Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Mad Tory Friday part 2…..

123457

Comments

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Sean_Fear said:

    Mortimer said:

    Sean_Fear said:

    Xenon said:

    rpjs said:

    kle4 said:

    The Tories seem intent on gifting Corbyn the next election. Those sending in no confidence letters are a completely disorganised rabble with no idea what they want instead. Those supporting May are supporting an atrociously bad deal with no merits and to deliver which the Tories have abdicated their entire domestic policy agenda. It’s shameful.

    It may be a bad deal, but it does have merits. To take the most obvious one for Brexiters, it ensures Brexit actually happens. That is still probable even without it, but not as certain is it was.
    With immigration undecided, trade unresolved, the common rule book over which we have no say foisted on us, NI left in limbo, the transition period length unresolved, how is that Brexit ?
    It's Britain leaving the European Union. Which was the only thing on the referendum ballot paper and the only thing that there is an actual mandate for.

    The Withdrawal Agreement was always intended to be phase I of the disengagement, that's what "transition period" means. You can't disentangle forty years of economic integration overnight. Well you can, but your economy will crash and burn if you do.
    Is there any way to get from phase 1 to phase 2?
    I can imagine the EU can just tell us to get stuffed if we try to negotiate anything else.
    They don't want the backstop (if it comes into effect) to be indefinite because it would breach their Four Freedoms. That is why they will want to negotiate an FTA with us.
    @Sean_F are you back to posting under Sean_Fear now, or is this an impostor?!
    It's me. I just can't sign into Hotmail right now.
    Is Hotmail still a thing?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,728
    kle4 said:


    Sorry, I don't quite follow: were told what?

    We were told that the promises were unrealistic and unworkable. The validity of those statements are more apparent now, but if one side exaggerates, and the other side points that out, and the people still choose a certain way, they were still told and it isn't that new information.
    That's fair enough, but assumes both sides get the same prominence. Far more people would have seen the scare stories than the responses - and scare stories sell.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    edited November 2018
    Masterton:
    The draft agreement is about 600 pages long, and I was impressed by the number of people who managed to read it and form a view within minutes LOL
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    A good 30 Tory MPs are committed to opposing the deal - as are the 10 DUP MPs. Difficult to see any support from Labour reaching double figures.Beyond that , the deal will be supported by the LD -Stephen Lloyd - and possibly the now Independent MP for Barrow in Furness. That still would have May well short of the votes needed to get it through the Commons.

    I predict a lot of Labour abstentions.
    I rather doubt that in the context of such a golden opportunity to humiliate the Government. Few will want to risk deselection by bailing out May.
    But context is everything here. If the Government is weakened or effectively destabilized to the point where it is at serious risk of collapse, the Opposition will seek to bring that about. I imagine that some LibDems might like the opportunity to exact some revenge for the 2015 election!
    And tell me how plunging the Country into a financial and constitutional crisis helps.

    Are you ready for rocketing interest rates, mortgage rates and the economic collapse that follows hurting the poorest and throwing thousands out of work
    A constitutional crisis would be part of the politics - and the Tories would deserve more blame than any other party for having brought us to such a position.
    As for the economic consequences , we have been here before as evidenced by the scaremongering of Cameron & Osborne prior to the Referendum. Such tactics persuaded me to Vote Leave - and I have no regrets.I do predict,though, that interest rates will not be shooting up.
    How do you defend a collapsing pound
    I think it unlikely that sterling would 'collapse' - the currency has already weakened significantly as a result of the Referendum outcome. Uncertainty is what the markets most dislike - but I suspect that any weakness is largely in the price we see today. Moreover, the sharp fall in the pound in late June 2016 did not prevent the Bank of England from cutting - rather than raising - interest rates.
    This mornings financial report says an immediate drop of 10% or more will happen in the event of no deal
    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.
  • The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    https://twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Interesting. As a government backbencher you would expect him to be making arguments in favour of government policy, not appearing to sit on the fence.
    Sensible chap, but I thought the SCon MPs were operating as a bloc?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,728
    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,728
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I don't accept the premise that any decision made in the coming weeks re-the deal is irreversible. A new Government that was in no way beholden to the DUP could start afresh , and - whatever the EU might say at this time - I believe they would respond to such a new approach.

    Starting afresh will take years. Not only will that cause more uncertainty, there is no guarantee that the result will be any better.

    Your last clause is one of hope based on what is politically convenient for you: I see no reason why the EU should respond positively to such an approach. (From their perspective) we're mucking them around a lot as it is.

    And it's not as if both we and they have other important things to get on with, which are getting subsumed by Brexit.

    We need to get this over and done with.
    I agree with what Nick Palmer has asserted here on earlier occasions.Labour is not obsessed with Brexit and the EU - and it would not be the main focus of its day to day political agenda. The issue would be allowed to fade into the background , and discussions with the EU would proceed in a much calmer atmosphere than we have experienced since June 2016.
    What discussions with the EU? Why would they want to go through all this sh*t again?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208

    The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    https://twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Tricky position representing Brexiting Tories in a highly marginal Scottish seat that voted 75% Remain, I believe.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Masterton:
    The draft agreement is about 600 pages long, and I was impressed by the number of people who managed to read it and form a view within minutes LOL

    A huge number managed an even greater feat of forming a view without having seen it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    Contrast if Labour can lend enough rebels to get the deal over the line, the DUP is likely utterly furious with the Tories and might stop the supply of votes for budgets and so forth. At that point May or whoever says they don't have the authority of the commons, and a general election is sought.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    Esther McVey's legacy.....Fiddling while Rome burns (and it's even worse now)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiWomXklfv8
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited November 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    Contrast if Labour can lend enough rebels to get the deal over the line, the DUP is likely utterly furious with the Tories and might stop the supply of votes for budgets and so forth. At that point May or whoever says they don't have the authority of the commons, and a general election is sought.

    There's also the advantage that, if the deal is passed, Brexit would to some extent be "boxed off" as an issue. Which IMO would also be strongly to Labour's advantage - we saw at the last election how Labour's polling improved as soon as the media started covering more political issues than just Brexit.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    FF43 said:

    The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Tricky position representing Brexiting Tories in a highly marginal Scottish seat that voted 75% Remain, I believe.
    I think it would be fairly straightforward in a 75% Remain constituency....
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Danny565 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    Contrast if Labour can lend enough rebels to get the deal over the line, the DUP is likely utterly furious with the Tories and might stop the supply of votes for budgets and so forth. At that point May or whoever says they don't have the authority of the commons, and a general election is sought.

    There's also the advantage that, if the deal is passed, Brexit would to some extent be "boxed off" as an issue. Which IMO would also be strongly to Labour's advantage - we saw at the last election how Labour's polling improved as soon as the media started covering more political issues than just Brexit.
    But that would happen anyway as soon as an election campaign got under way.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Can you talk me through the mechanism to get a "People's vote" if a hardline ERGer is in at No 10 ?
    No deal doesn't need any further vote, it is simply what happens on 29th March.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I don't accept the premise that any decision made in the coming weeks re-the deal is irreversible. A new Government that was in no way beholden to the DUP could start afresh , and - whatever the EU might say at this time - I believe they would respond to such a new approach.

    Starting afresh will take years. Not only will that cause more uncertainty, there is no guarantee that the result will be any better.

    Your last clause is one of hope based on what is politically convenient for you: I see no reason why the EU should respond positively to such an approach. (From their perspective) we're mucking them around a lot as it is.

    And it's not as if both we and they have other important things to get on with, which are getting subsumed by Brexit.

    We need to get this over and done with.
    I agree with what Nick Palmer has asserted here on earlier occasions.Labour is not obsessed with Brexit and the EU - and it would not be the main focus of its day to day political agenda. The issue would be allowed to fade into the background , and discussions with the EU would proceed in a much calmer atmosphere than we have experienced since June 2016.
    What discussions with the EU? Why would they want to go through all this sh*t again?
    The EU will not. They have said that May's deal is the only deal

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46228454

    "EU leaders have dismissed talk of renegotiating the draft Brexit deal and warned the UK's political situation could make a "no-deal" more likely.

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel said there was "no question" of reopening talks as a document was "on the table".

    Meanwhile French PM Edouard Philippe said there was a need to prepare for a no-deal because of UK "uncertainty"."
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    edited November 2018
    shiney2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    shiney2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    It is not MY

    TGOHF said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TGOHF said:

    Cyclefree said:



    The ERG need to be thrown out of the party. They are dangerous lunatics who are destroying their party and will destroy the country the way they are going.

    A remainer Conservative party would be about as popular as Ukip in Brighton.

    How popular do you think a Tory party that leads us to a crash out Brexit will be?


    Depends entirely how they manage it - one led by May / Hammond would be toxic.

    It is not May and Hammond wanting a crash out deal. It is the ERG, who are doing everything they can to undermine the government they claim to support at a critical time.

    Point of Order: they are supporting the last Tory Manifesto. MrsMay is a having a problem with that.. And also the 84% of tory members that support actually leaving the EU.
    ** Bangs head on table **

    Britain would be leaving the EU under this deal.

    next you'll be telling me you believe MrsMay on taking back control of our money laws and borders.

    I understand two DExu secretaries did that. both found out it was bollocks.

    You are confusing me with an ultra-Brexiteer. Within the limits Mrs May set herself (stupidly IMO) but done to appease the ERG, she has probably achieved the best deal she can while trying not to harm the economy. It’s this last bit which the ultras seem to ignore in their desire for Brexit purity.

    And, frankly, everything David Davis said before the referendum about how easy a deal would be has turned out to be utter balls. And Raab has only just learnt about the Dover-Calais route. So I place no value whatsoever on their comprehension skills, analysis or judgment.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    No deal will happen without anything else happening. That’s why Labour should be supporting May in the national interest.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    A good 30 Tory MPs are committed to opposing the deal - as are the 10 DUP MPs. Difficult to see any support from Labour reaching double figures.Beyond that , the deal will be supported by the LD -Stephen Lloyd - and possibly the now Independent MP for Barrow in Furness. That still would have May well short of the votes needed to get it through the Commons.

    I predict a lot of Labour abstentions.
    I rather doubt that in the context of such a golden opportunity to humiliate the Government. Few will want to risk deselection by bailing out May.
    And tell me how plunging the Country into a financial and constitutional crisis helps.

    How do you defend a collapsing pound
    I
    This mornings financial report says an immediate drop of 10% or more will happen in the event of no deal
    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.
    The fall in Sterling after 2016 was not temporary as you call it! Sterling is still worth less against a basket of leading currencies in 2018 than it was prior to the vote in 2016. 46% of UK exports are to the EU.

    It may have escaped your attention but we are about to Leave the optimal relationship for trade with the EU and make it much more difficult to trade with EU countries. This will not boost exports. Another point I would like to take you up on it is not like flicking a switch from exporting to EU and then exporting to the rest of the world. You have to build demand in markets for your products or services assuming their is any demand for what you are trying to sell. We will be losing demand in Europe markets for a number of reasons and so your naïve comment that the depreciation of sterling will increase aggregate demand is not really going to happen. Some non European growth will occur but constraints to growth in these sectors will occur. It takes years for an economy to get over the shock of a sudden economic shock like this. I could go on....
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I don't accept the premise that any decision made in the coming weeks re-the deal is irreversible. A new Government that was in no way beholden to the DUP could start afresh , and - whatever the EU might say at this time - I believe they would respond to such a new approach.

    Starting afresh will take years. Not only will that cause more uncertainty, there is no guarantee that the result will be any better.

    Your last clause is one of hope based on what is politically convenient for you: I see no reason why the EU should respond positively to such an approach. (From their perspective) we're mucking them around a lot as it is.

    And it's not as if both we and they have other important things to get on with, which are getting subsumed by Brexit.

    We need to get this over and done with.
    I agree with what Nick Palmer has asserted here on earlier occasions.Labour is not obsessed with Brexit and the EU - and it would not be the main focus of its day to day political agenda. The issue would be allowed to fade into the background , and discussions with the EU would proceed in a much calmer atmosphere than we have experienced since June 2016.
    What discussions with the EU? Why would they want to go through all this sh*t again?
    The EU will not. They have said that May's deal is the only deal

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46228454

    "EU leaders have dismissed talk of renegotiating the draft Brexit deal and warned the UK's political situation could make a "no-deal" more likely.

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel said there was "no question" of reopening talks as a document was "on the table".

    Meanwhile French PM Edouard Philippe said there was a need to prepare for a no-deal because of UK "uncertainty"."
    I would expect their attitude to change in the event of a second Referendum or a new Government taking office. It has good reason not to trust the present Government given its inherent instability in relation to Brexit.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    Oh and btw Rudd back as foreseen by, ahem, yours truly.

    Good weekend all.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    No deal will happen without anything else happening. That’s why Labour should be supporting May in the national interest.
    Brexit will be halted or dropped before No Deal is allowed to happen. It is in the EU's interest as well as the UK's interest. It would also be hard for all the EU politicians to row back on their assurances that the UK could cancel Brexit. RealPolitik rules....
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,951
    IanB2 said:

    OllyT said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Tracey Crouch should be back in government. She seems to have some principles and cares about people.

    The ERG need to be thrown out of the party. They are dangerous lunatics who are destroying their party and will destroy the country the way they are going.

    They have been dragging the party down for years we just have to hope that they don't take the country with it. With hindsight from Major to Cameron appeasing the Euro loons has been a major mistake. Should have let them all shuffle off and rot in UKIP with Reckless and Carswell.
    The trouble is that the rot has spread far wider amongst councillors and the membership, just as Labour's members are overwhelmingly Corbynite.
    It's almost like people who have an interest in politics care about having a say in who governs us. Funny that.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208

    FF43 said:

    The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Tricky position representing Brexiting Tories in a highly marginal Scottish seat that voted 75% Remain, I believe.
    I think it would be fairly straightforward in a 75% Remain constituency....
    Being in a party that attracts equal measures of derision and outrage isn't a good basis for Masterton's already uncertain reelection hopes.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    No deal will happen without anything else happening. That’s why Labour should be supporting May in the national interest.
    Brexit will be halted or dropped before No Deal is allowed to happen. It is in the EU's interest as well as the UK's interest. It would also be hard for all the EU politicians to row back on their assurances that the UK could cancel Brexit. RealPolitik rules....
    Can you talk me through the mechanism of precisely how this will happen if May's deal is voted down (And no they won't replace her with Ken Clarke)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Tricky position representing Brexiting Tories in a highly marginal Scottish seat that voted 75% Remain, I believe.
    I think it would be fairly straightforward in a 75% Remain constituency....
    Being in a party that attracts equal measures of derision and outrage isn't a good basis for Masterton's already uncertain reelection hopes.
    He would hold his seat easily according to the latest Scottish polls.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,141
    edited November 2018
    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    Contrast if Labour can lend enough rebels to get the deal over the line, the DUP is likely utterly furious with the Tories and might stop the supply of votes for budgets and so forth. At that point May or whoever says they don't have the authority of the commons, and a general election is sought.

    1,2,3 and your back
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Tricky position representing Brexiting Tories in a highly marginal Scottish seat that voted 75% Remain, I believe.
    I think it would be fairly straightforward in a 75% Remain constituency....
    Being in a party that attracts equal measures of derision and outrage isn't a good basis for Masterton's already uncertain reelection hopes.
    *Shrug*

    No one forced him to stand. Politics is a rough business, but at least these days your opponents only "eliminate" you in a political sense. Machiavellian solutions no longer apply ;)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,728
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    A good 30 Tory MPs are committed to opposing the deal - as are the 10 DUP MPs. Difficult to see any support from Labour reaching double figures.Beyond that , the deal will be supported by the LD -Stephen Lloyd - and possibly the now Independent MP for Barrow in Furness. That still would have May well short of the votes needed to get it through the Commons.

    I predict a lot of Labour abstentions.

    How do you defend a collapsing pound
    I
    .

    It may have escaped your attention but we are about to Leave the optimal relationship for trade with the EU and make it much more difficult to trade with EU countries. This will not boost exports. Another point I would like to take you up on it is not like flicking a switch from exporting to EU and then exporting to the rest of the world. You have to build demand in markets for your products or services assuming their is any demand for what you are trying to sell. We will be losing demand in Europe markets for a number of reasons and so your naïve comment that the depreciation of sterling will increase aggregate demand is not really going to happen. Some non European growth will occur but constraints to growth in these sectors will occur. It takes years for an economy to get over the shock of a sudden economic shock like this. I could go on....
    None of that is news to me. I would point out ,however, that sterling did bounce back a fair bit from the lows reached in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote. As someone who has taught Macroeconomics at undergraduate level I would hope that my comments are not entirely naive, and it is certainly well established that devaluation - or depreciation in the context of floating exchange rates - can be expected to boost the economy as a result of increased demand from overseas for exports accompanied by imports becoming less competitive in our own markets thereby boosting domestic industries. Of course, some time is needed for the J-Curve effect to work through.
    I am not by the way an ardent Brexiteer at all,and have never held very strong views on EU membership. It was very much a 50/50 decision for me, and in the end I voted Leave to reject the Cameron/Osborne scaremongering style of conducting politics. I wished to deny them a triumph and remain content that that was achieved.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Can you talk me through the mechanism to get a "People's vote" if a hardline ERGer is in at No 10 ?
    No deal doesn't need any further vote, it is simply what happens on 29th March.
    That is correct, and that is why "No Deal will not happen because *everyone is opposed to it" is a bullshit argument.

    Nevertheless, I would expect that - if Mrs May was deposed, or there was a General Election, or there was to be a referendum on the Deal - there would be a request from the government for an extension to Article 50.

    I think it likely that the EU would accede, but it is not certain.

    A referendum with the government campaigning for the deal - that would probably be OK.

    But if it were Mr Johnson wishing to reopen negotiations, then I suspect the answer would be "No, f*ck off you c*nt".

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    Contrast if Labour can lend enough rebels to get the deal over the line, the DUP is likely utterly furious with the Tories and might stop the supply of votes for budgets and so forth. At that point May or whoever says they don't have the authority of the commons, and a general election is sought.

    1,2,3 and your back
    I am :o ?! Where did I go !
  • Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    The weakness in that otherwise plausible series is the "say May then resigns" bit. It is quite clear that May will carry on until she is forced out. So, if prior to the deal being voted down she has already scraped through a confidence vote, then she can't be forced out for 12 months, and the DUP may well then vote against in a confidence vote. At that point, rather than resign in order to let another Conservative leader form a new government in the 14 days grace, May will try to reinstate her authority by winning another general election.

    I think the reluctance of some Brexiteers to send in the letters can only be because they realise that they have to wait for the moment of May's maximum weakness when forcing a vote on her leadership. That moment will be immediately after her deal has been voted down, not before.

    That creates a betting opportunity. Currently the odds against May going as leader in 2018 are lengthening, as the letters still haven't apparently reached the magic number of 48, and they will lengthen more if the contest isn't triggered. So while delay means the odds on offer will lengthen, the real chances of her going in 2018 will be shortening with that delay.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    No deal will happen without anything else happening. That’s why Labour should be supporting May in the national interest.
    Brexit will be halted or dropped before No Deal is allowed to happen. It is in the EU's interest as well as the UK's interest. It would also be hard for all the EU politicians to row back on their assurances that the UK could cancel Brexit. RealPolitik rules....
    But they want us to grovel for it. And I think there is a risk that all the bad faith comes home to roost. I personally think we should remain and voted for that, but second best would be no deal. I just don’t believe in tying yourself to an organisation without being able to influence it.

    It looks to me as if our hands are being tied for the next stage of negotiations. Let’s just leave without a deal. I think it will be better than the dire predictions. I mean yesterday we had health secretary won’t rule out deaths in no deal situation. Well that politics - no one apart from an idiot would hold themselves hostage to fortune in such a way - lots of people die every day and it would all be scrutinised and hung around his neck.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    A good 30 Tory MPs are committed to opposing the deal - as are the 10 DUP MPs. Difficult to see any support from Labour reaching double figures.Beyond that , the deal will be supported by the LD -Stephen Lloyd - and possibly the now Independent MP for Barrow in Furness. That still would have May well short of the votes needed to get it through the Commons.

    I predict a lot of Labour abstentions.
    I rather doubt that in the context of such a golden opportunity to humiliate the Government. Few will want to risk deselection by bailing out May.
    But context is everything here. If the Government is weakened or effectively destabilized to the point where it is at serious risk of collapse, the Opposition will seek to bring that about. I imagine that some LibDems might like the opportunity to exact some revenge for the 2015 election!
    And tell me how plunging the Country into a financial and constitutional crisis helps.

    Are you ready for rocketing interest rates, mortgage rates and the economic collapse that follows hurting the poorest and throwing thousands out of work
    A constitutional crisis would be part of the politics - and the Tories would deserve more blame than any other party for having brought us to such a position.
    As for the economic consequences , we have been here before as evidenced by the scaremongering of Cameron & Osborne prior to the Referendum. Such tactics persuaded me to Vote Leave - and I have no regrets.I do predict,though, that interest rates will not be shooting up.
    How do you defend a collapsing pound
    I think it unlikely that sterling would 'collapse' - the currency has already weakened significantly as a result of the Referendum outcome. Uncertainty is what the markets most dislike - but I suspect that any weakness is largely in the price we see today. Moreover, the sharp fall in the pound in late June 2016 did not prevent the Bank of England from cutting - rather than raising - interest rates.
    This mornings financial report says an immediate drop of 10% or more will happen in the event of no deal
    If you are talking about the IMF forecasts then it should be considered how spectacularly wrong they got it last time. From the remain supporting Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/04/imf-peak-pessimism-brexit-eu-referendum-european-union-international-monetary-fund
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    edited November 2018
    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,141

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it...

    There is a nontrivial chance and an increasing amount of evidence that MPs are a) thick as pigshit, b) actively malevolent, c) criminally negligent, or d) a combination of the three. They are entirely capable of fucking this up.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,177

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I don't accept the premise that any decision made in the coming weeks re-the deal is irreversible. A new Government that was in no way beholden to the DUP could start afresh , and - whatever the EU might say at this time - I believe they would respond to such a new approach.

    Starting afresh will take years. Not only will that cause more uncertainty, there is no guarantee that the result will be any better.

    Your last clause is one of hope based on what is politically convenient for you: I see no reason why the EU should respond positively to such an approach. (From their perspective) we're mucking them around a lot as it is.

    And it's not as if both we and they have other important things to get on with, which are getting subsumed by Brexit.

    We need to get this over and done with.
    I agree with what Nick Palmer has asserted here on earlier occasions.Labour is not obsessed with Brexit and the EU - and it would not be the main focus of its day to day political agenda. The issue would be allowed to fade into the background , and discussions with the EU would proceed in a much calmer atmosphere than we have experienced since June 2016.
    What discussions with the EU? Why would they want to go through all this sh*t again?
    The EU will not. They have said that May's deal is the only deal

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46228454

    "EU leaders have dismissed talk of renegotiating the draft Brexit deal and warned the UK's political situation could make a "no-deal" more likely.

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel said there was "no question" of reopening talks as a document was "on the table".

    Meanwhile French PM Edouard Philippe said there was a need to prepare for a no-deal because of UK "uncertainty"."
    I look forward to Prime Minister Raab or Prime Minister Corbyn telling those leaders they are liars, and then see how amendable they are to a deal more generous to the UK.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    viewcode said:

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it...

    There is a nontrivial chance and an increasing amount of evidence that MPs are a) thick as pigshit, b) actively malevolent, c) criminally negligent, or d) a combination of the three. They are entirely capable of fucking this up.

    Hah ! Yep.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,141
    justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    Many took the view that the pound was undervalued. Doesn't mean that they were right. "Many" believes in lots of things, often contradictory and frequently wrong.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    In summary, a dollar and a quarter buys a whole lot less than a dollar and two thirds.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    No deal will happen without anything else happening. That’s why Labour should be supporting May in the national interest.
    Brexit will be halted or dropped before No Deal is allowed to happen. It is in the EU's interest as well as the UK's interest. It would also be hard for all the EU politicians to row back on their assurances that the UK could cancel Brexit. RealPolitik rules....
    Can you talk me through the mechanism of precisely how this will happen if May's deal is voted down (And no they won't replace her with Ken Clarke)
    No Deal is immensely unpopular. It may be the default position but outside of the ERG and other Brexit Ultras no one seems to want it. That leaves May's Deal or Remain and May's Deal does not look like it will pass the HoC. That leaves Remain.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Exactly so.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,728
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    Wow. Just wow.

    You really think the fall in Sterling would be a lone effect on the economy?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    Wow. Just wow.

    You really think the fall in Sterling would be a lone effect on the economy?
    I have not said that at all - but was responding to the suggestion that the pound would fall in the event of the deal being voted down.

  • Brexit will be halted or dropped before No Deal is allowed to happen. It is in the EU's interest as well as the UK's interest. It would also be hard for all the EU politicians to row back on their assurances that the UK could cancel Brexit. RealPolitik rules....

    But they want us to grovel for it. And I think there is a risk that all the bad faith comes home to roost. I personally think we should remain and voted for that, but second best would be no deal. I just don’t believe in tying yourself to an organisation without being able to influence it.

    It looks to me as if our hands are being tied for the next stage of negotiations. Let’s just leave without a deal. I think it will be better than the dire predictions. I mean yesterday we had health secretary won’t rule out deaths in no deal situation. Well that politics - no one apart from an idiot would hold themselves hostage to fortune in such a way - lots of people die every day and it would all be scrutinised and hung around his neck.
    I fully agree. The EU's agenda has all along been to stop the UK from leaving, and they have offered nothing because they rightly expected that the UK led by May would ultimately accept anything on the table or find a way to reverse the Brexit decision. A perfectly rational gamble on their part and so long as May stays as leader it will have come off.

    On the other hand, if the UK has left, and negotiations then resume, then the EU can't stop the UK from leaving, so the game changes. It then becomes a negotiation in which both parties have a real interest in securing a mutually beneficial deal. Given the EU's huge balance of trade surplus with the UK and our annual net contribution to their budget, they are going to have to enter into some meaningful negotiations at last.

    In short, we will get a better deal negotiating after we have left, not before.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    edited November 2018

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    No deal will happen without anything else happening. That’s why Labour should be supporting May in the national interest.
    Brexit will be halted or dropped before No Deal is allowed to happen. It is in the EU's interest as well as the UK's interest. It would also be hard for all the EU politicians to row back on their assurances that the UK could cancel Brexit. RealPolitik rules....
    Can you talk me through the mechanism of precisely how this will happen if May's deal is voted down (And no they won't replace her with Ken Clarke)
    No Deal is immensely unpopular. It may be the default position but outside of the ERG and other Brexit Ultras no one seems to want it. That leaves May's Deal or Remain and May's Deal does not look like it will pass the HoC. That leaves Remain.
    I hope you're right, I think you're wrong.

    In terms of outcomes I want right now it is

    Deal

    Remain











    No Deal
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,728
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    Wow. Just wow.

    You really think the fall in Sterling would be a lone effect on the economy?
    I have not said that at all - but was responding to the suggestion that the pound would fall in the event of the deal being voted down.
    Yes, but your response is rather spoiled by the fact that such a fall would be just one negative effect of many: essentially, you are saying what could well happen when the economy is 'normal'.

    With Brexit, all bets are off.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    https://twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Interesting. As a government backbencher you would expect him to be making arguments in favour of government policy, not appearing to sit on the fence.
    Sensible chap, but I thought the SCon MPs were operating as a bloc?
    SCon MPs are split between Remainers and hard core Diamond Hard Brexiters.

    Ruth varies between which she is depending on the audience.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    And we wonder why we are in such a mess
  • justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    A good 30 Tory MPs are committed to opposing the deal - as are the 10 DUP MPs. Difficult to see any support from Labour reaching double figures.Beyond that , the deal will be supported by the LD -Stephen Lloyd - and possibly the now Independent MP for Barrow in Furness. That still would have May well short of the votes needed to get it through the Commons.

    I predict a lot of Labour abstentions.
    I rather doubt that in the context of such a golden opportunity to humiliate the Government. Few will want to risk deselection by bailing out May.
    But context is everything here. If the Government is weakened or effectively destabilized to the point where it is at serious risk of collapse, the Opposition will seek to bring that about. I imagine that some LibDems might like the opportunity to exact some revenge for the 2015 election!

    Are you ready for rocketing interest rates, mortgage rates and the economic collapse that follows hurting the poorest and throwing thousands out of work
    A constitutional crisis would be part of the politics - and the Tories would deserve more blame than any other party for having brought us to such a position.
    As for the economic consequences , we have been here before as evidenced by the scaremongering of Cameron & Osborne prior to the Referendum. Such tactics persuaded me to Vote Leave - and I have no regrets.I do predict,though, that interest rates will not be shooting up.
    How do you defend a collapsing pound
    I think it unlikely that sterling would 'collapse' - the currency has already weakened significantly as a result of the Referendum outcome. Uncertainty is what the markets most dislike - but I suspect that any weakness is largely in the price we see today. Moreover, the sharp fall in the pound in late June 2016 did not prevent the Bank of England from cutting - rather than raising - interest rates.
    This mornings financial report says an immediate drop of 10% or more will happen in the event of no deal
    If you are talking about the IMF forecasts then it should be considered how spectacularly wrong they got it last time. From the remain supporting Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/04/imf-peak-pessimism-brexit-eu-referendum-european-union-international-monetary-fund
    No - it was a London based currency trader who was very plausable
  • hamiltonacehamiltonace Posts: 660
    edited November 2018

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    Wow. Just wow.

    You really think the fall in Sterling would be a lone effect on the economy?
    Devaluation is part of the reason our company sales are 10% over budget this year which is a lot. However we are already struggling with capacity. UK industry lacks the spare capacity to solve the trade deficit in the short term. The main way it will reduce is through less consumption
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    Alistair said:

    The thoughts of Paul Masterton, one of the Brexit Mutineers as labelled by the Telegraph:

    https://twitter.com/pm4eastren/status/1063501819236835329?s=21

    Interesting. As a government backbencher you would expect him to be making arguments in favour of government policy, not appearing to sit on the fence.
    Sensible chap, but I thought the SCon MPs were operating as a bloc?
    SCon MPs are split between Remainers and hard core Diamond Hard Brexiters.

    Ruth varies between which she is depending on the audience.
    All the Scottish Tories obviously want "Norway" because it gives back control of all the coastal areas.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    IanB2 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    In summary, a dollar and a quarter buys a whole lot less than a dollar and two thirds.
    "This will not affect the £ in your pocket"
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    Wow. Just wow.

    You really think the fall in Sterling would be a lone effect on the economy?
    I have not said that at all - but was responding to the suggestion that the pound would fall in the event of the deal being voted down.
    Yes, but your response is rather spoiled by the fact that such a fall would be just one negative effect of many: essentially, you are saying what could well happen when the economy is 'normal'.

    With Brexit, all bets are off.
    So long as it ends up with Corbyn in charge, Justin will be pleased :)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    Lol, called it downthread
    Pulpstar said:

    How long before the ERG loons try and depose Brady as chair of the 1922 comittee ?

  • justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Are you a City currency trader or just winging it
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    Wow. Just wow.

    You really think the fall in Sterling would be a lone effect on the economy?
    I have not said that at all - but was responding to the suggestion that the pound would fall in the event of the deal being voted down.
    Yes, but your response is rather spoiled by the fact that such a fall would be just one negative effect of many: essentially, you are saying what could well happen when the economy is 'normal'.

    With Brexit, all bets are off.
    I was simply trying to make the point that a weaker currency confers certain benefits on the domestic economy - and I stand by that. On the wider Brexit issue, I have never had very strong views . I have always opposed our joining the Euro and disagreed with the prevailing Establishment view in the late 80s that we should join the ERM. To date my instincts on such issues have served me quite well.
  • AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    He is delusional sadly and also is insulting Sir Graham Brady. He should have the whip withdrawn
  • Stephen Barclaycard - your Brexitable Friend!
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Seems to me that right now it's a lot closer to its post-referendum low than to its post-referendum high though.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    IanB2 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    We would have to see - but such a drop would be likely to be temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016. It would also be helpful to our exporting industries and boost Aggregate Demand in the economy.

    Whilst the blip is temporary, the effects last. Not only in lost jobs and homes, but in the economy as a whole.

    As we've seen with Labour's 2008 recession, it takes years of growth to recover to where you were - and in the meantime you've 'lost' all those years of growth that you would have had. In fact, you'll probably never get that back.
    But a weaker pound is good for growth - any blip would be on the upside by making UK products more competitive overeas. Many would welcome more export -led growth and would argue that it would help to rebalance an economy that has been too dependant on domestic consumer demand.
    Perhaps (and it's very odd to hear a Labour supporter welcoming a downturn after the politics of the last ten years), but they might be slight advantages compared to the massive disadvantages. Many failed states have weak currencies and poor economies:and you can only export if you have stuff to export.
    But it would not be a downturn! Devaluation would stimulate economic growth - albeit at risk of some cost push inflation.
    And we wonder why we are in such a mess
    We've gone from £1 buying $4.00 in 1947 to $1.25-1.30 now.
    The fall against the S.Fr. is even more humiliating.
  • Cyclefree said:


    I wonder how much dirt the Tory Whips have on those 30 MPs........

    Someone must have been doing all that bullying and sexual harassment we heard about a few weeks back.

    Now I see what you mean by sensible pragmatism!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,705

    justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Are you a City currency trader or just winging it
    :lol: Sounds like you are feeling better Big_G - hope you and Mrs G are over your recent chest infections.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237

    Let’s just leave without a deal. I think it will be better than the dire predictions.

    I'm sure it will be better than the direst predictions. There will be medicine. There will be food.

    Imagine, though, that Gross Fixed Capital Formation (i.e. investment) drops from 18% to 15% of GDP, as businesses defer capital expenses given the chaotic situation. And imagine too that households increase their savings rate to compensate for the increased uncertainty. The pound has probably fallen, pushing up the cost of imported oil, and reducing households real spending power.

    None of these things are impossible. In fact, I'd suggest they are probable rather than possible.

    So, we now are in a recession. Hopefully a mild one, but nevertheless, there are job losses, and the government would like to respond by increasing spending.

    The problem is that UK government debt to GDP is at a relatively high level, and the budget deficit is not that small. Simply, the ability to solve our problems via the traditional methods of boosting spending are not unlimited. More debt is rarely the solution to too much debt. We are still suffering from the hangover of the GFC.

    Will we survive? Sure. But the government will be blamed for a nasty slowdown. House prices will probably fall.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    Betting post: lay JRM for next Tory leader, while you can still get such a reasonable price.
  • justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Are you a City currency trader or just winging it
    :lol: Sounds like you are feeling better Big_G - hope you and Mrs G are over your recent chest infections.
    Believe it or not still not quite but looking after each other in our old age !!!
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Exactly so.
    Exactly not so. The claim makes as much sense as saying

    Cancer will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    A recession will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    etc.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237
    @justin124

    Presumably the countries with the weakest currencies over the last three years have registered the strongest economic growth...

  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Are you a City currency trader or just winging it
    No to both - though I am a former Economics Lecturer.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    viewcode said:

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it...

    There is a nontrivial chance and an increasing amount of evidence that MPs are a) thick as pigshit, b) actively malevolent, c) criminally negligent, or d) a combination of the three. They are entirely capable of fucking this up.

    I suspect you are right, but I hope not.

    I think I will step back for a bit. Things at the moment are such a shambles.
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,861
    edited November 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Can you talk me through the mechanism to get a "People's vote" if a hardline ERGer is in at No 10 ?
    No deal doesn't need any further vote, it is simply what happens on 29th March.
    That is correct, and that is why "No Deal will not happen because *everyone is opposed to it" is a bullshit argument.

    Nevertheless, I would expect that - if Mrs May was deposed, or there was a General Election, or there was to be a referendum on the Deal - there would be a request from the government for an extension to Article 50.

    I think it likely that the EU would accede, but it is not certain.

    A referendum with the government campaigning for the deal - that would probably be OK.

    But if it were Mr Johnson wishing to reopen negotiations, then I suspect the answer would be "No, f*ck off you c*nt".e

    Robert. If Boris was PM and the country was heading for a No Deal, wouldn't this result in a Vote of No Confidence in the government, possibly supported by some Tory MPs, leading to a change of government and then no "No Deal"?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,705
    AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    Well how difficult can it be for them all to say who they are? Since, only half the required number appear to have gone public, we can safely assume there are well short of 48 letters.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Exactly so.
    Exactly not so. The claim makes as much sense as saying

    Cancer will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    A recession will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    etc.
    Cancer is a natural phenomenon and cannot be negotiated with.

    Political agreements are manmade and subject to completely different rules.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    edited November 2018
    viewcode said:

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it...

    There is a nontrivial chance and an increasing amount of evidence that MPs are a) thick as pigshit, b) actively malevolent, c) criminally negligent, or d) a combination of the three. They are entirely capable of fucking this up.

    Under our voting system the majority of our representatives are effectively chosen not by voters but by three or four Party diehards in some back room. Or at best by a small number of members.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    rcs1000 said:

    Let’s just leave without a deal. I think it will be better than the dire predictions.

    I'm sure it will be better than the direst predictions. There will be medicine. There will be food.

    Imagine, though, that Gross Fixed Capital Formation (i.e. investment) drops from 18% to 15% of GDP, as businesses defer capital expenses given the chaotic situation. And imagine too that households increase their savings rate to compensate for the increased uncertainty. The pound has probably fallen, pushing up the cost of imported oil, and reducing households real spending power.

    None of these things are impossible. In fact, I'd suggest they are probable rather than possible.

    So, we now are in a recession. Hopefully a mild one, but nevertheless, there are job losses, and the government would like to respond by increasing spending.

    The problem is that UK government debt to GDP is at a relatively high level, and the budget deficit is not that small. Simply, the ability to solve our problems via the traditional methods of boosting spending are not unlimited. More debt is rarely the solution to too much debt. We are still suffering from the hangover of the GFC.

    Will we survive? Sure. But the government will be blamed for a nasty slowdown. House prices will probably fall.
    Thank you for a sane explanation
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,746
    rcs1000 said:

    Let’s just leave without a deal. I think it will be better than the dire predictions.

    I'm sure it will be better than the direst predictions. There will be medicine. There will be food.

    Imagine, though, that Gross Fixed Capital Formation (i.e. investment) drops from 18% to 15% of GDP, as businesses defer capital expenses given the chaotic situation. And imagine too that households increase their savings rate to compensate for the increased uncertainty. The pound has probably fallen, pushing up the cost of imported oil, and reducing households real spending power.

    None of these things are impossible. In fact, I'd suggest they are probable rather than possible.

    So, we now are in a recession. Hopefully a mild one, but nevertheless, there are job losses, and the government would like to respond by increasing spending.

    The problem is that UK government debt to GDP is at a relatively high level, and the budget deficit is not that small. Simply, the ability to solve our problems via the traditional methods of boosting spending are not unlimited. More debt is rarely the solution to too much debt. We are still suffering from the hangover of the GFC.

    Will we survive? Sure. But the government will be blamed for a nasty slowdown. House prices will probably fall.
    That’s the economic fallout. Now talk about the political fallout.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,705
    edited November 2018

    viewcode said:

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it...

    There is a nontrivial chance and an increasing amount of evidence that MPs are a) thick as pigshit, b) actively malevolent, c) criminally negligent, or d) a combination of the three. They are entirely capable of fucking this up.

    I suspect you are right, but I hope not.

    I think I will step back for a bit. Things at the moment are such a shambles.
    Well don't stay away too long - we can't really influence things on here, which means we can't make them any worse.

    And sometimes it's good to talk post.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    viewcode said:

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it...

    There is a nontrivial chance and an increasing amount of evidence that MPs are a) thick as pigshit, b) actively malevolent, c) criminally negligent, or d) a combination of the three. They are entirely capable of fucking this up.

    I suspect you are right, but I hope not.

    I think I will step back for a bit. Things at the moment are such a shambles.
    Well don't stay away too long - we can't really influence things on here, which means we can't make them any worse.

    And sometimes it's good to talk post.
    :+1:

    Goodnight
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    Well how difficult can it be for them all to say who they are? Since, only half the required number appear to have gone public, we can safely assume there are well short of 48 letters.
    Are we assuming that everyone who resigned from the government also sent a letter?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    Well how difficult can it be for them all to say who they are? Since, only half the required number appear to have gone public, we can safely assume there are well short of 48 letters.
    Are we assuming that everyone who resigned from the government also sent a letter?
    Certainly not.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    edited November 2018
    AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    I can see this loudmouth rent-a-quote being turfed out at the next election.

    Con have only held North-West Leicstershire since 2010. Before that it was a Labour seat back to 1997 and beore that it was Con again.

    One of those "bell-weather" marginal seats that swings with the national mood - A swing to Labour across the country will see him on his bike.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    rcs1000 said:

    @justin124

    Presumably the countries with the weakest currencies over the last three years have registered the strongest economic growth...

    As I am sure you well know that is a non sequitur. It is much more related to cause and effect in that economic strength can boost demand for a currency whilst weakness can do the opposite. Ceteris Paribus though a weaker currency will boost aggregate demand - as we saw here in the UK in the aftermath of our ignominious ejection from the ERM in September 1992. That certainly laid the basis for several years of good economic growth.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,237
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Are you a City currency trader or just winging it
    No to both - though I am a former Economics Lecturer.
    Could you please tell me how much correlation there is between currency weakness and subsequent export growth?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,705

    justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in the 2016 Party Conference made people realise that the Single Market was dead and it rapidly descended to around $1.20 to $1.25

    Then people stopped panicking and it started to clamber back up again, hitting £1=$1.43 in April 2018.

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Are you a City currency trader or just winging it
    :lol: Sounds like you are feeling better Big_G - hope you and Mrs G are over your recent chest infections.
    Believe it or not still not quite but looking after each other in our old age !!!
    Stick to it - hope you're both feeling back to normal soon - you might both be selecting the next PM before long :smile:

    (PS I hope you won't be needing to)
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    rcs1000 said:

    Let’s just leave without a deal. I think it will be better than the dire predictions.

    I'm sure it will be better than the direst predictions. There will be medicine. There will be food.

    Imagine, though, that Gross Fixed Capital Formation (i.e. investment) drops from 18% to 15% of GDP, as businesses defer capital expenses given the chaotic situation. And imagine too that households increase their savings rate to compensate for the increased uncertainty. The pound has probably fallen, pushing up the cost of imported oil, and reducing households real spending power.

    None of these things are impossible. In fact, I'd suggest they are probable rather than possible.

    So, we now are in a recession. Hopefully a mild one, but nevertheless, there are job losses, and the government would like to respond by increasing spending.

    The problem is that UK government debt to GDP is at a relatively high level, and the budget deficit is not that small. Simply, the ability to solve our problems via the traditional methods of boosting spending are not unlimited. More debt is rarely the solution to too much debt. We are still suffering from the hangover of the GFC.

    Will we survive? Sure. But the government will be blamed for a nasty slowdown. House prices will probably fall.
    I agree, but the question the Govt must ask is how long will this last? If it is 12 months 18 months? Then they still have a couple of years of economic growth before the next election to rebuild credibility. The other question the Govt should ask is what can we now do outside the EU to make the UK more competitive and more attractive to investment, both UK and foreign.
    Plus the yoof would like lower house prices so they can say good for you.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,177
    AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    That seems like a genuinely serious allegation if he is serious, accusing a colleague within the party of significant procedural impropriety. I'm all for being able to slag off people within your own party, but that seems like a crossed line.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @justin124

    Presumably the countries with the weakest currencies over the last three years have registered the strongest economic growth...

    As I am sure you well know that is a non sequitur. It is much more related to cause and effect in that economic strength can boost demand for a currency whilst weakness can do the opposite. Ceteris Paribus though a weaker currency will boost aggregate demand - as we saw here in the UK in the aftermath of our ignominious ejection from the ERM in September 1992. That certainly laid the basis for several years of good economic growth.
    Yet trashed the Tories' reputation for economic competence for a decade. Just think what actual damage would do.
  • viewcode said:

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it...

    There is a nontrivial chance and an increasing amount of evidence that MPs are a) thick as pigshit, b) actively malevolent, c) criminally negligent, or d) a combination of the three. They are entirely capable of fucking this up.

    I suspect you are right, but I hope not.

    I think I will step back for a bit. Things at the moment are such a shambles.
    Aren't they just. I have moments (increasingly) of utter frustration at the deadlocked positions brexiteers and remainers hold. The media, as I said earlier, put up this irreconcilable for discussion and it is so frustrating as each side thinks it is superior, when most of us are shouting plague on both of your houses

    The ERG have finally been exposed as the wreckers they are and the DUP ignore the demands of their core vote in the farming community to back TM deal

    One day we will move into calmer waters but I have no idea when
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    stjohn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Can you talk me through the mechanism to get a "People's vote" if a hardline ERGer is in at No 10 ?
    No deal doesn't need any further vote, it is simply what happens on 29th March.
    That is correct, and that is why "No Deal will not happen because *everyone is opposed to it" is a bullshit argument.

    Nevertheless, I would expect that - if Mrs May was deposed, or there was a General Election, or there was to be a referendum on the Deal - there would be a request from the government for an extension to Article 50.

    I think it likely that the EU would accede, but it is not certain.

    A referendum with the government campaigning for the deal - that would probably be OK.

    But if it were Mr Johnson wishing to reopen negotiations, then I suspect the answer would be "No, f*ck off you c*nt".e

    Robert. If Boris was PM and the country was heading for a No Deal, wouldn't this result in a Vote of No Confidence in the government, possibly supported by some Tory MPs, leading to a change of government and then no "No Deal"?
    It's a VERY big step for someone to vote no confidence in their own party. Given the whole of the DUP would prop Boris up, I make it that we need 7 Tories to vote against the Gov't. Would there be 7 ?
    There might be - but it is a huge step extremely rarely taken; and with the FTPA it needs to be an explicit vote.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690

    Stephen Barclaycard - your Brexitable Friend!

    Thought she might have gone for Stephen Lloyd MP after he said he would vote for her deal yesterday

    Apparently his Black Horse was a problem wasn't allowed on Eurostar to Brussels
  • stjohn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing Labour voting down the deal won't do is lead to a change of Government. In fact it could even keep the Tories in power - if May's deal fails to get through, say May then resigns and Boris Johnson or David Davis is then in charge.
    The DUP's supply and confidence deal will probably be back on and the Gov't could just run the clock down to the 29th March at which point we leave with no deal.

    No Deal will not be allowed. MP's do not want it, business does not want it and an increasing number of the public do not want it.

    May's Deal and Remain are the only two options left.
    Can you talk me through the mechanism to get a "People's vote" if a hardline ERGer is in at No 10 ?
    No deal doesn't need any further vote, it is simply what happens on 29th March.
    That is correct, and that is why "No Deal will not happen because *everyone is opposed to it" is a bullshit argument.

    Nevertheless, I would expect that - if Mrs May was deposed, or there was a General Election, or there was to be a referendum on the Deal - there would be a request from the government for an extension to Article 50.

    I think it likely that the EU would accede, but it is not certain.

    A referendum with the government campaigning for the deal - that would probably be OK.

    But if it were Mr Johnson wishing to reopen negotiations, then I suspect the answer would be "No, f*ck off you c*nt".e

    Robert. If Boris was PM and the country was heading for a No Deal, wouldn't this result in a Vote of No Confidence in the government, possibly supported by some Tory MPs, leading to a change of government and then no "No Deal"?
    If Boris was PM the remainers and especially the ladies would resign leaving him unable to govern
  • rcs1000 said:

    Let’s just leave without a deal. I think it will be better than the dire predictions.

    I'm sure it will be better than the direst predictions. There will be medicine. There will be food.

    Imagine, though, that Gross Fixed Capital Formation (i.e. investment) drops from 18% to 15% of GDP, as businesses defer capital expenses given the chaotic situation. And imagine too that households increase their savings rate to compensate for the increased uncertainty. The pound has probably fallen, pushing up the cost of imported oil, and reducing households real spending power.

    None of these things are impossible. In fact, I'd suggest they are probable rather than possible.

    So, we now are in a recession. Hopefully a mild one, but nevertheless, there are job losses, and the government would like to respond by increasing spending.

    The problem is that UK government debt to GDP is at a relatively high level, and the budget deficit is not that small. Simply, the ability to solve our problems via the traditional methods of boosting spending are not unlimited. More debt is rarely the solution to too much debt. We are still suffering from the hangover of the GFC.

    Will we survive? Sure. But the government will be blamed for a nasty slowdown. House prices will probably fall.
    The country will still be able to get some medicines but it will not be the state of the art medicine. This is already happening as most major new medicines go to Germany first.

    When Brexit first came along I predicted the country was not ready for the implications of hard Brexit and so it could not happen. You need to look at Korea as an example of the standalone model not Singapore. High levels of investment, rapid adoption of technology and large restrictions on consumption. I have not seen one brexiter propose this model
  • justin124 said:

    viewcode said:

    justin124 said:

    ...temporary as was the case with the sharp fall in stering in June 2016...

    That's fiction. Here's the facts

    From May 2009 to June 2015 (the election), GBP/USD occupied a band around £1=$1.50 to £1=$1.65, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but mostly within that band.

    Then as the realities of the upcoming referendum set in, GBP/USD began to descend, hitting £1=$1.38 in February 2016

    But the belief was that the UK would vote "Remain" in the referendum and returned to the high $1.40's, briefly peaking at about $1.50 when Farage conceded on Referendum night in June 2016.

    When it became obvious that the vote was lost GBP/USD descended from ~$1.50 to about $1.35 that night.

    It fell a bit more but back then the belief was that there would be a soft Brexit and it wibbled around $1.30 to $1.35.

    Then May's speech in

    But since then people have started to worry again and it's descended to under $1.30. It peeked back up when May announced the deal, but now it's a bit under as the markets disdain instability. As of today it's about $1.28.

    Here's a source for historical GBP/USD movements: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/gbp/GBP-to-USD#charts

    You can find others if you like.
    Indeed - but sterling HAS bounced from the low points reached - I did not suggest that the fall was reversed. Many took the view that the pound was overvalued anyway given the weakness of our Balance of Payments position.
    There was a further fall in sterling in June 2017 in response to the shock of the election result - and that weakeness has been largely reversed . The currency is much more likely to weaken in reaction to unexpected news - as reflected in what occurred in both June 2016 and June 2017. I feel pretty confident that the markets have now factored in a range of possible outcomes - and that any further fall is likely to be limited.
    Are you a City currency trader or just winging it
    :lol: Sounds like you are feeling better Big_G - hope you and Mrs G are over your recent chest infections.
    Believe it or not still not quite but looking after each other in our old age !!!
    Stick to it - hope you're both feeling back to normal soon - you might both be selecting the next PM before long :smile:

    (PS I hope you won't be needing to)
    It will not be Boris or any of the ERG wreckers
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,220
    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    "Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen has told a national newspaper he believes the Tories are hiding the number of letters of no confidence."

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/brexiteer-believes-48-letters-of-no-confidence-in-theresa-may-have-been-submitted-1-5783021

    Well how difficult can it be for them all to say who they are? Since, only half the required number appear to have gone public, we can safely assume there are well short of 48 letters.
    Are we assuming that everyone who resigned from the government also sent a letter?
    No, sending a letter is a much bigger step. I suspect Mcvey might have done so given she's married to Philip Davies and the FOBT turnaround though. I doubt any of the others have
This discussion has been closed.