Discussion
sidicks said:
You seem to believe that there are only two possible outcomes - 'milk and honey' and 'disaster'. You're wrong.
You're right. So the basic Brexit options are these then just for completeness:After spending anywhere between about 4 and 10+ years in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal as we negotiate our new status in the world, with a load of people who have been burned along the way while we decide what we're going to do, probably still with immigration similar to what we have now, probably paying into the EU a sum broadly similar to what we do now, probably obeying most of the rules we do now....
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen. Two of the outcomes are worse than what we have now and we're betting on the only one that isn't as we need that to come good to make sure the exercise wasn't a monumental mistake.
And the Leave options:
After spending zero time in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal and indeed probably benefiting from a bit of an economic Remain boost as the world sees us step back from the brink of potentially putting a stick of dynamite underneath a massive trading bloc, with no one burned due to uncertainty, with everything basically staying the same as we know it but still with the option to leave if it doesn't, we have after the same 4-10+ year period...
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen, but a majority of the outcomes are the same or better than we have now.
Well if that doesn't sell the economic case for Brexit, I don't know what does.
walm said:
turbobloke said:
That's not a problem.
What's the boat called?
What's happening to Corbyn and how?
Brexit is a brilliant future.
Uh... didn't democracy get over-ruled!?What's the boat called?
What's happening to Corbyn and how?
Brexit is a brilliant future.
That's a problem but it wasn't what was asked.
Which is why I pointed it out.
Voting for Boaty was fine in my book so not a problem.
That was contrasted in my post with Corbyn being challenged by a democractic route rather than being 'over-ruled' i.e. replaced by diktat.
Compare and contrast, y'see.
Mario149 said:
You're right. So the basic Brexit options are these then just for completeness:
After spending anywhere between about 4 and 10+ years in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal as we negotiate our new status in the world, with a load of people who have been burned along the way while we decide what we're going to do, probably still with immigration similar to what we have now, probably paying into the EU a sum broadly similar to what we do now, probably obeying most of the rules we do now....
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen. Two of the outcomes are worse than what we have now and we're betting on the only one that isn't as we need that to come good to make sure the exercise wasn't a monumental mistake.
And the Leave options:
After spending zero time in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal and indeed probably benefiting from a bit of an economic Remain boost as the world sees us step back from the brink of potentially putting a stick of dynamite underneath a massive trading bloc, with no one burned due to uncertainty, with everything basically staying the same as we know it but still with the option to leave if it doesn't, we have after the same 4-10+ year period...
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen, but a majority of the outcomes are the same or better than we have now.
Well if that doesn't sell the economic case for Brexit, I don't know what does.
I'm sure you think you're making a valid point.After spending anywhere between about 4 and 10+ years in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal as we negotiate our new status in the world, with a load of people who have been burned along the way while we decide what we're going to do, probably still with immigration similar to what we have now, probably paying into the EU a sum broadly similar to what we do now, probably obeying most of the rules we do now....
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen. Two of the outcomes are worse than what we have now and we're betting on the only one that isn't as we need that to come good to make sure the exercise wasn't a monumental mistake.
And the Leave options:
After spending zero time in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal and indeed probably benefiting from a bit of an economic Remain boost as the world sees us step back from the brink of potentially putting a stick of dynamite underneath a massive trading bloc, with no one burned due to uncertainty, with everything basically staying the same as we know it but still with the option to leave if it doesn't, we have after the same 4-10+ year period...
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen, but a majority of the outcomes are the same or better than we have now.
Well if that doesn't sell the economic case for Brexit, I don't know what does.
sidicks said:
Mario149 said:
You're right. So the basic Brexit options are these then just for completeness:
After spending anywhere between about 4 and 10+ years in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal as we negotiate our new status in the world, with a load of people who have been burned along the way while we decide what we're going to do, probably still with immigration similar to what we have now, probably paying into the EU a sum broadly similar to what we do now, probably obeying most of the rules we do now....
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen. Two of the outcomes are worse than what we have now and we're betting on the only one that isn't as we need that to come good to make sure the exercise wasn't a monumental mistake.
And the Leave options:
After spending zero time in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal and indeed probably benefiting from a bit of an economic Remain boost as the world sees us step back from the brink of potentially putting a stick of dynamite underneath a massive trading bloc, with no one burned due to uncertainty, with everything basically staying the same as we know it but still with the option to leave if it doesn't, we have after the same 4-10+ year period...
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen, but a majority of the outcomes are the same or better than we have now.
Well if that doesn't sell the economic case for Brexit, I don't know what does.
I'm sure you think you're making a valid point.After spending anywhere between about 4 and 10+ years in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal as we negotiate our new status in the world, with a load of people who have been burned along the way while we decide what we're going to do, probably still with immigration similar to what we have now, probably paying into the EU a sum broadly similar to what we do now, probably obeying most of the rules we do now....
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen. Two of the outcomes are worse than what we have now and we're betting on the only one that isn't as we need that to come good to make sure the exercise wasn't a monumental mistake.
And the Leave options:
After spending zero time in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal and indeed probably benefiting from a bit of an economic Remain boost as the world sees us step back from the brink of potentially putting a stick of dynamite underneath a massive trading bloc, with no one burned due to uncertainty, with everything basically staying the same as we know it but still with the option to leave if it doesn't, we have after the same 4-10+ year period...
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen, but a majority of the outcomes are the same or better than we have now.
Well if that doesn't sell the economic case for Brexit, I don't know what does.
sidicks said:
Mario149 said:
Ring up your pension fund and ask them how it's doing. Those types of ramifications. There are already people on threads here saying they're directly affected. Everyone else *thinks* they'll be okay just because. I have expat retired friends in France whose meagre income is in GBP. They can't afford the pound to become worth less or for the French economy to suffer as an indirect result. And bear in mind that all the damage done now will have to be undone.
Any idiot who invests in equities and is worried about short term volatility deserves all he gets!Mario149 said:
And what about the people who had no choice, who have to buy their annuity during this period of uncertainty?
Who is forced to buy an annuity at the current time?Who, about to buy an annuity would be forced to be holding equities?
Mario149 said:
Or who don't have the ability to micromanage their investments? or simply had bad financial advice? Are they idiots too?
If you don't have the ability to manage your own investments, you pay someone else to do it.If that person gives bad advice, you can sue them.
Mario149 said:
The "I'm all right jack, so I'm sure everyone else will be too" cavalier attitude to other people's livelihoods is astounding.
Another straw man argument.turbobloke said:
Mario149 said:
sidicks said:
It is far too early to say how the negotiations will evolve.
It's the very fact that we'll be in negotiations that will continue to cause the problem. Markets like certainty. An ongoing negotiation where no-one knows what the final state of play will be is the very opposite. Mario149 said:
sidicks said:
You seem to believe that there are only two possible outcomes - 'milk and honey' and 'disaster'. You're wrong.
You're right. So the basic Brexit options are these then just for completeness:After spending anywhere between about 4 and 10+ years in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal as we negotiate our new status in the world, with a load of people who have been burned along the way while we decide what we're going to do, probably still with immigration similar to what we have now, probably paying into the EU a sum broadly similar to what we do now, probably obeying most of the rules we do now....
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen. Two of the outcomes are worse than what we have now and we're betting on the only one that isn't as we need that to come good to make sure the exercise wasn't a monumental mistake.
And the Leave options:
After spending zero time in the throes of greater economic uncertainty than normal and indeed probably benefiting from a bit of an economic Remain boost as the world sees us step back from the brink of potentially putting a stick of dynamite underneath a massive trading bloc, with no one burned due to uncertainty, with everything basically staying the same as we know it but still with the option to leave if it doesn't, we have after the same 4-10+ year period...
1) an economy that outstrips what we have now
2) an economy that is broadly the same as we have now
3) an economy that is worse than we have now
....of which no-one can tell us which is the most likely to happen, but a majority of the outcomes are the same or better than we have now.
Well if that doesn't sell the economic case for Brexit, I don't know what does.
The only continent with weaker economic growth than Europe is Antarctica.
Edited by SpeckledJim on Monday 27th June 14:00
Mario149 said:
turbobloke said:
Mario149 said:
sidicks said:
It is far too early to say how the negotiations will evolve.
It's the very fact that we'll be in negotiations that will continue to cause the problem. Markets like certainty. An ongoing negotiation where no-one knows what the final state of play will be is the very opposite. 5x is made-up. The markets get it when they're wrong and a correction occurs, unlike the shrillest crop of Remain howlers who won't ever 'get it'.
Your price for selling out on democracy isn't my price.
FFS Mario149.
Mario149 said:
turbobloke said:
Mario149 said:
sidicks said:
It is far too early to say how the negotiations will evolve.
It's the very fact that we'll be in negotiations that will continue to cause the problem. Markets like certainty. An ongoing negotiation where no-one knows what the final state of play will be is the very opposite. Market makers provide liquidity - they don't take positions, they just facilitate others taking positions.
They don't have any "wisdom" and nor do bookies. Both are simply offering a market and managing their own risk.
If more people bet on Brexit they shorten the odds and vice versa.
It's entirely mechanical.
The people pushing equities up and down are predominantly pension fund managers and occasionally the odd substantial hedge fund or bunch of hedgies.
walm said:
Mario149 said:
turbobloke said:
Mario149 said:
sidicks said:
It is far too early to say how the negotiations will evolve.
It's the very fact that we'll be in negotiations that will continue to cause the problem. Markets like certainty. An ongoing negotiation where no-one knows what the final state of play will be is the very opposite. If you knew how markets work you'd be far better than Soros.
It depends on what meaning we put on terms used.
walm said:
Market makers provide liquidity - they don't take positions, they just facilitate others taking positions.
They don't have any "wisdom" and nor do bookies.
NSS yet I can find 'Three Essays on the Wisdom of Capital Markets' without even trying.They don't have any "wisdom" and nor do bookies.
You appear to be playing semantic games with chutzpah on the side.
sidicks said:
walm said:
You guys seriously have no idea how markets work.
Not sure if you were including me in that claim, but if so, I assure you that you are wrong!Nothing much happened.
Don't panic! The economic dip is normal. The investors went with the polls and loaded cash into what would have been the proper places, now they are trying to snatch it back. This is expected and will get better!
London did not become a world center of banking because of the E.U. it did so because of lighter regulation and well-managed U.K. institutions.
London did not become a world center of banking because of the E.U. it did so because of lighter regulation and well-managed U.K. institutions.
turbobloke said:
NSS yet I can find 'Three Essays on the Wisdom of Capital Markets' without even trying.
You appear to be playing semantic games with chutzpah on the side.
The semantics are important here.You appear to be playing semantic games with chutzpah on the side.
Bookies simply match bets with a spread (essentially), as do market makers.
The people placing the bets and MAKING INVESTMENTS are the ones you should be attacking.
Placing the blame with "bookies and market makers" makes it look like it's some kind of corporate entity rather than:
- Ordinary punters making bets.
- Investment professionals doing their best to manage risk and make money for their investors - who are normally pensions!!
(BSD - I wish!!)
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff