Brexit or Britin

[Hoboh]

And just who does a dodgy financial market affect with it's daily up's and down's? I still get paid, live in the same house, shop at the same shops, ride my bike down the same roads etc. The people who suffer are those who buy into the mythical land of the magic money tree were little, if anything, has any true value.

Aye, the crash that occurred in 2008 hardly got talked about at all. No impact on anyone. It's not as if it's now 8 years later and still being talked about, now is it? No impact on pension funds or owt, stagnating the house prices etc.

Hardly worth a mention.

Sorry mate, but 2008 did not affect those who didn't pile their cash into all the get rich overnight schemes that banks and other people, pension funds? were selling at the time.
I always work off the 'if it looks to good to be true, it probably isn't' theory, (admittedly I got caught by a computer distribution scheme once that really I shouldn't have got involved in and lost some cash, but that wasn't so much greed as some tw*t of an ex pal!).
Banks and the financial system has been over hauled since then and that was the problem, a rampant deregulated financial sector who bordered on criminal, not a UK EU exit.

Christ alive. It affected millions of people. People lost jobs, income went down, house prices crashed.

The point being that an EU exit could quite feasibly lead to a very similar path.

You mean they got a little closer to reality.

[Hoboh]

GDP would be 6% lower after 15 years if UK adopted Canadian model, Rudd says


Amber Rudd, the energy secretary, is speaking now.

She says she is looking at the final alternative scenario the Treasury has modelled - a Canada-style free trade agreement.

She says the Canada deal runs to over 1,500 pages. More than 800 pages relate to exemptions.

When it comes into force, it may work well for Canada and the EU. But it would not necessarily work for the UK, she says.

She says the Canada deal offers some liberalisation on services. But Canada sells only around one tenth the services to the EU that the UK does.

And I'd bet that the EU only sells about one tenth of services to Canada than it does to the UK, next.

[Hoboh]

And here it is

GDP would be 7.5% lower if UK adopted WTO model, Crabb says


Stephen Crabb, the work and pensions secretary, is speaking now.

He is talking about the second alternative model - relying on WTO rules to reduce trade barriers with the EU.

But he says under WTO rules the UK would face 36% tariffs on diary products when trading with the EU, 12% tariffs on fish, 12% tariffs on clothes, and 10% tariffs on cars.

Get your new VW, Audi, BMW, Merc quick, THEY MIGHT GO UP 10% or more, I'm sure their bosses will like that and the French farmers will be demanding more subsidies to cope with increased tariffs.

[BWFC_Insane]

You mean they got a little closer to reality.

What? Who defines reality beyond the market? I don't think there is an arbitrary "house worth in reality" measuring body...And even if there were how much consolation would that be to the young couple with a baby who buy their house in 2007 and then find themselves in huge amounts of negative equity a year later? Mind you'd probably have had them sell the baby for a dose of reality....

It was very painful for many people, in the private and public sectors. Lots lost jobs. Wages were supressed, services cut.

If I look I'm sure you will have been moaning about it. To try and argue that a recession is "well, not that bad really" is absolutely bizarre.

[Worthy4England]

GDP would be 6% lower after 15 years if UK adopted Canadian model, Rudd says


Amber Rudd, the energy secretary, is speaking now.

She says she is looking at the final alternative scenario the Treasury has modelled - a Canada-style free trade agreement.

She says the Canada deal runs to over 1,500 pages. More than 800 pages relate to exemptions.

When it comes into force, it may work well for Canada and the EU. But it would not necessarily work for the UK, she says.

She says the Canada deal offers some liberalisation on services. But Canada sells only around one tenth the services to the EU that the UK does.

And I'd bet that the EU only sells about one tenth of services to Canada than it does to the UK, next.

Oh so that'd be a deal resolving 10% of what we trade between each other - that took 7 years to get to? And we're going to do it in 2.

Next.

[Hoboh]

You mean they got a little closer to reality.

What? Who defines reality beyond the market? I don't think there is an arbitrary "house worth in reality" measuring body...And even if there were how much consolation would that be to the young couple with a baby who buy their house in 2007 and then find themselves in huge amounts of negative equity a year later? Mind you'd probably have had them sell the baby for a dose of reality....

It was very painful for many people, in the private and public sectors. Lots lost jobs. Wages were supressed, services cut.

If I look I'm sure you will have been moaning about it. To try and argue that a recession is "well, not that bad really" is absolutely bizarre.

Do some research into actually how much houses cost to build.

I'm not arguing recession is 'not to bad', I'm saying a UK exit is a totally different event from a recession, the word is being thrown around to frighten people.
It is no more certain than a high yield nuclear device hitting London tomorrow from Russia.

[Hoboh]

GDP would be 6% lower after 15 years if UK adopted Canadian model, Rudd says


Amber Rudd, the energy secretary, is speaking now.

She says she is looking at the final alternative scenario the Treasury has modelled - a Canada-style free trade agreement.

She says the Canada deal runs to over 1,500 pages. More than 800 pages relate to exemptions.

When it comes into force, it may work well for Canada and the EU. But it would not necessarily work for the UK, she says.

She says the Canada deal offers some liberalisation on services. But Canada sells only around one tenth the services to the EU that the UK does.

And I'd bet that the EU only sells about one tenth of services to Canada than it does to the UK, next.

Oh so that'd be a deal resolving 10% of what we trade between each other - that took 7 years to get to? And we're going to do it in 2.

Next.

No, it's just bull from a failed politician.

[Worthy4England]

So how long will it take to re-negotiate all our trade agreements then? Just in years will do - no need for exact number of months...

[Hoboh]

Q: [From the Guardian’s Anushka Asthana]. Do you accept Andrea Leadsom’s point that you are not looking at other factors, like the impact of immigration on public services? And are you calling Tory colleagues economically illiterate?

Osborne says it is legitimate for Leave campaigner to say that some advantages might be worth the economic cost. But they need to accept that there will be economic costs, he says.

He does not answer the point about whether he was referring to Conservative colleagues.

And that is it. The Osborne speech and Q&A are over.

[Worthy4England]

Are you having hot flushes or something?

[BWFC_Insane]

You mean they got a little closer to reality.

What? Who defines reality beyond the market? I don't think there is an arbitrary "house worth in reality" measuring body...And even if there were how much consolation would that be to the young couple with a baby who buy their house in 2007 and then find themselves in huge amounts of negative equity a year later? Mind you'd probably have had them sell the baby for a dose of reality....

It was very painful for many people, in the private and public sectors. Lots lost jobs. Wages were supressed, services cut.

If I look I'm sure you will have been moaning about it. To try and argue that a recession is "well, not that bad really" is absolutely bizarre.

Do some research into actually how much houses cost to build.

I'm not arguing recession is 'not to bad', I'm saying a UK exit is a totally different event from a recession, the word is being thrown around to frighten people.
It is no more certain than a high yield nuclear device hitting London tomorrow from Russia.

Seriously, do you have any grasp at all on how our economy works? Like at all?

And secondly, exiting the EU, it is almost certain, that there will be some market turbulence, and there is a chance that could lead to recession. To deny that as a possibility is silly. Though not as silly as trying to make out that recession is no bad thing using the examples you've gone with. If you tried to argue that a potential period of pain is worth the end result, that might have made more sense....

[Hoboh]

Are you having hot flushes or something?

No, merely pointing out the weakness of all the 'In people camp', the one's who you fall for hook line and sinker.

So how long will it take to re-negotiate all our trade agreements then? Just in years will do - no need for exact number of months

Longer than it will take for the Eu to introduce TTip I would concede.

[Hoboh]

You mean they got a little closer to reality.

What? Who defines reality beyond the market? I don't think there is an arbitrary "house worth in reality" measuring body...And even if there were how much consolation would that be to the young couple with a baby who buy their house in 2007 and then find themselves in huge amounts of negative equity a year later? Mind you'd probably have had them sell the baby for a dose of reality....

It was very painful for many people, in the private and public sectors. Lots lost jobs. Wages were supressed, services cut.

If I look I'm sure you will have been moaning about it. To try and argue that a recession is "well, not that bad really" is absolutely bizarre.

Do some research into actually how much houses cost to build.

I'm not arguing recession is 'not to bad', I'm saying a UK exit is a totally different event from a recession, the word is being thrown around to frighten people.
It is no more certain than a high yield nuclear device hitting London tomorrow from Russia.

Seriously, do you have any grasp at all on how our economy works? Like at all?

And secondly, exiting the EU, it is almost certain, that there will be some market turbulence, and there is a chance that could lead to recession. To deny that as a possibility is silly. Though not as silly as trying to make out that recession is no bad thing using the examples you've gone with. If you tried to argue that a potential period of pain is worth the end result, that might have made more sense....

Seriously, you being a good old socialist type think that our economy should be based on boom and bust house prices?

And secondly, exiting the EU, it is almost certain, that there will be some market turbulence, and there is a chance that could lead to recession. To deny that as a possibility is silly

There will be some adjustments and ups and downs but Armageddon? No, and that is what Dodgy Dave and Gideon are trying to sell, because it benefits the nation? No fcuking chance, because it benefits them, their pals and a few multinationals.

[BWFC_Insane]

^^What I think or what I like and what the reality is, are entirely different things.

[Worthy4England]

There will be some adjustments and ups and downs but Armageddon? No, and that is what Dodgy Dave and Gideon are trying to sell, because it benefits the nation? No fcuking chance, because it benefits them, their pals and a few multinationals.

Aye - I think I've seen Boris out selling the Big Issue too. Farage used to be a commodities broker. Hannan bought up on mummy and daddy's farm in Bolivia before attending Marlborough college. We had Bedwetter's view from "Woodford" - a fund manager. IDS married to the daughter of the 5th Baron Cottesloe - lives in £1m pad given to them by father in law.

Need I go on? - no self interests there - honest, not a one....they're just in it for the good of the country.

Don't be so ridiculous.

[Lord Kangana]

Haven't loads of the Europhobes got backgrounds in finance?

[Worthy4England]

Haven't loads of the Europhobes got backgrounds in finance?

I dunno - but to suggest that one side is full of self interest whilst the other is a walking collection of Mother Theresa's - bizarre.

I think Hobes might have had too much EU Coffee this morning. It'll cost him twice as much, should we exit. (I just made that bit up)....

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Haven't loads of the Europhobes got backgrounds in finance?

More money to be made in turmoil and no interfering from them Eurocrats is my guess.

[Prufrock]

It may surprise some but I hadn't made my mind up for sure which way I was going to vote. I've always leaned in and was likely to vote that way but I was open to being convinced. The onus very much is on "Out" to win the argument though. I've heard nothing! An utterly nonsense sovereignty argument (we're having a bloody referendum; if we didn't have sovereignty, we couldn't do that!) and arguments over process. If your best argument to win a referendum you've been banging on about for 20 years or more is that the other side have had an extra leaflet than you, I'm not convinced.

It's made harder by the way news has changed with the internet. It's impossible to find out any real facts. There are loads of stories saying it costs us£x, and others saying we gain £y. How on earth Joe Bloggs is supposed to work out what's what I don't know.

Again though, the onus is on out. If one side are saying we'll all lose our jobs and catch on fire if we leave, and the other side are saying we'll all lose our jobs and catch on fire if we don't, then I think most people will think, "well, I've *got* a job now, and I'm not actually on fire, so probably stay".

[BWFC_Insane]

It may surprise some but I hadn't made my mind up for sure which way I was going to vote. I've always leaned in and was likely to vote that way but I was open to being convinced. The onus very much is on "Out" to win the argument though. I've heard nothing! An utterly nonsense sovereignty argument (we're having a bloody referendum; if we didn't have sovereignty, we couldn't do that!) and arguments over process. If your best argument to win a referendum you've been banging on about for 20 years or more is that the other side have had an extra leaflet than you, I'm not convinced.

It's made harder by the way news has changed with the internet. It's impossible to find out any real facts. There are loads of stories saying it costs us£x, and others saying we gain £y. How on earth Joe Bloggs is supposed to work out what's what I don't know.

Again though, the onus is on out. If one side are saying we'll all lose our jobs and catch on fire if we leave, and the other side are saying we'll all lose our jobs and catch on fire if we don't, then I think most people will think, "well, I've *got* a job now, and I'm not actually on fire, so probably stay".

Aye, this exactly. I'm similar in basically thinking probably best to be in, but there are elements of being in I'm not hugely keen on just like Jezza. But on balance I'd need to be convinced that voting out was in our best interests.

Not just the nonsense "it costs *insert made up amount* per week, so lets pull out" arguments that have been bandied around. Or the pretence that an exit has no risk and everything will be fine and dandy. The out campaign's inability to make a coherent and sensible argument that isn't "year but eurocrats innit", or some sort of little Englander complex, pushes me more to vote in.