Today Britain votes on remaining part of the EU

[mxnerd]

40K of those were from a year ago????

Oops, did not notice that. D:

 

[Blackjack200]

lol - yeah, I don't understand the role. I understand it perfectly but disagree wholeheartedly. Smart firms do their own underwriting.

WTF are you talking about? The ratings agencies have nothing to do with underwriting.

Are the agencies mostly right? Sure, they absolutely are. Are they always right? No, they aren't. However, when they are wrong, they are wrong big and they are usually far too slow to see it coming. Re-reviewing credits every 6-12mos doesn't help. They get paid for the work they do, same with Trustees. Which is why good firms have their own staff and aren't beholden to some doof's rating.

If you're a small insurance firm with a $30million operating fund, and you're required by regulation to keep that money in investment grade debt or treasuries, you don't hire a CFA for $100k+, you rely on the rating agencies.

Credit ratings do not represent a substantive fundamental analysis. They are a superficial rating. That's all they're meant to be.

The probabilistic game played by investors, especially fixed income, doesn't leave a large margin for error when dealing with declining credit that doesn't get a review for 6-12 months, or a sector under duress. Only fundamental analysis shows that. Do you think PIMCO or Blackrock give a flying fuck through a rolling donut about the RAs? My firm is in the majority.

Yeah, no shit FI shops don't use rating agencies, they're trying to outperform the markets.

If they weren't equipped they should have recognized it. However, I know, in particular, that they were equipped. Some analysts knew and received pressure from committees to change ratings that were suitable to driving business. That correlative analysis was ignored, or that systemic RE declines could never happen is sheer lunacy.

Again, the ratings agencies were dealing with a new kind of product and were under pressure to rate. This shit is not uncommon in finance. I'm not saying they did nothing wrong, but to suggest it was criminal, you need more than that.

Do I trust them to be able to accurately forecast Brexit 48hrs after the fact? Fuck no. This was a hedge, nothing more.

Again, more evidence that you don't understand the agencies. The downgrades reflect the uncertainty resulting from the vote. They were not attempts to "accurately forecast" anything.

 

[LegendKiller]

WTF are you talking about? The ratings agencies have nothing to do with underwriting.

Yes, they do. In lieu of being able to underwrite deals on your own, you depend on them to do some of the work for you. What, exactly, do you call an NRSRO? Do they not do due diligence, run cashflow models, sensitivity analysis, monte carlo, correlations, regressions...etc.? What do you call that? And depending on that analysis, what do you call that? Hopscotch? Jumping rope? Tiddly winks with manhole covers?

If you're a small insurance firm with a $30million operating fund, and you're required by regulation to keep that money in investment grade debt or treasuries, you don't hire a CFA for $100k+, you rely on the rating agencies.

And you get what you pay for.

Credit ratings do not represent a substantive fundamental analysis. They are a superficial rating. That's all they're meant to be.

See above. Hence why they are worthless. Your word "superficial" works well enough and gets my point across.

Yeah, no shit FI shops don't use rating agencies, they're trying to outperform the markets.

Hence why I think they are worthless.

Again, the ratings agencies were dealing with a new kind of product and were under pressure to rate. This shit is not uncommon in finance. I'm not saying they did nothing wrong, but to suggest it was criminal, you need more than that.

I deal with new products all of the time. That doesn't mean you can't think the process through and understand key risks and how they should factor into your investment decision to come to a yay or nay.

They fucked up. Hugely. Knowingly. I know more than a few analysts in my prior lives that have, over beers, lamented going to committee fully knowing their ratings were bullshit only to be forced into a AAA with threats of them losing their jobs.

There is absolutely no excuse for it. None. And they contradicted their own methodology when rating such products.

What about having 3+ years of fully amortized static pool default data with relevant and credit metrics? To say they had that is a bald faced lie and you know it. They didn't have jack shit but rated it anyway.

I was nothing but a lowly VP at an issuer and I knew the shit was doomed. My team and I said as much to the treasurer and CFO of the company only to have them layer in $20bn of committed liquidity prior to the event, that saved their asses.

Again, more evidence that you don't understand the agencies. The downgrades reflect the uncertainty resulting from the vote. They were not attempts to "accurately forecast" anything.

The downgrade is what it is, a hedge. They don't know but they did it anyway.

I see it all of the time. If you can look behind their ridiculous paywall to the FFELP downgrade cycle, they put dozens of tranches on neg watch, not because they ran a model, not because they think it'll default, but because they hedged. They didn't know but chucked it on there anyway. Not because there is increased risk or they forecasted something, but because they could. Herein lies the problem, it's braindead analysis and the buyside firms paying for their subscription services get what they pay for, braindead analysis. That's fine, issuers buy it for what it is, but don't run around pretending that it means jack shit for actual projections, which was my original point. Rather than acknowledging that you decided to come in and play "whose cock is bigger", hence your "You don't know what you're talking about", when its obvious I do, but you still can't resist measuring. Why? Likely because you have the cock god gave sand fleas and you're terribly self conscious about it, hence why you run around claiming *isms everywhere and trying to rip me down, when, in reality, we're just saying the same thing. Then again, perhaps it's just because you don't like me and want to grind an axe. Or, maybe, as a final option, you really just want to date me. Either way, that's okay, it's amusing nonetheless.

Don't think I have ever seen such vociferous defense of the agencies. It's refreshing considering there isn't a single person I've run into in my work history that's ever defended them to such extent, including former analysts. Which says a lot about you.

 

[biostud]

The thing is, that if a country want access to the EU, they more or less have to follow all the rules set by EU. If you're in EU you have a chance of getting some influence, when you're outside you just have bend over. Obviously a lot of the things possible today will still be possible in the future, it will just be more complicated. There's about 70.000 laws which are currently EU legislation, that needs to be transformed into British law, and if they don't, bye bye european market. And same goes for future EU rules, so sure UK can decide for themselves, but my guess would be that they will end up making a lot of EU law British law as well.

Yes minister - Why Britain Joined the European Union

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

 

[Z15CAM]

UK financial issues maybe an issue but I wonder if a UK Passport will be valid in Europe.

 

[Accord99]

Now north England wants to join Scotland.

Allow the north of England to secede from the UK & join Scotland petition: over 50,000 and counting.

https://www.change.org/p/the-uk-gov...gland-to-secede-from-the-uk-and-join-scotland

But NE England voted 58% to leave while NW England voted 53.7% to leave.

 

[biostud]

UK financial issues maybe an issue but I wonder if a UK Passport will be valid in Europe.

It will, just like Norway and Switzerland.

 

[Painman]

Indulge me, as I point out how EuroZone nonsense affects workaday folks in MY community, even over on the west side of the pond:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/german-supermarkets-ban-lobster-sales-1.1393419

More "concern" for animals with brains the size of a pea, than women being routinely molested via unfettered influx of sexually thristy 3rd worlders.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/lobster-ban-europe-1.3497657

Sweden wants a blanket ban on the importation of live North American lobsters across the European Union in an effort to prevent a possible underwater invasion.

"Of the local species." More like their own fishery revenue.

Fuck Yeah, let's ban ROMANIA from buying North American lobster, because Reasons.

And before I forget, just as a rando bonus, how about Spain's Pig problem:

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...ona-aims-to-control-its-wildlife-2211242.html

Fuck Yeah Gun Control...?

 

[agent00f]

I disagree, in the short term it will be a big problem for Great Britain .
Investors don't like uncertainty and on Monday they are going to start running away from the London Stock Exchange.
This will be a benefit to others in the EU.

Eu Commissioner Lord Hill announces his resignation

Great Britain has no trade agreements with other nations.

Read what I said carefully, I wasn't disagreeing with you.

One of the most annoying things with the remain campaign was the FUD they attempted to spread. If you know anything about economics you know that people want to trade as cheaply as possible, no one wants to pay over the odds for something. So trade agreements are negotiated to our benefit and swiftly, more so in an environment where we export more than we import and offer more value and quality.

The only way we can lose out is if the other EU countries cut off their nose to spite their face and put huge tariffs on our exports, but they just punish their population with more expensive goods and the UK simply goes to the next most profitable nations to sell our exports to.

No one sticks their nose up at the worlds 5th biggest economy because to do so hurts themselves more than it hurts us.

If you know anything about econ, it trivially stands that larger entities (whether corps or nations) are in a more favorable negotiating position. That's why Tesco/Walmart crowds out the corner shop.

UK was in an acceptable position prior to the EU because it was comparable in size to continental competitors--not anymore, which was why the EU was created in the first place.

It's likely the EU will make brexit an example of what not to do.

 

[agent00f]

LOL, you're too funny.

The number of calls I have seen them get wrong is far too many. Sure, I'll glance at a report, listen into a call, but I rarely take them seriously. Why? Because they aren't on the hook for anything and people have short memories.

Not only did they screw the pooch on the mortgage crisis (CDOs, wrappers, non-agency) , S&P getting taken out of CMBS for how long? 2 years? How many fuckups on the Corp side have they had? Putting $75bn of FFELP bonds on negative watch over legal final issues? LOL. They didn't even run models on a huge portion, the rest they could have easily remedied but failed to do so. Poor navient, caught in the middle.

Ohh, ZH is funny, but far more wrong than they are right. I do enjoy reading them, as does pretty much everybody.

I have never said that there won't be disruption and I have fully admitted that banks will have to leave. It's a negative for commercial RE, but how bad? Don't know yet.

We are 48hrs removed from Brexit, Moody's blew their load early, as they done before. We'll see how far it goes.

Let's make this very simple. You think Breitbart is a better source of accurate info than Moody's.

--
To clarify that, nobody's saying Moody's is the most accurate, just that there's far worse analytical minds.

 

[mikeymikec]

No, it needs to be reduced to manageable levels. In the short term enough to release the pressure on our public systems (NHS, housing, schooling, jobs etc)

What makes you think that the pressure on the NHS or anything else is due to immigrants? According to wikipedia, immigrants comprise 11.9% of the UK population. Even if you get rid of all of them, you've logically reduced the pressure by 11.9%, but as you said, you don't want to stop all immigrants, let alone shipping any home who are already here.

Long term it needs to be much less comparable to national birth rates, right now the actual percentage of non Britons (who do not share our values and who provably do not integrate even after 2-3 generations of children)

What makes you think that most immigrants do not share our values?

I did answer this, I said that leaving the EU is a prerequisite for lowering immigration because being a member means we cannot control our border. The vote was to leave the EU it was NOT for a manifesto, which means all we're doing is deciding shall we stay or go.

Yes, but you've voted for something completely non-specific in terms of what you've hoped for. Immigration (particularly involving people whom you describe as "not sharing UK values") may well go up after brexit. Also, do you suppose that EU immigrants are more or less likely to have values that you believe are compatible with our society? Because you just voted for less of them and more non-EU migrants. There's no reason to assume that immigration in general will go up or down simply because of brexit, the only reasonable assumption is the one revolving around the recession you've just voted for. Loads of UK businesses (mine possibly included, I barely scraped through the last recession) will die.

I mean would you prefer to have say 20,000 net migrants a year instead of 300,000 but stay in the EU or would you rather keep it at 300,000,

I don't know about you, but I and probably most other people who voted remain, as well as probably 90% of MPs, see immigration as a completely healthy facet of a properly functioning economy; if you want a country worth living in, then you have to be able to accept immigration, people are going to go where the jobs are. If the UK turns into a shit-hole with few jobs, then British people will immigrate to other countries (except of course you just voted to ensure that our capacity to do this has been reduced to - probably - visas only, which doesn't help the poorest find jobs, and the poorest are always the first to get it right in the ass when a recession comes). On the flipside, if the UK cannot keep up with the demand for more jobs in this country, that means more immigrants, or international corporations taking all of their jobs elsewhere.

In the event of a recession (which pretty much every economist has forecast for the UK at least in the short term), the public services that you're worrying about will be further strangled as more unemployed people will need them.

You say you want more control over immigration, but there is no plan to control immigration in such a way to alleviate your concerns and keep the economy running. That's what you just voted for. I don't know about you, but if I decide to make a massive change to my life, I plan it through first; I don't decide that I want to be a dancer tomorrow, move to another country and then realise that I don't know how to dance.

You're saying you'll vote UKIP. So you'll be voting for the guy who waited a day after the referendum to debunk one of the brexit campaign's main argument points: Giving the £350m / week that was going to the EU to the NHS. The figure itself has even been widely debunked. Sounds like an honest candidate to me with a realistic plan!

 

[norseamd]

It's simple - I recognize the long term outlook for fucking the proles. It ain't good. Call it pragmatic capitalism.

Maybe you might have picked up that I am a big fan of Brzezinski. I dont blindly trust him, but he is a pure genius. Listen to what he has to say here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzIcbhT6AMg

Remember how in traditional white society, they used to talk about doing what you can frugally, no need for excessivities, no need for luxury, save your earnings and resources, and that type of stuff, that was in addition to stuff like be polite, have manners, eat your vegetables, always be timely and dont procrastinate, and more?

I find that funny because .....

https://www.amazon.com/Civilization...6452344&ref_=la_B000APQ8G0_1_2&s=books&sr=1-2

How did the West overtake its Eastern rivals? And has the zenith of Western power now passed? Acclaimed historian Niall Ferguson argues that beginning in the fifteenth century, the West developed six powerful new concepts, or “killer applications”—competition, science, the rule of law, modern medicine, consumerism, and the work ethic—that the Rest lacked, allowing it to surge past all other competitors.

"Consumerism".

Would an old great grandpa and great grandma say you should be going out and spending all this money on stuff?

Maybe this was kinda going off the mark, but to me it is food for thought. If people want to do what they need to survive, then save the rest, they should have all the right to do that and not be criticized for it. The problem is that the average citizen has been relegated to nothing more than just a consumer in a mass controlled market economy. And this political philosophy of ideological corporate capitalism has basically become a full out religion, with many treating it with a true sense of reverence and sanctimony.

And no, I dont necessarily actually think that the EU was good for Great Britain or any one else really, but going about the way they did, and leaving in this way and at this time was a very, very terrible idea, especially since we have a Cold War 2.0 boiling over in Eastern Europe, and also conflict brewing with the Chinese in the South China Sea.

If this has a domino effect in the EU, and that domino effect transfers over to NATO, we are in for a world of hurt.

 

[norseamd]

No, it needs to be reduced to manageable levels. In the short term enough to release the pressure on our public systems (NHS, housing, schooling, jobs etc)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA3XTYfzd1I

 

[Painman]

Let's make this very simple. You think Breitbart is a better source of accurate info than Moody's.

--
To clarify that, nobody's saying Moody's is the most accurate, just that there's far worse analytical minds.

As of late, Breitbart gives very few fucks. They've become the mouthpiece of the alt-right and a few dissident lefties. And that's OK.

They're actually riding the wave.

 

[norseamd]

Ordinary Brit beats global onslaught of Establishment Elite. Our grandchildren will thank us 4the day we took back control of our democracy

quote

 

[agent00f]

As of late, Breitbart gives very few fucks. They've become the mouthpiece of the alt-right and a few dissident lefties. And that's OK.

They're actually riding the wave.

Breitbart was always a political activist first and foremost, and in this particular case of the worst sort. For various reasons people confuse that for journalism or anything to do with reporting facts. This is related to Brexit in that the popular Murdoch media & such in the UK are similar, and conflating what they claim with reality is largely responsible for the vote.

Some smart folks long ago recognized that democracy is predicated on a reasonably informed population, so the results here are no surprise when the basic requirements go unfulfilled.

 

[agent00f]

OMG LOL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHPqIkmemPM#t=5m25s

Cameron in an act of brilliance following the previous folly is going to make the next guy decide on Article 50. Cue yakety sax.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

For someone who loves to say business and money are so good, he sure seems to not follow that line when it comes to white populism. I would not be surprised if he loves Putin long time.

Same with Ducati696.

Someone is certifiably triggered about a DEMOCRATIC AND TRANSPARENT vote (that really had NOTHING to do with them personally) not going the way they thought (or as there "betters" ordained) it should.

LOL Also what in the hell does Vlad have anything to do with Brexit? Seriously grasp at straws more in your impotent rage.

 

[boomerang]

For example, I am freelancer/self-employed who moved to Spain, I am working for several UK companies...one of them actually pays me in GBP. What will this mean? Will it be impossible or much more difficult in the future, unlike now, simply to work for an UK company? It can WELL happen this might affect such things. It is also *likely* that traveling for UK people *will* get more difficult and they will need Visas, even for so simple things like now where you can hop on Ryanair and fly to Spain, France, whatever for €40. It COULD happen when the EU gets cranky over the exit...

Now we're getting to the heart of the matter. It's all about you...

 

[Blackjack200]

OMG LOL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHPqIkmemPM#t=5m25s

Cameron in an act of brilliance following the previous folly is going to make the next guy decide on Article 50. Cue yakety sax.

I've read some speculation that the next PM might simply refuse to do it. Invoking Article 50 was Cameron's promise, so as long as the next PM states upfront that they will not invoke Article 50 if elected, all you're left with is a broken promise by an outgoing PM.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

What makes you think that the pressure on the NHS or anything else is due to immigrants? According to wikipedia, immigrants comprise 11.9% of the UK population. Even if you get rid of all of them, you've logically reduced the pressure by 11.9%, but as you said, you don't want to stop all immigrants, let alone shipping any home who are already here.

It's partly due to immigrants, yes they make up a large percentage of the population. I never said anything about kicking out current immigrants I think that would probably cause more problems than it would solve. However there's a net 300k per year being added and that's what really needs to be targeted, every year we have more strain on these services and it's increasing year on year. We need to stem that tide, it's completely unreasonable that people have lived here for all their lives, paid taxes in some cases for 50-60+ years to fund schools and the NHS and public services, only to face huge waiting times in clinics and hospital or to find it hard to get their children a decent education because schools are over run by children who don't speak english and need additional special treatment.

What makes you think that most immigrants do not share our values?

Surveys done on immigrants show huge disparities, more so in the muslim population but generally everywhere else, you can research that yourself if you care to I'm not going to go through it here, suffice to say there's specific beliefs I've already mentioned which go against the british values. And more generally these people do not care they're putting strain on our NHS and other services, they have no empathy for the damage they're doing to the local people, they just care about themselves. Well these services are paid for by the British caring for one another and all chipping in.

Yes, but you've voted for something completely non-specific in terms of what you've hoped for. Immigration (particularly involving people whom you describe as "not sharing UK values") may well go up after brexit.

Possible yes, what the government decide to do with regards to immigration post brexit is out of our hands, the people who wish to leave are much more sided with parties like UKIP who aren't in power. But that's not the point.

-The point is this, many people wan lower immigration.
-Immigration of the 300k a year about 180k is from the EU
-To get immigration to levels much less than 100k per year it means lowering both EU and non EU immigration
-We can't lower EU immigration from the EU because the laws don't allow it.
-Thus, in order to lower immigration to the levels we want leaving EU is a pre-requisite

Leaving the EU doesn't solve the problem but is REQUIRED component of solving the problem. Again there's this stupid red herring going around that conflates the decision to leave the EU with some kind of manifesto. People were NOT voting for a manifesto I don't know how many times I'm going to have to say this, and there's no indication that people in any great quantity thought they were voting for a manifesto, the voting card is REALLY simple, in or out?

The next step for people who want lower immigration is to write to MP's and ask the current government with our upcoming ability to control immigration to kindly lower it to the levels we're asking for. Whoever replaces Cameron may or may not do that which is up to them and that's fine. It just means we need more votes for UKIP coming the 2020 general election. And if after a massive 52% display of outrage at the EU vote didn't tell the current government enough then a lot of those people will vote UKIP nad if the get in power they'll have the resolve we need to finally cut down immigration and get what we want.

So, we've basically established that the government lost the EU referendum because they were unwilling or incapable of reducing immigration. Next question is are they going to sensibly respond to this to maintain control over the country or are they going to not bend on immigration again. If they don't they risk losing the next GE to UKIP whose support is rapidly increasing.

Also, do you suppose that EU immigrants are more or less likely to have values that you believe are compatible with our society?

Don't care, I want much less of both and leaving the EU is a pre-requisite for that.

Because you just voted for less of them and more non-EU migrants. There's no reason to assume that immigration in general will go up or down simply because of brexit, the only reasonable assumption is the one revolving around the recession you've just voted for. Loads of UK businesses (mine possibly included, I barely scraped through the last recession) will die.

I'm no making that assumption though, you've just assumed I am. As i keep saying, brexit is just one piece of a larger puzzle and we need it in order to get what we want. It wont all happen at once, it will take time.

A recession isn't a sure thing right now. Besides in some circumstances recessions are good things, the US should have gone through one after the 07/08 crisis to fix the economy but didn't so that's a disaster waiting to happen. Recessions are tough but they happen for a reason because economies are running not based on real value but government meddling and once the meddling stops the house of cards built on that structure comes down. I doubt we'll have a recession but if we do have one then I welcome it, if we need one it's better to have it now rather than inflate the issue with QE and then end up with a bigger one down the line.

I don't know about you, but I and probably most other people who voted remain, as well as probably 90% of MPs, see immigration as a completely healthy facet of a properly functioning economy; if you want a country worth living in, then you have to be able to accept immigration, people are going to go where the jobs are.

We need an economy that can function without continual growth, because the UK is basically full now we can't sustain many more people off our land in fact we already need to import food because we can't grow enough locally. Any economy whose success is predicated on unlimited future growth is fundamentally flawed and doomed to fail. We need an economy that sustains itself on the current population and resources.

You say you want more control over immigration, but there is no plan to control immigration in such a way to alleviate your concerns and keep the economy running. That's what you just voted for.

There are plans, they're just not being made by the government right now, and they need to be, so that's what people like me will focus on next, if the current government are too stubborn then I'll vote UKIP and they'll sort it, not really fussed either way to be honest, but enough people want it so it's probably going to happen sooner or later.

I don't know about you, but if I decide to make a massive change to my life, I plan it through first; I don't decide that I want to be a dancer tomorrow, move to another country and then realise that I don't know how to dance.

I have planned it through.
Step 1: Vote out of EU
Step 2: Vote UKIP in in 2020 GE's

All you're doing is moaning that one of the steps seen in isolation doesn't make sense, well that's true, why not look at all the steps together, oh looks now it makes sense.

You're saying you'll vote UKIP. So you'll be voting for the guy who waited a day after the referendum to debunk one of the brexit campaign's main argument points: Giving the £350m / week that was going to the EU to the NHS. The figure itself has even been widely debunked. Sounds like an honest candidate to me with a realistic plan!

He didn't wait to do anything, the brexit campaign wasn't run by Nigel or UKIP in fact they distanced themselves from it, he didn't make that claim and it's not up to him to debunk it, he was ASKED what he thought about it and he gave an honest answer, which is that claim is not what people were voting for.

BUT PEOPLE KNOW THAT, people know the referendum wasn't to vote to spend all the spare cash on the NHS, the vote was in or out. The vote wasn't "stay in or leave and spend 350M on the NHS" and everyone knows that. The only people making a fuss about that are the people who didn't even vote leave anyway that want to make a fuss about how the leave side must have been mislead, just like we all must be stupid or hateful or racist, same old same old, it couldn't just be that we have a different and legitimate point of view that differs from other peoples. That whole headline trying to make Farage look bad is one tiny drop of water in a torrential downpour of hate against Farage which is untrue and is a product of leftist media in our country continually trying to spin what he says and place blame on him for things he hasn't done or supported.

Doesn't work, it's not going to work so just knock it off. Argue honestly and you're going to get further.

 

[mikeymikec]

HYPOTHETICAL question:

Let's assume this likely Brexit gives the EU a HUGE wake-up call, and they start to think over how things are run, and would also make *yet another* exception with the UK, and possibly make them an offer in regards to Immigration - ok, let's just speculate "the EU" would say that not a single further immigrant "is sent" to the UK, as a result of this wake-up call.

Do you think that the "common folks" in the UK then would revise their wish to exit the EU?

There's no way on the planet that the EU will allow any further concessions to the UK in the short term, especially with regard to free movement. The EU wants to send a message that leaving the EU has its price.

It was flat-out idiocy of Cameron to allow a referendum without a clear policy of "brexit has to win over x%" x being a figure that defines a clear mandate from the masses, say 65% at least. Aside from this referendum, the only time a vote of 52% means jack shit is when a small, odd (ie. opposite of even) number of people are asked to vote on something.

I wonder whether any politician wants to be the one who signed the UK's exit to the EU, and the subsequent fall-out (such as the almost certain recession). I bet that many brexit voters who lose their jobs will suddenly have a very short memory and blame that PM for their woes.

On the official UK government petitions website, there's a petition that has picked up 10 times the number of votes that any other UK official e-petition ever has, calling for a second referendum. I hope that efforts like this can save us from people who basically have no idea what they're voting for.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

 

[norseamd]

I wonder whether any politician wants to be the one who signed the UK's exit to the EU, and the subsequent fall-out (such as the almost certain recession). I doubt that even many brexit voters who lose their jobs will suddenly have a very short memory and blame that PM for their woes.

The UK voters will never blame themselves for this.

You should know people better than this, just saying.

www.metacafe.com/watch/an-F8pW27tJJhbmu2/gladiator_2000_estimating_the_situation/

 

[mikeymikec]

It's partly due to immigrants, yes they make up a large percentage of the population. I never said anything about kicking out current immigrants I think that would probably cause more problems than it would solve. However there's a net 300k per year being added and that's what really needs to be targeted

You said that public services at present are being pushed to "unmanageable" levels, so in order to correct the status quo logically those *current* levels must be reduced.

Also, now that you've voted for raising the bar on immigration at a time when the NHS has staffing shortages right across the board and a significant percentage of that staff are immigrants. You talk about unmanageable loads yet you want to make it harder for the NHS to get the staff it needs.

And more generally these people do not care they're putting strain on our NHS and other services, they have no empathy for the damage they're doing to the local people, they just care about themselves. Well these services are paid for by the British caring for one another and all chipping in.

We're back to this thing you were going on about before which makes little sense, this idea you run on that immigrants are both free-loaders and job stealers. If they're in work then they're helping pay for those services. If they're not sick, then they're paying for services for others to use.

Don't care, I want much less of both and leaving the EU is a pre-requisite for that.

IMO you've just admitted that your "values" argument is a load of shit. You think that you can bundle immigrants into one category despite the fact that they come from all over the world.

I'm no making that assumption though, you've just assumed I am. As i keep saying, brexit is just one piece of a larger puzzle and we need it in order to get what we want. It wont all happen at once, it will take time.

Yes, while unemployment goes way up, welfare benefits go down and pressure on public services goes up. Maybe you'll achieve the vision you've got by tanking our economy so that no-one wants to move here anyway.

We need an economy that can function without continual growth, because the UK is basically full now we can't sustain many more people off our land in fact we already need to import food because we can't grow enough locally. Any economy whose success is predicated on unlimited future growth is fundamentally flawed and doomed to fail. We need an economy that sustains itself on the current population and resources.

"the only constant is change". Any business seeks to grow rather than stay put, simply because change inevitably comes and moves the goalposts. The same applies to a country's economy; it's stupid to assume that you can keep everything the same. Ergo encouraging growth is always good, otherwise if your economy depends on some big industry, then either that industry collapses or a competitor takes a way a tonne of its income. Diversity is good, right across the board.

There are plans, they're just not being made by the government right now, and they need to be, so that's what people like me will focus on next, if the current government are too stubborn then I'll vote UKIP and they'll sort it, not really fussed either way to be honest, but enough people want it so it's probably going to happen sooner or later.

I have planned it through.
Step 1: Vote out of EU
Step 2: Vote UKIP in in 2020 GE's

Nothing in the meantime? Interesting plan. Do you want to do any trading with the EU? Apparently 40% of our exports go there.

All you're doing is moaning that one of the steps seen in isolation doesn't make sense, well that's true, why not look at all the steps together, oh looks now it makes sense.

That's because there aren't any steps in the plan. If the UK leaves the EU, the only plan will be to pick up the pieces and attempt to maintain the status quo. That means attempting to keep everything the same despite the fact that the rug has been pulled from under the economy.

He didn't wait to do anything, the brexit campaign wasn't run by Nigel or UKIP in fact they distanced themselves from it, he didn't make that claim and it's not up to him to debunk it, he was ASKED what he thought about it and he gave an honest answer, which is that claim is not what people were voting for.

You're either being completely dishonest to yourself or impossibly naive. If it's naivety, then I suggest that you learn quickly how most politicians work, because what Farage did is typical of the most weasel-like behaviour I'd expect from one. An honest politician who supports a campaign would point out an inaccuracy.

Doesn't work, it's not going to work so just knock it off. Argue honestly and you're going to get further.

As i keep saying, brexit is just one piece of a larger puzzle and we need it in order to get what we want. It wont all happen at once, it will take time.

I think we're done. I have argued honestly. Once I had a reasonable idea of your argument, I think you've basically voted for a massive change yet no plan attached to it. You're hoping that voting out of the EU results in all these great changes (none specified) that makes the UK will be "great again", yet assuming that the UK prospers, immigration will be lower, despite the fact that most people immigrate to find a job.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

On the official UK government petitions website, there's a petition that has picked up 10 times the number of votes that any other UK official e-petition ever has, calling for a second referendum. I hope that efforts like this can save us from people who basically have no idea what they're voting for.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

Yes which has both been botted by remainiacs and voted for overwhelmingly from outside the EU. The page has a JSON feed of all the raw data which when analysed showed less than 1/4 of the votes came from the UK.

It's not being investigated for Fraud - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407

Being generous that at least some foreign votes are expat Britons with the right to sign it still, it's certainly way less than 1M actual UK votes, and of what number of those were not bots and not through british proxies is anyones guess, some other smaller number.

It won't work.