LMAO....can you go even a day without making things up. My god you are the saddest individual on this site, which is saying something.
OT Brexit Vote
- Thread starter RUtix4me
- Start date
LMAO....can you go even a day without making things up. My god you are the saddest individual on this site, which is saying something.
I don't think everyone disagrees with me or the President a racist. On the CE board, though, I would say a significant number, but not certainly all, talk about him in a racist matter, as they show time and again. Several are on their upteenth screen name and others are on perma ban. I'd rather not delve into the specific comments as I'm sure you're aware of them but would be glad to if you legitimately are unaware.
And I can't help but draw the conclusion that much of the animus by those on the right is based on race, considering who they nominated for President, and poll after poll showing significant numbers of Republicans think the President is Muslim, born outside the US, etc...without even getting into the primary polling questions on the Emancipation Proclamation. Who are the ones talking about race again?
Fact of the matter is the head Senate Republican said their goal was to make the President a one termer, not to fix the economy. So I guess I missed all of their support. Again- show me where Republicans assisted in the turnaround. Was it when one shouted "you lie" during the SOTU? Was it the 62 times they voted to overturn Obamacare? This agenda stuff would have worked during the Reagan years, maybe even the Clinton years. When one party says they enacted voter ID laws to ensure he didn't win PA (and then he did) it really goes out the window. When one party shuts down the government to the tune of billions and then claims they can't afford Sandy victims, yeah I take that one very personally. And there is absolutely no chance in hell that I will ever say that it's acceptable to say someone can't do his or her job because of his ethnic background.
The fact of the matter is, the Republican party is totally off the rails. I don't understand how that is partisan or an agenda when you consider the fact that many of them, either on this board, or nationally, are in total agreement. I'm glad to provide a list. It is quite frankly incomprehensible how anyone can look at their Presidential campaign and see anything to like unless that person is racist and/or severely mentally imbalanced. It is beyond having anything to do with President Obama at this point, except that the criticisms of him as divisive, economically incapable, inexperienced, among others, are laughable if it weren't so sad that 30% of the country weren't on board.
A little voice inside my head said: "Don't look back, you can never look back!"
Love that song!
LOL - won't take that bet!
I see some anti Brexit post on here. The only people anti Brexit imo are Lenin loving anti democracy Bolsheviks.
And Americans who do business in Europe (or export goods to Europe) and like the convenience of having a unified market rather than have to deal with different sets of regulations for every country.
Are the regulations exactly the same across the board? I find that hard to believe outside of some areas of finance perhaps.
Caliknight, there are across-the-board definitions in many areas, e.g. what it is beer. in fact, these definitions have caused controversy because they often require changes in a nation's traditional practices.
http://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...d-juncker-unite-against-the-european-dreamers
Merkel and Juncker Unite Against Europe's Dreamers
Merkel and Juncker Unite Against Europe's Dreamers
All those businessmen must be bolsheviks or hipsters.
I mean whenever I hear currency traders and stock brokers their main concerns seem to be the proletariat and mustache wax.
Absolutely. Such as the equivalent of EPA regulations for cars, privacy rules for internet sites, labeling requirements for food, energy efficiency rules for air conditioners.
Here's one that has a big impact in New Jersey. Currently pharmaceuticals are approved EU wide. Ironically the European Medicines Agency is based in London and will probably have to move. I think that Brexit could increase the cost of selling pharmaceuticals in the UK, limit the availability of new drugs, and impact the amount of medical research that takes place in the UK. http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0ZA26J
Last edited:
Yea I believe the EU version of the FDA is based in London and they've already talked about moving it out in the future. Also Hollande and others have talked about moving Euro clearing away from there as well and that would be a big loss for London. I believe the continent already tried to move it out of there in the past while the UK was part of the EU but a Luxembourg court ruled in the UK's favor. One UK gov't official said they won largely because they were in the EU, now that they're not I don't know that it will stay there.
Like I said in multiple posts here, I don't see the massive gains made by leaving. No one has really pointed them out either. Norway and Switzerland are both out of the EU but participate in some aspects while paying fees to it and allowing free movement, 2 of the main arguments for Brexit. I believe Norway pays the same per capita in fees out of the EU as the UK pays inside it. I read an article where the former foreign minister of Norway said per capita immigration for Norway is higher than the UK. So you're basically around status quo for the 2 main drivers of leaving so what's the point? You also lose any say on trying to shape those rules as well. IMO just about status quo at best is what they're looking at and likely a recession and plenty of uncertainty in between.
Are the really the same across the board in every country? I can't tell from that link. And one as important area that needs to be considered is employment law and of course, taxes, which I can tell you, definitely aren't standardized.
The examples I gave are the same across the EU. And those certainly aren't the only ones.
Imagine the laws in the US being made by a foreign country. That's exactly what's happening to the EU countries. The Brits were the ones who came up with the Magna Carta over 500 years ago and they don't like having people they never voted for controlling the laws in their country. Germany runs the EU. The EU was supposed to be a trading bloc as it was originally called the EEC and was all about tariff free trading when it first started out post WW2, not the pseudo country run by Germany that it's morphed into.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/09/it-is-an-eu-army-that-could-bring-about-war/ <---do trading blocs call for their own army?
The Brits are the second biggest contributors to the EU money wise. That means British taxpayers are helping to foot the bill for the Greeks and other failing EU economy's that tanked and the ones who benefit from those bailouts are the German bankers, not the Brits. The EU growth rate as far as trade is the most stagnant in the world atm. The Brits aren't allowed to make deals with Commonwealth countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc... They would like to trade with those countries as well as China, India, South Africa, US, etc...
Merkel opened the doors to millions of Middle Easterners and North Africans and tried to set quotas on the rest of the EU countries in regards to taking them in. Now Germany is forcing those migrants on the rest of the EU in the form of quotas. Merkel let them in, and it should be Germany that deals with them, not the rest of the EU countries who obviously do not want them.
Luckily for the Brits they never left the Pound seeing how the Euro is being propped up atm by German bankers and is on the verge of tanking the first time Greece defaults on this latest deal. Italy isn't far behind and it's economy is on the verge of tanking also.
I'm aware of much of that stuff. History isn't the point, point is what are they gaining in practical terms by leaving. Any deal they strike now to have access to the single market is likely going to entail similar immigration levels because of free movement and likely some fee which could be similar. I don't know what if any subsidies they'd get in return either. Right now they have a net deficit into the EU but does that deficit actually grow if they still end up putting in money through a fee but get no or less subsidies in return.
The guys who were championing leaving have even admitted don't expect a dramatic decrease in immigration or a ton of extra money going to the NHS, 2 of the main drivers for leaving. On top of which there's a lot of real and opportunity costs from leaving from businesses slowing or moving investment due to the uncertainties. If you're going to take a drastic measure, there has to be some measureable gain and I don't see it.
Last edited:
Independance, making their own laws, control of their borders, and the right to make their own trade deals outside the EU for starters not to mention they won't be handing over billions of dollar to the EU every year.
The UK is most likely going to use the Australian point system for their immigration policies ... not an open border RE Schengen Zone with Merkel making the rules.
A primary pillar of the EU was the agreement of certain fiscal conditions under the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP). This set limits for annual budget deficit and debt. Just to show what a scam the EU is take a look at the history of these rules and their enforcement. They let in nations (Greece) that had no potential for meeting these limits and let founding members Germany and France exceed them without punishment. So the bailouts will continue of course at the expense of any nation that actually follows the rules. I don't see how an empire (that's really what this is) like this can continue indefinitely.
I agree with this bit and said so above. I think they looked the other way with regard to some debt to GDP ratios when letting some countries in. As I said above, when the sun is shining no one thinks to carry an umbrella. Times are good the "richer" countries want more trade and markets to sell into and the "poorer" ones want all the benefits that come with EU membership. After 2008 times get tougher and the richer countries can no longer sustain the poorer ones, paper over those issues and have to impose strict austerity on them and those countries don't like it and have a more difficult time working their way out partially because they can't print their own currencies.
Last edited:
Who said they won't have to pay billions to the EU every year. They'll likely have to pay some sort of fee to the EU for access to the single market and it's likely to be in the billions. I believe Norway pays 500 million euros and I've read per capita it's the same as the UK pays into the EU while inside. Now the UK has a net deficit into the EU but is that going to be the same/more/less than what they pay in a fee without receiving any subsidies back from the EU. We don't know. On top of which is the percentage of GDP shaved off and the other real/opportunity costs worth more than whatever that difference may be even if it turns out somewhat in the favor of the UK.
UK can have any immigration policy it likes but if it has any sort of agreement to access the single market it's going to have allow for free movement. It's pretty much a non starter for anyone from Merkel to whomever from the EU side from all the comments I've seen. Norway agrees to it. Switzerland basically agrees to it with some exceptions but they don't have passporting rights for their banks I believe. It's a huge market for them almost half their exports I believe and it's local being on their doorstep. Are they really going to forgo that? Yes they can strike their own deals as you say but who's to say if they'll be better/worse/same for them. Some might be better some might not. Being part of a large bloc and the largest market out there is a pretty nice negotiating position as opposed to a single country.
So like I said on the 2 main issues, forget about secondary issues wherever they can make their laws, if they're still looking for access to the single market in a similar fashion they have now I don't see much change from the status quo and lots of loss and uncertainty in the meanwhile. I said above a UK gov't official for Blair said the average trade deal takes 6.2 years to complete and there's still a ton of stuff to hash out. Reading around it doesn't even sound like they have the requisite manpower at present to even think of negotiating all the deals they will have to because they haven't had to in so long. So it might be even longer than that.
Last edited:
My impression is that the EU has no interest in making the UK another Sweden. And that would be a bad outcome from the British standpoint, because they would have to pay fees without having any voice in what the EU does.
Sweden is in the EU. It's Norway or Switzerland that are the models most point to but they don't see that they follow most of the main rules of free movement with Switzerland having a few exceptions but also losing some rights/access.
Actually, I think the markets are pricing in some sort of Norway/Switzerland model that's why they bounced back so quick because they think in the end it'll end up being something along those lines. I tend to think that's likely as well but we don't know. Regardless if it is that then what is the massive gain of leaving? Like I've been saying at best around status quo and lots of costs just to remain so.
Seems like you have most of the puzzle. Here's what you are missing - status quo is dead. If Brussels doesn't realize that now, the EU is dead. However, I tend to think that this was enough of a wake up call that things taken as gospel like open borders are up for negotiation. Otherwise, the consequences are a mass exodus from the EU. Frexit, Nexit, Daxit, Italexit, and others are all not only possible, but probable. The French will crush the 52% the Brits put up. Hollande is a dead man walking and both the French Right and Left want out.
The talk about banks/businesses moving now is laughable. Noone is doing sh*t until after the French elections next year.
I haven't seen that. The latest polls in France after Brexit that I read about show less than half favor even holding a referendum and in a vote 1/3 would vote to leave with slightly less than half voting to remain. Netherlands is really the one that I think could leave the rest as of now I don't see it.
I do agree that the UK leaving could lead to some reform in the EU but I don't know how much the UK will benefit from those reforms now that they're out. That's the ironic part of it.
I don't think talk of businesses slowing their investment or leaving is laughable at all. Everything is uncertain and up in the air. It's almost reflexive that business is going to hold back in that sort of environment. It all depends on the type of business. Sure some will stay and sure some will leave depending on the outcome of the negotiations which will take awhile. In the meantime uncertainty, slower growth and likely recession.
Last edited:
Agree, uncertaintly will cause some economic problems. I say, who cares. The EU has been limping along for years now with low growth and high unemployment because of the f*cked policies from Brussels. It's as if Germany won WW2 with the way they dictate how the bloc works. It's time for a fundamental change. There's no way the PIGS (minus Ireland) get out of their morass without exiting the Euro and introducing/devaluing the new lira, drachma, etc. All they are now are German economic slaves and they know it.
Also, forget the polls and look at elections. Polls are used as a propaganda tool in Europe. Look at the rise of the FN in France and the left/right wing branches of the PS and LR respectively. The FN's approval rating is almost 25%! They are going to be a huge player in April unless the EU defuses them. Also, watch out for Italy and the 5 Star Movement that won mayoral elections in Rome and Turin.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a422490c-4372-11e6-9b66-0712b3873ae1.html#axzz4DjKtAGE0
Norway and Switzerland don't come close to comparing to the UK in regards to size of economy and trade discrepancies with the EU. The UK has a lot of bargaining power seeing how there's a 70% trade deficit with the EU and as of yesterday the German auto industry is already chiming in Merkel's ear that hundreds of thousands of German jobs will be lost if they don't have access to the UK market.
The EU is dying and it's past the point of reform. It's dying a slow and painful death and it did this to itself.
The EU = Germany, France, a few northern European countries and a lot of poor little elves. Germany created this mess and it's going to eventually choke on it.
The EU started out as a free trade zone and morphed into what it is today ... a greedy, blood sucking beauracracy that eats itself from the inside out.
Exactly. You bully Greece. You don't bully the #2 economy in the EU. I'm not sure if the EU is past the point of reform, but it very well may be. Without drastic change, it is dead.
Yes the UK is a much larger economy but it's not as if they're the only ones with leverage. Just under 50% of their exports go to the EU. They need each other, you think UK jobs won't be lost either if they lose access as well. Some things are nonstarters or very difficult positions to change and any significant change in free movement is likely one of them. Even some of the lead campaigners of the Brexit movement have said don't expect a dramatic decrease in immigration and don't expect a ton of money going to the NHS. What does that tell you about how they feel the negotiations will end up looking?
A lot of it depends on how quick the UK can make trade deals with the Commonwealth countries, Asia and the US. If the UK can pull that off before Article 50 is invoked then the UK will be holding most of the cards. Canada, Australia and New Zealand have already told the UK it is ready to start negotiations on a trade pact. That leaves the US, India, Japan, South Korea, China, etc...
Well as I said above an official from the Blair administration said the average trade deal takes 6.2 years. Once invoked, Article 50 is on a 2 year clock. Not to mention what I said above that it doesn't sound like the UK even has the requisite manpower to negotiate all these deals as they haven't done so for so long. Take it a step further and right now there's sort of a power vacuum after they've won. Like ok what do we do next. Johnson leaves, Farage leaves, the Labor party head Corbyn having an internal mutiny. So with all those issues is negotiating all these deals likely any time soon?
Last edited:
It's a tough one to say how long a trade deal will take with all the political upheaval... which was dearly needed seeing how both Labor and the Tories were a fail for the most part. I know that the average EU trade deal with Canada took well over 7 years but most of that is on the EU and it's slow bureaucratic ways.
I just hope the UK gets a government put together ASAP. I'm just a bit surprised that Brexit supporter Daniel Hannon hasn't thrown his hat into the ring by now.
He is the man. This speech is stellar.
6-7 years? Looking too far out. Next year is the year. Perhaps even earlier. 6-7 years from now we might be reminiscing about the end of the EU.
I wish we had him for our president. He's as solid as it gets.
Hanan is one of the guys I mentioned that were leave campaigners who said don't expect a dramatic decrease of immigration or free movement.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ic-cuts-number-immigrants-coming-Britain.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ic-cuts-number-immigrants-coming-Britain.html
The UK considered a strategy based on the Commonweath back in the 1960s. The cost of transit makes it difficult for British goods to compete, say, with American goods in Canada.
You can because they won't be #2 anymore. UK benefited the most or a tie with Germany from being in the EU. You think they are carrying Greece or other poor members because they are good guys?
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Olympic Sports Rutgers Softball Returns with Youth Movement This Season- Latest: rubaseball78