Re house prices...seanT gets it, but I cannot believe the economic illiteracy of the others. Every recession we have is accompanied by house price falls. Negative equity is not a good thing for the economy. Banks restricting lending is not a good thing for the economy. People worried about their futures is not good for the economy. In fact a house price crash is a terrible thing for the economy.
Brexiters- can you really be this thick , aside from being nihilistic, reactionary and populist
Oh, by Britain's wealth you meant bricks and mortar.
London will be the most effected and the market is well up in recent years. It can afford a small decrease.
TheWhiteRabbit, London will be the most "effected", really?? For a gentleman of your level of overeducation
I had a DoS at Cambridge who looked like a little bit of her died inside every time she saw one of two mistakes: effected/affected and practice/practise. She had tolerant disdain of any other slip. But those two brought out a deadened look in her eyes that I can only describe as "whatever is the world coming to - I want to get off, preferably 50 years ago."
My big bugbear is the inquiry/enquiry one.
Then, for UK vs US English, it is the use of 'momentarily'. "The plane will be landing momentarily" "Well, I hope it lands long enough for me to get off."
Agree with those, plus its and it's, and disinterested vs uninterested.
Oh, and the way here they almost always spell capitOl with an O, even if they shouldn't.
Another irritating thing, on the BBC World Service I notice in particular, is that when asked a question, the responder will frequently start the reply with the word "So, ..."
I think the "start all responses with a so" comes from media training. I think trainers encourage people to start with "so" because it sounds more purposeful than "umm"! But it also makes it very easy to deflect a question, but still sound like you're actually making an effort to answer it.
Again, for all that I am flapping around like a headless chicken on crystal meth (and I am, it's what I do), I am the only one here proposing solutions. Everyone else is either saying Brexit is Bad, and not much else, or just pretending all is fine - which it clearly fucking isn't.
Thank God for SeanT is all I can say. If he weren't proposing solutions we would be REALLY fucked.
The problem I have is that the solution is staring us in the face: full membership of the EU. We don't HAVE to be so obstinate. We could say, OK we miscalculated. We all do that more often we would like. So at least put membership back on the table. But that is a question for Leavers. If a proportion think, yeah there is something in that, it will happen. But if they don't it's Plan B, to the extent you can call it a plan, along with the consequent unemployment and other fallout.
Ignore the voters? That is labour party leadership material right there....
A poll today in the Standard says a sizeable chunk of Leave voters have changed their mind, and that Remain would win a comfortable majority were the referendum rerun. Make of that what you will.
Re house prices...seanT gets it, but I cannot believe the economic illiteracy of the others. Every recession we have is accompanied by house price falls. Negative equity is not a good thing for the economy. Banks restricting lending is not a good thing for the economy. People worried about their futures is not good for the economy. In fact a house price crash is a terrible thing for the economy.
Brexiters- can you really be this thick , aside from being nihilistic, reactionary and populist
Oh, by Britain's wealth you meant bricks and mortar.
London will be the most effected and the market is well up in recent years. It can afford a small decrease.
TheWhiteRabbit, London will be the most "effected", really?? For a gentleman of your level of overeducation
I had a DoS at Cambridge who looked like a little bit of her died inside every time she saw one of two mistakes: effected/affected and practice/practise. She had tolerant disdain of any other slip. But those two brought out a deadened look in her eyes that I can only describe as "whatever is the world coming to - I want to get off, preferably 50 years ago."
My big bugbear is the inquiry/enquiry one.
Then, for UK vs US English, it is the use of 'momentarily'. "The plane will be landing momentarily" "Well, I hope it lands long enough for me to get off."
Agree with those, plus its and it's, and disinterested vs uninterested.
Oh, and the way here they almost always spell capitOl with an O, even if they shouldn't.
Another irritating thing, on the BBC World Service I notice in particular, is that when asked a question, the responder will frequently start the reply with the word "So, ..."
I think the "start all responses with a so" comes from media training. I think trainers encourage people to start with "so" because it sounds more purposeful than "umm"! But it also makes it very easy to deflect a question, but still sound like you're actually making an effort to answer it.
"... for all that I am flapping around like a headless chicken on crystal meth ..."
Well stop it. have a nice cup of tea, keep calm and carry on.
By the way, if you negotiate your book deals in the same way as you suggest the country should negotiate with the EU then you are considerably poorer than you should be.
LIKE!!!!
While one should always remember the alternate version of IF ...... If you can keep you head, while all about you/ Are losing theirs and blaming it on you ........ then you clearly have’t appreciated how serious the situation actually is!
However, we are not in a shooting war; we are almost certainly going to have to face from awkward times, and the world isn’t going to be how it was, but it’s highly unlikely that anyone else is going to die.
Well quite, Mr. Cole. There are three big lessons I have learned in my life, don't commit without a plan, things never look as bad in the morning, and hot, sweet tea is a sovereign remedy for anything bar a stomach wound.
Agree with the principles; many years ago I was taught that to fail to plan is to plan to fail. Not sure about the tea though; can’t stand the stuff!. Further, the sun is going to rise in the morning!
Mr. Cole, I presume you also remember, "Proper preparation and planning prevents piss poor performance."
Totally mystified over your attitude to tea though.
You don't seem to grasp how the UK economy is founded on house prices, and the confidence they bring. Yes a modest correction would be good. 10%?
What would that do?
And then there's the confidence thing. Rising house prices make homeowners feel happy and prosperous (even if it's bogus), falling house prices bring negative equity and retail slumps and the entire economy seizes up. We could be facing the worst case Brexit scenarios of a 5-10% drop in GDP.
10% is almost twice the drop we experienced after 2008.
I hope I'm wrong and it's just a modest correction, mainly in London and the SE, which would very arguably be a good thing. But no one knows.
The UK economy has been 'boosted' by high house prices in three ways:
ened was 1990-92, and saw house prices fall 40% in real terms, and unemployment double.
Well that's cheering.
And that's just the effect of house prices.
Add in the fall in inward investment, the decline of the City, the slowing economies of our post-Brexit neighbours, etc etc etc, and we could be looking at a 10-20% drop in GDP. Which is like the economic damage done by a mild civil war.
Fab!
But, as I keep saying, this is not inevitable. The fecking Tories have to admit all this, and go for EEA immediately, and stop the madness. Confidence will return, and quickly, if investors, homebuyers, bankers, know that not much will change, at least at first, as we keep all our economic ties with the EU.
I think we're looking at a price drop whatever happens, obviously it won't be as big if we stay in the single market, but I'd guess 20% for those of us in inner London is fair.
Does Mr Gove not see any of this, as he advocates leaving the single market?
Actually quite a sensible package from JM although I would like to see full blown FOM.
I think if the EU offers us EEA/single market but only with Free Movement we will just have to take it, sell it to the voters as an emergency stopgap. PM May can say to the people, quite honestly, that immigration is going to fall quickly, anyway, which it will, it always does in slumps. There won't be any UK jobs for EU nationals. They will stop coming.
At the same time take students out of the stats.
Totally agree with the proviso that idiots like you are required to pay the short-term costs of this fiasco till you're pushing up the daisies.
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
Re house prices...seanT gets it, but I cannot believe the economic illiteracy of the others. Every recession we have is accompanied by house price falls. Negative equity is not a good thing for the economy. Banks restricting lending is not a good thing for the economy. People worried about their futures is not good for the economy. In fact a house price crash is a terrible thing for the economy.
Brexiters- can you really be this thick , aside from being nihilistic, reactionary and populist
Oh, by Britain's wealth you meant bricks and mortar.
London will be the most effected and the market is well up in recent years. It can afford a small decrease.
TheWhiteRabbit, London will be the most "effected", really?? For a gentleman of your level of overeducation
I had a DoS at Cambridge who looked like a little bit of her died inside every time she saw one of two mistakes: effected/affected and practice/practise. She had tolerant disdain of any other slip. But those two brought out a deadened look in her eyes that I can only describe as "whatever is the world coming to - I want to get off, preferably 50 years ago."
Well, quite.
London will of course begin to manifest a distinct behavioural phenomenon derived from its subjective emotions.
Oh, wait, wrong again...
Let me have a third go
Heh! Hope you didn't mind the (good-natured) jibe.
Thinking back, "principle" vs "principal" genuinely upset her too.
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
You mean like the 60% of people - at least - in favour?
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
You mean like the 60% of people - at least - in favour?
No, I mean the people who thought they were voting for what the Leave campaign told them they were voting for, plus those who voted Remain but liked at least that aspect of what the Leave campaign promised them Leave would mean.
Mr. Llama, glad Accursed Kings got mentioned. Once I've finished what I'm currently on I'll check out a sample [may be a little while].
Mr. Dancer Book 1 of the series, The Iron King, is available on Kindle for £3.99. If you enjoy that the rest of the series is easily worth the money. If you don't it has cost you the price of a pint (well, given your are in leeds and depending where you drink, a pint and a bit).
It is a cracking read and given your penchant for writing about violent death, might give you some useful pointers about the use of poisons, as well treachery, skullduggery and general murderous intent.
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt announces complete ban on prescription sleeping pills as the NHS will now put Michael Gove's launch speech on-line .... once he's finished next Tuesday week ....
Homebuilders hard hit by Brexit - might damage their confidence going forward. One of @currystar posts on this pre-vote that started to change my mind on the whole caboodle.
If we really do need more homes then there will not be 40% falls in prices UK wide. We have an increase in demand that is still outstripping supply.
People go into the rented sector.
What a house price crash means is that the volume of houses being sold crashes. People are too sacred to buy. So that 500k that someone would have paid for a house with a 400k mortgage doesn't happen. That means there is 400k not slashing around in the real economy. Multiply that by many tens of thousands of times and you can see why a house price crash is terrible for a fragile UK economy. It effectively takes many billions out of the real economy, as well as hits the construction industry, as well as directly reduces tax intake through stamp duty, as well as hits associated industry sectors...solicitors etc.....
This scenario which is now happening in London and other affluent areas will spread outwards. This will be combined with foreign businesses who invest in the UK and have access to the common market reviewing their decisions. Add years of uncertainty and the odd political crisis and constitutional crisis.
Brexit is a monumental clusterfuck for Britain PLC.
The places like Ireland or Spain that popped their housing bubbles had a few hard years but are now growing quite quickly. Better or worse than the slow grind of stasis? Surely the jury is out?
Fox- we had a housing crash too in 2008, don't forget. I'd like to see how Spain and Ireland would like to have another one foisted on them now with their public finances scraping out of the depths.
Indeed - and here in Spain at least unemployment remains stratospheric with a very limited property price recovery that is now likely to go into reverse in the Costas as the British buyers disappear again.
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
You mean like the 60% of people - at least - in favour?
It's probably nearer 65% in favour of FOM, but assume Richard is arguing otherwise
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
Didn't know we had had an election on the subject. When did it take place?
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
You mean like the 60% of people - at least - in favour?
No, I mean the people who thought they were voting for what the Leave campaign told them they were voting for.
Of course those people who voted Leave and wanted to abolish FOM will be disappointed. But the 48% Remainers, plus maybe a third of the rest, will be quite content to keep it. That is a sizable majority, all in all, and that's democracy for you
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
You mean like the 60% of people - at least - in favour?
No, I mean the people who thought they were voting for what the Leave campaign told them they were voting for, plus those who voted Remain but liked at least that aspect of what the Leave campaign promised them Leave would mean.
You're doing valiant work Richard but I fear it's a while yet till the devalued Penny is going to drop for some posters.
But, as I keep saying, this is not inevitable. The fecking Tories have to admit all this, and go for EEA immediately, and stop the madness. Confidence will return, and quickly, if investors, homebuyers, bankers, know that not much will change, at least at first, as we keep all our economic ties with the EU.
I am interested in how you feel joining the EEA will stop the slowing economies of our post-Brexit neighbours. Or why you feel there will be a drop in inward investment in the medium term given the number of commonwealth and other countries lining up over the last couple of days to make trade agreements with us. But mostly I am interested in why you think this will cause a larger drop in GDP than the entire Subprime Crisis and Lehman's crash ?
Because it is a unique combination of headwinds that we are facing. Falling confidence, political instability, property price crash, wobbly banks, recessiony neighbours, our main industry (fin services) potentially crippled, more turbulence in Scotland + Ulster, on and on and on.
We put a bomb under the economy and set it off. WHY DIDN'T ANYONE WARN US OF THIS???
grrrr. I'M TOTALLY HACKED OFF THAT NO ONE WARNED ME THIS WOULD HAPPEN.
Now if people will just listen to ME, I have the solution, a very quick move to EEA, sidestep the storm almost entirely. The Europeans will want this (whatever the Commission says), we want it, America wants, China wants, we all want stability as soon as possible. So just bloody do it.
We'll have to talk about Free Movement later, once we're in the EEA. As I said, immigration is going to plummet anyway, for the next two years or more.
That's a joke right - no-one warned you!
I think Sean might be almost unique on PB in that he has managed to earn the contempt of both sides of the argument.
Original question - although it has probably been answered before now
As someone very wise once said, the secret to getting rich is to leave the first 10% and the last 10% for someone else.
If you are on at a blended price of, say, 70-75, and you can lock in a profit by selling at 5-6 why wouldn't you? You've squeezed most of the juice out of the opportunity & I'm sure there will be other profitable ways to deploy your capital that you will find in future.
Again, for all that I am flapping around like a headless chicken on crystal meth (and I am, it's what I do), I am the only one here proposing solutions. Everyone else is either saying Brexit is Bad, and not much else, or just pretending all is fine - which it clearly fucking isn't.
Thank God for SeanT is all I can say. If he weren't proposing solutions we would be REALLY fucked.
The problem I have is that the solution is staring us in the face: full membership of the EU. We don't HAVE to be so obstinate. We could say, OK we miscalculated. We all do that more often we would like. So at least put membership back on the table. But that is a question for Leavers. If a proportion think, yeah there is something in that, it will happen. But if they don't it's Plan B, to the extent you can call it a plan, along with the consequent unemployment and other fallout.
Ignore the voters? That is labour party leadership material right there....
A poll today in the Standard says a sizeable chunk of Leave voters have changed their mind, and that Remain would win a comfortable majority were the referendum rerun. Make of that what you will.
No, it didn't. It said 7% of Leavers now wanted to Remain and 3% of Remainers now wanted to leave. In other words, it is now 50:50.
Which is pretty much what the polls said before the vote. They were wrong.
I presume, Mr Knox, that this is you in MAXIMUM IRONY mode
I suspect he's realising he is a Scouser (I'ts never their fault) and is having some kind of breakdown.
Not all scousers are Andy Burnham jellies. I for one voted leave and I am very glad I did. Vindicated by the latest chapter opened in Turkey accession negotiations and the other false prophecies (calais border moved, Scottish independence, etc. etc.)
Turkey will not join the EU in your or my lifetime.
Did we feel the same way about East Germany in 1974 ?
It's an order of magnitude less likely than East Germany, because all that needed to change there was that the Communist government needed to go.
Now, Turkey could get rid of Islamist government. But it would still be a poor, Muslim country that brought little but poor, badly educated, migrants to the EU.
Earlier this year, the Dutch voters decisively rejected the EU even having a trade deal with the Ukraine. Why do you think they would be keen on full membership of Turkey?
Of course those people who voted Leave and wanted to abolish FOM will be disappointed. But the 48% Remainers, plus maybe a third of the rest, will be quite content to keep it. That is a sizable majority, all in all, and that's democracy for you
You are attributing motives to people, and wrongly assuming that all those who voted Remain did so because they don't mind freedom of movement. Many of them, such as me, will have voted Remain despite the fact that they see that as a disadvantage.
But we have had a referendum, in which the principal message of the winning side was clear. Personally, I respect it, but it's odd that so many on the winning side now claim they don't.
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
You mean like the 60% of people - at least - in favour?
It's probably nearer 65% in favour of FOM, but assume Richard is arguing otherwise
Given we've voted, it really does feel like fighting the last war. We've debated this a lot haven't we? Out of the 17 million odd leavers:
- A few thought it meant no muslims and mass deportations starting Friday week. - A few thought it meant no more immigration - A few thought it meant sharply reduced EU immigration and increased Commonwealth immigration...
... and so on. On here, we can only report on our own motivations. Even my family (who were 23:4 Leave/Remain) had different priorities and reasons for voting the way they did.
It seems to me that this is an advantage for the next PM. We all know what Remainers wanted. It's much more opaque what Leavers were after.
It seems odd that so many of those rightly insisting that the will of voters should be respected don't want to respect their clear message regarding freedom of movement.
You mean like the 60% of people - at least - in favour?
But lots of people that are not wild about immigration are either thinking with their wallets, or bought into Project Fear. Expect to see extensive bitching next year if the numbers continue to go up after the BrExit vote because the politicians chickened out of doing anything on FoM, and lots of votes for Nigel's Merry Men.
Of course those people who voted Leave and wanted to abolish FOM will be disappointed. But the 48% Remainers, plus maybe a third of the rest, will be quite content to keep it. That is a sizable majority, all in all, and that's democracy for you
You are attributing motives to people, and wrongly assuming that all those who voted Remain did so because they don't mind freedom of movement. Many of them, such as me, will have voted Remain despite the fact that they see that as a disadvantage.
But we have had a referendum, in which the principal message of the winning side was clear. Personally, I respect it, but it's odd that so many on the winning side now claim they don't.
We voted to Leave, we will now Leave.
Every other issue can be resolved at the General Election.
Again, for all that I am flapping around like a headless chicken on crystal meth (and I am, it's what I do), I am the only one here proposing solutions. Everyone else is either saying Brexit is Bad, and not much else, or just pretending all is fine - which it clearly fucking isn't.
Thank God for SeanT is all I can say. If he weren't proposing solutions we would be REALLY fucked.
The problem I have is that the solution is staring us in the face: full membership of the EU. We don't HAVE to be so obstinate. We could say, OK we miscalculated. We all do that more often we would like. So at least put membership back on the table. But that is a question for Leavers. If a proportion think, yeah there is something in that, it will happen. But if they don't it's Plan B, to the extent you can call it a plan, along with the consequent unemployment and other fallout.
Ignore the voters? That is labour party leadership material right there....
A poll today in the Standard says a sizeable chunk of Leave voters have changed their mind, and that Remain would win a comfortable majority were the referendum rerun. Make of that what you will.
But, as I keep saying, this is not inevitable. The fecking Tories have to admit all this, and go for EEA immediately, and stop the madness. Confidence will return, and quickly, if investors, homebuyers, bankers, know that not much will change, at least at first, as we keep all our economic ties with the EU.
I am interested in how you feel joining the EEA will stop the slowing economies of our post-Brexit neighbours. Or why you feel there will be a drop in inward investment in the medium term given the number of commonwealth and other countries lining up over the last couple of days to make trade agreements with us. But mostly I am interested in why you think this will cause a larger drop in GDP than the entire Subprime Crisis and Lehman's crash ?
Because it is a unique combination of headwinds that we are facing. Falling confidence, political instability, property price crash, wobbly banks, recessiony neighbours, our main industry (fin services) potentially crippled, more turbulence in Scotland + Ulster, on and on and on.
We put a bomb under the economy and set it off. WHY DIDN'T ANYONE WARN US OF THIS???
grrrr. I'M TOTALLY HACKED OFF THAT NO ONE WARNED ME THIS WOULD HAPPEN.
Now if people will just listen to ME, I have the solution, a very quick move to EEA, sidestep the storm almost entirely. The Europeans will want this (whatever the Commission says), we want it, America wants, China wants, we all want stability as soon as possible. So just bloody do it.
We'll have to talk about Free Movement later, once we're in the EEA. As I said, immigration is going to plummet anyway, for the next two years or more.
That's a joke right - no-one warned you!
I think Sean might be almost unique on PB in that he has managed to earn the contempt of both sides of the argument.
I like Sean, and his rants and wobbles are like the rain storms that roll in most afternoons in the tropics. I don't take much from them. He's a good egg, and I've enjoyed his novels.
He does channel what most of us must feel. I'm not a robot. I worry and fret that I made the wrong decision, I feel sad and remorseful that I've contributed to upsetting other people.
However, I've felt remorse after almost every major decision I've made in my life (my first marriage springs to mind...). We can only do the best we can with the information we have in front of us at the time.
It is nonsense to ascribe support for FOM to everyone who voted REMAIN. Many will have voted REMAIN out of fear, but we just don't know how many. Of those who voted LEAVE some were relaxed about FOM, but who knows how many? FOM and voting record are two completely separate things.
Brexit cannot be cancelled or delayed, says François Hollande
The chatter seems to be if we don't trigger Article 50 they will try and trigger Article 7
Erm in what sense are we in serious and persistence breach of:
"The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail."
I presume, Mr Knox, that this is you in MAXIMUM IRONY mode
I suspect he's realising he is a Scouser (I'ts never their fault) and is having some kind of breakdown.
Not all scousers are Andy Burnham jellies. I for one voted leave and I am very glad I did. Vindicated by the latest chapter opened in Turkey accession negotiations and the other false prophecies (calais border moved, Scottish independence, etc. etc.)
Turkey will not join the EU in your or my lifetime.
Did we feel the same way about East Germany in 1974 ?
It's an order of magnitude less likely than East Germany, because all that needed to change there was that the Communist government needed to go.
Now, Turkey could get rid of Islamist government. But it would still be a poor, Muslim country that brought little but poor, badly educated, migrants to the EU.
Earlier this year, the Dutch voters decisively rejected the EU even having a trade deal with the Ukraine. Why do you think they would be keen on full membership of Turkey?
I don't doubt we wont want it, I just see Erdogan stockpiling his ammunition migrants until he can threaten more effectively, when he has 10m sitting behind his borders and says he wants residency for his people in the EU or else, who is going to blink first ?
Original question - although it has probably been answered before now
As someone very wise once said, the secret to getting rich is to leave the first 10% and the last 10% for someone else.
If you are on at a blended price of, say, 70-75, and you can lock in a profit by selling at 5-6 why wouldn't you? You've squeezed most of the juice out of the opportunity & I'm sure there will be other profitable ways to deploy your capital that you will find in future.
You haven't squeezed most of the juice out, though. Say £10 at 75.0, the juice is +£740 or a loss of £10. If you lay off the whole potential profit at 6.0 you've extracted only 20% of the juice.
But, as I keep saying, this is not inevitable. The fecking Tories have to admit all this, and go for EEA immediately, and stop the madness. Confidence will return, and quickly, if investors, homebuyers, bankers, know that not much will change, at least at first, as we keep all our economic ties with the EU.
I am interested in how you feel joining the EEA will stop the slowing economies of our post-Brexit neighbours. Or why you feel there will be a drop in inward investment in the medium term given the number of commonwealth and other countries lining up over the last couple of days to make trade agreements with us. But mostly I am interested in why you think this will cause a larger drop in GDP than the entire Subprime Crisis and Lehman's crash ?
Because it is a unique combination of headwinds that we are facing. Falling confidence, political instability, property price crash, wobbly banks, recessiony neighbours, our main industry (fin services) potentially crippled, more turbulence in Scotland + Ulster, on and on and on.
We put a bomb under the economy and set it off. WHY DIDN'T ANYONE WARN US OF THIS???
grrrr. I'M TOTALLY HACKED OFF THAT NO ONE WARNED ME THIS WOULD HAPPEN.
Now if people will just listen to ME, I have the solution, a very quick move to EEA, sidestep the storm almost entirely. The Europeans will want this (whatever the Commission says), we want it, America wants, China wants, we all want stability as soon as possible. So just bloody do it.
We'll have to talk about Free Movement later, once we're in the EEA. As I said, immigration is going to plummet anyway, for the next two years or more.
That's a joke right - no-one warned you!
I think Sean might be almost unique on PB in that he has managed to earn the contempt of both sides of the argument.
I wear this badge with pride. Like Monsieur la Croix de Venus.
Well Hollande can say what he likes, doesn't alter the fact that only the country itself can decide when/if to invoke Article 50, so what he says means sod all quite frankly.
Again, for all that I am flapping around like a headless chicken on crystal meth (and I am, it's what I do), I am the only one here proposing solutions. Everyone else is either saying Brexit is Bad, and not much else, or just pretending all is fine - which it clearly fucking isn't.
Thank God for SeanT is all I can say. If he weren't proposing solutions we would be REALLY fucked.
The problem I have is that the solution is staring us in the face: full membership of the EU. We don't HAVE to be so obstinate. We could say, OK we miscalculated. We all do that more often we would like. So at least put membership back on the table. But that is a question for Leavers. If a proportion think, yeah there is something in that, it will happen. But if they don't it's Plan B, to the extent you can call it a plan, along with the consequent unemployment and other fallout.
Ignore the voters? That is labour party leadership material right there....
A poll today in the Standard says a sizeable chunk of Leave voters have changed their mind, and that Remain would win a comfortable majority were the referendum rerun. Make of that what you will.
Erm in what sense are we in serious and persistence breach of:
"The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail."
I assume they will claim that we are holding them hostage, which does seem rather at odds with some of these high ideals.
In any case, if they try it, are we really going to go the ECJ to argue that they can't throw us out because we want to leave?
Brexit cannot be cancelled or delayed, says François Hollande
The chatter seems to be if we don't trigger Article 50 they will try and trigger Article 7
Oh, okay. What's Article 7?!
Article 7 TEU aims at ensuring that all EU countries respect the common values of the EU, including the rule of law. The preventive mechanism of Article 7(1) TEU can be activated only in case of a ’clear risk of a serious breach’ and the sanctioning mechanism of Article 7(2) TEU only in case of a ’serious and persistent breach by a Member State’ of the values set out in Article 2.
Article 2 states:
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
Again, for all that I am flapping around like a headless chicken on crystal meth (and I am, it's what I do), I am the only one here proposing solutions. Everyone else is either saying Brexit is Bad, and not much else, or just pretending all is fine - which it clearly fucking isn't.
Thank God for SeanT is all I can say. If he weren't proposing solutions we would be REALLY fucked.
The problem I have is that the solution is staring us in the face: full membership of the EU. We don't HAVE to be so obstinate. We could say, OK we miscalculated. We all do that more often we would like. So at least put membership back on the table. But that is a question for Leavers. If a proportion think, yeah there is something in that, it will happen. But if they don't it's Plan B, to the extent you can call it a plan, along with the consequent unemployment and other fallout.
Politically impossible without it being indisputably and irreversibly a crap storm, and it has only been a week so far too soon to say. And logistically impossible since by the time that might conceivably happen, article 50 will be declared and if it wasn't the government would collapse.
The other issue is we were warned things might go badly at the start, so it's not a justification to rerun a ref, needed to democratically annul the democratic mandate. And neither party would win a snap GE on a don't declare article 50 platform. I'm able to be persuaded if in 9 months it's clear I was a fool, but places voting 70% for leave won't change their minds, and the Scots no longer care.
Erm in what sense are we in serious and persistence breach of:
"The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail."
I assume they will claim that we are holding them hostage, which does seem rather at odds with some of these high ideals.
In any case, if they try it, are we really going to go the ECJ to argue that they can't throw us out because we want to leave?
Erm, as it were...
Are they really going to take us to the ECJ to argue that one of their closest allies is in contempt of the rule of law? When we've already said we're leaving?!
Original question - although it has probably been answered before now
As someone very wise once said, the secret to getting rich is to leave the first 10% and the last 10% for someone else.
If you are on at a blended price of, say, 70-75, and you can lock in a profit by selling at 5-6 why wouldn't you? You've squeezed most of the juice out of the opportunity & I'm sure there will be other profitable ways to deploy your capital that you will find in future.
You haven't squeezed most of the juice out, though. Say £10 at 75.0, the juice is +£740 or a loss of £10. If you lay off the whole potential profit at 6.0 you've extracted only 20% of the juice.
Brexit cannot be cancelled or delayed, says François Hollande
The chatter seems to be if we don't trigger Article 50 they will try and trigger Article 7
Oh, okay. What's Article 7?!
Article 7 TEU aims at ensuring that all EU countries respect the common values of the EU, including the rule of law. The preventive mechanism of Article 7(1) TEU can be activated only in case of a ’clear risk of a serious breach’ and the sanctioning mechanism of Article 7(2) TEU only in case of a ’serious and persistent breach by a Member State’ of the values set out in Article 2.
Article 2 states:
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
That way just likes a diplomatic pissing competition. They sanction us by excluding us from various EU activities, since we are on the way out anyway we respond by refusing to pay for the activities we are excluded from. Doesn't benefit anyone, ergo, it won't happen.
If they do that, especially in the very near future, it's one way to guarantee seriously bad blood.
No way they can kick us out. He is also wrong to say it cannot be cancelled. We could just say tomorrow, sorry Monsieur, changed our minds. We're not leaving. And that would be that.
Appalling racist attacks on British People, officials and even MEPs on the streets and bars of Brussels, Eurostar and even in EU and EU parliament buldings.
Apparently this has been going on at a low level for years but has got far worse in the last week.
Funnily enough I dont see SJWs foaming all over social media about it though.
It seems to me that President Hollande wouldn't be very good at playing a game of chicken.
But since he isn't, and since other EU leaders and bureaucrats also seem not to have noticed that delaying Article 50 harms us just as much as it harms them, we might as well use the smidgen of leverage it gives us. Theresa May appears to have noticed this.
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
Democracy? Putting some nice words in a document does not translate to reality though does it? In a democracy you can vote out the players and vote in a change of direction. How do the people of the EU vote out the President or the Commission? How might they vote for a different direction (yes - I mean 'the Project')? The people of the EU are serfs to a totally unaccountable and unreformable bureaucracy. That's why I bolded the human dignity words. We're well rid.
"Along with the outrage over the election result, there's a conspicuous lack of desire to address the root reasons for the election victory. Like the fact that one of the world's oldest democracies may have lost faith in the European institutions because democracy is something its people hold near and dear. It's a thought that is immediately banished. Instead we hear about how reckless David Cameron was in calling for a referendum. The argument, put forth in numerous versions, holds that you cannot hold a popular referendum on something as complicated as EU membership.
It's astonishing how many commentators have parroted that line, seemingly unconscious of what it says about their own understanding of democracy. What it really means is this: Elections can only be good if the results correspond with the desires of the educated. Or as Micky Beisenherz, a columnist for the German weekly Stern, put it: "Democracy is great thing. The only dumb thing about it is that stupid are allowed to participate."
I see that Loretta Lynch has effectively recused herself from the Clinton Server investigation process without recusing herself, by saying that she will accept the findings of the FBI probe.
I think that's the least she could do. The whole episode was so odd and potentially damaging to the investigation that even Democrats said she shouldn't have done it. Recusing herself from the investigation was the only option.
The FBI investigation apparently finished interviewing last week, except for seeing Hillary. One of the more unusual facets of this whole email / Foundation scandal is that Clinton and her 4 main aides all have the same attorney representing them for both the Judicial Watch and FBI investigations. I am told (I am not an attorney) that this is VERY unusual.
Appalling racist attacks on British People, officials and even MEPs on the streets and bars of Brussels, Eurostar and even in EU and EU parliament buldings.
Apparently this has been going on at a low level for years but has got far worse in the last week.
Funnily enough I dont see SJWs foaming all over social media about it though.
"Along with the outrage over the election result, there's a conspicuous lack of desire to address the root reasons for the election victory. Like the fact that one of the world's oldest democracies may have lost faith in the European institutions because democracy is something its people hold near and dear. It's a thought that is immediately banished. Instead we hear about how reckless David Cameron was in calling for a referendum. The argument, put forth in numerous versions, holds that you cannot hold a popular referendum on something as complicated as EU membership.
It's astonishing how many commentators have parroted that line, seemingly unconscious of what it says about their own understanding of democracy. What it really means is this: Elections can only be good if the results correspond with the desires of the educated. Or as Micky Beisenherz, a columnist for the German weekly Stern, put it: "Democracy is great thing. The only dumb thing about it is that stupid are allowed to participate."
Thanks Plato. I'm reading around a lot to see what the Europeans are thinking. Otherwise I start getting really hostile when I hear Hollande sabre rattling just for domestic consumption. I'm trying to stay in love with Europe .
I see that Loretta Lynch has effectively recused herself from the Clinton Server investigation process without recusing herself, by saying that she will accept the findings of the FBI probe.
I think that's the least she could do. The whole episode was so odd and potentially damaging to the investigation that even Democrats said she shouldn't have done it. Recusing herself from the investigation was the only option.
The FBI investigation apparently finished interviewing last week, except for seeing Hillary. One of the more unusual facets of this whole email / Foundation scandal is that Clinton and her 4 main aides all have the same attorney representing them for both the Judicial Watch and FBI investigations. I am told (I am not an attorney) that this is VERY unusual.
In this country you could only do that if there was no realistic prospect that their arguments would diverge and cause a conflict of interest. Which is very difficult to gauge at the outset and therefore normally avoided.
Again, for all that I am flapping around like a headless chicken on crystal meth (and I am, it's what I do), I am the only one here proposing solutions. Everyone else is either saying Brexit is Bad, and not much else, or just pretending all is fine - which it clearly fucking isn't.
Thank God for SeanT is all I can say. If he weren't proposing solutions we would be REALLY fucked.
The problem I have is that the solution is staring us in the face: full membership of the EU. We don't HAVE to be so obstinate. We could say, OK we miscalculated. We all do that more often we would like. So at least put membership back on the table. But that is a question for Leavers. If a proportion think, yeah there is something in that, it will happen. But if they don't it's Plan B, to the extent you can call it a plan, along with the consequent unemployment and other fallout.
Ignore the voters? That is labour party leadership material right there....
A poll today in the Standard says a sizeable chunk of Leave voters have changed their mind, and that Remain would win a comfortable majority were the referendum rerun. Make of that what you will.
That poll is irrelevant now, but similar polling may not be irrelevant in the future. If we're in deep recession by Xmas, and polling shows REMAIN 65/LEAVE 35, and we still haven't triggered A50 (and May and Gove say they won't trigger til 2017) - then it's very hard to guess whether PM May WOULD squeeze the trigger.
It's over. We're leaving the EU and there won't be another referendum.
Given that the EU must now realise that Article 50 leaves them open to being held hostage by any member state at any time, we have now created an urgent need to reform the Lisbon Treaty itself. Why not take advantage of it to secure terms on which we could stay full members?
Brexit cannot be cancelled or delayed, says François Hollande
The chatter seems to be if we don't trigger Article 50 they will try and trigger Article 7
Oh, okay. What's Article 7?!
Article 7 TEU aims at ensuring that all EU countries respect the common values of the EU, including the rule of law. The preventive mechanism of Article 7(1) TEU can be activated only in case of a ’clear risk of a serious breach’ and the sanctioning mechanism of Article 7(2) TEU only in case of a ’serious and persistent breach by a Member State’ of the values set out in Article 2.
Article 2 states:
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
Utter rubbish. Legally it was a nonbinding referendum and nothing has changed.
That said, the ECJ interprets things in a way that suits it with a view to ever closer union so would probably deploy judicial activism to gerrymander the result.
We sure are learning who our friends are. Hostility from euro governments and racist attacks by their brussels people, meanwhile us and commonwealth stampeding for trade deals.
Maybe its about time the MOD sent a couple of trident subs to Zeebrugge and get them to near surface and wave their periscopes around outside the harbour.
Comments
Totally mystified over your attitude to tea though.
I've gone well into the red with Eagle laying at 4.2
Thinking back, "principle" vs "principal" genuinely upset her too.
It is a cracking read and given your penchant for writing about violent death, might give you some useful pointers about the use of poisons, as well treachery, skullduggery and general murderous intent.
As someone very wise once said, the secret to getting rich is to leave the first 10% and the last 10% for someone else.
If you are on at a blended price of, say, 70-75, and you can lock in a profit by selling at 5-6 why wouldn't you? You've squeezed most of the juice out of the opportunity & I'm sure there will be other profitable ways to deploy your capital that you will find in future.
Which is pretty much what the polls said before the vote. They were wrong.
Now, Turkey could get rid of Islamist government. But it would still be a poor, Muslim country that brought little but poor, badly educated, migrants to the EU.
Earlier this year, the Dutch voters decisively rejected the EU even having a trade deal with the Ukraine. Why do you think they would be keen on full membership of Turkey?
But we have had a referendum, in which the principal message of the winning side was clear. Personally, I respect it, but it's odd that so many on the winning side now claim they don't.
- A few thought it meant no muslims and mass deportations starting Friday week.
- A few thought it meant no more immigration
- A few thought it meant sharply reduced EU immigration and increased Commonwealth immigration...
... and so on. On here, we can only report on our own motivations. Even my family (who were 23:4 Leave/Remain) had different priorities and reasons for voting the way they did.
It seems to me that this is an advantage for the next PM. We all know what Remainers wanted. It's much more opaque what Leavers were after.
http://www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/latest-report/british-social-attitudes-31/immigration/introduction.aspx
But lots of people that are not wild about immigration are either thinking with their wallets, or bought into Project Fear. Expect to see extensive bitching next year if the numbers continue to go up after the BrExit vote because the politicians chickened out of doing anything on FoM, and lots of votes for Nigel's Merry Men.
Every other issue can be resolved at the General Election.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/01/brexit-cannot-be-cancelled-or-delayed-says-francois-hollande?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-poll-most-brits-want-general-election-to-be-called-this-year-a3285706.html
He does channel what most of us must feel. I'm not a robot. I worry and fret that I made the wrong decision, I feel sad and remorseful that I've contributed to upsetting other people.
However, I've felt remorse after almost every major decision I've made in my life (my first marriage springs to mind...). We can only do the best we can with the information we have in front of us at the time.
"The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail."
If they do that, especially in the very near future, it's one way to guarantee seriously bad blood.
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/8203-revealed-how-each-area-of-bristol-voted-in-the-eu-referendum/story-29465008-detail/story.html
http://www.expressandstar.com/news/local-news/2016/07/01/brexit-wolverhamptons-leave-hotspots-are-revealed-in-new-figures/
Well Hollande can say what he likes, doesn't alter the fact that only the country itself can decide when/if to invoke Article 50, so what he says means sod all quite frankly.
In any case, if they try it, are we really going to go the ECJ to argue that they can't throw us out because we want to leave?
Erm, as it were...
Article 2 states:
The other issue is we were warned things might go badly at the start, so it's not a justification to rerun a ref, needed to democratically annul the democratic mandate. And neither party would win a snap GE on a don't declare article 50 platform. I'm able to be persuaded if in 9 months it's clear I was a fool, but places voting 70% for leave won't change their minds, and the Scots no longer care.
It's easier to understand
Apparently this has been going on at a low level for years but has got far worse in the last week.
Funnily enough I dont see SJWs foaming all over social media about it though.
http://dailym.ai/297p85j
But since he isn't, and since other EU leaders and bureaucrats also seem not to have noticed that delaying Article 50 harms us just as much as it harms them, we might as well use the smidgen of leverage it gives us. Theresa May appears to have noticed this.
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
Democracy? Putting some nice words in a document does not translate to reality though does it? In a democracy you can vote out the players and vote in a change of direction. How do the people of the EU vote out the President or the Commission? How might they vote for a different direction (yes - I mean 'the Project')? The people of the EU are serfs to a totally unaccountable and unreformable bureaucracy. That's why I bolded the human dignity words. We're well rid.
The Eagle is drifting.
Meeting on Monday to expel Carswell.
Le buffoon.
Mr. Bedfordshire, wrong sort of racism.
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/748903761939234816
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/brexit-is-merkel-to-blame-a-1100303.html#js-article-comments-box-pager
"Along with the outrage over the election result, there's a conspicuous lack of desire to address the root reasons for the election victory. Like the fact that one of the world's oldest democracies may have lost faith in the European institutions because democracy is something its people hold near and dear. It's a thought that is immediately banished. Instead we hear about how reckless David Cameron was in calling for a referendum. The argument, put forth in numerous versions, holds that you cannot hold a popular referendum on something as complicated as EU membership.
It's astonishing how many commentators have parroted that line, seemingly unconscious of what it says about their own understanding of democracy. What it really means is this: Elections can only be good if the results correspond with the desires of the educated. Or as Micky Beisenherz, a columnist for the German weekly Stern, put it: "Democracy is great thing. The only dumb thing about it is that stupid are allowed to participate."
Smith 4.3 - 7.6
Miliband 8.0 - 9.6
(Not much liquidity)
Bananaman 8 / 9.6
Smith 4.3 / 7.6
Benn 13.5 / 14
Jarvis 13.5 / 17
McDonnell 14.5 / 16.5
Lewis 28 / 38
The FBI investigation apparently finished interviewing last week, except for seeing Hillary. One of the more unusual facets of this whole email / Foundation scandal is that Clinton and her 4 main aides all have the same attorney representing them for both the Judicial Watch and FBI investigations. I am told (I am not an attorney) that this is VERY unusual.
This is about as gloomy as it gets. Brexiteers care to comment?
That said, the ECJ interprets things in a way that suits it with a view to ever closer union so would probably deploy judicial activism to gerrymander the result.
We sure are learning who our friends are. Hostility from euro governments and racist attacks by their brussels people, meanwhile us and commonwealth stampeding for trade deals.
Maybe its about time the MOD sent a couple of trident subs to Zeebrugge and get them to near surface and wave their periscopes around outside the harbour.