Global stocks go up when GBP drops, when measured in Pounds
So you just needed to globaify your stocks
Do tell
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
So they want us to leave without paying their £100bn, leaving them with a massive black hole?
Dont you think that the richest market in the world cant live without the uk?
I admit its still early days but till this time of writing its not the eu whose backpaddling furiously and begging for transitional deals
Last edited:
I know, but I won't but it's all 100% legal
Nigerian Price been in contact?
Nothing like that - although funnily enough I used to deal with Nigeria a lot and received dozens of those types of emails
Can do.
Always believed the best solution is to match your assets/liabilities and income/expenditure in the same currencies.
Hence we took £ mortgages in the UK when we bought some UK properties, although the monthly payments have to come out of your income which might be a different currency so there's always an FX risk but it's only on your monthly repayments and not the full value of your asset because what you own and what you owe moves at the same rate, and we bought / contributed to FFR ( now € ) pensions when we decided we'd stay here.
You can usually manage to do both as long as you've got the right passport for where you want to borrow the money, and ( different ) currency income / residency qualification for where you want to buy your pensions.
Well...At least that's what we did.
I was going to ask what the CAF thought of Brexit. Then I thought: umm... what's the British contribution to the CAF, anyway? I'd still be kind of curious to know. From here, it looks like the most inept and self destructive piece of political manoeuvering since America got the DT's. But that's an outside view, if course.
I'm sure you're ( almost ) right, but I wouldn't have phrased it that way.
They'll both go through the 'cinema' of negotiations because then both sides can blame the other when the UK leaves without a UK/EU Trade Deal.
Hopefully for the UK, they can then start to cut their own deals with other countries straight away and let the arbitrators decide what is a fair Exit Payment.
No deal is better than a bad deal, and all that.....
They cant without exit payment, otherwise the rest will have to pay more. None want that and eastern europe expect their rebates.
Every single one of your posts is hating on the UK. You really want us to suffer, don't you.
I'm a remain voter and I'm a UK business man, I wish this didn't happen. I wish everything was far more simple than what is about to happen. But if you honestly think Europe will be the same again, let alone somehow stronger for this, then you'll keep making the same mistakes as the politicians keep doing. In fact, you might as well just be one for all I know, since the shit you keep coming out with is based on some bias you hold. You are everything that is wrong with Europe, we should all be together and fighting to keep it together, not be gloating that it's cracking up. But wait, it's not cracking up, it'll be just grand without those pesky outsiders who never loved it anyway...
But you carry on, respond to this like you actually give a feck.
I am using the first table from a Brexiter source. Just look at the countries who take the most. Now Poland, Romania, Hungary. Bulgaria and the Czech republic are enjoying unprecedented economic growth. Malta is not included but I assure you its more of the same. Which means that these countries had benefited greatly from the EU, they can now hold on their own and while cutting in the EU budget won't be desirable they can probably take the hit, especially if the UK automobile industry ends up pitching camp there
Meanwhile if Frankfurt or Paris can nick a big chunk of the UK services then they will probably be able to pay more.
The Brexiters assured us that the EU is desperate to give the UK unrestricted access to the single market (remember the Prosecco theory). Well...till now the ones begging for a trade deal is the UK. They told us that the EU is on the brink of collapse and countries will now flock to leave. It didn't happen either. They told us that Turkey is set to join, flooding the EU with millions of Turks. Erm you get the drill. Maybe they overrated this hand too?
Now I can come with two explanations to it
a- The EU has a very strong hand which allows them plenty of fire power not to be flexible. That is a valid argument with one flaw ie why aren't they negotiating on trade? Things can be done concurrently even though the EU has a very strong hand. After all everything is decided at the end right?
b- The EU has no intention to offer a decent deal to the UK and just want to cause as much damage to the UK's credibility until it crashes out. As specified by article 50 they are legally bound to speak about future relations which they are doing. However that doesn't mean that they are obliged to offer a decent deal, which, i guess, that's their plan all along. If the UK crush out mangled and embarrassed then its negotiation hand will be weaker, that means less beneficial trade deals for them. How long will it take before businesses move elsewhere?
Now the big question for b is if its personal against the UK or is it personal towards the Tory Party. For all we know the EU might already have backroom deals with JC. All they need to do is to topple the three clowns (Boris, Fox and Davis) for such deal to come in motion.
Last edited:
That would be an exercise of self harm and I am not into that. Sure I will soon move out of the UK but my salary for the past 5 years had been in pounds which lets face it, if it continues to this route, it wont be worth alot. So no, its not within my personal interest to see the UK go down in flames.
I have mingled around politicians since I was a boy with most of my mother's family being involved in politics. My grandfather was former prime minister Duminku Mintoff's neighbour and had been a loyal supporter to him up until things got a bit iffy. My parents orchestrated the PR strategy of a young politician who would later on become a minister and now an EU beaurocrat. My uncle has a meeting hall named for him in Malta's biggest union HQ and my aunt was a canvasser to a young journalist whose now prime minister. I also worked as a person of trust in a ministry for a brief period of time up up until I got fed up of politics and returned to the efficient private sector were I belong. That said, I grew up having politicians for dinner and spending hours selling tickets for this or that raffle. I know these people and I assure you that to understand their way of thinking that you have to throw personal bias and desires out of the window.
As I said its still early days + in politics even a week is too long. So I may be wrong in what . However till the time of writing I can only come with two arguments that explain the EU's hostility with the UK
a- The EU has a very strong hand which allows them plenty of fire power not to be flexible. That is a valid argument with one flaw ie why aren't they negotiating on trade? Things can be done concurrently even though the EU has a very strong hand. After all everything is decided at the end right?
b- The EU has no intention to offer a decent deal to the UK and just want to cause as much damage to the UK's credibility until it crashes out. As specified by article 50 they are legally bound to speak about future relations which they are doing. However that doesn't mean that they are obliged to offer a decent deal, which, i guess, that's their plan all along. If the UK crush out mangled and embarrassed then its negotiation hand will be weaker, that means less beneficial trade deals for them. How long will it take before businesses move elsewhere?
Now the big question for b is if its personal against the UK or is it personal towards the Tory Party. For all we know the EU might already have backroom deals with JC. All they need to do is to topple the three clowns (Boris, Fox and Davis) for such deal to come in motion.
Last edited:
Cheap labour, race to the bottom graphs. Thats all these graphs show. They dont show polish accountants picking fruit in uk cos it pays more than any job back home. Its a failed project that benefits the few.
I am using the first table from a Brexiter source. Just look at the countries who take the most. Now Poland, Romania, Hungary. Bulgaria and the Czech republic are enjoying unprecedented economic growth. Malta is not included but I assure you its more of the same. Which means that these countries had benefited greatly from the EU, they can now hold on their own and while cutting in the EU budget won't be desirable they can probably take the hit, especially if the UK automobile industry ends up pitching camp there
Meanwhile if Frankfurt or Paris can nick a big chunk of the UK services then they will probably be able to pay more.
The Brexiters assured us that the EU is desperate to give the UK unrestricted access to the single market (remember the Prosecco theory). Well...till now the ones begging for a trade deal is the UK. They told us that the EU is on the brink of collapse and countries will now flock to leave. It didn't happen either. They told us that Turkey is set to join, flooding the EU with millions of Turks. Erm you get the drill. Maybe they overrated this hand too?
Now I can come with two explanations to it
a- The EU has a very strong hand which allows them plenty of fire power not to be flexible. That is a valid argument with one flaw ie why aren't they negotiating on trade? Things can be done concurrently even though the EU has a very strong hand. After all everything is decided at the end right?
b- The EU simply wants to humiliate the UK and let it leave without a deal.
I don't know of any polish accountants picking fruit in the UK anymore. If they do then they are being silly as accountants can find good jobs anywhere in the EU. Actually the UK is finding it hard to find unskilled people picking fruit after Brexit, let alone accountants.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/05/brexit-uk-food-industry-eu-fruit-veg-pickers
That's not the argument though. These countries are witnessing real economic growth since joining the EU. They won't leave the EU just because the EU budget will get smaller
Well i only saw an interview with a polish accountant on the bbc news so dont take it as gospel. He was probably lying.
I believe it's fairly clear there are two reasons for the hostility.
a) the major European countries don't like us. The UK has always been a bit of a black sheep in Europe and a pain in the neck to Brussels.
b) they want to make our exit as painful as possible, for two purposes. Firstly to hoover up whatever trade they can from the fallout and most importantly to discourage anyone else thinking of leaving.
I do agree with what you say.
One key flaw in the Brexiteers mindset is that the EU has some moral right to defend the UK economy. According to them the EU would be stupid to damage it since a big chunk of that business will rather move to the US then to Europe. However that doesn't really make sense. In the EU mindset the UK will soon be a competitor just like China, India or the US is. If they can attract 5-10% of that fleeing business to the EU then that's a bonus for them.
Also the EU needs to make sure that there's no loophole for the UK to exploit. It simply cant afford to give unrestricted access to the single market on better terms that they have now else others will be asking for the same (Canada, US etc) and current EU countries will leave the union to go on these new terms. Such deal risk to become so complex that it might be better off for the EU to just call it a day and let the UK leave without a deal.
There's also the question of economy of scale. The UK is a rich country but the EU represent a continent. Irrespective on how rich a country is, it will still need to rely on at least some of its neighbours. Therefore the UK needs the EU more then the EU needs the UK
Considering the complexity of such deal then it might be easier for the EU to let the UK go empty handed with a clean cut, especially since it will cause havoc to the UK market and attract some of the business to the EU.
I don't like that tactic as you dont choose your neighbours and its within everyone interest to be nice to them (not stupid just nice). Europe is currently reaping the 'benefits' of treating a post Soviet Russia like the Cinderella of Europe. There again, the UK cant expect the EU to act nice to them after they spent years demonising the union and working for the US benefit
Last edited:
The EU's tactic will be to ensure it's politically impossible for any UK leader to recommend to its parliament a deal that it's offered. It seems fairly straight forward. Nonsense about the EU wanting the UK to leave, as if it has the mentality of one of two sisters angry that the other has used her hairbrush without permission, is bizarre.
The UK does need the EU more than the other way around but that doesn't mean the UK's exit wouldn't be damaging to the EU.
"The UK can't expect the EU to be nice to them after they spent years demonising the union"
Do we really think the EU negotiating team are 14 year olds with angsty diaries looking for revenge?
It's in both parties interest to continue the relationship on the same or similar terms. Idea that the EU will want 'revenge' because the UK hasn't been 'nice' to them it amusing but quite a naive and juvenile analysis.
If the EU really wanted to play the 'we still remember when you took our hairbrush and didn't ask' tactic it could have simply said from the outset that they wouldn't negotiate any terms and EU would automatically fall out onto WTO rules. The fact is there is political and economic will on the EU's side to persuade the UK to ditch Brexit and that's what their stance will be. And it will succeed. All they have to do is ensure that the UK govt get a 'deal' that is utterly unacceptable to all but a tiny margin of right-wing Eurosceptic Tory MPs.
The complexity required for any deal is a trump card the EU is blatantly using in its favour. Why the hell would it just say "It's too complicated" and walk away. The UK would lose less than the EU but the EU would still lose. There will still be an economic impact on the EU that any adult negotiator will want to avoid, and isn't going to claim that it's worth it because the UK spent years not being nice to them.
Sorry for the rant but the whole "EU will just say it doesn't want to negotiate and let the UK leave" is no less batshit than "The EU needs us more than we need them, they'll agree to everything we say" - and it angers me when people who espouse both pretend it's some kind of well-thought-out, considered point of view.
The UK does need the EU more than the other way around but that doesn't mean the UK's exit wouldn't be damaging to the EU.
"The UK can't expect the EU to be nice to them after they spent years demonising the union"
Do we really think the EU negotiating team are 14 year olds with angsty diaries looking for revenge?
It's in both parties interest to continue the relationship on the same or similar terms. Idea that the EU will want 'revenge' because the UK hasn't been 'nice' to them it amusing but quite a naive and juvenile analysis.
If the EU really wanted to play the 'we still remember when you took our hairbrush and didn't ask' tactic it could have simply said from the outset that they wouldn't negotiate any terms and EU would automatically fall out onto WTO rules. The fact is there is political and economic will on the EU's side to persuade the UK to ditch Brexit and that's what their stance will be. And it will succeed. All they have to do is ensure that the UK govt get a 'deal' that is utterly unacceptable to all but a tiny margin of right-wing Eurosceptic Tory MPs.
The complexity required for any deal is a trump card the EU is blatantly using in its favour. Why the hell would it just say "It's too complicated" and walk away. The UK would lose less than the EU but the EU would still lose. There will still be an economic impact on the EU that any adult negotiator will want to avoid, and isn't going to claim that it's worth it because the UK spent years not being nice to them.
Sorry for the rant but the whole "EU will just say it doesn't want to negotiate and let the UK leave" is no less batshit than "The EU needs us more than we need them, they'll agree to everything we say" - and it angers me when people who espouse both pretend it's some kind of well-thought-out, considered point of view.
Last edited:
Why do people keep accusing Devilish of hating the UK? He's saying nothing different to a dozen of us British posters, but apparently because he's from Malta that means he hates Britain? You don't need a UK passport to think that Brexit is a giant shitshow and the country is going to suffer horribly as a result. It comes across as pretty crappy expecting the foreign guy (living in the UK no less) to not be allow to speak his mind freely.
a- Till the time of writing politicians had likened the EU to Nazism and the mafia. A foreign secretary had the cheek to go to Berlin and describe Brexit as a liberation knowing fully well what liberation for the Berliners means. So yes politicians can act as 14 year olds. In matter of fact the whole Brexit thing was the creature of a Tory party catfight which is more appropriate behaviour of 14 year olds rather then adults.
b- When NS suggested that Scotland remains in the EU she was quickly shot down. When remainers said that the UK should pull the plug out of Brexit Guy Verhofstadt was quick to counter to that by saying that the UK will have to give up special perks including the hard-fought budget rebate. That doesn't seem to be a union whose desperate to keep the UK in the EU.
c- The EU is obliged to discuss future relationships with the UK. That's what article 50 says. However there's many interpretations to that. The EU is indeed discussions future relations to the UK but do feel that these 'discussions' are leading to somewhere? I don't.
As said this is a matter of opinion. I myself think that there's a chance that its just a ploy to destroy the Tory government and allow a friendlier JC to take over the UK. However we must face reality. This whole charade had cost the EU big time. Any decisions taken will shape how the EU deals with current members + its trade partners. Whatever happens (Brexit, remaining etc) its within the EU interest that the UK ends up weaker then it currently is. That's the only way it can better ensure that it wont pass from this ordeal ever again
Last edited:
I've wondered if the EU strategy is similar to that but with the added backup contingency that if the UK do just stick their noses in the air and walk away, the EU are left in a position where the hoovering up of UK based businesses provides a limited safety net to compensate against the damage on the EU side. A heavily damaging Brexit for the UK then also increases the likelihood of a later re-application once it becomes clear that there is no economic solution outside.
Annoying as feck though, as if the government had immediately gone to the EU after the vote and given full guarantees that this wasn't what they wanted, and they'd do everything in their power to solidify EU-UK ties and mitigate the damage on both sides, the EU probably wouldn't have felt forced into this position. Instead we had May and her ridiculous bunch of morons talking like Britain was still in the age of colonialism and gunship diplomacy. Brexit was certainly the UK public shooting itself in the foot, but the government didn't have to follow up by adding a shot to the face.
Take your anger out on the 17 million fools who are to blame for the downturn of the UK, if the Uk suffers it is down to them. The EU will get over any disadvantages of this idiocy long before the Uk will, stop the idiotic UK politicians before it's too late.
Yeah if push comes to shove the EU's position will of course be protectionism. Which of course is different than welcoming the opportunity of a shoving match out of some bizarre justification of historical lack of politeness, like the world's crappiest wrestling storyline that some seem to think is inevitable.
If you ask me it's a matter of timing and when it will become politically convenient for the UK government to soften its stance without fear of political reprisals. The inevitability of May being ousted within the next 2 or 3 years could be an 'out', or in this case an 'in'
Unless you voted for the referendum with Cameron and the Conservative party. Anyone who voted Conservative has no right to complain now.
I don't follow that argument either because even if there was a referendum, it doesn't follow that the outcome had to be a leave vote, the same as if someone voted Labour in the last election would mean they are pro-Eu as Corbyn is just as anti-EU as half the Tories
I voted Labour because
a) My local Labour Candidate was more pro-remain than my local Liberal Candidate (who seemed to be blaise about Europe and was a Union Leader)
b) Labour are the only party that offered anything in the last election
c) Lib Dems offered NOTHING in the last election
And I consider myself a Lib Dem centralist first and foremost
So - I agree
Corbyn was a nonentity in 2015, Labour's leader was Miliband, or you could have voted for Clegg's lot. The manifestos were simple, Cameron wanted a referendum, the others didn't.
I was talking about this year re Corbyn. In 2015 Cameron got more votes because of the referendum promise. If I had been in the UK at that time, would I have voted for Cameron , probably yes - but not for the referendum. A lot of Tory supporters are not anti EU and a lot of Labour supporters are not pro-EU so the lines are smudged, Liberals are a non-important option - as I've said for some time if I was now in the UK I'd have no idea who to vote for and meaningless votes are just a waste of time.
Last edited:
i voted labour during Miliband administration and Lib dem during the last GE. We're closer in political views than we think
Same here.
Davis is a salesman.
Yup, a lying salesman.
Hitting a wall can involve concrete and progress, he just forgot to mention the impediment to further progress.
The irony
Which is why you don't like the idea of Cameron and the Tories being responsible for the referendum and erroneously brought Corbyn into it, presumably as an attempt at deflection.
I understand the discomfort but the fact remains, Cameron and the Conservative party campaigned for the referendum and anyone that voted for them shares the responsibility.
Cameron and the Tories are responsible for the referendum, the result was because of gullible people believing a load of rubbish.
I brought Corbyn in (2017) because May offered a chance to stop this idiocy (even though she thought she was cementing her position) but Corbyn didn't want to stop it either so there was no chance to stop it.
I think both May and Corbyn are equally despicable
Last edited:
Spoken like a well off white heterosexual.
Gullible tories yes and you still would have voted for a referendum by proxy. You couldn't make this up.
When you think of all the cash wealthy city types poured into the Tory election coffers, and now they're moaning at what's going to happen.
I think turkeys voting for christmas is the apposite phrase, hackneyed though it is.
Rubbish, you think only tories voted for leave, the only people I know who voted to leave were all traditional Labour voters who now think May and Boris are the dogs "nuts" - if I had voted from where I used to live it would make no difference anyway, most of my adult life I lived in safe Tory seats with 20k+ majorities.
this Tory/Labour thing is rubbish too with regards to the referendum.