper_job.html

_Farage: "What I’d like to see is a grown-up and sensible attitude to how we negotiate a different relationship. I know that virtually none of you have never done a proper job in your lives, or worked in business, or worked in trade, or indeed ever created a job. But listen, just listen."_


----------



## james4beach

And after UKIP's Farage taunted the EU parliament, a Scottish MP desperately tried to save the honourable image of Scotland, lest it be dragged into the mud by Farage.

So sad for Scotland and Ireland.


----------



## mordko

Look up Juncker, the man who did the most for the British vote to go the way it did. He is the President of the EC, who has been talking about "punishing" Britain - in a very putinesque style. 

Amazingly, Juncker never spent 1 day working in a real job. He went to university and then straight into politics then all the way to the top of EUSSR to a position where he can inflict the maximum damage. 

Meanwhile France and Italy are pushing hard for a European superstate. It's an interesting lesson to learn from Brexit, particularly so given that the people of France are even more Europsceptic than the Brits. To foil France and Italy, Germany is pushing for a set of rules that amounts to a single budget for the EU superstate but not the other trinkets.


----------



## GoldStone

james4beach said:


> So sad for Scotland and Ireland.


Spare a thought for the millions of Europeans who have been unemployed for many years due to the failed euro experiment.


----------



## dotnet_nerd

Brexit turned out to be a big Nothingburger.

My portfolio is up about $6000 since all the brouhaha


----------



## humble_pie

new dog said:


> In one of our elementary schools the refugee parents of a young girl who was a A student beat here until she was brain damaged and now needs help to do homework. She was taken away but the parents I believed were not charged because they didn't have enough evidence. They treated her very badly because she was a girl they didn't want in their family.



this does not sound like any story belonging to the recent wave of refugees, ie those who arrived in late 2015 & 2016.

some cultures famously maltreat women & girls & we have already have immigrants & new canadian citizens from those cultures living in canada. In an extreme although not isolated case of honour killing, afghan-born Mohamed Shafia drowned his ex-wife and three of his own daughters in the kingston locks in 2009. This is a problem we in the west must learn to deal with, are learning to deal with.

but not by spreading rumours in order to deliberately smear refugees without any facts. Might one inquire where you are getting your taboid story from? if there was no evidence, how do you know - i mean "know beyond a shadow of a doubt," in the classic Marie Henein judicial sense - how do you know for sure that a) the family were refugees, b) the daughter was an A student until suddenly they began beating her, & c) the family did not want this girl. 


.


----------



## mordko

dotnet_nerd said:


> Brexit turned out to be a big Nothingburger.
> 
> My portfolio is up about $6000 since all the brouhaha


My North American and Far Eastern holdings are up a bit, but the stuff within my British pension is still down when converted into CAD. It's a long-term game though.


----------



## humble_pie

GoldStone said:


> Spare a thought for the millions of Europeans who have been unemployed for many years due to the failed euro experiment.




it's the old story of which came first, the chicken or the egg.

it's just as easy to conclude that youth unemployment would be worse today without the history of the EU.

superimpose your bar chart onto a base map of europe. Where are those countries with no youth jobs located? with the exception of france, they are located in eastern & southern europe.

move westward & the stats for youth employment improve greatly. We're told that youth jobs in non-members switzerland & austria are doing OK, so the pattern is intact.

when the Cold War ended, it left east block countries in ruins. There was even lingering concern not to accept their broken economies into the EU. This translated into the effort by western europe to help draw those countries towards a better life in the european union.

southern europe? one could just as easily post a bar chart for the entire world, showing youth unemployment in catholic vs non-catholic countries. The bars will be the same. High vs low.

stats don't tell the whole story.


----------



## mordko

Actually, East European economies, e.g. Poland, Hungary and the Baltics are some of the most vibrant in the EU. They are poorer than the likes of Greece but are not fond of socialism, have more flexible labour laws and have learnt to limit the size of state to manageable proportions. 

In general, eurozone works to set up conditions favourable to its largest economy (German). Weaker economies of Greece/Italy/France need weaker currency, lower interest rates, etc... but Germans say "tough". That, and a rigid labour market cause high unemployment.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> it's the old story of which came first, the chicken or the egg.
> 
> it's just as easy to conclude that youth unemployment would be worse today without the history of the EU.


Sorry, your conclusion is simply not credible. It's pretty much the consensus among most respected economists that Euro currency is the cause; high unemployment in the southern Europe is the effect. 

Greece/Italy/Spain need weaker currencies to be competitive with Germany. It's too bad they can't do anything about it, sans leaving the euro zone.


----------



## humble_pie

GoldStone said:


> Sorry, your conclusion is simply not credible.


perhaps you could read more carefully? i didn't have any conclusion, i merely mentioned that It's just as easy to conclude ...




> It's pretty much the consensus among most respected economists that Euro currency is the egg; high unemployment in the southern Europe is the chicken


like i said, bar charts will show different economic sets for catholic vs non-catholic countries ... one can draw the comparisons out further to ridiculous lengths, ie indo-european language origin vs no proto-indo-european-trees ...

let's face it though, goldstone's personal economists are always going to be the planet's "most respected" while everybody else will have to put up with crippled tattered cross-eyed ragamuffin econos . :biggrin:


.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> Actually, East European economies, e.g. Poland, Hungary and the Baltics are some of the most vibrant in the EU. They are poorer than the likes of Greece but are not fond of socialism, have more flexible labour laws and have learnt to limit the size of state to manageable proportions.



ah, the Visegrad group. Poland, hungary, czech republic, slovenia. Also home to vibrant neo nazi & Pegida parties.


----------



## olivaw

Good news ...

*Could Brexit Be Canceled? Here's How Vote Might Be Reversed*
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/br...-be-canceled-here-s-how-vote-could-be-n600451


> Secretary of State John Kerry echoed many analysts Tuesday when he said "there are a number of ways" the Brexit vote might be reversed — meaning the U.K. might remain part of the EU after all.


----------



## mordko

Yes, it is a really good news the US Secretary of State lives in la-la fantasy land.

As Merkel said, "This is no time for wishful thinking, but rather to grasp reality." 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-will-happen-as-cameron-makes-his-eu-farewell

Or in the words of Disraeli: "In a democracy it is occasionally necessary to defer to the wishes of the majority".


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> ah, the Visegrad group. Poland, hungary, czech republic, slovenia. Also home to vibrant neo nazi & Pegida parties.


You would know. Do they have the right blood type for your taste?


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> As Merkel said, "This is no time for wishful thinking, but rather to grasp reality." .


Merkel is negotiating. Doing a pretty good job of it too. 


*WHY BREXIT MIGHT NOT HAPPEN AT ALL*
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/why-brexit-might-not-happen-at-all


*Petition for second EU referendum reaches 4 million as hundreds attend anti-Brexit protest in London*
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...eu-referendum-hits-4-million-as-hundreds-att/


----------



## bass player

The vote was official...an online petition after the fact is nothing but sour grapes. I'm pretty sure there were also well over 4 million people in Canada who would have signed a petition the next day to oust Trudeau, but no one seems to be calling for a re-election.


----------



## james4beach

mordko said:


> Amazingly, Juncker never spent 1 day working in a real job. He went to university and then straight into politics then all the way to the top of EUSSR to a position where he can inflict the maximum damage.


You're echoing the kind of anti-intellectualism that is growing rampant in the USA too


----------



## bass player

james4beach said:


> You're echoing the kind of anti-intellectualism that is growing rampant in the USA too


The problem with democracy for some is the fact that sometimes the people get to make choices that the ruling elite don't like. The intellectuals don't always know what's best, and this vote proved it. People chose to withdraw from a non-democratic entity, and the ruling elite are left sputtering with disbelief.


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> The vote was official...an online petition after the fact is nothing but sour grapes. I'm pretty sure there were also well over 4 million people in Canada who would have signed a petition the next day to oust Trudeau, but no one seems to be calling for a re-election.


I thought that too, but I am starting to realize that political and legal situation in the United Kingdom is very different than at first glance: 
- The Referendum was advisory
- Cameron said he would invoke Article 50 immediately if the Leave side won. He didn't. 
- The vote was 2 to 2 (i.e. England and Wales voted Leave, Scotland and Northern Ireland voted Remain.
- The popular vote was 52-48. Hardly a blow out. 
- 4 million signatures is too many signatures to ignore. 
- Scotland's parliament is working on another Independence referendum. 
- Britain's government and opposition are in a state of chaos. 
- Leave campaigners like Boris and Nigel are walking back from their own rhetoric. Why?
- Britain may accept EU rules for participation in the European market. So even if they leave, they won't really leave. 

No wonders the markets recovered. Brexit is no longer a certainty.


----------



## mordko

james4beach said:


> You're echoing the kind of anti-intellectualism that is growing rampant in the USA too


I think that rulers should gain a bit of experience in the real world first - aka work in the industry. You could be an economist, a lawyer, an engineer or a businessmen before you start your carer in the government. 

How exactly is this "anti-intellectualism"?


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> The problem with democracy for some is the fact that sometimes the people get to make choices that the ruling elite don't like. The intellectuals don't always know what's best, and this vote proved it. People chose to withdraw from a non-democratic entity, and the ruling elite are left sputtering with disbelief.


The EU is democratic. There is a debate about a democratic deficit in the EU but that is a common debate in every democracy. We debate Canada's democratic deficit all the time.


----------



## gibor365

mordko said:


> You would know. Do they have the right blood type for your taste?


If they are not Jews, she will be OK


----------



## gibor365

bass player said:


> The vote was official...an online petition after the fact is nothing but sour grapes. I'm pretty sure there were also well over 4 million people in Canada who would have signed a petition the next day to oust Trudeau, but no one seems to be calling for a re-election.


There is a big difference between elections and referendum.



> Leave campaigners like Boris and Nigel are walking back from their own rhetoric. Why?


 Because they don't want to leave! This referendum was just political game... Now they're thinking how to reverse referendum and not to "loose a face"


----------



## mordko

gibor365 said:


> If they are not Jews, she will be OK


You sure? While she is mixing up Slovakia and Slovenia, she appears to have a generic problem with all these countries.


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> The EU is democratic. There is a debate about a democratic deficit in the EU but that is a common debate in every democracy. We debate Canada's democratic deficit all the time.


The EC president is our good ol friend Juncker. He is the one callin for the punishment of insubordinate Brits, Putin-style. He is the one whose policies prior to the vote helped to secure support for Brexit. He is an EU bureaucrat who never spent a day in the real world. Nobody ever voted him in.

How is this democracy???


----------



## gibor365

mordko said:


> You sure? While she is mixing up Slovakia and Slovenia, she appears to have a generic problem with all these countries.


Don't expect too much  , G.W.Bush was mixing up Austria and Australia and was POTUS


----------



## AltaRed

"The European Commission (EC) is the executive body of the European Union responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties and managing the day-to-day business of the EU.[2] Commissioners swear an oath at the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate.[3]

The Commission operates as a cabinet government, with 28 members of the Commission (informally known as "commissioners").[4] There is one member per member state, but members are bound by their oath of office to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state.[3] One of the 28 is the Commission President (currently Jean-Claude Juncker) proposed by the European Council[5] and elected by the European Parliament.[6] The Council of the European Union then nominates the other 27 members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated President, and the 28 members as a single body are then subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament.[7] The current Commission is the Juncker Commission, which took office in late 2014."

Mordko, what are you on about? Sounds pretty democratic to me.


----------



## mordko

AltaRed said:


> Mordko, what are you on about? Sounds pretty democratic to me.


We have a different idea of democracy. My idea has the president elected by the people, not selected among bureaucrats during backroom arm-wrestling. If democractic leaders screw up, a few years later people get to vote and kick them out of office. Here we have a supernational structure which has huge impact on peoples lives while its president has never been elected and european electorate has exactly zero power to kick him out of office.


----------



## AltaRed

The peoples' representatives of each country, elected by the voters of their own country, vote. What makes that different from many democracies? We don't directly elect our PM either. The PM is automatically the leader of the party that wins the most seats, not necessarily by the most votes either. 

You can't have a few hundred million partisan/parochial voters from 28 countries voting for an EC President. Absurdity would reign.

The EC President can only preside if s/he has the backing of the European Parliment. That is the way it should be.


----------



## bass player

AltaRed said:


> The PM is automatically the leader of the party that wins the most seats, not necessarily by the most votes either.


That's not necessarily true. The PM must also be elected by a majority of the people in their riding.


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> That's not necessarily true. The PM must also be elected by a majority of the people in their riding.


The analogy to Prime Minister is appropriate. There is no legal requirement for the prime minister to be a member of parliament. 

As an aside, the current President of the European Commission is a former Prime Minister of Luxembourg. The current President of the European Council is a former Prime Minister of Poland.


----------



## james4beach

mordko said:


> I think that rulers should gain a bit of experience in the real world first - aka work in the industry. You could be an economist, a lawyer, an engineer or a businessmen before you start your carer in the government.


I disagree with your definition of "real world". The business world is also the realm of crony capitalism, corrupt bankers, and shady unethical real estate business (i.e. Trump). Business people are no more "real" than academics, and they certainly don't have better intentions or abilities.

Nigel Farage, who speaks about this "real world", is a former commodities trader and multi-millionnaire. He is wealthy and from elite circles. These elites like Farage somehow are able to convince blue collar workers that they will operate in their best interests. *There is nothing "real world" about a group of elite bankers (Farage/UKIP) and real estate moguls (Trump) -- they are tricking you.* And people are stupid enough to think that these people have their interests in mind.

And people like Farage and Trump have the worst ethics, partly due to their upbringing among the elites. I trust academics more.

Farage is a Millionaire Banker



> The party leader Farage is a millionaire banker, from millionaire banking lineage – his father Guy Oscar Justus Farage was a stockbroker.
> 
> Farage didn’t work his way up from the bottom. He was educated at £10,000 a term private school Dulwich College. On leaving college he used daddy’s contacts to become a commodities trader in the City. He is one of those suited, champagne quaffing, morally bankrupt traders that helped bring our economy to its knees. A vote for UKIP, is a vote to install another wealthy heir into Number 10.
> 
> This is important. The party poses as an outsider, challenging the established political parties of Labour, Lib Dems and Tories. They claim they are the only real alternative. In fact, Farage is exactly like Cameron, Osborne and the rest of the millionaires making up Cameron and Clegg’s cabinet. And the ideology UKIP espouses, is the same Neoliberalism now infecting the Tories and Lib Dems. There’s precious little difference between them. As Max Headroom used to say, ‘And now … more of the same’.


----------



## mordko

AltaRed said:


> The peoples' representatives of each country, elected by the voters of their own country, vote. What makes that different from many democracies? We don't directly elect our PM either. The PM is automatically the leader of the party that wins the most seats, not necessarily by the most votes either.
> 
> You can't have a few hundred million partisan/parochial voters from 28 countries voting for an EC President. Absurdity would reign.
> 
> The EC President can only preside if s/he has the backing of the European Parliment. That is the way it should be.


If PM does not get elected in his constituency, he isn't going to be the PM. The party he leads has to get votes from the people. 

Juncker never got a single vote from anyone. He is not responsible to anyone. All you get is backroom wrangling and a compromise candidate, ideally a demonstrable nobody who will jump when Germany and France say so (exactly like Juncker). 

See the difference? 

Now... It's set up this way deliberately. If the EC President is elected, he has legitimacy. EU countries don't want that because then they stop being countries. It's catch 22.


----------



## AltaRed

:hopelessness:


----------



## mordko

james4beach said:


> I disagree with your definition of "real world". The business world is also the realm of crony capitalism, corrupt bankers, and shady unethical real estate business (i.e. Trump). Business people are no more "real" than academics, and they certainly don't have better intentions or abilities.
> 
> Nigel Farage, who speaks about this "real world", is a former commodities trader and multi-millionnaire. He is wealthy and from elite circles. These elites like Farage somehow are able to convince blue collar workers that they will operate in their best interests. *There is nothing "real world" about a group of elite bankers (Farage/UKIP) and real estate moguls (Trump) -- they are tricking you.* And people are stupid enough to think that these people have their interests in mind.
> 
> And people like Farage and Trump have the worst ethics, partly due to their upbringing among the elites. I trust academics more.
> 
> Farage is a Millionaire Banker


You can trust whoever you want. And I am not saying that being a businessman automatically makes a perfect leader. All I am saying is that someone who never did anything other than government isn't qualified in my book. Juncker is a lawyer by education but he never practiced law, never earned a single cent other than as a career politician. He is a son of an old Nazi, became a career politician in a tiny statelet straight out of school and has zero real life experience. 

Trump has different problems in his biography, it's irrelevant to this discussion. The amount of money does not qualify someone in my book, and neither does it disqualify him/her.


----------



## james4beach

Trump and Farage have a lot of similarities. Both are loud, obnoxious and generally rude. Both come from very wealthy families and followed in the family's business (Trump: real estate, Farage: banking). More importantly, both skipped the university education which would have helped make them educated and well-rounded, and instead are self-declared experts in everything. They're both wealthy elites who are also uneducated and ignorant.


----------



## mordko

Not really very familiar with Farage. Trump did not skip "the university education". He went to university. He is a scumbag; it has nothing to do with having or not having an education. How is this relevant to Brexit and the EU?


----------



## gibor365

mordko said:


> Not really very familiar with Farage. Trump did not skip "the university education". He went to university. He is a scumbag; it has nothing to do with having or not having an education. How is this relevant to Brexit and the EU?


Not just "education" . he graduated from Wharton and

_According to Forbes, approximately 90% of billionaires in the finance industry obtained their business degrees from one of three Ivy League institutions: Wharton, Harvard University or Columbia University, with Wharton alumni accounting for the majority_

But, yes,


> How is this relevant to Brexit and the EU?


----------



## humble_pie

GoldStone said:


> It's pretty much the consensus among most respected economists that Euro currency is the cause; high unemployment in the southern Europe is the effect.



this is so strange. My sources are saying that southern italy, southern greece & southern spain have been economic basket cases for a thousand years or more, nothing to do with a recent historical ripple called the EU.


----------



## mordko

All these countries did a heck of a lot better prior to joining the euro. So did countries like Germany, Holland and Portugal. Here is the effect of being part of the eurozone:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...ce-the-single-currency-launched-10359630.html

And if one were to look at growth rates, they used to be much higher in Italy, Greece and Spain.


----------



## humble_pie

hmmmn this doesn't sound quite right. You're saying that after the destruction of WW II, throughout the cold war, prior to the EU, all those countries were booming?

strange, i thought it was the other way around. I thought any postwar lift that a broken europe received in the latter half of the 20th century came from the US via the marshall plan. Gradually this fertilized bauhaus creative energy, scandinavian productivity, the genius of italian design. Eventually europe became strong enough to go it alone .

the north american economy is as hollowed out as europe, or possibly even more so. But surely you'd never be saying that the european union managed to destroy north american markets as well.

.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> All these countries did a heck of a lot better prior to joining the euro. So did countries like Germany, Holland and Portugal. Here is the effect of being part of the eurozone:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...ce-the-single-currency-launched-10359630.html
> 
> And if one were to look at growth rates, they used to be much higher in Italy, Greece and Spain.



but why are you switching the topic from the european union to the eurocurrency zone? 

agree that the UK is not a eurocurrency country. It never was.

the topic of this thread is brexit, i thought. IE exit from the european political union. Not exit from a currency it doesn't use.


----------



## Pluto

I think the globe is suffering a hangover from the China boom: they aren't buying as much stuff. 
Plus the tech boom is maturing. Most of the hot tech products are not being replaced as often due to maturity in hardware.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> but why are you switching the topic from the european union to the eurocurrency zone?
> 
> agree that the UK is not a eurocurrency country. It never was.
> 
> the topic of this thread is brexit, i thought. IE exit from the european political union. Not exit from a currency it doesn't use.


HP, why don't you look up the thread? You may discover that the point I commented on specifically addressed the eurozone. How is that "switching the topic"? Reading comprehension problems often go along with the excessive interest in bloodlines. 

And of course this is relevant to EU membership. The vast majority of EU's economy is eurozone. It's been stagnating. EU, as a protectionist organization, has been reluctant to agree trade deals with countries like Canada, US, etc... Outside the EU Britain would be able to increase trade with the economies that are actually growing. 

As for what was going on during wartime, you are quite right. EU is indeed doing a bit better. Killer argument.


----------



## olivaw

Gibor365 said:


> But, yes,
> "How is this relevant to Brexit and the EU?"


Nigel Farage is a rich fat cat who uses demagoguery to sway voters. It's good to understand how the Leave side won the referendum because it will help us defeat them in the second referendum.  

Donald trump is a rich fat cat who uses demagoguery to sway voters. It's good to understand his tactics too. 

Definitely relevant. 



humble_pie said:


> the topic of this thread is brexit, i thought. IE exit from the european political union. Not exit from a currency it doesn't use.


humble, Thanks for trying to keep this thread on topic.


----------



## GoldStone

NDR Research on Brexit:

"we expect that Brexit will be dealt with in typical European fashion: with *a compromise that changes nothing, satisfies no one, and kicks the can down the road*."


----------



## mordko

They will give it all to achieve nothing and satisfy no one


----------



## andrewf

I think this is why the markets are recovering... the conclusion being that either UK will not invoke article 50, or if it does, it will exit EU only in the technical sense (still subject to freedom of movement, tariffs, etc.). Ie, the brexiters who voted for a curtailing of EU migration will have been thwarted.

In the mean time, lawyers will make a fortune rewriting a mountain of UK legislation.


----------



## mordko

If I were to guess:

- UK will exit, it's not a banana republic where they can ignore the vote. 

- There will be freedom of movement, but no housing benefits, income benefits, child benefits and all the other welfare payments, no free NHS, no free education. Ditto for Brits in Europe. 

- There will be freedom of investment and free trade.

- UK will chip into the budget to cover the specific programs it participates in. 

- UK won't be party to common foreign policy/military policy, EU human rights laws, CAP, payments to poor EU regions, common immigration laws, ever closer union etc...

- UK will be free to set up its own trade agreements with other countries.


----------



## GoldStone

Boris Johnson:

*I made this mess, but I refuse to clean it up*


----------



## SMK

+1


----------



## bass player

GoldStone said:


> Boris Johnson:
> 
> *I made this mess, but I refuse to clean it up*


The referendum showed that 17 million people thought the EU was the mess, which is why they voted to leave, but I guess you can lay the blame all on one person if it helps you to sleep. :biggrin:


----------



## SMK

bass player, mess or not, why do you think Boris Johnson pulled out of the race? I think there is only one simple explanation, don't you?


----------



## GoldStone

bass player said:


> The referendum showed that 17 million people thought the EU was the mess, which is why they voted to leave, but I guess you can lay the blame all on one person if it helps you to sleep. :biggrin:


You are thinking in black and white. The EU being a mess / the UK being a mess are not mutually exclusive things.

And for the record, I lean ever so slightly pro-Leave, but the leadership of the Leave camp (or lack thereof) gives me a lot of doubts.


----------



## mordko

SMK said:


> bass player, mess or not, why do you think Boris Johnson pulled out of the race? I think there is only one simple explanation, don't you?


Eh... because he was back-stabbed by Gove?


----------



## SMK

IMO, he arrived at this decision days not hours ago.


----------



## andrewf

Are May or Gove likely to pursue the 'out means out' Brexit? Seems to me they both will try for the non-exit Brexit. All that will happen is UK loses its say in EU affairs, but is still bound by EU rules and obligations.


----------



## gibor365

> - UK will exit, it's not a banana republic where they can ignore the vote.


 They won't ignore, they may do 2nd referendum  or


> the conclusion being that either UK will not invoke article 50, or if it does, it will exit EU only in the technical sense (still subject to freedom of movement, tariffs, etc.).


----------



## mordko

@gibor - see above. It will exit in a sense that UK won't be an EU member state, will not pay benefits to EU immigrants, have independent foreign policy, won't be part of the common agricultural policy, will have independent trade policy etc... There will still freedom of movement for EU workers.


----------



## gibor365

imho, if even UK invoke article 50, that again imho 50/50  , UK independence from EU will be extremely limited.... and don't forget Scotland and N.Ireland who will try to "block" Brexit


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> Boris Johnson:
> 
> *I made this mess, but I refuse to clean it up*


Yesterday Boris was being called the presumptive Prime Minister. Today he is out. Oh to know what is happening in the British corridors of power.


----------



## olivaw

> "The Brexit vote was driven by angry, less educated, older white voters who feel screwed by globalization and the establishment, and have been fed a chip butty of xenophobia slathered in slogan sauce," Full Frontal host Samantha Bee said on Monday.


http://www.vox.com/2016/6/28/12050318/samantha-bee-brexit-trump-full-frontal



> "That is really the worst outcome of Brexit: not the breakup of the EU, or the fact that you can now use the British pound as loo paper; it’s that the vote made these hateful morons think that over half the country agreed with them," Bee said. "This is why it’s not enough for Trump to lose. It has to be a [freakin] landslide."


----------



## new dog

Brexit was the people trying to fight forward from the elite, globalists or the unelected people who think they can control everything. Of course it may not work well now but at least people are trying to take control of their lives instead of the government and others controlling them. The only thing worse then Trump is Hillary because at least the people chose someone they thought represented them.


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> the fact that you can now use the British pound as loo paper


That is indeed a "fact". The pound dropped 10% or so. Of course CAD is worth quite a bit less than the pound. It also dropped 20-30% because of the oil crisis.

@Olivaw - as the dollars are worth even less than the toilet paper - I would be prepared to take them off your hands and save you the composting effort.


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> "The Brexit vote was driven by angry, less educated, older white voters who feel screwed by globalization and the establishment, and have been fed a chip butty of xenophobia slathered in slogan sauce," Full Frontal host Samantha Bee said on Monday.
Click to expand...

This is typical and wide-spread reaction from the so called "elites".

_**** old people. **** poor people. **** uneducated people. **** people worried about immigration._

Oh, Samantha, thanks for your deep insight.


----------



## GoldStone

David Frum writing in The Atlantic:

*Why The U.K. Left the European Union*

Quote:

===========

The force that turned Britain away from the European Union was the greatest mass migration since perhaps the Anglo-Saxon invasion. 630,000 foreign nationals settled in Britain in the single year 2015. Britain’s population has grown from 57 million in 1990 to 65 million in 2015, despite a native birth rate that’s now below replacement. On Britain’s present course, the population would top 70 million within another decade, half of that growth immigration-driven.

British population growth is not generally perceived to benefit British-born people. Migration stresses schools, hospitals, and above all, housing. The median house price in London already amounts to 12 times the median local salary. Rich migrants outbid British buyers for the best properties; poor migrants are willing to crowd more densely into a dwelling than British-born people are accustomed to tolerating.

This migration has been driven both by British membership in the European Union and by Britain’s own policy: The flow of immigration to the U.K. is almost exactly evenly divided between EU and non-EU immigration. And more is to come, from both sources: Much of the huge surge of Middle Eastern and North African migrants to continental Europe since 2013 seems certain to arrive in Britain; as Prime Minister David Cameron likes to point out, Britain has created more jobs since 2010 than all the rest of the EU combined.

The June 23 vote represents a huge popular rebellion against a future in which British people feel increasingly crowded within—and even crowded out of—their own country: More than 200,000 British-born people leave the U.K. every year for brighter futures abroad, in Australia above all, the United States in second place.

...

*Is it possible that leaders and elites had it all wrong? If they’re to save the open global economy, maybe they need to protect their populations better against globalization’s most unwelcome consequences* — of which mass migration is the very least welcome of them all?

If any one person drove the United Kingdom out of the European Union, it was Angela Merkel, and her impulsive solo decision in the summer of 2015 to throw open Germany — and then all Europe — to 1.1 million Middle Eastern and North African migrants, with uncountable millions more to come. Merkel’s catastrophically negative example is one that perhaps should be avoided by U.S. politicians who seek to avert Trump-style populism in the United States.

===========


----------



## humble_pie

.
but see how illogical David Frum's article is, though.




GoldStone said:


> David Frum writing in The Atlantic:
> 
> The force that turned Britain away from the European Union was the greatest mass migration since perhaps the Anglo-Saxon invasion. 630,000 foreign nationals settled in Britain in the single year 2015 ... British population growth is not generally perceived to benefit British-born people.


ok, notorious right-winger Frum is saying that brown people are not benefiting british-born people.


but then he contradicts himself a couple sentences later like so:



> as Prime Minister David Cameron likes to point out, Britain has created more jobs since 2010 than all the rest of the EU combined



a reader doesn't know what to think. Are we being told that newly arriving brown people have created more jobs in the UK since 2010 than all the rest of the EU combined? or are we being told that the auld high norse stock outperformed so strongly, both employment-wise & business-wise, just because of the multicultural stimulation? which is it?


either way, me i think David Frum is doing a huge service. I think the smallish proportion of brits - only 37% they say - who voted Leave did a huge service. They got it out there. They called a spade a spade. They said We Are Fed Up With Brown People.

one could literally hear the air hissing out of the previously unspoken racist balloon. Now we know who is who. Now things are better grounded. Now most of the old leaders have either resigned or else they're being thrown out. Now the sensible majority of the Union, including the scots, the irish, the welsh, the elected members of the british, scots & irish parliaments, plus all the turncoat brexiteers, can all get on with the job of carving out a better deal for great britain.

scotland's nicola sturgeon is crystal clear that the elected parliaments are going to take legal precedence over any flim-flam referendum, which has turned out to be not much more than a ventilation of mood.


----------



## GoldStone

humble_pie said:


> ok, notorious right-winger Frum is saying that brown people are not benefiting british-born people.


Notorious left-winger HP put words in Frum's mouth. Frum didn't say anything about "brown people". In fact, he pointed out that half of migrants to the UK came from EU countries.



humble_pie said:


> a reader doesn't know what to think. Are we being told that newly arriving brown people have created more jobs in the UK since 2010 than all the rest of the EU combined? or are we being told that the auld high norse stock outperformed so strongly, both employment-wise & business-wise, just because of the multicultural stimulation? which is it?


Notorious left-winger HP missed another, very logical option. The robust free market economy of the UK is a job creating machine that keeps attracting mass migration.



humble_pie said:


> either way, me i think David Frum is doing a huge service. I think the smallish proportion of brits - only 37% they say - who voted Leave did a huge service.


Notorious left-winger HP is being illogical here: 37% voted to leave, but even smaller proportion of brits voted to remain.



humble_pie said:


> one could literally hear the air hissing out of the previously unspoken racist balloon.


Notorious left-winger HP fails to understand that it's possible to have legitimate concerns about mass migration without being a racist. The UK is a small island, yet it absorbed 630,000 migrants in 2015. Canada -- a huge country -- absorbed about 260,000. Canadian economic immigrants have to pass a strict point system to be selected. By the standards of the notorious left-wingers like HP, Canada is a racist country because exercises control over its own borders.


----------



## mordko

Naturally David Frum didn't say a word about "brown people", but someone who the other day castigated me for not having a drop of "British blood" apparently cannot read. Either that or it's a simple smear.


----------



## GoldStone




----------



## GoldStone

mordko said:


> Naturally David Frum didn't say a word about "brown people", but someone who the other day castigated me for not having a drop of "British blood" apparently cannot read. Either that or it's a simple smear.


Smear is HP's middle name.


----------



## bass player

Some people fail to grasp that there is a difference between race and cultural beliefs, which leads them to call the others who are not ignorant of the difference as "racist".


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> David Frum writing in The Atlantic:
> 
> *Why The U.K. Left the European Union*
> 
> This migration has been driven both by British membership in the European Union and by Britain’s own policy: The flow of immigration to the U.K. is almost exactly evenly divided between EU and non-EU immigration. And more is to come, from both sources: Much of the huge surge of Middle Eastern and North African migrants to continental Europe since 2013 seems certain to arrive in Britain; as Prime Minister David Cameron likes to point out, Britain has created more jobs since 2010 than all the rest of the EU combined.


Well slap me up side the head and call me a liberal but isn't Frum saying the same thing as Samantha Bee? 

Or maybe not. Frum also talked about "North African migrants". Hey, isn't that code for "Brown people" and Muslims?


----------



## mordko

GoldStone said:


> Smear is HP's middle name.


No kidding. And her surname is "Ignorance". Because British-born people come in all sorts of colours while most of the recent immigrants are whiter than white.


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> Frum also talked about "North African migrants". Hey, isn't that code for "Brown people" and Muslims?


And your statement is a liberal code for: Frum is a racist. Amiright?

Here are Frum's statements verbatim where he mentions Middle Eastern and North American migrants:

#1

"The flow of immigration to the U.K. is almost exactly evenly divided between EU and non-EU immigration. And more is to come, from both sources: Much of the huge surge of Middle Eastern and North African migrants to continental Europe since 2013 seems certain to arrive in Britain"

#2

"If any one person drove the United Kingdom out of the European Union, it was Angela Merkel, and her impulsive solo decision in the summer of 2015 to throw open Germany—and then all Europe—to 1.1 million Middle Eastern and North African migrants, with uncountable millions more to come."

To call this "code" is a feeble attempt to shut down the debate. And then you wonder why people vote for Brexit and Trump.


----------



## bass player

GoldStone said:


> To call this "code" is a feeble attempt to shut down the debate. And then you wonder why people vote for Brexit and Trump.


California recently tried to pass a bill that would allow the government to prosecute those who had a different opinion on climate change. It did not pass, but it does prove that those on the left do not want debate, and in fact, want to make debate illegal. 

Those who call others racist are simply doing the same thing as the eco-nuts...they are trying to shut down the debate because any real debate with facts would expose their lies.


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> And your statement is a liberal code for: Frum is a racist. Amiright?


No. If I wanted to say "Frum is a racist", I would have said "Frum is a racist" but I didn't say that. 



GoldStone said:


> Here are Frum's statements verbatim where he mentions Middle Eastern and North American migrants:
> 
> ----
> 
> To call this "code" is a feeble attempt to shut down the debate. And then you wonder why people vote for Brexit and Trump.


Not at all. The feeble attempt to shut down debate comes when somebody attacks the person instead of the idea. 


goldstone said:


> Notorious left-winger HP ...





goldstone said:


> Smear is HP's middle name.





mordko said:


> No kidding. And her surname is "Ignorance".


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> Not at all. The feeble attempt to shut down debate comes when somebody attacks the person instead of the idea.
> 
> 
> 
> goldstone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Notorious left-winger HP ...
Click to expand...

Ah, but I just threw HP's words back at her. It's a debate technique to highlight a weak effort by your opponent.



HP said:


> ok, notorious right-winger Frum is saying that ...


----------



## olivaw

Back to the debate ...



> This migration has been driven both by British membership in the European Union and by Britain’s own policy: The flow of immigration to the U.K. is almost exactly evenly divided between EU and non-EU immigration. And more is to come, from both sources: Much of the huge surge of Middle Eastern and North African migrants to continental Europe since 2013 seems certain to arrive in Britain; as Prime Minister David Cameron likes to point out, Britain has created more jobs since 2010 than all the rest of the EU combined.
> 
> "If any one person drove the United Kingdom out of the European Union, it was Angela Merkel, and her impulsive solo decision in the summer of 2015 to throw open Germany—and then all Europe—to 1.1 million Middle Eastern and North African migrants, with uncountable millions more to come."


HP rightfully pointed out that Frum complained about immigrants and specifically singled out Middle Eastern and North Africans. Then, in the very same paragraph, Frum added that Britain has been a successful job creator at the exact same time. 

Frum doesn't tell us anything about Middle Eastern and North African immigrants so we are left to guess his meaning. He did, however, display a remarkable lack awareness about the refugee crisis. Instead he blamed Angela Merkel, as if she created them. 

Now I don't want to call Mr. Frum a 'racist" or use the word "code" but it does seem like Mr. Frum is arguing that Britain is better off outside the EU because it can more easily shirk its duty to accept its fair share of refugees. That's what Bee said, except she didn't ***** foot around it the way Frum did. 

Amiright?


----------



## new dog

You can call it racist or whatever you want but the bottom line is the immigration rate is extremely bad for Britain as it would be for Canada as well. I have no clue why people here think this sort of migration would do them or Britain any good at all. Many of these people also stand for everything that most here are against like discriminated against homosexuals and feminists. 

The Dalai Lama has it right when he said we should help them with the intention of returning them to rebuild the countries they had left.


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> Now I don't want to call Mr. Frum a 'racist" or use the word "code" but it does seem like Mr. Frum is arguing that Britain is better off outside the EU because it can more easily shirk its duty to accept its fair share of refugees.


The EU demands that everyone accept their "fair share"...the problem is that Britain can't decide that fair share number for themselves, but it's somehow okay if Merkel does?

Just imagine Obama telling Canada how many refugees we had to take in...


----------



## AltaRed

It is what the EU (28 countries) says it is, not Merkel. She is one voice, albeit a strong voice. No need to beat up on Merkel.


----------



## mordko

Immigration from North Africa did not "create" jobs in Britain.

Several factors play a role in job-creation. It's things such as economic outlook/business confidence, certain types of investment and skilled workforce to fill in the types of jobs that are being created in the 21st century.

In the UK context there are three categories of immigrants:

- Highly skilled engineers, computer scientists, bankers, doctors, chefs, nurses, etc... They do contribute to employment and overall wealth generation. There is some, but very little resentment against this type of immigrant. Diane Abbot is one example of said resentment - she famously complained about "Finnish nurses". 

- Low skilled manual workers, builders, waiters, etc... They also contribute to employment. Most of the recent wave came to Britain from places like Romania and Poland. They do the job for lower wages than the local-born low-skilled workers. While they contribute to the economic prosperity of the upper classes, they compete head-on with the lower classes and cause quite a bit resentment in that cohort. The sheer number of recent immigrants from poor EU countries put pressure on public services and welfare, which didn't help either. 

- North African/Middle Eastern refugees. These have significant language problems. Women often stay at home and never learn to speak English. Only about 10% of these immigrants have skills. Even then they are not transferable; someone claiming to be an electrician may have laid a few cables. Nor is there much pressure on them to take unskilled work; as refugees they get free housing and benefit cheques. As we have seen in Germany, this group is actually a drag on employment.


----------



## olivaw

There are 65.3 million forcibly displaced people worldwide. Nearly 21.3 million of them are refugees and half of those are under the age of 18. Brexit isn't going to change that.


----------



## new dog

What do you propose we do about it then?


----------



## olivaw

new dog said:


> What do you propose we do about it then?


Scapegoating immigrants and refugees isn't the answer. Look at how that worked out in UK. The Kingdom may be torn apart.


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> Scapegoating immigrants and refugees isn't the answer. Look at how that worked out in UK. The Kingdom may be torn apart.


Leave campaign repeatedly pointed to Australia's and Canada's point-based immigration systems as the model the UK should adopt. How is it scapegoating?

Your position is hypocritical. You criticize millions of Brits for wanting to adopt the exact same arrangement that works well for us.


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> Leave campaign repeatedly pointed to Australia's and Canada's point-based immigration systems as the model the UK should adopt. How is it scapegoating?
> 
> Your position is hypocritical. You criticize millions of Brits for wanting to adopt the exact same arrangement that works well for us.


C'mon GoldStone, let's not pretend that the Brixiteers were just looking for a more efficient refugee admittance process. 

Farage admired the Australian system, not the Canadian system. Australia is the poster child for turning your back on refugees.


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> Australia is the poster child for turning your back on refugees.


CNN is far from unbiased. Just look at this example. She has no interest in conducting an interview...she constantly interrupts the interviewee and is only concerned that her one-sided, partisan opinion be heard. It's shameful, but has become normal behavior from one-side of the debate that is hateful and vindictive of any differing opinions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivOOM0PbNps


----------



## gibor365

olivaw said:


> C'mon GoldStone, let's not pretend that the Brixiteers were just looking for a more efficient refugee admittance process.
> 
> Farage admired the Australian system, not the Canadian system. Australia is the poster child for turning your back on refugees.


Respect to Australia! The only country that treat refugees and immigrants fair! They are example for all western world.



> Farage admired the Australian system, not the Canadian system.


 only masochist can admire Canadian idiotic system , esp during JT regime..

The only normal party in Canada was The Reform Party who


> advocated an immigration policy based solely on the economic needs of Canada


anyway , it's too late for Canada and UK...they pass the "critical point" , situation is irreversible , both countries will become some Indian-Chinese-Muslim mix in 8-10 years .. just look at our government ! 4 punjabis with turbans like in cartton about 1000 and 1 night


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> C'mon GoldStone, let's not pretend that the Brixiteers were just looking for a more efficient refugee admittance process.


They were looking to reduce the number of migrants coming into the country. This is not an unreasonable or extremist goal. The UK is a small over-populated island. It accepted 600K migrants last year. Canada accepted 260K, even though we are a huge, under-populated country. Either our level of immigration is too low, or theirs is too high.

I happen to think that:

* immigration to Canada seems about right
* immigration to the UK is too high
* immigration to Japan is too low and the country is paying a heavy economic price for its refusal to accept immigrants

According to you, no level of immigration is too high, end of discussion. You are against scapegoating immigrants and refugees, but you are perfectly fine scapegoating a wide swath of British population for wanting to pursue a reasonable immigration reform.

Who is the real extremist here?


----------



## gibor365

> They were looking to reduce the number of migrants coming into the country.


 Don't look just at numbers, look at quality  ... how many immigrant came to Canada from developed EU countries?!


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> Farage admired the Australian system, not the Canadian system. Australia is the poster child for turning your back on refugees.


FYI, this may come as a surprise to you. An opinion piece in The Guardian:

Australia's refugee policies: a global inspiration for all the wrong reasons

Quote:

=================

The sad reality is Australia’s refugee policies are envied and copied around the world, *especially in Europe*, now struggling to cope with a huge influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa. Walls and fences are being built across the continent in futile attempts to keep out the unwanted. A privatised security apparatus is working to complement the real agenda. Australia is an island but it has long implemented remote detention camps with high fences and isolation for its inhabitants.

...

Brussels has proposed an Australian-style border force to monitor the EU’s borders and deport asylum seekers. *Germany and France support the move.* This proves that the most powerful nations have little interest in resolving the reasons so many people are streaming into Europe (such as war and climate change) and prefer to pull up the drawbridge. Former Australian prime minister Tony Abbott encouraged Europe to turn back the refugee boats and it seems Brussels is listening. Europe is also copying Australia’s stance of privatising the detention centres for refugees.

=================


----------



## gibor365

> This proves that the most powerful nations have little interest in resolving the reasons so many people are streaming into Europe


 and why should they?! 

france has enough issues with huge number with north african immigrants from former colonies who keep destroying country


----------



## GoldStone

One more point regarding this:



olivaw said:


> Farage admired the Australian system, not the Canadian system.


Actually, Canadian and Australian immigration systems are very similar. Both countries use point-based criteria to select the most desirable economic immigrants. Both countries rely on private sponsorship to adopt refugees.

The only key difference between Canada and Australia is geography. Unlike Australia, Canada is protected from all 4 sides: Arctic in the north; vast cold oceans East and West; US border in the South. Australia isn't so lucky. Their refugee policy was designed to deal with waves and waves of boat people coming from the nearby South Asia islands. Canada cannot claim a higher moral ground because we don't face the same challenge.


----------



## gibor365

> Just imagine Obama telling Canada how many refugees we had to take in...


 Obama and EU can tell whatever they want.... all Eastern Europe countries, like Croatia, Polandm Hungary etc , told EU to [email protected] off (regarding request to accept specific number of refugees)


----------



## andrewf

I think a country's capacity to accept immigrants is more related to its existing population, wealth and culture/institutions. So, the geographical size of the UK seems less relevant (and UK has plenty of unpopulated countryside).

I personally think Canada could accept more immigrants. My only hesitation is allowing immigration from cultures that do not do well integrating with the rest of Canadian society or hold values that are hostile to ours.


----------



## GoldStone

andrewf said:


> I think a country's capacity to accept immigrants is more related to its existing population, wealth and culture/institutions. So, the geographical size of the UK seems less relevant


The geographical size is not relevant, but population density is.

UK population density map:










Does it remind you of anything? (hint: look up brexit vote map)




andrewf said:


> (and UK has plenty of unpopulated countryside).


Immigrants tend to settle in the densely populated urban areas.


----------



## GoldStone

Population density: England vs the UK vs the rest of Europe










Did you know that about 1 million Poles live permanently in the UK, most of them in England? That's about 3% of Poland's entire population. Isn't that an astonishingly high number?

I'm not surprised that English people said enough is enough.


----------



## gibor365

> My only hesitation is allowing immigration from cultures that do not do well integrating with the rest of Canadian society or hold values that are hostile to ours.


and those immigrants are majority in Canada... just check official stats , 35% of immigrants coming just from 4 asian countries.
P.S. and there are huge difference between immigrants and refugees


----------



## gibor365

> Did you know that about 1 million Poles live permanently in the UK, most of them in England?


 Poles are everywhere , include Canada  btw, check population of Iceland, 96% Icelanders and 4 % Poles 

P.S. I prefer 1 mil Poles, than 10,000 refugees from syria or iraq


----------



## andrewf

gibor365 said:


> and those immigrants are majority in Canada... just check official stats , 35% of immigrants coming just from 4 asian countries.
> P.S. and there are huge difference between immigrants and refugees


I don't agree.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> I don't agree.


about what?! Official ministry of immigration stats?! or difference between immigrants and refugees?

btw, those numbers ONLY fo official immigration.... there is huge number of indians that coming on business visas , after 6months(ridiculous law) apply for PR and stay in Canada for good with their families...
Our company was bought by Indian one and I see it every day. More than half company employees in Mississauga are indian foreign workers.... who replace laid off Canadians.... I hear more hindi and tamil than english on the floor.


----------



## heyjude

gibor365 said:


> Respect to Australia! The only country that treat refugees and immigrants fair! They are example for all western world.
> 
> only masochist can admire Canadian idiotic system , esp during JT regime..
> 
> The only normal party in Canada was The Reform Party who
> 
> 
> anyway , it's too late for Canada and UK...they pass the "critical point" , situation is irreversible , both countries will become some Indian-Chinese-Muslim mix in 8-10 years .. just look at our government ! 4 punjabis with turbans like in cartton about 1000 and 1 night


Gibor, I am getting so tired of your anti-Canada vitriol. I cannot for the life of me understand why you chose to immigrate to Canada if you hate it so much.


----------



## andrewf

gibor365 said:


> about what?! Official ministry of immigration stats?! or difference between immigrants and refugees?
> 
> btw, those numbers ONLY fo official immigration.... there is huge number of indians that coming on business visas , after 6months(ridiculous law) apply for PR and stay in Canada for good with their families...
> Our company was bought by Indian one and I see it every day. More than half company employees in Mississauga are indian foreign workers.... who replace laid off Canadians.... I hear more hindi and tamil than english on the floor.


I don't agree that the top four countries from which immigrants to Canada come are necessarily incompatible with Canadian values or unable to integrate into Canadian society. Top three are mostly fine .

1	China	33,908	13.1
2	India	30,576	11.8
3	Philippines	28,943	10.5
4	Pakistan	9,931	4.4


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> They were looking to reduce the number of migrants coming into the country. This is not an unreasonable or extremist goal. The UK is a small over-populated island. It accepted 600K migrants last year. Canada accepted 260K, even though we are a huge, under-populated country. Either our level of immigration is too low, or theirs is too high.


Exactly my point, Brexiteers want to reduce the number of immigrants. Is the problem as large as they claim? Is poor overcrowded little England suffering from a huge influx of huddled masses? 

Immigration rates are usually expressed in net migrants per 1,000 population with a positive number representing a net immigration rate. The net migration number for UK in 2015 is 333,000 which represents a net migration rate of 2.54 per 1,000 population. Canada's net migration is far higher at 5.66 per 1,000. Ireland is higher than the UK too, sitting at 4.09. Switzerland 4.74; Sweden 5.42; Italy 4.10; Norway 5.42. 

Britain isn't overcrowded. The population density is 2.55 per sq km which puts the nation at #53 in the world. For comparison, Netherlands is #30. Israel #32, Belgium #36, Germany #56, Italy #62. 

When numbers are presented in context, Brexiteer fear mongering about immigration and overcrowding are overstated. 
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2112rank.html 
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density



Samantha Bee added that Brexit voters feel screwed by globalization and the establishment. Specifically:


> The Brexit vote was driven by angry, less educated, older white voters who feel screwed by globalization and the establishment and have been fed a chip butty of xenophobia slathered in slogan sauce.


Do you believe that Brexit is going to stop UK from participating in global markets or undermine the establishment? Nigel Farage is from a rich banking family. Boris was the mayor of London. They are the personification of the establishment. They support trade which means they support globalization.


----------



## gibor365

heyjude said:


> Gibor, I am getting so tired of your anti-Canada vitriol. I cannot for the life of me understand why you chose to immigrate to Canada if you hate it so much.


When I immigrated it was a different country... I couldn't imagine that in 17 years after immigration, I will be visual minority in our ward in GTA!


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> I don't agree that the top four countries from which immigrants to Canada come are necessarily incompatible with Canadian values or unable to integrate into Canadian society. Top three are mostly fine .
> 
> 1	China	33,908	13.1
> 2	India	30,576	11.8
> 3	Philippines	28,943	10.5
> 4	Pakistan	9,931	4.4


but don't you think that immigration should be more balanced ... not only asians, but may be some Europeans?! it's reverse discrimination now


----------



## GoldStone

olivaw said:


> Exactly my point, Brexiteers want to reduce the number of immigrants.


This is their democratic right.




olivaw said:


> Is the problem as large as they claim? Is poor overcrowded little England suffering from a huge influx of huddled masses?


Can you be more condescending than that? You are doubling down on the dismissive elitist attitude that lost Brexit referendum and led to the rise of Trumpism. Good job.




olivaw said:


> Immigration rates are usually expressed in net migrants per 1,000 population with a positive number representing a net immigration rate. The net migration number for UK in 2015 is 333,000 which represents a net migration rate of 2.54 per 1,000 population. Canada's net migration is far higher at 5.66 per 1,000. Ireland is higher than the UK too, sitting at 4.09. Switzerland 4.74; Sweden 5.42; Italy 4.10; Norway 5.42.


Net migration rate nets immigration and emigration. We can see the breakdown of the UK numbers here:

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

British citizens had a negative migration rate of -39,000. Therefore, the total net migration rate (that includes Brits and non-Brits) understates the magnitude of Non-British immigration.

Non-British immigration: 547,000 -- double the rate of Canadian immigration
Non-British emigration: 174,000
Non-British net migration: 373,000

Note that Non-British net migration is 1.4x higher than Canadian immigration.

You cited net migration rate per 1,000 population. This data point should be examined in conjunction with the density rate. Just as an illustration, a country can rank #10 in net migration rate per 1,000 and #10 in population density, but if you combine the two, it can easily shoot up to the top of the rankings in terms of "immigration strain".




olivaw said:


> Britain isn't overcrowded either. The population density is 2.55 per sq km which puts the nation at #53 in the world. For comparison, Netherlands is #30. Israel #32, Belgium #36, Germany #56, Italy #62.


The overall UK number is misleading because population is not evenly distributed. Northern Scotland is sparsely populated. England on the other hand has a much higher density than the rest of Britain. England has the second highest density rate among major European countries (Netherlands is #1). Furthermore, England's density is growing fast. England is projected to overtake Netherlands as the most densely populated major European country by mid-century.

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/356


----------



## andrewf

gibor365 said:


> but don't you think that immigration should be more balanced ... not only asians, but may be some Europeans?! it's reverse discrimination now


I don't particularly care. Like I said, I think Canada can take more. If the UK doesn't want immigration from Poland, I think we should welcome them.


----------



## olivaw

GoldStone said:


> This is their democratic right.
> 
> Can you be more condescending than that? You are doubling down on the dismissive elitist attitude that lost Brexit referendum and led to the rise of Trumpism. Good job.


As a citizen of the UK, it is MY democratic right to argue that they (and you) are wrong on Brexit and to work to ensure that Article 50 is never invoked. 



> Net migration rate nets immigration and emigration. We can see the breakdown of the UK numbers here:
> 
> http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics
> 
> British citizens had a negative migration rate of -39,000. Therefore, the total net migration rate (that includes Brits and non-Brits) understates the magnitude of Non-British immigration.
> 
> Non-British immigration: 547,000 -- double the rate of Canadian immigration
> Non-British emigration: 174,000
> Non-British net migration: 373,000
> 
> Note that Non-British net migration is 1.4x higher than Canadian immigration.
> 
> You cited net migration rate per 1,000 population. This data point should be examined in conjunction with the density rate. Just as an illustration, a country can rank #10 in net migration rate per 1,000 and #10 in population density, but if you combine the two, it can easily shoot up to the top of the rankings in terms of "immigration strain".


I cited net migration rate per 1,000 and population density. Those are objective figures and they do not support the argument that UK is overwhelmed by immigration. Your statement that UK's rate is double that of Canada is factually incorrect. The Brexiteer site that you reference does not use objective data. It uses cherry picked (and unscientific) data to come up with a made up term called "immigration strain". 



> The overall UK number is misleading because population is not evenly distributed. Northern Scotland is sparsely populated. England on the other hand has a much higher density than the rest of Britain. England has the second highest density rate among major European countries (Netherlands is #1). Furthermore, England's density is growing fast. England is projected to overtake Netherlands as the most densely populated major European country by mid-century.
> 
> http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/356


In an earlier post you also claimed to recognize a correlation between population density and Leave voters. TheBrexit vote data doesn't support your Population Density hypothesis. Rather: 

1) Younger voters tended to vote Remain, Older were more likely to vote Leave. 
2) Better educated voters tended to vote Remain, less educated voters were more likely to vote Leave
3) The median income of Remain voters was higher than Leave voters. 
4) Scots were more likely to vote Remain than Englishmen and the Welsh.


----------



## olivaw

gibor365 said:


> When I immigrated it was a different country... I couldn't imagine that in 17 years after immigration, I will be visual minority [SIC] in our ward in GTA!


There are more non whites than whites in the World and the World is becoming a global village. Suck it up, buttercup.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> I don't particularly care. Like I said, I think Canada can take more. If the UK doesn't want immigration from Poland, I think we should welcome them.


Nah, Poles won't fit Liberal agenda . Syrians are different matter....huge political PR


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> As a citizen of the UK, it is MY democratic right to argue that they (and you) are wrong on Brexit and to work to ensure that Article 50 is never invoked.


That is a very interesting interpretation of ones "democratic right". Presumably that means that once a party you don't like gets elected it is "your democratic right" to work to ensure that they should never take office.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> Naturally David Frum didn't say a word about "brown people", but someone who the other day castigated me for not having a drop of "British blood" apparently cannot read. Either that or it's a simple smear.



what a crock. No one said anything about anybody's "british blood." Not yours, not anyone else's.

what i posted is that you'd told the forum you are russian, therefore you have no celtic or saxon blood.

the reference to blood as an indicator of place of origin is a simple literary figure of speech that's been used in song & story for more than 2,000 years. It indicates where a person hails from, no more, no less. Homer used this figure of speech. The old testament uses this figure of speech.

i'm sorry you've chosen to feel offended. Might i suggest that you get over it.

oh, and please stop putting your fake words in other people's mouths. You are making a fool out of yourself.


.


----------



## mordko

The point you made was that because I don't have any "saxon or celtic blood", I cannot comment on British issues. 

Can it possibly be a more racist statement? It is particularly egregious given that I am a British citizen, that I have family in the UK, that my kids were born there... But even putting all that aside, it's racist. 

"you've chosen to feel offended."

Not in any way shape or form. I am merely pointing out that you are making blatently racist statements while falsely accusing David Frum and others of being racist


----------



## humble_pie

gibor365 said:


> it's too late for Canada and UK...they pass the "critical point" , situation is irreversible , both countries will become some Indian-Chinese-Muslim mix in 8-10 years .. just look at our government ! 4 punjabis with turbans like in cartton about 1000 and 1 night




to post up a national insult like this on the very weekend of Canada Day is beyond comprehension. Such a poster must have grave mental health issues.

people with as much hatred of canada as gibor constantly harbours & nurses & cultivates & stokes, are ticking time bombs. Someone should flag the gibor to the RCMP.

as for just one among the current Sikh cabinet ministers - all of whom wear turban headgear - the minister of defence is a much-decorated intelligence & combat veteran who has served several critical missions in the middle east. Canada is very, very lucky to have him.

i find it more than obscene that some deranged traitor would dare to attack the spotless minister with a disgusting racist insult, on canada day weekend.


.


----------



## ian

It will be interesting to see the impact on UK expats living in Spain, etc and on the real estate prices in those areas. Should Brexit occur, these folks will no longer be able to come and go as they wish, stay as long as they wish, or be covered by health insurance. Not to mention the decreased value on the GBP for those on pensions or those selling up.

Already, some EU countries are requesting longer term expats to file a statement of assets if over 10K while others like France are imposing or proposing increased taxes rental income from homes in those locales. I can see others doing the same. Spain now has a tax on those going to the Balearic Islands.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> The point you made was that because I don't have any "saxon or celtic blood", I cannot comment on British issues.
> 
> Can it possibly be a more racist statement? It is particularly egregious given that I am a British citizen, that I have family in the UK, that my kids were born there... But even putting all that aside, it's racist.




don't be silly, mordko. My statement is not racist in the least.

i find you preposterous with your preaching & haranguing on british issues. According to yourself, you sojourned in england for merely 10 years, took out citizenship, then abandoned the country.

now you are in canada doing the same.

there are noticeable numbers of temporary transients these days, shopping for citizenships in order to hoover up all the social & financial benefits they can, then abandoning in order to move on to the next state where they will re-commence the hoovering. Canada attracts more than her fair share of these, because of the excellent social benefits this country has long offered.

are you one of those opportunistic tourist citizens, mordko? we already have some of these itinerant *citizens* in the forum. They attract attention because they boast so much about their exploitation.

canada btw is beginning to move towards blocking multiple citizenships. Precisely because of the hoovering. Have you noticed? 

that you keep dictating your views re britain so pompously - bullying the readers - attacking cmffers who disagree with your racist views - when all you personally have done is pass through england for 10 short years - this preaching of yours is too much of a stretch. Sorry, but no one is going to perceive you as an authority on the sceptre'd isle.

here's what i respect from real citizens. They don't wander the planet casually picking up citizenships like alley cats. Instead, real citizens love their country. They work hard all their lives. Saving what they can, always working together, they build & endow the hospitals, the universities, the libraries, the theatres, the museums, the symphony halls & the sports arenas.

two of the best hospitals in my town today were built with pennies saved up in the late 19th century by irish and chinese railway workers.

what have you done for canada, mordko? what did you do for england? as a matter of fact, what have you ever done for cmf forum, other than antagonize the valuable old-time members on here & drive them away?


.


----------



## olivaw

humble_pie said:


> don't be silly, mordko. My statement is not racist in the least..


Humble, don't feel obliged to defend yourself against mordko's false accusations of bigotry. He doesn't even believe them himself.


----------



## AltaRed

I find the best way for me to "form a conclusion" about a member is to scan through that member's posts. IMO, it is most telling and IMO2, one reason why quality forum/board software contains that option (another being for moderator use in banishment/suspension).


----------



## gibor365

Lauren Southern attacked by 'anti-fascists' at London Brexit rally... Who is fascist?!


----------



## andrewf

gibor365 said:


> Lauren Southern attacked by 'anti-fascists' at London Brexit rally... Who is fascist?!


By no means would I defend the far left (regressives), but I think you could get a similar reaction at almost any demonstration on the left or right, particularly when emotions are running hot.


----------



## bass player

andrewf said:


> By no means would I defend the far left (regressives), but I think you could get a similar reaction at almost any demonstration on the left or right, particularly when emotions are running hot.


The overwhelming majority of violence at demonstrations is started by the left....they are violent at left demonstrations and then they show up at peaceful right rallies or demonstrations and start fights...like they do at Trump rallies. And, of course, they then blame Trump for "inciting violence", lol. The mental gymnastics that they must go through to buy into such a stretch of logic is truly mind boggling.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> By no means would I defend the far left (regressives), but I think you could get a similar reaction at almost any demonstration on the left or right, particularly when emotions are running hot.


Political specter like a circle, thus there is a very thih border between far-left and far-right.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> don't be silly, mordko. My statement is not racist in the least.


How is it not racist if you are claiming I don't have a right to comment on Brexit because of my wrong ancestry??? That's racist, according to any dictionary. 



humble_pie said:


> According to yourself, you sojourned in england for merely 10 years, took out citizenship, then abandoned the country.


What the heck??? It's been a long time since I've heard such screwed up stupid claims if your company purchases a division in another country and asks a few managers to relocate it's "abandoning". Unbelievable. 

"now you are in canada doing the same."

As in paying tax at the maximum rate? Totally. All of these people should be kicked out. If you keep getting your face in the mud; its probably because that chip on your shoulders is keeping you down.

" social benefits this country has long offered."

Having paid tax at ~50%, I don't feel like I owe anything to you. 

"They attract attention because they boast so much about their exploitation."

You are not a commie, are you? 

"canada btw is beginning to move towards blocking multiple citizenship."

Oh really? Then you should report me to RCMP. Good luck. 

Sorry... Had enough and didn't read the rest of your post. 

Going forward, I am going to block you for racism and stupidity. May I suggest you mind your own business?


----------



## gibor365

> "canada btw is beginning to move towards blocking multiple citizenship."


 really?! or it's just hp's sick imagination?!


----------



## mordko

gibor365 said:


> really?! or it's just hp's sick imagination?!


The latter.


----------



## olivaw

gibor365 said:


> really?! or it's just hp's sick imagination?!
> 
> 
> mordko said:
> 
> 
> 
> The latter.
Click to expand...

Why don't you morons take it elsewhere?


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> Why don't you morons take it elsewhere?


Well, if it's not HP's sick imagination then perhaps you can enlighten me what it is. Because it's bullshit.


----------



## agent99

gibor365 said:


> really?! or it's just hp's sick imagination?!


Suggestion - Only read messages from HP, if they have something to do with your printer


----------



## mordko

Awesome sauce as well


----------



## heyjude

AltaRed said:


> I find the best way for me to "form a conclusion" about a member is to scan through that member's posts. IMO, it is most telling and IMO2, one reason why quality forum/board software contains that option (another being for moderator use in banishment/suspension).


I quite agree. Where are the moderators when you need them?


----------



## new dog

I doesn't bother me what everyone argues about but I do wonder how it goes this way. I think Brexit was a great thing and do agree with not allowing refugees in wholesale. Europe created the whole refugee mess besides the regime change crap because they advertised open doors.


----------



## gibor365

new dog said:


> I doesn't bother me what everyone argues about but I do wonder how it goes this way. I think Brexit was a great thing and do agree with not allowing refugees in wholesale. Europe created the whole refugee mess besides the regime change crap because they advertised open doors.


I just doubt very much that Brexit will solve refugees problem

btw, I admire Lauren . Smart, brave and beautiful : probably future of our Conservative party


----------



## new dog

Brexit isn't about solving the refugee crisis but rather the people of Britain wanting more control over immigration and other matters.


----------



## gibor365

new dog said:


> Brexit isn't about solving the refugee crisis but rather the people of Britain wanting more control over immigration and other matters.


I'd say that people (who voted for Brexit) wanted to show that they don't agree with current refugees/immigration politics...  and what can you expect with Sharia law zones in ..... London?!


----------



## mordko

A heck of a lot of people voted for Brexit. More people voted for Brexit than for anything or anyone ever in Britain. There were a lot of different reasons. Sovereignty, Immigration policy, protest vote by "have nots", people who were pissed off with the utter idiocy prevalent in Brussels, economic reasons... 

Does not matter, the vote is over.


----------



## olivaw

For a while some far right wing British hate groups promoted the falsehood that there were Sharia law zones in London. 

Here's what Snopes had to say about it: 




> The belief that large neighborhoods or entire towns and cities have been effectively placed outside local rule of law is in no way new: variations of the rumor have circulated since the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, but the rumor received both heightened attention and increased saturation after a controversial Fox News segment on 11 January 2015.
> 
> In the course of that segment, Fox News host Jeanine Pirro spoke with self-styled terrorism expert Steve Emerson:
> 
> Emerson began his set of remarks by claiming a number of Muslim no-go zones existed in areas of the U.S., England, France, and other western countries. According to Emerson, "Sharia law" essentially overrode the laws of the countries in which said zones were located, and local police avoided interceding in the affected areas:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> In response, British Prime Minister David Cameron termed Emerson "a complete idiot":
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Mr Emerson issued a grovelling apology after issuing the claim.


http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/nogozones.asp


----------



## mordko

- Jihadi flags flying over London: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...jihadi-islamic-state-flown-poplar-east-london
- "Gay-free zones" stickers placed in London: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...tic-fined-100-for-gay-free-zone-stickers.html
- Young Muslims ran "Sharia patrols". They harassed people who drank alcohol, couples holding hands, etc:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia_patrols
- Looking Jewish while walking is dangerous in several British cities: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-spat-abused-stalked-happens-Copenhagen.html

"Sharia law zones" is an exaggeration. Or, perhaps, premonition of things to come.


----------



## new dog

I would say you are probably right olivaw. With an event like this you will bring out the big racists and the false promotions by either side. I am sure these extreme people certainly don't help and bother any group that is trying to accomplish their goal like Brexit or trying going forward after Brexit. The media like CNN is already biased toward remain and against Brexit that it welcomes any ammunition it can get while trying to ignore and not cover the negatives on the remain side.

In the US your see it with Trump in spades, the media wants to do everything and anything to put him and his supporters down. Hillary on the other hand despite FBI investigations will be let off the hook and given positive spin as much as possible by the media. This is what the Liberal left have going for them is the media is almost entirely on their side.


----------



## new dog

Mordko most left leaning gay people can't see this and will only get it when it is to late and they will have to go back in the closet to survive. Many women will also see this to late and will wish they had never been deceived by the media and do gooders out there.


----------



## mrPPincer

Nigel Farage resigns as UKIP leader: 'I want my life back'
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36702468


----------



## SMK

The "Brexit Scare" worked in Spain, and it seems EU support is now surging in Europe, or is it?


----------



## olivaw

*A law firm is taking action to ensure the formal process for the UK leaving the EU is not started without an act of Parliament.*


----------



## olivaw

_The Independent_ had this to say about the three resignations by key UK politicians (with one more on the way). It may not be the most unbiased of news sources, but it sure has a way with words:



> A lot of unbelievable things have happened in UK politics in the past week and a half, but our three most prominent politicians from the EU referendum debate flinging themselves like rats off a sinking ship is probably the most astonishing.


http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...son-david-cameron-eu-referendum-a7118806.html


----------



## bass player

All the doom and gloom predicted by the "stay" crowd isn't happening, In fact, it's the opposite:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...trade-deals-Britain-Brexit.html#ixzz4DSTGReZH


----------



## olivaw

*The Brexit Vote Is Making Skeptical Europeans Value the EU* - Fortune



> In a series of polls taken since the Brexit vote, support for the EU has actual risen in some member countries that were previously lukewarm on the institution.





> “This poll confirms that nobody wants to put themselves in the kind of mess the British have created for themselves,” Marlene Wind, a professor in political science at the University of Copenhagen, told Bloomberg.


*Brexit Withdrawals Prompt Halt of $3.9 Billion Property Fund* - Bloomberg


----------



## andrewf

bass player said:


> All the doom and gloom predicted by the "stay" crowd isn't happening, In fact, it's the opposite:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...trade-deals-Britain-Brexit.html#ixzz4DSTGReZH


It's virtually impossible that the UK will be able to get trade deals finalized and ratified with these countries within 2.5 years. These things take a lot of time to negotiate, and the UK doesn't have the infrastructure to get it done.


----------



## bass player

andrewf said:


> It's virtually impossible that the UK will be able to get trade deals finalized and ratified with these countries within 2.5 years. These things take a lot of time to negotiate, and the UK doesn't have the infrastructure to get it done.


I guess all those countries lining up to do business with the UK should have checked with you first and they could save themselves a lot of heartache... :stupid:


----------



## bass player

> “This poll confirms that nobody wants to put themselves in the kind of mess the British have created for themselves,” Marlene Wind, a professor in political science at the University of Copenhagen, told Bloomberg.


Nobody...well, nobody except for the 17 million people that voted to leave. A poll a few days later is meaningless.

The 17 million that voted to leave did so exercising their free will. That's how democracy works, regardless how inconvenient it may be for some people. Whining the next day is to be expected. They had their little rant, but now it's time that they got over themselves and started acting like responsible adults.


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> Nobody...well, nobody except for the 17 million people that voted to leave. A poll a few days later is meaningless.
> 
> The 17 million that voted to leave did so exercising their free will. That's how democracy works, regardless how inconvenient it may be for some people. Whining the next day is to be expected. They had their little rant, but now it's time that they got over themselves and started acting like responsible adults.


Dominic Greive, the former Attorney General disagrees with your opinion Bass. 



> *Second EU referendum would be possible, former attorney general says
> *
> “We have to accept … that the referendum result represents, at the time it was held, a clear statement of a majority view that we should leave the EU,” he wrote. “In a democracy such a result cannot just be ignored. The Government and Parliament must treat it with respect. It is of course possible that it will become apparent with the passage of time that public opinion has shifted on the matter. If so a second referendum may be justified.”
> 
> *Mr Grieve also rebuffed suggestions that supporters of the EU should not speak out against the result – arguing that in a free society people should be able to dispute the majority view. He said he remained supportive of people campaigning against Brexit, having been “deeply troubled” by the outcome of the vote*.


----------



## ian

So let's just say that there is another referendum. What should the number be? And if it is not reached, should there be yet another? Should the pro Brexit folks get to insist on another referendum if the results turn out to be the polar opposite of the current results? 

Not certain where this type of reasoning will lead. Certainly not to any conclusion.


----------



## andrewf

bass player said:


> I guess all those countries lining up to do business with the UK should have checked with you first and they could save themselves a lot of heartache... :stupid:


Do you think the US is going to be heartbroken if it reverts to WTO trading rules with the UK?

It's not about getting my permission, it is the reality that trade deals take upwards of 5 - 10 years to negotiate and ratify. Maybe the UK could do it faster, but it doesn't have the hundreds of experienced trade negotiators, and it has to work, concurrently, on deals with all of these countries. And let's be realistic, the UK is probably going to be very busy ensuring its continued access to the EU market.


----------



## andrewf

ian said:


> So let's just say that there is another referendum. What should the number be? And if it is not reached, should there be yet another? Should the pro Brexit folks get to insist on another referendum if the results turn out to be the polar opposite of the current results?
> 
> Not certain where this type of reasoning will lead. Certainly not to any conclusion.


If remain had won, the brexit folks would sooner or later be demanding another referendum, particularly if public opinion shifted in their favour.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> If remain had one, the brexit folks would sooner or later be demanding another referendum, particularly if public opinion shifted in their favour.


True  . This is what QC separatists were doing and what possible Scotland will be doing... This is why referendum should be only advise to the government


----------



## olivaw

Brexiteers have suggested that legal residents of the United Kingdom be used as pawns in their negotiation with Europe.



> *Brexit: Rights of EU citizens living in UK sparks row*
> 
> MPs have criticised the government for not guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens to remain in the UK after the country leaves the European Union.
> 
> Ministers say it would be "unwise" to fully "guarantee" EU citizens' rights without a deal for Britons abroad.


----------



## olivaw

*ANALYSIS:Brexit chaos leaves behind 'a leaderless state'*



> "We are in a leaderless state in Britain at the moment," said Ben Page, chief executive of the Ipsos MORI polling firm.
> 
> Having a lame-duck prime minister and a rudderless opposition would be enough to throw the country into political chaos. But the Brexit shockwaves go much deeper.
> 
> Page predicts "political [career] assassinations, resignations and general turmoil."
> 
> The vote has plunged the country into economic uncertainty unseen since the 2008 financial crisis.





> Compounding the political confusion, no one knows exactly when the U.K. will begin to negotiate its exit from the EU and what it might obtain from the talks.
> 
> "What the population really wants is something they may not be able to have," said pollster Page. "They quite like free trade, but they also want to be able to limit the number of immigrants."
> 
> Voting to "take back control," Britons hoped to gain the best of both worlds. What they got is a deepening multifaceted crisis.
> 
> One team won, the key players left, the arena is crumbling.
> 
> And yet there's still overtime to be played.


----------



## heyjude

Mark Carney is earning the big bucks today as the pound dips to a new low:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...d-pound-plunges-back-towards-31-year-lows-as/


----------



## SMK

Now below the 31 year low of 1.32 after hitting a high of 1.50 the day of the vote.


----------



## olivaw

*GBP / USD Forecasts Slashed to 1.22 at Credit Suisse*


----------



## gibor365

*Russia celebrates Brexit saying the ‘financial mafia’ EU will DISAPPEAR in five years*

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...-mafia-EU-DISAPPEAR-referendum-vladimir-putin


----------



## ian

Who cares what Russia says about it?


----------



## andrewf

Nothing would make Russia (Putin) happier than to see Europe collapse.


----------



## gibor365

ian said:


> Who cares what Russia says about it?


every country esp in europe


----------



## AltaRed

gibor365 said:


> every country esp in europe


Hardly. It does have some undue influence due to its O&G exports to Europe and its military sabre rattling but it is simply incapable of mounting any kind of financial influence. That was a key weakness in the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union itself. 13th after Australia http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP.pdf


----------



## ian

No one cares. Russia is a corrupt state led by a dictator. Nothing they say can be believed, hence no one believes them.

Russia have enough of their own problems. Oil has crashed, so has the ruble. As a country they are in a massive depression that makes our recession look like a walk in the park. As usual, those in Russia in position of influence are too busy stealing from their own countrymen and moving money out of the country to even consider how to better the conditions of their citizens. Nothing every changes with that mob of gangsters. Well, maybe the names and faces change from time to time but that is about it.


----------



## gibor365

AltaRed said:


> Hardly. It does have some undue influence due to its O&G exports to Europe and its military sabre rattling but it is simply incapable of mounting any kind of financial influence. That was a key weakness in the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union itself. 13th after Australia http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP.pdf


 O&G exports to Europe is a big thing ...except it Russia is exporting gold, platinum, palladium, uranium, potash etc ...practically all periodic table ... Don't forget one of the best in the world weapon...
13th after Australia, and only 3 EU members (Germany, France and Italy) have more


----------



## mordko

The fact that Europe buys Russian oil and gas makes Russia dependent on Europe. Not the other way around. Things changed. It took Vlad a while to grasp it - to the cost of his people - but he is getting there.


----------



## mordko

Russia is sanctioning its own people by boycotting European agricultural products. Two years on:

- Russians are eating less and the food prices are very high.
- Europe is exporting more agricultural products than before the Russian sanctions.


----------



## SMK

No one cares? Some are forgetting Russia's veto powers that has already caused enough trouble for not only Europe. Russia is not important? Then you're smoking something.


----------



## bass player

SMK said:


> No one cares? Some are forgetting Russia's veto powers that has already caused enough trouble for not only Europe. Russia is not important? Then you're smoking something.


The leave crowd forgets that a lot of people voted to regain independence. I wonder what the outcome would have been if the question was:

Do you want to be governed by:

1. People we elect in our own UK parliament
2. People we didn't elect in Brussels


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> The leave crowd forgets that a lot of people voted to regain independence. I wonder what the outcome would have been if the question was:
> 
> Do you want to be governed by:
> 
> 1. People we elect in our own UK parliament
> 2. People we didn't elect in Brussels


The European parliament in Brussels is elected so you need to correct item 2 Bass.


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> The European parliament in Brussels is elected so you need to correct item 2 Bass.


No, because it's not the government and neither is it the body from which the government gets selected. The European government is called European Commission, which is a 100% unelected bureaucracy. European President is an unelected bureaucrat as well.


----------



## olivaw

The people of Europe elect the European Parliament directly. The European Parliament elects the president of the European Commission. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament


----------



## mordko

Exactly. It's as if in our system the PM and all members of the government were unelected bureaucrats, not accountable to the people of Canada. Kinda like the old USSR system.


----------



## olivaw

The carnage continues:

Three more property funds suspended over Brexit fears, as shares slide again -- business live


----------



## mordko

Of course the EC president is selected by the European Council which is another unelected body.


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> Exactly. It's as if in our system the PM and all members of the government were unelected bureaucrats, not accountable to the people of Canada. Kinda like the old USSR system.
> Of course the EC president is selected by the European Council which is another unelected body.


Wrong. You've unsuccessfully tried this argument before, but your facts are incorrect. They will not be made correct through repetition or false analogy.


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> The carnage continues:
> 
> Three more property funds suspended over Brexit fears, as shares slide again -- business live


I thought everyone agreed there would never be a Brexit, so what are they stressing about? And why are the Italian banks going bankrupt? Have we missed Itexit? And how come Deutsche Bank poses the largest risk to the market? Is it a British institution?


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> Wrong. You've unsuccessfully tried this argument before, but your facts are incorrect. They will not be made correct through repetition or false analogy.


Strictly factual. Not one member of EU cabinet of ministers is elected. Not the head, not one member. No way around it. People get exactly zero say as to which individuals or which political forces will be represented in the EC.


----------



## olivaw

In the words of a previous poster: :hopelessness:


----------



## mordko

Also worth noting that the European Parliament, which is an elected legislative body hardly ever gets any people to actually vote for it. Usually two thirds of the electorate can't be bothered. And those who do send people like Nigel Farage to Brussels (his party won EU elections in the UK), which shows exactly what voters think about the EU Parliament.


----------



## gibor365

SMK said:


> No one cares? Some are forgetting Russia's veto powers that has already caused enough trouble for not only Europe. Russia is not important? Then you're smoking something.


Exactly what I was telling..... I know that many on this forum hate Russia (and don't want to argue about it).... but to tell "No one cares" is a big BS


----------



## heyjude

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/20150201PVL00036/Elections


----------



## mordko

If the European government is elected, perhaps someone could tell me what percent of Europeans voted for any of these bunch:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commissioner#Appointment


----------



## AltaRed

Gotta give it up Mordko. No one is listening. Your reference to the European Commission is not the European Parliament.

The European Parliament is elected http://www.europarl.org.uk/en/your-meps/european_elections.html and depending on the EU country, by the people, or by political parties, or by district councils or by some other means. It is not terribly releveant how the voting is done as long as it is representative. Indeed, it likely makes no sense to allow individual people to vote for something as complicated as European Parliament members to represent your own country. Look how people f*cked up the Brexit referendum, never mind representatives for a super-sovereign body.


----------



## mordko

AltaRed said:


> Gotta give it up Mordko. No one is listening. Your reference to the European Commission is not the European Parliament..


The original point by the Bass Player was that the European Union is governed by unelected autocrats. European Parliament is not the EU government. It is the unelected European Commission that forms the European Government. That should be a simple enough concept to fathom. 

European Commission gets picked from among unelectable bureaucrats, usually the ones leaders of European political parties don't want in their own countries.


----------



## AltaRed

ISTM there is misinformation on how things work. The elected EP is fully engaged in the approval of legislation. Legislation is drafted by the European Commission, and voted on by both the European Parliament and European Council (28 members), and laws are then implemented by the European Commission. Try these two links to start with http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/ and http://europa.eu/eu-law/index_en.htm


----------



## mordko

Rather familiar with how things work, albeit going back to late 90s and early 2000s. It's the epitomy of governing by quangos. The executive is entirely unelected, including the president. The EP is elected, badly - as I have described at 1:17PM.


----------



## olivaw

Nobody should reasonably try to argue that Americans are governed by unelected bureaucrats, even though members of cabinet are appointed by the President. 

It is equally unreasonable to say that Europeans are governed by unelected bureaucrats. Members of the European Commission are, for all intents and purposes, selected by the elected governments of member states, one commissioner for each state. Cabinet and the President is approved by the elected members of the European Parliament through a vote. Parliament has the right to censure the President. 

On a more practical note: *Shares slide as Brexit fears take hold*. The market has responded negatively to uncertainty stemming from the referendum result. Imagine what will happen if UK invokes Article 50.



> Analysts blamed warnings from the Bank of England that Brexit risks were "crystallising" and fears about the UK commercial property market.
> 
> In late trade, the pound was at about $1.29. Sterling has dropped by about 14% against the dollar since hitting $1.50 ahead of the referendum result.
> 
> Against the euro, the pound was down 0.9% at €1.1656, having earlier hit its lowest level since 2013.
> 
> "Pessimistic predictions for sterling are coming true," said Andrew Edwards, chief executive of ETX Capital. "The pound is the chief proxy for the post-Brexit mood in the markets.


"


----------



## mordko

In the US it is the elected President who is in charge of the Executive. In the EU it is the unelected President who runs the quango of unelected officials. US ministers are accountable to the President who can and does regularly replace them. While governments pick Commissioners, the commissioners are not accountable to the governments. They are accountable to nobody. While the EP has hypothetical power to kick the commissioners out, it can't be done by a simple majority and it has never been done. It really matters who is the minister in the US, a lot of attention is paid to it. Going to Brussels as a commissioner is equivalent to being kicked out from the active politics, it's similar to being sent to the Lords. 

And - again - hardly anyone votes for EP. When they do, it's parties like Le Pen or the Independence Party who often win European Elections. 

The differences should be pretty obvious.


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> No, because it's not the government and neither is it the body from which the government gets selected. The European government is called European Commission, which is a 100% unelected bureaucracy. European President is an unelected bureaucrat as well.


The Commission is appointed by the governments of each member, and is in this way democratically accountable. It might not be a terrible idea to have them elected directly, or drawn from the MEPs (similar to how a cabinet is formed in a parliamentary democracy).


----------



## olivaw

So now you are OK with the Commission, but not with the President. Perhaps bass should modify his original statement.


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> Exactly. It's as if in our system the PM and all members of the government were unelected bureaucrats, not accountable to the people of Canada. Kinda like the old USSR system.


The PM is not elected. The PM is effectively selected by the House of Commons. There is no requirement that they be an MP, though that is conventionally the case.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> The PM is not elected. The PM is effectively selected by the House of Commons. There is no requirement that they be an MP, though that is conventionally the case.


Let me try to simplify... In Canada, candidates have to present their polcies, debate and then people decide who will be the PM. In the EU you find out who is in government, and who is the head of the executive branch after the fact. And they will have zero accountability, unlike Canadian PMs who can be kicked out of office - and regularly are. 

Nu?


----------



## mordko

olivaw said:


> So now you are OK with the Commission, but not with the President. Perhaps bass should modify his original statement.


Eh... not in any way shape or form. The whole system is rotten through.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> The Commission is appointed by the governments of each member, and is in this way democratically accountable. It might not be a terrible idea to have them elected directly, or drawn from the MEPs (similar to how a cabinet is formed in a parliamentary democracy).


Accountability implies that you can be kicked out if you don't perform. The governments have no right to do so. 

Europe can't be a parliamentary democracy, because each country has its own issues and no leader of any party speaks the language that all the people of Europe can understand. In fact most Europeans hold the view that EU is too much like a super-national state as it is.


----------



## olivaw

The claim that Europe was run by a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was a Brexiteer talking point. The Guardian said



> *But aren’t a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in charge?*
> 
> Actually, they aren’t. When people talk about “the unelected bureaucrats of Brussels”, they usually mean the European commission. The commission is an organisation like no other: more than a civil service but less than a government. Composed of 28 commissioners – one from each country – the commission drafts, enforces and monitors EU laws. But it does not pass laws.


There are seven European decision making bodies:

1	European Parliament
2	European Council
3	Council
4	Commission
5	Court of Justice of the European Union
6	European Central Bank
7	Court of Auditors

By treaty, all member states of the EU are democracies and the EU is a democracy.


----------



## olivaw

*Brexit polls: Would UK vote differently in a new EU referendum?*



> A new survey suggests Wales would reverse its EU referendum decision if the vote were held now.





> This is the second survey to suggest Leave voters are now experiencing "Bregret" - Brexit regret. Polling firm Opinium found last week that seven per cent now wished they had voted to stay in the EU.





> Former attorney general Dominic Grieve said a second referendum could happen "with the passage of time" if it became apparent that public opinion had shifted.


----------



## mordko

The whole UK preferred Bremain according to the vast majority of polls prior to the Brexit vote.


----------



## mrPPincer

mordko said:


> The whole UK preferred Bremain according to the vast majority of polls prior to the Brexit vote.


I don't know how you can say that mordko.

The poll of polls linked at the top of this thread said it was neck and neck, very close to 50/50, and it was changing every day, right up until the vote happened.


----------



## mordko

mrPPincer said:


> I don't know how you can say that mordko.
> 
> The poll of polls linked at the top of this thread said it was neck and neck, very close to 50/50, and it was changing every day, right up until the vote happened.


I can say it, because it's true. Only 1 in 10 polls predicted the correct outcome. On the day before vote most polls predicted victory to remain. http://www.theguardian.com/politics...erendum-pollsters-wrong-opinion-predict-close


----------



## mrPPincer

That is saying a completely different thing than your first statement.

It's true that the polls tipped in slight favour of a Bremain vote at the very end.

That is not the same thing as saying the whole UK preferred Bremain.


----------



## mordko

Eh? U.K. Wide Polls predicted victory to Bremain = according to polls UK preferred Bremain.


----------



## humble_pie

here is 20-something Francesca Barber, a graphics assistant at the New York Times who says she's the child of multinational parents, since childhood she's studied & worked all over europe & north america.

barber also says she learned a crucial lesson from Brexit. She says that youth in great britain had taken their EU opportunities far too much for granted. She says that youth turnout in the brexit vote was low while elder turnout was high. Barber vows she'll work to make sure that such a thing never happens again.

here in canada, we've already witnessed the power of the youth vote, when a youth-invigorated liberal party won the 2015 election by a stunning landslide.

here are the Brexit vote age breakdown stats. All the way from only 36% of 18-24 year olds who voted, up to a whopping percentage of great britain's oldsters aged 65 & up, 83% of whom turned out for the Brexit vote & evidently voted Leave.

_*% who got through our final #EUref poll turnout filter by age group:*_

18-24: 36%
25-34: 58%
35-44: 72%
45-54: 75%
55-64: 81%
65+: 83%

https://twitter.com/SkyData/status/746700869656256512?ref_src=twsrc^tfw


.


----------



## olivaw

humble_pie said:


> here is 20-something Francesca Barber, a graphics assistant at the New York Times who says she's the child of multinational parents, since childhood she's studied & worked all over europe & north america.
> 
> barber also says she learned a crucial lesson from Brexit. She says that youth in great britain had taken their EU opportunities far too much for granted. She says that youth turnout in the brexit vote was low while elder turnout was high. Barber vows she'll work to make sure that such a thing never happens again.
> 
> here in canada, we've already witnessed the power of the youth vote, when a youth-invigorated liberal party won the 2015 election by a stunning landslide.
> 
> here are the Brexit vote age breakdown stats. All the way from only 36% of 18-24 year olds who voted, up to a whopping percentage of great britain's oldsters aged 65 & up, 83% of whom turned out for the Brexit vote & evidently voted Leave.
> 
> _*% who got through our final #EUref poll turnout filter by age group:*_
> 
> 18-24: 36%
> 25-34: 58%
> 35-44: 72%
> 45-54: 75%
> 55-64: 81%
> 65+: 83%
> 
> https://twitter.com/SkyData/status/746700869656256512?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
> 
> 
> .


Even if there isn't another referendum, there will be an election and it will be fought on Brexit. Those young people will get a second chance to make their voices heard.


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> Even if there isn't another referendum, there will be an election and it will be fought on Brexit. Those young people will get a second chance to make their voices heard.


The results of that poll are not surprising...young, idealistic people with very little in the way of life experience voted to stay (more government control), while older and wiser people who have decades of real life experience voted to leave (less government control). It's the same in Canada and the US...the young tend to vote left, and then once they gain some life experience many of them politically shift to the right.


----------



## andrewf

bass player said:


> The results of that poll are not surprising...young, idealistic people with very little in the way of life experience voted to stay (more government control), while older and wiser people who have decades of real life experience voted to leave (less government control). It's the same in Canada and the US...the young tend to vote left, and then once they gain some life experience many of them politically shift to the right.


Isn't this also ageism? The people whining about calls to disenfranchise the wrinklies because they will be dead soon can't also suggest that the views of the young are less legitimate.

Given how much progress there is over time, it may not be so much that people's views change, but which political party represents those views changes over time. Particularly wrt social change.


----------



## bass player

andrewf said:


> Isn't this also ageism? The people whining about calls to disenfranchise the wrinklies because they will be dead soon can't also suggest that the views of the young are less legitimate.
> 
> Given how much progress there is over time, it may not be so much that people's views change, but which political party represents those views changes over time. Particularly wrt social change.


I wouldn't call it ageism. I think it's generally accepted by most that people gain wisdom as they age.


----------



## steve41

bass player said:


> I wouldn't call it ageism. I think it's generally accepted by most that people gain wisdom as they age.


I have to agree wholeheartedly. Why just the other day I..... _(what were we talking about?)_


----------



## SMK

Older people have different priorities naturally; marijuana legalization would not be on top of their list. 

There are those who gain wisdom and those that want to live in the past.


----------



## andrewf

bass player said:


> I wouldn't call it ageism. I think it's generally accepted by most that people gain wisdom as they age.


Except the wisdom that racially segregated schools was a bad idea, or that women should not just stay in the kitchen. Some ideas die mainly through old age.


----------



## bass player

andrewf said:


> Except the wisdom that racially segregated schools was a bad idea, or that women should not just stay in the kitchen. Some ideas die mainly through old age.


And some bad ideas continue to flourish in spite of a proven 100% failure rate due to the cluelessness and warped ideology of youth. For example, polls have shown that more than half of all millennials do not support capitalism. The fact that none of them would have any of the things that they have without capitalism never crosses their brainwashed minds.

Since democracy can't exist without capitalism, and end to capitalism will be the end to democracy. So, it's a good thing that all those old racists and old sexists are still around to prevent the collapse of democracy.


----------



## olivaw

Actually bass, bad ideas don't flourish because of youth. They flourish because so many people are resistant to change or reluctant to give up privilege. Racism and sexism are, after all, the fierce defence of privilege by the privileged.


----------



## humble_pie

bass player said:


> And some bad ideas continue to flourish in spite of a proven 100% failure rate due to the cluelessness and warped ideology of youth. For example, polls have shown that more than half of all millennials do not support capitalism. The fact that none of them would have any of the things that they have without capitalism never crosses their brainwashed minds.
> 
> Since democracy can't exist without capitalism, and end to capitalism will be the end to democracy. So, it's a good thing that all those old racists and old sexists are still around to prevent the collapse of democracy.




lol bass is priceless.

this post is a gem .:biggrin:

they should make it a sticky. To warn the numbers of young people who arrive here frequently that there are still a phew old phartz around.


.


----------



## mordko

They say those who don't support socialism when they are young don't have heart and those who don't support capitalism when they are old don't have brains. Not sure the first part is accurate.


----------



## humble_pie

^^


sorry, this quote is so stale-dated it's grown hoary & useless with age.

reportedly it first appeared in 1875. Anselme Batbie, a leading french jurist of his day, attributed the idea to british statesmen Edmund Burke, although no original quote has ever been found among Burke's papers.

declared Batbie: « Celui qui n’est pas républicain à vingt ans fait douter de la générosité de son âme; mais celui qui, après trente ans, persévère, fait douter de la rectitude de son esprit. »

mordko perhaps you could update yourself. If you feel you must castigate the young, perhaps at least you might be able to find something that's not 2 centuries old.


.


----------



## mordko

I like old quotes. Barbarians think I am a barbarian because they don't understand me.


----------



## Koogie

olivaw said:


> Racism and sexism are, after all, the fierce defence of privilege by the privileged.


What a pantload. 

Racism exists in every community, including lots of "visible minorities" being racist against other "visible minorities" I mean, they are human after all. You're not so full of paternalistic liberal guilt that you can't recognize that, are you ?

Racism and sexism aren't the exclusive domain of those horrible nasty old white people who are ruining your socialist idyll by not embracing T2, selfies and legalized weed. 
Or doesn't that fit into the "narrative" that progressive, politically correct thugs like to spout so often ?


----------



## olivaw

Koogie said:


> What a pantload.
> 
> Racism exists in every community, including lots of "visible minorities" being racist against other "visible minorities" I mean, they are human after all. You're not so full of paternalistic liberal guilt that you can't recognize that, are you ?
> 
> Racism and sexism aren't the exclusive domain of those horrible nasty old white people who are ruining your socialist idyll by not embracing T2, selfies and legalized weed.
> Or doesn't that fit into the "narrative" that progressive, politically correct thugs like to spout so often ?


What in the world are you on about? Paternalistic liberal guilt, socialist idyll, T2, nasty old white people, legalized weed, politically correct thugs - Extrapolate much? 

Yeah, racism exists in every community. Did somebody imply that it didn't?


----------



## Koogie

olivaw said:


> What in the world are you on about? Paternalistic liberal guilt, socialist idyll, T2, nasty old white people, legalized weed, politically correct thugs - Extrapolate much? Yeah, racism exists in every community. Did somebody imply that it didn't?


Yes, you did imply it. "Racism and sexism are, after all, the fierce defence of privilege by the privileged."

Only the privileged can be racist ? 

And it doesn't take much "extrapolation" to know who you are referring to as the privileged.


----------



## bgc_fan

Interesting, a lot of ideological stereotypes being thrown out to explain the split between the "youth" and older folks.
How about a more pragmatic explanation? In this age of globalization, and lack of 30-year jobs, most of the youth find themselves changing careers and jobs on a fairly regular basis. Being part of the EU opens up more opportunities for these people as they get to experience the best of what certain countries can offer. It's not a secret that a big question with the Yes vote is what are the EU countries going to do with UK citizens who are working in their countries. Should they just deport them? I mean, I suspect that's what the UK will do with the EU citizens and all the older folks would be behind that. For my stereotypical view, I get the impression of middle-aged folk who are either retired or close to retiring, sitting in their front lawns complaining about all these foreigners and how nice things used to be.


----------



## mordko

We are making wild guesses now, but ^^^ makes little sense to me. Britain has much, much, much lower unemployment rate among youth than continental Europe does. In fact it's young people from the continent that come to England looking for work and it's very hard for an average Brit to find employment on the continent. It's actually the oldies that tend to retire to Spain. 

The real divide was between "haves" and "have nots". The latter voted "Brexit".


----------



## bgc_fan

Not completely wild. There are approximately 1.5 million UK expats working in Europe: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36606847
Which is a little over 2% of the population so it isn't that insignificant. They aren't there because of lack of work in the UK, but rather there are certain experiences that it offers. That probably doesn't include university aged people who enjoy travelling and working.


----------



## james4beach

mordko said:


> Britain has much, much, much lower unemployment rate among youth than continental Europe does.


Look at that unemployment rate in France ... or Spain ! My word


----------



## mordko

bgc_fan said:


> Not completely wild. There are approximately 1.5 million UK expats working in Europe: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36606847
> Which is a little over 2% of the population so it isn't that insignificant. They aren't there because of lack of work in the UK, but rather there are certain experiences that it offers. That probably doesn't include university aged people who enjoy travelling and working.


The article you are quoting refers to 1.3 million (rather than 1.5 million) who "live and work in Europe". That number includes all British expats in Europe, a large chunk of them are retirees who do not work. I do not have a number for how many of these work but it ain't going to be half of them. The number 1 country for British expats is Spain and we know exactly what Brits do on Costa del Sol. These are your oldies I am talking about. 

There are also 3 million EU citizens in Britain, with 270,000 who came to the UK last year. https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/


----------



## mordko

james4beach said:


> Look at that unemployment rate in France ... or Spain ! My word


Yes, and it's mostly the young people. Wise rigid socialist labour laws - got to admire the persistence in the face of evidence.


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> There are also 3 million EU citizens in Britain, with 270,000 who came to the UK last year. https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/


3 million productive EU citizens in the United Kingdom contributing to the economy and the social tapestry. Great news!!!!!!! 

http://ca.iasservices.org.uk/how-does-immigration-benefit-the-uk/



> According to research by UCL, European immigrants who arrived in the UK since 2000 contributed more than £20bn to the economy between 2001 and 2011. Not only that, they also rewarded the country with valuable human capital and vital skills that would have cost the UK £6.8bn in education.


----------



## mordko

Some productive, some are on benefits. That's not the point though. 

I personally recall how Labour promised at the time of EU expansion, that after Poland and Romania joining no more than 30 thousand would come every year. They forgot an order of magnitude. People remember, things like this get them pissed off. 

The other aspect is that the "have nots" are suffering because this depressed wages at the bottom of the scale. This was another factor which caused poor Brits to support Brexit. Personally I think they did it for the wrong reasons as influx of low wage workers helps to keep the economy competitive and helps everyone but I understand why some didn't see it that way.


----------



## olivaw

The only relevant point is that immigrants contribute. Scapegoating them for the plight of workers who have been displaced by globalization serves no constructive purpose for the country. Politicians who campaign against immigrants for political gain deserve our contempt.

*cough*nigel*cough*farage*cough


----------



## james4beach

Yes immigrants do contribute, but they make easy scapegoats for anything that's a problem in society. This has happened time and again throughout history.


----------



## mordko

Exactly. Which is why we all protested vigorously when HP attacked immigration.


----------



## james4beach

I'm in one of those "can't we all just get along" Friday moods


----------



## sags

Thank goodness capitalists are there to save freedom and democracy for everyone.


----------



## sags

mordko said:


> Exactly. Which is why we all protested vigorously when HP attacked immigration.


Nice try, but that approach is going to get you nowhere. Members on CMF for a long time know HP to be one of the brightest and most level headed members on the board, whose counsel has often been sought by others.


----------



## olivaw

sags said:


> Nice try, but that approach is going to get you nowhere. Members on CMF for a long time know HP to be one of the brightest and most level headed members on the board, whose counsel has often been sought by others.


+1


----------



## sags

mordko said:


> Yes, and it's mostly the young people. Wise rigid socialist labour laws - got to admire the persistence in the face of evidence.


I admire the persistence in the face of the "corrupt capitalism" that has replaced the founding concept of ownership of small business and enterprises.

Today's capitalism is feudalism by another name.


----------



## gibor365

sags said:


> Nice try, but that approach is going to get you nowhere. Members on CMF for a long time know HP to be one of the brightest and most level headed members on the board, whose counsel has often been sought by others.


If it's a joke you forgot to insert  .
Because of her provocations and attacks several valuable CMF members left the forum, include Toronto.gal
One of the reasons that some CNF members call her "duche"


----------



## sags

I would be sorry if T.gal left the forum, but what I have seen on the forum is an influx of people who post their opinions and don't like it when they are challenged on them, which Humble is quite capable of doing.

That is how forums work though. Opinions are posted and they are either accepted, challenged, rejected or ignored by others.

If people can't accept having their opinions challenged, they probably should avoid posting on forums.


----------



## sags

It is noticeable on some topics which can be complicated, for example dealing with tax issues or an estate, that there is a wide range of opinions and statements posted............some which are extremely accurate and some which are clearly misinformed, but nobody directly challenge or insults another poster in those threads. What happens is they post their own reply or agree with another member's reply and from the options choose to "ignore" the misinformed post and refrain from open criticism of the post.

That doesn't seem to happen as smoothly in this section of the forum under topics that are highly political.

Personally, I try to keep in mind that people enter debates with preconceived notions and are very unlikely to change their mind.


----------



## olivaw

*Four European countries reject ‘generous’ Brexit deal with UK, poll finds*


> An opinion poll published on Friday, found the majority of voters in Germany, France, Sweden and Finland think the UK should not receive any favours when negotiating a post-Brexit trade deal.
> 
> ...
> 
> Of the five continental countries covered in YouGov’s poll, only voters in Denmark favoured offering Britain a "generous" EU deal.
> 
> YouGov interviewed 2,045 people in Germany, 1,008 people in France and around 1,000 people in Sweden, Finland and Denmark between 30 June and 5 July.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-brexit-deal-with-uk-poll-finds-a7128001.html


----------



## humble_pie

olivaw said:


> *Four European countries reject ‘generous’ Brexit deal with UK, poll finds*
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-brexit-deal-with-uk-poll-finds-a7128001.html



the brexit issue is so complex that i imagine a new poll could be taken every day & all the results would differ.

i also imagine that the citizens of france, germany, sweden & finland have not yet even begun to think about the british contribution to NATO. It's substantial. All four countries plus denmark need great britain in NATO, measurably more than great britain needs the nebulous benefits of european union membership.

sweden & finland, in particular, are presently drawing closer to NATO, are in fact said to be "partners," which is an early stage prior to joining NATO as full members.

it's astonishing to realize that neither sweden nor finland ever saw fit to join NATO during all the decades of the cold war. For 70 long years, both countries have been neutral. But now, all of a sudden. sweden & finland are nervous enough to seek association with NATO. Perhaps they know something about russia that we here in canada don't know ...

.


----------



## mordko

sags said:


> Nice try, but that approach is going to get you nowhere. Members on CMF for a long time know HP to be one of the brightest and most level headed members on the board, whose counsel has often been sought by others.


That's great you are friends, but let's check out facts:

1. HP: " According to yourself, you sojourned in england for merely 10 years, took out citizenship, then abandoned the country."

This is a traditional nationalistic "lack of loyalty" attack. 

2. "there are noticeable numbers of temporary transients these days, shopping for citizenships in order to hoover up all the social & financial benefits they can, then abandoning in order to move on to the next state where they will re-commence the hoovering. Canada attracts more than her fair share of these, because of the excellent social benefits this country has long offered."

This is a wholesale attack on immigrants as well as a personal attack on me based on the false and malicious claim that I am in Canada "to hoover up all the social benefits then abandon" etc...

3. "canada btw is beginning to move towards blocking multiple citizenships. Precisely because of the hoovering. Have you noticed? "

This is an outright lie attacking dual citizenship.

4. "here's what i respect from real citizens. They don't wander the planet casually picking up citizenships like alley cats. Instead, real citizens love their country."

Hey James, you are wondering. Clearly you don't love Canada. Not a real citizen, not even fully human, you are more like an alley cat. 

5. "but what would you know? you're not from england, were never born in the emerald isle, don't have as much as a single drop of saxon or celtic blood in your veins"

A 100% racist statement, one can find this same sentiment in droves on stormfront and the like. Also, why is she being racist against them capital letters? Is it because they have the same root as "capitalism"?

In all 5 cases these outright lies attack me as an immigrant rather than provide any "level headed opinion" about my views.


----------



## mordko

sags said:


> I admire the persistence in the face of the "corrupt capitalism" that has replaced the founding concept of ownership of small business and enterprises.
> 
> Today's capitalism is feudalism by another name.


Yep, no corruption in France or Spain. Unless presidents and mayors handing brown envelopes counts as "corruption". It does? Nah, can't possibly be true, Canadian Liberals do that, so it's all kosher. 

Do agree that today's capitalism is corrupt. We have big nanny states to thank for that. It's like Friedman said, the west didn't "win" the battle of the systems vs USSR. It is just rotting slower because it still has vestiges of capitalism. 

Getting back on topic, youth unemployment in EU countries with rigid labour laws ranges from about half (Spain, Italy) to a quarter (France). Yep, we should all admire this persistence and try to simulate it over here. 35 hour week anyone?


----------



## mrPPincer

mordko said:


> That's great you are friends, but let's check out facts:
> 
> 1. HP: " According to yourself, you sojourned in england for merely 10 years, took out citizenship, then abandoned the country."
> 
> This is a traditional nationalistic "lack of loyalty" attack.
> 
> 2. "there are noticeable numbers of temporary transients these days, shopping for citizenships in order to hoover up all the social & financial benefits they can, then abandoning in order to move on to the next state where they will re-commence the hoovering. Canada attracts more than her fair share of these, because of the excellent social benefits this country has long offered."
> 
> This is a wholesale attack on immigrants as well as a personal attack on me based on the false and malicious claim that I am in Canada "to hoover up all the social benefits then abandon" etc...
> 
> 3. "canada btw is beginning to move towards blocking multiple citizenships. Precisely because of the hoovering. Have you noticed? "
> 
> This is an outright lie attacking dual citizenship.
> 
> 4. "here's what i respect from real citizens. They don't wander the planet casually picking up citizenships like alley cats. Instead, real citizens love their country."
> 
> Hey James, you are wondering. Clearly you don't love Canada. Not a real citizen, not even fully human, you are more like an alley cat.
> 
> 5. "but what would you know? you're not from england, were never born in the emerald isle, don't have as much as a single drop of saxon or celtic blood in your veins"
> 
> A 100% racist statement, one can find this same sentiment in droves on stormfront and the like. Also, why is she being racist against them capital letters? Is it because they have the same root as "capitalism"?
> 
> *In all 5 cases these outright lies attack me as an immigrant rather than provide any "level headed opinion" about my views.*


I've observed over the years that *it's a regularly used tactic by h_p to viciously attack the individual rather than their arguments*; I sometimes wonder if she can even tell the difference.
h_p has consistently proven herself unwilling or unable to keep herself from crossing that line into troll territory, every time someone stands up to her bullying.

She has driven multiple contributing CMF members from the forum since I've been here, including myself for a time.
I have her on ignore now, since one of her latest troll campaigns in a thread I started recently on the free ETF trades offered in CIBC IE's 25th anniversary celebration.

To her avid defenders, both of you, just wait until she inexplicably goes into troll mode on your arse, maybe you inadvertently somehow offend her self-perceived 'internet cred' lol, you'll see her other side.. it ain't pretty.


----------



## humble_pie

mrPPincer said:


> I've observed over the years that *it's a regularly used tactic by h_p to viciously attack the individual rather than their arguments*; I sometimes wonder if she can even tell the difference.
> h_p has consistently proven herself unwilling or unable to keep herself from crossing that line into troll territory, every time someone stands up to her bullying.
> 
> She has driven multiple contributing CMF members from the forum since I've been here, including myself for a time.
> I have her on ignore now, since one of her latest troll campaigns in a thread I started recently on the free ETF trades offered in CIBC IE's 25th anniversary celebration.
> 
> To her avid defenders, both of you, just wait until she inexplicably goes into troll mode on your arse, maybe you inadvertently somehow offend her self-perceived 'internet cred' lol, you'll see her other side.. it ain't pretty.




lol it is yourself, mister pincer, who attacks below the belt. It is yourself who goes berserk with rage. It is yourself who is an explosive troll. Clearly, there is something wrong with you, something more than just the heavy drinking, which you yourself admit to.

i find myself wondering if the something-gone-seriously-wrong has to do with the roadkill you told us you like to pick up from the roadside, then you take the possibly-infected critters home to eat.

surely you remember posting your story. It was lurid with gruesome details. You described how, when you get the roadkill critters home, you butcher the animals & string up their carcasses in a tree that grows in front of your house.

on & on you went, one repulsive detail after another. The carcasses hanging in the tree do look a little weird, you said, but it's all OK because you live alone, your house is secluded & no neighbours ever come to visit you anyhow.

brrrr. How terrifying. May i say that, if i lived in your community, i would not allow my children or anyone else's children to venture within two miles of your house.

as for the cibc thread, you are quite wrong. The immediate topic was not an ETF offer. The topic was the particular CIBC handling of the recent & universal IIROC requirement that brokers must be more fair & more transparent re FX fees in registered accounts.

me i was extraordinarily reasonable & logical. I mentioned the historical circumstances, how all brokers are being forced by the IIROC to pull up their FX socks in registered accounts. I explained exactly why - in my opinion - the cibc protocol of automatic conversion to CAD is not particularly helpful to large numbers of investors. Especially not when the same investors can, these days, so easily open a true dual currency CAD/USD registered account at many other brokers.

that is all. Totally harmless, really. But you exploded into a sinister, libellous, screeching, out-of-control rage. Obviously you are nursing this rage along, stoking your hatred, poisoning cmf forum with it as hard as you can.


.


----------



## mordko

^^^:disgust: Nicely illustrating mrPPrincer's point.


----------



## mrPPincer

mordko said:


> ^^^:disgust: Nicely illustrating mrPPrincer's point.


Thanks for not quoting it, mordco.
I have zero interest in what it said, having been here 5 years I have better things to do than go down that rabbit hole; it's ugly down there.



> humble_pie
> 
> Senior Member
> This message is hidden because humble_pie is on your ignore list.
> View Post
> 
> Remove user from ignore list


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> Yep, no corruption in France or Spain. Unless presidents and mayors handing brown envelopes counts as "corruption". It does? Nah, can't possibly be true, Canadian Liberals do that, so it's all kosher.


As do Conservatives. Our second-to-last Conservative PM received envelopes of cash from a german national tied to an Airbus procurement contract. I don't recall any Liberal PMs having been accused of personally receiving bribes.

The point being that we shouldn't pretend any party has a monopoly on corruption. Power corrupts.


----------



## humble_pie

^^

not at all each:

mister pincer by his own posts is an aging never-married childless male, living alone, who displays some worrisome rageaholic behaviours & tells cmf forum that he drinks too much ...

it's wonderful how the dysfunctional few of you are finding each other though.

mordko, if you look upthread you will see one highly-respected longterm cmf member saying that you should quit posting here because no one is listening to you. Give it up, he says.

you will also see two longterm respected members suggesting that you and/or gibor365 should be banned.

.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> As do Conservatives. Our second-to-last Conservative PM received envelopes of cash from a german national tied to an Airbus procurement contract. I don't recall any Liberal PMs having been accused of personally receiving bribes.
> 
> The point being that we shouldn't pretend any party has a monopoly on corruption. Power corrupts.


Didn't Malroney receive payment for lobbying after leaving office? Wasn't Chrétien personally involved in giving away huge quantities of taxpayer funds to mafia in exchange for channeling part of cash back to the liberals? 

Not sure the two offences are of the same magnitude. 

Anyway, the original point was that south European countries with rigid labour laws are not exactly corruption free.


----------



## mordko

H_P, I said it before, let me repeat it. It is none of your business how many children others have and whether they are married. Last time I checked being male wasn't a crime. These and the rest of the racist and disgusting **** you are spewing are personal attacks which say more about you than the individual you are targeting. 

Mind your own business.


----------



## ian

Not to mention a past Conservative Prime Minister who use to have his Public Works Minister collect $10K (cash thank you very much) from business people who wanted to attend a reception with the PM OR just a little more money for those who wanted a private audience.

Or a former Conservative PM who won the Party's leadership by doing things like signing up people from a men's homeless shelter, giving them a few bucks, and bussing them down to the convention so that they could be good Conservatives and vote for him.

To think that corruption is limited to one political party is silly. After a time, they are all at it to a greater or lesser extent. Liberals and Conservatives are as bad as each other. Just look at the Senate.


----------



## olivaw

mordko, gibor and mrPPincer - would you take it to a different thread please. This is the Brexit thread. 

Looks like we won't get our second referendum......

*Brexit: Government rejects petition signed by 4.1 million calling for second EU referendum*



> The Government has rejected a call for a second referendum on European Union membership in a petition that was signed by more than 4.1 million people following the Brexit vote.
> 
> It was the most-signed Government petition since the process was introduced in 2011.
> 
> However in an official reply, the Foreign Office said 33 million people had had their say and “the decision must be respected”.


----------



## sags

Kind of a sticky wicket............this whole Brexit thing.

It reminds me of times in younger days when I did something out of anger or foolishness and regretted it later, but had to live with the consequences.

It is the "oh oh, what have I done" moment of clarity.


----------



## sags

Meanwhile in Italy, the banks are wobbly with a couple of them holding $400 billion in bad debt, and having a total market cap of only $13 Billion.

Germany doesn't want to bend EU rules. Merkel apparently wants the bail in provisions enacted.

Didn't we just go through a global banking crisis only a few years ago ? Capitalism................ain't it wonderful.

http://business.financialpost.com/n...t-of-the-italian-banks-are-also-a-basket-case


----------



## Beaver101

olivaw said:


> mordko, gibor and mrPPincer - would you take it to a different thread please. This is the Brexit thread.
> 
> ... ]


 ... no need to, CMF's version of Fukishima has been around since mid-2009 and its members are suffering the long-term effects.


----------



## mrPPincer

olivaw said:


> mordko, gibor and mrPPincer - would you take it to a different thread please. This is the Brexit thread.


Take what? I was just responding to the drift of the thread, which you olivaw incidentally, were a part of; I wouldn't know what the troll in question was talking about without the quotes because I have her on ignore; I could care less.



olivaw said:


> Looks like we won't get our second referendum......


dang.. well I guess it's a wait & see game now..
I have 4 UK adrs, all major players & all long term holds.

Funny how everybody is jumping ship now.. "My job is done, I'm out".

Five to ten years to get a trade deal done with one just country, with a full team of negotiators lol

They have no team, and have to build deals with ALL the other countries now.. good luck.

Once article 50 is enacted they have two years to get all their deals done; they're out regardless after that.

No wonder everybody is jumping ship.
Standing on floats shouting rhetoric is work?? a-holes.

hmm.. just my opinion, we'll see..
Will be interesting to watch.

My guess right now is developments will be slow and the end result after a lot of uncertainty and market turmoil, they'll be lucky to get a deal somewhat similar to what they have right now.

Possibly best result is somebody campaigns in the next election on a soft/non exit and will win.


----------



## mrPPincer

Haha and Scotland & Northern Ireland can easily hold referendums & leave UK & stay in EU long before Englund could ever get all that sorted out..

So they have to negotiate that at the same time .. good luck with that england.. enjoy your tea and crumpets while you mull on that..

tic tic tic..


----------



## mrPPincer

^Sorry all. it's painful to watch for me too, especially as I have skin in the game, just laughing at the irony of it is all.


----------



## Argonaut

Brexit is much worse for Europe than it is for the UK. Glad the Brits took control of their own destiny from Merkel and the Eurocrats. Splendid Isolation.


----------



## mrPPincer

Argonaut said:


> Brexit is much worse for Europe than it is for the UK. Glad the Brits took control of their own destiny from Merkel and the Eurocrats. Splendid Isolation.


hmm disagree, but it's frikkin awesome to see you back Argonaut, you're something of a legend around here with your TFSA 5-pack.

Granted, the EU model is not up to specs, but imho working on the model has to be better than isolationism isn't it?


----------



## mrPPincer




----------



## mordko

mrPPincer said:


> Five to ten years to get a trade deal done with one just country, with a full team of negotiators lol
> 
> They have no team, and have to build deals with ALL the other countries now.. good luck.


One of the reasons negotiations with the EU take so long is precisely because EU is a pain in one place and has a bunch of anti-trade countries who torpedo potential deals. The common sense solution would be to keep UK as part of EU free trade zone and of all the trade deals UK is a part of now as a result of being in the EU. Damaging trade is in nobody's interest. 

While taking the piss and getting people to vote until they give the answer you want is indeed EU's modus operandi, it's unlikely to happen in the case of the UK. If this were to happen a higher proportion would say "no".


----------



## andrewf

The piss will indeed be taken, since UK within the EU common market is not what people voted for. If the solution to this mess is Brexit in name only, with UK still part of the common market and contributing cash to the EU along with freedom of movement, then the Leave side will have lost the referendum after all.


----------



## gibor365

> Brexit: Government rejects petition signed by 4.1 million calling for second EU referendum





> dang.. well I guess it's a wait & see game now..
> I have 4 UK adrs, all major players & all long term holds.


yes, it will be interesting to see market reaction... any prediction?!


----------



## bass player

sags said:


> Kind of a sticky wicket............this whole Brexit thing.
> 
> It reminds me of times in younger days when I did something out of anger or foolishness and regretted it later, but had to live with the consequences.
> 
> It is the "oh oh, what have I done" moment of clarity.


Those who were incapable of making the right choice on election day haven't earned the right to complain about the results.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> The piss will indeed be taken, since UK within the EU common market is not what people voted for. If the solution to this mess is Brexit in name only, with UK still part of the common market and contributing cash to the EU along with freedom of movement, then the Leave side will have lost the referendum after all.


The Brexit side unites a lot of different views, just as the Bremain side does. I am guessing, but the guess is that independence from the EU superstate was the number one reason for voting leave. Being part of the market does not interfere with sovereinity. In fact, that was what people voted for all those years ago, not the Unelected EU superstate and ever closer union.

The only view that was altogether absent in England, was that UK should be part of the EU because its a wonderful organization.


----------



## andrewf

The rhetoric seemed to focus on the cash contributions to the EU and freedom of movement. The scenario we are talking about is not what was processed by the Brexiteers side.


----------



## mordko

andrewf said:


> The rhetoric seemed to focus on the cash contributions to the EU and freedom of movement. The scenario we are talking about is not what was processed by the Brexiteers side.


Have you listened to the debates? A couple I've heard had Brexiteers express polar opposite views and ideologies, with the exception of no longer being a part of the EUSSR. Being part of the common market was heavily represented among Brexiteers and the Norwegian/Swiss examples were often quoted. Both contribute to the EU budget, albeit less than members and both permit free movement, albeit with some constraints on those who don't work. In fact, they are members of the same club that UK was a founding member of until it pulled out to join the EU.


----------



## sags

If the people want to vote again, they can certainly do so.

Votes of previous elections or platforms are often overturned by another vote at a later date.

Perhaps when the full knowledge of the ramifications of leaving the EU are fully understood, people will want to change their minds...........or perhaps not.

When faced with new information it is practical to at least consider changing the outcome.


----------



## olivaw

The new Prime Minister will need to call an election. My hope is that the election is fought on Brexit and that voters choose the party that is least likely to invoke Article 50. 

England is a powder keg. Many Leave voters thought that Brexit meant that Central and Eastern Europeans were going to be kicked out of the country. They're going to be disappointed and angry. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/world/europe/brexit-immigrants-great-britain-eu.html



> In any case, the negotiation is likely to take at least two years once it begins, and in the meantime there is no legal barrier to more European Union immigrants moving to Britain. As local residents realize that the immigrants are unlikely to be sent home soon — despite intimations of such an outcome by some Brexit advocates — frustration in Boston is mounting.
> 
> Mr. Pacho, the taxi-company owner, described the atmosphere as a balloon ready to burst with a single prick if it becomes clear that immigrants will not be forced to leave.
> 
> “What if the government says, ‘Let’s actually stay in the E.U.,’ or ‘We can’t end freedom of movement’?” he asked. “It will be a third world war here. Businesses will be destroyed. I’ve got a really bad feeling about this.”
> 
> Some residents said the outbursts of racial abuse could reflect Leave voters’ disappointment at having to face, for months or even years, the very people they had implicitly rejected in the referendum.


----------



## mordko

Between Bremain, Brexit and not sure, the last one is the worst option by far. Unceraity kills investment. 

The next election is in 2020 and by then everything should be sorted. 

The idea of revoting straight after the referendum because someone might have changed mind is dumb. On this bases we would be voting on Brexit every month in perpetuity.


----------



## olivaw

Precedent is to call an election after the selection of a new Prime Minister by the governing party to give the new PM a mandate. Expect a general election in early 2017.


----------



## mordko

Not really. Gordon Brown stayed on. He never did get elected. In fact, the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated by a "caretaker" Prime Minster who stepped in when Maggie was forced to resign.


----------



## mordko

Crucially, the contenders already said there won't be an election until it's due so anything else is just making things up. Dreaming is permitted.


----------



## olivaw

Brexiteer fantasies aside, Remain voters will not roll over. Trade treaties take years, not months. Scotland may vote to remain in the EU as an independent member state. The next Prime Minister (May) campaigned Remain - politically, she has no choice but to declare her respect for the referendum but she's a pragmatic politician. Legal challenges will be ongoing. Political challenges will be ongoing. 

Where did Brexiteer leaders go again?


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> Crucially, the contenders already said there won't be an election until it's due so anything else is just making things up. Dreaming is permitted.


This isn't quite what they said because they can't say that. The Fixed Term Parliament Act removes the PM's power to call an election when it is politically advantageous. Parliament now holds the power. 

The majority of Parliamentarians opposed Brexit. A forthcoming legal case asks the Court to rule that the Prime Minister must seek Parliamentary approval to invoke Article 50. If that fails, Parliament can exercise it's will and force a general election, allowing the people a second chance to have their say. Whether or not that happens remains to be seen, but I hope that we do see another general election. 

If the Prime Minister invokes Article 50, there is nothing to suggest that the UK government will achieve free trade with Europe without the free migration of labour. 

Brexiteers who want Central and Eastern Europeans deported will be thwarted either way. As the Telegraph suggested, it is a powder keg in some towns and smaller cities. 

If Article 50 is invoked - the best that can happen is that the United Kingdom will maintain a position as a secondary participant in the EU. The worst is Scottish Independence, an outflow of capital and labour, inflation, recession and an England that is forced to accept disadvantageous trade deals. 

As has been said before, there will be a compromise. Nobody will be happy. It will be engineered by Remain leaders because Brexit leaders have scattered.


----------



## mordko

If we are just gonna make thinks up then why not discuss what Martians will do about Brexit when they take over planet Earth in September?

Here:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...dum-if-she-becomes-conservative-a7110656.html

This is May. She is not and never has been pro-Brussels, but she supported Cameron. No early election, no referendum, exit from the EU. 

Her only opponent is Leadsom, she is even more Eurosceptic. If she becomes the leader, she will invoke Article 50 straight away. 

Saying that not everyone will get everything they want is like saying that tomorrow is Monday. Of course not; different groups wanted different things. 

Referendum is over so it's time to get over. 

Far more interesting is that it's the Labour that is in a huge mess. All the predictions were that Tories would fall apart if the outcome of the vote was "out". 

The idea of them winning elections if it were to be held soon is rather far-fetched. And even if they won, by whatever freak of nature, the main worry would be about Corbyn's complete inability at leadership in any meaningful sense. (Which, on the other hand, may be reassuring.)

The Tories on the other hand — look at them. Merely a week ago they looked like they were about to implode. They got their act together in no time, they'll elect a new leader, the in-fighting and bickering will continue, but they know that they have a job to do, so they will keep it simmering under the surface, and their discipline will ensure that it doesn't erupt, but that there are the usual safety valves for steam to come out from time to time. That sense of purpose that unites beyond the intra-party frictions is by now nearly completely absent from Labour. 

I don't like the whole idea of Labour but the country needs a meaningful opposition. Maybe it is time for a relaunch of the SDP.


----------



## olivaw

mordko said:


> Referendum is over so it's time to get over.


Democracy doesn't work that way. There are myriad legal and political arguments ahead. You and Bass have to accept that the Remain side is not going anywhere. 

Here's what a leader of your own side has to say about Theresa May: 


> *Theresa May would abandon Brexit if elected Prime Minister, Ukip donor Arron Banks claims*
> 
> The Ukip donor and millionaire businessman Arron Banks says he does not believe Theresa May would push through Brexit if she were to become Prime Minister.
> 
> Mr Banks, a key financial backer of the Leave.EU campaign, has said he will back Andrea Leadsom in the Tory leadership race, primarily due to a fear the Home Secretary would ‘betray’ Brexit if elected leader.


----------



## bass player

olivaw said:


> Democracy doesn't work that way. There are myriad legal and political arguments ahead. You and Bass have to accept that the Remain side is not going anywhere.


No one said that the remain side is going anywhere. What we are hearing are complaints from the remain side who think that another referendum should be taken or that the will of the people should simply be ignored. And, of course, those feelings are echoed by a highly supportive media who feel the same.

Sure, there will be some difficulties. But, there were also difficulties belonging to the EU and that's why a majority of the people felt that the short term pain of leaving is worth the long term gain. People knew what they voted for, so give them some credit.


----------



## mordko

bass player said:


> People knew what they voted for, so give them some credit.


Nah, you don't understand how the democracy works. It works like in China. No vote - no problem in the first place. Central committee gets to decide; it's full of clever people who can think things through properly on behalf of the stupid uninformed populace.


----------



## olivaw

bass player said:


> No one said that the remain side is going anywhere. What we are hearing are complaints from the remain side who think that another referendum should be taken or that the will of the people should simply be ignored. And, of course, those feelings are echoed by a highly supportive media who feel the same.
> 
> Sure, there will be some difficulties. But, there were also difficulties belonging to the EU and that's why a majority of the people felt that the short term pain of leaving is worth the long term gain. People knew what they voted for, so give them some credit.


It was a majority, but not an overwhelming majority Bass. Minds change.


----------



## andrewf

mordko said:


> Nah, you don't understand how the democracy works. It works like in China. No vote - no problem in the first place. Central committee gets to decide; it's full of clever people who can think things through properly on behalf of the stupid uninformed populace.


Problem is, people didn't know what they voted for. Most of them voted for a cake-having and cake-eating scenario. It's not going to happen, obviously.


----------



## gibor365

> things through properly on behalf of the stupid uninformed populace.


 but in reality every country, include Canada , has a lot of "stupid uninformed populace".



> Problem is, people didn't know what they voted for. Most of them voted for a cake-having and cake-eating scenario. It's not going to happen, obviously.


 I agree! It was "emotional voting" under slogan "immigrants [email protected] of" ...but next day they had hangover


----------



## olivaw

"immigrants [email protected] of" sloganeering had an ugly side effect. Uninformed dolts have harassed and assaulted immigrants, especially those from Eastern and Central Europe. Imagine what they'll do when they find out that they won't get what they want.


----------



## SMK

How easy the selection of the next PM will be, now that there is just one candidate, or can others join the race at this point?


----------



## heyjude

It's a done deal. The Queen is returning tomorrow to London from Balmoral so that Cameron can visit her and formally resign. May will then visit the Queen and move into #10. 

Here is a speech May made this morning:
http://www.theresa2016.co.uk/we_can_make_britain_a_country_that_works_for_everyone

Apparently if Leadsom became PM, one of her first acts would have been to fire Mark Carney:
http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/theresa-pm-leadsom-supporters-lose-faith/33216

The Guardian live blog is here:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...adsom-apologises-to-theresa-may-politics-live

Both sterling and the FTSE have risen sharply. A bit of certainty is a good thing.

Edited to add: the changeover will be on Wednesday.


----------



## gibor365

> Both sterling and the FTSE have risen sharply. A bit of certainty is a good thing.


 That's what I don't really understand  ... Does market , on the 2md thought, likes Brexit ?!


----------



## olivaw

I think May will be a good Prime Minister, but I find it interesting that a Conservative membership vote was avoided. Perhaps it's all just a lucky coincidence but UK got exactly what was needed.

Scottish Parliament is in session. Nicola Sturgeon outlined one of May's upcoming challenges:


> There can be absolutely no doubt of Scotland’s desire to remain in the European Union, and for us to be dragged out against our will – as stands to happen – is democratically unacceptable.
> 
> My priority – and the priority of the Scottish Parliament – should now be to do everything we can to protect Scotland’s relationship with the EU.
> 
> Government officials are now drawing up fresh referendum legislation, and MSPs will have an important role in scrutinising this process – and they will have to approve another referendum.
> 
> https://www.holyrood.com/articles/c...-sturgeon-reflects-future-scottish-parliament


----------



## twa2w

heyjude said:


> Apparently if Leadsom became PM, one of her first acts would have been to fire Mark Carney:
> http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/theresa-pm-leadsom-supporters-lose-faith/33216.


Canada should have fired Mark Carney.


----------



## heyjude

gibor365 said:


> That's what I don't really understand  ... Does market , on the 2md thought, likes Brexit ?!


No, but the market hates uncertainty.


----------



## SMK

Having the favoured candidate as the winner was enough reason to make markets happy. One less uncertainty to deal with.


----------



## gibor365

heyjude said:


> No, but the market hates uncertainty.


So, you think that if UK government would approve 2nd referendum, it would be bad for markets?!

Maybe one of the reason is


> George Osborne has pledged to cut corporation tax to encourage businesses to continue investing in the UK following the EU referendum vote.
> In an interview with the Financial Times, the chancellor said he would reduce the rate to below 15% - five points lower than its current 20% rate.


?


----------



## heyjude

gibor365 said:


> So, you think that if UK government would approve 2nd referendum, it would be bad for markets?!


You are putting words in my mouth. I never voiced that opinion. 

If you read the speech that Theresa May made this morning, to which I put a link upthread, she made it very clear that she intends to follow through with Brexit. Two days from now, she will be in charge. That is very different from what David Cameron proposed, i.e., a lame duck prime ministership until October.


----------



## gibor365

> *You are putting words in my mouth. I never voiced that opinion. *


 This is just logical conclusion 
you said that market hates uncertainly, and 2nd referendum would be an uncertainly


----------



## heyjude

gibor365 said:


> This is just logical conclusion
> you said that market hates uncertainly, and 2nd referendum would be an uncertainly


Not knowing who the next PM would be would also bring uncertainty.

An early general election is more likely than another referendum.


----------



## gibor365

heyjude said:


> Not knowing who the next PM would be would also bring uncertainty.
> 
> An early general election is more likely than another referendum.


Don't see any point in "early general election", as regardless outcome, looks like Brexit is a fact


----------



## mordko

Our incoming PM: "Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a success of it". 

Impressed with how quickly my old party has sorted itself out. 

Juncker is going to regret the day he got plucked out of Luxembourg for the role of bureaucrat in chief for European superstate.


----------



## AltaRed

A UK economic downturn and a positive vote in a 2nd Scottish independence referendum are likely the first items on the agenda. Second may be notice given to the expulsion of all those Brits in the EU and imposition of border controls (and/or tariffs) if the UK does not invoke Article 50 on a timely basis. One or more of those events may be the trigger for an early English general election (the Scots could be on their way out by then).


----------



## SMK

gibor365 said:


> 2nd referendum would be an uncertainly


But also hopes of Bremain, and what quickly had erased market losses soon after the vote.


----------



## humble_pie

heyjude said:


> It's a done deal. The Queen is returning tomorrow to London from Balmoral so that Cameron can visit her and formally resign. May will then visit the Queen and move into #10.
> 
> Here is a speech May made this morning:
> http://www.theresa2016.co.uk/we_can_make_britain_a_country_that_works_for_everyone
> 
> Apparently if Leadsom became PM, one of her first acts would have been to fire Mark Carney:
> http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/theresa-pm-leadsom-supporters-lose-faith/33216
> 
> The Guardian live blog is here:
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics...adsom-apologises-to-theresa-may-politics-live
> 
> Both sterling and the FTSE have risen sharply. A bit of certainty is a good thing.
> 
> Edited to add: the changeover will be on Wednesday.





wonderful roundup of top british articles re the change of power at the top, thankx jude!

including electrifying victory speech from PM-elect Theresa May. She embraces Brexit lock, stock & barrel. Britannia will rise again, on her own, stronger & more united than ever, says May. Her prime ministership will be dedicated to making sure that every citizen - every political party, every class, every cultural background, every colour, every creed - will have full opportunities for education, jobs & prosperity, says May.

wow, what a fireball. May is more thatcher than thatcher herself ever was. Who was that legendary early Celtic queen who fought off the Romans? Boadicea? maybe these contemporary Whitehall godmothers are her direct descendents.

PS jude, what i saw in your channel 4 blogspot is that Leadsom would *not* have fired Carney. Rather, the blogspot says Leadsom confirmed directly to journo gary gibbon that Carney would stay.

the fire-Carney rumour, says gibbon, was only a rumble from an "ardent" but unnamed Leadsom supporter, who reportedly opined that several prominent pro-EU british heads of high finance, including the governor of the bank of england, would have to roll ...


.


----------



## mordko

The only trigger for an early election would be a vote of no confidence. Given that Tories have majority, it's just not going to happen. 

No Brit will be kicked out of Europe, that's pure fantasy. There could be changes to the right of claiming benefits or healthcare. 

With regards to Scotland - Sturgeon will do her best to try and stir as much instability as possible as soon as possible. Hard to predict whether she has any chance of succeeding. One slight problem is that EU countries with separatist movements (such as Spain) have already pored cold water on the whole idea that Scotland might get an express acceptance to the EU once it's out of the UK.


----------



## andrewf

AltaRed said:


> A UK economic downturn and a positive vote in a 2nd Scottish independence referendum are likely the first items on the agenda. Second may be notice given to the expulsion of all those Brits in the EU and imposition of border controls (and/or tariffs) if the UK does not invoke Article 50 on a timely basis. One or more of those events may be the trigger for an early English general election (the Scots could be on their way out by then).


The EU cannot legally impose border controls/tariffs on the UK while it is still a member.


----------



## olivaw

andrewf said:


> The EU cannot legally impose border controls/tariffs on the UK while it is still a member.


UK cannot legally prepare for Brexit without invoking Article 50 but that's what May said that she plans to do. Europeans are fuming at the arrogance of it.


----------



## mordko

UK can legally take as much time as it wants prior to initiating Article 50 and nobody can do a thing about it. It's all part of the bargaining process which has already started by various parties making announcements.

Europeans are indeed fuming at the arrogance of "it". "Brexit was Juncker's fault and he must go". http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...fault-and-he-must-go-says-czech-foreign-mini/


----------



## humble_pie

.
Nicola Sturgeon is hardly a stirrer of instabilitiy. As first minister of scotland, Sturgeon is more than a match for the newly-elevated british home secretary.

ancient highlander toast:

_hair's tae oos
wha's lich oos
_
ps countries do not pore cold water. They pour cold water.


.


----------



## olivaw

Nicola Sturgeon has been loud and clear. "_There can be absolutely no doubt of Scotland’s desire to remain in the European Union, and for us to be dragged out against our will – as stands to happen – is democratically unacceptable._"

A member state that plans to leave EU is expected to invoke Article 50. Failure to do so while making preparations to withdraw from the EU could technically be considered an act of war. This fiction that UK can do whatever it wants, for however long it wants, is contrary to the wording and spirit of the treaty and contrary to internationally recognized diplomatic conduct. 

Unless, of course, the British government has no intention of withdrawing from the EU. In that case - carry on.


----------



## humble_pie

mordko said:


> "Brexit was Juncker's fault and he must go".



but why leave out the critical part about how it's the Czech minister who's calling for juncker to go.

Visegrad lives! did u also happen to hear today that hungary - most rabidly right-wing among the visegrad quartet - creator of europe's biggest wall against refugees in 2015 - hungary is now begging for refugees to please come to the country to relieve an acute labour shortage ...


.


----------



## AltaRed

andrewf said:


> The EU cannot legally impose border controls/tariffs on the UK while it is still a member.


Ah, but if the UK tries to manipulate the process dragging their feet on Article 50, I doubt the EU will sit idly by. Something will be done to poke the Brits in the ribs.


----------



## mordko

humble_pie said:


> but why leave out the critical part about how it's the Czech minister who's calling for juncker to go.
> 
> Visegrad lives! did u also happen to hear today that hungary - most rabidly right-wing among the visegrad quartet - creator of europe's biggest wall against refugees in 2015 - hungary is now begging for refugees to please come to the country to relieve an acute labour shortage ...
> 
> 
> .


I see. All Europeans are equal, but some are apparently more equal than others.


----------



## andrewf

I don't see why the EU should try to punish the UK for delaying in invoking article 50. They should, however, refuse to negotiate until the UK does invoke article 50. Otherwise the negotiations might go nowhere.


----------



## AltaRed

andrewf said:


> I don't see why the EU should try to punish the UK for delaying in invoking article 50. They should, however, refuse to negotiate until the UK does invoke article 50. Otherwise the negotiations might go nowhere.


The EU can't very well continue to include the Brits in any decision making, i.e. the European Council, the European Commission nor the European Parliament. Nor can the Brits remain in any significant posts in the bureauocracy. It is an inherent conflict of interest (fox in the hen house). There are lots of things for which action should be taken unless the Brits say....sorry for f*cking this up.... We really want to stay.


----------



## mordko

Merkel said Brexit = Brexit. May said Brexit = Brexit. Anyone of any significance said Brexit = Brexit. Can't recall any side in any referendum being such poor losers and hopeless fantasist. Seriously people, time to move on. Far more interesting to bet which country would be next to pull out. 

And the EU has more issues on its hands than keeping itself busy by being spiteful. Like shrinking economies, massive unemployment and the Italian banks going bankrupt. Italy is just a tad bigger than Greece, so could be a rough ride.


----------



## olivaw

"Brexit = Brexit" is an empty phrase because there is no consensus about the meaning of the word "Brexit".


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion

Here's a old thread that should be on current radar:

*UK faces food, fuel and drugs shortages in no-deal Brexit: Times, citing official documents*
_Opponents of no deal say it would be a disaster for what was once one of the West’s most stable democracies. A disorderly divorce, they say, would hurt global growth, send shockwaves through financial markets and weaken London’s claim to be the world’s preeminent financial center.

Brexit supporters say there may be short-term disruption from a no-deal exit but that the economy will thrive if cut free from what they cast as a doomed experiment in integration that has led to Europe falling behind China and the United States. _


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion

Not related to Brexit, but related to Britian, and I didn't think jihadi jack deserved the dignity of a thread with his name on it.
Seems like Ms. May pulled a fast one on Canada as she was leaving office.
I'll be interested to see how Canada handles this one. Sounds like their is little inclination to do anything - which is just fine IMO.
The father of a British-Canadian man dubbed Jihadi Jack — who was recently stripped of his U.K. citizenship — says he’ll be pressuring politicians to help get his son into Canada.


----------



## humble_pie

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Here's a old thread that should be on current radar:
> 
> *UK faces food, fuel and drugs shortages in no-deal Brexit: Times, citing official documents*
> _Opponents of no deal say it would be a disaster for what was once one of the West’s most stable democracies. A disorderly divorce, they say, would hurt global growth, send shockwaves through financial markets and weaken London’s claim to be the world’s preeminent financial center.
> 
> Brexit supporters say there may be short-term disruption from a no-deal exit but that the economy will thrive if cut free from what they cast as a doomed experiment in integration that has led to Europe falling behind China and the United States. _



Brexit is one among many geopolitical topics that should be on current radar

recently i read that, of total canadian exports to the european community, 40% is going to great britain alone. So the stability of that export market should be of grave concern to us.

as a matter of fact, in these hair-raising times all export markets should be of grave concern to us ...

a sizable number of cmffers though are more concerned with whether it's possible to get into the mumblety-peg business with $100


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion

I'm still gobsmacked (is that a good British term?) that this thing would have traction based on a 51.9% referendum result. Its not like a vote on having flouride in the water - it is gnarly and nuanced with impacts that are difficult to know ahead of time.


----------



## bgc_fan

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> I'm still gobsmacked (is that a good British term?) that this thing would have traction based on a 51.9% referendum result. Its not like a vote on having flouride in the water - it is gnarly and nuanced with impacts that are difficult to know ahead of time.


Except the pro-Brexit campaign was simply: EU is taking advantage of us, we'll have billions of pounds back that we won't have to contribute, and we don't have to put up with EU regulations.

Of course, omitting that the UK GDP increase and economy growth has probably been helped with their EU connections. The billions of pounds? Omitted the fact that money was also going back the other way, so they aren't going to be any better off. As for EU regulations, well, if they want to trade with EU countries, they'll have to make sure their goods meet EU standards. Likewise for anything that gets imported will likely meet EU standards. Of course, now that they aren't part of the EU, they have zero say in crafting these standards.


----------



## humble_pie

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Not related to Brexit, but related to Britian, and I didn't think jihadi jack deserved the dignity of a thread with his name on it.
> Seems like Ms. May pulled a fast one on Canada as she was leaving office.
> I'll be interested to see how Canada handles this one. Sounds like their is little inclination to do anything - which is just fine IMO.
> The father of a British-Canadian man dubbed Jihadi Jack — who was recently stripped of his U.K. citizenship — says he’ll be pressuring politicians to help get his son into Canada.




yes we should definitely stay disinclined to do anything

somewhat similarly there are said to be known canadian women with small children by their ISIL husbands who are now stranded in camps in syria; however canada is disinclined to do anything to bring them back

& a small number of White Helmets did not make the security checkpoint so they & families are still languishing in a camp in jordan ... i am assuming the security checks were both fair & competent, so if canada is once again being disinclined, then i am happy to agree


----------



## humble_pie

one possible way to get a partial 2nd referendum on Brexit: nicola sturgeon, leader of the scottish nationalist party, wrote to boris johnson a couple weeks ago that scotland now wants to hold a 2nd referendum on scottish breakway independence.

the scotNats are strong supporters of continued EU membership. They say that Brexit will trigger the loss of 100,000 jobs in scotland.


----------



## dubmac

humble_pie said:


> one possible way to get a partial 2nd referendum on Brexit: nicola sturgeon, leader of the scottish nationalist party, wrote to boris johnson a couple weeks ago that scotland now wants to hold a 2nd referendum on scottish breakway independence.
> 
> the scotNats are strong supporters of continued EU membership. They say that Brexit will trigger the loss of 100,000 jobs in scotland.


I just got back from a trip to Scotland - mostly in the north and east & Orkney Islands. Exploring my ancestry and following the footsteps of some of the ancient dubmacs. Truly a wonderful trip! People very friendly, history everywhere!
Difficult to determine how well they would fare in the event of a separation from the UK. They have oil (Aberdeen - but I think it is on the wane.) Lots of fishing boats (but don;t know whether the fishing is as good.) Tourism, Whiskey distilleries, and sheep (wool) were definite growth industries. When I was in the pub, the locals in Aberdeen were almost teary-eyed when the celtic band played "Caledonia". Apparently, this ballad is a pseudo-anthem for the nationalist movement. 
Definitely recommend it - oh yeah - bring a raincoat.


----------



## Longtimeago

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Not related to Brexit, but related to Britian, and I didn't think jihadi jack deserved the dignity of a thread with his name on it.
> Seems like Ms. May pulled a fast one on Canada as she was leaving office.
> I'll be interested to see how Canada handles this one. Sounds like their is little inclination to do anything - which is just fine IMO.
> The father of a British-Canadian man dubbed Jihadi Jack — who was recently stripped of his U.K. citizenship — says he’ll be pressuring politicians to help get his son into Canada.


What I don't understand is that he (Jack Letts) was born in Oxford, England. So he is a Brit by birth and only a Canadian through his Canadian born Father. I did not think the UK could take away the citizenship of someone born in the UK but obviously, it appears they can.


----------



## Longtimeago

humble_pie said:


> Brexit is one among many geopolitical topics that should be on current radar
> 
> a sizable number of cmffers though are more concerned with whether it's possible to get into the mumblety-peg business with $100


Actually humble_pie, some cmffers are capable of being concerned or interested in more than one thing at a time and as to which is of more concern to them, you really have no way of knowing that. So please try to refrain from making comments that simply show your ignorance. 

As it happens, while I personally am interested, not concerned, with whether it is possible to get into business with $100, I am personally concerned about Brexit. As it happens my wife has pension income from the UK which can be seriously affected by it if the UK economy takes a real dive after a no-deal Brexit.


----------



## Longtimeago

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> I'm still gobsmacked (is that a good British term?) that this thing would have traction based on a 51.9% referendum result. Its not like a vote on having flouride in the water - it is gnarly and nuanced with impacts that are difficult to know ahead of time.


Do you not remember how close the vote was on Quebec separating from Canada OnlyMyOpinion? That was 49% to leave, 51% to remain. If it had gone the other way, Quebec would have presumably left Canada and there would have been all kinds of unconsidered consequences to them doing that. 

The thing is that referendums on this kind of thing really are a very stupid thing in the first place. They are voted on based on EMOTION and nothing else. Therefore, there should be no reason to be 'gobsmacked' by the results. They are entirely predictable. I have many extended family members in Scotland and while most of them were and are against leaving the EU, some voted and remain in favour of it regardless of how much new information comes out about the potential negative consequences. In one conversation on the subject I had with a cousin, her response was, 'I don't care about any of that, we just want out!' 

As the saying goes, 'when emotion comes in the door, logic goes out the window.' You cannot argue logically with an emotional person.


----------



## MrMatt

Longtimeago said:


> Do you not remember how close the vote was on Quebec separating from Canada OnlyMyOpinion? That was 49% to leave, 51% to remain. If it had gone the other way, Quebec would have presumably left Canada and there would have been all kinds of unconsidered consequences to them doing that.
> 
> The thing is that referendums on this kind of thing really are a very stupid thing in the first place. They are voted on based on EMOTION and nothing else. Therefore, there should be no reason to be 'gobsmacked' by the results. They are entirely predictable. I have many extended family members in Scotland and while most of them were and are against leaving the EU, some voted and remain in favour of it regardless of how much new information comes out about the potential negative consequences. In one conversation on the subject I had with a cousin, her response was, 'I don't care about any of that, we just want out!'
> 
> As the saying goes, 'when emotion comes in the door, logic goes out the window.' You cannot argue logically with an emotional person.


If they had all the information of the negative effects they likely wouldn't have voted to join the EU.
The reality is people suck at making decisions, which is why it is important to make sure the consequences are as close as possible, and to the extent possible limited to those making the decision.

When the consequences of a choice don't even land on the decider, the bad decisions get even worse.


----------



## humble_pie

dubmac said:


> I just got back from a trip to Scotland - mostly in the north and east & Orkney Islands. Exploring my ancestry and following the footsteps of some of the ancient dubmacs. Truly a wonderful trip! People very friendly, history everywhere!
> Difficult to determine how well they would fare in the event of a separation from the UK. They have oil (Aberdeen - but I think it is on the wane.) Lots of fishing boats (but don;t know whether the fishing is as good.) Tourism, Whiskey distilleries, and sheep (wool) were definite growth industries. When I was in the pub, the locals in Aberdeen were almost teary-eyed when the celtic band played "Caledonia". Apparently, this ballad is a pseudo-anthem for the nationalist movement.



what a trip! thankx for sharing

it's easy to see that whiskey & tourism are marquee industries. IP industries should be leading the flock as well, in scotland as well as ireland & even wales.

but sheep? how are sheep (wool) qualifying as a growth industry in caledonia.

i'm aware that a feverish resurgence of interest in high-end wool trade products is well underway. But it's a costly & specialized niche. When it comes to basic clothing, textiles & household goods like rugs & blankets, would not most of scotland still be relying on petroleum based fibers from asian factories.


----------



## MrMatt

Longtimeago said:


> Do you not remember how close the vote was on Quebec separating from Canada OnlyMyOpinion? That was 49% to leave, 51% to remain. If it had gone the other way, Quebec would have presumably left Canada and there would have been all kinds of unconsidered consequences to them doing that.
> 
> The thing is that referendums on this kind of thing really are a very stupid thing in the first place. They are voted on based on EMOTION and nothing else. Therefore, there should be no reason to be 'gobsmacked' by the results. They are entirely predictable. I have many extended family members in Scotland and while most of them were and are against leaving the EU, some voted and remain in favour of it regardless of how much new information comes out about the potential negative consequences. In one conversation on the subject I had with a cousin, her response was, 'I don't care about any of that, we just want out!'
> 
> As the saying goes, 'when emotion comes in the door, logic goes out the window.' You cannot argue logically with an emotional person.


There is no mechanism for a province to unilaterally leave Canada.
There is a clause in the treaties to allow a member state to leave the EU.

Quebec can leave, just take their share of the debt, and return any land or resources you didn't bring in.


----------



## dubmac

humble_pie said:


> how are sheep (wool) qualifying as a growth industry in caledonia.


they make "Harris Tweed" woven woollens. ...(maybe growth industry is not quite an accurate description. sheep were all over the place in the north.)


----------



## Rusty O'Toole

I'm astonished over and over again by the ability politicians have to make a mess of things. Take this Brexit business. It seems the people want to leave, the politicians want to stay. So, why wouldn't the politicians try to fix things? Why not ask what it is the people don't like about the present arrangement and change them? It has to be worth a try. Instead they seem to be obsessed with causing the maximum damage to themselves


----------



## MrMatt

Rusty O'Toole said:


> I'm astonished over and over again by the ability politicians have to make a mess of things. Take this Brexit business. It seems the people want to leave, the politicians want to stay. So, why wouldn't the politicians try to fix things? Why not ask what it is the people don't like about the present arrangement and change them? It has to be worth a try. Instead they seem to be obsessed with causing the maximum damage to themselves


Because the politicians and ruling elites see themselves as superior and think they know better than the citizenry.

This is what is pushing populism around the world.
An out of touch ruling class.


----------



## andrewf

Half the people want to stay. Of the other half that want to leave, only some want to leave no matter what. The rest want some kind of deal, and some only want to leave if they can get a deal the EU will never agree to.

The problem with Brexit is that the choices are 'BrINO' or Brexit in name only where the remain part of the customs union, etc. or the UK implodes with N Ireland rejoining Ireland and possibly Scotland leaving as well. I think a lot of idle observers do not appreciate how loaded the issue of the Northern Irish border is.

It is an impossible situation. Holding the referendum was a mistake. But having held the referendum, the UK should have negotiated a deal and put that to the people. If the Brexit on offer now is what was the choice for the referendum, I doubt it would have succeeded. The referendum was originally a promise of having cake and eating it.


----------



## sags

Seems a logical and reasonable solution.

They held a referendum on if they wanted to negotiate a Brexit and it was approved. Now they should vote on Brexit with no deal in place. It is what it is.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole

MrMatt said:


> Because the politicians and ruling elites see themselves as superior and think they know better than the citizenry.
> 
> This is what is pushing populism around the world.
> An out of touch ruling class.


If they are so smart why are they making a dog's breakfast of things?


----------



## MrMatt

Rusty O'Toole said:


> If they are so smart why are they making a dog's breakfast of things?


They THINK they're smarter, which is the problem.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion

MrMatt said:


> Because the politicians and ruling elites see themselves as superior and think they know better than the citizenry.
> This is what is pushing populism around the world.
> An out of touch ruling class.


Here's an article after your own heart Matt, A 'pure product of the British elite': How Europe sees Boris Johnson's Brexit manoeuvres
I could only shake my head reading in the article, _"Boris Johnson, the man who, according to his sister, wanted, as a child, to be "world king."_
and _Johnson wrote a biography of Churchill that reviewers said read like a self-congratulatory autobiography._

What a Monty Python show.

Somehow we need to begin cultivating and promoting better future leaders than the selfie narcissists that seem prevalent today.


----------



## like_to_retire

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Somehow we need to begin cultivating and promoting better future leaders than the selfie narcissists that seem prevalent today.


How would you attract these people? 

No normal person would want to be a politician, so it's left up to power hungry, self-admiring, crazy people.

ltr


----------



## Longtimeago

I didn't think it could be possible to make more of a mess of it than it already was but I was wrong. All the actions taken by Johnson and by Parliament in the last week have shown just how much worse they can and have made it. 'You couldn't make it up', as the saying goes.

In all of this, the forest is being forgotten while everyone is concentrating on the trees.


----------



## humble_pie

cooks in london are talking about stockpiling

i mean good cooks, the kind who earn a living at it, they're stockpiling or they're talking about secret truck garden suppliers they know


----------



## humble_pie

the canada pension plan investment board is weathering Brexit like a trooper

the CPPIB's london based head of international investing says he's more concerned that a new election wlll bring Labour's Jeremy Corbyn to power than he is about Boris & Brexit

the UK labour leader has announced that the party intends to re-nationalize all of britain's utility & infrastructure that was privatized years ago by margaret thatcher. Corbyn is saying he's going to un-thatcherize england. Even worse, the UK gummint won't be paying fair market prices for the utilities it grabs, says corbyn.

the CPPIB has large holdings in british utilities & british infrastructure companies, valuing them for reliable performance & capable management. London CPPIB head Alain Carrier is understandably concerned by Labour's intentions.

carrier, who recently told the london sunday Times that he is feeling "very cautious" about canadian investments under a prospective Labour government in the UK, has moved the CPPIB's holding in Anglian Waters to hong kong, a jurisdiction that enjoys a treaty with great britain which limits nationalization. In 2006, the CPPIB had paid $1 billion CAD for its stake in Anglian Waters.

one billion $$ CAD for one british stock in 2006 - 13 long years ago - that's not water under the bridge.

“A number of things the U.K. was known for – stable regulatory environment, stable political environment, transparency – one may wonder whether these are weaker or under threat at this point,” carrier said.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...britain-less-attractive-as-a-place-to-invest/


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion

^ Very interesting post Humble, thanks. 
I guess one takeaway could be "never say never". 
Today's well-regarded, stable investment climate could become tomorrow's wasteland easier than we might think.


----------



## Longtimeago

The problem I see is nothing will change no matter what happens. Even if the EU grants another extension, there is no deal that is going to be found that is agreeable to a majority of parliament, no matter what. Theresa May probably got as good a deal as the EU will ever agree to, so what is the point of an extension whose purpose is to allow more negotiating to go on, if no better deal is ever going to happen?

If an extension is granted, an election is then called, regardless of who wins that election, they will not be able to negotiate a deal that they can get a majority of parliament to agree to. Whether the Conservatives or Labour were to gain the largest number of seats and form a government, it is beyond belief that either would in fact gain a real majority government, it will have to be a coalition government and who is going to partner with who? One party quite likely to gain seats is the Liberal Democrats who are showing large gains in popularity right now. They have an unequivocal position of opposing Brexit and will never vote for ANY deal, no matter what. Nor will the Scottish Nationalist Party who are also 100% opposed to Brexit. So how can any deal ever get through parliament? The two parties that would have to join in voting for a deal to get it through parliament are the Conservatives and Labour. Anyone think they are ever going to agree with each other on a deal? Not before pigs can fly.

An extension or no extension the outcome to me remains the same. Either they accept the deal the EU is willing to agree to OR you have no deal at all. If you have no deal then you either leave the EU with no deal or you repeal Article 50 and remain in the EU. All an extension does is delay that decision yet again, which is pointless.


----------



## humble_pie

Longtimeago said:


> The problem I see is nothing will change no matter what happens. Even if the EU grants another extension, there is no deal that is going to be found that is agreeable to a majority of parliament, no matter what Theresa May probably got as good a deal as the EU will ever agree to, so what is the point of an extension whose purpose is to allow more negotiating to go on, if no better deal is ever going to happen?




thankx for your insights they make good sense to me. 

i hadn't thought of the liberal democrats gaining but certainly the scotNats are powerful in opposing Brexit. I'm not up on irish MPs but they, too, must be largely opposing Brexit?

in another thread sags posted a valuable video from the UK. It was contrasting the towns' brexit voting patterns with cities' Brexit voting. It mentioned how the pro-brexit towns are shrinking & aging as industries have departed britain for cheaper labour countries.

the video underscored how the anti-brexit cities are booming with young people who have fled the jobless towns to seek education & opportunity in a multinational urban environment.

so went the Brexit vote, we can remember. London & major cities voted against, statistically the big pro Brexit vote came from rural & market town districts in central, eastern, northern & northeastern england.

do u recall how many young brits woke up the day after the Brexit vote to say OMG they hadn't understood, they hadn't voted, now they urgently wanted a re-vote to be held?

such a 2nd brexit vote may yet come to pass, if the scenario unfolds along your forecasted lines of stalemate & deadlock, which sound pretty realistic to me.


.


----------



## Longtimeago

It is such a mess at this point, it is impossible to predict what will happen. There are now too many entrenched for and against MPs in parliament for them to ever agree on anything to do with this. The same is not true of the population of the country now. Recent polls have shown quite clearly that if given a second referendum today, at least 60% would vote to remain in the EU.

There should never have been a referendum in the first place on such a complex issue. For a referendum on anything to be of any use, it has to be on an issue that the majority of the public is well enough informed to make an informed choice and that was far from the reality when the referendum was held. It should also have been made clear that a simply majority would not be enough to qualify as a 'majority' to be acted on.

A majority of 52 to 48 is not a majority, it's a tie! Consider any poll on anything we read about these days. They always say that the number is 'statistically significant', give or take X%. If a vote is 80/20, the statistical validity becomes irrelevant but at anything near 50/50, it becomes extremely important. What it tells you is that the poll only shows a differing opinion but not to a large enough degree to be evidence of how you should act.

Look at how parliament itself operates when they vote on an issue. Some things require only a 'simple majority' ie. 51/49 while more important issues like the vote Johnson just lost on calling an early election require a '2/3rds majority'. The referendum should have had that same caveat attached to it in my opinion. 

Look at the split in votes here: https://www.bbc.com/news/politics/eu_referendum/results The only near 2/3rds vote was in Scotland and that was to remain. Most informed Scots voted in the past against the Scottish Nationalist held referendum on leaving the UK and becoming independent. NOW, they would vote in favour of becoming independent in order to re-join the EU if Brexit goes ahead. N. Ireland's voters are now coming to the same conclusion and even Wales is moving in that direction. Brexit is tearing the country apart at the seams, with those seams being the borders within the UK of the member countries of Scotland, N. Ireland, Wales and England.

Don't forget the United Kingdom is composed of countries each of which has it's own history, culture and nationalism. Very few people refer to themselves as 'Brits' first. They're Scots, Welsh, Irish, or English first and Brits a distant second. Brexit is moving them backwards in that thinking.


----------

