Brexit discussion thread III

Professor Moriarty

Econ_ wrote: »

You don't give these Brexiteers enough credit. They are not lofty half-wits.

They don't respond with anger and defiance; they respond in a cunning, devious and highly orchestrated manner.

I'm afraid you give them far too much credit. They are making an utter mess of Brexit.

steddyeddy

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

They must have the worst strategists advising them - they're backing themselves into a corner.

The north's place under UK/English patronage will depend on how happy non-unionists are with their lot and Unionists have done little but sneer and mock all sorts of groups from Irish speakers to gay people.

The only long-term strategy that I can think of that Unionists are planning for is to make the north such a basket-case dependency of England's that the people there would be afraid to vote for a UI and the southern voters would be afraid to take it on.

There's one problem with that chaos strategy though, the English. The English would eventually start asking why they're paying many billions every year to prop up somewhere they couldn't give a **** about while they have problems keeping the real countries in Britain in the union.

but in fairness it's worked for them previously because the UK just gives them anything they want.

Econ_

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'm afraid you give them far too much credit. They are making an utter mess of Brexit.

They've been driving the UK strategy thus far.

A mess for everybody else - yes. For them? No. They're perfectly happy for everything to go tits up and having a no deal scenario.

Professor Moriarty

Econ_ wrote: »

They've been driving the UK strategy thus far.

A mess for everybody else - yes. For them? No. They're perfectly happy for everything to go tits up and having a no deal scenario.

Well, from that perspective, they are a glittering success.

Junkyard Tom

steddyeddy wrote: »

but in fairness it's worked for them previously because the UK just gives them anything they want.

With the Brexit freight train careening down the tracks that may be about to change. Also, the north is the most deprived region under UK jurisdiction as far as I'm aware.

I've even noticed, on twitter, increasing numbers of nominal unionists peeking over the non-existent border and wondering if they'd be better of in a UI.

Capt'n Midnight

Unfortunately thanks to May's failed election gamble the DUP are relevant for Brexit.


What is the long term plan of the DUP MP's in Westminster, or do they even have one ?


Not having an Assembly means the that smaller parties will get reduced funding. But that won't matter until the next election. Then again it's not likely the DUP will be relevant after the next election anyway. And that could be sooner than they'd like.

And they are alienating lots of demographics on the way. IF they can prevent a border poll that may not be a problem. If they can't then then it's a whole other story.

It's a huge gamble.

https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/02/20/who-benefits-from-the-collapse-of-power-sharing/

The collapse of the talks over an Irish Language Act bears the hallmark of being the work of people who can’t imagine any prospect of the Union ending in the near future. Yet the demographic situation is steadily eroding for Unionism and the DUP seems intent on alienating swing voters in a future border poll to buttress its already dominant position within Unionism.

The DUP had won. But it wasn't enough. They either had to win without concessions or the Assembly had to be killed.

This comment.

Irish Language legislation was just the symbol for Nationalists that the Northern state OFFICIALLY recognised them like it does in Britain for Welsh and Scots Gallic speakers. We don't want it forced down anyone's throats, compel people to learn it or expect Unionists to change their street names. That was just fear and scaremongering as Stephen Farry alluded to on Spotlight when he seen the very watered down document that Sinn Fein allegedly agreed to.
On the same programme Professor Jon Tonge from Liverpool University painted a dark picture when he said that if Unionists couldn't agree to such a weak document for Irish speakers then they NEVER would and the Good Friday Agreement and the notion of power-sharing is dead.

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

He's precluded from being pm due to his catholic religion. The pm by law advises the queen over who to promote in the Anglican church and uk law prohibits jews and Catholics from doing that job. That's why blair had to wait til he left to declare himself RC.

There's no law forbidding a Catholic from being Prime Minister.

There is a law forbidding a Catholic from advising the monarch on ecclesiastical appointments, and by convention the Prime Minister advises the monarch on certain church matters. (The Lord Chancellor advises on other church matters.) This gives rise to a perceived difficulty with a Catholic serving as PM. But there's no law that says the PM must advice the Queen on ecclesiastical matters; if a Catholic were to be elected PM then advice on all ecclesiastical matters could be offered by the Lord Chancellor, and this would solve the problem.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Paddy Power will give you 11/4 on there being an election this year. Interestingly, Mogg is favourite to be next PM at 4/1 followed by Corbyn at 6/1.

Presumably the bet on Rees-Mogg doesn't reflect a calculation that a Rees-Mogg-led Tory party would win a general election; just a calculation that May at some point will be dumped or will stand down, and that JRM will win the ensuing Tory leadership election (which is ultimately decided by a ballot of party members).

In short, what the odds tell us is that punters do not expect May to last until the next election. They think it more likely that she will stand down, and the party will choose JRM, than that she will still be in office at the next election, and lose to Labour.

Peregrinus

LeinsterDub wrote: »

An in depth sector by sector analyse ,how quaint! Does anyone think Britain should consider doing one?

7% isn't too bad, obviously we want to avoid it but I thought it would be worse

Nody wrote: »

The problem is the X factor of UK policy which no one knows. Let's take cheese for example . . .

I don't think this is quite right. The 7% figure is modelled on the assumption that the UK reverts to WTO terms, and we know what this entails. The UK woukd be applying most-favoured-nation tariffs to EU and US cheese (and all other products) alike, because that's what the WTO would require.

Peregrinus

jobbridge4life wrote: »

A 7% hit on GDP doesn't really tell us much about the impact though. Ireland's GDP is a pretty poor reflection of how well the country is actually doing, thanks largely to the distortion created by DFI.

I think the question is which 7% of our GDP would be eroded by Brexit? If it's 7% largely made up of Irish produce traded across the border or into Britain, that's a real hit. If it's 7% made up of multinational earnings currently booked in Ireland which cease to be booked in Ireland on account of Brexit, maybe not so much of a hit.

I think we all know it would be more of the former, though.

LeinsterDub

The worst impact of Brexit will be postponed for at least two years after a major climbdown by UK Prime Minister Theresa May.

The British government will continue to operate under EU laws and regulations during a two-year transition period, according to a draft legal text seen by the Irish Independent.

https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/worst-of-brexit-to-be-postponed-for-two-years-in-major-climbdown-by-may-36630710.html


Is there a single issue the UK has held it's ground on? Given the UK has tried to hold every bit of ground no matter how incompatible they may be it's not surprising they can't fight for their position.

Leroy42

If the above is true, surely the next question to May is why? All along they have had their red lines and Boris etc have been spouting that Brexit is a land of oppurtunites etc. Why would you want to postpone that?

The UK government must have seen something that has made them think that postponing it is the best option and then the question must be what will change during the transition period that will remove whatever those issues are.

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

If the above is true, surely the next question to May is why? All along they have had their red lines and Boris etc have been spouting that Brexit is a land of oppurtunites etc. Why would you want to postpone that?

The UK government must have seen something that has made them think that postponing it is the best option and then the question must be what will change during the transition period that will remove whatever those issues are.

I don't think that they have suddenly realised or discovered anything. It's a mixture of ceasing the wilful denial of reality and acceptance that Little Englander bluff and bluster hasn't shifted the EU's position.

Skedaddle

It's swings and roundabouts for the Irish economy.

Some sectors and individual businesses are hugely exposed, others aren't going to be impacted at all, others may even benefit by taking business that would have otherwise gone to the UK.

Even in agri-food, a lot of people are forgetting things like for processed food, Brexit potentially removes a lot of very competent British competition, or at least renders it potentially much more expensive. We have a lot of businesses here who can like-for-like replace British products at home and in some EU markets too.

I'd worry a lot more about services SMEs, some of whom are very exposed to the UK market.

It's also likely you'll see plenty of businesses, big and small, looking for EU-bases and Ireland's the obvious choice. A survey last year was showing this was the first choice destination for 75% of UK companies, and for obvious reasons - language, business environment familiarity and the legal system is almost totally compatible with English law for things like contracts and dispute resolution. So, it's extremely familiar to most businesses and requires little or no serious adjustment, other than finding office space.

The other huge risk here is a potential run on Sterling if things really went crazy in Britain. You could see a very dramatic devaluation which would cause a lot of issues here for exporters, far more so than tariffs would.

You also have to factor in that the British consumer economy could contract significantly and go through a major crisis which would just reduce demand generally. That's also a distinct possibility.

The problem is that we have no idea how this is going to work, so it's almost impossible to model. There is no agreement between the UK and EU and there's no precedent for anything like this to base the predictions on. The EU as a concept is pretty much without precedent. It's far more integrated and complex than any other trade bloc and there are a lot of very complex supply chains that involve UK companies that are going be rather difficult to untangle and remake.

I think a lot of the business and investment community is still banking on Brexit imploding. There's an assumption in the London based banking and finance sector for example that some kind of 'global elite' will listen to them and swoop in, dealing with Brexit and making it all go away. I think they're grossly overestimating how much lobbying power they have with a populist movement like this.

Then a lot of the business community here and elsewhere are just assuming Brexit will probably implode under its own chaos before it happens. That is possible, but who knows...

The biggest issue though is that it's nearly impossible to make contingencies for something that has no detail.

Realistically, you're looking at needing about 10-years to deal with the complexities of Brexit. The 2 year timeline is ludicrous and either has to change or will lead to a complete disaster.

A sane and realistic Brexit would have been to say you'd take the UK out of the EU by 2030.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

If it's 7% largely made up of Irish produce traded across the border or into Britain, that's a real hit.

But much of this is food today.

What are folks in the UK supposed to do, lose 7% of their body weight?

Replace Irish food with home grown? Not happening. Import food from further away? Are we sure that will be cheaper?

At some point, people in the UK will simply have to allow that food inflation is happening, and spend a bigger % of their income on food.

Skedaddle

I think they're grossly underestimating the risk of very significant inflation. You can't deconstruct and rebuild supply chains that quickly and also there's a huge risk to GBP if the markets turn on it.

Also without any details of what's happening, supply chains can't even adapt ahead of time.

What worries me is that the political figures seem to think that the markets are 'intelligent' or think long term. They can be remarkably shortsighted and can react violently anything they perceive as risk. At the moment I think the UK's getting the benefit of the doubt because many investors and traders don't really believe that Brexit will happen and certainly not a hard Brexit.

If you prove them wrong on this, they'll probably react quite dramatically by just flipping the switch on investments both in currency trades and British assets.

Nody

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Is there a single issue the UK has held it's ground on?

To move ahead with Brexit and leave the EU; you could possibly throw in leaving the CU as well but that one is open until the final deal is signed as a possibility to row back on after all. ECJ is another one arguably they held but it's getting very muddy on the ground esp. about talk of remaining in various bodies etc. that fall under ECJ jurisdiction.

Beyond that most other ideas/promises/ideals have been compromised in one way or another from no transition period to transition period, from short transition to longer transition, from no payments to payments etc.

Leroy42

I think the term 'compromised' is incorrect, as that implies that they had a position and were willing to move on it to get something.

But I don't believe that they have a position to start from. They have ideas, they have talking points, but not an actual agreed position.

Christy42

Skedaddle wrote: »

It's swings and roundabouts for the Irish economy.

Some sectors and individual businesses are hugely exposed, others aren't going to be impacted at all, others may even benefit by taking business that would have otherwise gone to the UK.

Even in agri-food, a lot of people are forgetting things like for processed food, Brexit potentially removes a lot of very competent British competition, or at least renders it potentially much more expensive. We have a lot of businesses here who can like-for-like replace British products at home and in some EU markets too.

I'd worry a lot more about services SMEs, some of whom are very exposed to the UK market.

It's also likely you'll see plenty of businesses, big and small, looking for EU-bases and Ireland's the obvious choice. A survey last year was showing this was the first choice destination for 75% of UK companies, and for obvious reasons - language, business environment familiarity and the legal system is almost totally compatible with English law for things like contracts and dispute resolution. So, it's extremely familiar to most businesses and requires little or no serious adjustment, other than finding office space.

The other huge risk here is a potential run on Sterling if things really went crazy in Britain. You could see a very dramatic devaluation which would cause a lot of issues here for exporters, far more so than tariffs would.

You also have to factor in that the British consumer economy could contract significantly and go through a major crisis which would just reduce demand generally. That's also a distinct possibility.

The problem is that we have no idea how this is going to work, so it's almost impossible to model. There is no agreement between the UK and EU and there's no precedent for anything like this to base the predictions on. The EU as a concept is pretty much without precedent. It's far more integrated and complex than any other trade bloc and there are a lot of very complex supply chains that involve UK companies that are going be rather difficult to untangle and remake.

I think a lot of the business and investment community is still banking on Brexit imploding. There's an assumption in the London based banking and finance sector for example that some kind of 'global elite' will listen to them and swoop in, dealing with Brexit and making it all go away. I think they're grossly overestimating how much lobbying power they have with a populist movement like this.

Then a lot of the business community here and elsewhere are just assuming Brexit will probably implode under its own chaos before it happens. That is possible, but who knows...

The biggest issue though is that it's nearly impossible to make contingencies for something that has no detail.

Realistically, you're looking at needing about 10-years to deal with the complexities of Brexit. The 2 year timeline is ludicrous and either has to change or will lead to a complete disaster.

A sane and realistic Brexit would have been to say you'd take the UK out of the EU by 2030.

If they delay that long it would go to super sane option of no brexit. 5 years would be long enough to get a rerun of the referendum which would win in a landslide.

farmchoice

this could signal a move from cakism to jamism. '' jam yesterday and jam tomorrow but no jam today''.

brexit in the future but no brexit today....indefinitely. this suits Theresa May down to the ground, she can keep riding the two houses of the tory party for another while whilst spouting inane platitudes and guff.

in fact she can up the brexit retortic while avoiding brexit, the brexiteers and the media can blame the EU for the delay but dont worry ''its better to do it right then quickly and at the end of the day brexit means brexit''.

this is particularly damaging for British business as no one knows whats going on but then so is brexit so no change there.

Skedaddle

Realistically, it can't be done in the time frame they've gone for. Anyone with *any* knowledge of how trade negotiations work knows this!

So it's change the schedule, crash out or time out with no deal really.

Leroy42

I don't think the UK can afford to continue to just let this drag on. Brexit has consumed everything over there. There are very serious issues that should be front and centre of the political debate. The rise and level of knife crime, the massive problems with the NHS, the lack of investment in the northern regions, power sharing in NI, Syria - things are getting even worse, Russia attempts to influence, UK productivity levels are still low, the gig economy, a decision on Trident, a full review on the future of the armed forces, the continued disgrace of food banks (am I not saying that these are unique to the UK or that the UK is the only country with major problems but rather that Brexit seems to be the only focus).

They need to make a decision and get back to running the country.

May should go over to the EU and ask them what the best they can give the UK (they have pretty much told them the options already). Forget about a negotiation, the UK has no leverage. Put the options to the parliament. Select one option from the menu. Give a free vote and accept that whatever is chosen is the basis for future talks.

farmchoice

Leroy42 wrote: »

I don't think the UK can afford to continue to just let this drag on. Brexit has consumed everything over there. There are very serious issues that should be front and centre of the political debate. The rise and level of knife crime, the massive problems with the NHS, the lack of investment in the northern regions, power sharing in NI, Syria - things are getting even worse, Russia attempts to influence, UK productivity levels are still low, the gig economy, a decision on Trident, a full review on the future of the armed forces, the continued disgrace of food banks (am I not saying that these are unique to the UK or that the UK is the only country with major problems but rather that Brexit seems to be the only focus).

They need to make a decision and get back to running the country.

May should go over to the EU and ask them what the best they can give the UK (they have pretty much told them the options already). Forget about a negotiation, the UK has no leverage. Put the options to the parliament. Select one option from the menu. Give a free vote and accept that whatever is chosen is the basis for future talks.

all of the above is true. but consider this, who has been the single biggest benefactor from this whole mess? i would suggest its threasa May. it has made her prime minister and somehow kept here there despite her limited ability and the dysfunction of her party.
everyone knows that once brexit is sorted, one way or the other, she is gone so is it in her interest to start kicking it down the road?

its actually in the interest of a lot of brexiteers as well, the likes of Johnston gove etc as he/they know full well its a disaster about to happen (probably hoped the referendum would have been lost in the first place). this way they can keep up the rhetoric without having to face the reality.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

I don't think the UK can afford to continue to just let this drag on.

May and co. don't care what the UK can afford, the question for them is how many weeks their Government can totter onwards.

Brexit and the UK's future are entirely incidental.

Skedaddle

Well you have to also remember that Brexit is acting as a handy smoke screen for all of the current government's failings and a way to jam through policies that would otherwise be debated.

There are serious and increasing problems in Britian that are directly linked to Tory ideology on welfare and dogmatic views of the absolute primacy of market economics.

NI has had a bit of shield against this, to date.

J Mysterio

Skedaddle wrote: »

I think they're grossly underestimating the risk of very significant inflation. You can't deconstruct and rebuild supply chains that quickly and also there's a huge risk to GBP if the markets turn on it.

Also without any details of what's happening, supply chains can't even adapt ahead of time.

What worries me is that the political figures seem to think that the markets are 'intelligent' or think long term. They can be remarkably shortsighted and can react violently anything they perceive as risk. At the moment I think the UK's getting the benefit of the doubt because many investors and traders don't really believe that Brexit will happen and certainly not a hard Brexit.

If you prove them wrong on this, they'll probably react quite dramatically by just flipping the switch on investments both in currency trades and British assets.

I'm amazed the pound hasnt plunged already. Were the markets 'intelligent', they should have already. The threat of another financial crisis is very worrisome, and seems likely.

Leroy42

J Mysterio wrote: »

I'm amazed the pound hasnt plunged already. Were the markets 'intelligent', they should have already. The threat of another financial crisis is very worrisome, and seems likely.

This has me surprised as well. I am far from being any sort of expert on the markets, but all the current signals point to a hard Brexit and that whatever Brexit does happen is likely to be negative from the UK and the EU.

So are the markets simply hoping that it won't happen, or are they playing a game of first the blink?

I can't see any justification for market optimism.

Professor Moriarty

Good article on an EU paper published today with what The Guardian describes as "incendiary timing" in the context of the upcoming Tory Brexit meeting.
In particular, this might give pause for thought:

Next week, Brussels will publish its draft withdrawal agreement, including legal text on the Irish border, under which the UK would in effect commit to keeping Northern Ireland in the single market and customs union, unless a future free trade deal or technological solution emerges to avoid a hard border.

Under such a scenario, a border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would seem unavoidable, a scenario wholeheartedly opposed by the Democratic Unionist party, whose MPs give the Conservative government a working majority in the House of Commons.

Nody

J Mysterio wrote: »

I'm amazed the pound hasnt plunged already. Were the markets 'intelligent', they should have already. The threat of another financial crisis is very worrisome, and seems likely.

Markets are always stupid and seeing things in hindsight; see how a month before the IT crash for example people were talking about how these stocks were somehow unique and different except we had the except same arguments in the 70s with companies going to insane valuations "because they will always deliver" with P/Es in the 100s for the likes of Coca Cola etc.

The market is stupid and reacts like a herd of skittish deers and only after enough other people started running the hoard reacts. This is further driven by bot trading (see the flash crash in 2010 fall due to a faulty bot that suddenly lowered the market in seconds etc.).

Skedaddle

J Mysterio wrote: »

I'm amazed the pound hasnt plunged already. Were the markets 'intelligent', they should have already. The threat of another financial crisis is very worrisome, and seems likely.

A lot of traders are pretty blind to political and systemic risks. We've seen this over and over with market crashes. They also tend to engage in a lot of group-think and trend following - a lot of low insight numbers analysis. So, when the penny (or pound) finally does drop, the usually behaviour is everyone piles on and tries to short positions or at the very least will panic and try to get out.

I also get the impression there's still a sense that it "will all be all right on the night" and that somehow this is going to end up as a fudge. By the time the markets decide to go negative on UK exposed assets and Sterling, it could be far too late anyway.

The really savvy investors, are the ones who'll actually profit from any collapse. There are various funds, clever investors and disaster capitalists poised to make a fortune if it does go bang.

J Mysterio

farmchoice wrote: »

all of the above is true. but consider this, who has been the single biggest benefactor from this whole mess? i would suggest its threasa May. it has made her prime minister and somehow kept here there despite her limited ability and the dysfunction of her party.
everyone knows that once brexit is sorted, one way or the other, she is gone so is it in her interest to start kicking it down the road?

its actually in the interest of a lot of brexiteers as well, the likes of Johnston gove etc as he/they know full well its a disaster about to happen (probably hoped the referendum would have been lost in the first place). this way they can keep up the rhetoric without having to face the reality.

They will go down in infamy as the crew who destroyed Britain. Liars and cheats.

Skedaddle

J Mysterio wrote: »

They will go down in infamy as the crew who destroyed Britain. Liars and cheats.

You'd wonder to be honest. I still think that if there's a big economic mess, they'll probably turn it on the EU and blame it on notions of intransigence and bullying instead of facing the reality that they engaged in a ridiculous act of what could only be described as economic self-sabotage.

J Mysterio

"Statistics show 130,000 EU citizens left UK in a year - the highest level in a decade"

These probably arent the fruitpickers either. Scientists, researchers, academics, skilled professionals.

Also interesting is:

"The ONS said that the overall employment rate for EU nationals was 81.2 per cent, followed by Brits at 75.6 per cent and non-EU nationals on 63.2 per cent."

The group they are railing against are gainfully employed. It's themselves or foreignors of non-EU origin who aren't so much.

George Koureas, a partner at immigration law firm Fragomen, said: “The UK has become a significantly less attractive place for European citizens to work since Brexit, so it’s no surprise that more EU workers are leaving the country. 

“Although the Government may see this as good news, it presents a significant threat to UK businesses, already struggling to hire the skilled workers they need to thrive.”

This is before the real impact is going to be felt. Mad Max wasteland ho.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-immigration-latest-brexit-eu-migrants-workers-talks-statistics-falling-a8222736.html

Skedaddle

Well, the big thing that they're forgetting is that they're putting up the same kind of barriers to EU nationals as a move to the US would have and they really aren't offering anything like the level of options and opportunities of a country that size, particularly for academics.

A lot of EU nationals who decide to move to another EU country to live / work did so on the understanding that they were doing so as an equal citizen, without burdensome application processes or complications with bringing partners, children and so on. Many also move with the idea that they might spend part of their career in one country and then move home or move elsewhere.

I know I've done this myself a couple of times and have really enjoyed the freedom to work in other EU countries and I've never felt 'unwelcome'. Whereas, if I were to go through the rigmarole of applying for say a US visa, I would really want to be getting offered some kind of amazing job.

So for a lot of EU academics and professionals (Ireland being an exception as long as the CTA is still operating), the UK has become about as attractive as moving to Australia or NZ, only with a worse economy than Australia and a lot more of an unfriendly environment as there's specifically targeted anti-EU / anti-continental sentiment being expressed in the media and so on.

I already know quite a few people who've opted to take up academic posts in Ireland, The Netherlands, France and Germany because of the UK decision. They would have been quite enthusiastic about some UK institutions but now they're just looking elsewhere.

The reality of it is that the UK cities and universities had become hubs for EU nationals in all sorts of industries and they're throwing that away. There are other EU hubs that don't have all of these problems, and certainly includes Dublin and probably Cork and some of the smaller cities here in terms of academics and IT. But, it definitely includes very attractive big cities like Berlin, Paris, Frankfurt, etc etc. There are countless Dublin-scale cities all over the continent, many of which have great universities and really vibrant.

To a lot of people it's really: The UK .. could you really be bothered?

I guess they will achieve their aim of reducing immigration though, by making the place unattractive.

I mean, unless you've a very compelling reason to go through all of that bureaucracy and stress, why would you even apply for a job there?

Realistically speaking, the majority of the EU is pretty affluent and attractive to live in and people have tons of other options.

I would also add that I actually would feel really claustrophobic if my rights to live elsewhere in the EU were removed. Ireland's lovely and all but, there's something very reassuring about knowing there's a big continent there to explore if ever the mood takes me. I'd genuinely feel very odd about having that right potentially removed, even if I rarely use it.

Nody

Nody wrote: »

Markets are always stupid and seeing things in hindsight; see how a month before the IT crash for example people were talking about how these stocks were somehow unique and different except we had the except same arguments in the 70s with companies going to insane valuations "because they will always deliver" with P/Es in the 100s for the likes of Coca Cola etc.

The market is stupid and reacts like a herd of skittish deers and only after enough other people started running the hoard reacts. This is further driven by bot trading (see the flash crash in 2010 fall due to a faulty bot that suddenly lowered the market in seconds etc.).

thousands of highly educated and extremely highly paid analysts all over the world are stupid?

J Mysterio

Aegir wrote: »

thousands of highly educated and extremely highly paid analysts all over the world are stupid?

Cos they did a great job in advance of the last crash, right?

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

"Statistics show 130,000 EU citizens left UK in a year - the highest level in a decade"

These probably arent the fruitpickers either. Scientists, researchers, academics, skilled professionals.

Also interesting is:

"The ONS said that the overall employment rate for EU nationals was 81.2 per cent, followed by Brits at 75.6 per cent and non-EU nationals on 63.2 per cent."

The group they are railing against are gainfully employed. It's themselves or foreignors of non-EU origin who aren't so much.

George Koureas, a partner at immigration law firm Fragomen, said: “The UK has become a significantly less attractive place for European citizens to work since Brexit, so it’s no surprise that more EU workers are leaving the country. 

“Although the Government may see this as good news, it presents a significant threat to UK businesses, already struggling to hire the skilled workers they need to thrive.”

This is before the real impact is going to be felt. Mad Max wasteland ho.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-immigration-latest-brexit-eu-migrants-workers-talks-statistics-falling-a8222736.html

130,000 left the UK, 220,000 emigrated to the UK.

The numbers are down, but the number of EU nationals in the UK is still increasing.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43154308

J Mysterio

Aegir wrote: »

130,000 left the UK, 220,000 emigrated to the UK.

The numbers are down, but the number of EU nationals in the UK is still increasing.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43154308

"The number of EU citizens coming to the UK plummeted by 47,000 in the year and the number leaving – 130,000 – is the highest recorded level since the 2008 financial crisis."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-immigration-latest-brexit-eu-migrants-workers-talks-statistics-falling-a8222736.html

And from your own link

"It estimates that 130,000 EU nationals emigrated in the year to September, the highest number since 2008.

Meanwhile, 220,000 EU nationals came to live in the UK - 47,000 fewer than the previous year.

Net EU migration - the difference between arrivals and departures - was 90,000, the lowest for five years."

What are you talking about?

Hurrache

RTE News earlier said that basically those at today's meeting aren't getting out until they've come to an agreement on where they want to go re Brexit.

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

Cos they did a great job in advance of the last crash, right?

If you are referring to the referendum result, they got it wrong as did everyone else.

if you are referring to the crash in the Irish economy, the analysts were warning about that for months before hand, to the point Bertie couldn't understand why they didn't kill themselves.

J Mysterio

Aegir wrote: »

If you are referring to the referendum result, they got it wrong as did everyone else.

if you are referring to the crash in the Irish economy, the analysts were warning about that for months before hand, to the point Bertie couldn't understand why they didn't kill themselves.

I'm referring to the global financial crisis.

Larbre34

Hurrache wrote: »

RTE News earlier said that basically those at today's meeting aren't getting out until they've come to an agreement on where they want to go re Brexit.

Nice to know we'll never see them again so. Frankly they do deserve to be trapped for all eternity in their own mess (in every sense of the word)

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

"The number of EU citizens coming to the UK plummeted by 47,000 in the year and the number leaving – 130,000 – is the highest recorded level since the 2008 financial crisis."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-immigration-latest-brexit-eu-migrants-workers-talks-statistics-falling-a8222736.html

And from your own link

"It estimates that 130,000 EU nationals emigrated in the year to September, the highest number since 2008.

Meanwhile, 220,000 EU nationals came to live in the UK - 47,000 fewer than the previous year.

Net EU migration - the difference between arrivals and departures - was 90,000, the lowest for five years."

What are you talking about?

130,000 EU nationals left the UK.
220,000 moved to the UK

220,000 - 130,000 = 90,000

Therefore there are 90,000 more EU nationals in the UK at the end of the year than at the beginning.

J Mysterio wrote: »

I'm referring to the global financial crisis.

they saw it.

J Mysterio

Aegir wrote: »

130,000 EU nationals left the UK.
220,000 moved to the UK

220,000 - 130,000 = 90,000

Therefore there are 90,000 more EU nationals in the UK at the end of the year than at the beginning.

Sorry boss, you claimed "the numbers are down, but the number of EU nationals in the UK is still increasing." That is demonstrably not the case. Net migration is down 90k, the lowest in 5 years.

Aegir wrote:

they saw it.

Sure they did.

Hurrache

Larbre34 wrote: »

Nice to know we'll never see them again so. Frankly they do deserve to be trapped for all eternity in their own mess (in every sense of the word)

They may be wasting their time anyway, her plan is being deemed a three baskets plan

“three baskets” the UK would look at existing regulations and decide whether it wanted to keep them the same as now, whether it would want to modify its regulations but to achieve the same goals, or whether it wanted to completely break with the EU in certain areas.

but the EU have apparently already rejected such a plan.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trade-plan-future-relationship-theresa-may-three-baskets-chequers-meeting-boris-johnson-david-a8222996.html

sink

J Mysterio wrote: »

Sorry boss, you claimed "the numbers are down, but the number of EU nationals in the UK is still increasing." That is demonstrably not the case. Net migration is down 90k, the lowest in 5 years.

What he said is true, it's the difference between a decrease in growth rate and and increase in the absolute number, they're not contradictory. What's happening is a slowdown in growth, so there is significantly less of an increase in the absolute number than previous years but the absolute number itself is still increasing albeit at a slower rate.

No one, not even UKIP campaigned to stop all net migration. Just to get it down to a much lower level. What they didn't tell you was that this would of course damage economic growth as more jobs will be left unfulfilled and businesses struggle to grow due to lack of staff.

Zubeneschamali

J Mysterio wrote: »

I'm amazed the pound hasnt plunged already. Were the markets 'intelligent', they should have already.

The folks in the markets, of all people, are aware how utterly disastrous a no-deal crash-out would be. This means that they think it won't happen, they think no-one could be that stupid.

If it becomes clear that it is going to happen, that the people in charge really are that stupid, and the folks in the markets start to believe it, there will be a London crash to make 2008 look like a blip.

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

These probably arent the fruitpickers

Speaking of the fruitpickers, this is a Sky News piece from last October highlighting the worries of the orchard industry's representative body called 'English Apples and Pears'. Speaks of a disaster in 2019 if things aren't sorted by September, since the usual practice is to guarantee labour a year in advance for picking the crop. Most come from continental Europe, with only a 'small fraction' from the UK according to the article.

https://news.sky.com/story/apple-growers-face-catastrophe-without-brexit-labour-deal-11098069

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

Sorry boss, you claimed "the numbers are down, but the number of EU nationals in the UK is still increasing." That is demonstrably not the case. Net migration is down 90k, the lowest in 5 years.

net migration is down, but it isn't negative.

More people are moving to the UK than leaving

Boss

J Mysterio wrote: »

Sure they did.

seeing it and preventing it are two different things

listermint

Aegir wrote: »

net migration is down, but it isn't negative.

More people are moving to the UK than leaving

Boss



seeing it and preventing it are two different things

Net Migration is down, and you are marking it as a positive...



Hilarious stuff buddy. Sorry but thats just madness, Its down simply because the whole economy is slowing and it may slow into a stupper within the year.