Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
I have a hard time believing that, but nevermind.

Please do all you like, I‘m happy to expand your lacking knowledge on banking, which seems to steem from some weird mixture of American pre-1999 knowledge and Hollywood movies.

Please do then. Ideally with a reasonable amount of depth.

You clearly don't understand investment banking at all if you think most of it is betting, which I presume is your way of saying buying/selling stocks, commodities etc the way those firms do in films like Wall Street etc. That's trading which is a subsection of IB. Investment banking is on the whole very varied and is very important to the running of the financial system. They deal with things like underwriting IPOs, debt raising for business / dealing bonds (like getting a mortgage but on a larger scale), dealing with mergers and acquisitions and more. It's crucial to the running of our society today, especially for large businesses, and it's very very false to say the world could've done without for the past 100 years. It exists because there's a need for it. I understand it's fashionable to say 'let's bash bankers', but without understanding what IB actually is it justs comes across as uninformed.
 
Bizarre why anyone thinks Labour is left wing anyway. It is under Corbyn but that's been a dramatic change since the New Labour years where Labour was central to slightly leaning right. Hence why the Blair fanboys hated Corbyn.
 
- You could write that as they're committed to balancing the books, so that we no longer post a trade budget deficit year after year and increase out our total debt. Sometimes you have to cut to do that if you're not earning enough. That's what happens in business (and yes, I know the running of the country's not a business, but that doesn't exempt you from being financially responsible). Ditto on the cuts on benefits.
The problem with that analogy of course is that if a government cuts its spending, its income will be adversely impacted. That is why austerity largely hasnt worked.
 


This strikes me as particularly troubling, especially in light of Trump's apparent decision to back Russia over us on the nerve agent thing. We can't really trust/rely on the US at the moment.
 
What I always found sad was that nationalization just gets treated as a dead end where innovation will inevitably stagnate. We should be looking at ways to bring across the main benefits of free market companies to a state run organization. Government itself kept completely out of operations, staff/management incentivized on results like a private company etc. There’s no logical reason I can see why running a service for non-profit or for profit should determine its effectiveness and efficiency.

Because govt can't keep itself out of the operations if there are votes to be had. If the govt ran the electricity biz, there would be political pressure, say, to intervene to subsidise various groups at the expense of others. Or pressure to avoid job losses or fare rises near elections. Or whatever.

Profits are ultimately how a commercial org decides to what to do, and what to not do/how to allocate investment. I remember when we had loads of state run industries in this country and their service was shite.
 
Last edited:
697.png
 
Because govt can't keep itself out of the operations if there are votes to be had. If the govt ran the electricity biz, there would be political pressure, say, to intervene to subsidise various groups at the expense of others. Or pressure to avoid job losses or fare rises near elections. Or whatever.

Profits are ultimately how a commercial org decides to what to do, and what to not do/how to allocate investment. I remember when we had loads of state run industries in this country and their service was shite.

The law of the market works for some products but not for everything. Some must be state owned or state regulated. Energy related for example. Is too strategic and only a few operators that if they decide as oligopoly, for example the gas, jack the price up when you are going to that long weekend. Lets say 200% price. Is very simpliestic

The same with water service. And of course healthcare when the company would look more for the profit than the health of the patient. The state must be there or owning or regulating very strictly. The law of the market is not for every good and service if you are not a robot
 


giving a platform to racist, hate spreading cnuts.
That's all Brexit is, lies, division & hate.
 


giving a platform to racist, hate spreading cnuts.
That's all Brexit is, lies, division & hate.


This won't even make headline news in the UK. A quick search on BBC website shows there's no article about it.

edit: Reading a bit more about her she's a right wing journalist. Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage are leaping to her defense.
 
Last edited:
This won't even make headline news in the UK. A quick search on BBC website shows there's no article about it.

edit: Reading a bit more about her she's a right wing journalist. Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage are leaping to her defense.

The name Tommy Robinson at the bottom of the video was enough to tip me off.

A little bit snow flaky though to campaign for harder border controls and then bitch and whine when those same border controls are applied to you.
 


giving a platform to racist, hate spreading cnuts.
That's all Brexit is, lies, division & hate.


Whilst I think all Western countries should be aiming to be 100% secular asap, I also think people who incite hate should be punished. Handing out those leaflets was a twatty thing to do and she was rightfully told to feck right off when you consider that and some of her previous actions.*

Well, the UK seemingly has no problem controlling it's borders from outside of the white EU it appears.

*The vile Canadian woman actually did the following:

In May 2017, Southern took part in an attempt organized by the identitarian group Génération identitare to block the passage of an NGO ship, the Aquarius (co-owned by SOS Mediterranée and Doctors without Borders), which was leaving Sicily to start a search-and-rescue mission for ship-wrecked migrants off the shores of Northern Africa. Claiming that the goal of the activists "was to stop an empty boat from going down to Libya and filling up with illegal migrants", Southern was briefly detained by the Italian Coast Guard. NGO ships often rescue migrants and refugees, who disembark from Libyan shores on unsafe makeshift rafts, and bring them to Sicily. [33][34]With regard to her actions, Southern stated that "if the politicians won’t stop the boats, we’ll stop the boats."[10]
 
Last edited:
Looks like the UK have got nothing as expected (and quite right). Let's see Davis try spin this as a victory
 
Unfortunately for him he's only got 99% of the British press more than willing to do it for him.

If you took what the likes of Davis said during the campaign I'd be shocked if even 10% of it has come to pass.

That's impressive non-delivery even for the Tories
 
So NI to remain in the single market and customs union then as a "back stop" option? Over to you Arlene......
 
Davis added: “Make no mistake, both the United Kingdom and the European Union are committed to the joint report in its entirety and in keeping with that commitment we agree on the need to include legal text detailing the back stop solution for the border of Northern Ireland and Ireland in the withdrawal agreement that is acceptable to both sides.

But it remains our intention to achieve a partnership that is so close as to not require specific measures in relation to Northern Ireland and therefore we will engaged in detail on all the scenarios set out in the joint report.”

Err, what the feck does that even mean? I thought they supposedly had super special plans for a frictionless border? Is he now saying they'll just not have a border? I'm confused. :wenger:
 
Err, what the feck does that even mean? I thought they supposedly had super special plans for a frictionless border? Is he now saying they'll just not have a border? I'm confused. :wenger:

Sounds like David Davis speak for "we have no idea what we're doing and don't have another solution so we will be staying in the CU and SM after all, but we don't want to upset the Brexiteers too much yet".

Daily Mail readers seem to be frothing at the mouth already.
 
I hope that the EU will tie this transition period to written commitment from the UK that there won't be any Irish border + irrespective on whether there's a trade deal at the end of this transition period they will pay the EU what is owed.
 
I hope that the EU will tie this transition period to written commitment from the UK that there won't be any Irish border + irrespective on whether there's a trade deal at the end of this transition period they will pay the EU what is owed.

They have no choice but to do that anyway - it's written into the GFA that there can be no difference in trade, etc. north and south of border in Ireland so NI simply has to remain in the single market. All the nonsense that has been talked about is pointless due to this fact. It's written into law.
 
The main advantage of this transition deal is that the UK will be able to sign FTA with the US while still being in the EU. If they use that well they can make good money by repackaging US products and dump them in the EU.
 
The main advantage of this transition deal is that the UK will be able to sign FTA with the US while still being in the EU. If they use that well they can make good money by repackaging US products and dump them in the EU.

The whole idea of not paying tariffs is the unified regulation and standards, they can't just repackage GMO corn and chlorine chicken and sell it as a UK product especially since the origin of everything must be declared.
 
The main advantage of this transition deal is that the UK will be able to sign FTA with the US while still being in the EU. If they use that well they can make good money by repackaging US products and dump them in the EU.

Other than what Grib said , no, they can negotiate a deal between March 2019 and December 2020 but can't sign it until after they've left in 2021. Plus do you really think 21 months will be enough to agree a deal with the USA?
 
Other than what Grib said , no, they can negotiate a deal between March 2019 and December 2020 but can't sign it until after they've left in 2021. Plus do you really think 21 months will be enough to agree a deal with the USA?

Well were there is the will there is a way. However, I can see Trump screwing the UK up big time.
 
Well were there is the will there is a way. However, I can see Trump screwing the UK up big time.

US government financial advisers have already said that UK must concede everything to have a trade deal with the US so no change there.
 
Trump may be leaving at the same time as the UK leaves the EU, on the other hand Trump could be re-elected and the UK stays in the EU (in all but name).

true, however that doesn't mean that the person replacing him will be pro UK especially if the person in question happens to be a democrat. The Obama-Clinton administration had a soft spot towards the EU and saw Brexit as a travesty (since the UK acted as the US voice/veto within the EU). The republicans would probably allow their trade experts do the talking. Its rumoured to be as tough if not tougher then those used by the EU.
 
true, however that doesn't mean that the person replacing him will be pro UK especially if the person in question happens to be a democrat. The Obama-Clinton administration had a soft spot towards the EU and saw Brexit as a travesty (since the UK acted as the US voice/veto within the EU). The republicans would probably allow their trade experts do the talking. Its rumoured to be as tough if not tougher then those used by the EU.

Yes agreed, can't see the USA do the UK any favours whoever is in power. The special relationship only works one way.
 
I really hope the irony of the DUP spending a fortune to campaign for Brexit, and it leading to Northern Irelands effective annexation from the United Kingdom isn't lost on people.