EU Referendum Results Thread | Leave have won, Cameron resigns

[Mozza]

It not, it's way more complicated that that. It's who eco-system, it takes years, decades even to built a top financial center.
Exactly. They are doing it already, they won't be able to replace UK fallout simply because they won't be an economy as big as UK that will suddenly appear on the map.
It won't be much of a choice for most of them, only a moron will lose UK market, to go where, in Slovakia? They are already in Germany and France.
People tend actually to overestimate EC role, some of EC economies are top-notch of course, but more than half is nowhere near UK level.

Don't forget that a lot of UK exports go to USA, Arab world, Asia so if a company wants to have access there they will remain in UK, because a UK office will give you much better USA, Hong Kong market penetration even without these close EC ties than an office in say Paris, never mind some third rate EC country.
Nothing too complicated about. As i've said top companies even work in Russia.
Nobody can know that since the deal is not on the table yet, nobody knows anything about how it will actually effect UK economy in the long run. For example you can check UKs intra-EC exports and "rest of the world" exports from 1990 till now. You probably will be surprised by that data.

Frankfurt already has a large finance sector, they'll just grow it. Multinationals will stick their main sites within the EU, not the UK

They won't loose the UK market, this is about the price we pay to access theirs, they are the bigger party, they will dictate terms. Much as America will do when we want access to theirs. I'm sorry but you are living in fantasy land if you think the UK can leave and get a better deal

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

I thought this was about the taking from the haves and giving to the have nots. But you only care about the British have nots?

No, firstly I'm not for taking from the haves, but for have nots to become haves, at least a bit, and prevent the haves from exploiting them. I don't believe in redistributing money between citizens as a goal, you've got to get the distribution right first time. For example by balancing supply and demand of labour.

Secondly, I do think the British government should be there for the interest of the British people, not just the British haves, certainly not the haves around the world and not for the Polish have nots either. Of course there are very practical reasons to help the Polish a bit on their way, but there's no problem living in a country that has just a lower living standard and lower cost of living, especially not when the economy is growing fast and it's getting better every year. Poverty is relative and just lower cost of living is not poverty at all.

(Anecdotal evidence incoming...) I've heard from a few people who employ for low-paid jobs and they say they get very few British people even apply for the jobs compared to foreigners. Maybe we're just a bunch of lazy cnuts who will get what we deserve when the economy tanks. That would correlate with the fact that we are well known for having poor productivity, which I doubt is the fault of the EU.

And if you get people from Bangladesh or Central Africa in, they will work 18 hours a day for 10 pounds just as long as they can send 2 pounds home. But that's not what century's of prosperity have been about, has it? If the work has to be done in the UK and is paid for in the UK, it should meet UK standards for UK people and if you can't find UK people who want to do it you pay too little or the work is too hard, or a bit of both. As an employer you have to adapt and organize it differently, make it easier work and maybe even innovate to do so, and if an immigrant happens to get that job, it should be a job to British standards for him or her too. You want to go back to medieval standards because some people in the world still are and you can fly them in? Or you want to go back to 1950's standards in work and pay just because the Polish are in a situation that they will accept it and because the pay is much better for them compared to their cost of living?

Uncontrolled mass immigration serves a few haves and a lot of Polish people, and not the people your government is there to serve. You need democracy to make sure the government serves all of it's people and that's why the EU is antidemocratic and will persist in that. No, it's not getting 'more democratic', it's getting less democratic in the sense that it's citizens get less power over how they are governed every single year. Uncontrolled mass immigration is just one of the many things the EU does to transfer wealth from the have nots to the haves, as almost any undemocratic government has done in the times before democracy. It's also democracy in the different member states that has brought the wealth and peace that the EU now tries to claim as it's own achievement and threatens to take away as punishment, just because it has the power to.

 

[Manny]

Frankfurt already has a large finance sector, they'll just grow it. Multinationals will stick their main sites within the EU, not the UK

They won't loose the UK market, this is about the price we pay to access theirs, they are the bigger party, they will dictate terms. Much as America will do when we want access to theirs. I'm sorry but you are living in fantasy land if you think the UK can leave and get a better deal

Yeah this.

If the EU access becomes in any way tougher, companies will no longer need a large presence in the UK. They can move the bulk of their roles to other offices in EU countries, leaving a smaller presence in the UK to still maintain any of its benefits.
@Vilev

 

[Mozza]

No, firstly I'm not for taking from the haves, but for have nots to become haves, at least a bit, and prevent the haves from exploiting them. I don't believe in redistributing money between citizens as a goal, you've got to get the distribution right first time. For example by balancing supply and demand of labour.

Secondly, I do think the British government should be there for the interest of the British people, not just the British haves, certainly not the haves around the world and not for the Polish have nots either. Of course there are very practical reasons to help the Polish a bit on their way, but there's no problem living in a country that has just a lower living standard and lower cost of living, especially not when the economy is growing fast and it's getting better every year. Poverty is relative and just lower cost of living is not poverty at all.


And if you get people from Bangladesh or Central Africa in, they will work 18 hours a day for 10 pounds just as long as they can send 2 pounds home. But that's not what century's of prosperity have been about, has it? If the work has to be done in the UK and is paid for in the UK, it should meet UK standards for UK people and if you can't find UK people who want to do it you pay too little or the work is too hard, or a bit of both. As an employer you have to adapt and organize it differently, make it easier work and maybe even innovate to do so, and if an immigrant happens to get that job, it should be a job to British standards for him or her too. You want to go back to medieval standards because some people in the world still are and you can fly them in? Or you want to go back to 1950's standards in work and pay just because the Polish are in a situation that they will accept it and because the pay is much better for them compared to their cost of living?

Uncontrolled mass immigration serves a few haves and a lot of Polish people, and not the people your government is there to serve. You need democracy to make sure the government serves all of it's people and that's why the EU is antidemocratic and will persist in that. No, it's not getting 'more democratic', it's getting less democratic in the sense that it's citizens get less power over how they are governed every single year. Uncontrolled mass immigration is just one of the many things the EU does to transfer wealth from the have nots to the haves, as almost any undemocratic government has done in the times before democracy. It's also democracy in the different member states that has brought the wealth and peace that the EU now tries to claim as it's own achievement and threatens to take away as punishment, just because it has the power to.

Poland is growing because of all the EU money it has recived, as they grow and get richer more British made products will find a market there as we produce higher value goods, its win win alround if we give them a leg up.

If people are being paid £10 for an 18 hour day thats illegal and so is up to the UK government to police, nothing to do with the EU.

As I've said before there is no mass immigration, 333,000 in a country of 65,000,000 is tiny and should be managable every year

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Poland is growing because of all the EU money it has recived, as they grow and get richer more British made products will find a market there as we produce higher value goods, its win win alround if we give them a leg up.

As I said there are very good and practical reasons to help Poland. That doesn't mean the right to work in a much richer country for every Polish should be part of that.

If people are being paid £10 for an 18 hour day thats illegal and so is up to the UK government to police, nothing to do with the EU.

The point was that you shouldn't call people lazy just because they don't accept worse standards in labour because people from poor countries do.

As I've said before there is no mass immigration, 333,000 in a country of 65,000,000 is tiny and should be managable every year

It's putting pressure on wages and job security. That does mean that allthough there's win in both Poland and the UK, it doesn't mean there's win win all around because it's the British haves and the Polish have nots who win at the expense of the British have nots.

As this freedom is unlimited within the EU and it's an EU dogma, the EU has taken immigration and any regulation of it out of democratic control. And it's negative effects for the native have nots can't be countered with national laws. In theory they might, but no country in the EU has managed to get them payed to the nation's standards. Often it is not allowed by the EU for the national authorities to do more checks on European foreigners and their subcontracters. The EU is starting investigations against member states who try to maintain their minimum standards, and not against member states who facilitate letterbox companies to avoid those standards. And you're always going to lose out with regulation when you're up against the laws of supply and demand.

 

[Arruda]

Well current life expectancy overall is 81 and you'd expect that to be higher for young people with the devolopment of medicine. 89 is not far off.

Life expectancy is an objective measure that doesn't take into account speculation of how medicine will evolve etc, only demographic factors. In short, it's an average of how old people are when they die. It increases as people get older because you've already gone through a part of your life, so the closer you get to your life expectancy, the more likely is it that you'll be one of those who'll die above that age.

Imagine a scenario were life expectancy at birth (what we usually mean when we only say "life expectancy") is 80. If you live until 70, then you're not one of the unlucky ones that died when they were 10, 20 or 30. So you're more likely to be one of those who'll die with 85 and 90 and pushes the average up. Someone born today has a life expectancy of 80 years old, someone who already is 80 is obviously expected to live longer than that.

 

[Vilev]

If the EU access becomes in any way tougher, companies will no longer need a large presence in the UK.

They would need if they want to be part of a top-10 market and also has access to the whole world. UK is one of the leaders in global trade, even if we simply won't count the EC part.

Frankfurt already has a large finance sector, they'll just grow it. Multinationals will stick their main sites within the EU, not the UK

Nope, most of people will remain in UK, sure some will move, they would need to buff up the EC presence, but 20 years from now, London still would be far ahead of Frankfurt. Because of the USA, Arabs, Asia, they will not move the majority of their resources from London for various of reasons, you won;t get the same level of excellence in Frankfurt.
Also London can offer a better deal. Don't forget that EC policy on financial services is pretty much shit. Ask anybody, they all tell you that EC sucks and that is why financial power shift to other regions, London had some exceptions but they were still were somewhat limited.

They won't loose the UK market, this is about the price we pay to access theirs, they are the bigger party, they will dictate terms.

What "access"? You do know that UK has a huge trade deficit with the rest of EC?

Guardian is hugely pro-remain i believe, right?
So here it is:
UK trade deficit with EU hits new record

The latest healthcheck from the Office for National Statistics on goods coming in and going out of the UK reveal that the gap between exports and imports in the first three months of 2016 widened by £0.7bn to £23.9bn.
Figures from the ONS showed that Europe is gradually becoming a less important destination for UK companies. In 2000, 60% of exports went to other EU countries, but the percentage fell to 58% in 2005, 54% in 2010 and 47% in 2015.
Over the same period, imports from the EU remained constant, accounting for 54% in both 2000 and 2015.

So you need to check your facts, it's not UK access to EC market that is bigger and more important UK actually buys much more from EC partners than it sells them.

 

[RoadTrip]

@Vilev

Interested what you do for a living? Not a sarcastic backhand comment, genuine question.

I work in London, and many of my clients have already begun processes of shifting elements of their base to EU- not just Frankfurt but also Luxambourg. In particular, I have close friends who work in the banks and they've already had calls to staff detailing plans to move some of their business to Frankfurt. These are US institutions too, might I add.

Long story short, the evidence already proves your theory incorrect.

 

[rcoobc]

Does he mean 2008?

Also the markets haven't fallen in any kind of manner in the tweet. FTSE closed much higher than 2 weeks ago. Closed higher than periods in May and April this year.

Look how far we dropped when China was coughing at the start of 2016. That's a real drop and still nothing like 2008. Also the pound rallied to a higher level leading up to the EU so the drop is misleading. It's not far from getting back to where it was before. The biggest drop in the pound to dollar was in 2015, people should look at that.

We won't know the real story in a day.

FTSE 250 still seems pretty unhappy to me.

Went down when it looked like we were leaving the EU, back up when it looked like we might be staying, and then plummeted when we left.

And they say the FTSE 250 is a more accurate representation of the UK economy as a whole.

The FTSE 250, which is considered a bellwether of the UK economy as a whole because it contains more UK-focussed companies, ended the day down 7.2pc - its worst day since Black Monday. The fall wiped £25bn off the value of the index in all and wiped almost a quarter off the value of some stocks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...erling-surge-or-slump-as-the-eu-referendum-c/

That's not to say the FTSE 250 hasn't been lower in the past 12 months, but it's still taken a hit

 

[Mozza]

They would need if they want to be part of a top-10 market and also has access to the whole world. UK is one of the leaders in global trade, even if we simply won't count the EC part.
Nope, most of people will remain in UK, sure some will move, they would need to buff up the EC presence, but 20 years from now, London still would be far ahead of Frankfurt. Because of the USA, Arabs, Asia, they will not move the majority of their resources from London for various of reasons, you won;t get the same level of excellence in Frankfurt.
Also London can offer a better deal. Don't forget that EC policy on financial services is pretty much shit. Ask anybody, they all tell you that EC sucks and that is why financial power shift to other regions, London had some exceptions but they were still were somewhat limited.
What "access"? You do know that UK has a huge trade deficit with the rest of EC?

Guardian is hugely pro-remain i believe, right?
So here it is:
UK trade deficit with EU hits new record


So you need to check your facts, it's not UK access to EC market that is bigger and more important UK actually buys much more from EC partners than it sells them.

Anyone who does business in Londom because we are part of the EU moves to Frankfurt.

45% of our exports go to the EU, we represent 13% of theirs, we will be way more desperate for access

 

[Mozza]

As I said there are very good and practical reasons to help Poland. That doesn't mean the right to work in a much richer country for every Polish should be part of that.

The point was that you shouldn't call people lazy just because they don't accept worse standards in labour because people from poor countries do.


It's putting pressure on wages and job security. That does mean that allthough there's win in both Poland and the UK, it doesn't mean there's win win all around because it's the British haves and the Polish have nots who win at the expense of the British have nots.

As this freedom is unlimited within the EU and it's an EU dogma, the EU has taken immigration and any regulation of it out of democratic control. And it's negative effects for the native have nots can't be countered with national laws. In theory they might, but no country in the EU has managed to get them payed to the nation's standards. Often it is not allowed by the EU for the national authorities to do more checks on European foreigners and their subcontracters. The EU is starting investigations against member states who try to maintain their minimum standards, and not against member states who facilitate letterbox companies to avoid those standards. And you're always going to lose out with regulation when you're up against the laws of supply and demand.

I have no problem with freedom of Labour laws, if money can be shifted around why can't people. Or is thst right just going to be the domain of wealthy people?

I don't call those people lazy. The Mail and The Sun have been delivered victory by the very people they attack every week

We have a minimum wage, its ok. Working conditions are the domain of UK domestic law, don't blame the EU

 

[Manny]

They would need if they want to be part of a top-10 market and also has access to the whole world. UK is one of the leaders in global trade, even if we simply won't count the EC part.

I said companies will still maintain a presence in London to reap any benefits, but I expect the bulk of the roles (where possible) will be moved to other European cities. Like what @rpitroda said.

Nope, most of people will remain in UK, sure some will move, they would need to buff up the EC presence, but 20 years from now, London still would be far ahead of Frankfurt. Because of the USA, Arabs, Asia, they will not move the majority of their resources from London for various of reasons, you won;t get the same level of excellence in Frankfurt.
Also London can offer a better deal. Don't forget that EC policy on financial services is pretty much shit. Ask anybody, they all tell you that EC sucks and that is why financial power shift to other regions, London had some exceptions but they were still were somewhat limited.

I think this is incredibly naive. The ease of conducting business and profit will win out. If you needed a European HQ or a single office, would you have it in the EU or London?

In terms of talent, I would expect the top talent would be happy to move out of London to continue earning their high salaries if that was the only option.

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

I have no problem with freedom of Labour laws, if money can be shifted around why can't people. Or is thst right just going to be the domain of wealthy people?

I don't call those people lazy. The Mail and The Sun have been delivered victory by the very people they attack every week

We have a minimum wage, its ok. Working conditions are the domain of UK domestic law, don't blame the EU

No, working conditions are also the domain of supply and demand. And as I explained, every domestic law in the EU fails to deal with underpayed immigrants. The right to work everywhere in de EU is serving the wealthy people, not the common people. That's why it shouldn't be a surprise there are no exceptions possible, while the right to shift money around, to sell products or services in foreign EU member states knows quite a few exceptions. There's also a difference in the way the EU applies the rules, and it allows countries to applie and enforce their own domestic laws.

 

[Mozza]

No, working conditions are also the domain of supply and demand. And as I explained, every domestic law in the EU fails to deal with underpayed immigrants. The right to work everywhere in de EU is serving the wealthy people, not the common people. That's why it shouldn't be a surprise there are no exceptions possible, while the right to shift money around, to sell products or services in foreign EU member states knows quite a few exceptions. There's also a difference in the way the EU applies the rules, and it allows countries to applie and enforce their own domestic laws.

Working conditions are also a matter of legislature. The minimum wage is a working condition. 20 days holiday a year is slso. Temp workers being treated the same as permenant employers another. Its not just a matter of supply and demand.

If we fail to police this adequately thats our fault

 

[berbatrick]

No, firstly I'm not for taking from the haves, but for have nots to become haves, at least a bit, and prevent the haves from exploiting them. I don't believe in redistributing money between citizens as a goal, you've got to get the distribution right first time. For example by balancing supply and demand of labour.

Secondly, I do think the British government should be there for the interest of the British people, not just the British haves, certainly not the haves around the world and not for the Polish have nots either. Of course there are very practical reasons to help the Polish a bit on their way, but there's no problem living in a country that has just a lower living standard and lower cost of living, especially not when the economy is growing fast and it's getting better every year. Poverty is relative and just lower cost of living is not poverty at all.


And if you get people from Bangladesh or Central Africa in, they will work 18 hours a day for 10 pounds just as long as they can send 2 pounds home. But that's not what century's of prosperity have been about, has it? If the work has to be done in the UK and is paid for in the UK, it should meet UK standards for UK people and if you can't find UK people who want to do it you pay too little or the work is too hard, or a bit of both. As an employer you have to adapt and organize it differently, make it easier work and maybe even innovate to do so, and if an immigrant happens to get that job, it should be a job to British standards for him or her too. You want to go back to medieval standards because some people in the world still are and you can fly them in? Or you want to go back to 1950's standards in work and pay just because the Polish are in a situation that they will accept it and because the pay is much better for them compared to their cost of living?

Uncontrolled mass immigration serves a few haves and a lot of Polish people, and not the people your government is there to serve. You need democracy to make sure the government serves all of it's people and that's why the EU is antidemocratic and will persist in that. No, it's not getting 'more democratic', it's getting less democratic in the sense that it's citizens get less power over how they are governed every single year. Uncontrolled mass immigration is just one of the many things the EU does to transfer wealth from the have nots to the haves, as almost any undemocratic government has done in the times before democracy. It's also democracy in the different member states that has brought the wealth and peace that the EU now tries to claim as it's own achievement and threatens to take away as punishment, just because it has the power to.

Do you think there would be these problems: "a vast influx" of East European immigrants, collasping labour standards, if, while keeping border open, the UK govt decided to outlaw the overuse and abuse of 0-hour contracts, and pushed for a living wage? If protections were in place, net migration would be lower because, presumably, created jobs would be lower. With no migration and the same regressive laws (which will probably be the situation now), labour will continue to suffer.

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Working conditions are also a matter of legislature. The minimum wage is a working condition. 20 days holiday a year is slso. Temp workers being treated the same as permenant employers another. Its not just a matter of supply and demand.

If we fail to police this adequately thats our fault

Appearantly not, because every member state fails to police it adequately and the EU is frustrating adequate policing by beeing strict on the Western-European member states that try, and not beeing strict on the Eastern-European member states that facilitate avoiding or breaking those national laws about wages for example.

For example in Belgium there are 10.000 trucker jobs 'taken' by Romanians and Bulgarians etc, and not because they do their job better because their licenses are not at the same level and they cause a lot of accidents on Belgian roads. And if they try to police them and find out if they are paid enough they have to get through a jungle of of Eastern European letterbox company's and get in trouble with the EU for singling out Eastern Europeans. Those 10.000 unemployement benefits have to be paid by other Belgian truck drivers and other Belgians of course, and the money earned from those jobs in Belgium is spent in Eastern Europe. In the building sector the numbers are even worse. So that's not really helping normal Belgians in any way, not their income and not their job security, and not even their security on the road. So they are probably going on strike again very soon and block the roads, but then it's for the national government to solve the problem that is created by the EU.

They don't ask for an advantage in their own competing for Belgian transport jobs, they just want to compete on a level playing field. The EU doesn't allow that, because the EU wants as much pressure on wages and working conditions as possible.

Do you think there would be these problems: "a vast influx" of East European immigrants, collasping labour standards, if, while keeping border open, the UK govt decided to outlaw the overuse and abuse of 0-hour contracts, and pushed for a living wage? If protections were in place, net migration would be lower because, presumably, created jobs would be lower. With no migration and the same regressive laws (which will probably be the situation now), labour will continue to suffer.

Unless supply and demand are balanced of course, then you don't need much laws. But I think England has always been more right wing than North West Europe when it comes to income inequality and labour conditions, and that's why it isn't as clear to the English that the EU is a huge force against the income, working hours and job security for the working class.

Even if not frustrated and sabotaged by the EU, I think there's only so much pressure you can effectively police against. The living wage in the UK would still be extremely high for a Bulgarian compared to his cost of living in Bulgaria. That's where the pressure comes from. In that sense it's an artificial disturbance of the labour market that serves the rich in poor countries at the cost of the poor in rich countries.

 

[theyneverlearn]

Does A Leave Vote Definitely Mean A Brexit?

http://news.sky.com/story/1717492/does-a-leave-vote-definitely-mean-a-brexit

Interesting points made.

 

[Mozza]

Appearantly not, because every member state fails to police it adequately and the EU is frustrating adequate policing by beeing strict on the Western-European member states that try, and not beeing strict on the Eastern-European member states that facilitate avoiding or breaking those national laws about wages for example.

For example in Belgium there are 10.000 trucker jobs 'taken' by Romanians and Bulgarians etc, and not because they do their job better because their licenses are not at the same level and they cause a lot of accidents on Belgian roads. And if they try to police them and find out if they are paid enough they have to get through a jungle of of Eastern European letterbox company's and get in trouble with the EU for singling out Eastern Europeans. Those 10.000 unemployement benefits have to be paid by other Belgian truck drivers and other Belgians of course, and the money earned from those jobs in Belgium is spent in Eastern Europe. In the building sector the numbers are even worse. So that's not really helping normal Belgians in any way, not their income and not their job security, and not even their security on the road. So they are probably going on strike again very soon and block the roads, but then it's for the national government to solve the problem that is created by the EU.

They don't ask for an advantage in their own competing for Belgian transport jobs, they just want to compete on a level playing field. The EU doesn't allow that, because the EU wants as much pressure on wages and working conditions as possible.

Its up to Belgium to work out an employment system that allows them to police such activities

The EU does not want as much pressure on wages and working conditions as possible, they wouldn't have passed the social chapter if that was the case. They wouldn't give temp workers the same rights as perms. You have seen the problem but have the wrong solution

 

[Jerch]

So making a thread for laughing at Britain on a British forum was not the best idea I suppose

So there are my thoughts on this topic from that thread:

So you guys just voted to leave EU. But why? As little as I followed the debate you did because you want to stop giving money to EU and stop foreign people coming in the country and stealing you jobs...

but it looks like British economy has lost way more money in one day than you would pay to EU in many many years. And did you ever think that foreign people are coming in your country because there are jobs British people on one side don't want to do or on the other side are not qualified enough for it.

But no worries there are countries like Switzerland which are doing just fine without EU... well yeah but they still have open borders and pay a shitload of money to EU to be part of EU economy and you just voted against it. So you can't make those coutries as an example.
But no worries, EU will surely give you the best deals and you will get the best of two world of course. Just because they will want to show every country that is considering quitting EU that it is just fine if you do it
I think EU will make such a great example out of this that no country will ever again consider doing this.

So what closed borders will mean for Britain? I am no expert but more taxes in importing and exporting comes to my mind (oh did I saw in one thread that leaving EU will mean less taxes), also companies leaving Britain because of those taxes and because lack of people who are prepared to do the low payed jobs (hm those stupid immigrant workers) resulting in less well paid jobs you all love. Of course don't forget your beloved pound taking a hit in a process. But it will be ok because you will not have to pay money to EU anymore, money which you more or less get back anyway.

But all this will make Great Britain "great" again. If only this wouldn't fuelled Scotland to reconsider again if leaving Britain would be better for them and this time I thin their choice will be to leave. Then Great Britain won't be as Great anymore I suppose.

I always thought Britain is a country full of reasonable/smart/intelligent people and country with quit good politicians. But this referendum made me reconsider this because politicians did enabled this referendum and you people actually voted to leave.

But I am still wondering, what was 52% thinking when you voted to leave?

On more serious note, maybe second referendum is not such a bad idea because reality is hitting in and I think next time the result would be a lot different.

I just want to add that I think this result absolutely means Britain is out of the EU. Looking at the response EU people gave to the result you wonder if they are not infact happy you guys voted as you did. Britain was always one leg in and one leg out (keeping pound for example) and always first to moan about EU politics. And even if Britain is/was second biggest economy in EU it looks like they are not worried about it because Britain will have to make some deals with EU about open economy because without it Britain is really fecked and I have a feeling EU people know how they will hit Britain with those deals to get even more net money (money that Britain will not get back as they did with most of the money they paid now) as they did before. It is really lose/lose situation for Britain now.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

So making a thread for laughing at Britain on a British forum was not the best idea I suppose

So there are my thoughts on this topic from that thread:


I just want to add that I think this result absolutely means Britain is out of the EU. Looking at the response EU people gave to the result you wonder if they are not infact happy you guys voted as you did. Britain was always one leg in and one leg out (keeping pound for example) and always first to moan about EU politics. And even if Britain is/was second biggest economy in EU it looks like they are not worried about it because Britain will have to make some deals with EU about open economy because without it Britain is really fecked and I have a feeling EU people know how they will hit Britain with those deals to get even more net money (money that Britain will not get back as they did with most of the money they paid now) as they did before. It is really lose/lose situation for Britain now.

I think you are spelling Jerk wrong as well.

 

[Jerch]

I think you are spelling Jerk wrong as well.

Well you showed a middle finger to all other EU countries, I think you should be prepared that people from those countries laugh at you when this decision backfire.

 

[Enigma_87]

Dunno if has been posted

 

[RedSky]

Dunno if has been posted

They've done a few of those, must be a parody. Still she does it well.

 

[Carolina Red]

Dunno if has been posted

Yeah... I sincerely hope that is faked.

 

[berbatrick]

Dunno if has been posted

Parody, surely.

 

[Rado_N]

Just been told a girl from a mate's office vote out 'because Katie Price voted out'.

Words fail me.

 

[Silva]

Still haven't met anyone who voted leave. Could be worth starting a campaign to make Oxford a city-state. Tourism and the Unis alone would probably bring in enough cash to support the local economy.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

It does.

Unrelatedly, we need a lot more of your sort, right now. Those who voted for this for genuine reasons, as opposed to those who voted for it out of hate. Be vocal.

Why, thank you. Although i've struggled to stick with being a member of a political party, and there aren't any suitable ones available at present. So i try to make my voice heard through donations, crowd funding sites, petitions e.t.c.

However there is so much frustration and bitterness prevailing at present, and i think it will be some days before calmer heads begin to assert themselves. A friend of mine who works for a start-up i the City voted Leave, and he didn't feel comfortable even admitting this to colleagues (such was the atmosphere on Friday).

Maybe you watch this programme, i don't know, but i thought ti we3nt to provide some sense of a broader perspective: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07ht93z

 

[Skills]

They've done a few of those, must be a parody. Still she does it well.

Yeah it's a parody. There's loads of them

 

[Sigma]

Just been told a girl from a mate's office vote out 'because Katie Price voted out'.

Words fail me.

Feck. My. Life.

 

[Dirty Schwein]

 

[Vilev]

Anyone who does business in Londom because we are part of the EU moves to Frankfurt.

No, just the portion. I doubt it will even be a half. And if all market, trading and passport, clearing stuff gets sorted through it might be no more than 15%. Some jobs will be lost for sure. But then some jobs will be gained, cause of the other stuff.

45% of our exports go to the EU, we represent 13% of theirs, we will be way more desperate for access

13% that's including UK? I think so, i've seen this number before, it's a EU exports to UK to total EU exports. Though i am not sure. Not the best way to calculate it obviously.
But anyway these percentages hardly matter, what matters much more is than UK buys way more from EU than sells them, the trade deficit is way over 50 billions, so if all the tariffs will revert to WTO then it will be EC who will be hit harder. Sure one can point out that the whole of EC is actually bigger than UK, so a fallout would not be as critical. But the thing is, it still will hit hard and it's vital to remember, than EC is not a country. It's a block and right now they have several very small okay economies like northern countries and then only one good economy, that's Germany. France is in much worse shape than UK is. Italy and Spain are in post-recession blues with economies that hardly work.
Basically EC always benefited Germany that is an export oriented economy with strong production, it has trade surpluses with almost every EC country. And german products are good, if they will have restricted access to UK market, first of all people will still buy them, then germans can sell their goods to other countries. It's a not so big deal for them. But what about the rest of EC? Many of them are very much dependent on UK market, because it's one of the few in EC were they do have significant trade surpluses, to compensate for deficits in other places.

Spoiler: Germany exports to EC members and Intra-EC trade

Note that UK is the only big economy that is the least EU in terms of intra EU trade. You can't argue with number, sure EU is a major partner and it will stay that way, but UK over time moves away and away from EU trade. And right now, in 2016 the single market actually provides better opportunity for other european companies to export into UK rather than UK exporting to EU.

 

[Vilev]

I said companies will still maintain a presence in London to reap any benefits, but I expect the bulk of the roles (where possible) will be moved to other European cities. Like what @rpitroda said.

Sure some will move, but it won;t be much and then many will go to UK, because it will have much better financial management. And without EC, it can focus on unique strong qualities and challenge HK and Singapore on their own terms. See below for explanation.

I think this is incredibly naive. The ease of conducting business and profit will win out. If you needed a European HQ or a single office, would you have it in the EU or London?

Of course the ease of conducting business and profit will win. Now you need to see whether financial services are situated in core EC countries or in UK, Swiss (that's not a part of EC either and similar deal for UK can be arranged). Answer this, if it's so good to have a HQ in EC and being in EC is what matters then why all major fin center are actually not in EC? Why Swiss and UK won against Germany, France? And then ask yourself this, over the last 10-15 years did EC fin centers increased their influence in the world or decreased it?

In terms of talent, I would expect the top talent would be happy to move out of London to continue earning their high salaries if that was the only option.

High salaries. Exactly. And with socialistic EU approach, these clueless bonus and salary caps EU actually loosing out on financial services. And don't forget UK was the voice of reason, well because financial services account for a lot of their economy of course. If EC have had their way they might have imposed completely moronic measures like introducing financial taxes, damaging the sectors advantages against others.
So actually in terms of policy UK given their dependency on financial services might be better off. Some of the politics of EU post-2008 is already has been heavily criticized by the City and major banks.

 

[dannyrhinos89]

Still haven't met anyone who voted leave. Could be worth starting a campaign to make Oxford a city-state. Tourism and the Unis alone would probably bring in enough cash to support the local economy.

Up here in leeds its opposite, through work I come into contact with probably 50 people a day give or take and I've not come across one that voted remain.

 

[Skills]

 

[Ventura]

So they voted "Leave the Commonwealth and the UN"?

 

[Sigma]

If I was the reporter there I would have just laughed. Why don't these reporters call them out on their stupidity?

 

[redshaw]

FTSE 250 still seems pretty unhappy to me.

No doubt. FTSE 100 is more international. FTSE 250 can move 2000 points in no time. The money lost can be restored just as quick.

So you guys just voted to leave EU. But why? As little as I followed the debate you did because you want to stop giving money to EU and stop foreign people coming in the country and stealing you jobs...

but it looks like British economy has lost way more money in one day than you would pay to EU in many many years. And did you ever think that foreign people are coming in your country because there are jobs British people on one side don't want to do or on the other side are not qualified enough for it.

The argument of why vote to save on the EU when you just lost years of payments. It was inevitable the shockwaves would do that the day after. This value can be restored easily or not.

The big question is can anyone offer a plan to ease fears. Soon as that happens all the money comes back.

I'm not for Leave, but pointing at the stock market a day after the referendum is not worthwhile or some haha moment. We need to look at it when the decisions are announced which could be catastrophic or not.

 

[Carolina Red]

"The movement of people in Europe, fair enough. But not from Africa, Syria, Iraq, everywhere else. It's all wrong."

I was unaware that those places were EU members.

 

[Vilev]

I work in London, and many of my clients have already begun processes of shifting elements of their base to EU- not just Frankfurt but also Luxambourg. In particular, I have close friends who work in the banks and they've already had calls to staff detailing plans to move some of their business to Frankfurt. These are US institutions too, might I add.

Long story short, the evidence already proves your theory incorrect.

My theory is not that none of the jobs will be lost or moved. I've said it won't be the majority of them or even half or even a significant part like 30%. Some will move, sure because companies will need EU center of operations, but most will remain and given how further negotiation go some of the leaving ones might return and new ones will come as well.

Read my previous post. And ask your friends how do they rate and what do they think about current, post-08 EU policy on financial sector. Most i am sure will tell you that it's been bad. With all these FTT and various bonuses, salary caps does not help competing with Asia, USA. And that's a kind of obvious thing. London is a huge financial center, Paris, Frankfurt are not, not nearly as much, countries that rely on financial services such as Luxembourg do not any real power against Germany, France and the rest. And for Germany a FTT does make some sense, it's a completely different economy to UK. I think Sweden also a export oriented production based, highly socialistic economy introduced FTT although they were not successful but in theory it could work in these industrial countries. In post-industrial ones and UK is highly post-industrial it would not only not work, it could actually completely derail and destroy them. So actually independent UK, with independent policy that accounts for a specific UK interest could benefit in the long run. It could be damaging as well. For example now without EC there is no telling if the new Tory government would not actually increase UK dependence on City and give London a free reign. But that's all remains to be seen.

Interested what you do for a living? Not a sarcastic backhand comment, genuine question.

Venture capital. I went from more of a technical expertise in life sciences, i was actually in bioinformatics, to a more general management. The last two years in my current position i primary deal with investments strategies and GR. A lot of my work is international, so i travel quite a lot.